I would like to talk about justice, or really what might seem injustice, in certain life-or-death decisions God makes in the Torah. I am concerned with four apparently untimely deaths which, on their face, seem profoundly unfair. These are the killing of Nadaav and Avihu, sons of Aaron on what should have been a magnificently joyous day, and of Aaron and Moshe Rabbenu, who were not permitted to enter the “promised land” with the people they had led for forty years.
Let’s start with Aaron’s two elder sons Nadav and Avihu. We read in Parshat Shemini that on the eighth day of the dedication of the mishkan ( the portable tabernacle built, at God’s command, after Sinai) Aaron offered sacrifices upon the altar and these offerings were accepted by God, who, in Leviticus 9:24 sent a heavenly fire to consume them. At the beginning of chapter 10, “Aaron’s sons, Nadav and Avihu each took his fire pan, put fire in it and laid incense on it; and they offered before God alien fire-which had not been enjoined upon them. 2, And fire came forth from God and consumed them; thus, they died by God’s will.” The recorded response to this is verse 3 “Then Moses said to Aaron: ‘This is what God meant by saying “Through those near to Me I show Myself holy, and gain glory before all the people’.”
There have been, of course, any number of Rabbinic interpretations of this event:
Rabbi Eliezer said that they died because they gave decisions on religious matters in the presence of their teacher, Moses.
Rabbi Yishmael said it was because they entered the Santuary intoxicated, deriving this from the admonishment against drinking alcohol before entering the Tent of Meeting found in verses 8 and 9 of the same chapter.
There are other interpretations suggesting that they were punished for excessive piety or passion or excessive ambition, or that they were punished because they used incense that was different from the prescribed formula. This is actually the interpretation I like the most.
The concluding chapters of Exodus, describing the construction of the Mishkan, is rife with the phrase “Asher tzivah Adonai et Moshe” or something similar, (“As God commanded to Moses”). This offering made by Nadav and Avihu is described in the text as just the opposite. It was different. As one can put it LO asher tzivah Adonai et Moshe. I think that this is what they were punished for. Forgetting, for the moment, my take, the wide variety of interpretations shows the episode to be somewhat ambiguous and shows us, once again, that scripture needs to be read with an open and inquiring mind and a careful eye. I also still question whether their sin, whatever it was, really worthy of capital punishment.
The decision, on God’s part, not to allow either Moses or Aaron to cross into Canaan, arises from a later incident. In the book of Bamidbar, Numbers, chapter 20, Miriam, the sister of Aaron and Moses dies (at the much too early age of 126 years). During her life, as reward for her righteousness, (she is, after all, referred to as a prophet(ess)) the people, in their wanderings, have been followed by a well of water. See the Chumash Etz Hayim commentary on Num 20:2) Upon her death the wells dry up and the people are soon thirsty and become rebellious. (When, oh, when will they figure out that, with Moses’ earthly assistance, God will take care of them and their needs…. Never!)
Num 20:7 et seq “and the Lord spoke to Moses, saying,(8) “you and your brother Aaron take the rod (this appears to be the same rod that Moses used to perform a variety of miracles and plagues before Pharoah) and assemble the community, and before their very eyes ORDER the rock to yield its water. Thus, you shall produce from the rock and provide drink for the congregation and their beasts.
Later, in the same chapter, Aaron is brought to a mountain top, has his priestly garments given to his son Eleazer, and Aaron dies. The people mourn him thirty days, which, we are told is the basis for the Sheloshim mourning period for close relatives other than parents.
Some time later on, at the end of Devorim (Deuteronomy) Moses likewise ascends a mountain, this time alone, so his burial place will be forever unknown and can’t become a shrine or place of worship. He is allowed to see the land of their destination, and dies “by the mouth of the Lord”
So, what is their great sin. It is striking the rock instead of talking to it. In Exodus 17:6 Moses is told to strike the rock with his rod. Here in Numbers, he is simply doing what he did before. Rashi says that by hitting the rock in this instance and not speaking to it as commanded – (there is the commanded/not commanded dichotomy again) Moses diminishes God’s sanctity by making it look as if he, Moses, had brought forth the water for, says Rashi Had you spoken to the rock and it had brought forth water I would have been sanctified before the whole congregation, for they would have said: what is the case with this rock which cannot speak and cannot hear and needs no maintenance? It fulfills the bidding of the Omnipresent God! How much more should we do so?
So, we are being taught that by making it appear that they, and not God, had brought the water from the rock, the brothers had sinned. This appears an especially likely explanation given their angry outburst in verse 10 of Numbers 20. Rambam suggests that their greatest sin was the anger with the people expressed in that outburst. (Rather, I guess, than being patient and compassionate).
But what did Aaron do wrong? It was Moses who hit the rock. He, Aaron, was there. Moses might well have taken his advice had he spoken up. The Talmud, Shavout 39a, tells us that Kol Yisrael Avverim Zeh Bazeh, All Israel are responsible for one another. Aaron should not just have stood by; he should have guided Moses in the right path.
Again, as in the case of Aaron’s sons, I question whether this lapse is sufficiently serious to rise to the level of being a capital offense.
Here’s the thing:
In Exodus 19:6 God instructs Moses to tell the people “…you shall be to Me a kingdom if priest and a holy nation” later in chapter 19 God tells Moses to warn the people and the priest to stay pure The are pretty much the last instruction before the moment of revelation, the utterance of the aseret ha’divrot, AKA the Ten Commandments. This assertion imposes upon us a responsibility. If we are to be a holy kingdom of priests then it is implied that part of our responsibility is to teach, at least by example, Godliness, to the rest of the world. It kind of imposes a higher standard of behavior and obedience. On top of this, Aaron and Moses are the leaders (and teachers) of the people. Of Nadav and Avihu, one is in line to be the next High Priest. These four come as close to being kings as you can get in the wilderness generation. Chapter 17 of Deuteronomy tells us about kings in Israel. They shall not be haughty rulers , or enrich themselves. Their job is to study and learn and observe the Torah faithfully, thus, not as mighty rulers but as first among equals, they will be a guide and inspiration to the people. Leaders are held to a high standard of conduct. Maybe it is because of their greater responsibly, that Nadav, Avihu, Aaron and Moses earned such seemingly overly-harsh punishment. And maybe, because we hold ourselves out as a Godly nation we need to hold ourselves to high behavioral and ethical standards. In our society, a public disgrace by a Jew is considered a “hillul hashem” a disgrace of God’s name. Therefore, it is incumbent upon us, for God’s sake as well as our own, to be careful about how the world sees us because unfortunately, but not unrealistically, the rest of the world insists on holding us the same high (and double) standard we set for ourselves.
