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.

Aharei Mot: The Beginning of Judicial Reform – in 1538

by Rav Netanel Yosifun, Rosh Yeshivat Orot Netanya, yeshiva.org.il, translated by Hillel Fendel.

It was in the year 1538. Thousands of Jews from all over the world descend upon the holy city of Tzfat in the Galilee. Among them are very many expellees from Spain, former Anusim who were forced to convert to Christianity when they were young to escape the Inquisition. They were later somehow able to escape from Spain and return openly to their Judaism.

These repentant Jews, true baalei teshuvah, pine with all their hearts to atone for the many grave sins they committed in their early years. They turn to the Sages of the generation, asking for the way to true repentance. They even ask to receive lashes, as prescribed in the Torah for certain sins – for they know that those who are liable for the heavy punishment of karet (a form of cutting off from Israel and even the afterlife) can avoid it if they are flogged.

However, the Sages find themselves powerless to help them. Only a Beit Din (Torah court) of Sages who have received genuine ordination – i.e., from one who has been ordained by rabbis in an unbroken chain starting from Moshe Rabbeinu – are authorized to sentence and administer lashes. It is a matter of consensus that such a forum of Sages does not exist at that time. 

There were some very great rabbis in Tzfat at the time, however, including the renowned Rav Yaakov Berav, as well as the author of the Shulchan Arukh, Rav Yosef Karo. They and others convened, and found a solution: the renewal of s'michah (genuine rabbinic ordination). How was it to work?

Rav Berav cited a ruling by Maimonides (the Rambam), whose words carried, and still carry today, tremendous weight in the world of Jewish Law. Maimonides wrote in the Laws of Sanhedrin (4,11): 

"It appears to me that if all the Sages in the Land of Israel agree to appoint and ordain specific judges, these judges are thereby 'officially ordained,' authorized to levy fines and ordain others." 

Rav Berav concluded that certainly the Rambam did not mean "all the Sages" literally. In addition, since at that time the Sages of Tzfat comprised the majority of Sages in Eretz Yisrael, they as a body – the vast majority of which agreed with Rav Berav – can agree to renew the ordination process.

The Sages of Tzfat then convened and decided to ordain Rav Yaakov Berav, writing in the ordination decree as follows: 

"We have determined and chosen the greatest among us, the absolute Sage, our teacher and rabbi, Rabbi Yaakov Berav, to be ordained, to be called Head of the Yeshiva and Rabbi – and he will convene and ordain others of the wisest among us, and they will be ordained from now on and forever... And if a sinner receives lashes [based on these Sages' rulings] as mandated by the Torah … he will be exempt from karet…"

And thus Rav Berav became the first ordained rabbi, who later ordained the renowned Beit Yosef - Rav Yosef Karo - and other giants of the generation.

It turned out, though, that this ordination process did not last for many generations, mainly because of the dissenting opinions of great scholars such as the Radbaz and the Ralbach, and the fact that the scholars in other parts of the Land, mainly in Jerusalem, were not involved in the process. 

The original ordination decree makes clear that the rabbis involved were mainly seeking a solution for the specific problem of the Anusim from Spain. But from the Rambam's ruling, on which the Tzfat rabbis mainly relied, we can see that what bothered the Rambam was the actual renewal of ordination in order that the Sanhedrin be renewed. As he explained in his commentary to the Mishna (Sanhedrin 1,3): 

"If we do not say this [that genuine ordination can be effected in this manner], there will be no possibility of ever having a Great Beit Din, because each of its judges must be indubitably ordained, and G-d has already promised that the Sanhedrin will be renewed, in saying, 'I will restore your judges as at first' (Yeshayahu 1,26). And if perhaps you might say that the Messiah will appoint the judges even if they are not ordained, this is unsustainable, because as we explained in our introduction to these books, the Messiah will not add or detract from neither the Written nor the Oral Torah. And I am of the opinion that the Sanhedrin will be restored before the Messiah is revealed, and in fact this will be one of the signs of his arrival…"

That is, according to the Rambam, the renewal of ordination and the Sanhedrin is a vital stage in the Redemption process, and must happen before the arrival of the Messiah. The Anusim of Spain simply sought to atone for their sins, but ended up nearly meriting us an important milestone along the way to the coming of the Messiah.

This is actually a very profound statement, which also touches upon the events of recent generations. Sometimes, people set out to do something that is important for the moment, while behind the scenes hides G-d, the G-d of the history of the Nation of Israel, Who pushes the processes forward to bring Redemption to the world.

Something similar can be found in this week's Torah portion of Acharei Mot (Vayikra 16-18). The commentators discuss where exactly in the Tabernacle did Nadav and Avihu, sons of Aharon, bring the forbidden incense offering that lead to their deaths. 

The Ibn Ezra notes the fact that the portion opens with a mention of their deaths and then immediately states that no one may enter the Holy of Holies, except the High Priest on Yom Kippur. He says that this proves that Nadav and Avihu brought the unauthorized incense fire all the way into the Holy of Holies. 

Nachmanides, however, says that the brought the offering on the incense altar, in the outer part of the Sanctuary. He brings several proofs, but one of them is this: "How would it ever occur to them to enter the place that even their father did not enter? For Aharon brought the incense upon the inner altar [in the outer area], so why should they bring their incense even further in than his?" 

Thus, Nachmanides holds that Nadav and Avihu brought their offering on the Incense Altar, and not in the Holy of Holies – where until that day, no one ever thought to enter. And only because of this incident did G-d in fact issue a command that the Holy of Holies should be entered precisely once each year, by the High Priest. Thus, because of the need to atone for the problem that had been created, we merited to ascend and progress to a level higher than what we had attained previously. 

And in our own generations, as we have learned from the Gaon of Vilna (Kol HaTor 1,13), "In the generation of the Footsteps of Messiah, from every tribulation emerges a salvation; salvation comes from amidst the troubles, as is written: "It is a time of trouble for Yaakov, and from [within] it he will be saved" (Yirmiyahu 30,7) – from every tribulation will ultimately result a great salvation and uplifting even higher than before.