Exclusively Excluded: Aharon and the Menorah

Behaloscha

Exclusively Excluded

בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת־הַנֵּרֹת אֶל־מוּל פְּנֵי הַמְּנוֹרָה יָאִירוּ שִׁבְעַת הַנֵּרוֹת

אוֹי לִי שֶׁמָּא בִּשְׁבִילִי אֵין הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְקַבֵּל שִׁבְטוֹ שֶׁל לֵוִי

Parshas Behaloscha begins with a Tzivuy that Moshe Rabbeinu was to give to Aharon Hakohen: דַּבֵּר אֶל־אַהֲרֹן וְאָמַרְתָּ אֵלָיו בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת־הַנֵּרֹת אֶל־מוּל פְּנֵי הַמְּנוֹרָה יָאִירוּ שִׁבְעַת הַנֵּרוֹת. Rashi, here, asks a simple question: לָמָּה נִסְמְכָה פָרָשַׁת הַמְּנוֹרָה לְפָרָשַׁת הַנְּשִׂיאִים. Parshas Nasso ends by speaking at length about the Korbanos that were brought be the נְּשִׂיאִים during the Chanukas HaMishkan leading Rashi to ask: what is the connection between those Pessukim and the Tzivuy given to Aharon about the Menorah, with which Parshas Behaloscha begins?

The answer given by Rashi is somewhat well-known: לְפִי שֶׁכְּשָׁרָאָה אַהֲרֹן חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים חָלְשָׁה אָז דַּעְתּוֹ, שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה עִמָּהֶם. Aharon was discouraged by the fact each Shevet was represented during the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים, save Shevet Levi. HKBH responded to Aharons feelings, saying חַיֶּיךָ שֶׁלְּךָ גְדוֹלָה מִשֶּׁלָּהֶם, שֶׁאַתָּה מַדְלִיק וּמֵטִיב אֶת הַנֵּרוֹת. The Mitzvah of preparing and lighting the Menorah, which was exclusive to Shevet Levi, is far greater than participating in the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים and Aharon therefore had no reason to despair.

The connection between the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים and the words בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת־הַנֵּרֹת is now understood: the Tzivuy that Aharon received with these words was meant to dispel the חֲלִישׁוּת הַדַּעַת engendered by the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים.

While the words of Rashi are based on a Tanchuma , the Medrash Rabba here brings a Memra that is slightly different.

The Medrash begins by pointing out the Seder of the Pessukim, connecting the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים to the Mitzvah of Menorah: מַה כְּתִיב לְמַעְלָה מִן הָעִנְיָן, וַיְהִי בְּיוֹם כַּלּוֹת משֶׁה, וַיַּקְרִיבוּ נְשִׂיאֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְאַחַר כָּךְ: דַּבֵּר אֶל אַהֲרֹן בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת הַנֵּרֹת. The connection between the two is explained as follows: אַתְּ מוֹצֵא לְמַעְלָה אַחַד עָשָׂר שְׁבָטִים הִקְרִיבוּ וְשֵׁבֶט אֶפְרַיִם הִקְרִיב, וְכָל הַנְּשִׂיאִים הִקְרִיבוּ חוּץ מִנְּשִׂיאוֹ שֶׁל לֵוִי. During the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים, all the Shevatim were represented by their Nasi, other than Shevet Levi. The Medrash continues, noting that Aharon was the Nasi of Shevet Levi, but had not been part of the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים, leading him to exclaim: אוֹי לִי שֶׁמָּא בִּשְׁבִילִי אֵין הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְקַבֵּל שִׁבְטוֹ שֶׁל לֵוִי. Aharon assumed that since he was the Nasi of Shevet Levi, it was in some way due to him that they were not included in the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים.

The Medrash continues, telling us that Hashem said to Moshe Rabbeinu: לֵךְ אֱמֹר לוֹ לְאַהֲרֹן אַל תִּתְיָרֵא לִגְדוֹלָה מִזּוֹ אַתָּה מְתֻקָּן. There was a greater role for Aharon to fill, namely the Hadlakas HaMenorah , as the Passuk tells us בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת־הַנֵּרֹת. The Medrash concludes, explaining why the Mitzvah of Menorah was considered greater than the Kobanos : הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת, כָּל זְמַן שֶׁבֵּית הַמִּקְדָשׁ קַיָּם הֵם נוֹהֲגִים, אֲבָל הַנֵּרוֹת לְעוֹלָם. Whereas the Korbanos could only be brought while the Mikdash stood, the נֵּרוֹת were forever.

This Medrash is, in some ways, very similar to the Tanchuma upon which the Pshat of Rashi is based—both assume that the Tzivuy of בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת־ הַנֵּרֹת was related to the fact that Shevet Levi was not involved in the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים. There are, however, several questions specifically related to the Medrash Rabba that must be addressed.

First, the Medrash mentions that אַחַד עָשָׂר שְׁבָטִים הִקְרִיבוּ and then וְשֵׁבֶט אֶפְרַיִם הִקְרִיב, which makes it sound like the Nasi for Shevet Ephraim—Elishama ben Amihud —brought his Korban last, on the twelfth day. If so, the Medrash would be telling us that once Aharon saw that the final Nasi had brought his Korban it was clear to him that Shevet Levi would not be included, leading to his question. This, however, was not the case—Elishama ben Amihud brought his Korban on the seventh day, relatively early in the span of the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים. Why then does the Medrash mention this Shevet in particular? What is the relevance of the fact that שֵׁבֶט אֶפְרַיִם הִקְרִיב to the thought process of Aharon HaKohen ?

Second, faced with the reality that Shevet Levi was not included in the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים, why did Aharon assume that this was due to him? Why were the words שֶׁמָּא בִּשְׁבִילִי אֵין הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְקַבֵּל שִׁבְטוֹ שֶׁל לֵוִי his immediate reaction? It could have been that there was another reason that Shevet Levi did not bring Korbanos during those days, one that had nothing to do with Aharon—why did the thought cross the mind of Aharon HaKohen that he was to blame?

Some suggest that Aharon assumed that it was his role in the חֵטְא הָעֵגֶל that disqualified him from bringing Korbanos as part of the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים. If this was the case, the sentiment expressed by the words שֶׁמָּא בִּשְׁבִילִי would be well placed—Aharon assumed that since he had a role, however minor it was, in the חֵטְא הָעֵגֶל he was not allowed to bring the Korbanos and he was the Nasi of Shevet Levi, as the Medrash points out, so it was because of him that the entire Shevet was not able to participate in the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים.

This, however, is difficult to assume.

At the very beginning of Parshas Shemini, the Passuk says וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל־אַהֲרֹן קַח־לְךָ עֵגֶל בֶּן־בָּקָר לְחַטָּאת וְאַיִל לְעֹלָה תְּמִימִם. The very first Kobran that Moshe Rabbeinu told Aharon to bring on the יּוֹם הַשְּׁמִינִי was an עֵגֶל בֶּן־בָּקָר לְחַטָּאת. Rashi, there explains why this was the case: לְהוֹדִיעַ שֶׁכִּפֵּר לוֹ הַקָּבָּ"ה עַל יְדֵי עֵגֶל זֶה עַל מַעֲשֵׂה הָעֵגֶל שֶׁעָשָֹה. To the extent that Aharon was in some way bore responsibility for the מַעֲשֵׂה הָעֵגֶל , this Korban was meant to allay his fears, showing him שֶׁכִּפֵּר לוֹ הַקָּבָּ"ה .

The יּוֹם הַשְּׁמִינִי, as we know , was the first day of the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים and it was on that day that Aharon was unequivocally told, שֶׁכִּפֵּר לוֹ הַקָּבָּ"ה עַל יְדֵי עֵגֶל זֶה עַל מַעֲשֵׂה הָעֵגֶל שֶׁעָשָֹה. If so, why would he have later assumed, after the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים was completed, that it was his role in the מַעֲשֵׂה הָעֵגֶל that prevented Shevet Levi from participating? It is clear from the Medrash that Aharon felt responsible for Shevet Levi having been excluded, and said שֶׁמָּא בִּשְׁבִילִי אֵין הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְקַבֵּל שִׁבְטוֹ שֶׁל לֵוִי, but it does not seem that these thoughts could have been related to his role in the מַעֲשֵׂה הָעֵגֶל .

If so, why did Aharon say this? Why did this thought, שֶׁמָּא בִּשְׁבִילִי , cross his mind?

The final question to be asked on the Medrash concerns the response given by HKBH: לֵךְ אֱמֹר לוֹ לְאַהֲרֹן אַל תִּתְיָרֵא לִגְדוֹלָה מִזּוֹ אַתָּה מְתֻקָּן הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת, כָּל זְמַן שֶׁבֵּית הַמִּקְדָשׁ קַיָּם הֵם נוֹהֲגִים, אֲבָל הַנֵּרוֹת לְעוֹלָם. Why was the Menorah, with its characteristic of הַנֵּרוֹת לְעוֹלָם the response to the concerns of Aharon? The words אַל תִּתְיָרֵא seem to indicate that the Tzivuy of בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת־הַנֵּרֹת was in some way an answer to the concern that Aharon had voiced--שֶׁמָּא בִּשְׁבִילִי אֵין הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְקַבֵּל שִׁבְטוֹ שֶׁל לֵוִי—how so? Why was the Mitzvah of בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת־ הַנֵּרֹת specifically used to allay the fears of Aharon, as the Medrash seems to indicate?

Perhaps if we answer the first question, we can better understand the Medrash.

As we have seen, the words שֵׁבֶט אֶפְרַיִם הִקְרִיב cannot simply mean that Aharon saw the Nasi of that Shevet bring his Korban and realized that there was no day available for Shevet Levi—for this occurred earlier in the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים. The Meforshei Hamedrash suggest that Aharon understood that Shevet Menashe would represent the offspring of Yosef Hatzaddik , since Menashe was older than Ephraim. Accordingly, when he saw that Shevet Ephraim had indeed participated, Aharon assumed there was no day remaining for Shevet Levi. This too is difficult to understand because the Torah never said that there were only twelve days of חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים, HKBH only told Mosheנָשִׂיא אֶחָד לַיּוֹם נָשִׂיא אֶחָד לַיּוֹם יַקְרִיבוּ אֶת־קׇרְבָּנָם לַחֲנֻכַּת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, that is there was one Nasi per day but no total days are mentioned. Why then would the fact that Shevet Ephraim participated indicate that there would not be a day for Shevet Levi—perhaps there were to be thirteen days of the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים?

It therefore stands to reason that it was only when Aharon realized that the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים had come to an end without the participation of his Shevet that he said שֶׁמָּא בִּשְׁבִילִי . If so, we must understand why that Sh evet Ephraim is mentioned in the Medrash—in what way did the inclusion of this Shevet indicate to Aharon that the exclusion of Shevet Levi may be attributed to him?

We can perhaps answer this question based on an insight into the nature of Shevet Ephraim, as seen through the Divrei Chazal.

The Pessukim in Sefer Yechezkel speak about the עֲצָמוֹת הַיְבֵשׁוֹת that the Navi revived, and the Gemara in Sanhedrin asks a question: וּמַאן נִינְהוּ מֵתִים שֶׁהֶחְיָה יְחֶזְקֵאל, who were the מֵתִים that Yechezkel brought back to life? The Gemara answers אֵלּוּ בְּנֵי אֶפְרַיִם שֶׁמָּנוּ לַקֵּץ וְטָעוּ, the עֲצָמוֹת הַיְבֵשׁוֹת were the bones of the Bnei Ephraim who miscalculated the term of the Shibud and left Mitzrayim prematurely. The Pessukim in Divrei Hayamim tells us that they were killed by the אַנְשֵׁי גַת הַנּוֹלָדִים בָּאָרֶץ, and the Gemara explains that it was these מֵתִים that Yechezkel later revived.

In relating this story, the Gemara cites an additional Passuk from Divrei Hayamim that does not seem directly related to the discussion at hand: וַיִּתְאַבֵּל אֶפְרַיִם אֲבִיהֶם יָמִים רַבִּים וַיָּבֹאוּ אֶחָיו לְנַחֲמוֹ. Their father, Ephraim, was מִתְאַבֵּל over the deaths of his children for a long time, and his brothers tried to console him.

The Medrash in Parshas Beshalach brings this story on the words וְלֹא־נָחָם אֱלֹקים דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ פְּלִשְׁתִּים, explaining that HKBH took Bnei Yisroel on a route that avoided the spot where the עֲצָמוֹת הַיְבֵשׁוֹת lay so that they would not be frightened. The Medrash adds two points that are not mentioned in the Gemara, however. First, it explains the source of their miscalculation: שֶׁחִשְּׁבוּ מִיּוֹם שֶׁנִּדְבַּר עִם אַבְרָהָם בֵּין הַבְּתָרִים וְטָעוּ שְׁלשִׁים שָׁנָה. They started counting from the בְּרִית בֵּין הַבְּתָרִים and therefore thought that the קֵּץ was thirty years prior to Yetzias Mitzrayim .

Second, the Medrash asks a question: מִי הָיָה חָפֵץ לְהוֹצִיא אֶל הוֹרֵג בָּנָיו, who wished to kill the children of Ephraim? The answer is surprising: אֶפְרָיִם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְאֶפְרַיִם לְהוֹצִיא אֶל הוֹרֵג בָּנָיו. The Passuk in Hoshea seems to indicate tha Ephraim himself wished his children to be wiped out by the אַנְשֵׁי גַת הַנּוֹלָדִים בָּאָרֶץ.

This clearly requires explanation.

R’ Yitzchok Yadler , in Tiferes Tzion, explains that the two pieces of information added by the Medrash are related to one another.

There was a Kabalah from the Avos , which all the Shevatim had, that included the date from which the four hundred years of the Shibud would be counted—the birth of Yitzchok Avinu . The Aveirah of the Bnei Ephraim, then, was not that they left Mitzrayim , but that they did not keep the Mesorah, that they did not heed the words of the Gedolim who came before them. Their father, Ephraim ben Yosef, was still alive at the time and he understood that this was an example that could not be followed—if the Bnei Ephraim had been successful in their journey, it would have set a precedent that the Divrei Chachamim could be disregarded, and therefore the Passuk tells us אֶפְרַיִם לְהוֹצִיא אֶל הוֹרֵג בָּנָיו.

This was the legacy of Shevet Ephraim: over thirty thousand members of the Shevet had been massacred, at the behest of their forefather, who was then left bereft, but all in the name of a Kiddush Hashem. By allowing, even hoping, that his offspring would be punished, Ephraim set an example for all generations about the primacy of the Divrei Chachomim .

Perhaps it was this idea that affected the thinking of Aharon Hakohen at the end of the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים.

When Aharon saw that Shevet Ephraim, with their history, had been included among the Shevatim he realized the value of a true leader: because Ephraim ben Yosef acted against his instincts as a father in the interest of Kvod Shamayim, his children retained their place among Klal Yisroel, and were included in the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים.

This led Aharon to a thought: if Shevet Levi was not included, even if it wasn’t because of his actions, it would be attributed to him nonetheless: שֶׁמָּא בִּשְׁבִילִי אֵין הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְקַבֵּל שִׁבְטוֹ שֶׁל לֵוִי. If the Shevet wasn’t Zoche to participate in the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים it lay at his feet, as the Nasi of the Shevet , and he bore responsibility. Perhaps, he reasoned, they had in some way gone against the Mesorah like Shevet Ephraim.

It was for this reason that that Hashem told Moshe Rabbinu לֵךְ אֱמֹר לוֹ לְאַהֲרֹן אַל תִּתְיָרֵא לִגְדוֹלָה מִזּוֹ אַתָּה מְתֻקָּן. The omission of Shevet Levi from the חֲנֻכַּת הַנְּשִׂיאִים was not because the Shevet was lacking, but because they had a higher calling. To highlight this point, the Mitzvah that was given at that time was one that lasted forever, even in Galus through the Menorah of Chanukah.

The Mitzvah of בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת־ הַנֵּרֹת is one that speaks directly to the unending chain of the Mesorah, highlighting the fact that Aharon and his Shevet , about whom Moshe Rabbeinu later said יוֹרוּ מִשְׁפָּטֶיךָ לְיַעֲקֹב וְתוֹרָתְךָ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, were not only continuing the Mesorah, but in fact central to its very existence.