Sacred Trust

As Rosh Chodesh Adar takes place in this coming week, this Shabbos is Parshas Shekalim, and so in place of the regular Haftorah we Lein the Haftorah of Shekalim. The Pessukim come from Sefer Melachim, and discuss the reign of Yoash (also known as Yehoash), who became king at the young age of seven. Clearly if this Haftorah was chosen for the week of Shekalim, we can learn something from the Pessukim with regard to this time of year.

At the beginning of the Hafotrah, the Navi testifies that Yoash was by and large a righteous king, except that people still used Bamos in his time, and then turns to the events of his reign.

At the beginning of his kingship, Yoash instructed the Kohanim to receive any funds given to the Bais Hamikdash directly from the donors, and use them for the Bedek Habayis, the material upkeep of the Mikdash. It seems, though, that this plan was unsuccessful: “Vayehi Bishnas Esrim V’Shalosh L’Melech Yehoash Lo Chizku HaKohanim Es Bedek Habayis.” By the twenty third year of his reign, it was apparent that the Kohanim were not keeping up their part of the bargain, and the Mikdash had fallen into some degree of disrepair. Yoash therefore instituted a set of reforms, changing the way that the monies donated for the Bedek Habayis were managed. The rest of the Haftorah describes the new process, which was much more centralized: a large Aron was put at the entrance of the Bais Hamikdash, and all funds were placed there, to be distributed from time to time to pay for repairs and upgrades to the Bais Hamikdash.

At first glance, the connection between these Pessukim and the Mitzvah of Shekalim is not entirely clear, but a closer look reveals one possible link. At the beginning of the Haftorah, when Yoash instructs the Kohanim to personally attend to the funds, he delineates the types of donations to which he is referring: “Kol Kesef HaKedoshim…Kesef Over Ish Kesef Nafashos Erko Kol Kesef Asher Ya’aleh Al Lev Ish L’Havi Bais Hashem.” Yoash spoke about all donated funds, “Kol Kesef Hakeodshim”, but also to some specific types. Rashi explains that the term “Kesef Over” refers to the Shekalim, about which the Passuk says “Kol HaOver Al Hapikudum.”

On one level it would seem as though we have discovered the link between the Haftorah and Parshas Shekalim—the actual Shekalim are spoken about in the Pessukim. This is a bit of a tenuous connection, however. As noted, the bulk of the Pessukim speak about the funds used for the Bedek Habayis, the upkeep of the Bais Hamikdash itself, but this was not the purpose of the Machatzis HaShekel.

Rashi in Parshas Ki Sisa tells us that there were three Terumos in the times of Moshe Rabbeinu, two of which were done with a Machatzis Hashekel: at the start of the Terumas Hamishkan, and after the Mishkan was complete. The first round of Shekalim went to the construction of the Adanim of the Mishkan itself, and the second went to the purchase of Korbanos Tzibbur. Rashi also notes that it was this second donation of Shelakim that the Passuk refers to with the words “Lechaper Al Nafshosheichem” because the Korbanos are Mechaper. The Mitzvah of Machatzis Hashekel was not only in the time of Moshe Rabbeinu, however, but a Tzivuy L’Doros, and they were always used to purchase the animals for the Korbanos Tzibbur. In fact this is why we announce the Mitzvah of Machatzis HaShekel in Adar, by way of Parshas Shekalim: because the new year for Korbanos Tzibbur begins in Nissan, and we want to make sure the funds are available. This being the case, that we are reminding people of the Chiyuv to give funds to be used for Korbanos, known as Kodshei Mizbeach, it is curious that we chose to read a Haftorah that speaks almost exclusively about the other type of Hekedash—Kodeshi Bedek Habayis.

Perhaps, however, there we can find another relevant connection between the Haftorah and Shekalim. Towards the end of the Haftorah, in describing the new process for maintaining the Bedek Habayis, the Navi speaks about the payment system: “V’Lo Yechashvu Es HaAnashim Asher Yitnu Es Hakesef Al Yadam Lases L‘Osei Hamlecahs Ki BeAmana Hem Osim.” The literal meaning of these words is that no Cheshbon was made with those who distributed the funds to the various workmen, as they acted in faith. Rashi explains that there were two levels of management, so to speak, there were Amrikalin, who were the upper level and they distributed funds to the Gizborin who oversaw the work directly. The Passuk is telling us, says Rashi, that the Amrikalin did not question the Gizborim to discern exactly how the money was spent but there seems to have been something of an honor system.

There are two simple questions to be answered about this Passuk. First, why does the Navi tell us this. Why is it important for us to know how the Amrikalin acted with regard to the Gizborin and their level of trust? Second, what do the words “Ki BeAmana Hem Osim” mean? The Passuk seems to be telling us that the Amrikalin did not have to check on the Gizborin because they were acting with Amana, but how would one know if they were not being checked on? Rashi includes quotes these words in his Pirush without providing an explanation, but, interestingly, this Passuk is mentioned in the Gemarah in Bava Basra as the source for a Halacha, and perhaps the words of the Rishonim there will enlighten us as to the meaning of the Passuk.

The Gemarah presents a Halacha: “Ain Michashvin B’Tzedaka Im Gabbai Tzeddak V’Lo B’Hekdesh Im Gizborin.” We do no to hold the Gabbai Tzeddaka accountable for exactly how he distributed the funds he collected, but rather trust that he executed his obligations responsibly. As a source to this Halacha, the Gemarah brings our Passuk in Melachaim, “V’Lo Yechashvu Es HaAnashim…”, but prefaces it by saying “Af Al Pi SheAin Raya L’Davar Zecher L’Davar.” This Passuk is not a true Mekor for the Halacha, but a “Zecher”, lesser form of proof.

One wonders why this is the case: the Halacha brought in the Gemarah seems almost identical to the idea mentioned in the Passuk, why then is the Passuk in Melachim not a complete Mekor for the Din of the Gemarah? Indeed, both Rashi and Tosfos address this question in Bava Basra, both seem to agree that the reason one cannot learn the Halacha directly from the Passuk is because the Gizborim spoken about in Sefer Melachim were somehow different from the standard Gabbai Tzedaka. There is, however a Machlokes as far as why they were different.

Rashi seems to take a practical approach: the Gizborim at the time of Yoash were responsible for a spate of workers and craftsmen, and so it was impractical to hold them accountable for every penny, so to speak. So complicated was their task that the Amrikalin had no choice but to trust that they were executing the duties of their office in good faith. In this understanding, the words “Ki BeAmana Hem Osim” means that the Amrikalin did not keep a Cheshbon, rather the Gizborim were trusted to carry out their duties.

Tosfos, however, answers the question with five simple words: “Shani Hasam Shehayu Tzaddikim Gemurin.” The Gizborin at the time of Yoash, explains Tosfos, were true Tzaddikim and so it was not necessary for the Amrikalin to be Mechshev, for they could be trusted to carry out their duties with Tzidkus. This is obviously not totally applicable to every Gabbai Tzedaka, and so the Gemara applies the concept of “Af Al Pi SheAin Raya L’Davar Zecher L’Davar.”

The approach of Tosfos seems to be a more Pashut understanding of the Passuk: “Ki BeAmana Hem Osim” means that they were trusted implicitly to be carrying out their duties properly because they were Tzaddikim. In fact, the Metzudos Dovid brings a similar idea noting “ViLekach Hayu Nivchiru Mitechila”, their Tzidkus is reason they were selected for their roles in the first place!

Perhaps this idea is related to the Shekalim as well. As we know, when Haman wished to convince Achashverosh to make a decree against Klal Yisroel, he offered “Aseres Alafim Kikar Kesef” as payment. The Gemarah in Meggilah tells us: “Galuy V’yoduah Lifnei Mi Sheamar V’Haya HaOlam SheAsid Haman Lishkol Sheklaim Al Yisroel Lifichach Hikdim Sheklehen L’Shakalav”. The Borei Olam knew, Kaviyachol, that Haman would attempt to buy the fate of the Yidden with Shekalim, and so he proceeded Haman’s Shekalim with those of Bnei Yisroel. The Gemarah ends with the Mishna in Shekalim that tells us that we announce the Mitzvah of Machatzis Hashekel in Adar.

It is not immediately clear what the Shekalim of Klal Yisroel, the Mitzvah of Machatzis Hashekel, have to do with the Aseres Alafim Kikar Kesef of Haman, and how one counteracts the other, which is the implication of the Gemara. It is also not clear what the words “Hikdim Sheklehen L’Shakalav” mean. How did the Shekalim of Klal Yisroel “proceed” those of Haman? Many assume that the Gemara refers to the annual calendar, in that the Mitzvah of Machatzis Hashekel begins before Purim. This is not exactly clear from the Gemarah, however.

The Bnei Yissaschar has a fascinating explanation of the exchange between Haman and Achashverosh which addresses this question.

The Megillah tells us that Achashverosh did not take the “Aseres Alafim Kikar Kesef”, but told Haman to keep them as though they were a gift. The Bnei Yisaschar explains that this had a profound affect in Shamayim.

In Parshas Ki Sisa, in the Mitzvah of Machatzis Hashekel, Hashem tells Moshe to take the “Kessef Hakipurim” and they will be a “Zikaron Lifnei Hashem Lichaper Al Nafshoshechem.” The Bnei Yisaschar explains that Mitzvah of Shekalim have a special power: when Bnei Yisroel does the Mitzvah of Shekalim during the time of the Bais Hamikdash, it is wirten in the Sefer Hazichronos, and the Koach of “Lichaper Al Nafshoshechem” then exists even when they cannot do the Mitzvah. Thus, the Mitzvah of Machatzis Hashekel has an everlasting affect, and can stand in our good stead even in times when, B’Avoseinu HaRabim, we cannot do the Mitzvah itself.

When Achashvereosh refused to take the money from Haman, but considered it as though it had been given, the Kudsha Brich Hu was reminded of the promise made to Klal Yisroel: “V’Haya L’Bnei Yisroel L’Zikaron Lifnei Hashem Lichaper Al Nafshoshechem.” Hashem was reminded, so to speak, that such is the Koach of the Shekalim—even when we cannot give them it is considered as though we had.

This is the explanation of the words “Lifichach Hikdim Sheklehen L’Shakalav”. The fact that Klal Yisroel gave Shekalim when the Bais Hamikdash stood, well before the time of Haman HaRasha, was the Zechus that led to their salvation at that time. It was the Shekalim that existed in the Sefer HaZikaron that counteracted the wishes and decrees of Haman and Achashverosh.

Perhaps this is the connection between our Haftorah and the Mitzvah of Shekalim.

“V’Lo Yechashvu Es HaAnashim Asher Yitnu Es Hakesef Al Yadam Lases L‘Osei Hamlecahs Ki BeAmana Hem Osim.” The Navi tells us that sometimes a person is so trustworthy, such a Ba’al Amana, that one needn’t ensure that he is carrying out his duties carefully, which would otherwise be the responsible approach.

The Shekalim remind us that this is of course true with the ultimate Ne’eman about whom the Mishna says “V’Neeman Hu Ba’al Melachtecha SheYishalem Lecha Sechar Peulasach.” Sometimes we don’t know why we are doing a Mitzvah, what affect our Teffilos or Maasim Tovim have. The Shekalim remind us that we don’t have to. The Mitzvah of Shekalim saved us years after it was done, in its capacity as “Zikaron Lifnei Hashem”, reminding us that when the Gizbor is a Ne’eman, we needn’t be Mechashev—the Schar is certainly reaching its intended recipients.