Adding, Subtracting and Connecting

Toward the beginning of this weeks Parsha, as Moshe Rabbeinu continues his final Drasha to Klal Yisroel, he warns them to adhere closely to the Torah and Mitzvos: “V’Ata Yisroel Shema El HaChukim V’El HaMishpatim Asher Anochi Melamed Eschem L’Asos” He then adds a warning against striking out on our own path: “Lo Sosifu Al HaDavar Asher Anochi Mitzveh Eschem, V’Lo Sigreu Mimenu: Do not add onto that which I have commanded you, and do not take away from them.” This Passuk of course contains the Issur of Bal Tosef, which we are familiar as well as the Issur of Lo Sigreu.

Next, in what seems to be an explanation for why we should not add or detract from the Torah, Moshe reminds Bnei Yisroel: “Enechem HaRaos Es Asher Asah Hashem L’Baal Peor, Ki Kol Ish Asher Hitzmido L’Baal Peor Hishmedo Hashem Elokecha Mikirbecha: For your eyes have seen that which Hashem did with regard to Baal Peor for He destroyed all those that followed Baal Peor.” This refers to those who served Baal Peor at the urging of the Bnos Midyan at the end of Parshas Balak, all of whom perished in a Magefah.

Moshe then contrasts the fate of those who followed Baal Peor with that of those he was speaking to: “V’Atem Hadvekim B’Hashem Elokechem Chaim Kulchem Hayom: But all you who clung to Hashem stand here alive today.”

There are a number of questions to be asked on this entire progression of Pessukim.

First, the Torah does not generally prove to us that a certain action is prohibited based on prior events—an Issur exists because the Torah says so. What does the reminder of those who dies as a result of their actions add?

In addition, there were a number of times that members of Klal Yisroel were punished for their actions—in the case of the Chet HaEgel for example, or the Misonenim—why did Moshe specifically choose the example of those who served Baal Peor? There would seem to be a connection between these Issurim—Bal Tosef and Lo Sigreu—and Baal Peor. How are we to understand this link?

The contrast with those standing before Moshe on that day seems interesting as well. The Gemarah in Sanhedrin learns that there was an implicit cricitism of Klal Yisroel in Moshes words. The Torah uses the term “Hitzmido” with regard to those who served Baal Peor. A Tzimid Pesil, which comes from the same Shoresh, is a seal that is used to close a vessel very tightly and permanently. The use of this word implies that those who were drawn to Baal Peor were attached tightly to the Avodah Zarah. When referring to our relationship with Hashem, on the other hand, the Torah uses the word Devakim. The Gemarah says that this term is used for a lees permanent connection, like two dates that are stuck together: while they may be attached at the moment, they are easily separated.

While there is another opinion in the Gemarah that views the Passuk in the opposite light, in this understanding Chazal seem to be saying that those who Moshe was speaking to had a less permanent connection to Hashem than those who served Baal Peor and were killed. This being the case, why did Moshe use this contrast to reinforce the Mitzvos of Bal Tosef and Lo Sigreu? Perhaps better understanding of these Pesukim can help us appreciate the message that Moshe Rabbeinu sought to pass on at this vital juncture.

The Medrash Tanchuma in Parshas V’Area tells us that Sefer Devarim, Kaviyachol, appeared before Hashem and complained: “Akrani Shlomo, Asani Plaster: Shlomo (Hamelech) has uprooted me and made a mockery of me.”. The Medrash continues, explain that the Pessukim in Sefer Devarim establish clear limits on the number of wives and horses a king may have, as well as the amount of possessions he may hold. Shlomo Hamelech, however, seemingly flaunted these Halachos for during his rule, Shlomo amassed wealth and marrying wives well beyond the restrictions set forth by the Torah. Hashem responded to Sefer Devarim that while Shlomo Hamelech, and many others like him, may pass through this world, their days are ultimately numbered, but not one letter of the Torah will ever be uprooted—the Torah, unlike humans, is eternal.

R’ Elyashiv zt”l points out that Sefer Devarim complained that it had been uprooted by Shmolo “Akrani Shlomo,” while in fact the complaint was only with regard to one set of Mitzvos of many contained within the Sefer. Why does Sefer Devarim seem to be accusing Shlomo of uprooting it in totality?

R’ Elyashiv explains that the answer to this question is rooted in the Mitzvos of Baal Tosef and Lo Sigreu. To Sefer Devarim, the omission of a single Passuk, a single Mitzvah, was akin to erasing the entire Sefer. If one Mitzvah was missing, because Shlomo HaMelech did not keep it, that was just the same as uprooting the entire Sefer. This is this the underlying theme of these Issurim: they speak to the innate Shleimus and perfection of the Torah.

Shlomo Hamelech had a Cheshbon for why he violated the Mitzvos contained in Sefer Devarim—he felt that they did not apply to him, that he was above them, so to speak. He was wrong, however, and Chazal say that he was punished for this. In a similar vein, one might think that he can add to a Mitzvah—and he may have the best intentions of Avodas Hashem in mind—but this too is a mistake. If a particular action was the Ratzon Hahsem and accomplished the goals of the Torah, it would have been included as a Mitzvah, and far be it from us to presume that we can decide otherwise. Just as subtracting a Mitzvah is akin to eliminating the whole Torah because it detracts from the Shleimus HaTorah, so too adding to the Torah diminishes the sense of the perfection of the Torah.

Perhaps using this understanding of the Mitzvos of Bal Tosef and Lo Sigreu, we can better appreciate their connection to Baal Peor.

The Gemarah in Sanhedrin relates the sequence of events that occurred when Bnei Yisroel encountered the Bnos Midyan in the Midbar. Seeking, at the suggestion of Bilaam, to lure Bnei Yisroel away from the Derech Hashem, the Bnos Midyan set up a market for the Jews to peruse. At the market stalls they placed older women, who urged the men of Klal Yisroel to enter the tents to pursue better deals. Inside the tents were younger women who plied the men with wine and then lured them into Aveirah, beginning by asking the men to serve their Baal Peor idols. The men responded: “Yehudi Ani!” as they could not bear the thought of serving Avodah Zarah. The Bnos Midyan responded by pointing out that all they were really asking was for the men to relieve themselves in front of the idols. The Bnei Yisroel, not knowing that this was the Avodah of Baal Peor, obliged and their downfall followed—as Moshe says in this week’s Parsha they were thereafter firmly attached to Baal Peor.

How is it possible that serving Baal Peor, which is done in such a disgusting and base manner, was such a draw and pulled Bnei Yisroel in so quickly? We obviously cannot relate the Yetzer Harah of Avodah Zarah in general, but certainly this form of idol worship seems completely unnatural. In addition, it seems that the damage done to these men was not contained to only Avodah Zarah, but the Gemrah adds that it led these men to be Kofer in the entire Torah. What was the Avodah of Baal Peor and how can we understand the draw that these men felt upon serving it just once?

R’ Chaim Shmulevitz explains the Avodah of Baal Peor based on a story related in the Gemarah elsewhere in Meseches Sanhedrin. One person served Baal Peor and used the idol itself in a most demeaning and vulgar way. Rather than being disgusted, the priests of Baal Peor praised this individual exclaiming that no one had ever thought to serve the Avodah Zarah in such a creative manner!

R’ Chaim points out that we see from this Gemarah that the Avodah of Baal Peor was the destruction of boundaries. A person performed his most peronal acts in front of this idol: rather than a separation between sacred and material, the Avodah of Baal Peor was to show that there was no boundary, no Geder at all. Thus, if someone found a way to break down those walls even further—although to us he may seem to be denigrating the Avodah Zarah—he has found a higher level of perfection in his service of the god. This is obviously counter to the essence of Torah, explains R’ Chaim: the Torah puts into place Gedarim on top of Gedarim, in order to keep us far from Aveirah.

Our goal is not to mix Kodesh and Chol, breaking down any barrier, but to elevate the Chol using our capacity for Kedusha—and the only way to do so is to follow the Gedarim emplaced by the Torah via the six-hundred thirteen Mitzvos. While there are many ways for a person to serve Hashem, there is no room for “choose your own adventure” in Yiddishkeit.

With this explanation of Baal Peor we can certainly understand how those who were lured into serving the Avodah Zarah were thereafter captivated by its service: the idea of destroying every sense of Gedarim must have seemed very enticing when contrasted with strict Torah observance. We can also see how this would lead to total Kefirah in Toras Moshe Rabbeinu: the very Avodah of Baal Peor stands opposed to the core of our Torah.

This also helps underscore the connection between Baal Peor and the Issurim of Bal Tosef and Lo Sigreu. As we explained, these Mitzvos help us focus on the Shleimus of the Torah—they teach us that each Mitzvah is necessary and that adherence to these Mitzvos is the only way to reach perfection in our Avodas Hashem. Just as eliminating a Mitzvah cannot be seen as furthering our mission of personal Shelimus, so to the addition of a Mitzvah, regardless of our good intentions, is contrary to the Derach HaTorah. As we have seen, the opposite is true of Baal Peor—this is an Avodah Zarah that teaches that there are no boundaries in life, there is no set path—each can create his own brazen and perverse Avodah. Truly then the contrast between the Torah and Baal Peor is best highlighted in relation to these Mitzvos, as Moshe Rabbeinu illustrates in this week’s Parsha.

How then are we to understand the next Passuk: “V’Atem Hadvekim B’Hashem Elokechem Chaim Kulchem Hayom.” As we have noted, there is an implicit criticism of Klal Yisroel in this Passuk. Why then did Moshe choose to insert these words in relation to the Mitzvos of Bal Tosef and Lo Sigreu and their connection to Baal Peor?

The truth is that the message Moshe was conveying at this time is quite daunting. As my Rosh Hayeshiva was often heard to say: “Shas is long, and Shas is hard.” There are many Mitzvos and many Halachos, and the impassioned Drasha of Moshe Rabbeinu, highlighting the Shleimus HaTorah and the importance of Dikduk HaMitzvos, as brought out in the previous Pesskuim, may have seemed overwhelming. Thus Moshe chose to give those standing before him a dose of Chizuk.

“VAtem Hadvekim B’Hashem Elokeychem” You, those who are attached to Hashem, however tenuously, “Chaim Kulchem” remain living. Moshe was telling Klal Yisroel that in contrast to those who ran after Baal Peor, who attached themselves to the Avodah Zarah in such a total and complete way, those who connect to Hashem on even a basic level remain alive. Why is this true? I believe the answer is found in the last word of the Passuk: “Hayom.”

The Sefer Chashvah L’Tovah, written by the Alexander Rebbe, explains that the only way for a person to stay committed to growth, and forge a relationship with Hashem is to take it one day at a time: “Hayom.” If we look at the Torah on a whole, and consider a lifelong commitment to Shemiras HaMitzvos, it can indeed be overwhelming. Therefore we must tell ourselves that we will connect to Hashem today and take each day as it comes.

This was the message Moshe Rabbeinu was giving over to Bnei Yisroel at this point: we must not be overwhelmed by the bredth of the Torah and Mitzvos. Yes, the Torah is the essence of Shelimus and the path to our own personal perfection, but the way to approach growth is one step at a time, one day at a time. Our connection to Hashem may be in the manner of Dveykus, like two dates that are easily separated, but all that matters is that we are connected today. What may happen in the future is unimportant: “Chaim Kulchem HaYom.”

As we each travel along our road to growth, there are times that we may be overwhelmed. Indeed, the Torah holds us to a high standard and demands much of us. At these times we must keep in mind the words of Moshe Rabbeinu: The Torah is the only road to Shelimus, there are no shortcuts and there is no room for us to forge our own path. But if we take growth one day at a time, and remain connected to Hashem on even slightly, we can merit life. We must remember: the key to Chaim Kulchem is Hayom.