Not About Me

In most years Parshas Titzaveh is attached to Parshas Zochor, and is thus the Shabbos immediately preceding Purim. As we have mentioned before, any time a Parsha is connected to a Yom Tov by the calendar, the two must have some connection on a less obvious level as well. It behooves us to try and discover this connection as we till invariably gain insight into the Parsha as well as the Yom Tov. That said, we will try and explore the link between Parshas Titzveh and Purim.

One of the facts that we are taught at a young age about Parshas Titzveh is that the name of Moshe Rabbeinu does not appear anyplace in the Parsha. A cursory glance through the Parsha confirms this fact, but obviously there is something more to the story.

The Torah was not split into Parshios until relatively late in our history, there is therefore no mention of this phenomenon in the Rishonim: the original source is the Ba’al Hatruim at the beginning of our Parsha. The Tur notes that starting with his birth in Parshas Shemos, until the end of the Parsha, Moshe’s name appears in each Sedra other than Titzveh. He explains that following the Chet HaEgel Moshe beseeched Hashem to forgive Bnei Yisroel: “V’Im Ayin, Macheni Nah M’Sifricha: and if you do not [forgive them], remove me from your Torah.” Because Chazal tell us that anything a Tzaddik says must come true, on some level, the name of Moshe was omitted from one Parsha

In some editions, the Ba’al Haturim adds another reason why the name of Moshe was excluded from this Parsha: to spare him embarrassment.

When Hashem first spoke to Moshe in Parsahs Shemos, Moshe protested that he was not a worthy messenger of Hashem, asking Hashem “Shalach Nah B’Yad Tishlach: Please send the one you would usually send.” Chazel explain that Moshe was referring to his brother Aharon, asking Hashem to send Aharon, a more worthy messenger in his stead. The Passuk says that Hashem reacted strongly to this request: “VaYichar Af Hahsem B’Moshe,” and Chazal tell us that as a result of this exchange Moshe lost the Kehuna Gedolah—to which he was originally going to be Zoche—and it was transferred to Aharon.

The Ba’al HaTurim therefore says that being that this is a Parsha that speaks about the Kohanim at length, the name of Moshe Rabeinu was omitted from this Parsha in order to spare him the embarrassment of having lost the Kehuna to Aharon.

It is interesting to note that the Tur seems to list these as two separate reasons: the Kiyum of “Macheni Nah M’Sifrecha” and the result of “Shalach Nah.” Why do we need to reasons? It would seem that each one is not enough of an answer on its own.

Further, in both cases a basic question can be asked: granted that Moshe’s name had to be missing from one Parsha, “Tzaddik Gozer V’Hakadosh Baruch Hu Mikayem,” but why here? Why is it this Parsha specifically that lacks a mention of Moshe?

A similar question can be asked in regard to the second Pshat brought by the Ba’al HaTurim: there are many Parshios that discuss the role of the Kohen Gadol, and the various Avodos that he does. Why then does the Torah choose only this Parsha to omit his name in order to save him the embarrassment?

I think that perhaps the two answers are actually connected.

Let us first understand why Moshe said “Shalach Nah B’Yad Tishlach” and the result of this statement.

When Hashem spoke to Moshe, telling him to go to Pharaoh and demand that he release Bnei Yisroel, Moshe was concerned. As the Anav MiKol Adam, Moshe could not image that he was worthy of this mission. In addition he felt that his older brother, Aharon, was better suited for the task: Aharon was greater in stature and Moshe felt that his own speech impediment rendered him less that desirable to transmit the word of Hashem.

In fact, so sure was he that Aharon was the more qualified candidate, that Moshe was afraid that if he took upon himself to follow the word of Hashem, and go to Pharaoh, Aharon would be hurt or insulted. For this reason, he asked Hashem to send Aharon, the one who was more worthy: “Shalach Nah B’Yad Tishlach.”

Keeping this in mind, why was Moshe punished for saying “Shalach Nah B’Yad Tishlach?” Seemingly he had a valid concern, both in his feeling that he wasn’t worthy, and in worrying about Aharon’s reaction. Why was the Kehuna taken from him because of this utterance?

Perhaps we can understand these Pessukim as follows.

In saying “Shalach Nah” Moshe was placing his own feelings, his own Cheshbon, into the Tzivuy of Hashem. He was told to go to Pharaoh and was expected to do just that. He may have had the best Cheshbonos, the most righteous of calculations, but those should have had absolutely no affect on his response to the Dvar Hashem.

We can now understand the response of Hashem: “Halo Aharon Achicha Halevi..,Hinei Hu Yatzei L’Krasecha V’Raah V’Samach Libo.” In his reply to Moshe, Hashem stressed that Aharon would be waiting for Moshe’s return to Mitzrayim and would in fact be happy that his brother was sent as the Shaliach of Hashem. Moshe was told that he had no reason to think that Aharon would be upset at his younger brother’s selection; to the contrary, he would celebrate.

Aharon was thus able to remove his personal Cheshbon from the picture; he could act in a way that was totally selfless, with no regard for his own feelings or attitudes. In this way he was more worthy of the Kehuna than Moshe. Rashi there says that because his “heart” was happy for Moshe, Aharon was Zoche to the Choshen that rested upon his heart.

When Moshe said “Macheni Nah M’Sifricha” however, he showed that he had learned the lesson of Shalach Nah B’Yad Tishlach.

The Chofetz Chaim points out that Moshe had every right to be personally insulted by the Chet HaEgel. Chazal tell us that when Moshe seemed to be delayed in descending from Har Sinai, the Sattan showed Bnei Yisroel “Arono Shel Moshe” to confuse them and make them think that he had passed away.

What was Bnei Yisroel’s response? There was no mass mourning, no outpouring of emotion upon the loss of their leader. Rather, they immediately began to look for a replacement, and when one was created—the Egel HaZahav—they rejoiced, singing and dancing around it.

When Moshe heard of these events, he should have taken personal affront. He was Hashem’s Shaliach to lead Bnei Yisroel from Mitzrayim, split the Yam Suf, provide them with water and sustenance. He was their direct connection to Hashem and had been their fearless leader. Could they not mourn his loss for even a day before looking for the next leader? Even if they felt that the leadership vaccum was too great to bear, they installation of their new Manhig should at least have been a bittersweet affair—how could they possibly rejoice?

But Moshe Rabbeinu was completely selfless in his defense of Klal Yisroel. His personal feelings played no role in his absolute determination to gain forgiveness on their behalf. Hashem offered to rebuild Klal Yisroel from the ground up starting with Moshe Rabbeinu, but is response was: “Im Tisah Es Chatosam, V’Im Ayin, Macheni Nah Misifricha Asher Kasavta: Either forgive them, or erase me from the Torah.” Moshe was expressing that he stood with Klal Yisroel absolutely, regardless of any personal feelings that he may have been entitled to.

I think we can now understand the omission of Moshe’s name from our Parsha.

The Medrash Tanchuma says that Bnei Yisroel asked Hashem: “You create the ultimate sources of light, why do you need us to light the Menorah?” Hashem responded to Klal Yisroel: “Your lights are much more dear to me than the celestial bodies [which provide light.]”

This is a slightly cryptic Medrash, but I think that on the face of it there is a message that is very much related to our discussion.

The Menorah is a Mitzvah that seems unnecessary: surely Hakadosh Barush Hu does not need our lights. Nonetheless we perform the Mtizvah because Hashem told us to—regardless of our own appreciation for its necessity. In this way the Menorah is an indication of the very selflessness that Aharon seems to exemplify in Parshas Shemos.

In fact we are told, in Parhas Behaloscha, “VaYas Ken Aharon: And Aharon did as we was commanded.” Chazal explain that the Torah relates this seemingly obvious fact, to tell us that he performed this Mitzava with the same excitement and devotion each day, as if it was his first.

We see that Aharon excelled in the ability to do Mitzvos—even those which may seem to be unnecessary—without any of his own Cheshbonos, in a totally selfless manner.

Perhaps then, if Moshe’s name was mentioned in this Parsha, which begins with the Tzivuy of Hadlakas HaMenorah, it would call to mind the words “Shalach Nah B’Yad Tishlach.” We may think about the relative lack of selflessness that Moshe displayed in his earlier conversation with Hashem. Therefore Moshe’s name is left out, reminding us that he also said: “Macheni Nah Misifricha.” Moshe was able to overcome any personal Cheshbon in his defense of Klal Yisroel, the lesson of Shalach Nah B’Yad Tishlach having been learned.

The two explanations of the Ba’al HaTurim go hand-in-hand, they compliment each other: precisely in the Parsha which would remind us of Shalach Nah B’Yad Tishlach, we are reminded that he also said Macheni Nah Misifricha, removing his own interests and feelings from his reaction.

Perhaps this also helps explain the connection between Parshas Titzaveh and Purim.

The Nes of Purim came about through Mordechai and Esther, two people who were the paradigm of selflessness.

The final Passuk of the Meggilah says that Mordechai was “Ratzuy L’Rov Echav.” Chazal explain that he lost his standing in the Sanhedrin as a result of becoming a member of the king’s court. Why would the Passuk tell us this fact, which would seem to indicate a loss of Mordechai’s stature?

Mordechai knew that he would not be held in the same regard because of his new role, he knew that he would suffer personal losses. Nonetheless, he did what needed to be done, because it was for the ultimate benefit of Klal Yisroel. Mordechai understood selflessness.

Esther, as we know, was willing to risk everything to go to Achashverosh and plead for her nation’s safety. “K’Ashe Avaditi, Avaditi:” can there be a more selfless statement?

The message of Purim is the power of putting our own personal Cheshbonos aside. Both Mordechai and Esther had every opening to ignore the plight of their brothers and sisters in favor of their own personal safety and advancement. They resisted that urge, and were able to save Klal Yisroel.

The Mitzvos of Purim call to mind the nature of their sacrifice. Each of the Mitzvos we do on Purim is in someway tied to other people. Even the Seudah, which seems to be a personal celebration, is tied to others: some say that the reason we are told to become inebriated is so that we will let down our guard and be more generous to Aniyim.

Through Parshas Titzveh we recall the selfless nature of Aharon’s Avodah, and the lack of personal Cheshbon shown in the words “Macheni Nah Misifricha.”

On Purim, we celebrate a Yom Tov that came about only because of the selflessness of Mordechai and Esther, by ourselves acting without personal Cheshbon, doing on behalf of others.

Our Parsha and the upcoming Yom Tov and inextricably tied together; their joint message should serve as a call to us all to lay aside our own personal feelings and emotions in the service of Hashem and His beloved people.