Printable PDF is available here. Last year’s piece of Parshat Re’eh is available here.
Please share with friends and anyone who might be interested!
Rav Kook (She’muot Re’iah, excerpted in P’ninei ha’Re’iah)
But only to the place which the Lord your G-d shall choose from all your tribes, to set His Name there; you shall seek after His dwelling and come there. (Devarim 5:12)
David and Shmuel noted that the pasuk says “Then you shall arise, and get you up unto the place which the Lord your G-d shall choose” (Devarim 17:8). This teaches that the Temple is higher than all places in Eretz Yisrael. And Eretz Yisrael is higher than all countries… … They thought to build the Mikdash at Ein Eitam, which is higher than any other place in the portion of Benjamin. Then they said: Let us lower it a bit, as it is written: “He hovers above it throughout the day, and He dwells between his shoulders” (Devarim 33:12). This indicates that the Temple is situated slightly lower, between two peaks…
And with regard to this matter, that David and Shmuel discovered the location of the Temple, Doeg the Edomite[1]was jealous of David, as it is written: “Because jealousy for Your House has eaten me up” (Tehillim 69:10), and it is written: “Lord, remember for David all his affliction; how he swore to the Lord, and vowed unto the Mighty One of Jacob: I will not come into the tent of my house, nor go up into the bed that is spread for me; if I will give sleep to my eyes, or slumber to my eyelids; until I find a place for the Lord, a dwelling place for the Mighty One of Jacob” (Tehillim 132:1–5). (Gemara Zevachim 54b)
What exactly was the point of contention between David and Doeg regarding the proper location of the Mikdash? Chazal teach us (Gemara Sanhedrin 93b) that Doeg was not a mere ignoramus, but the head of the Sanhedrin itself and – until he became corrupt and wicked – a towering spiritual personality. And why did David originally agree with Doeg’s position but later change his mind? This must be more than a mere dispute about the Biblical zoning codes, or else our Sages would not have recorded it for posterity. What is the lesson for us?
The matter seems as follows. Doeg believed that the sanctity of the Mikdash was meant to be supernal. Its holiness was to hover above our world, inaccessible and beyond the reach of the average person. Fundamentally, Doeg claimed, the sanctity of the Mikdash was for the spiritual elite – primarily the Kohanim – and was not a democratic in nature. The location he chose for the Mikdash, at the highest point in Jerusalem, was simply the physical reflection of his elitist ideological program.
David knew differently. He realized that holiness was meant as the heritage of the entire Jewish people. The Mikdash was not meant for the Kohanim, but the entire Jewish people. And while it was true that the Kohanim were the religious elite of the nation, their spiritual stature was not for their own aggrandizement, but was intended to flow outward, inspiring and uplifting the rest of the people. Thus, while only a portion of the nation can serve in the Mikdash as Kohanim, the entire nation is called upon to become a “kingdom of Kohanim and a holy nation” (Shemot 19:6).
[1] Doeg was a member of Shaul’s court and is mentioned in Shmuel Aleph (Perakim 21 and 22) where he is depicted as an antagonist of David who murdered many Kohanim. Chazal teach that he is one of the few people who forfeited their portion in Olam ha’Ba.
Food for Thought
Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch (Commentary on the Siddur): The holy is set apart from the profane only to show that it is from the holy that the spirit of sanctity and sanctification should go out to permeate all the other phases of human life. That which is shut off from the light is so separated only that, under the cover of darkness, it may gather new strength in order then, suffused with light, to be awakened to new life and vigor. Yisrael, too, is set apart from the other nations only so that, through Yisrael, the rest of the nations may be won over to an ever-increasing extent to the truths it has revealed.
Rav Eliahu Dessler (Michtav M’Eliyahu Vol. 3, Pg. 356-357): [T]he Lithuanian yeshivos focused on a single goal – to create great Torah scholars who were also G-d fearing people. To accomplish this, they prohibited going to university. They realized that there was no other way to produce great Torah scholars except by concentrating all their students’ energies and desires exclusively to learning Torah. Don’t think that they didn’t realize from the beginning that this approach would ruin some who would not be able to deal with this extreme lifestyle and would consequently leave religious observance. But this is the price that they paid for the sake of producing in their schools great Torah scholars who were G‑d fearing… [T]hose who had a strong desire to learn a profession and surely those were interested in become academics were completely abandoned and not dealt with at all. This rejection was done so that the actions of these students wouldn’t harm others by giving them any legitimacy by trying to help them in any way. I heard that they found support for such an approach by the statement found in Vayikra Rabba (2:10) – “One thousand students enter to study Bible and only one comes out as a posek, and G-d says ‘That is the one I desire.’” They also mentioned the words of the Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim that “It is better that 1000 fools die in order to obtain one Torah scholar.”
Joshua Berman (Created Equal: How the Bible Broke with Ancient Political Thought, pg. 67-68): The election of the priests and Levites is nowhere given metaphysical basis. Plato justified the hierarchy of Greek societies on the grounds that the gods had differentiated the souls of different classes of persons. The Bible knows of no such discourse… their election is a reflection not of their innate status but of G-d’s. As a sovereign kind, He is worthy of an honor guard, of servants set aside as His attendants.
Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch (Collected Writings, Vol. 2 Pg. 240): A minority should never tolerate that its cause should become its raison d’etre, become the spiritual monopoly of only a few initiates. By doing so, it would endanger its very survival. Once it inhibits the spiritual flow of research and knowledge within its ranks, it allows its members to drift into the majority that is always ready to receive them.
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (Yisro, 5774): Every nation had its priests. In the book of Genesis, we encounter Malkizedek, Abraham’s contemporary, described as “a priest of the most-high G-d” (Gen. 14: 18). The story of Joseph mentions the Egyptian priests, whose land was not nationalized. Yitro was a Midianite priest. In the ancient world there was nothing distinctive about priesthood. Every nation had its priests and holy men. What was distinctive about Israel was that it was to become a nation every one of whose members was to be a priest; each of whose citizens was called on to be holy.
I vividly recall standing with Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz in the General Assembly of the United Nations in August 2000 at a unique gathering of two thousand religious leaders representing all the major faiths in the world. I pointed out that even in that distinguished company we were different. We were almost the only religious leaders wearing suits. All the others wore robes of office. It is an almost universal phenomenon that priests and holy people wear distinctive garments to indicate that they are set apart (the core meaning of the word kadosh, “holy”). In post-biblical Judaism there were no robes of office because everyone was expected to be holy. (Theophrastus, a pupil of Aristotle, called Jews “a nation of philosophers,” reflecting the same idea.)
Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch (Collected Writings Vol. 2, pg. 436): Look upon these men as they pass through the growing darkness of the ages, see what they meant to us and what they accomplished, and then try to find even one parallel to their character and to their achievements! Search the whole earth, if you will, for another nation to whom the elements of spirit, thought and knowledge were not merely reserved for individual thinkers but became the very soul of an entire nation! Look for another nation whose collective intellectual bent labored with unflagging zeal for one and a half millennia to develop one single area of knowledge, a nation within which knowledge was not merely the prerogative of a few ivory-tower thinkers, the kind comforter of philosophers behind prison bars, but the consolation, the wealth, the strength and the inspiration of an entire people.
Talmudology Blog: This passage is unequivocal in its meaning: Jerusalem – that is, the Temple Mount – is the highest place in Israel, and Israel itself is the highest place on earth. Now you don’t need me to tell you that this is not a true statement. But I will anyway. It’s not true. After a quick check in your reference book or internet search engine of choice you will see this is not correct. It’s not even close. (I’m talking to you, Denver). The Maharsha (1555-1631) in his commentary to Kiddushin 69a suggests that since the Earth is a sphere, Israel and Jerusalem can be seen as if they were its “center.” Perhaps the Maharsha means that the spherical earth spins on its axis and that is the highest point, just like you might see a model of the earth on a bookshelf that spins on an axis with the North Pole at the top. But that cannot be, because the axis of the rotation of the Earth does not pass through Israel. It passes through the North Pole.
The Maharal of Prague wrote that Jerusalem is, spiritually speaking, the highest point on Earth (באר הגולה, הבאר הששי). Elsewhere, the Maharal suggests that just as water flows from the peaks of mountains down into valleys, it is Torah teachings that flow down from the spiritual capital Jerusalem to water the rest of the world. Perhaps it is this that gives Israel and its capital a shot at the claim of being the most spiritually elevated. Perhaps. But it’s a claim that is contingent on the behavior of all those who live there.
Questions for Discussion
- Could Rav Kook’s explanation for the Mikdash’s location provide an explanation for the chosenness of Israel?
- Rav Hirsch, in “Food for Thought” above writes that in Judaism, knowledge is “not merely the prerogative of a few ivory-tower thinkers.” Can you think of some aspects of Jewish law or history that demonstrate this?
- Are there advantages to the ‘elitist’ model that Rav Kook says was rejected by David? If so, what are they?
- Why does Torah Judaism have Kohanim and rabbis, as opposed to a fully egalitarian model where everyone is their own religious authority?
- Look up Devarim 14:23. Does it support Rav Kook’s theory? (See Tosafos in Bava Basra, 21a ד׳ה כי מציון.)
- What does it mean to be a “kingdom of Kohanim and a holy nation”?
