Affective Actions

There are many people who we learn about throughout our travels through Tanach who can be seen as exemplary, and from whom we can learn a great deal. The actions and words of the Avos Hakedoshim, the Shevatim, Moshe Rabbeinu, and Aharon HaKohen are the foundation of our lives, the root of our entire existence as Yidden. There are others—many of those that we meet in Neviim and Kesuvim—about whom we know less, and who have many fewer Pessukim dedicated to their lives, but whom we can learn a great deal from. In this week’s Parsha, however, we find the story of a group of men whose names we do not learn, whose backgrounds and stories we have very limited knowledge, and who speak only a few words, but teach us a great lesson nonetheless.

The Torah relates that at the beginning of Chodesh Nissan in the second year of Bnei Yisroel’s travels through the Midbar, Hashem told Moshe that we would once again be required to bring the Korban Pesach. Moshe conveyed this Tzivuy to Klal Yisroel as per the instructions of Hashem.

At this point the Torah interjects with a story: there was a group of men who were Tammei because they handled a dead body and were therefore prohibited from bringing the Korban Pesach. These men approached Moshe and explained their status as Temmim L’Mes: “Anachnu Temmeim L’Nefesh Adam.” They then uttered two words that, to me at least, are astounding for the amount of meaning conveyed in just two words: “Lama Nigarah?”

Moshe seems to find merit in their argument, and told them to standby while he asked Hashem what the Halacha should be.

As a result of their claim—that it was unfair for them to be unable to bring the Korban Pesach—a new Mitzvah was taught to Klal Yisroel: Pesach Sheini. From that point forth, those who were unable to bring the Korban Pesach on Erev Pesach—due to a legitimate hindrance—could bring the Korban one month later, on Pesach Sheni.

The courage and dedication of these men is extraordinary and the outcome of their claim—a brand new Mitzvah—is certainly remarkable. But the exact nature of their conversation with Moshe and the root of their request must be well understood, for within lies a message that can help us all in our paths of Avodas Hashem.

There are a number of questions that can be asked on this section of the parsha. The Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh, among others, asks a simple question with regard to the claim of these men. They began the discussion by telling Moshe: “Anachnu Temmeim L’Nefesh Adam” and proceeded to ask why they could not bring the Korban Peach. But hadn’t they just explained why they were not allowed to participate in this Motzvah? “Anachnu Temmeim L’Nefesh Adam” that alone was the disqualifying fact—and they seemed to know that—why did they begin by explaining this fact and then asking why they couldn’t bring the Korban?”

Further, how are we to understand the response given by Moshe: , “Imdu V’Eshma Mah Yitzaveh Hashem Lachem.” From as outsider’s perspective, this group seems to be beyond reason. They understand the Halachos governing the Korban Pesach and, on the face of it, were asking for a special dispensation. Why did Moshe feel that their claim and complaint warranted a dispensation? What was his reason for taking the question directly to Hashem. He certainly would not have done so if he did not find at least a significant merit to their claim—what was the point that this group made that Moshe felt deserved a direct consultation with Hashem?

In a more general sense, we must understand why there is such ambiguity when it comes to the identities of these individuals. The Torah not only omits their names, but also the exact nature of their story: we are told that they were Tammei, but not why. In fact, the Gemarah in Meseches Sukkah brings three opinions as far as when and how these men became Tammei: R’ Yosi Hagelili says they were those carrying the Arono Shel Yosef; R’ Akiva holds that they were Mishael and Eltzaphon, who were responsible for removing the bodies of Nadav and Avihu from the Moshkan; R’ Yitzchok says that there was a Mes Mitzvah in the Midbar, and these individuals were busy with that Mes.

Why did the Torah leave this point open to speculation? The Parsah begins with a short introduction: “Vayhi Anashim Asher Hayu Temeim L’Nefesh Adam” Why not clarify why they were Tammei?

I think that perhaps a better understanding of these Pessukim will help us understand one of the messages that is contained within this Parsha.

R’ Baruch Mordechai Ezrachi brings the the Sifri on the words “VaYomru HaAnashim HaHema Elav” which says: “Magid Shehayu Bnei Adam Kesharim, V’Charedim Al HaMitzvos. ” R’ Ezrachi explains that there was something about their actual words, something about their Tayna which caused Moshe Rabbeinu to pay them heed. There seems to be an element of “Charedim Al HaMitzvos” which can be understood from the way that their question was asked, which is the reason that Moshe judged their claim worth further examination; it was for this reason that he said “Imdu V’Eshma Mah Yitzaveh Hashem Lachem.”

What was the crux of their question? In what way did their actual words indicate to Moshe Rabbeinu that they were “Bnei Adam Kesherim” and “Charedim Al HaMitzvos”?

As we mentioned earlier, the central point of their claim was two short words: “Lama Nigarah?” Most people translate these words as “Why should we be left out?” or “Why are we kept back?” I think that perhaps there is another understanding.

The Ibn Ezra makes a simple comment on the words “Lama Nigarah”: “Mibinyan Nifal” This is an explanation of the Dikduk of these words, and means that they are Passive in the future tense. Why did the Ibn Ezra choose to explain this here? There are many verbs found within the Torah, why did he see fit to define the Dikduk characteristics of these words specifically?

Perhaps we can understand the claim of these Anashim better based on the words of the Ibn Ezra.

The usual translation of the words “Lama Nigarah” is “Why should we be left out?” or “What should we be prevented.” In this understanding, their question seems to be based on the actual Hakrava of the Korban Pesach: “Why should we be excluded from bringing the Korban Pesach?”

There may be another understanding as well, but let us first turn to the first part of their statement: “Anachnu Tammeim L’Nefesh Adam.”

As we mentioned, it is curious that the Torah mentions that these individuals were Tammei because they had come in contact with a Mes, but leaves out the details of whom that Mes was. Perhaps there is a message in that omission.

In each of the three circumstances mentioned in the Gemarah in Sukkah—Atzmos Yosef, Nadav and Avihu, or a Mes Mitzvah—there may have been alterior motives for their handling of the Mesim. There may have been a sense of Kavod or heroism that would compel someone to become involved with the Mitzvah. We can imagine that being selected to carry the Atzmos Yosef, for example, would be a position that bore prestige—not just anyone would be Zoche to that Mitzvah.

Maybe that is why the Torah, and the men themselves, left out the name or names of the Messim that they were Tammei from: to let us know that the identities was not part of their Cheshbon. These were people who did this Chesed purely because it was a Chesed, seeking no Kavod or prestige for their actions. The fact that the Mes may have been a Tzaddik played no role in their decision to carry out the Chesed.

R’ Chaim Shmulevitz, in more than one place in Sichas Mussar, explains that when a person performs Chesed, especially in a way that is completely selfless, it elevates him. If a person is able to put aside all of his own feelings, any ego or illusions of grandeur, and perform true Chesed, he is not the same person that he was before he performed that act of Chesed.

R’ Chaim explains that this is the reason that the Torah has such strict guidelines for the appropriate way to do Chesed, and almost superhuman expectations of one who is a Ba’al Chesed—because doing Chesed elevates us to the point that we are able to live up to the standard set by the Torah in this area.

These men, the Anashim, understood this. They were cognizant of the affect that doing Chesed, or really any Mitzvah, has on a person. They understood that they had been elevated by their act of Chesed that caused them to become Tammei, and it was this awareness that led to their question of “Lama Nigarah.”

The word “Nigarah” can be related to the word “Gara” which means less or decreased. As the Ibn Ezra explains, this form of the word is passive and future tense. These men were asking: “Why should we be made less?”

These were people who understood Mitzvos, they understood that by not bringing the Korban Pesach, their Ruchnias would suffer, that they would not be able to reach the Madreigah that the addition of this Mitzvah would bring. That was why they began by explaining how they became Tammei—through an act of selfless Chesed—and concluded by asking how it was possible that rather than be elevated, their Ruchnias would suffer as a result.

When Moshe Rabbeinu heard the full extent of their claim, he immediately recognized that these were “Bnei Adam Kesharim, V’Charedim Al HaMitzvos.” Their claim was rooted in a deep understanding of the affect that Mitzvos have on a person, and as the Seforno says, a comprehension of the concept of Mitzvah Goreres Mitzvah. For this reason, Moshe felt that there must be substance to their claim, and that it warranted a clarification of the Ratzon Hashem.

The message of the Anashim is clear: we must realize that when we do Mitzvos it affects us. If we put our efforts and attention into Mitzvos we are elevated by our actions. As a result, we are Zoche to the opportunity to do more Mitzvos, because we find ourselves on a new level in Ruchnias.

The Anashim that approached Moshe Rabbeinu had a keen awareness of this power, and their expression of this understanding caused them to be the source of a whole new Mitzvah: Pesach Sheni. If we can be similarly attuned to the results of our actions, to the way our Mitzvos affect us, and the way our negative actions have an adverse effect, we too can be Zoche to become “Bnei Adam Kesharim, V’Charedim Al HaMitzvos.”