Friday, July 03, 2020

every individual counts

Chazal (Taanis 9a) tell us that the mon fell in Moshe's zechus, the be'er came in Miriam's zechus, and the ananei ha'kavod came in Aharon's zechus.  Miriam died -- no more be'er.  Aharon died -- no more ananei ha'kavod.  We read about what happened as a result in Chukas.  Yet, Chazal tell us that the be'er returned and the ananim returned because Moshe was left.  His zechus alone was enough to merit all three gifts.  

Everyone asks: if Moshe's zechus alone was enough to warrant Hashem giving us mon, the be'er, and the ananei ha'kavod, then why at first did the latter two come only in Miriam and Aharon's zechus?

Chasam Sofer answers that each of these three leaders of Klal Yisrael taught us a different lesson.  Moshe taught us the power of Talmud Torah.  Aharon taught us the power of avodah.  Miriam taught us the value of chessed.  (Interestingly, the Torah makes it very clear to us just how important Moshe and Aharon's contribution was.  Only Aharon could wear special bigdei kohen gadol and do avodas Yom haKippurim.  Every parsha in the Torah is a testimony to Moshe's role as teacher of Torah.  But what do we really know about Miriam?  Rav Bakshi Doron writes in his sichos that the greatest chessed is that which is done quietly and without fanfare, that which does not call attention to the neediness of the recipient or to the role the giver plays.  This was Miriam's contribution.  It deliberately remains hidden behind the scenes, as all great chessed should.)  For 40 years in the desert each one inculcated these midos in Klal Yisrael.  After 40 years of Klal Yisrael learning about the power of avodah from Aharon, Moshe could bring back the ananim.  After 40 years of learning about chessed from Miriam, Moshe could bring back the be'er.  However, at the start of the journey, before Klal Yisrael absorbed the lesson of Aharon and Miriam's life, Moshe's own zechus would not have been sufficient.   

The Radomsker in Tiferes Shlomo offers a different answer, one that we can take heart in for our own avodah. 

The gemara (Taanis 21b) writes that there was a plague in Sura, but the town where Rav lived was spared.  Everyone thought that the reason they were not affected by the disease was, of course, the zechus of Rav.  The townspeople all had a dream and it was revealed to them that this was not so.  To spare the town from disease was too small a thing to warrant being pushed off because of Rav's zechus.  Rather, the reason they were spared was because of a certain person who would lend out his shovel and spade to the chevra kadisha to do burials. 

Maharasha asks the obvious question: Yesh bichlal masayim manah!  If sparing the town required only minimal zechuyos, so few that even the chessed of just lending a shovel was enough, then certainly Rav's great zechus should have been sufficient.  Why was it revealed that davka Rav's zechuyos had NO part in the matter?

We see from this gemara an amazing yesod: Hashem makes space for the little guy.  Yes, of course Rav's zechus would have been enough to space that town.  But Hashem decided that that was not Rav's role in life.  His role was bigger and better things.  Hashem decided that sparing that town would be the role a simple guy who was willing to lend out his shovel would play in life.

There are tzadikim, talmidei chachamim, roshei yeshivos, greater than you and me.  So what does Hashem want need us for?  What's our contribution?  How is my drop of davening, my drop of learning, making any difference? 

"Ani a'avir kol tuvi al panecha," Hashem tells Moshe.  I'll reveal everything to you, you have the greatest zechuyos.  However, "V'chanosi asher achon v'richamti es asher aracheim," and Chazal add "afilu aino kadai."  My chassadim and rachamus come into the world not just because of you, Moshe.  I choose to use other vehicles as well, even those who are not so worthy.  Even if all the good they do is lending out a shovel for a burial.  I want their avodah too, and have therefore chosen to direct hashpa'ah specifically in their merit and not yours.

Hashem's chessed is not just in the gifts he gives us, but in the opportunities he gives us.  What each one of us does is important.  The mon, the be'er, the ananim could have have come b'zechus Moshe from day #1.  But Hashem deliberately chose to direct his hashpa'ah through Aharon and Miriam so that they too could have a zechus in sustaining Klal Yisrael. 
So too, Hashem carves out a role, a mission, for each individual, an accomplishment that rests on his/her specific zechuyos to the exclusion of what even greater people might accomplish. 

No one else, no matter how great, can make up for your accomplishing what Hashem wants from you. 

2 comments:

  1. "Aharon died -- no more ananei ha'kavod. We read about what happened as a result in Chukas"; "Hashem makes space for the little guy"

    Rashi informs us that just one shifchah was captured by the Aradian Canaanites, at 21:1d. the pasuk itself tells us a >captive was captured<, like the yafes to'ar found in >captured captivity< (Dev. 21:10). from this 'gezerah shavah' we learn that the shifchah mourned, in addition to 30 days for Aharon, 30 days more* [during her captivity] for the loss of the ananei ha'kavod. in the "zechus" of her added lamentation, Hashem granted the nation its aura of glory at 21:3.

    *like the yafes to'ar who mourns 'yerach yamim'


    {was the lender's face blurred in the communal dream on 21b, to fully preserve his zechus?}

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. -- why didn't the chevra kadisha at some point acquire its own tool set, new from the factory floor?

      Sura was known for its "grapes, wheat, and barley" (Wikipedia); Israel praised for wheat barley grapes. this match [like a match for biological transplant] meant that a "shovel and spade" used for farming Sura, used >too< for burial, would make eventual tunneling easier for any deserving bones en route to techiyas ha'meisim...


      -- and why didn't the lender donate his tool set to the chevra?

      was this a day laborer, one paid by the hour? no. such a one couldn't plan on handing off the tools of his trade, disrupting his contractual services, again and again and again...

      was this a day laborer, paid by the job? no. such a one, while he could repeatedly lend his tools on the spot, would go further and do some digging himself!

      this was a landowner (of a field or at least garden), who did not donate his shovel and spade-- which he affordably could --in order to rack up [mitzvah] points for each successive act of lending. but who would only lend! and not 'stoop' to any digging himself...

      so really, how meritorious was he, this "certain person", this 'neighbor' who begrudged anyone who so much as asked to borrow from him the least item* for the least seconds?

      in this matter of community burials he was very forthcoming.

      Hashem, after study of the man's file, after turning the account over in His mind a while, after checking His calendar for upcoming plague, had to give credit where credit was due...

      [now we know that >yes<, the lender's face was blurred...]


      *his bic pen was kodesh kodashim and he the high priest

      Delete