Likkutei Sichos Vol. 24 – Vezos HaBerachah
1. Regarding the difference between the "weeping" of the Jewish people for Moshe Rabbeinu and their weeping for Aharon HaKohen after their passing — concerning Aharon it is written, "And all the house of Israel wept," whereas for Moshe it is written, "And the children of Israel wept" — there are two explanations:
The first explanation is that when Aharon passed away, "because of Moshe's weeping (for Aharon), everyone wept in his honor and reverence," whereas after Moshe's death, since "there was no one as great as Moshe to weep for him, only the men wept."
The second explanation is that for Moshe, only the "males" wept, whereas for Aharon, "who pursued peace and brought peace between a man and his fellow and between a woman and her husband, it is said 'all the house of Israel,' males and females."
According to the first explanation, it emerges that the emphasis on "the children of Israel wept" (only the men) — not "all the house of Israel" as with Aharon — highlights Moshe's unique greatness, that he did not leave anyone as great as he was, whose weeping would cause "all the house of Israel" to weep.
In contrast, according to the second explanation, the same emphasis ("the children of Israel wept for Moshe" — the men and not the women) highlights that in Moshe's case, the matter of bringing peace was not as complete as it was with Aharon.
This is puzzling: It is understood that where it speaks about Moshe's death, it is fitting to recount his virtues; and as we indeed see here in the very verses: "And Moshe... his eye did not dim... and no prophet arose... for all the signs..."
1. How does this emphasis fit with the idea that Moshe did not have the same level of bringing peace as Aharon?
2. The question becomes even greater when considering the order of language in Rashi's commentary:
Rashi states, "The children of Israel — the males, but for Aharon, since he pursued peace and brought peace between a man and his fellow and between a woman and her husband, it is said 'all the house of Israel,' males and females."
Seemingly: If Rashi's intention is only to explain why it says "all the house of Israel" for Aharon and "the children of Israel" for Moshe, Rashi should have started the matter by saying: "(The children of Israel, the males) and for Aharon it is said all the house of Israel, males and females (and then give the reason) because he pursued peace, etc."
From the fact that Rashi begins with the matter of Aharon's bringing peace — and furthermore, with elaboration — it implies that Rashi intends (not only to explain the reason and necessity that "the children of Israel wept" in our verse means "the males," but also) to highlight the virtue of Aharon in comparison to Moshe (in the matter of bringing peace).
This is puzzling, as here, in the matter of Moshe's passing, it seems inappropriate to emphasize and elaborate on something that is contrary to Moshe's virtue (in comparison to Aharon).
One cannot answer that on the contrary: due to the superiority and greatness of Moshe Rabbeinu in general, the Torah needs to caution that regarding this matter (love of Israel and bringing peace), one should not be satisfied with the conduct as it was with Moshe, but rather learn from Aharon's conduct —
because, seemingly, this is not the place for it.
From this, it is understood that when learning about Moshe's passing, it is relevant to know the difference between Moshe and Aharon, including Aharon's virtue in comparison to Moshe;
and therefore, the verse here emphasizes "the children of Israel wept for Moshe," and Rashi explains (reveals) that with this, the verse intends to indicate Aharon's virtue (in comparison to Moshe), that he was "a pursuer of peace and brought peace between a man and his fellow and between a woman and her husband."
3. This will be understood by first explaining why we do not find in the words of our Sages regarding Moshe's conduct in bringing peace between a man and his fellow and between a woman and her husband as we find with Aharon:
It is understood and obvious that this is not because Moshe lacked, G‑d forbid, in love of Israel. On the contrary, Moshe Rabbeinu was a lover of Israel, as explained at length in Likkutei Sichos, volume 19, page 2 and onwards, and see also Gur Aryeh on Chukas there.
He was the faithful shepherd of all and every Jew, who took care of their needs:
3. Moshe Rabbeinu attended to their spiritual needs — he personally taught Torah to "all the people," and not only the laws of the Torah (which Jews must know to understand what actions to perform and what actions to avoid), but also the intricate discussions of the Torah, which "were given only to Moshe and his descendants," yet he "acted generously and gave them to Israel."
And he also attended to all their physical needs, starting with the manna, which was in Moshe's merit, and even the other needs that were in the merit of Aharon and Miriam, after their passing (when the well ceased and the clouds of glory departed) — they returned in Moshe's merit.
However, the explanation is that due to Moshe's nature and mission, a different manner of conduct in love of Israel (and bringing peace) was required from him than the conduct of Aharon.
4. The explanation for this:
Regarding Aharon's method of bringing peace, our Sages tell us that in order to make peace between a man and his fellow, he would "alter" the truth, which is, of course, something permissible (and desirable) according to the Torah, as our Sages say, "It is permissible for a person to deviate for the sake of peace."
However, for Moshe Rabbeinu, since his attribute was the attribute of truth, such a method of bringing peace was not possible for him.
And even though the concept of "it is permissible to deviate for the sake of peace" is, as mentioned, a directive from the Torah, which is the Torah of truth [and as discussed elsewhere regarding the precise language of our Sages "it is permissible to deviate" — that this is merely a matter of "deviation," but not, G‑d forbid, a lie (the opposite of the Torah of truth)],
such a manner of conduct is nevertheless associated with a "concealment" on the attribute of truth, and therefore it is not suitable for the mission of one whose unique attribute (and level) is the attribute of truth. This manner of conduct is appropriate for Aharon, whose attribute is the attribute of kindness.
5. Perhaps we can add another point: It is not relevant to engage with those who are in a lowly state, to the extent that the only way to make peace between them is by deviating from the truth.
Since both approaches are according to Torah, it is understood that each has its own unique advantage:
The advantage of Moshe's approach is that it does not involve any deviation from the attribute of truth. On the other hand, there is an advantage in Aharon's approach, which specifically reaches the "lowest" individuals (for whom one must "deviate").
This also explains why, specifically at Moshe's passing, Aharon's greatness is emphasized: During Moshe's lifetime, when he was occupied with fulfilling his mission in this world, he was entirely engaged in his manner of service, and his mission in the world was to "do" everything in the manner of the attribute of truth.
However, when the time came for "And Moshe went up to Mount Nebo" — he had already completed his mission here below and was about to ascend above — it was then the time for him to appreciate the advantage in Aharon's approach, which brings peace to every Jew.
This is similar to the explanation in the well-known statement of Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai near his passing: "I do not know which path they will lead me on." The question is well-known: How is it possible that Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai, who was one of the greatest Tannaim — and as our Sages extol his greatness in several places, and he was certainly extremely careful in turning away from evil and doing good — could have a doubt whether he would go to Gan Eden or Gehenna?
The explanation given is that although he was certain that regarding his revealed faculties, his service was in complete perfection, he was uncertain whether he had also accomplished what he needed to regarding the essence of his soul (which is beyond revelation).
However, it remains unclear: If he had a doubt about the state of his soul's essence — whether it was in a state of holiness or, G‑d forbid, the opposite — why did he only become distressed about this near his passing and not earlier, throughout his entire life?
One of the explanations for this is:
Throughout his life, our teacher was entirely occupied and immersed in his mission in this world — studying Torah for himself and with others, etc. — and he did not have the time to pause and reflect on his "levels," where he stood with the essence of his soul;
5. It was specifically near his passing, when he was about to complete his mission in this world, that he could reflect on what was happening with the essence of his soul.
Similarly, in our context: It was specifically near his passing, when Moshe had already completed his mission in this world, that he experienced the ascent of his soul to a higher level. In every place and situation, Moshe's characteristic is the attribute of truth. Why then is it said that at his passing, the truth of Aharon's service became apparent to him?
It can be explained (according to Chassidus) that the concept of Moshe's passing does not only mean a physical departure — that his soul left his body — but it is primarily a spiritual ascent, that his soul rose to a higher level than he had reached during his lifetime in this world.
As is known, the explanation of the verse "And Moshe ascended to Mount Nebo" is that during his lifetime in this world, Moshe reached the forty-nine gates of understanding. On the day of his passing, he merited and ascended to the fiftieth gate.
This can also be understood as the inner explanation of "And Moshe ascended": Moshe's essence is drawing down from above to below (the escort of the King); therefore, he brought down the Torah — "Moshe received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it."
In contrast, Aharon is "the escort of the Matron," as he kindles (and elevates) the lamps of the Menorah — "When you light the lamps," "until the flame rises on its own," which spiritually means that he elevates the souls of Israel (the soul of man is the lamp of G‑d) so that they stand in an ascent to their root and source.
On the day of his passing, Moshe was elevated beyond his level, through the fact that he also experienced the advantage of (Aharon —) "And he ascended" — an ascent from below to above.
[And this is connected with the fact that he then merited the fiftieth gate]:
During his lifetime, when Moshe's service was defined according to his attribute and level, all (but only) forty-nine gates of understanding shone for him, which the number forty-nine indicates the limitation of the world (seven times seven — the seven days of creation);
However, when he experienced the concept of "And he ascended," an ascent and departure from his limitations — that his service was not limited even by his nature in holiness (the attribute of truth), only in the line of "drawing down from above to below," but...
6. In him, there was also the "ascent from below to above" — this is connected with the fact that he was given the fiftieth gate, which is beyond limitation.
Accordingly, we can also understand regarding the concept of love for one's fellow Jew and bringing peace:
Since on the day of his passing, Moshe experienced the service of "And he ascended" — the level of Aharon — he therefore then perceived the advantage of Aharon's bringing peace (which reached all Jews, as mentioned above).
7. From all of this, we see another aspect of the greatness of Moshe Rabbeinu's love for the Jewish people:
In the verses that speak about his passing, he speaks in his own words (and with Divine inspiration) and emphasizes the virtue of Aharon, so that Jews would learn from this how broad and deep the concept of love for one's fellow Jew must be.
Despite the great elevation of his love for the Jewish people, which certainly ascended (increasing in holiness) throughout his life from level to level in his love for the Jewish people (just as he elevated in holiness in all matters of holiness) —
Nevertheless, this is not sufficient, and one must conduct oneself like Aharon — "pursuing peace and establishing peace between a person and his fellow, and between a woman and her husband."
(From the talks of the night of Shabbos Chol HaMoed Sukkos and Simchas Torah 5742)