A Dvar Torah for Miketz – Chanuka from Rav Yedidya Berzon

Chipazon or Zrizus?

There is a fascinating episode in this week’s parsha. Reuven turns to the Shvatim and says: 

וַיַּ֩עַן֩ רְאוּבֵ֨ן אֹתָ֜ם לֵאמֹ֗ר הֲלוֹא֩ אָמַ֨רְתִּי אֲלֵיכֶ֧ם לֵאמֹ֛ר אַל־תֶּחֶטְא֥וּ בַיֶּ֖לֶד וְלֹ֣א שְׁמַעְתֶּ֑ם וְגַם־דָּמ֖וֹ הִנֵּ֥ה נִדְרָֽשׁ׃

In essence, he is saying, “I told you so! I told you not to hurt the child, and now we are paying the price for what we did!” Yosef even gets emotional and starts to cry. Now let us compare this with Reuven’s behavior in the previous parsha,

וַיָּ֤שׇׁב רְאוּבֵן֙ אֶל־הַבּ֔וֹר וְהִנֵּ֥ה אֵין־יוֹסֵ֖ף בַּבּ֑וֹר וַיִּקְרַ֖ע אֶת־בְּגָדָֽיו׃

וַיָּ֥שׇׁב אֶל־אֶחָ֖יו וַיֹּאמַ֑ר הַיֶּ֣לֶד אֵינֶ֔נּוּ וַאֲנִ֖י אָ֥נָה אֲנִי־בָֽא׃

When Reuven returns to the bor and he sees that Yosef is no longer there, he says: “The child is no longer here! He was just a child!”  In perhaps one of the most dramatic emotional responses in the Torah, Reuven even tears kriyah. Here we see full recognition of sin and he takes full responsibility. And yet in this week’s parsha, Reuven says, “I told you so!” putting all the blame on his brothers. Where is the Reuven that took all the responsibility on himself in the previous parsha? What change happened to Reuven and what was his process?

To better understand this, we need to address a different question. Yaakov Avinu’s bracha to Reuven in Parashas Vayechi  “Pachaz cmayim”  Onkelos states that Reuven was supposed to be the bechor, inheriting both the malchus and kahuna. And this bracha is explaining why he lost them because he’s Pachaz cmayim – hasty and impulsive. What exactly is this midda that Yaakov Avinu identifies Reuven and how does it explain Reuven’s contrasting behavior in these episodes?

Mesilas Yesharim describes that one of the central middos for an Eved Hashem to develop is zrizus . What is the difference between zrizus and pachas? Pachaz is an instant response – an impulsive reflex. One does not go through a cognitive process or understanding what he is doing.  Zrizus is also quick action, but the intellect is engaged. It is the resulting response of a thought process – a quick but conscious decision to run out to fulfill a mitzvah without wasting any time.

Zrisuz and Pachaz are two fundamentally different middos. Zrizus is a focused action that follows zhirus, which is mindfulness. In fact, zhirus is a required prerequisite of zrizus! Quick action that lacks zhirus beforehand is called Pachaz. Pachaz is an emotional response without any intellectual process, and it can be used in a positive or negative way. And even though the Torah does not accept that Reuven did a cheit in this episode, we can suggest that Reuven’s pachaz resulted in a negative outcome.

Earlier, this same middas hapachaz did lead him to a dramatic and inspirational moment –when he tears kriah and takes responsibility for Yosef’s disappearance from the Bor. However, the lack of mindfulness and intellectual engagement perhaps resulted in this later episode, when Reuven puts all the blame on his brothers. The passionate aspect of pachaz might be very powerful, but it does not last. Longterm development in avodas Hashem can only result from conscious intellectual involvement – and not from non-intellectual, emotional reflexive behavior.

The concept is particularly relevant to the month of Teves and Chanuka. Teves falls out deep in the winter, during the shortest periods of daylight. Darkness represents challenges. When one is faced with a difficult challenge, there are two ways try to get out. A quick dramatic emotional approach can be executed either with or without thoughtful engagement. A person doesn’t always want to think about: what am I going through and why – how can I grow from this situation?

The yesod of Chanuka is Tahara The oil had to be pure (even though halachically it was permissible otherwise) The Chashmoniam merited both the Kehuna and Malchus, because they transcended their challenges. Reuven lost both of these because he acted with Pachaz – reflexive response without thought. Kehuna and Malchus require both zhirus and zrizus. Chashmonaim went beyond just defeating the Greeks. They wanted lasting change, so they strove for tahara.

To grow from a challenge, a person can’t just take an impulsive dramatic approach. He needs to go back to his past process, identify what went wrong and fix it, purify it. We don’t leave the past behind or deny it – but rather we go back and find the pure oil and bring it to light.