“When the entire assembly saw that Aharon had passed away, they wept for him 30 days, all of Bnei Yisrael” (Bamidbar 20:29).
Rashi expounds that both the men and women cried, because Aharon had promoted peace between disputing parties and husband and wife.
The Medrash Avos D’Rebbi Nosson clarifies that Aharon never accused either party of misconduct. Moshe Rabbeinu, on the other hand, rebuked them sharply and therefore concerning his petirah the pasuk says (Devarim 34:8), “The Bnei Yisrael wept for Moshe.”
This seems difficult to understand. If a person acted inappropriately, why shouldn’t he be rebuked? The Avos D’Rebbi Nosson continues that Aharon would tell each disputant that the other person wished to reconcile. He would then sit with each person until he overcame his resentment and anger. When the two would finally meet, they would reunite and lovingly hug each other.
Rav Yaakov Galinsky asks: How is it possible that, despite the hundreds, probably thousands, of reconciliations that Aharon effected, his secret was never revealed?
The Talmud in Sotah (49a) states: If two Torah scholars who live in the same city are not pleasant to each other with regard to halacha, and are constantly sparring with each other, one will die and the other will be exiled.
The question is: Why do they both get punished? Isn’t it possible that one is guilty and the other is innocent?
The Talmud (Taanis 7a) tells us that fire cannot ignite in one lone piece of wood, only in a pile of kindling. Now we only have to determine who is more guilty, and that is easy, as it says in Mishlei (21:2), “Man’s every way is upright in his eyes.” Each person considers himself the innocent party, believes his actions are totally for the sake of Heaven, and that it is the other party who is guilty. The truth is, though, that one may be more guilty than the other, or perhaps initiated the argument and dragged the other person into it, and that is why one dies and the other individual only goes into exile.
When Aharon HaKohen made peace, he never told either party that he was wrong – whether it was the husband or wife, or two arguing parties – because each one believes he is the righteous party who has been wronged. This is the way it has been since Adam HaRishon, who contended that it was Chava who made him do the sin. Chava blamed her transgression on the snake. Kayin told Hashem that He had not been vigilant to protect Hevel from being killed.
The Mishna in Pirkei Avos (1:12) urges us to be among the disciples of Aharon, loving peace and pursuing peace, i.e. to actively engage in bringing peace between two friends, and between husband and wife. Such people merit reward for this mitzvah in this world, as well as in the world-to-come. The Avos D’Rebbi Nosson teaches that when one makes peace in his home, the Torah considers it as if he established peace among the entire Jewish Nation.
R’ Yonasan Eybeschutz writes in the Sefer Ye’aros Devash that whenever an argument arises, the Evil Inclination tries to convince each party that he is right and their dispute is totally l’shem Shamayim (for the sake of Heaven). How can one determine if this is true?
If there is a camaraderie between the two parties, and their differences only concern halachic matters, it is possible that their dispute has no ulterior motive. But if there is animus between the two parties, then it is not an argument l’shem Shamayim. The Mishna in Pirkei Avos (5:20) defines the dispute between Hillel and Shammai as one that was l’shem Shamayim. The Talmud in Yevamos (14a-14b) tells us that Bais Hillel and Bais Shammai had different opinions about the laws of spiritual purity and defilement, as well as marriage, yet they married into each other’s families and ate from each other’s food.
Korach’s argument with Moshe Rabbeinu was acrimonious, filled with resentment and hatred – a definite indication that it was not at all motivated to promote the honor of Hashem.
The chronicles of the city of Brezan record the details of a fascinating din Torah that was presented before the Maharsham in the winter of 1908.
A shul in Hamburg that had been founded by Ashkenazim from Hungary, Galicia and Russia had been davening nusach Ashkenaz for decades. However, there was an influx of chassidim emigrating from Galicia and Poland to Hamburg, and they wanted to daven nusach Sfard.
A major dispute arose between the two groups, and both sides agreed to present their arguments before the Maharsham. After each side presented their arguments, the Maharsham spoke:
“Thank Hashem that our brothers in the Hamburg community have come to adjudicate a matter of nusach. It is a strong indication that they are all G-d-fearing.” He continued, “I will tell you a humorous story about R’ Yoshef Shaul Nathanson, the Baal Sho’el U’Meishiv.
“One summer, the Gaon came to the city of Skolya for its invigorating climate and fresh air. Hundreds of families lived in this city and all the shuls davened nusach Sfard. However, during the summer months, many people would come to Skolya from Levov, where they davened nusach Ashkenaz.
“One Friday night, as the baal tefillah began to recite Ke-Gavna (which precedes the Maariv prayer) in nusach Sfard, the people of Levov began to protest and were reciting Ba-meh Madlikin in accordance with nusach Ashkenaz. The citizens of Skolya derided the people of Levov and shouted: ‘We are the residents here; you are the guest.’
The people of Levov retorted: ‘You earn your livelihood for the entire year from our visit, and we donate to the upkeep of the shul. It is we who are important here.’
“The residents argued, ‘we live here year-round; we are tadir (regulars) and you are she’eino tadir (occasional people). The halacha is tadir v’she’eino tadir, tadir kodem, meaning the more frequent or constant takes precedence.’
“After the Maariv prayers were over, R’ Yosef Shaul invited all the congregants to his home where he told them the following: ‘You should know, my dear brothers, that when you all assemble to pray, the Evil Inclination cannot tolerate the honor that you are bestowing upon Hashem. He schemes and devises different means to interrupt your prayers. Tonight, he instigated the people of Levov to recite Ba-meh Madlikin – how can we kindle the fire of contention among us. He then incited the citizens of Skolya to shout Ke-Gavna – let us unite in our dispute.’
“’Believe me,’ continued R’ Yosef Shaul, Sages had in mind when they composed these prayers. We are currently in exile, and we cannot resolve this matter while we are captives of the Evil Inclination. We should pray, instead, for the arrival of Mashiach, at which time we will recite whatever he rules.’
“The Gaon then instructed that the residents of Skolya should recite the Ke-Gavna quietly to themselves, while the visitors from Levov should quietly recite the Ba-Meh Madlikin.”
R’ Nathanson concluded, “I would like to reveal a secret to you at this time. Although I am currently in Skolya, I say Ba-Meh Madlikin quietly to myself. As long as there will be peace among everyone, the nusach (exact text) will become less important and the Evil Inclination will be driven away.”
