<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16481" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>*************************************************************<BR>
THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org]<BR> In Memory of
Rabbi Abraham Leibtag<BR> Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem
Leibtag<BR>*************************************************************</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>"ZOT CHUKAT HA'TORAH"<BR> [For Parshat Chukat
& Parshat Parah]<BR> WHAT'S A CHOK, AND WHAT'S A TORAH?</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> How should one translate the phrase "ZOT CHUKAT HA'TORAH" (see 19:2)
in the opening psukim of Parshat Para?<BR>[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.]</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> 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. <BR> 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.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>INTRODUCTION<BR> 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'. <BR> 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. <BR> 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 <BR> "zot torat ha' -----" -
<BR> ['this is the procedure for the ------
offering: ..."<BR> <BR> 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.).<BR> <BR> 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:<BR>"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)</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> 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)!</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>THE LAWS OF TUMAT MEYT<BR> 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].<BR> 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'. <BR> 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.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>TWO PROCEDURES IN THE PROCESS<BR> 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.<BR> 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".<BR> Therefore, as we study chapter 19, we should expect to uncover
the details of two procedures:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>PROCEDURE #1 - Making the 'ashes' of the parah adumah.<BR> [as
detailed in 19:2-9!)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>PROCEDURE #2 - Sprinkling these ashes (mixed with
water).<BR> [as detailed in 19:17-19!]</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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".</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>WHAT'S A CHOK?<BR> 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.<BR> 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:<BR>"... 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!)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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!<BR> 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:<BR>"... 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)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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:<BR>"...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)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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!).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>THE CHOK OF TUMAT MEYT<BR> Let's see now how the word "chok" would
apply to the laws of "tumat meyt".<BR> 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.<BR>[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.]</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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! <BR> 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).<BR> 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. <BR>[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"!]</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>PROCEDURE #1 & its CHUKIM<BR> 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:<BR>19:2-3 -<BR> Take a red heifer (one without a blemish) and
give it to Elazar (the deputy high priest) who must slaughter it outside the
camp.<BR>19:4 -<BR>Sprinkle the blood of the heifer seven times opposite the
entrance to the Ohel Moed.<BR> 19:5-6 -<BR>Burn the carcass of the heifer
together with branches from both a hyssop and cedar tree, etc., until in turns
into ashes.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Now that the 'ashes' have been prepared, the Torah informs us of two
special CHUKIM that accompany this process:<BR> 19:7 - <BR>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"].<BR>19:8
- <BR>The kohen who BURNS the animal becomes "tamey" [that's also a CHOK],
and must wash his clothes etc.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Then Chumash continues with the final stages of this
procedure:<BR> 19:9 -<BR>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].<BR> 19:10 -<BR>This person who collects the ashes also
become "tamey" [just like the other two]. That's yet another CHOK!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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.<BR>[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!]</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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":. <BR>"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:]<BR> - 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." <BR> (see
19:10-13)<BR> <BR> 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.<BR> 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".</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>PROCEDURE #2 and its CHUKIM<BR> Let's take a look now at 19:14. Note
how this pasuk (at first glance) seems to contradict our definition of a
TORAH:<BR>"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..." <BR> (19:14-15)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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?<BR> The answer to this question is quite
simple.<BR> 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!].<BR> <BR> In this manner, 19:14-16
should be translated as follows:<BR> <BR> "This is the
TORAH - FOR:<BR>a) the case when a person dies in a tent, then everything
in the tent becomes "tamey" (19:14), [and for...]<BR> b) any
open vessel in that tent (19:15), or<BR>c) any person who touched a dead body in
the field or bone or grave (who also becomes "tamey" (19:16)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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:<BR>"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).<BR> <BR> 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).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>THE CHUKIM OF PROCEDURE #2<BR> This second procedure, just like the
first procedure, is also accompanied by certain consequential
"chukim":<BR> a) he who sprinkles the solution becomes "tamey"
<BR>(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);<BR> b) anyone who touches this solution also
becomes "tamey"<BR> (see 19:22).<BR>[i.e. "tamey for one
day, he must wash his clothes and then he becomes "tahor" at sunset.]</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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".</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>CHUKAT ha'TORAH<BR> 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.
<BR> (1) making the ashes; and<BR> (2)
sprinkling the "mei chatat" - water w/ashes
solution.<BR> <BR> 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 inherit 'statute' [CHOK] of
this 'procedure' [TORAH]. Hence, this may be the technical meaning of this
introductory phrase "chukat ha'torah", i.e.<BR> - the CHOK {that those
involved becomes "tamey"] in <BR> the TORAH [procedure] required to
cleanse "tumat meyt".</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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.<BR> <BR>THE RAMBAM<BR> 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:<BR>"... 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]</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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:<BR>"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...
<BR> (see Rambam Hilchot Meillah - the beginning of 8:8)
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> 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.]<BR> 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.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> shabbat
shalom,<BR> menachem<BR>==============<BR>FOR
FURTHER IYUN<BR>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.
<BR> 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! <BR> 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!]</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>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!]</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>