Acharei Mot-Kedoshim: The Strange Case of the Back-and-Forth Format: Rebuke with Love

by Rav Hillel Fendel.

This week's Torah reading comprises two portions – Acharei Mot and Kedoshim (Vayikra 16-20). Between them they have 79 Torah commandments, including (especially in Kedoshim) many having to do with dealing honestly in monetary matters. Perhaps most famously, however, is the commandment to "love your neighbor as yourself" (Vayikra 19,18) – and related mitzvot, such as not to embarrass people, not to take revenge, and perhaps surprisingly, to admonish those who are sinning and help return them to the Torah path. How is admonishment related to love?

The relevant verse is: "Do not hate your brother in your heart; you shall certainly admonish him, and do not bear sin because of him" (19,17). This appears to say that if one has sinned against you or offended you, do not keep your angry feelings to yourself; rather, the Rambam writes (Laws of Character Traits, Hilkhot De'ot, 6,6), you are "commanded to make the matter known and ask him: 'Why did you do this to me?'" That is, you must not let your resentment fester, but rather show him that you were offended or wronged, for the goal of making peace with him.

However, there is another way in which this mitzvah of admonishment, called "tokhecha," can be fulfilled. The Rambam (in the very next paragraph, Law 7), abandons the case of one who was wronged by another and discusses this new case: "If one sees that his fellow Jew has sinned [in general] or is following an improper path, you must [seek to] correct his behavior and tell him that he is harming himself by his evil deeds… [You should] rebuke him privately, patiently and gently, and tell him that [you are] only saying this for his own benefit, to allow him to merit the life of the World to Come..."

There are, of course, many details as to how this commandment must be fulfilled, so that it does not lead to hatred and resentment. In fact, the Rambam continues in the next paragraph (Law 8) to details some of these laws.

Fascinatingly, however, in the next law, Law 9, the Rambam returns to the original case, and says: "If one was wronged by a colleague and prefers not to admonish him or even mention the matter… but rather forgives him in his heart and bears no hatred, this is pious behavior – for the Torah is concerned only that there be no feelings of hatred."

That is to say, he no longer has an obligation to admonish! Instead, because he was able to totally forgive him, this not only takes the place of rebuke, but is actually considered a very high level of behavior.

Back and Forth

If we follow carefully the above rulings by the Rambam, we can almost not avoid asking the following question: Why does he discuss the case of one who was wronged by his colleague in Laws 6 and 9, and the laws of one who has sinned in general in Laws 7 and 8? Would it not have been more logical to place Law 9 right after 6, and thus complete the first topic, and only then to teach Laws 7 and 8?

This question does not appear to be addressed by any of the major commentaries on the Rambam. This makes it possibly even more puzzling: Why did the Rambam, the great organizer of the laws of all the Torah's mitzvot and the Talmud's rulings, choose to break up the laws of the tochekha in this manner?

Perhaps we can offer the following explanation:

The Rambam was not coming to teach us the laws of hokhei'ach tokhiach, rebuke and admonishment – but rather the "special character traits that must accompany the administering of such admonishment." That is, this mitzvah is not just a mechanical one, but rather one whose fulfillment requires special attention to how it is to be carried out.

This becomes somewhat evident when we us review some of the details that the Rambam included in the laws of this mitzvah: "If [one who has wronged you] asks you to forgive him, you must forgive…" That is, the Rambam steps back from the mitzvah of rebuking to tell you that the goal of the obligation is to be able to forgive him!

The Rambam then continues [regarding one who sinned in general]: "You must tell him that you are admonishing him only for his own good, and that he is only harming himself by his sins… You must speak to him calmly and nicely, and say that you wish only to help him attain the World to Come…" What beautiful sentiments accompany this seemingly harsh mitzvah!

The Rambam then elaborates at length that when rebuking him for sins between-man-and-man [as opposed to sins between-man-and-G-d], you must "not shame him, and certainly not in public." Don't get carried away in your fervor to rebuke and cause him shame, which the Sages teach is akin to spilling his blood! And by the by, we can infer from the Rambam's last words that you must be careful not to shame him even when talking to him privately...

And finally, the Rambam concludes by returning to where he started - the scenario of one who wronged another - and explains that the ideal is actually not to rebuke at all, if possible, but rather to attain the level of midat hassidut, true piety, and forgive him in your heart altogether! This of course only applies when one has sinned towards you, and not in general – and this is why the Rambam returns to this case at the end, in order to conclude with this highest level. 

In sum: The strange format by which the Rambam explains the mitzvah of rebuke is so that he can teach us, at the same time, the important character traits and sensitivity that must accompany its performance. 

Acharei Mot-Kedoshim: Shabbat Strengthens Family Bonds

based on a Dvar Torah by Rav Meir Kahana, Av Beit Din in the rabbinical court of Ashkelon and Chairman of the Rabbinical Judges Union.

There is a strong connection within the Jewish people regarding family values and faith, and this is expressed through the observance and remembrance of Shabbat.

Parashat Kedoshim, which describes the holiness and unique status of the Jewish people, opens with the commandment: “A person shall revere his mother and father, and you shall keep My Sabbaths; I am the Lord.” These two commandments are presented together, even though there can be tension between them. If a parent tells a child to violate Shabbat, the child must not listen. Although honoring parents is a very important commandment, Shabbat takes precedence, since the parent is also obligated to honor God.

At the same time, on a simple level, these commandments are not just in tension—they are connected. A parent is responsible for ensuring that their child observes Shabbat, showing that Shabbat is a central part of faith.

Shabbat represents belief in the creation of the world. By observing it, a person affirms that God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh. In this way, keeping Shabbat expresses belief in the ongoing renewal of creation.

Similarly, the sabbatical year of the land and the cancellation of debts reflect the idea that God created the world and gave us the ability to function within it, both agriculturally and economically. This creates a link between honoring parents, through whom we come into the world, and observing Shabbat, which expresses belief in God as the Creator. These commandments are therefore deeply connected.

The opening commandments of Parashat Kedoshim also parallel the Ten Commandments. Both honoring parents and keeping Shabbat are fundamental elements of faith in God.

Shabbat is a defining sign of the Jewish people because it expresses the belief that the world has purpose. During the six days of the week, people work, and on the seventh day they stop and reflect on the purpose of life and creation.

The family is the primary environment in which a child’s faith is formed. It is the basic unit that builds the wider community and the Jewish people as a whole. The importance of family in Judaism is closely tied to the message that the Jewish people convey to the world: that God is one. This belief is expressed both in Shabbat observance and in family life.

After two and a half years of war, family life has been deeply affected, with many parents serving long periods in reserve duty. As a result, there has been a strong effort to reinforce family connections—grandparents helping out and parents dedicating as much time as possible to their children when they return home.

Shabbat observance has also been challenging in this context, especially in complex situations such as military service. Even so, all of these elements are part of one broader system: expressing faith in God. The Jewish family that observes Shabbat reflects the broader mission of the Jewish people in the world.

Tazria–Metzurah: Why Demolish the Houses?

based on a Dvar Torah by Rav David Davidkavitz, rabbi of the community of Yitzhar, Rosh Yeshiva “Ro’eh Yisrael”, and director of the Kashrut Department of the Samaria Religious Council.

Parashat Tazria–Metzurah serves as a preparation for the month of Iyar and all its special days. There is a unique mitzvah in the Torah that is not only a commandment but also a kind of gift: the demolition of houses in the Land of your inheritance that are afflicted with tzara’at — “And I will place a plague of tzara’at upon a house in the land of your inheritance” (Leviticus 14:34). This mitzvah exists nowhere else in the world; it is unique to the Land of Israel.

Our Sages explain that this is actually a gift: when one finds in the Land of Israel a house that belonged to a non-Jew that is afflicted with tzara’at, it is considered a blessing, because treasures are sometimes hidden within its walls — valuables that the Canaanites concealed. Through demolishing the house, these treasures are revealed — Rashi on Leviticus 14:34 (based on Vayikra Rabbah 17:6) — and therefore it is a great gift, “when you come into the land of your inheritance.”

One might say that in recent times, much discussion has revolved around the demolition of enemy houses that served as infrastructure for terror. There is a profound dimension to this, as explained by the Zohar (Tazria–Metzora): the primary purpose is not the physical treasure hidden in the walls, but rather the destruction of houses of idolatry that existed in the Land of Israel. The Creator placed treasures within them in order to bring about their destruction, but the ultimate goal is the removal of evil from the land.

The Land of Israel is not suited for houses of idolatry, nor for homes associated with bloodshed — places where weapons are hidden, even in children’s rooms, bedrooms, and institutions of education and healthcare. The essence of the Land is to increase goodness in the world — it is a “land of life” (based on Deuteronomy 30:20). Therefore, there is no place within it for homes built upon corrupt values.

As we approach the month of Iyar and read Parashat Tazria–Metzora, we come to understand the importance of purity — the purity of the home, the purity of clothing, and how a Jew appears both externally and internally. What kind of light does he radiate? Originally, a person was clothed in “garments of light” (Bereishit Rabbah 20:12), which over time became “garments of skin” (Genesis 3:21). Yet the inner light of a Jew still exists — “A person’s wisdom illuminates his face” (Ecclesiastes 8:1). One’s appearance and entire being should reflect the Name of God.

Therefore, “You are children to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 14:1) — but this must be expressed with grace, so that “all the peoples of the earth shall see that the Name of the Lord is called upon you, and they shall fear you” (Deuteronomy 28:10).

Tazria-Metzurah: The True, Shining Face of Humbleness

by Rav Naim Ben-Eliyahu ZT"L, Former Rosh Yeshivat Ben Ish Chai, yeshiva.org.il, translated by Hillel Fendel.

One of this week's two Torah portions, Tazria (Vayikra 12-13), begins with the sacrificial offering that a birthing mother must offer, but then continues with the laws of various bodily impurities.

The Torah tells us here that the purity or impurity of a leprosy-like lesion is determined exclusively by a Priest, based on his on-site examination. This is because of the Priest's high spiritual level; he is able to see a superficial phenomenon and understand its depth, for he is like a Divine angel – as is written, "For the lips of a Priest will guard knowledge, and teaching should be sought from his mouth - for he is a messenger [angel] of the Lord of Hosts" (Malachi 2,7).

In Torah law it is clear that the color of a skin that is touched with leprosy is evidence of an inner and deep problem, and only a Priest graced with deep vision can uncover and diagnose the issue and its solution.

We might well ask: This entire matter of lesions and leprosy appears to be rather sordid; why does the Torah give so much attention and space to this matter? And how is it that the Priests must leave their holy priestly duties in the Holy Temple to deal with it?

King Shlomo describes the beauty of the "beloved" with these words: "His head is as the finest gold; his locks are curled, as black as a raven [Heb.: orev] (5,11)." And the Medrash explains that even these matters - discharges, afflictions, and the laws of menstruation and childbirth, which are considered “dark” and unpleasant, are like an orev before the Holy One, blessed be He – from the same root as arev, meaning pleasantness and sweetness. These matters are actually pleasing and sweet before G-d, as written: “Then shall the offering of Yehuda and Yerushalayim be pleasing [arvah, from the same root] to the Lord…” (Malachi 3,4).

But why, actually, are these matters so pleasing to G-d?

This can be explained with a parable:

There was once a king’s son who was born with extremely delicate and fair skin. Everyone marveled at his complexion and his skin's pure radiance. One day the child fell ill with chickenpox. All of his skin began to take on a strange color, the sores opened, and blood and pus oozed out. The king immediately summoned a doctor, who applied various kinds of ointments, iodine-based treatments and the like to the skin. Seeing his son in this condition, the king was very happy – because he knew that his beloved son was in the process of healing via the doctor's treatments.

A few days after the prince recovered, the king called him and, with great love and affection, began to teach him the laws of skin afflictions: how they come about and how they are healed, so that his cherished son would know how to guard himself against them.

Precisely in this manner does Hashem teach us the laws that are explained here in Parashat Tazria. "What do they stem from, spiritually? How are they healed? And how can we protect ourselves from them?" And this is why they are pleasant and sweet before Him.

The Torah describes the appearance of the leprous growths as being "deep under the skin" and "not deeper than the skin" (13,3-4), about which even Rashi says that he does not quite understand what it means. The holy Ohr HaChaim, however – R. Chaim ben Atar (early 18^th century, Morocco) – explained it very profoundly, as follows: 

A person's skin reflects his spiritual state, for he was created in G-d's image. If one does good deeds, speaks good things, and is steeped in Torah and mitzvot, his face shines and his skin is radiant. And if he is a sinner, his skin will reflect this as well. And if then repents, G-d Himself will forgive him, erase his sin from his body, and cleanse and polish his skin.

The Ben Ish Chai (R. Yosef Chaim of Baghdad, d. 1909) was asked how it could be that Moshe Rabbeinu did not know that his face shone after he spoke with G-d (Sh'mot 34,29), whereas R. Shimon bar Yochai – who was certainly not greater than Moshe – said about himself that he saw that his countenance shone?

The Ben Ish Chai's answer is very deep – a concept that “no ear has heard and no eye has seen.” He first cites the Talmud (Gittin 36b) which states: “Those who are insulted but do not insult in return, who hear their disgrace but do not respond… Scripture says about them, ‘But those who love Him are like the rising of the sun in its might.’ (Judges 5,31)."

This alludes to Moshe Rabbeinu, the Talmud states, who was humble and did not take offense at or respond to insults. However, this high level is actually not the highest – for it means that he felt insulted, and understood that his honor was impugned, but simply worked on himself not to respond.

An even higher level is one who does not even know that he was insulted! He is so far from feeling arrogance or self-importance that he does not feel there is anything about him that is "good enough" to be insulted. This was the true level of Moshe Rabbeinu, explains the Ben Ish Chai: that he did not even know that his face radiated and shone, felt nothing different, and could not understand why he was being looked at strangely.

This helps us understand what the Holy Ohr HaChaim explained here: One's skin is a testimony to the depth of his character. If he is insulted yet does not even notice it, his character is so profound and deep that it is recognizable on his skin – as with Moshe, to whom we can apply this verse: "A man's wisdom will light up his face" (Kohelet 8,1). 

Shmini: Arrogance and Bachelorhood

by Rav Moshe Tzuriel ZT"L, yeshiva.org.il, translated by Hillel Fendel.

The Torah tells us (Vayikra 10,1-2) that Aharon's sons Nadav and Avihu "offered before G-d a strange fire that He did not command them."  Though this seems straightforward, still and all, our Sages found several other reasons for their deaths. For instance, Medrash Rabba (20,1) states, "Many women were waiting to get married, but Nadav and Avihu, in their arrogance, said, 'Our father's brother [Moshe] is a king, our mother's brother [Nachshon ben Aminadav] is the prince of the Tribe of Judah, our father is the High Priest, and we ourselves are deputy priests. What woman could possibly be suitable for us?'"

They were tainted, as often happens with those who come from distinguished lineage, with the sin of haughtiness, and thus did not even consider the offers of marriage suggested to them.

The Talmud is even more up-front about their "attitude" problem: "Nadav and Avihu were walking behind Moshe and Aharon, and one said to the other, 'When will these two old men die already, and you and I will lead the generation?' G-d then said to them, 'We will soon see who buries whom.'" (Tr. Sanhedrin 52a)

This terrible trait of arrogance was a part of them ever since the day the Torah was given at Sinai, as the above Medrash continues: "Already at Mt. Sinai their death sentence was handed down, for it is written (Sh'mot 24,11) that they "saw G-d and ate and drank"  - with no sense of humility, as if they were dining with a friend of theirs." They were not at all like Moshe Rabbeinu, about whom it is written at the Burning Bush, "Moshe hid his face for he was afraid to look upon G-d" (Sh'mot 3,6).

The Gemara (Eruvin 63a) also tells us that they died because they issued a Halakhic ruling in front of Moshe without consulting with him. That is, when they decided to offer the fire in the Holy Tabernacle, they did not ask Moshe beforehand, as they should have. This, too, shows their trait of arrogance.

But it was even worse than that – for they did not even consult with one another! The Torah tells us that each of them "took his own pan and placed in it fire," emphasizing that each one acted on his own. They had no humility even one towards the other, and certainly did not cooperate with each other. This was very unlike how Moshe and Aharon behaved, as we read in Rashi to Sh'mot 12,3: "They showed honor one to another, and each one asked the other, 'Teach me' – and [when they spoke to Israel], the words would emanate from between both of them, as if they were both speaking."

The Sages also added this "fault" to the list: They were punished because they had no children. What is the source for this? Bamidbar 3,4 recounts this sin and then adds: "They had no children."  This addition seems to be irrelevant, and therefore the Sages derived that it was precisely the reason for their punishment! For the Talmud teaches (Pesachim 113b) that among those who are distanced from G-d are those who were not married and those who have no offspring [for lack of effort]. This indicates that one who tarries in marrying is also at fault and distanced from G-d – for all this stems from arrogance.

When we see that the Sages state various reasons for a particular phenomenon, we do not assume that we simply do not know the real reason; rather, each opinion is showing us another aspects of the same explanation. In the case of Nadav and Avihu, we are happy to note that they were not guilty of many different sins, but only of various aspects of the sin of arrogance. Because they were privileged in various manners, Nadav and Avihu displayed arrogance in different ways.

We can say that this itself was the "strange fire" that they offered before G-d – for it is incumbent upon one who approaches the highest levels of holiness to feel humility.

Showing Humility

A few verses later, we read that Moshe instructed Aharon's remaining sons, Elazar and Itamar, to offer up the Rosh Chodesh sacrifice. However, because they were in mourning for their brothers, they burnt it on the Altar and did not eat from it. Moshe thought they had carelessly disqualified it, and when he tried to clarify this matter, Aharon explained that they were in mourning and therefore could not eat from it. Why did Elazar and Itamar not respond to Moshe? Because of their humility: They wished to show deference to their father Aharon, and also to not directly negate Moshe's words. Moshe then humbly admitted that he had forgotten this law.

Let us relate our message to the unmarried young men of today [2007]. Sadly, Interior Ministry statistics of 2003 show that among males aged 20-29, more than three-quarters are single, and among women – 60% are unmarried. [ed. note: More recent data show lower, but still worrisome, numbers.] It is well-known that the situation is better among the religiously observant community than in the general population. But even among the religious, there are still very many single men and women, even in the 27–30 age range. Why is this so?

Part of this is easily explainable, since by the time one finishes both military service and completes professional training, a young man is already approaching the age of 24–26. But this certainly does not explain away why many of those who delay are influenced by the aforementioned arrogance. There is no question that too many are overly selective, constantly waiting for what appears to be a better match - “more attractive,” or “more religious,” or someone with better financial means.

These unfortunate young men do not realize that as time passes, the “better” offers become less common, because they get taken by others...

It could be that the hesitation of these young men stems either from a sense of inferiority that they fear will be discovered by their dates. It could also be the opposite: They sincerely think that they deserve better. But they fail to recognize that just as the women suggested to them have flaws and imperfections, so too do these very men themselves have the same (both in terms of physical appearance and character traits) – and these only increase over time, rendering themselves at least as undesirable as they perceive the women to be!

In addition, the necessary flexibility required for a person to be patient and accommodating with their “partner” gradually decreases over time. As people grow older, their demands increase, which makes it harder to conclude a match.

Just as physical beauty is found primarily at a relatively young age, so too the ability to accept opposing views is more common among the young, who are more pliant and accepting. Similarly, the more one becomes established in society or in business, the less open s/he is to cooperating with someone who is different from them. This creates a kind of trap for all those waiting to hear a "better" offer.

Young men of our time must learn from the sin of Nadav and Avihu: not to fall into the trap of arrogance!