וַתִּפְתַּח֙ וַתִּרְאֵ֣הוּ אֶת־הַיֶּ֔לֶד וְהִנֵּה־נַ֖עַר בֹּכֶ֑ה וַתַּחְמֹ֣ל עָלָ֔יו וַתֹּ֕אמֶר מִיַּלְדֵ֥י הָֽעִבְרִ֖ים זֶֽה
Rashi says why is he called a נער if he is a yeled? Rashi says והנה נער בכה. קוֹלוֹ כְּנַעַר. The Ramban objects, וכבר דחו זה ואמרו אם כן עשית למשה רבינו בעל מום (סוטה יב: שמו''ר א' כ''ח). ועוד, מה טעם שיזכיר הכתוב עובי קולו.
The source of this debate is the Gemarah Sotah (12b) וְהִנֵּה נַעַר בֹּכֶה קָרֵי לֵיהּ יֶלֶד וְקָרֵי לֵיהּ נַעַר תָּנָא הוּא יֶלֶד וְקוֹלוֹ כְּנַעַר דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה אִם כֵּן עֲשִׂיתוֹ לְמֹשֶׁה רַבֵּינוּ בַּעַל מוּם אֶלָּא מְלַמֵּד שֶׁעָשְׂתָה לוֹ אִמּוֹ חוּפַּת נְעוּרִים בַּתֵּיבָה אָמְרָה שֶׁמָּא לֹא אֶזְכֶּה לְחוּפָּתוֹ.
Rashi on the Gemarah says בעל מום - והוא לוי ונפסל בקול לעבודת השיר. The source of this din is Chullin (24.) What kind of voice is a blemish for a Levi? Rashi Chullin (24b) says קול אחד - שצריכין לבשם את קולם שיהא נראה כקול אחד. Rashi in Megillah (24b) says דעבי קלך - ותניא בהכל שוחטין (חולין דף כד.) בשילה ובבית עולמים הלוים נפסלין בקול. This means any oddity in the voice of the Levi that makes him stand out will make him pasul. However, the Rambam Kli Mikdash (3:8) says לְדוֹרוֹת אֵין הַלֵּוִי נִפְסָל בְּשָׁנִים וְלֹא בְּמוּמִין אֶלָּא בְּקוֹל שֶׁיִּתְקַלְקֵל קוֹלוֹ מֵרֹב הַזִּקְנָה יִפָּסֵל לַעֲבוֹדָתוֹ בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ. The Briskor Rav says we see from the Rambam that only if the voice becomes damaged from old age does the Levi become pasul. (It is noteworthy that the Chafetz Chayim in Likutay Halachot does not learn the Rambam means only if the voice changes from old age is the Levi pasul. The Rambam says old age to contrast from the time of the Mikdash where just age made a Levi pasul.) How does this fit with the Gemarah here for Moshe's voice was not different due to old age?
The Maharsha seems to learn the Gemarah is not a halachik issue of baal mum rather just that it would not be apropos for Moshe to be a baal mum. In light of that interpretation, there is no difficulty in the Rambam.
The Chasam Sofer (Orech Chayim #12) takes a different approach. He suggests that the issue of Moshe being a baal mum is that he was part of the Sanhedrin and a baal mum is pasul to be part of Sanhedrin as the Gemarah Sanhedrin (36b) says. The C.S .wants to say that even a mum for a Levi disqualifies one from being a member of the Sanhedrin. The Or Samech Sanhedrin (2:6) suggests the same chiddush that a pesul of Levi would also be disqualified from Sanhedrin. However, the O.S. does not learn that is peshat in the Gemarah Sotah itself but only since the Gemarah says that Moshe was not a baal mum to be disqualified Levi do we say that even a pesul for a Levi disqualifies one from the Sanhedrin. Why is that?
The Gemarah Sanhedrin learns that a baal mum is pasul to be a member of the Sanhedrin from כולך יפה רעיתי ומום אין בך. The Gemarah has a different limud from (שמות יח, כב) ונשאו אתך אתך בדומין לך ליהוי that to be a member one has to be מיוחס like Moshe. Tosfos asks if there is a limud to be a valid member of Sanhedrin one has to be like Moshe, then why do we need a separate passuk to disqualify a baal mum, just have the same limud that they are not like Moshe, who did not have a mum? Tosfos answers without the passuk of ומום אין בך we would have not said a baal mum is pasul. The Briskor Rav (Vaerah) explains the answer is that we would have said only regarding yichus where the passuk spells out the yichus of Moshe in Vayerah, do we know that is important for a Sanhedrin member to have proper yichus but having a mum we would have said doesn't matter vis-a-vis being a member of Sanhedrin. Therefore we need another passuk to tell us that being a baal mum also disqualifies one from being part of Sanhedrin. Says the O.S., now that we know Moshe was not a baal mum even regarding a mum of Leviem, therefore to be a member of Sanhedrin one cannot even have that pesul for otherwise it is not simliar to Moshe, not אתך. (There is room to disagree for if it is not included in the possuk of מום אין בך, then it doesn't create a pesul to be part of Sanhedrin for אתך is just to be מגלה that being a baal mum is an issue but what is a mum follows the normal standard like for Kohanim.)
The Briskors have chakirah in this din that the Levi can no longer sing well, he becomes pasul. Is that merely a din in the avodah of the shir or is it a chalos pesul in the Levi if his voice is unfit. The Rambam (ibid) says וְיֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ נִפְסָל אֶלָּא לוֹמַר שִׁירָה אֲבָל יִהְיֶה מִן הַשּׁוֹעֲרִים. They say why does the Rambam say this a chiddush, יראה לי, of course the Levi can do other things if his voice is no longer good, it is only the chirah that is disqualified? We see from the Rambam that it creates a pesul in the Levi and therefore one would have that the Levi can't do anything, קמ"ל he can still be from the שוערים just like in the Midbar after the Levi became disqualified due to age, they were still able to be from the שוערים (see Smah mitzvah 170.) That maybe why the Rambam holds it is only when the voice is off due to old age does it disqualify the Levi for only then is the person unfit but if the person just doesn't have a nice voice that doesn't mean there is a pesul in the Levi.
(Post based upon ideas in Pninim Mibey Midrasha, Chemda Yekarah, Avodas Dovid on Sotah, Gevuros Yitzchak on Sotah and Chumash.)
According to the Rogatchover we have a different answer for the Rambam. The pessukim in Behaloscha (8:25-26) וּמִבֶּן֙ חֲמִשִּׁ֣ים שָׁנָ֔ה יָשׁ֖וּב מִצְּבָ֣א הָעֲבֹדָ֑ה וְלֹ֥א יַעֲבֹ֖ד עֽוֹד׃ וְשֵׁרֵ֨ת אֶת־אֶחָ֜יו בְּאֹ֤הֶל מוֹעֵד֙ לִשְׁמֹ֣ר מִשְׁמֶ֔רֶת וַעֲבֹדָ֖ה לֹ֣א יַעֲבֹ֑ד כָּ֛כָה תַּעֲשֶׂ֥ה לַלְוִיִּ֖ם בְּמִשְׁמְרֹתָֽם. The first passuk Rashi says ולא יעבד עוד. עֲבוֹדַת מַשָּׂא בַּכָּתֵף, אֲבָל חוֹזֵר הוּא לִנְעִילַת שְׁעָרִים וְלָשִׁיר וְלִטְעֹן עֲגָלוֹת. The Levi is disqualified only from carrying the aron but can do other things. That is like the case of the Rambam where one's voice becomes bad due to old age. The Levi in that case can do other things. However, says the Rogatchover, the second passuk ועבודה לא יעבד means he does not serve at all. That is says is talking about one who is born with a pesul such as with a bad voice. That Levi will be disqualified from everything. The issue is if this difference was agreed upon by the Rambam and being born with a bad voice is an even greater pesul why does he not say it in the halachot, וצ"ע.
The Baal Haturim however, says a whole different peshat in the possuk. He says the נער is not Moshe, it is Aharon, והנה נער בוכה – זה אהרן שהניחתו אצל התיבה. נער בכה. בגי׳. זה אהרן הכהן. The Hadar Zekanim says the same interpretation and says that is how she knew he was Jewish for if Aharon who was Jewish (he has a Jewish nose,) was crying about him obviously the child is Jewish as well. We see from here that even as a young boy Aharon's midah was to care about others, to care for his brother and that is why he merits to care for Klal Yisrael in the avodah of the Mikdash.
The Sichos Mussar asks why is Moshe called Moshe, the name given to him by an Egyptian woman if the Midrash says he had 10 names? He explains, אלא הן הדברים, מכוח מסירות נפשה של בתיה בת פרעה, שהמרתה פי אביה, והצילה את משה נגד גזירת פרעה, ומכוח גמילות החסד שגמלה עמו בגדלה אותה בהקרבה ובמסירות, קיבל משה רבינו אל תוך נפשו ובשרו את הכוחות הללו, ועל ידם נתעלה והוכשר להיות גואלן ומושיען של ישראל, כי בהקרבה ובמסירות נפש ניהל את צאן יתרו בתחילה, ובהקרבה ובמסירות נפש הושיע אח”כ את ישראל, בין בעמדו לפני פרעה ובין בעלייתו למרום, וכל ארבעים שנה במדבר היו חייו רצופים הפקרת נפשו עבור ישראל, מסירות נפש תמידית עבור כל אחד ואחד מישראל עד לאמירת ואם אין מחני נא מספרך אשר כתבת.
כל זאת היה טבוע בנפשו והתפתח בו מן הגרעין של המסירות נפש שהשקיעה בו בתיה בת פרעה במשותה אותו מן המים, על כן נקבע בו השם משה יותר מכל עשר שמות שהיו לו, כי שם זה ממצה את גדולת משה רבינו יותר מכל השמות, וזהו שכרן של גומלי חסדים, שהחסד שעושים, עושה פירות, ומי שגמלו עמו חסד, על שם החסד הוא נקרא ושמו חי וקיים לעד, כשמו של משה רבינו גואלן של ישראל.
The leaders, Moshe and Aharon, were the leaders of Klal Yisrael because they were willing to give up of themselves to help others. The golus was due to the דלטורין. The geulah had to come about by people who went to the opposite extreme. Those who were willing to sacrifice themselves, their own gain, for another.
No comments:
Post a Comment