Rabbi Frand on Parshas Vayechi
These divrei Torah were adapted from the hashkafa portion of Rabbi Yissocher Frand's Commuter Chavrusah Tapes on the weekly portion: Tape # 175 --
Embalming, Autopsies, and Cremation.
Good Shabbos!
Too Much Of A Good Thing
At the beginning of Parshas Vayechi, Yaakov Avinu gathered his sons to
speak to them. In Bereishis 49:16, Yaakov addressed his son Dan: "Dan will
judge his nation". Yaakov was, in a sense, saying that Dan (as his name
implies) has a unique sense of justice within him, and as a result it is
appropriate that his tribe will produce judges for our people. Our Rabbis
tell us that Yaakov was referring to Samson, who was from the tribe of Dan.
Samson would judge the Jewish people for 20 years. Samson inherited this
ability from his great grandfather Dan, who possessed a tremendous sense of
fairness.
The Talmud (Pesachim 4a) tells of an individual who would always say,
"Judge my case" and concludes that this individual must have come from the
tribe of Dan. Rash"i explains that this man would insist on going to court
about every little matter, refusing to settle without taking the matter
before judges.
This Gemara [Talmud] is hard to understand. When Yaakov said, "Dan will
judge his nation" he was referring to a beautiful attribute of the tribe of
Dan -- his sense of fairness and justice. However, here the Gemara implies
that Dan's attribute is bad, by assuming that this fellow, who would always
say, "sue me" or "I'll see you in court," must have been from the tribe of
Dan. How do we reconcile this contradiction?
Rabbi Henoch Leibowitz says that this Gemara teaches us an important lesson
about character traits (midos). We speak about a person having good
character traits -- being honest and humble, not losing one's temper, not
being haughty. Why are they referred to as "midos" (literally measurements)?
An underlying principle of character traits is that they have to be
measured. The ba'alei mussar ask why there is no commandment in the Torah
that a person should have good "midos". They explain that there is no such
thing as a character trait that is all bad or all good. The challenge is to
use the various character traits in the proper measure. Sometimes it is
appropriate for a person to have a 'measure' of anger, and sometimes a
person needs to have a 'measure' of haughtiness.
The trouble starts if a character trait gets out of hand. This Gemara is
telling us is that Dan had a tremendous sense of Din (justice). However,
this trait that the founder of the tribe had in his genes went haywire in
the fellow mentioned in tractate Pesachim. He took the 'measure' of justice
too far. His sense of justice was too strict. There was never compromise.
It was always 'Din' -- "See you in Court!"
Any trait, even the best, if not applied in its proper measure and in its
proper context, can go bad.
Chushim Was Deaf, But Not Dumb
The verse (50:13) says, "His sons carried him [Yaakov Avinu] to the land of
Canaan and they buried him in the cave of the Machpelah field, the field
that Avraham had bought as a burial estate from Ephron the Hitite, facing
Mamre."
There is a very interesting Gemara (Sotah 13a) that describes Yaakov's
funeral: When they reached the Me'aras HaMachpelah, Yaakov's brother, Eisav
came and tried to stop them. Eisav claimed that Yaakov had already used his
allotted plot in the cave -- by burying Leah there -- and that the
remaining plot belongs to him (Eisav). Yaakov's sons reminded Eisav that he
had sold his birthright to their father. Eisav countered that he only sold
the birthright but he did not forsake his own burial spot in the cave to
which he would have been entitled even as a non-firstborn. They argued back
and forth and finally the brothers said they had the receipt for the sale
of the plot -- but it was in Egypt.
They sent Naftali -- the fastest runner among them -- to Egypt to retrieve
the document. Naftali began running to Egypt to retrieve the receipt. In
the meantime, Chushim, son of Dan, came forward. He was deaf and he had not
heard the exchange between Eisav and the children of Yaakov. He inquired
about the cause of the delay. The brothers explained why they were waiting
to bury Yaakov until Naftali returned from Egypt. Chushim was incensed that
his grandfather should remain in shame, unburied, until Naftali returned.
He took the situation into his own hands. Chushim took a club, hit Eisav
over the head, and killed him. End of problem. Yaakov Avinu was buried.
Who was on the mark here and who was off the mark? Chushim son of Dan was
clearly right. What kind of insult was this to Yaakov to let him lie
unburied while they retrieved the paperwork of the sale? What kind of
nonsense was this to put up with this harassment from Eisav after all these
years? However, Chushim was the only person, out of the entire delegation
of sons and grandsons to have this sensitivity to object to what was
transpiring. What was Chushim's special trait that gave him this clarity of
insight?
Rabbi Henoch Leibowitz explained that the difference between Chushim and
everyone else was that he was deaf. Everyone else became involved in the
argument. When someone is involved in an argument, he sometimes forgets the
ultimate point over which he is arguing. The goal sometimes becomes winning
the argument, for the argument's own sake. People become so involved in
the back and forth -- "You did sell it", "You didn't sell it", "I'm right",
you're wrong" -- to the extent that they forget the ultimate point. We are
in the middle of a funeral over here! Yaakov Avinu is laying in disgrace!
It is easy to become so involved in the peripheral -- in argument for
argument's sake, in which egos are involved -- that we lose perspective.
People can sit and argue whether the Peace Table should be round or square
for weeks, while thousands of people are killed every day in a war. People
come to negotiate a peace treaty to save lives, and instead argue about the
size and shape of the table!
Chushim was deaf, and did not need to become a party to the arguments. He
was not concerned about who was right and who was wrong. Chushim saw one
issue. The issue was "my grandfather is laying in disgrace". When
grandfather is laying in disgrace, forget arguments, forget bills of sale,
forget receipts, and forget who is right and who is wrong. This is a
travesty and it can not be allowed to continue!
How often does this happen to us? We lose sight of the bigger picture and
allow an argument to take on a life of its own. We often forget what it is
all about. We must never lose sight of the forest because of the trees. We
must never fail to distinguish between the 'ikar' (main issue) and the
'tafel' (the peripheral).
Glossary
Ba'alei Mussar -- Masters of ethical behavior
Midos -- (literally measurements) character traits
Sources and Personalities
Rav Henoch Leibowitz -- Rosh Yeshiva, Yeshiva Chofetz Chaim, Forest Hills, NY
This week's write-up is adapted from the hashkafa portion of Rabbi
Yissochar Frand's Commuter Chavrusah Torah Tapes on the weekly Torah
portion (#175). The corresponding halachic portion for this tape is:
Embalming, Autopsies, and Cremation. The other halachic portions for Parshas Vayechi
from the Commuter Chavrusah Series are:
Also Available: Mesorah / Artscroll has published a collection
of Rabbi Frand's essays. The book is entitled:
and is available through your local Hebrew book store or from
Project Genesis, 1-410-654-1799.
