Moshe’s Frustration – The Souls of His Nephews

 Parshat Shemini

by Rabbi Avi Billet

Two things happen in our parsha that are part of a short list of similar events in the Torah: Moshe Rabbenu gets angry at people for seemingly breaking an important Torah law (10:16), and he forgets a law (10:19-20). 

The Sifrei Bamidbar 157 quotes Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah who says, ‘Moshe got angry three times and made a mistake each time because of it.” The Maharsha in Pesachim (66b) similarly notes “And the Midrash also mentions that when he got angry he forgot laws on account of his anger.” 

Neither of these events – Moshe’s anger and forgetting a law – are commonplace. But there is a subtle connection that is an undercurrent of a number of cases where both coincide – Moshe’s anger is often most apparent when he sees people doing something that will cause either their own death, the deaths of others, or both, a concern which is more common than his forgetting the law. 

Moshe gets angry at Pharaoh who refuses to let Israel go before the death of the firstborn (Shemot 11:8). He gets angry at the people who are looking for Mon on Shabbos (Shemot 16:20). He gets angry over the Golden Calf (Shemot 32:19). He gets angry at those challenging God along with Korach (Bamidbar 16:15). He gets angry when the people do not follow the instructions for Midian annihilation (Bamidbar 31:14). 

All of these incidents have Moshe getting frustrated that people are choosing not to follow God’s word even though death is patiently waiting to step in and take over. With Pharaoh, the final plague immediately follows. With respect to the Mon, we find out later that Shabbos violation can bring a death sentence. The Golden Calf is followed by the deaths of 3,000 people. Death and devastation follows the rebellions of Korach and Datan V’Aviram. Much death preceded the Midian battle, and it was an improper vengeance which Moshe feared would lead to more deaths. 

Which brings us to his nephews and their non-eating of the sin offering. Is Moshe’s anger misplaced? 

When the Torah describes Moshe addressing his nephews as to which offerings of the Eighth Day dedication services they must eat, the words the Torah uses to describe them are Aharon’s בניו הנותרים – which can literally be translated as “remaining sons,” though some translations use the phrase “surviving sons.” Targum Yonatan calls them “his sons who were saved from the ‘sreifah,’” that last word referencing the fire that consumed the souls of their older brothers. 

It seems that Moshe may have looked upon them as survivors, based on a view that suggests Nadav and Avihu died as punishment to Aharon for his role in the Golden Calf, and that all of Aharon’s sons were actually supposed to die had Moshe not intervened, praying on behalf of Elazar and Itamar that they should survive this decree (Rashi 10:12). 

Malbim takes this a step further, quoting the Talmud in Yoma (87a) and Mechilta D’Miluim (35) which suggest Elazar and Itamar were either deserving of dying in the sereifah or were close to it because they were right next to Nadav and Avihu at their moment of death. Along this line of thinking, Ramban raises the possibility that Nadav and Avihu did not die in the place where the fire entered them, but managed, before expiring, to get to a place where their father’s Levite cousins, Mishael and Eltzafan, could comfortably go to retrieve them. (Non-kohanim are typically not allowed to enter some areas of the Mishkan. And no, Nadav and Avihu weren’t thinking of their deaths and their need to get to a place where non-kohanim could reach them.) 

We can argue whether Moshe was right to get angry. We can look at the Sifrei and the Maharsha quoted above and suggest that his anger actually triggered his forgetting the halakha. All of the instances of his anger are associated with people who are clearly sinning and therefore running the risk of their own demise, or that of those following them. 

However, it is painfully clear to me in this instance that whether Moshe actually felt his nephews were sinning in not eating from the requisite Korban, or whether he thought their inaction was misguided, he was concerned for their Neshamas. 

After all, while the verse says the fire consumed Nadav and Avihu, it is clear from the fact that their bodies needed to be retrieved that the fire didn’t consume them completely. Their souls were consumed, rendering their bodies lifeless! 

 For over a year now, we have been playing the pikuach nefesh card. “Follow the science” has become a canard. Science, after all, changes all the time. It is mostly theory. Much of science today is data driven, but sometimes it is agenda driven. Which means it is often enough bad science. At the very least, it is ALWAYS disputed. The government science agencies keep changing their rules and keep coming out with new studies that contradict things they’ve been saying for months or even close to a year. Sometimes for the betterment of society, and sometimes to make things worse. 

 I have spoken to many doctors in the last few months – and have found that they all have differing opinions about “the science.” Some of them are emergency room doctors and have told me about treatments they have used to prevent deaths in the bad cases, and about mistakes that were made at the beginning, and how there’s a learning curve. Some doctors think independently, speak to other doctors who think independently, and some doctors just do exactly what they’re told to do and think how they’re told to think. That’s what medicine always was – when you didn’t like one doctor’s opinion you sought a second opinion. And certainly when we seek opinions, those rendering them should share our values and should be guided by the Torah and a reverence for God. 

Pikuach nefesh always had a very clear definition prior to March 2020. Pikuach nefesh meant you do just about anything necessary to save a life that is currently in danger. You violate Shabbos, you allow eating non-kosher, you move mountains to save this one life because without the necessary intervention needed right now this person will die. Pikuach nefesh was not defined in the theoretical, because were it defined in the theoretical, we should allow Chillul Shabbos all the time to provide added protection “just in case,” we would allow eating the healthiest foods which are not certified kosher “just in case,” and violate just about any law under the sun – whether between man and God or between man and man – in the name of potentially saving a hypothetical life that might one day be in danger. 

 The verses which are used to argue that we must do whatever we can to save a life are, ironically, ונשמרתם מאד לנפשותיכם, השמר לך ושמר נפשך מאד (Devarim 4:9,16). Both of these verses speak of guarding our souls. And while some have taken a homiletical leap and extended this to doing whatever is possible to guard one’s body from harm, the fact is that it is a homiletical leap. All of the Rishonim on the Torah say, in one form or another, it refers to guarding one’s soul from destruction and impurity. It is only in the later period (Acharonim) where the commentaries branch out to have it refer to physical health. (Maimonides was, for a long time, a lone voice in saying it refers to physical health concerns.) 

Rav Elyashiv Z”L wrote (commentary on Brachos 32b) – "וכן מה שמורגל בפי העולם לומר שצריך ליזהר בפקוח נפש משום ונשמרתם מאד לנפשותיכם לכאורה הוא טעות." Translated: How people are accustomed to express - that one must be careful of life-threatening situations because of the verse 'you must carefully guard your souls' - that is surely an error. 

He goes on to say that people have taken the verse to mean to be careful for one’s physical self - though the Talmudic passage in Shavuot 36a which he uses to support that idea actually quotes the verse of ושמר נפשך מאד. 

People struggle with all kinds of physical challenges. Some have allergies, some have conditions in which a certain kind of diet is warranted. Certainly many take those seriously and are careful. But some are not. Are those who are not careful in violation of ונשמרתם מאד לנפשותיכם? Are people who drive over the speed limit in violation? What about people who drive under the speed limit – who simply go on the highway, which sometimes has car accidents? Are they in violation? What about people who smoke? Are they in violation? A person can live a very long life as a smoker – not everyone gets lung cancer. Who is to say? What about a person who has a very unhealthy diet or who is extremely overweight? Is this person in violation of this mitzvah? Eating is allowed! The Talmud even mentions in Bava Metzia that some of the great rabbis were very overweight. Were they in violation of ונשמרתם מאד לנפשותיכם? The only reference in all of the Talmud to this verse is a story in which a Roman officer uses it to explain to a Jew who did not show him deference (because the Jew was davening), arguing “Aren’t you supposed to take care of your life?” And the Jew replies, “That verse means I’m supposed to guard my soul – which I was, in not interrupting my prayer and supplication before the Almighty.” (Brachos 32b) 

Moshe was worried about the souls of his nephews. He knew from very fresh first-hand experience that their souls were the key – were they to have sinned, their souls could be taken by God, and they would be as dead as their brothers. 

So he got angry. Because he knew that we cannot understate the importance of the soul, especially the souls of children. “The science” indicates that children are not dangerous. “The science” indicates that children are not spreaders or silent-killers. “The science” indicates children should have their lives back. 

We are taught Moshiach will come in the merits of the learning of the youngsters. Their learning is only valuable if their souls are nourished as well. And that nourishing is often ingrained in them through the regular opportunity to be in shul, without restrictions, and with encouragement for them to participate in synagogue service as much and as often as possible. 

Moshe was frustrated. I very much relate to what he was going through in my concerns for the souls of children. And, for further reading, I highly suggest this opinion piece, which logically and rationally suggests how the extreme response to what has been going on is akin to religion, complete with a sacrifice of children in terms of destroying their mental health and preventing them from being able to live normal lives.