The Parasha read today in Israel and slated to be read in the Diaspora next Shabbat elates the test that Moshe set - after Korach accused him of acting on his own volition, for the sake of his rule, and to confer honor on his brother, Aaron - and after Moshe ‘became exceedingly distressed and said to G-d:’Do not regard their offering. I have not all who dispute him (14:15) taken a donkey from a single one of them, and I have not harmed a single one of them.
The Torah then relates the test that each claimant take his fire-pan and place incense upon it..(and) present his fire-pan before G-d, and let you’ - Korach - ‘and Aaron each take his fire pan (14:17) and place incense upon it, and let each man present his fire-pan before Hashem.’
We then read that they all did as bidden, with the awesome results that are so well known.
Rashi comments:’Do not regard their offering’:’The incense thst they are offering before You tomorrow - do not pay any attention to them by even considering it as a sacrificial rite, albeit a forbidden one’.
‘No donkey belonging to any one of them did I take. Even when I traveled from Midian to Egypt on their behalf and mounted my wife and sons on a donkey, and could have claimed reimbursement for that donkey from them, I nevertheless used my own own funds.’
Rav David Pardo expounds:’Why would Moshe see a need to ask Hashem not to pay regard to their offering of incense? It was clear that it was not a permitted offering!
‘We have therefore to say, that he was referring to their share in the daily communal sacrifices’ - as Rashi brings as a second explanation -‘Let even their portion not be accepted before You favorably; let the fire leave it alone and not consume it.’
Rav Baruch Halevi Epstein adds:’Why did Moshe see a need to ask that no regard be given to any offerings his opponents may bring - did our Sages not teach (Sanhedrin 112:)that the offerings of the wicked are an abomination in the eyes of Hashem?
‘He did so because our Sages also say (Chulin 8:) that if a sinner repents, he is accepted.
‘Moshe asked that even if they did teshuva, their offering not be accepted.’
Sforno - as elucidated by Rav Yehuda Cooperman - beautifully expounds the deeper meaning of Moshe Rabbeinu’s words to Hashem:’’Do not regard their offering’: Do not pay attention to any offering that they may offer by way of atonement’ - Rav Cooperman: Moshe casts on Hashem, as it were, to act on the insult to his honor, in his stead.
‘Moshe seeks to prevent the acceptance of their repentance for their transgression ‘between man-and-man’, against him.
‘And if you should ask: Are we not enjoined to be forbearing for offences against us - so why did Moshe not do so in this case?
‘We need to say that the halachot of ingratitude are different than any other area of offense by one person against another.
‘This is because ingratitude is evidence of descent to the lowest level of human behavior.
‘We learn this from the parsha of Adam HaRishon, whose fate was decreed - and his repentance not accepted, to permit him to return to Gan Eden - because he blamed his transgression on Hashem, claiming that it resulted from the woman ‘Hashem had given with him’, giving him the forbidden fruit that he ate- this being- as Rashi comments there - ingratitude for Hashem’s benevolence.
‘This is not considered ‘an isolated act’, but a deleterious attribute, any forbearance of which is likely to only strengthen it in the character of the person - this being the origin of the descent of man, and whose repair for mankind’s future, came by the giving of the Torah’ - concludes Rav Cooperman.
Returning to the commentary of Sforno:’Says Moshe: I do not forgive the transgression against me - and it cannot therefore be forgiven, as you - Hashem - said:’Yom Kippur atones for transgressions between man-and-G-d, but not between man-and-man, until the party offended is appeased - which Moshe was not.
‘I have not taken a donkey from a single one of them: Not even by way of a loan, and therefore my rule over them was wholly for their benefit and their needs - not my personal use or interest as is the usual way of rulers - their complaint is therefore not about my abuse of my position, but only because they are ingrates.’
The Be’er Mayim Chaim proffers a different exposition, as to the basis of Moshe Rabbeinu’s plea to Hashem, not to accept any offerings made.
He expounds:’Moshe was greatly aggrieved and he said to Hashem..:This disputation was in reality against Hashem- as the opponents desired to be free of any yoke, they would in the end also seek to throw off the yoke of Heaven.
‘If after all the miracles wrought for them by the hand of Moshe, taking them out of Egypt and sustaining them in the Wilderness, in their eyes, then any yoke is but a burden to be cast off.
‘True: the repentance of sinners is accepted - but not in the case of apostasy, as was the case here - as anyone who is an apostate to Hashem and His never-ending benevolence, is deemed to be like an idol worshipper.
‘The evidence of their apostasy is that though I did not take even a donkey from them - a small matter, bearing in mind their large number - and this to serve them, still I used my own donkey.
‘Nor did I cause harm to any one of them by my rule - not even to those who had no relatives to look after them.
‘Therefore, their wish to be free of my rule, is not because of my yoke being on them, nor of any financial burden I imposed on them - by way of taxes or other demands - and any claims they might make in that regard, are baseless.
‘It is therefore only their base hearts that leads them to seek to cast off the yoke of rule - even saying to the One Above: Who are You that we should serve You’ and to abandon going in His ways.
‘It is therefore appropriate to prevent acceptance of their share of any communal offerings, as ‘the offerings of the wicked are an abomination in the Eyes of Hashem’.’
Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch, on ‘not one donkey of theirs did I take’, comments:’Had I imposed myself on them, by any minor act of force or of self-enrichment, they would have had the right to cast doubt as to my mission being from Above, as those carrying out a mission from the One Above, must in all their attributes be pure and upright - this being the very first test of the mission being from Above.
‘I do not deserve the accusations that they are throwing at me, as I have done nothing which might cast doubt on my faithfulness to my mission - not by the pursuit of dominance, let alone on any individual amongst the people - such as taking a donkey for my use - nor have I harmed any one of them by acting in an arbitrary manner towards him.’
The Netziv compares Moshe Rabbeinu’s reaction in our parsha, to his very different reaction when Miriam and Aaron spoke inappropriately about him, at the end of Parashat Beha’alotcha, noting that there, ‘He was totally unmoved, as there the matter did not concern the conduct of the people, but only his honor, which left the humble Moshe unconcerned.
‘However, here, when the people suggested that he had harmed them, it was clearly a different tale, leading him to make his plea to Hashem, not to have regard to any offerings they might bring.
‘The offerings in question were those offered to atone for character attributes which required atonement and repair.
‘Said Moshe: If they should bring their offering to atone for their brazen words against him, because of anger against him, ‘do not have regard to their offering’ - because their action did not in truth stem from anger - though anger clearly is a bad attribute - as they have no reason to be angry with him, as ‘not even one donkey did he take from them’.
‘Nor did I cause harm to any one of them’ - I did not take pleasure in any calumny of one of them, which could inadvertently bring him to anger, but they acted brazenly and intentionally, and therefore their offering should not be accepted.’
Rav Zalman Sorotzkin adds:’How could they complain that I am seeking to rule over them, when ‘not even a donkey did I take from them’?
Anarbanel proffers:’Moshe was not aggrieved at their accusation that he took them out of Egypt, nor when they said:’We will not come’.
‘He was, however, troubled and aggrieved at their words:’You seek to exercise authority over us’, as if he was abusing his position.
‘He therefore prayed to Hashem:’Have no regard to any offerings they may proffer’, as - the very opposite of the way of rulers - did I even take one donkey from then, for the performance of my duties for them?
‘Have I acted by force against any one of them?
‘How, then, can they say that I seek to exercise authority over them?’.
The Alshich Hakadosh adds:’The opponents accused the humble Moshe of asserting authority like a king, and his brother, too, as the Kohen Gadol.
‘Therefore Moshe made his plea to Hashem, that just as he shunned gifts, so too, the fire of the altar, should ‘shun’ the daily offering of the accusers - and not consume it.
‘Further, as to the charge that Moshe acted ‘as a king’ - it clearly was not the case, as had he acted in that way, he would have taken a tithe of their flocks and some of them as his slaves - yet he did not take even one of them for his private army.
‘The very opposite: even for their needs - to lead them out of Egypt - he used his own donkey, for his journey from Midian to Egypt.
‘Further, he did not harm even one of them - not even Datan who informed Pharoah that Moshe killed the Egyptian, leading to his having to escape to Midian, as that caused Pharoah to seek to kill him.
‘Even
to him, Moshe did not seek to do harm.’
The Ktav Sofer brings a new insight into our subject, commenting:’By and large, disputations surround the ruler, who is often suspected of favoring those who present him with gifts.
‘Further, when he rebukes the people, they understand whom he has in mind in his words - thereby shaming that individual in public.
‘This clearly leads to there being hatred of the reprover.
‘Moshe - as in the case of Mei Marah - was careful when rebuking the people, to do so in a manner not leading to any particular individual.
‘This is what was alluded to, in saying that ‘he did not cause harm to any person’ - ensuring that his words of rebuke - when necessary - did not cause the great harm of embarrassment to any individual.’
A parting gem from Rav Moshe Sternbuch:’We learn from our Parasha, the required lofty level of the leader of our people to guard himself against any suggestion of benefitting personally from his office, so that there should be no opening to cast aspersions against him.
‘For this reason, Moshe took care to avoid taking even that which was due to him, lest the mockers seek to undermine him, and - heaven forfend - cause a desecration of the honor of Heaven.’
לרפואת נועם עליזה בת זהבה רבקה ונחום אלימלך רפאל בן זהבה רבקה, בתוך שאר חולי עמנו.