Parshat Pinchas
23 Tammuz 5761
July 14, 2001
Daf Yomi: Kiddushin 68


Guest Rabbi:
Rabbi Dov A. Brisman
Young Israel of Elkins Park, PA

Torah for Posterity

"And the daughters of Tzelofchod, son of Chefer, son of Gilad, son of Machir, son of Menashe, to the familes of Menashe son of Yosef (approached)..." (Bamidbar 27:1)

The above pasuk serves as an introduction to the laws of inheritance. Although the daughters of Tzelofchod had a specific question, the entire order of inheritance was related as a response to their specific concern.

Likewise, the entire lineage of the sisters is listed all the way until Yosef. Why was this necessary?

Rashi (based on Sifri) explains the Torah's necessity to list the generations until Yosef, as well as the repetition of Menashe's name and lineage to Yosef. Two issues are raised: a) Yosef's love of Eretz Yisrael; b) the prestigious lineage of Tzelofchod's family. Yosef, who loved Eretz Yisrael and whose final testament was that his remains be returned to Eretz Yisrael, merited descendants who strongly desired to own land there. Second, all who are listed in the pasuk were tzadikim (righteous people).

Rashi then continues to impart to us a general scriptural rule. If a person's spiritual calibre is unknown to us, but he is listed together with a known tzadik, then we can conclude that all who are listed with him are tzadikim by association. Similarly, if only one of the people listed is known to be a rasha (evil person), then we can conclude that those listed with him are also "rashaim by association." Hence, the entire list of people, comprising the lineage mentioned here, were righteous people.

I would like to pose one simple question. What is the significance of this rule at this particular juncture in the Torah? Why is it necessary to emphasize the righteousness of the ancestors of Tzelofchod?

The Gemara in Sanhedrin (99b-100a) states that one who denigrates a talmid chacham is considered an apikores (heretic) and has no share in the world to come (olam haba). An example of such denigration is if one says "how do the Sages (chachamim) help us? They never permitted (consumption of) a raven nor did they forbid (consumption of) a pigeon." There is a basic flaw in the attitude of the apikores. The apikores believes that by "merely" continuing the flow of tradition throughout the generations, the talmid chacham is creating a meaningless state of monotony. The nation will eventually lose interest in Torah Judaism unless there are changes and modifications made in the halacha itself. Only then will the religion become "catchy" and hence, popular.

What the apikores (intentionally) fails to understand is that the durability of Judaism is its constancy and integrity. These are the strengths which have enabled us to flourish as a nation. Our innovation lies in our "adaptability" not in our "changeability." Of course, times and circumstances change, new situations and environments are created. However, Torah principles do not change. Rather, they "fit" into the situation and resolve the conflicts and problems that change can bring. Such is the nature of the Torah's power.

Now perhaps we can answer the question that was previously posed. A new situation had arisen in the parsha which was hitherto never presented. Do daughters have the right to inherit land? What is the Torah's position on this issue? The daughters of Tzelofchod were part of a family whose roots were embedded in righteousness. For many generations only subservience to Torah mattered. Therefore, the adaptability of Torah stood prominent, and the five sisters were alert to the new shaila (inquiry) that had presented itself. For this reason, the Torah found it relevant to relate the righteousness of their lineage. Generations which continue the loyalty to Torah tradition are the guarantee not only of Jewish survival but the adaptability of Torah to all situations and problems.

On the other hand, Rashi adds the dimension of "rasha by association." The goal and attitude of the "rasha" is the immediate gratification. His concern is not rooted in the long-term gain or in moral justice. For this reason, his legacy is short-lived and has no durability.

The example of a rasha cited by Rashi is Yishmael ben Netanya. He led a group of people who assassinated Gedalyahu ben Achikam, who was appointed by the emperor Nebuchadnezzar to lead the Jewish community which remained in Eretz Yisrael after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Yishmael ben Netanya committed this atrocity because he felt that the position should have been his, (see Metzudat David, Melachim II, 25:25). The result of his crime was that he also did not enjoy any rule. This defiance of Nebuchadnezzar incited great fear among the remnants of the Jewish community. They fled to Egypt for protection.

A legacy of wickedness has no integrity, hence no durability. All of its aspirations eventually do not materialize.

It is my prayer that HaShem guide us that we always choose the everlasting and eternal light of the Torah, and witness the flourishing of a Torah-true Klal Yisrael.