[Par-lite] For Parshat Chukat - shiur #2

Wed Jun 27 15:39:13 EDT 2012

*********************************************
****************

        THE TANACH STUDY CENTER
[http://www.tanach.org]

            In Memory of Rabbi Abraham
Leibtag

      Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem
Leibtag

*********************************************
****************

                                  "ZOT CHUKAT
HA'TORAH"

                              [For Parshat
Chukat & Parshat Parah]

      WHAT'S A CHOK, AND WHAT'S A TORAH?

      How should one translate the phrase
"ZOT CHUKAT HA'TORAH" (see 19:2) in the
opening psukim of Parshat Para?

[Note how just about every English
translation slightly varies in their attempt
to interpret this verse, e.g. "the Torah's
decree" (Stone & Living Torah), "a ritual
law" (JPS), etc.]

      Many students of Chumash innocently
assume that the word "torah" refers to the
entire Torah, while the word "chok" implies a
specific law that has no obvious reason; and
hence - this opening pasuk informs the reader
that the laws of Parah Adumah (that will
follow) will be the quintessential example in
the entire Bible of a law that doesn't make
any sense.  

      In the following shiur, we will
consider an alternate understanding of the
words "chok" and "torah" in this pasuk, based
on their meaning elsewhere in Chumash.  While
doing so, we will attempt to arrive at a
clearer understanding of this special set of
laws, and the purpose of this enigmatic
opening phrase.

INTRODUCTION

      Today, in common conversation, the word
'Torah' is used to describe either the entire
Bible, or even the entire corpus of Jewish
law.  In fact, even the study of the Oral
Law, such as the Mishna and Talmud is
referred to 'Torah study'.  

    However, when we examine the use of the
word "torah" in Chumash, we find that it has
a very different meaning.  Instead of
referring to the entire book, the word
"torah" in the books of Vayikra and Bamidbar
usually refers to a specific type of law,
usually one of a procedural nature. 

    For example, in our study of Parshat
Tzav, we saw how each paragraph (in the
section describing how to offer the various
korbanot / chapters 6 thru 7) began with the
phrase 

    "zot torat ha' -----" - 

      ['this is the procedure for the ------
offering: ..."

    Hence, the phrase "zot TORAT
ha'mincha..." (see 6:7-10) is translated:
"this is the PROCEDURE for how to offer the
korban mincha" - followed by the details
concerning how the kohanim are to offer it.
Similarly, "zot TORAT ha'chatat" introduces
the laws of how to offer the "korban chatat"
(see 6:18 and 7:1, etc.).

    An even better example is found in Sefer
Bamidbar, at the conclusion of the laws
concerning the procedure that the priest must
conduct to test whether the "sota" [a wife
accused by her husband for 'cheating'] was
innocent or guilty.  Note the use of the word
"torah" in the pasuk that summarizes this
lengthy process:

"zot TORAT ha'knaot - this is the torah [the
procedure] for this case of 'jealousy', when
a wife... or when the spirit of jealousy
comes upon a man, and he be jealous over his
wife.. and the priest shall execute upon her
all this TORAH"  - i.e. this procedure!  (see
Bamidbar 5:29-30 in its context)

      With this background, we can begin our
attempt to understand the word "torah" in
Parshat Para - to show that here as well, it
refers to a specific procedure (and not to
the entire Chumash)!

THE LAWS OF TUMAT MEYT

      To appreciate what procedures are
discussed in Bamidbar chapter 19, we must
first provide a short overview of the basic
laws of "tumat meyt" [spiritual
uncleanliness, caused by contact with a dead
body].

    According to Jewish law, if a person
touches (or is in the same room with) a dead
body, he becomes "tamey" [spiritually
unclean] for period of at least seven days,
during which time he is not permitted to
enter the Temple courtyard.  To 'cleanse'
himself of this "tumah", a special
'procedure' is required.  The kohen [priest]
must sprinkle upon him from a special
solution consisting of spring water mixed
with specially prepared ashes of a "para
Adumah" - a 'red heifer'. 

    The first sprinkling can only be
performed after three days, and then needs to
be repeated four days later, i.e. on day
seven.  At sunset of that seventh day, he
becomes "tahor" [spiritually clean] and hence
permitted once again to enter the Temple.

TWO PROCEDURES IN THE PROCESS

      Obviously, before the kohen can perform
this 'sprinkling procedure' - someone has to
first make the 'ashes'.  Hence, the first
procedure [="torah"] that Chumash will
describe will be how to make these ashes.  As
only a small amount (of ashes) is needed to
make this special solution, the ashes
collected from the burning of each "para
aduma" could suffice for decades.

      After the explanation of this first
procedure, Chumash will explain the details
for the second "torah" - i.e. the procedure
whereby the kohen sprinkles this solution of
the "tmey meyt".

      Therefore, as we study chapter 19, we
should expect to uncover the details of two
procedures:

PROCEDURE #1 - Making the 'ashes' of the
parah adumah.

            [as detailed in 19:2-9!)

PROCEDURE #2 - Sprinkling these ashes (mixed
with water).

    [as detailed in 19:17-19!]

      As we study these psukim, we will show
how these two procedures also contain several
consequential laws, which we identify as
"chukim"!  Therefore, before we begin our
detailed study, we must first explain the
Biblical meaning of the word "chok".

WHAT'S A CHOK?

      Contrary to popular opinion, a "chok"
is not the name for a Biblical law that
doesn't make sense (or has no reason).
Indeed, we will find "chukim" that have no
obvious reason, and that may even be
'characteristic' of a "chok" - but it is not
the definition of a "chok"!  Instead, a
"chok" is a statute - i.e. a set law or
ordinance that doesn't change.

      To clarify this point, let's take an
example from a law that you are all familiar
with: the Korban Pesach.  Everyone knows why
we offer the Korban Pesach - to commemorate
how God saved Am Yisrael from the Tenth
Plague.  Certainly, this mitzvah makes a lot
of sense, but to your surprise - Chumash
refers to this law as a CHOK and gives a
reason! Let's take a look:

"... and you should keep this commandment (of
Korban Pesach) as a CHOK for you and your
children for ever. When you come into the
Land that God shall give you... keep this
ritual. And when your children will ask: What
is this ritual for you? Tell them it is the
Pesach offering, for God passed over the
houses of Bnei Yisrael when He smote the
Egyptians..." (see Shmot 12:24-27!)

      In fact, Chumash refers to all of the
Jewish Holidays as CHUKIM (see Parshat Emor -
Vayikra 23:14,21,31 & 41) - because they are
set in the yearly calendar, and repeat
themselves every year!

    Chumash also uses the word "chok" to
describe statutes that are not mitzvot. For
example, when Sefer Breishit describes how
Yosef purchased of the land from the
Egyptians, we are informed that he cannot
acquire the land belonging to the priests -
because:

"... it is the CHOK of the priests by
Pharaoh, that they eat their portion [lechem
CHUKAM] that Pharaoh had given them..."
(see Breishit 47:20-22 and its context)

    Two psukim later, we find another
example, where Chumash describes the 20% set
land tax imposed on Egyptian produce as a
"chok" (see Breishit 47:26)

      For a similar reason, when Bnei Yisrael
are required to produce a certain daily
output of bricks, Sefer Shmot describes this
set quota as a CHOK:

"...and the taskmasters of Bnei Yisrael
scolded them saying - Why did you not
complete CHOK'CHEM [your quota] to make
bricks as before..." (see Shmot 5:14 and its
context)

      Note also how Yirmiyahu refers to the
laws of astronomy, i.e. the constant and
unchanging cycles of the sun and moon around
the earth, as "CHUKOT shamayim v'aretz" (see
Yirmiyahu 33:25 and even better, see
Yirmiyahu 31:35-36!).

      For this reason, the holidays in
Parshat Emor are referred to as CHUKIM for
they celebrated on a REGULAR basis, once a
year based on the solar (agricultural)
calendar.  Hence, a "chok" implies something
constant that doesn't change - a statute.

THE CHOK OF TUMAT MEYT

      Let's see now how the word "chok" would
apply to the laws of "tumat meyt".

    The law that a person who touches a dead
body becomes "tamey" for seven days should
definitely be considered a "chok"  - for it
is a law that never changes - it remains
constant.

[In modern Hebrew we find a similar use,
where the 'laws of nature' are called CHUKEI
ha'TEVA. Take for example Newton's laws of
motion - they are set and don't change.]

      Based on this definition, a CHOK can be
logical, but it doesn't have to be! Certain
CHUKIM may be beyond our comprehension,
however many other CHUKIM can actually make a
lot of sense. Therefore we find some "chukim"
that are quite logical, while others are not
- however, the fact that a certain law is not
logical, does not define it as a CHOK! 

      In contrast, a MISHPAT, as its name
implies, is a JUDGEMENT - based on reason.
The very concept of a MISHPAT relates to a
decision or judgment that must be made
between two claims that come before the
court.  Hence, the Torah refers to the entire
set of civil laws relating to damages etc. in
Shmot chapters 21->23 as MISHPATIM (see Shmot
21:1 & 24:3).

      With this  background, let's read
through Parshat Parah and attempt to identify
more precisely where we find a TORAH and
where we find a CHOK, and how they relate to
one another.  As we read, we will notice how
the chapter neatly divides into two sections,
according to the two procedures that we
mentioned above. 

[As a teacher's note - to explain this
concept of TORAH as a procedure, take the
word 'recipe' as an example. A recipe demands
a certain procedure to attain a certain goal,
i.e. a sponge cake recipe requires that we
take 4 eggs, flour, water, sugar; mix them
into a batter, and bake it etc. The result -
a cake - and hence the recipe card is titled:
Sponge cake. In a similar manner, the Parshat
Parah informs us of the proper 'recipe' [i.e.
the TORAH] to make the ashes for "efer
parah"!]

PROCEDURE #1 & its CHUKIM

      We assumed above that the first "torah"
(or procedure) would describe how to prepare
the "efer ha'parah" [the ashes of the
heifer], that will later be used for
sprinkling).  As you review 19:2-6, note how
these psukim describe precisely this
procedure:

19:2-3 -

      Take a red heifer (one without a
blemish) and give it to Elazar (the deputy
high priest) who must slaughter it outside
the camp.

19:4 -

Sprinkle the blood of the heifer seven times
opposite the entrance to the Ohel Moed.

19:5-6 -

Burn the carcass of the heifer together with
branches from both a hyssop and cedar tree,
etc., until in turns into ashes.

      Now that the 'ashes' have been
prepared, the Torah informs us of two special
CHUKIM that accompany this process:

19:7 -     

The kohen who PERFORMS this procedure becomes
"tamey" [that's a CHOK], therefore he must
wash his clothes and remains "tamey" until
the evening ["tumat yom"].

19:8 -      

The kohen who BURNS the animal becomes
"tamey" [that's also a CHOK], and must wash
his clothes etc.

Then Chumash continues with the final stages
of this procedure:

19:9 -

A clean person must COLLECT the ashes and
stores them outside the camp. This is
actually the final stage of the procedure
[i.e. part of the TORAH].

19:10 -

This person who collects the ashes also
become "tamey" [just like the other two].
That's yet another CHOK!

      Hence, we find that this specific
procedure of making the "efer" is accompanied
by several special CHUKIM. Note how these
CHUKIM, even though they are not an integral
part of the procedure, they are a direct
consequence - and therefore should be defined
as related "chukim" [statutes], but not an
integral part of the procedure.

[If we use again our "mashal" from the cake
recipe, the person mixing the batter must
later wash his hands, but that does not
affect how the cake comes out!]

      To prove these definitions, let's take
a more careful look at this last pasuk, as it
explains the purpose of this procedure. i.e.
for these ashes must be used for the CHOK of
"tumat meyt":. 

"The person who collects the ashes must wash
his clothes, and [these ashes] are to be
[used] for Bnei Yisrael for a CHUKAT OLAM -
an everlasting statute: [i.e. introducing the
CHOK of:]

-  One who touches a dead body becomes
"tamey" for seven days.  If he is sprinkled
upon on the third & seventh day, he becomes
"tahor"; if not he remains "tamey"... and
should he enter the Mikdash, he is to be cut
off from Israel." 

    (see 19:10-13)

      These psukim end the first section of
Parshat Parah, as the ashes are prepared, and
we are also informed of what they will be
needed for.

    Now that the "efer" is prepared, we are
ready to discuss the second TORAH [procedure]
found in this chapter, i.e. the precise
details of this 'sprinkling process' - known
in Hebrew as "torat ha'haza'ah".

PROCEDURE #2 and its CHUKIM

      Let's take a look now at 19:14. Note
how this pasuk (at first glance) seems to
contradict our definition of a TORAH:

"And this is the TORAH - a person who dies in
a tent, everything in the tent becomes tamey
[unclean] for seven days. And any open
vessel... it too becomes tamey..." 

    (19:14-15)

      Based on our above definitions of CHOK
& TORAH, this law [of how one contracts
"tumat meyt"] should be considered a "chok"
for it describes a set law that never
changes!  Why then does 19:14 introduce this
law as a TORAH?

      The answer to this question is quite
simple.

    If one reads the next set of psukim
carefully, it becomes clear that the phrase
"ZOT HA'TORAH" in 19:14 is INTRODUCING the
procedure that is defined later on 19:17-19.
In other words, we need to add the word 'for'
in 19:14 [i.e. a "lamed" after "zot ha'torah
L'adam asher yamut b'ohel..." [which is
implicit based on the context - see also
Rashbam on 19:2!].

    In this manner, 19:14-16 should be
translated as follows:

    "This is the TORAH  - FOR:

a) the case when a person dies in a tent,
then everything in the tent becomes "tamey"
(19:14), [and for...]

            b)    any open vessel in that
tent (19:15), or

c) any person who touched a dead body in the
field or bone or grave (who also becomes
"tamey" (19:16)

      THEN: for any of these "tamey" persons
or objects, we must take from the "efer" [the
ashes of the heifer] and put it into a vessel
with water (see 19:17) in order to perform
PROCEDURE #2 [i.e. "torat ha'za'ah"], as
explained in the next set of psukim:

"A person who is TAHOR [clean] shall take a
hyssop branch, dip it in the water [mixed
with the ashes], and then sprinkle it on
(either) the tent and vessels, or on the
person who touched the bones... or who
touched a grave..." (see 19:18).

      This procedure, as described in 19:18,
was first introduced by the phrase "zot
ha'TORAH" in 19:14.  The next pasuk (19:19)
informs us that this procedure must be
repeated on both the third and seventh days
(see 19:19).

THE CHUKIM OF PROCEDURE #2

      This second procedure, just like the
first procedure, is also accompanied by
certain consequential "chukim":

    a) he who sprinkles the solution becomes
"tamey" 

(see 19:21, see also Rashi who quotes
Chazal's understanding that it refers to only
someone who carries this solution, but not
actually the one who sprinkles it);

    b) anyone who touches this solution also
becomes "tamey"

     (see 19:22).

[i.e. "tamey for one day, he must wash his
clothes and then he becomes "tahor" at
sunset.]

      Note how both Procedures #1 and #2
carry with them very similar consequential
CHUKIM, i.e. anyone who is involved in this
process of either making the "efer", or
sprinkling it upon someone else, becomes
"tamey".

CHUKAT ha'TORAH

      Based on these definitions, we can
suggest an explanation for the opening phrase
"CHUKAT ha'TORAH" that introduces these laws
(see 19:1). As we have shown, this chapter
contains many special CHUKIM that relate to
the TORAH (procedures) of "tahara" from
"tumat meyt", i.e. 

    (1) making the ashes; and

    (2) sprinkling the "mei chatat" - water
w/ashes solution.

      Each of these two procedures carry
special "chukim" that accompany these
procedures: The special chukim all have one
common denominator. Anyone involved in these
procedures for cleansing one who is "tamey" -
he himself becomes "tamey". This strange CHOK
that by making someone else TAHOR you become
TAMEY is an inherent 'statute' [CHOK] of this
'procedure' [TORAH]. Hence, this may be the
technical meaning of this introductory phrase
"chukat ha'torah", i.e.

      - the CHOK {that those involved becomes
"tamey"] in 

       the TORAH [procedure] required to
cleanse "tumat meyt".

      Clearly, this CHOK appears to negate
all logic - for why should the person
involved in the process of making someone
else TAHOR become TAMEY? For this reason,
this specific CHOK becomes a classic example
of a law that doesn't make sense (see Rashi
19:2).  HOWEVER, this does not mean that the
definition of a CHOK is a law that doesn't
make sense!  As we explained above, a CHOK is
a set law.  CHUKIM don't have to make sense,
but certainly it is OK if they do.

THE RAMBAM

      A similar explanation of CHUKIM is
found in the Rambam in his concluding section
of Sefer Avodah in Hilchot Meilla. Note how
Rambam differentiates between CHUKIM and
MISHPATIM:

"... the MISHPATIM are laws whose reason is
evident ["taamam geluyah"] and the benefit
for keeping them is apparent in this world,
e.g. the prohibition to steal or to murder,
or honoring one's parents; while the CHUKIM
are laws whose reason is not evident ["taamam
eino geluyah"]... and the laws of Korbanot
fall under category of CHUKIM..." [see
Hilchot Meilla 8:8]

      Note the examples that Rambam uses for
Mishpatim - stealing, murder, and honoring
one's parents. Even though these are mitzvot
in the Torah, they are based on a very
obvious rational. Even without the Torah,
most societies establish similar laws for
they are based on common sense. In contrast,
CHUKIM are divine decrees and as such do not
necessarily need to be based on any obvious
reason. Nevertheless, note how Rambam demands
that we make every effort to understand God's
reason for the CHUKIM as well:

"It is fitting that one should contemplate
the laws of the Torah to understand their
reasoning to the best of his ability. But
should he find a law that he does not
understand (or does not make sense to him)...
he should not conclude that they are any less
important, rather he must keep them and treat
them with the utmost respect... 

    (see Rambam Hilchot Meillah - the
beginning of 8:8) 

      Even though CHUKIM (by their very
nature) don't have to make sense ["ein taamam
glu'yah"], nevertheless Rambam implores that
we make every effort to try to understand
them, Should one be unable to find a reason
for a certain CHOK, he must relate this lack
of understanding to his own inability to
grasp God's infinite wisdom rather than
conclude that the CHOK has no purpose.  [Note
for example how Ramban mentions if this final
halacha that "korbanot" are a classic example
of CHUKIM, yet in his MOREH NEVUCHIM he makes
effort to explain the reason and logic for
each and every type of korban! In fact,
Rambam claims that if we were aware of all
the various types of Avodah Zarah that
existed in the time of Yetziat Mitzraim, we
would be able to understand the reason for
ALL of the CHUKIM of korbanot! [See Moreh
III, the closing two paragraphs of chapter
49.] In fact, one could consider Rambam's
attempt in Moreh Nevuchim to provide a reason
for the various laws korbanot an example of
what he suggested in Hilchot Meillah 8:8 -
i.e. that we attempt with the best of our
ability to understand the reasons for CHUKIM
as well.]

      This dialectic, where on the one hand
we must 'blindly' accept each and every one
of God's CHUKIM, even though we may not
understand them, yet at the same time we are
encouraged to make every intellectual effort
to attempt to comprehend their reason - is a
beautiful example of the challenge of our
faith in God. In Judaism, our faith in God
can only be enhanced by our constant quest
for reason and truth.

shabbat shalom,

menachem

==============

FOR FURTHER IYUN

1. In Sefer Devarim, it appears that the word
TORAH is used in a very general context,
referring to entire set of mitzvot including
many chukim and mishpatim. See 1:5, 4:44 -
"v'zot ha'Torah asher sam Moshe...", 27:3
etc. 

      However, if you remember our study of
the main speech of Sefer Devarim, the use of
the word Torah may remain in its original
context as a procedure. To determine what the
goal of that overall procedure is, note
carefully 5:1-2, 5:28, 6:1, and most
important -the closing psukim of that speech
in 26:16-19, and relate to Shmot 19:5-6! 

    In other words, the entire set of laws
recorded in the main speech in Sefer Devarim
(chapters 5-26) are consistently referred to
as a "torah" - for they comprise the
'procedure' for how to make Am Yisrael an "am
kadosh" - just as God originally proposed
(and Bnei Yisrael accepted) at Maamad Har
Sinai!]

2. Can you find the logic of this chok that
one who makes someone else tahor becomes
tamey?  Is there a law of 'the conservation
of tumah'?!   [Ask anyone in the "kiruv"
business!]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20120627/10c633a3/attachment-0001.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: chukat3.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 39043 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20120627/10c633a3/attachment-0001.pdf 