The Power of Anger - In Memoriam of Mr. David M. Warren (Menachem Dovid ben Harav Yosef Z’L)

“And regarding the he-goat of the sin-offering, Moses repeatedly inquired and, behold, it was burnt, and he became angry . . .” (Leviticus 10:16)

At Israel’s first Rosh Chodesh (new month) celebration, the priests burned the sacrifice rather than conclude the service by eating from it, per Moses’ instructions. However, upon hearing Aaron’s explanation for the sacrifice being burned, that the Priests (Aaron’s remaining family) could not partake in it because Aaron’s two oldest sons just died and were not yet buried, Moses realized he had been wrong. The Torah then says, “And Moses heard [what Aaron said] and it was good in his eyes.” (Leviticus 10:20)

As Rashi (1040 – 1105) says, Aaron explained to Moses, the Priests could not have eaten from the sacrifice because they had an “Onen” status; someone who had not yet buried an immediate family member, could not be expected to eat from the sacrifice with the proper mindset and was therefore barred from eating it altogether. (Leviticus 10:12-19)

The Sifse Chachomim (Rabbi Shabtai be Yosef Bass 1641 – 1718, Compilation of commentaries on Rashi;10:19) supplements Rashi’s explanation by adding that the Kohanim (Priests), Aaron’s remaining family, could have theoretically eaten from the sacrifice that evening after burying Aaron’s eldest sons, but because the sacrifice had to be placed on hold it was defiled before they had a chance to complete the ritual of eating it; the sacrifice had to be burned.

Still, the question remains, why did Moses our Teacher, who received the Torah directly from G-d, not realize Aaron’s remaining sons were acting according to the law? According to the Midrash, Moses didn’t recognize Aaron remaining sons were acting properly because Moses had gotten angry. (Midrash Vayikra Rabbah 13:1; Talmudic Homiletics, 400 CE - 600 CE)

When Moses discovered the sacrifice had been burnt instead of eaten, he became angry and anger compromises one’s ability to reason. Had Moses not become angry, he could have rationally considered and logically concluded why the sacrifice had to be burned. Aaron sons did so because they were Onenim, this resulted in the sacrifice being placed on hold, which caused the sacrifice to accidentally become defiled through improper service.

The lesson here is that even Moses’ ability to reason could be impeded by momentary anger.

As soon as Moses understood why Aaron sons burnt the sacrifice, “it was good in his eyes”. Yet, the entire episode could have been avoided had Moses fully considered the situation before becoming angry.

If such a thing could happen between Moses our Teacher with his brother, Aaron the High Priest, imagine how careful we must be to not judge others in anger.

Shabbat Shalom

--

Dvar Torah for Parshat Parah

This week’s portion of the Red Cow is read in preparation for the Korban Pesach – sacrificial Passover lamb, of which only those who are pure or purified can partake. Upon coming in contact with a deceased person, the only way to purify oneself was through the sprinkling of the Red Cow's ashes.

“This is the statute of the Torah, which G-d has commanded, saying: “Speak to the Children of Israel, and they shall take for you a perfectly Red Cow, which has no blemish, and no yoke had been placed upon her.” (Numbers 19:2)

Commenting on the verse, Rashi (1040 – 1105) says the Toarh specifically calls this commandment a statute “because the Accusers of the Torah and the nations of the world aggrieve Israel by saying ‘What is the reason for this commandment? What reason is there for this?’ Therefore, the Torah wrote it as a statute, which implies, ‘it is a decree before me (G-d), you have no right to reflect upon it.’”

The Sifsei Chachomim (Shabtai ben Yosef of Kalizs 1641 – 1718) asks a question on Rashi (Verse 2, letter 2). “Why is this commandment so special, that it is a statute that one has “no right to reflect upon it”? There are plenty of statutes that are not understandable, such as the laws of “Kela’aim” (planting different vegetables near one another), or “Shatnez” (wearing garments with interwoven wool and linen).
Answering his own question, the Sifsei Chachomim suggests the laws of the red cow are unique because “this statute works in a contradictory fashion.” The ashes of the red cow purify the impure but render unclean those who prepare the ashes.

Many Torah laws are perplexing and we persevere to understand them. However, the nature of the red cow’s ashes is impossible to comprehend – how can something purify the spiritually impure but have the opposite effect on someone who is spiritually pure? Since the Torah is indivisible, if one element is paradoxical, the entire Torah is a paradox. Therefore, the Torah call this a “Hok,” a statute, warning us that it is inherently contradictory and we only obey because it is a heavenly decree.

By segregating the Laws of the Red Cow from other laws, the Torah demonstrates the importance of consistency with its teachind and observances. So too, we need to be consistent when teaching Torah values to others. The classic cliché “how can such a person who seems to hold the banner of a ‘Torah Follower’ act in such a fashion” is such a strong argument because of the inconsistency it breeds.

Understanding the importance of consistency, and how the Torah and our sages did their utmost to keep that virtue intact can be a source of inspiration for how we live our lives and treat others. There’s no such thing as a part-time Jew, as choosing what to agree with and what to observe; that would be inconsistent.