Why is "Vayikov" (and he pronounced/pierced) written instead of "Vayekalel" (and he cursed)? What would the blasphemer have merited if he had accepted the humiliations with love? Were the blasphemer and the Mekoshesh (wood gatherer) in the same Shabbat, and what is the exact calculation that proves the timing? All this and many more insights and pearls for the weekly Torah portion - Emor, from the Gaon and Tzaddik Rabbi Eliezer Berland shlit"a:

"And the son of the Israelite woman pronounced [Vayikov] the Name" –

What is the story with the blasphemer? Why did the blasphemer suddenly start cursing? After all, the Midrash says—Midrash Rabbah—that the husband of Shlomit was Dathan. She had a husband who was a "holy of holies" (very meticulous), [but] he only disagreed with the Tzaddik (righteous leader)... that was his problem. But besides that, he was a good, devoted husband; he washed the dishes, did the mopping, he did all the cooking, and she would rest and say Tehillim (Psalms). He did everything for her; he only did one thing wrong—he opposed the Tzaddik. This was Dathan; he was the husband of Shlomit. And of course, this child was not his child. Suddenly, everyone was swallowed by the earth—suddenly, everyone is swallowed by the earth—Dathan, Aviram, Korach, the children, the grandchildren, the great-grandchildren; even the great-grandchildren were swallowed by the earth, along with the wives and the infants. Only one was not swallowed by the earth, and that was the blasphemer; the blasphemer was not swallowed by the earth. Everyone asked, "Why weren't you swallowed by the earth?! Why? The earth isn't swallowing you, why?!" He said, "I am a holy of holies, I am a Tzaddik." No, no, you have another reason, something... let's go to Moshe and ask him. They went to Moshe, and he told the whole truth; immediately, he [the blasphemer] began to curse. So he was—he truly thought he was the son of Dathan, he thought he belonged to the tribe of Reuven altogether. He didn't know anything about the story, and suddenly the story was revealed; immediately he cursed Moshe the Tzaddik and was pushed away from the Tzaddik. And this was the moment he needed to do Teshuvah (repentance); this was the moment he could have been holy, as great as Moshe. If he had held on, he would have risen to the level of Moshe. If he had accepted the bizayon (humiliation) with love, he would have risen to the level of Moshe; he could have been Moshe. Therefore, it is written "Vayikov" (and he pierced/pronounced) and not "Vayekalel" (and he cursed); "Vayekalel" appears later [in the verse]. "Vayikov" means that he made a hole (nekev) between the World of Yetzirah (Formation) and the World of Asiyah (Action). He drew down lights from the World of Atzilus (Emanation); he was that great.

"And they placed him in custody" – Were the blasphemer and the wood-gatherer in the same Shabbat?

"And they placed him in custody"—Rashi explains—"Alone, and they did not place the Mekoshesh (wood gatherer) with him, though both were in the same period"—at the same time. They knew that the Mekoshesh was liable for death, but they did not know if the prohibition of desecrating Shabbat was punishable by skilah (stoning), chenek (strangulation), serefah (burning), or skilah. Moshe had said, "Those who desecrate it shall surely be put to death," but he did not say which type of death; they did not know at all how he was liable for death or how to execute those liable for death. But here, regarding the blasphemer, they did not know if he was liable for death at all, and therefore they placed him alone. Rashi says, "Shlomit daughter of Divri," "Vayikov"—that he pronounced the Ineffable Name. For he was at the Giving of the Torah, and there he heard the Explicit Name. Here it is written "Vayikov"; what is "Vayikov"? The Zohar says that he pierced a hole between the World of Asiyah and Yetzirah, between Yetzirah and Briah (Creation), and between Briah and Atzilus. He wanted to see the Merkavah (Divine Chariot) in the World of Atzilus. Therefore, the son of Divri went out from the camp of Israel as explained. "Of the tribe of Dan," because Dan went with the idol of Micah. And now it is the end of the forty years that Israel was in the desert, as they are now arriving at the Land of Israel, and now they divided the land among all the tribes. We are after the 1st of Nissan; every tribe received its inheritance, its place. The members of the tribe of Dan said to the blasphemer, "Leave the camp"; he had come to pitch his tent within the camp of Dan. The blasphemer had actually converted (Geyrus); he went and immersed, performed the conversion, drew a drop of blood for the covenant (dam brit). Nevertheless, the members of Dan said to him when he sought to sit among them, "Leave the camp." They said—the members of the tribe of Dan—"This is not your place; it is written, 'Each man by his standard, according to the ensigns of their fathers' houses.' You do not have a Jewish father," for his father was an Egyptian. It is written "according to their fathers' houses"—and you are without a Jewish father, and therefore, despite the fact that you converted, you cannot sit in the camp of Dan because your father is not from this tribe. What did the blasphemer mock? He mocked the warm bread, the Lechem HaPanim (Showbread) that was baked and remained for nine days until the following Shabbat. Why? Is it the way to eat cold bread? And how much more so for the King, for whom it is not the way; why do they not bake the Showbread every day? But in truth, the Showbread remained warm for nine days. Because with Moshe, he—the blasphemer—left liable in judgment. For the blasphemer went to Moshe to ask him if it was true that he was the son of an Egyptian, for the blasphemer knew nothing of the story of Shlomit daughter of Divri whom the Egyptian had caused to sin; by chance, that Israelite who fought with the blasphemer and told him this knew of the story. This was a secret; no one in the world knew of the story, they didn't reveal it to anyone, only Moshe knew through Ruach HaKodesh (Divine Inspiration). And that Jew who fought with the blasphemer knew of the story. So the blasphemer went to Moshe to ask him what the Halacha (law) was—is it true that he is not fit to sit in the camp of Dan? Can one rely on a mere story?! Moshe said yes, "Each man by his standard, according to their fathers' houses"; you do not have a Jewish father, and it is written "according to their fathers' houses." Rashi here writes that the Mekoshesh and the blasphemer were at the same time, and... asks that according to the calculation, it turns out the blasphemer was in Iyar of the second year, for the blasphemer argued about the place of his tent because he wanted to sit in the camp of Dan, and it must be that this was after the division of the camps, which was in Iyar of the second year. And according to what Rashi writes in Parshat Shelach Lecha, that the Mekoshesh desecrated the first Shabbat they were in the desert, it turns out that this was in Iyar of the first year. If so, how can his words be possible, saying that the blasphemer and the Mekoshesh were imprisoned in the same period? It turns out that the portion of the blasphemer was after the 1st of Nissan, on the 1st of Iyar. After the 1st of Iyar of the second year. Now it is Iyar, the month of Ziv, in the second month, on the first of the month in the second year; then they divided the camps. Exactly now, on the 1st of Iyar, was the division of the camps, the division of the camps. And since the argument of the blasphemer was about the place of his tent, it must be that this was after the division of the camps, after the 1st of Iyar of the second year. After all, when they accompanied Yaakov to his burial in the Land of Israel, they already accompanied him according to the order of the journeys, and when they camped around the Mishkan (Tabernacle), they already camped according to the order of the journeys. How can you say that the Mekoshesh and the blasphemer were together on the same Shabbat, on the same day? After all, the desecrator—Rashi in "Shelach Lecha" says that he—the Mekoshesh—desecrated the first Shabbat they were in the desert, and that turns out to be on the 1st of Iyar in the first year. The first Shabbat the Mekoshesh desecrated; the second Shabbat Dathan and Aviram desecrated. For on the 15th of Iyar of the first year, the Manna began to fall. Now—in the portion of the Mekoshesh, we are in the 1st of Iyar of the first year; on the 1st of Iyar the Mekoshesh already went, on the 1st of Iyar before the story with the Manna, when they—Dathan and Aviram—went to collect the Manna on Shabbat. There is a contradiction here; here in the portion of the blasphemer, it is written that this was on the 1st of Iyar in the second year since it was after the division of the camps, and Rashi says in "Shelach Lecha" in the portion of the Mekoshesh—if only Israel had kept the first Shabbat—the first Shabbat—which turns out to be in Iyar of the first year—the Mekoshesh desecrated; the second Shabbat Dathan and Aviram desecrated. How is it possible then that the Mekoshesh and the blasphemer were at the same time, for the Mekoshesh was in the first year and the blasphemer in the second year? [-] The Mekoshesh needed to do Teshuvah, to learn the law of skilah (stoning). But in practice, a Temple of Fire was supposed to descend on the first Shabbat that Israel was in the desert. For at a Brit (circumcision), a Temple of Fire descends; every Brit—it is written in Zohar Lech Lecha—that they were surrounded by fire all night. For the Brit is surrounded by fire, the Sandak (godfather) is surrounded by fire, the father is surrounded by fire, all the guests are surrounded by fire; at every Brit, a Temple of Fire must descend. And then, on the first Shabbat, a Temple of Fire was supposed to descend! If the Mekoshesh had not desecrated the Shabbat, he would not have had to learn the laws of stoning by desecrating the Shabbat, for Moshe did not tell him to learn the laws of stoning, he did not appoint him for this; he sacrificed his life (mesirus nefesh) on his own. But if they had kept that Shabbat, a Temple of Fire would certainly have descended!!!

The lesson has been edited; if any error has occurred, it should not be attributed, G-d forbid, to our Rav shlit"a, but to the writer, and "may our error remain with us." Illustration courtesy of the artist R' Yehoshua Wiseman. To purchase: www.yehoshuawiseman.com

The Shuvu Banim website team wishes you, the readers and followers, a peaceful and blessed Shabbat!!!