17 Jun PARASHAT SHELEAH: STAYING FOCUSED ON THE ETERNAL

Toward the end of
Parashat Shelah
(15:32-36), we read
the disturbing story of
the “Mekoshesh Esim,”
the man who publicly
desecrated Shabbat by
collecting wood. The Torah tells that it was not
known what punishment this man deserved for
violating Shabbat, and so he was detained until
G-d informed Moshe that he should be killed
through stoning.
Rashi, commenting on this section (15:32),
writes that this story is told as criticism of Beneh
Yisrael, who observed only one Shabbat properly
in the desert before neglecting Shabbat. Already
on the second Shabbat, the “Mekoshesh Esim”
publicly desecrated Shabbat. The Torah tells of
this incident to bemoan the fact that already on
the second Shabbat in the wilderness, Beneh
Yisrael failed to preserve the sanctity of this
special day.
The Maharal of Prague (Rav Yehuda Loew, d.
1609), in his Gur Aryeh, explains that Rashi
refers here to the first and second Shabbatot after
the manna began to fall. As we read in Parashat
Beshalah, G-d commanded Beneh Yisrael at that
time to observe Shabbat. The Torah there relates,
“Va’yishbetu Ha’am Ba’yom Ha’shebi’i” – the
people observed the command to rest on Shabbat
(Shemot 16:30).Already on the next Shabbat, the
Maharal writes, the “Mekosheh Esim” desecrated
Shabbat by gathering wood.

It emerges, then, that, according to Rashi, the
story of the “Mekoshesh Esim” occurred even
before Beneh Yisrael arrived at Mount Sinai to
receive the Torah, shortly after the manna began
falling.
Rashi’s comments here seem difficult to explain
in light of his remarks elsewhere, toward the
end of Parashat Emor (Vayikra 24:12). There
Rashi writes that the “Mekoshesh Esim” was
imprisoned at the same time as the “Megadef”
– the public blasphemer, who was likewise kept
in custody until G-d informed Moshe how he
should be punished. Now several verses earlier
(Vayikra 24:10), Rashi cites a view that the
“Megadef’ blasphemed G-d in response to the
law of the “Lehem Ha’panim” – the showbread
in the Mishkan. He did not understand how
G-d could command that the bread should
remain on the table in the Mishkan for an entire
week before being eaten, as the “Megadef”
deemed it disrespectful for there to be stale
bread in Hashem’s abode. It is clear, then, that
the story of the “Megadef” occurred only after
the commands regarding the Mishkan – which
of course included the Misva of the “Lehem
Ha’panim” – were given, meaning, at Mount
Sinai, after Matan Torah. We need to understand,
then, how it was possible for the “Megadef” and
the “Mekosesh Esim” to be imprisoned at the
same time. The “Mekoshesh Esim” committed
his offense much earlier, before Beneh Yisrael
arrived at Mount Sinai, whereas the “Megadef”
blasphemed only after Matan Torah.

The Maharal (Gur Aryeh, Parashat Emor)
answers that the “Mekoshesh Esim” was not put
to death immediately, because G-d did not want
him killed during Beneh Yisrael’s encampment at
Sinai. The period from Beneh Yisrael’s departure
from Egypt through their stay at Mount Sinai, the
Maharal explains, was a time of joy, and it was
thus inappropriate to, in the Maharal’s words,
“be involved in death.” The Maharal draws a
comparison to the Misva of “Shana Rishona,”
which requires a groom to remain home and
not travel during the first year of marriage, in
order to bring joy to his new wife. Similarly,
during this period of Hashem’s “wedding” with
Beneh Yisrael, they were not to put violators to
death. Hence, the “Mekoshesh Esim” was still in
prison when the “Megadef” was detained.
We might add a deeper insight.
The Gemara in Masechet Ta’anit (5b) famously
states, “Yaakob Abinu Lo Met” – Yaakob Abinu
never died. The Hatam Sofer (Rav Moshe Sofer,
1762-1839) explains that “death” signifies
transience, the impermanence of this world. The
teaching “Yaakob Abinu Lo Met” means that
Yaakob Abinu paid no attention to “death,” to
that which is temporary. He was focused entirely
on Torah and Misvot, which yield everlasting
rewards. By saying that Yaakob “never died,”
the Sages are teaching us that Yaakob did not
involve himself in matters that “die,” which
bring temporary benefit, as he was invested
solely in the pursuit of the eternal blessings of
Torah and Misvot.

On the basis of the Hatam Sofer’s comment,
we might arrive at a deeper understanding of
why Hashem did not want Beneh Yisrael, in
the Maharal’s words, to “involve themselves
in death” at Sinai. The purpose of Matan Torah
was precisely to draw our attention to eternity,
to allow us the opportunity to transcend the
transience of this world and achieve immortality
through our engagement in Torah. Our ancestors’
encampment at Sinai was all about the antithesis
of “death,” of impermanence, as it gave us the
key to immortality. And for this reason, G-d did
not want the people to put violators to death –
because this period was all about eternal life
through the study and observance of Torah.
Our world is full of lures and
enticements. Wherever we turn, we are misled to
think that physical pleasures and material luxuries
are what matter most, that we should devote our
lives to the pursuit of these delights. We must
remember that whereas all material assets and
worldly pleasures are temporary, our spiritual
achievements are everlasting. The Torah we learn
and the Misvot we perform remain with us for
all eternity. These, then, should be our primary
points of focus. Like Yaakob Abinu, we should
direct our attention not to “death” – to that which
is fleeting and temporary – but rather to “life,” to
the eternal benefits of Torah and Misvot.