Question: I find it very difficult to understand the punishment of death that was meted out to Rabbi Akiva’s students. If he was so great, we can assume that his students were of a superior caliber as well. How did they rate such a harsh punishment?
Zelig Aronson
Queens, N.Y.
Answer: The Aruch HaShulchan (Orach Chayyim 493:1-5) states as follows: “The days between Pesach and Shavuot have been treated by all of Jewry for hundreds of years as days of judgment and days of mourning because 12,000 pairs of Torah scholars, the students of Rabbi Akiva, died in this short time period, as the Talmud (Yevamot 62b) relates. Therefore, it has been accepted by all of Jewry from the times of the Geonim not to marry between Pesach and Shavuot… We also find that they have accepted not to cut their hair during these days as well, as a sign of mourning…”
The Aruch HaShulchan cites various customs in this regard; most are of the opinion that the period of mourning is only 34 days. Some start the mourning period immediately after Pesach [Pesach itself is included in the count of 34 days, but excluded from any manifestations of mourning due to its festival status] and it lasts until the 34th day of the Omer. Others begin from Rosh Chodesh Iyar until the three days of hagbala, the three days preceding Shavuot (see ad loc. for more detail).
Indeed, we treat these days as national mourning days because of this great tragedy. The Aruch HaShulchan notes that in the last millennium, a great number of Jewish communal tragedies occurred in that same time frame in Europe as well.
Pursuant to your question, what was the sin for which the students of this great teacher received such a harsh punishment?
We read in Parashat Shemini (Leviticus 10:1-3): “Vayikchu b’nei Aharon Nadav ve’Avihu ish machtato vayitnu bahen eish vayasimu aleha ketoret vayakrivu lifnei Hashem esh zara asher lo tziva otam. Vateitze esh milifnei Hashem vatochal otam vayamutu lifnei Hashem. Vayomer Moshe el Aharon, hu asher diber Hashem leimor, bikrovai ekkadesh ve’al pnei kol ha’am ekaved, vayiddom Aharon” – The sons of Aaron, Nadav and Avihu, took each his firepan, and put fire in it and frankincense upon it, and they brought before Hashem a strange fire which He had not commanded them. And a fire went out from Hashem and devoured them and they died before Hashem. Then Moses said to Aaron, “This is what Hashem spoke, saying, ‘With those that are near [dear] to Me I will be sanctified and before the entire people I will be glorified’” and Aaron was silent.
The Talmud (Eruvin 63) states that Nadav and Avihu, in spite of their unique greatness, erred in that they thought that even though a heavenly fire descended upon the altar, they were to bring [a fire] of their own as well. They had derived it from the following verse in Parashat Vayikra (Leviticus 1:7): “Ve’natnu b’nei Aharon HaKohen esh al hamizbe’ach” – The sons of Aaron, the High Priest, shall place a fire on the altar.”
Though this indeed is the halacha, they were guilty of doing so in front of their teacher, Moses, who had not issued such an instruction.
Torah Temima (Leviticus 10:2) cites Maharsha (to Eruvin 63) who asks how that could be the case since Moses did indeed issue that instruction as noted above (supra Leviticus 1:7). If that is so, what new halacha were they issuing before their teacher (which could be the only transgression for which they would have been liable for punishment)?
He seeks resolution to this question from the Gemara (Berachot 31b) which relates, based on the verse (I Samuel 1:25), “Vayishchat’u et ha’par va’yavi’u et hana’ar el Eli” – And they slaughtered the bull and brought the youth [Samuel] to Eli. The Gemara notes the seeming lack of relationship between these matters: Because they [Elkanah and Chana, Samuel’s parents] slaughtered a bull, they then brought the youth before Eli? The Gemara explains that they went out in search of a Kohen to slaughter the bull, and at that point Samuel asked them why they were searching for a Kohen when an Israelite may also perform that same ritual slaughter, as the verse (Leviticus 1:5) states, “V’shachat et ben habakar lifnei Hashem v’hikrivu bnei Aharon haKohanim et hadam” – and he shall slaughter the bull before Hashem, and the sons of Aaron, the priests, shall bring forth the blood. It is only the bringing of the blood that necessitates a Kohen; however, as to the slaughter itself, that may be done even by an Israelite. When the attendants perceived what Samuel had done, they brought him before Eli, who remarked, “You have spoken well. However, you are guilty of rendering a halacha decision in the presence of your teacher [Eli, referring to himself].” The Gemara relates that, nonetheless, Chana begged Eli to forgive him [Samuel] for that transgression.
Now in truth, this incident cited by Torah Temima is no comparison to the case of Aaron’s sons, for in Samuel’s case it would seem that clearly Samuel was the one who, through his exposition, rendered the halacha, while Nadav and Avihu were only following Moses’ explicit instruction.
Indeed, he too finds the comparison difficult and explains further that they erred fundamentally in their action because they misunderstood Moses’ instruction. Moses taught about the outer altar – mizbe’ach ha’chitzon – but insofar as concerns the inner altar – mizbe’ach ha’penimi – one is to take the fire from the outer altar and not bring a strange fire (one that they had lit, i.e., their own creation). Torah Temima goes further and explains that simply for doing what they did with their own firepans, they did not deserve punishment. In this action, they were clearly shogegim (ones who sinned due to error and not on purpose). Rather, their mistake was in assuming (or deciding) that the inner altar was subject to the same rules as the outer altar, and this only happened because in their haste they did not wait for a further instruction from Moses. Accordingly, they violated the serious dictum of issuing a ruling in the presence of their master, incurring their fatal punishment.
To be continued
