Parshat Behalotecha chronicles the impassioned plea-outcry of a group that had been excluded from the mitzvah of korban Pesach because of their ritual impurity (Bamidbar 9:7): "va-yomru ha-anashim ha-heimah eilav anachnu temeim le-nefesh adam; lamah nigara le-vilti hakriv et korban Hashem be-moado be-toch Benei Yisrael". Remarkably, the pasuk does not record an actual demand or request, nor does it clearly explicate a complaint or source of anguish or distress. While Rav Saadia Gaon interprets that the group was requesting that they not be precluded from implementing a substitute for the original and timely korban Pesach, others (Rashi, Seforno etc.) posit that the pasuk registers a complaint about the justification of the initial exclusion itself. However, it is noteworthy that the pasuk itself merely conveys anguish due to the initial lost opportunity! Indeed, Onkelos appears to render the verse in this fashion: "lama nitmina bedil de-lo lekarva yat kurbena de-Hashem be-zemano bego Benei Yisrael". It is curious that the mere expression of distress would engender Moshe's intervention and trigger Hashem's formulation of Pesach Sheni.
While the Sifrei and many mefarshim emphasize that Pesach Sheni was always anticipated as an integral component of the commemoration of Yetziat Mitzrayim, they credit the group's initiative by characterizing their role as "megalgelin zechut al yedei zakai". Why did this outcry, particularly if it did not constitute either a request-demand or complaint-argument, resonate so powerfully? Surely there must have been other queries, complaints, or efforts to expand religious commitment and fulfillment, particularly when halachic standards militated against universal participation in treasured mitzvot. The omission or obfuscation of specific proposals or arguments, according to the mefarshim that project these, implies that the depth of anguish and the impassioned presentation was more compelling than the force of any specific argument. The Seforno (9:1) posits that the yearning and dedication to korban Pesach articulated by this delegation was one of the primary factors that qualified Klal Yisrael to merit immediate entry into Eretz Yisrael had it not been for the eigel transgression.
Elsewhere (Pesach Sheni: A Quest for Spiritual Opportunity and National Identity), we have posited that the phrase "betoch Benei Yisrael" reflected a keen, even penetrating understanding of korban Pesach's transcendent national significance. This deep appreciation underpins the "megalgelin zechut al yedai zakai" attribution. Perhaps this perspective is further reinforced by the Torah's rare usage of the term "nigara" in this context.
The mefarshim struggled with this challenging usage. As noted, Rav Saadia translates this as a reference to having been "prevented" or "obstructed" (nimna) from participating in a substitute korban Pesach. However, Ibn Ezra correctly notes that nigara is a passive (nifal) form that appears to characterize the group itself, rather than a reference to its paralysis or inability to act. Onkelos, cited previously, apparently emphasizes that those denied participation in the korban Pesach are defined by their deprivation. This dire characterization certainly underscores a deep yearning for and profound understanding of korban Pesach's singular status. This appreciation of korban Pesach's stature justifies Seforno's assessment cited previously.
Moreover, the term "nigara" denotes more than deprivation. It invokes the Torah's doubly formulated double infraction - "lo tosifu al ha-davar asher anochi metzaveh etchem ve-lo tigriu mimenu; lishmor et mitzvot Hashem Elokeichem asher anochi metzaveh etchem" (Devarim 4:2; and see Devarim 13:1). Numerous mefarshim (See Bechor Shor, Keli Yakar etc.) note that the Torah's pairing of these apparently opposite injunctions - adding to and subtracting from the mitzvoth - also asserts a profound principle - "kol ha-mosif gorea" (adding unsanctioned mitzvot constitutes a detraction or diminution of the entire system). There is compelling evidence that adding to and subtracting from the Divine halachic system equally undermines that system, as either disrupts the perfect balance and precise calibration that is pivotal to the Torah's perfection and self-sufficiency (Toras Hashem temimah). [I hope to examine the character of bal tosif and bal tigra and their fascinating interrelationship elsewhere.] By using the phrase "lamah nigara", the delegation conveyed penetrating insight with respect to the vital contribution of korban Pesach as a singular spiritual opportunity, but also demonstrated keen appreciation for the role of mitzvot generally as indispensable and irreplaceable vehicles of avodat Hashem, and of the perfect balance that the Divine halachic system optimally provides. By invoking the passive and self-descriptive "lama nigara", the group proclaimed itself not merely at a loss or bereft of spiritual opportunity, but actually broadly diminished by this exclusion, no matter the cause or justification. More than an argument or proposal, Moshe was confronted by a simple and powerful expression of distress, anguish, by feelings of spiritually diminution engendered not only by the absence of a particularly pivotal spiritual opportunity, but by the further impact of that omission on the totality of avodat Hashem, indeed on the entire religious persona. The very capacity to experience and articulate "lama nigara" catalyzed Moshe Rabbeinu, ultimately justifying the decision of "megalgelin zehut al yedai zakei." [1] [2]
[1] While this "giraon" superficially appears to have been corrected by a "tosefet", further reflection and analysis dispels this conclusion. In fact "lamah nigara" was neutralized by a halachic institution that was sanctioned by Moshe Rabbeinu, endorsed by Hashem, and that was in any case revealed to be part of the initial corpus of halachah. Moreover, the sanctioned innovation of Pesach Sheni neutralized an exclusion based on ritual defilement, enabling a second opportunity to engage in a vital halachic practice of prime spiritual significance - an aseh whose neglect triggers a karet punishment.
[2] See also Bamidbar 27:4 and 36:3,4. It is surely no coincidence that the term "yigara" is also employed in the plea of the benot Tzelafchad, which also engendered a "megalgelin zechut al yedei zakai" response! Interestingly, it is also invoked ("venigrea", "yigarea", "yigara") to temper the effect of the benot Tzelafchad ruling, maintaining the equilibrium between competing halachic values, contributing further to the integrity of the system. In these contexts "giraon" may simply refer to subtraction, omission, exclusion as the term describes the absence of the noun (respectively-the "sheim avinu" or "nachalah") whose stature has been imperiled. Indeed, Onkelos consistently renders this usage as "yitmana". However, in light of our suggestion regarding "lamah nigara", we may project that this term always connotes a flawed, deficient or diminished state that challenges halachic integrity.