When
discussing this week’s pasha, Parshas Chukas, most people focus on the idea of
a chok – a mitzvah that is beyond our ability to reason out – and,
specifically, the actual chok of the para aduma, the pure red
heifer sacrificed and burned so that its ashes can be used in the ritual of
purification for anyone who has been in contact with a corpse. The human
relationship to death is a funny thing, and that might really be one of the
essential messages of this week’s parsha.
Although the parsha begins with a detailed description of the para aduma, it is not until the 11th verse of the first chapter that the use of the heifer’s ashes begins to be revealed: “He that touches a dead body of any human soul becomes impure (the common, not so great, translation of tamei) for seven days” (Bamidbar 19:11). It is not just touching a dead body that renders one impure, but, as the continuing verses explain: “When a person dies in a tent, all that comes into the tent and all that is in the tent, shall be impure for seven days…and every thing that touches one that is slain with a sword in the open fields, or a dead body, or a human bone, or a grave, shall be unfit for seven days” (19:14 and 16).
The seven days it takes to regain purity are days in which a person comes to terms with the reality of mortality, just as the seven days of shiva are days when a mourner is given time to begin dealing with the emotions of loss. Most people are familiar with concept that there are different stages of mourning, or, perhaps, different ways in which people mourn. Parshas Chukas goes on to demonstrate that.
The most obvious emotion in dealing with death is grief. One expects tears to be shed after the announcement of a passing, and so it was for the Children of Israel when they were told of Aaron’s death. “And when all the congregation saw that Aaron was dead, they wept for 30 days, the whole house of Israel” (20:29).
The reaction of the Israelites to the death of Aaron seems expected, until one compares it to the description of the death of Miriam at the beginning of the very same chapter. “The Children of Israel, the whole congregation, came into the Desert of Zin in the first month, and the people settled down in Kadesh. And Miriam died there and was buried there. And there was no water for the congregation, and they gathered themselves against Moshe and Aaron” (20:1-2). It seems the people mourned Miriam with anger, one of the emotions commonly noted as an early stage of mourning.
One might assume that the recording of the tears shed for Aaron demonstrates that the people were more distressed at his loss than they were when Miriam died. More accurately, they were differently distressed. As the High Priests and the brother of Moshe, Aaron was a very public figure. He was also known as a leader who went out among the people and actively sought to bring peace between those who were in strife. The people could articulate what it was that they lost when Aaron passed away. (Also, whereas Miriam’s death appears to be natural, Aaron was called forth one day, taken to a mountain with his son and successor and with Moshe, and did not return.)
“Rav Zalman Sorotzkin (1881-1966) explains that the pasuk immediately following Miriam’s death that ‘…there was no water for the congregation’ (20:2) hints at the fact that not only was there no water to drink, but there was also no water in the eyes of Bnei Yisrael; there was no shedding of tears.*”
Miriam’s impact on the lives of the Israelites was far less tangible than Aaron’s was. It was in Miriam’s merit that they had potable water, but the well represented something far greater, the importance of the subtle person in the background looking out for the greater good. Miriam was, even as she aged, the strong-hearted lass who stood hidden in the reeds to make certain her baby brother was safe but had the courage to approach an Egyptian princess to ensure that he would be properly cared for. Like the miraculous water that flowed from the rock, Miriam was a source of constant, steady, and understated leadership. Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch refers to it as her “quiet, unobtrusive work for the moral future of the people.” Perhaps that is one of her connections to water, which has no flavor but is essential to life. Because Miriam was a public figure only when necessary, her death did not bring on the collective, cathartic mourning as did Aaron’s passing. Instead, it led to anxiety, which drove the people to gather themselves against Moshe and Aaron. The people needed an outlet for the grief they may not even have known they felt, and they expressed their sense of loss and confusion by complaining.
Rav Hirsch notes within his commentary on 20:1 that “probably it is not for nothing that this chapter, which records so curtly and simply, the deaths of Miriam and Aaron, is preceded by the great para aduma chapter…” So what is the connection? Perhaps it goes back to the very concept of a chok, a law for which no one can not truly provide a reason. Perhaps Parshas Chukas focuses on the method for purifying those made impure by the presence of death because, in reality, the human mind cannot truly understand death. People will always question the mortal fate of those closest to them or those they see as innocents, and, unless they are incredible tzaddikim, they will react with sadness, or anxiety, or anger. In the end, however, a person leaves olam hazeh for one reason, the same reason that the kohanim incur impurity in order to mix and sprinkle the ashes of the para aduma – because that is the decree of the One Who rules the World.
* https://www.shortvort.com/2733/
Although the parsha begins with a detailed description of the para aduma, it is not until the 11th verse of the first chapter that the use of the heifer’s ashes begins to be revealed: “He that touches a dead body of any human soul becomes impure (the common, not so great, translation of tamei) for seven days” (Bamidbar 19:11). It is not just touching a dead body that renders one impure, but, as the continuing verses explain: “When a person dies in a tent, all that comes into the tent and all that is in the tent, shall be impure for seven days…and every thing that touches one that is slain with a sword in the open fields, or a dead body, or a human bone, or a grave, shall be unfit for seven days” (19:14 and 16).
The seven days it takes to regain purity are days in which a person comes to terms with the reality of mortality, just as the seven days of shiva are days when a mourner is given time to begin dealing with the emotions of loss. Most people are familiar with concept that there are different stages of mourning, or, perhaps, different ways in which people mourn. Parshas Chukas goes on to demonstrate that.
The most obvious emotion in dealing with death is grief. One expects tears to be shed after the announcement of a passing, and so it was for the Children of Israel when they were told of Aaron’s death. “And when all the congregation saw that Aaron was dead, they wept for 30 days, the whole house of Israel” (20:29).
The reaction of the Israelites to the death of Aaron seems expected, until one compares it to the description of the death of Miriam at the beginning of the very same chapter. “The Children of Israel, the whole congregation, came into the Desert of Zin in the first month, and the people settled down in Kadesh. And Miriam died there and was buried there. And there was no water for the congregation, and they gathered themselves against Moshe and Aaron” (20:1-2). It seems the people mourned Miriam with anger, one of the emotions commonly noted as an early stage of mourning.
One might assume that the recording of the tears shed for Aaron demonstrates that the people were more distressed at his loss than they were when Miriam died. More accurately, they were differently distressed. As the High Priests and the brother of Moshe, Aaron was a very public figure. He was also known as a leader who went out among the people and actively sought to bring peace between those who were in strife. The people could articulate what it was that they lost when Aaron passed away. (Also, whereas Miriam’s death appears to be natural, Aaron was called forth one day, taken to a mountain with his son and successor and with Moshe, and did not return.)
“Rav Zalman Sorotzkin (1881-1966) explains that the pasuk immediately following Miriam’s death that ‘…there was no water for the congregation’ (20:2) hints at the fact that not only was there no water to drink, but there was also no water in the eyes of Bnei Yisrael; there was no shedding of tears.*”
Miriam’s impact on the lives of the Israelites was far less tangible than Aaron’s was. It was in Miriam’s merit that they had potable water, but the well represented something far greater, the importance of the subtle person in the background looking out for the greater good. Miriam was, even as she aged, the strong-hearted lass who stood hidden in the reeds to make certain her baby brother was safe but had the courage to approach an Egyptian princess to ensure that he would be properly cared for. Like the miraculous water that flowed from the rock, Miriam was a source of constant, steady, and understated leadership. Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch refers to it as her “quiet, unobtrusive work for the moral future of the people.” Perhaps that is one of her connections to water, which has no flavor but is essential to life. Because Miriam was a public figure only when necessary, her death did not bring on the collective, cathartic mourning as did Aaron’s passing. Instead, it led to anxiety, which drove the people to gather themselves against Moshe and Aaron. The people needed an outlet for the grief they may not even have known they felt, and they expressed their sense of loss and confusion by complaining.
Rav Hirsch notes within his commentary on 20:1 that “probably it is not for nothing that this chapter, which records so curtly and simply, the deaths of Miriam and Aaron, is preceded by the great para aduma chapter…” So what is the connection? Perhaps it goes back to the very concept of a chok, a law for which no one can not truly provide a reason. Perhaps Parshas Chukas focuses on the method for purifying those made impure by the presence of death because, in reality, the human mind cannot truly understand death. People will always question the mortal fate of those closest to them or those they see as innocents, and, unless they are incredible tzaddikim, they will react with sadness, or anxiety, or anger. In the end, however, a person leaves olam hazeh for one reason, the same reason that the kohanim incur impurity in order to mix and sprinkle the ashes of the para aduma – because that is the decree of the One Who rules the World.
* https://www.shortvort.com/2733/
No comments:
Post a Comment