Leadership Staff

וַיְהִי מִמׇּחֳרָת וַיָּבֹא מֹשֶׁה אֶל אֹהֶל הָעֵדוּת וְהִנֵּה פָּרַח מַטֵּה אַהֲרֹן לְבֵית לֵוִי וַיֹּצֵא פֶרַח וַיָּצֵץ צִיץ וַיִּגְמֹל שְׁקֵדִים

וּמַטֵּה אַהֲרֹן יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים הוּא הַמַּטֶּה שֶׁהָיָה בְּיַד יְהוּדָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וּמַטְךָ אֲשֶׁר בְּיָדֶךָ

The destruction of Korach V’Adoso was followed by a popular uprising that precipitated a Mageifah , which Aharon stopped using the Ketores , at the direction of Moshe Rabbeinu . After this, the Torah tells us that HKBH instructed Moshe to devise a test that would prove who had truly been chosen to serve the role of Kohen.

The process is described by the Pessukim: “דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְקַח מֵאִתָּם מַטֶּה מַטֶּה לְבֵית אָב מֵאֵת כׇּל נְשִׂיאֵהֶם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם”. Each Shevet would place a Matteh , upon which the name of their Nasi would be written. These Mattos would be placed in the Ohel Moed, and the result would be seen the next day: “וְהָיָה הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר אֶבְחַר בּוֹ מַטֵּהוּ יִפְרָח”. This test would serve to quell all dissent: “וַהֲשִׁכֹּתִי מֵעָלַי אֶת תְּלֻנּוֹת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר הֵם מַלִּינִם עֲלֵי”.

The Shevatim did as they were instructed, and the next day the answer was clear: “וְהִנֵּה פָּרַח מַטֵּה אַהֲרֹן לְבֵית לֵוִי” The Matteh of Shevet Levi, upon which the name of Aharon HaKohen was written, was the one that had sprouted.

The Medrash, here, addresses an unasked question: where did the “מַטֵּה אַהֲרֹן” come from? This question seems relatively elementary, but the answer given is anything but: “הוּא הַמַּטֶּה שֶׁהָיָה בְּיַד יְהוּדָה”. The Matteh that Aharon used, teaches the Medrash, was the same Matteh that Yehuda gave to Tamar. The Passuk in Parshas Vayeshev tells us that Tamar requested several items as an Eravon, which Yehuda gave to her : “ וַתֹּאמֶר חֹתָמְךָ וּפְתִילֶךָ וּמַטְּךָ אֲשֶׁר בְּיָדֶךָ וַיִּתֶּן לָהּ”. Later, as she is about to be brought to her death, Tamar makes another request of Yehudah: “הַכֶּר נָא לְמִי הַחֹתֶמֶת וְהַפְּתִילִים וְהַמַּטֶּה הָאֵלֶּה.” As we know, Yehuda admitted his error at that time, saving Tamar’s life.

Why does the Medrash assume that the Matteh used by Aharon HaKohen to identify “הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר אֶבְחַר בּוֹ” was the Matteh of Yehudah? What possible connection could exist between the Matteh that Yehuda owned so many years before and the Matteh Aharon?

It is interesting to note that the Medrash does not entertain the notion that the Matteh actually belonged to Aharon, instead offering two alternative options. First, “יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים הוּא הַמַּטֶּה שֶׁהָיָה בְּיַד משֶׁה וּמֵעַצְמוֹ פָּרַח”. Some say the Matteh of Moshe Rabbeinu , which we are familiar with from the Makkos and Krias Yam Suf , was used here. Alternatively, the Medrash tells us, “ְאִית דְּאָמְרֵי נָטַל משֶׁה קוֹרָה אַחַת וַחֲתָכָהּ לִשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר נְסָרִים”. Some suggest that Moshe took one beam and cut it into twelve pieces, so that each of the twelve Mattos came from the same exact source.

The truth is that these two Pshatim are easier to understand. The Matteh of Moshe was used to do many Nissim, and so would fit naturally into these circumstances. The final option, “נָטַל משֶׁה קוֹרָה אַחַת וַחֲתָכָהּ לִשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר נְסָרִים”, has a logical advantage as the Medrash explains: “שֶׁלֹא יֹאמְרוּ מַקְלוֹ הָיָה לַח וְהִפְרִיחַ”. Since all the Mattos came from the same source, there could be no argument that one was more likely to sprout than the others.

How then can we understand the first Pshat given by the Medrash? Why would the “מַּטֶּה שֶׁהָיָה בְּיַד יְהוּדָה” have been in the possession of Aharon HaKohen , and why would it have been used in this test?

Although the Medrash appears to establish a connection between Aharon and Yehudah through this Matteh , it seems that this link may actually run deeper.

When HKBH tells Moshe Rabbeinu how to set up the test using the Mattos, the Passuk says: “דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְקַח מֵאִתָּם מַטֶּה מַטֶּה לְבֵית אָב מֵאֵת כׇּל נְשִׂיאֵהֶם”. The Medrash Rabba in Parshas Vayetzei , in discussing the children of Leah, quotes these words and tells us: “רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר עָלוּ בָּהֶם שְׁנֵי שְׁבָטִים, שֵׁבֶט כְּהֻנָּה וְשֵׁבֶט מַלְכוּת. אַתְּ מוֹצֵא שֶׁכָּל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בָּזֶה כָּתוּב בָּזֶה”.

The implication of the Medrash is that the use of the term “מַטֶּה מַטֶּה לְבֵית אָב” hints at the fact that there are two Shevatim that bear leadership of Klal Yisroel—Shevet Levi and Shevi Yehudah—and the two are equal: “כָּל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בָּזֶה כָּתוּב בָּזֶה”. The Medrash goes on to enumerate the many similarities between Kehuna , represented by Shevet Levi, and Malchus, the mark of Shevet Yehudah. Some of these similarities are practical—both are anointed with Shemen , for example—and some are related to words that appear in Pessukim that discuss both, but the Medrash makes it clear that Kehuna and Malchus are closely connected.

In one sense, this Medrash helps us understand the Medrash in Parshas Korach: the innate connection between Shevet Levi and Shevet Yehuda, between Kehunah and Malchus, can explain why the “מַטֵּה אַהֲרֹן לְבֵית לֵוִי” is said to have belonged to Yehudah. That said, we must still understand not only what this relationship teaches us, but why it is specifically expressed here, where the Torah speaks about the Mattos used to indicate “הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר אֶבְחַר בּוֹ”?

If the connection between Kehuna and Malchus is related to this singular Matteh —the one that was both the “מַטֵּה אַהֲרֹן לְבֵית לֵוִי” and “הַמַּטֶּה שֶׁהָיָה בְּיַד יְהוּדָה”— it would seem vital to understand its ultimate origins, as identified by Chazal.

In Parshas Chukas , when it becomes necessary to extract water from the Selah, Moshe is told: “קַח אֶת הַמַּטֶּה”, with a “Heh HaYediah ” which indicates that this was a particular Matteh . The Yalkut explains that indeed it was:

זֶה הַמַּטֶּה שֶׁהָיָה בְּיַד יַעֲקֹב אָבִינוּ...וְהוּא הַמַּטֶּה שֶׁהָיָה בְּיַד יְהוּדָה...וְהוּא הָיָה בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה...וְהוּא הָיָה בְּיַד אַהֲרֹן... וְהוּא הָיָה בְּיַד דָּוִד... וְהוּא הָיָה בְּיַד כָּל מֶלֶךְ וּמֶלֶךְ עַד שֶׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ

This was the very Matteh about which Yakkov Avinu said “כִּי בְמַקְלִי עָבַרְתִּי אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן הַזֶּה”, and it was passed to Yehudah, was then used by both Moshe and Aharon, later by Dovid and the Malchei Yehudah that followed.

When the Medrash tells us “וּמַטֵּה אַהֲרֹן...הוּא הַמַּטֶּה שֶׁהָיָה בְּיַד יְהוּדָה” it is referring to this Matteh , the one that originally belonged to Yaakov Avinu , which he brought with him to Bais Lavan , and which was later passed from generation to generation. It was this Matteh that was shared by Aharon and Yehuda, and represented their respective leadership roles.

How can we understand this? We know that there are no totems in Yiddishkeit—the Matteh was not a good luck charm and certainly not a magical implement. Why then was something as simple as a staff passed on from Yaakov Avinu all the way to the Malchei Yehudah up until the Churban? This is an especially important question because the role of this Matteh has not come to an end, as the Yalkut tells us: “כֵן עָתִיד אוֹתוֹ הַמַּטֵּה לִמָּסֵר לְמֶלֶךְ הַמָּשִׁיחַ”. This Matteh will be borne by Moshiach as well, and will be used “לִרְדּוֹת בּוֹ אֶת אֻמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם”, to punish our enemies.

It should be added that there is an attendant Yalkut , in Parshas Shemos , that traces the same Matteh all the way from Adam HaRishon to Yaakov Avinu in great detail . There we learn that the Matteh was itself taken from Gan Eden and passed from one generation to the next.

The role of this Matteh in our history and our future, and its symbolism, must be better understood.

The Arugas HaBosem , in a short piece on Parshas VaYishlach , explains the role of the Matteh in a way that can perhaps allow us to better understand its importance.

When Yaakov Avinu sends a message to Esav, he says: “כִּי בְמַקְלִי עָבַרְתִּי אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן הַזֶּה”, which is generally understood to mean that he had only his Makleh , his staff, when he crossed the Yarden. The Arugas HaBosem , however, explains these words slightly differently.

While in the home of Yitzchok Avinu , Yaakov had imbibed such a Ruach of Bitachon , such a clear and present concept of the Hashgachas Hahsem , that when he reached the Yarden, he merely placed his Makel in the water, and the river split. Such was the Bitachon of Yaakov Avinu at that moment that he was completely removed from Teva, and relied soley on HKBH.

Years later, when he encountered Esav, Yaakov felt that it was necessary to split his family in two—an act of rational Teva that he contrasted with his earlier experience: “כִּי בְמַקְלִי עָבַרְתִּי אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן הַזֶּה וְעַתָּה הָיִיתִי לִשְׁנֵי מַחֲנוֹת”. Whereas he had previously been able to create Nissim with little effort, because he lived above Teva, it was now necessary for him to act within the bounds of nature and take preventative steps.

It was this Matteh , and its message of Bitachon , that was then passed to Yehudah, and used in the story of Tamar, which led to the creation of Malchus Yehuda. This is because a leader in Klal Yisroel must always maintain an awareness of his relative irrelevance. If one thinks that his leadership skills, his strategic acumen, or his diplomatic instincts are necessary for the success of his nation, he is gravely mistaken: all that matters is the Ratzon Hashem. The message of the Matteh is that the more one focuses on Teva, the more one becomes reliant on it. One may live an existence of “כִּי בְמַקְלִי עָבַרְתִּי אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן הַזֶּה” if only he knows that it is possible.

This is why the Matteh , is featured so prominently in our history and future: we find it at every juncture in which there is a threat that Teva will be the focus rather than the absolute Bitachon that the Matteh , which had been plucked from Gan Eden, represents.

That is why the Medrash tells us “מַטֵּה אַהֲרֹן...הוּא הַמַּטֶּה שֶׁהָיָה בְּיַד יְהוּדָה”. As the Medrash in VaYetzei tells us, “שְׁנֵי שְׁבָטִים, שֵׁבֶט כְּהֻנָּה וְשֵׁבֶט מַלְכוּת” there are two positions of leadership in Klal Yisroel, and “אַתְּ מוֹצֵא שֶׁכָּל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בָּזֶה כָּתוּב בָּזֶה” they share qualities, including the element of the Matteh . Aharon used the Matteh of Yehuda in this case to deliver a message to his challengers: any leadership role includes the Matteh . If a person thinks that they are better suited to serve as a leader for any reason other than the Ratzon Hahsem , they will not be successful. Only if one is willing to take the role with the Matteh firmly in hand, secure in the knowledge that he is but a Shliach , an instrument of the Ratzon HaBoreh , can he be a true, and effective leader.