We all know the story of Rav Amram Chasida who underwent a difficult trial, and at the moment he saw that he was nearly failing, it was the middle of the night when everyone was sleeping. Rav Amram could have gone back to sleep, but he remained in his place and began to cry out, “A fire in Amram’s house! A fire in Amram’s house!” His students heard the cries and thought there was, chas v’shalom, a fire in their Rav’s house. They all immediately came running with buckets of water, but when they arrived, they saw that there was no fire. His students said to him, “Rabbeinu, you have shamed us!” Rav Amram answered them: “It is better that you be ashamed of Amram in this world and not be ashamed of him in the World to Come.”
This is the story. And everyone asks: Why did Rav Amram need to cry out and publicly announce his disgrace, thereby shaming himself and perhaps even his students?
The daughters of Tzelafchad demanded the portion of their father (27:3): ’לו היה לא מתובנים בחטאו כי קרח בעדת ...היה לא והוא במדבר מת אבינו’ - “Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not... among the assembly of Korach, but died for his own sin, and he had no sons.” Their request was, “Why should our father’s name be diminished... give us a possession among our father’s brothers.” Moshe Rabbeinu did not know what to rule, but HaKadosh Baruch Hu said (27:7), ‘נתון ,דוברות צלפחד בנות כן נחלה אחוזת להם תתן’ - “The daughters of Tzelafchad speak correctly—you shall surely give them a possession of inheritance.” Rashi explains: “This teaches that their eyes saw what the eye of Moshe did not see.”
And this is astonishing: In what merit did the daughters of Tzelafchad see what Moshe did not see? And furthermore, why was this section written in their name in the Torah?
Chazal say that Tzelafchad was the “wood-gatherer” who was executed for the sin of desecrating Shabbos. And Chazal have said, “If Israel would only keep two Shabbosim, they would immediately be redeemed.” And this Tzelafchad was the cause that the Jewish people were not redeemed. Seemingly, his daughters should have hidden his identity and not said, “He died for his sin.” But since their entire purpose was that their father’s name not be diminished, that some remembrance of him should remain, therefore they preferred to publicize his name—even if it would bring them shame. And since they were willing to be shamed—they merited those great qualities.
So too, Rav Amram—he knew it was better to be ashamed in this world, and indeed, he merited that until this day we call him “Rav Amram Chasida”! We are not required to be ashamed, but when one fulfills a mitzvah with self-sacrifice—even at the price of disgrace—its virtue and the reward for it are immeasurable!
- Tiv HaTorah - Pinchas
