----- Forwarded Message -----From: "Rabbi Moshe Revah" <htcnews-htc.edu@shared1.ccsend.com>To: "mates57564@aol.com" <mates57564@aol.com>Sent: Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 12:06 PMSubject: Dvar Torah from the Rosh HaYeshiva - Parshas Beha'alosecha – 5785Email from Hebrew Theological College
Dear Yeshiva Family,
Hakdamah: A Time to Cry Out and Reflect
As we sit to learn, write, and discuss these sugyos, our hearts and tefillos are with our brothers and sisters in Eretz Yisrael. With danger looming and the danger of war once again very real, we are deeply aware that this is a time to daven, to cry out, and to engage in teshuvah.
How fitting — and sobering — that these events unfold on Erev Shabbos Parshas Behaalosecha. The Torah tells us (Bamidbar 10:9), "וכי תבואו מלחמה בארצכם... והרעתם בחצוצרות" — "When you go to war in your land… you shall blow the trumpets." These trumpets were not just sounds of alarm, but calls for national awakening.
The Rambam (Hilchos Taanis 1:1) explains this mitzvah as a model for all generations: "דבר זה מדרכי התשובה הוא" — It is the way of teshuvah: when tragedy strikes and we experience national suffering, we must not respond with silence or indifference, but with tefillah, tza'aka, and ma'asim tovim.
As we study the intricate halachos of tumah, korbanos, and chinuch haMizbei'ach, we remember that these are not ancient technicalities — they are the lifeblood of Am Yisrael's spiritual mission. The Beis HaMikdash is not history; it is our destiny.
May our learning, our tefillos, and our longing be a merit for Klal Yisrael, and may we soon see the day when the chatzotzros are sounded no longer in times of war and distress — but in celebration, as the Shechinah returns to Klal Yisrael in its full glory!!
This Week's Parshah: A Deeper Look at Pesach Sheni and Tumah in Korbanos
In this week's parshah, we learn about the mitzvah of Pesach Sheni — the "second" chance to bring the Korban Pesach (Passover offering) for those who were unable to bring it at its proper time. The Torah describes the scenario of individuals who, due to being tamei (ritually impure), could not participate in the regular Korban Pesach. To accommodate them, Hashem gave a special opportunity: one month later, on the 14th of Iyar, they could bring the korban they had missed.
Generally, someone who is tamei is disqualified from bringing or consuming a korban (sacrifice). However, our parshah introduces a major exception to that rule. In our Parshah (9:2 - see Rashi), the Torah teaches that certain korbanos can still be brought even when those involved — whether the kohanim (priests) or the tzibbur (community) — are tamei. Specifically:
· If the korban is a communal offering (korban tzibbur) — not an individual's personal offering.
· Or, even if it is an individual's offering (like the Korban Pesach), if it is time-sensitive — meaning it must be brought at a particular time — then it may still be brought in a state of tumah, as long as the majority of the community is also tamei.
This halachah is known as tumah hutrah b'tzibbur (impurity is overridden for the community).
Tumah Hutrah B'Tzibbur and the Miracle of Chanukah
Based on this, the Re'em (Rabbi Eliezer of Metz) in his commentary on the Sefer Mitzvos Gadol (Sma"g, Chanukah, mitzvah 5) raises a fascinating question: Why, during the Chanukah story, did the Chashmonaim go to such lengths to find pure, uncontaminated oil (shemen tahor) for the Menorah? (Although it is the beginning of the summer, it's never not a time to discuss the Torah of Chanukah!)
After all, lighting the Menorah in the Beis HaMikdash (Holy Temple) is a communal mitzvah, not a private act. If so, halachically speaking, they would have been permitted to light the Menorah even with tamei (impure) oil. So why the search for pure oil? And what, then, was the miracle[1]?
Many approaches are offered to answer this question but we will focus only on two of them[2]. Many commentaries[3] suggest that the Chashmonaim needed the oil to be tahor (ritually pure) because they had just built a new menorah. The original one had been defiled or destroyed, and this new one was being used for the very first time.
According to this view, the first lighting of a newly made menorah was considered an act of chinuch — a kind of sanctification or dedication of the menorah to its holy purpose. And such a dedication, they argue, must be done in purity. The rule that allows lighting the menorah in a state of tumah (impurity) only applies to a menorah that had already been previously sanctified and used in the Mikdash. But a brand-new menorah — being used for the first time — required pure oil for its initial lighting[4].
The Kli Chemdah on our Parshah quotes the Avnei Nezer offering another explanation. He suggests that the leniency of tumah hutrah b'tzibbur — allowing impurity in communal service — only applies to mitzvos that must be performed at a specific time. For example, since the Menorah must be lit each day at a designated time, the requirement to light it would override the concern for impurity, and the service would proceed even if those involved were tamei.
However, this logic only applies when the Menorah already exists, was already dedicated and the obligation to light it is in place. If, however, the Menorah itself is invalid — such as when it was defiled or destroyed — then at that point there is no mitzvah to light the Menorah, since it does not exist. The mitzvah that would be around would be the mitzvah to make a new menorah, but this mitzvah to make a new one does not have a fixed time. There is no specific deadline for building a new Menorah.
Accordingly, in the times of the Chashmonaim, since they needed to construct and dedicate a new Menorah, and they had no pure oil on hand, they would not have been allowed to light with impure oil, for there was no pressing need to light the menorah that day. There was no pressing obligation to immediately build and light the Menorah in impurity.
A question on both of these approaches.
However, on both of these approaches there is a tremendous difficulty raised by many Achronim. In Taanis 17a, the Gemara records that the Rabbanan forbade Kohanim from drinking wine in our times. The reason? Because the Beis HaMikdash could be rebuilt any moment, and a Kohen must always be ready and fit for service. A Kohen who has consumed wine would be pasul (invalid) for performing the avodah (Temple service).
But Tosafos there (s.v. ba'inan) asks: why would wine disqualify them at all? Aren't they all tamei meis (impure due to contact with the dead), which already invalidates them? Tosafos answers that tumah hutrah b'tzibbur — impurity is entirely permitted when dealing with communal offerings. So, their tumah is not a barrier to service.
Now, according to the explanation of later Acharonim, this principle — that impurity is permitted for communal offerings — applies only to regular communal service (avodas tzibbur) after the Bais Hamikdash is up and running, but not to avodas chinuch — the inaugural or rededication service, like what occurred during Chanukah. In that case, the service must be performed in a state of purity, or according to the Kli Chemda, does not have a designated time.
However, these explanations seems to contradict Tosafos. After all, Tosafos applied the principle of tumah hutrah b'tzibbur even to the future Beis HaMikdash that will be rebuilt — and surely that too involves avodas chinuch (a rededication of the Mizbe'ach). If so, why do the Acharonim say that tumah isn't permitted for avodas chinuch?
A simple Resolution – the future Bais Hamikdash will not require Chinuch
A simple resolution may be based on a question posed by the Shaagas Aryeh (in Gevuros Ari, Ta'anis 17b): Why is it that Chazal forbid kohanim to drink wine throughout the entire day, out of concern that the Beis HaMikdash may suddenly be rebuilt and they'll need to perform the avodah (Temple service)? After all, the chinuch (dedication) of the mizbe'ach, the altar, is only done through the korban tamid shel shachar — the morning offering. Once that time has passed, there's no concern of chinuch on that day, so at least for the rest of that day why should they still be prohibited from drinking?
The Maharsham (Shu"t Maharsham, vol. 6, siman 38) resolves this by explaining that the future Beis HaMikdash will not require chinuch at all, because it will have already been dedicated in Heaven. As the Gemara in Sukkah (41a) explains (see Rashi and Ritva there) the Bais Hamikdash will come down fully built. According to tradition, Eliyahu HaNavi will come and offer sacrifices before the Mikdash is even built in this world, and since that Mikdash will descend from Heaven (binyan shel ma'alah), it won't require human dedication like the previous ones.
If so, this fits beautifully with the Tosafos we mentioned earlier — that in the future, the rule of tumah hutrah b'tzibbur (allowing impurity in communal offerings) would apply without restriction, because there's no issue of chinuch. There's no contradiction.
However, during the time of Chanukah, things were different. The Chashmonaim built a new Menorah through human hands — it was not a heavenly structure — and therefore, it required a proper chinuch. And since the rule of tumah hutrah b'tzibbur does not extend to acts of chinuch, they could not inaugurate the Menorah in a state of impurity, despite the general leniency for communal offerings.
This explains why they needed pure oil and why the miracle was necessary — not because impurity isn't usually allowed, but because chinuch of a newly built vessel demands purity.
However, this suggestion is not universally accepted. The Mikdash Dovid (siman 1) maintains that chinuch is required even in the Third Beis HaMikdash, despite its heavenly origin. Similarly, the Ramban (Parshas Nasso) writes that avodas chinuch is still me'akev — an essential prerequisite — even for the final Mikdash. According to this view, we cannot simply dismiss the need for chinuch, and the Maharsham's resolution would not suffice.
Thus, while the Maharsham may explain the leniency of tumah hutrah b'tzibbur in the future Mikdash, the opinions of the Mikdash Dovid and the Ramban restore the original tension: if chinuch is still required even then, how could tumah hutrah apply? And more pressing for us, how could the Chashmonaim have performed a chinuch of the Menorah using tumah, if tumah is not permitted for purposes of chinuch?
A deeper look at Chinuch
To answer these questions, I saw a beautiful piece from R' Yisroel Moshe Dranger in the Kuntros Kol HaTorah[5].
He first explains several reasons from the Achronim of why there is a need for chinuch haMizbe'ach and chinuch kelei haMikdash altogether:
1. Rav Yitzchak Peretz Perla (in his commentary to the Sefer HaMitzvos of Rav Saadya Gaon) argues that until the Mizbe'ach is inaugurated through the morning Tamid, it lacks the halachic status of a Mizbe'ach altogether.
2. Rav Menachem Ziemba (in Otzar HaSifra) suggests the process is comparable to kiddush keilim, the sanctification of vessels. Just as klei shareis (Temple utensils) must be sanctified before use, so too the Mizbe'ach and its vessels must be dedicated specifically for their avodah before they attain sanctity.
3. The Chazon Ish (Menachos 30:5) understands chinuch as a mitzvah to initiate the vessels through specific avodos mentioned in Menachos (e.g., certain types of minchah offerings). Even those utensils crafted by Moshe Rabbeinu in the desert, which had their inherent kedushah through anointment, still required chinuch through these avodos.
4. The Brisker Rav (Menachos 49a) sees these avodos not merely as preparatory, but as a halachic hechsher — they qualify the vessels for use. Without this initiation, the keilim are not fit for avodah. This approach is also echoed in the Mikdash Dovid (Kedoshim 2:1).
Can Chinuch Be Performed Betumah? A Deeper Look
Let us delve further into the idea that avodas chinuch — the inaugural service that sanctifies the mizbe'ach or keilim (vessels) — cannot be performed in a state of tumah (ritual impurity), even though tumah hutrah betzibbur generally permits communal offerings to be brought while tamei.
The underlying distinction may be this: when Chazal said that tumah is permitted for communal service, they meant that the avodah itself remains valid despite the tumah. However, in the case of chinuch, the avodah is not just a mitzvah to be performed — it is meant to effect a change in the status of the object. The goal is to transform a vessel into a kli shareis, or a mizbe'ach into one halachically defined as such.
If the keilim or mizbe'ach are not yet sanctified, then the avodah of chinuch must confer upon them a new halachic status — a shem kli shareis or shem mizbe'ach. And according to many views, an avodah performed in a state of tumah is not potent enough to achieve this. In other words, impure avodah cannot generate a halachic transformation in the object, which is the essence of chinuch.
Based on this, we can understand three earlier perspectives:
- According to the first approach (as quoted earlier), until a tamid shel shachar is offered, the mizbe'ach has no halachic status. Clearly, such a defining act cannot take place in tumah.
- According to the second approach, the avodah of chinuch serves to sanctify the keilim, similar to kiddush keilim. Here too, if the avodah is performed in tumah, it lacks the halachic force to endow the object with sanctity.
However, if we follow:
- The fourth approach (the Brisker Rav), that chinuch is not meant to change the object but is simply a mitzvah to begin the avodah with these vessels — then perhaps there is no reason to treat chinuch differently than any other avodah. In that case, tumah hutrah betzibbur would apply, just like it does to regular communal offerings.
- The same would be true according to the third approach (Chazon Ish), who says the mitzvah of chinuch is simply to use these vessels in actual avodah — not to change their status per se. If so, there is no inherent distinction between this avodah and others that are permitted betumah.
Thus, the debate hinges on how we understand the goal and mechanics of chinuch. If the avodah is meant to change the object's halachic identity, then tumah would undermine that process. But if it is simply a mitzvah to begin using the vessel in avodah, then tumah hutrah betzibbur might apply fully.
The Nature of Chinuch in the Future Beis HaMikdash
Based on the principles discussed above, we can now consider how chinuch — the process of sanctifying the Mizbei'ach and other vessels — will function in the future Beis HaMikdash.
According to Rashi and Tosafos (based on the verse "Mikdash Hashem konenu yadecha", Shemos 15:17), the Third Beis HaMikdash will descend from Heaven, fully built and sanctified. It will not be constructed by human hands. If so, the entire concept of chinuch may be fundamentally different in that context.
In contrast to the Chanukah era — when the Chashmonaim had to rededicate a defiled and desecrated Mikdash — the Heavenly Beis HaMikdash will not require the same form of sanctification. It will not need to be transformed from mundane to holy. The Mizbei'ach will not be "new" in the halachic sense that demands chinuch to endow it with sanctity or legal status. It will already possess these qualities inherently, having descended from Heaven in a fully prepared and holy state.
Even if we were to say that some form of chinuch is necessary — perhaps to begin the actual service or to inaugurate the vessel's function — that form of chinuch would not be about creating a halachic status in the object (i.e., chalos shem). It would simply be a mitzvah to initiate service, and therefore, tumah hutrah betzibbur would still apply.
This stands in contrast to the Chanukah context, where the vessels were human-made replacements for defiled ones, and thus required formal chinuch — a halachic transformation which, as we've discussed, cannot be performed in tumah.
Regarding the view of the Ramban (Parshas Naso, based on Yechezkel 43), who holds that even the future Mikdash will require chinuch, we can understand this to refer not to the sanctification of objects — which is unnecessary for a Heavenly Mikdash — but rather to the general obligation to begin the avodah in the proper way. That means starting with specific services such as the Tamid shel Shachar, the Haktaras HaMenorah, and so on.
And this kind of chinuch, as Tosafos in Taanis explains, is no different than any other avodah of the tzibbur — where tumah is indeed permitted. There is no reason to exclude the inaugural avodah from the general rule of tumah hutrah betzibbur, especially when the goal is not to confer new status on a vessel, but simply to begin the Divine service properly.
This parallels the chinuch performed by Shlomo HaMelech, using the original vessels from the Mishkan — the Shulchan and Menorah made by Moshe Rabbeinu. Even though these vessels were already holy, there was still a mitzvah to initiate their use in the Beis HaMikdash through actual avodah — yet their essential sanctity did not require re-activation.
Final Thoughts: Chinuch and Tumah in the Future Beis HaMikdash
In light of all we have seen, the position of various Acharonim — that the rule of tumah hutrah betzibbur (impurity being permitted in communal offerings) does not apply to avodah that is mechaneches (initiatory or sanctifying) — seems to apply specifically in cases where the avodah is needed to create a new halachic status in the object. For instance, where the purpose of the chinuch is to give a Mizbei'ach its halachic identity or to confer sanctity upon newly constructed vessels. In such cases — where the chinuch is an act of transformation or legal activation — the Acharonim maintain that it cannot be performed in a state of tumah.
However, when the Beis HaMikdash descends from Heaven — complete, sanctified, and fully formed — as Chazal and Rishonim such as Rashi and Tosafos describe, there may be no need for this kind of halachic activation at all. The Mizbei'ach and vessels will already possess their sanctity and status; nothing new needs to be conferred upon them. Even the element of preparing them for service — if such preparation is required at all — may not apply in this case.
In that scenario, any chinuch that takes place will be of a different kind: not to create or confer status, but rather a mitzvah or structured seder to begin the avodah. And in such a case — where there is no transformation or legal change in status being performed — the rule of tumah hutrah betzibbur certainly applies, just as Tosafos themselves write in Taanis.
May we soon merit to see the Beis HaMikdash rebuilt and established — tibaneh ve'tikonein bimheira b'yameinu — when all of these halachos will no longer be theoretical, but lived realities once again.
Have an amazing Shabbos Kodesh!
Rabbi Moshe Revah
Rosh HaYeshiva
[1] See Pnei Yehoshua on Shabbos 21b who further asks that no mention is found of requiring tahor oil for other communal sacrafices of the time, and it stands to reason that they used tamei oil for those korbanos. If so, why was the Menorah any different? One possible approach is that while oil used for meal offerings (menachos) could be more easily replaced and did not need to be as carefully produced in terms of purity, the oil used for the Menorah had a higher standard. It needed to be specially pressed, which was not easily reproduced during that time.
[2] There is a well-known dispute in Maseches Pesachim (79a) about the status of tumah when it comes to communal offerings — whether tumah is hutrah betzibbur or tumah is dechuya betzibbur. In simpler terms: when the majority of the community is in a state of ritual impurity, is the concept of tumah completely disregarded (hutrah — as if it doesn't exist at all)? Or is it overridden only because of necessity (dechuya — still a problem, but temporarily allowed)? I often explain this with a mashal (analogy): imagine an ambulance racing through a red light. If tumah is dechuya, it's like the red light is still there, but the ambulance is allowed to pass through due to the emergency. If tumah is hutrah, it's like the light turned green — no issue exists at all. The Pnei Yehoshua makes a critical point: if we hold like the view that tumah is dechuya, then we understand why, in the Chanukah story, the Chashmonaim searched so hard for pure oil. Even though it is technically permitted to use impure oil when no alternative exists, there is still an obligation to seek out a tahor option if one can be found. In this approach, their search wasn't extra — it was the proper halachic conduct. Indeed, this is how we pasken - rule. The Rambam rules in several places (see Hilchos Bi'as HaMikdash 4:14–15) that tumah is dechuya when it comes to korbanos tzibbur. So if you can find a tahor option, you must. Only when no alternative exists can tumah be allowed. If so, the Chanukah question only becomes challenging according to the opinion that tumah is hutrah — that there is no issue whatsoever in using tamei oil for a communal mitzvah like lighting the menorah. If tumah is entirely suspended in this case, then why did they go to such lengths to find pure oil?
[3] See Chochmas Shlomo O.C. §670, Chidushei HaRim al haTorah – Chanukah, Anfei Yehuda on Sefer Ve'hizhir, Parshas Tetzaveh §4, Gilyonei HaShas, Shu"t Tzafnas Paneach Vol. 1 §52, Gur Aryeh Yehuda §19:18, and similarly in Knaf Rinah O.C. §77 quoting Shu"t Mar'eh Yechezkel. See also Ma'aglei Tzedek (Chanukah collection) and his Shaarei Tzedek O.C. §101. Additionally, the Levush Mordechai in his introduction to Maseches Nedarim explains the language of the piyut: "Ufartzu chomos migdalai vetimu kol hashemanim" — that they defiled all the oils and desecrated the Mikdash, and therefore they could not light with impure oil, since it was not permitted for the initial sanctification; hence the need for a miracle, "u'minotar kan'kanim na'aseh nes lashoshanim."
[4] However, even if we accept that the first night required tahor (ritually pure) oil because it was a chinuch, a new rededication of the Menorah—why then did the miracle need to last for eight full days? After the first night, once the pure oil had been used up, it should have been permissible to light with tamei (impure) oil under the principle of tumah hutrah b'tzibbur (impurity is permitted for communal offerings). So why did the oil need to miraculously burn for all eight nights? There are answers to this question, but due to space constraints I have left them for another time.
[5] Choveres 77 – Tishrei 5774 Pg. 353
HTC
Hebrew Theological College is a member of Touro University
and a partner with the Jewish United Fund in serving our community
Hebrew Theological College | 7135 N. Carpenter Road | Skokie, IL 60077 US
Friday, June 13, 2025
Fw: Dvar Torah from the Rosh HaYeshiva - Parshas Beha’alosecha – 5785
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment