Shabbos Parashas Acharei Mos - 5779
Shabbos Parashas Acharei Mos - 5779
Rabbi Hal Miller
Like the practice of the land of Egypt in which you dwelt, you shall not do, and
like the practice of the land of Canaan to which I am bringing you, you shall not do,
and you shall not follow their statutes. [Vayikra 18:3]
When the ways of the people where we live differ from ours, which do we follow? The answer,
of course, is that it depends. The Shulchan Aruch directs that we do what we can to fit in with
those around us. But if we live some place that requires us to commit murder or other dastardly
anti-Torah acts, we would certainly understand that we must refuse, in fact must relocate to
some other place. But our verse refers to a land "to which I [God] am bringing you", which
may mean we don't have the choice to simply move elsewhere.
The Gemora in Chullin [18b] tells us, "We impose upon one the stringencies of the place
he left, and the stringencies of the place to which he went." We see this principle also in
Pesachim [50a] and other places, in varying contexts. We are not supposed to, in any context,
show up in someone's home and demand or expect them to conform to what we are used to.
Our verse tells us that there is a limit. Where is that limit, how is it set, who sets it? Does it
change with "the times"?
Our verse refers to Egypt and Canaan. Are we restricted from following local law and custom
only in these two? A class of nations represented by these two? Or all nations in general?
Does this verse apply only to that period of time, or to all times?
We can note that Egypt and Canaan at the time were severely and blatantly corrupted in
their ways. Is it a matter of degree, and following the customs of a people not quite so brazen
in licentiousness may be okay?
In that time, Egypt and Canaan were the most advanced civilizations in the world. They were
the "gold standard", the leaders in military might, trade, culture, and such. Does this mean we
are not allowed to adopt these particular characteristics from nations of the world, but that other
characteristics are not covered here? Certainly central Europe was that "gold standard" during
the first 40 years of the 20th century. Did that justify following what Germany did? Germany's
faults were not the same as those of Egypt or Canaan.
The line seems to be that of Torah prohibition. A country that merely does not observe the
laws of kosher butchering is not the same as one that prohibits it outright.
Nechama Leibowitz writes, "material progress does not necessarily spell moral advancement.
Hence the Torah warns us at the beginning of the chapter on forbidden relations not to be
dazzled by the external glitter of technological progress and lose sight of moral standards."
To the question of why these two countries, she says that if Israel did not differentiate itself
from Egypt, God would ask why He removed us from there. If Israel does not differentiate
itself from Canaan, He would ask why He was giving us their land.
Rav Soloveitchik follows these comments when he writes, "Israel is separate and distinct from
the nations surrounding her. We must uphold this unique identity; under no conditions are we
to consider assimilation. Egypt and Canaan are mentioned specifically because these nations
represented the two poles of secular civilization in biblical times. Egypt was the most urbanized
and technologically advanced civilization of the time, while Canaan was pastoral and primitive.
The Torah emphasizes here that as different as they were from each other, neither of these
fundamentally immoral societies should serve as role models."
Our verse is a reminder that we are to maintain the highest of moral standards, wherever
we are, and whoever we may be with. We cannot adopt the ways of the lands in which we live.
The Jewish people must always be a good example to the rest of the world.