Achrei Mos – פרק פ׳׳ח

Kapital 88 begins with the words “Shir Mizmor L’Bnei Korach Lamenatzeach Al Machalas L’Anos Maskil L’Heiman HaEzrachi”, an introduction that is not only unique, but also difficult to understand. On its face, the Passuk seems to attribute this Perek to two authors, Bnei Korach as well as Heiman HaEzrachi, which would be unusual at the least. Rashi therefore explains that and this Kapital was indeed written by the Bnei Korach specifically to be sung by Heiman HaEzrachi, who was one of the Meshoririm in the Mikdash. Radak has a similar, but inverse, explanation. Heiman, he notes, lived in the time of Shlomo HaMelech and was considered one of the Chachmei Yisroel. It was he who wrote the Mizmor to be sung upon the Duchan by the Bnei Korach, who were Leviim.

Besides the identity of its author, this introductory Passk also helps frame the theme and purpose of the Perek. Rashi explains that the words “Al Machalas L’Anos” refer to the “Cholas Ahava” felt by those in Galus, indicating that this Perek was written about the suffering that brings these feelings about. Similarly, Sforno explains that the Perek was written “Al Galus Churban Rishon V’Galus Churban Sheni…”

The Pessukim are easily understood in this light. The Mizmor itself begins with the a plaintive cry: “Hashem Elokei Yeshuasi Yom Tza’akti BaLayla Negdecha”. The pains of Galus lead us to cry out to Hashem day and night, seemingly without end. We ask that these Teffilos be accepted, “Tavo Lifanecha Tifilasi HaTeh Aznecha L’Rinah”, so that we may experience the Yeshua for which we yearn.

Much of the Perek describes we feel as we traverse the pains of Galus. At times, we feel so alone as though there is no one to come to our aid, “Nechshavti Im Yordei Bor Hayisis K’Gever Ain Eyal”. We feel abandoned and scorned, as though Hashem has banished us from his midst: “Shatani B’Bor Tachtios B’Machashakim B’Mitzolos.” So much so that even our peers feel distant: “Hirchakta MiYudai Mimeni Shatani Toavos Lamo…”

Another section discusses the damage to Kvod Shamayim that results from our affliction. Rhetorically, a series of questions are asked: “Im Yefaim Yakumu Yoducha Sela”, “HaYesupar Bakever Chasedcha”, “HaYivadah B’Choshech Pelaecha”. These Pessukim all carry the same message: if we are destroyed by our enemies, the Chilul Shem Shamayim arises from our inability to be Mehallel and offer Shevach V’Hodaah to HKBH.

The remainder of the Perek reinforces both these ideas, as we beg Hashem to save us from our enemies, a message perhaps best summed up by one Passuk: “Lama Hashem Tiznach Nafshi Tastir Panecha Mimeni”. We know that the pains of Galus are the result of Hester Panim and beg HBKH to bring an end to both.

The Pessukim in this Perek are steeped in pain, each one making a statement that carries forth the pain of Galus, but there is one that perhaps stands out in this regard. The Passuk says: “BaMesim Chafshi Kimo Chalalim Shochvei Kever Asher Lo Zechartem Od…” Radak explains these words as follows: “Tov Li SheEheyeh Im Mesim SheEheyeh Chafshi”. It would be better to be among the Mesim, free from pain, as opposed to the reality presented by Galus, where we are servants of those who hate us.

These words are particularly difficult to digest, bringing to mind the numerous times during Galus that Yidden expressed thoughts of “Tov Li SheEheyeh Im Mesim…” At the same time, it is difficult to understand this sentiment being expressed in the Pesuskim, especially based on the statements made later in the Perek. If it is true that Chilul Shem Shamayim arises from our downfall, “HaYesupar Bakever Chasedcha”, then how can we long for a reality of “BaMesim Chafshi Kimo Chalalim”?

This question becomes even stronger if we consider the way Chazal use these words.

The Gemara in Shabbos teaches a Halacha: we are Mechalel Shabbos to save the life of anyone, even a one-day-old baby, but: “Dovid Melech Yisroel Mes Ain Mechalelin Alav Es HaShabbos”, once a person is no longer among the living Chilul Shabbos is no longer allowed. The Gemara explains the reasons for these Dinnim: if the baby’s life is saved, he will go on to keep many more Shabbosos, justifying the isolated Chilul Shabbos. When it comes to “Dovid Melech Yisroel Mes”, however, there is no incentive to be Mechalel Shabbos because he is “Batel Min HaMitzvos” and can no longer keep Shabbos. The Gemara then brings a Drasha to support this idea: “BaMesim Chafshi, Kivan Shemes Adam Na’aseh Chafshi Min HaMitzvos”.

The words “BaMesim Chafshi Kimo Chalalim” are used by the Gemara to prove that a person who is no longer among the living is “Batel Min HaMitzvos”, and one this scale a one-day-old baby, who has no Zechuyos but has potential, carries more weight than a Tzaddik who is no longer alive. If this is the case, how can we yearn for a status of “BaMesim Chafshi Kimo Chalalim”?

Now, it can easily be said that the Passuk is merely an emotional statement—that it carries the feelings of those in the throes of Galus even if its sentiment is not totally correct. Even if that is true, however, we must understand the way the statement is made: why did the Meshorer choose the term “BaMesim Chafshi”, aluding to the “free” nature of one who is no longer alive, in this Passuk? How is the idea of “Kivan Shemes Adam Na’aseh Chafshi Min HaMitzvos”, which is learned from these words and quoted a few times throughout the Divrei Chazal, related to the overall message of this Perek? Why were these the words chosen to express this most desperate feeling?

The idea of “Kivan Shemes Adam Na’aseh Chafshi Min HaMitzvos”, and the status of those who are no longer among the living, is relevant to this week’s Parsha, which begins by telling us that Hashem spoke to Moshe “Acharei Mos Shnei Bnei Aharon…” The Pessukim that follow speak about the Avodas Yom HaKippurim, giving rise to a two-part question. First, why does the Torah mention Misas Nadav V’Avihu at all? Why is it necessary to remind us that the sons of Aharon perished “B’Karvasam Lifnei Hashem”? Second, even if we can explain the appearance of these words, we must understand why the are used specifically here—why does the Torah mention the story of Nadav and Avihu as an introduction to the Pessukim which describe the Avodah of Yom Kippur?

There are several Medrashim that seem to address one or both of these questions, including a Medrash Yelamdenu brought in Yalkut Shimoni: “Re’ah Mah Hayu Chavivin Banav Shel Aharon SheAchar Misasan Mazkiran HaKasuv.” The fact that the Passuk mentions the Bnei Aharon posthumously indicates a level of Chiba. By way of proof to this idea, the Medrash points out that the only other time this occurs is with respect to Moshe Rabbeinu as Sefer Yehoshua begins with the words “VaYehi Acharei Mos Moshe…”

This Medrash seems to answer the first question on the Passuk: the words “Acharei Mos Shnei Bnei Aharon…” are used to show Chiba between HKBH and the sons of Aharon. The second question, however, remains unanswered: why does the Torah use this opportunity to tell us about the Chibbah? Why are these words used in relation to the Avodas Yom HaKippurim specifically?

We must also understand the overall premise of this Medrash. Why does mentioning a Tzaddik after their Misa connote Chibba? In addition, if it is true that “Kivan Shemes Adam Na’aseh Chafshi Min HaMitzvos”, what is the value, so to speak, of the Tzaddik once he is no longer alive? Why does the Torah talk about Nadav and Avihu to show Chibba when they are in a position of Chafshi Min HaMitzvos?

To answer these questions and better understand these various Divrei Chazal we can turn to a novel explanation of the words “Kivan Shemes Adam Na’aseh Chafshi Min HaMitzvos”.

The Yismach Moshe explains the Gemara in Shabbos with an important insight into Avodas Hashem. As we know, each person has a Chelek HaRuchani, a Neshama, that yearns to come close to Hashem. The challenge is that we also have a Chelek HaGashmi that intercedes and acts as a barrier between our Neshama and its ultimate goal. We therefore have Mitzvos, physical actions, that allow us to use our Guf for Kedusha, diminishing its role as a barrier to our Neshama, and allowing us to attain the heights for which we yearn. This is the ultimate purpose of Mitzvos—to condition our Chelek HaGashmi to be subservient to our Neshama, and not act as a detriment to our desires for Kirvas Elokim.

When a person is Niftar, however, his Chelek HaGashmi is no longer relevant—he has no physical needs and the barrier is therefore removed. If his life was dedicated to Kirvas Elokim, if all he ever wanted was to be closer to HKBH, than the removal of this barrier allows his Neshama to be uninhibited, enjoying Devaykus B’Hashem at the highest level. The Mes is therefore said to be “Chafshi Min HaMitzvos”, because he no longer requires Mitzvos to attain new heights. Once the Chelek HaGashmi is no longer part of the equation, Mitzvos are no longer necessary—he is “Chafshi Min HaMitzvos”, free to be close to HKBH without any physical actions.

This idea can help us in our Avodas Hashem, but also in understanding the Medrash Yelamdenu. If someone has attained true greatness their status in the Olam HaEmes is obvious because they will enjoy that uninhibited Kirvas Elokim that their life prepared them for. The extent to which one truly desired DEveykus B’Hahsem while they were alive can be seen once they are “Chafshi Min HaMitzvos”, and so the Pessukim therefore speak only about those who are Chaviv in this regard.

The words “Acharei Mos Shnei Bnei Aharon…” are therefore a testament to the character of of Nadav V’Avihu, about whom the Passuk says “B’Korvai Ekadesh”, but are also directly relevant to Yom Kippur. There is one day a year in which our Chelek HaGashmi is rendered all but irrelevant: the Inuyim of the Yom HaKadosh are what allow us to attain the heights on that day, as the barrier that exists all year is temporarily lowered. This Kedusha is so extreme that is on this one day that the Kohen Gadol can enter the Kodesh HaKodashim—free of any Gashmi, one who is truly Kadosh can dare to experience Kirvas Elokim that is otherwise unattainable on this earth. It is specifically with regard to this day that the idea of Re’ah Mah Hayu Chavivin Banav Shel Aharon is revealed, for the message of this idea resonates loudly each year on Yom Kippur.

Perhaps these ideas can allow us to understand the words “BaMesim Chafshi Kimo Chalalim” in context as well.

Of course we may question the motives of one who wishes to escape the confines of this world to avoid further physical pain. After all, “Lo HaMesim Yahelleu Kah”, or as the Pasusk in this Perek puts it, “HaYesupar Bakever Chasedcha.” This is not the emotion expressed in this Passuk, however. The Meshorrer longs for an existence of “BaMesim Chafshi Kimo Chalalim” because the pains of Galus inhibit his growth in Ruchnias. When one is concerned with his survival and that of those around him, he cannot properly focus on Avodas HaShem. The existence of “Kivan Shemes Adam Na’aseh Chafshi Min HaMitzvos” is therefore attractive: though he may not be able to do Mitzvos or sing Hallel to Hahsem, the elimination of physical concerns will allow him to attain the Devaykus Hashem for which he truly yearns.

The message of this Perek is one that can help us all: we must see the difficulties of Galus through the lens of Bnei Korach and Heiman HaEzrachi. Aside from the difficulties that threaten our Chelek HaRuchani, we must ask Hashem to save us from the threats to our Gashmi. If we notice the ways in which our growth and Kirvas Elokim are threatened by Galus, perhaps our cries of “Lama Hashem Tiznach Nafshi Tastir Panecha Mimeni” will be answered that much sooner.