Chukat 5772 – Gilayon #755
(link to original page)
Click here to
receive the weekly parsha by email each week.
Moshe lifted up his hand, and smote the rock with his rod twice and water came
forth abundantly, and the congregation and their cattle drank"
The Striking of the Boulder- Response Out Of Desperation or
Fulfillment of God's Command?
Have we the right to
investigate the feelings of Moshe our teacher at that moment? What was in the
heart of 'the servant of God' – about whom God himself testified "in
all my house, trusted is he?" What had distracted him from
properly discharging his mission?
We might offer the
following suggestion: Moshe took the staff from the tabernacle where it had
stood for almost forty years. He took the staff in his hand as God had commanded,
and, holding this symbol of his divine mission, he proceeded to gather the
people. Here he stands once again – after forty years – with the staff of God
in his hand. At the beginning of his mission forty years earlier, he
needed the staff in order to publicly certify his appointment. Now he is pained
by the thought that in all those forty years, despite all he had done for them,
he had not succeeded in winning the people's trust. In the bitterness of this
emotion, he forgot his mission, and instead of talking softly to the boulder,
he spoke harsh words of admonition. In the storm of his feelings, he struck the
(From the commentary
of Rabbi Shimshon Rafael Hirsch on Bemidbar 20:11)
refused to give
passage through his border…
You shall not abhor the Edomite for he is your brother.
honor of my granddaughter Hila Miriam bat Yael and Imri Nitnas
on 10 Adar 5772,
my grandson Alon Yisrael ben Yael and Nati Leiser,
on 14 Iyar 5772
The Torah tells us about number of events and encounters between
the children of
other nations at the time of the exodus from
and leading up to their entrance into the
The Torah tells us at the beginning of Parashat Beshalach "God
led them not by the way of the land of the Plishtim although that was near; for
God said: Lest the people regret when they see war and they return to
The first encounter, except for when the Egyptians chased after
the children of Israel before the parting of the Red Sea in which there was a
need for divine intervention in order to release the nation from fear of Egypt
without war, was the encounter with Amalek. It is interesting to point out that this
encounter with Amalek took place in Refidim, after the nation complained about
the lack of water. Immediately afterwards the Torah tells us: "And Amalek
came and fought against
in Refidim", and the author of the Midrash Tanchuma Beshalach Chapter 25
expounds on the word Refidim: "Refidim can only mean that they slackened
their grip on the Torah, thus Amalek came upon them". Amalek is understood
here also as someone who takes advantage of the weakness of the enslaved nation
who just now came out of
But here, in contrast to the events at the Red Sea, the children of
and were victorious over Amalek.
During the first two years of the journey through the wilderness,
The Torah does not tell us of any additional encounter between the children of
In Parashat Shlach, the spies manage to incite in the generation
of the wilderness fear of war against the residents of the land: "We are
not able to go up against the people for they are stronger than we". On
account of their weakness, it was decreed that the children of
another forty years until all those who left
to enter the land.
In our parasha, we witness again a hostile encounter between the
and another nation, and this is the language of the verse:
long time; and the Egyptians dealt ill with us and our fathers; and when we
cried to the Lord, He heard our voice, and sent an angel, and brought us forth
out of Egypt; and, behold, we are in Kadesh, a city at the edge of your border.
through field or through vineyard, neither will we drink of the water of the
wells; we will go along the king's highway, we will not turn aside to the right
by the highway; and if we drink of your water, I and my cattle, then will I
passage through his border; wherefore
Moshe attempts to turn toward "his brother"
even in this instance the war between the children of
This parasha, in which Moshe requests passage through
answered negatively, occurs between the story of "the waters of Meriva"
(in which there is again a lack of water, after the death of Miriam. In this
story, the people suffer from despair, and Moshe strikes the rock instead of
speaking to it and the decree is given that Moshe and Aharon will not enter the
land of Israel) and the story of Aharon's death.
After Aharon's death, the Canaanite King Ered starts a war with
he apparently feels terrorized.
makes a vow to God, wages battle and is victorious in this war.
The next war, too, following the refusal of Sichon the king of the
requests passage through his land, concludes with
of the Amorite cities. The children of
also won the war against Og king of the
who initiated a war.
When Balak the Moabite king saw that all the local nations who
attempted to fight
were beaten, he hires the services of Balam who may not be successful in
yet nevertheless is successful in seducing large portions of the nation to have
licentious relations with the daughters of Moav and worship the baal peor. This
is not a classic victory of battle, but it does constitute the cause of a
severe crisis within the people of
After the difficult plague in which 24,000 people among
Moshe is commanded to enlist the people in a war of revenge against Midian. In
this war, the kings of Midian are killed as well as Balam ben Be'or.
In contrast, Moshe is commanded not to wage war against Ammon and
Moav because their lands were given to the descendants of
Beyond the various stories that are told about the animosity that
prevailed between the children of
interesting to notice the differential manner in which the Torah relates to
these enemies and commands us to respond to them.
Concerning the Egyptians, who enslaved the people
for hundreds of years, it is stated: "You shall not abhor an Egyptian,
because you were a stranger in his land" (Devarim 23:8).
As we know, Amalek becomes the ultimate eternal enemy about whom
it is said: "Utterly erase the memory of Amalek" and also "It is
an eternal war for the Lord against Amalek from generation to generation".
Also in relation to the Edomite, although he did not allow us to
pass through his land, and he even came out to war against us, we are commanded
to relate to him as we do towards the Egyptians: "You shall not abhor an
Edomite, for he is your brother" (Devarim 23:8).
In contrast, concerning the Ammonites and Moabites it is said "An
Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of the Lord even to the
tenth generation shall none of them enter into the assembly of the Lord for
ever. Because they met you not with bread and with water in the way, when you
came forth out of
and because they hired against you Balam the son of Be'or from Petor Aram
Naharayim, to curse you. Nevertheless the Lord your God would not hearken unto
Balam. But the Lord your God turned the curse into a blessing for you, because
the Lord your God loved you. You shall not seek their peace nor their
prosperity all your days for ever" (Devarim 23:4-7).
It is interesting to point out that seemingly Ammon and Moav
cannot enter the assembly of God although there is no such comprehensive
who behaved in a similar manner. More than that, there is no explicit mention
in the Torah stating that Ammon or Moav did not greet the children of
bread and water. The Torah only tells us that the children of
Ammon and Moav because their land was promised to
The Ramban (23:5) explains why Ammon and Moav are excluded from
the "assembly of God", and these are his words:
It seems to me that the Torah distances these two brothers who
were recipients of Avraham's loving kindness, for he saved their father and
mother from destruction and captivity (Bereshit 14:16), and in his merit
God sent them out from the upheaval (Bereshit 18:29) and they were
obligated to treat Israel well, yet they treated them badly; The first hired
Balam ben Be'or against him- these were the Moabites, and the other did not
greet them with bread and water when they approached nearby, as it is stated (Devarim
"'You are today to pass over the border of Moav, even Ar, and when you
come over against the children of Ammon" and behold the verse warns them (Devarim
them not, nor contend with them" and they did not greet them at all, as
the verse would have written "as the children of Esav, the Moabites, and
Ammonites did to me", but it did not mention Ammon, who did not meet them.
Behold, in this respect Ammon acted more wickedly than the others, for the
children of Esav and the Moabites took bread and water out from their borders
when they knew that
was warned against contending with them, yet Ammon did not want to do so. This
is the reason behind the phrase "who did not greet": they did not go
out to greet them with bread or water as the others did, thus the verse names "Ammonite"
first and mentions his sin in not greeting them first, and afterwards mentions
the Moabite and his sin.
Concerning the preferential relationship which the Egyptians and
Edomites merit, Rashi writes (Devarim 23:8-9): You shall not abhor an Edomite – completely,
although it would be fitting for you to abhor him for he came out to meet you
with sword. You shall not abhor an Egyptian- entirely, although they threw your
male children into the
were your lodging place when you were in need, therefore: Children who are born
to them to the third generation etc…. and the other nations are permitted
immediately, thus you may learn that [the punishment] is more severe for
the person who causes another to sin than it is for one who kills another
person, for the one who kills him kills him in this world, while the one who
causes him to sin takes him out of this world and the world to come. Therefore
greeted them with sword shall not be abhorred, nor the Egyptians who drowned
them, yet those who caused them to sin shall be abhorred.
Rashi, then, not in accordance with the Ramban who explains the
severity of the punishment for Ammon and Moav by saying that they were
obligated to treat us with loving kindness because they were saved in the merit
of our forefather Avraham, sees a greater danger in the nation that harms the
soul of the people that he finds in the nation who fights against us. It is not
clear how Ammon caused
The Netziv, in his commentary "Ha’emek Davar" does not
hang the matter particularly upon the merit of the Edomite and the Egyptian,
but rather he sees in this relationship an opportunity for cultivating elevated
character traits. This is his wording:
For he is your brother": The Holy One Blessed Be He wanted to
to the sublime level of the soul, and the more elevated a soul is, he draws
close those who are near him. Thus he reminded him to remember their
brotherhood with the children of
stranger in his land": This, too, is the way of the sublime soul to bestow
goodness and not to be ungrateful and called a scoundrel. Thus the Holy One
Blessed Be He habituates us to this mitzva.
On the practical,
halakhic plane, our Sages neutralized the scope of these restrictions. For
example: At first, they decreed that the restriction of Ammonites and Moabites
joining the assembly of God should apply only to the males, and they expounded:
Ammoni (male) and not Ammonit (female), Moavi (male) and not Moavit (female)"
(Yevamot 69A). A more comprehensive neutralization of the restriction is cited
in the statements of Rabbi Yehoshua (Brachot 28A): "But are
Ammon and Moav sitting in their proper places? Sanherev the king of Ashur
already came and mixed up all the nations". Meaning: We cannot correlate
the nations from ancient days with latter day nations that have the same name.
How, then, shall we
relate to the differences in our relations towards various nations described in
the scriptures? I think that in all the attempts of the Torah commentators
to explain the differences between the relations with various nations in the
Torah, one should relate on the level of "seek and you shall be rewarded",
since they raise various criteria that are likely to be useful to us when we
come to determine, even in our day, our relations with nations who cause us
harm in various forms. It could be that it is possible to learn from here that
there is a difference between relations of animosity or hostility that follows
from opposing interests or political quarrels even if they are accompanied by
difficult violence and relationships of essential hatred that flow from racist
ideology. Similarly, the Netziv teaches us that hatred is not a desirable
quality of the soul and one must rise above feelings of vengefulness.
The way of our Sages
also makes it possible for us to believe in the possibility of people and
nations to change and not to drag animosity and hostility on for many
generations, but rather to remember that "the descendants of Haman taught
Torah in Bnei Brak, and the descendants of Sisra taught children in Jerusalem,
and the descendants of Sanheriv gave public Torah expositions" (Gittin
to rise above and forgive.
Leiser, Editor of Shabbat Shalom, Psychologist
"When a man dies in a tent…" (Bemidbar 19:14)
[Translator's note: To understand this passage from Sifri, it is
helpful to compare two verses in Hebrew: Num.19:14 Zot hatorah adam ki yamut
baohel… and 2 Sam 7:19 vzot torat ha-adam…]
"You shall die on the mountain you are about to ascend" (Deut.32:50) Moses said: Master
of the Universe, why do I have to die an untimely death? They will say Moses
took us out of
and split the sea and gave us the Torah, and the manna, and brought the quail,
and performed miracles and wonders… but I still have much left to do. God
responded: Moses, every man (adam) must die, as it is said, "This is the
law [zot hatorah] :When a man [Heb. adam] dies in a tent" ; and it says, (2
"This is the law, after the manner of a great man, O Lord God" [Heb.
v'zot torat ha-adam] The accompanying angels said to the Holy One Blessed be
He: Master of the Universe, why did the first man, Adam, die? He answered: He
did not follow My instructions. They responded: And did Moses follow Your
instructions? God said to them: every man (adam) must die, as it says in
Numbers 19:14, "This is the law: When a man [adam] dies [in a tent]…"
(Sifri, Haazinu, section 339)
Can a serpent kill – can a serpent revive?
Hezkiyahu, King of Judea, did four things, and his thought
concurred with of the Omnipresent: He hid a book of remedies, and his thought
concurred with of the Omnipresent; he crushed the copper serpent, and his
thought concurred with of the Omnipresent…
D'Rabbi Natan, 2:4)
The Holy One,
Blessed Be He, said to him: "Make yourself a burning-snake… So Moshe
made a viper of copper… (Bemidbar 21:8-9) And thus stood the
copper serpent; whenever a person was bitten, he would look upon it and be healed.
Until Hezkiyahu reigned and saw
going astray after it. He said; Now whoever is in need of cure goes to this and
ignores The Holy One, Blessed Be He. He took it away, as is written "And
he crushed the copper serpent etc." (II
Kings 18:4) People began to protest: That which Moshe established you
demolish? He replied: Whoever is need of cure, let him look to The Holy One,
Blessed Be He, and he will be cured, as is written "Men look to Him and
are radiant; let their faces not be downcast."
Bereishit, Chap 11)
The sin of jeftah
…And this was the mistake that Jeftah made with his daughter.
For he thought that just as a cheirem ["doomed" object] of the chief
of Israel is valid and takes effect to put [certain] people to death, and[also] anyone who transgresses it is liable to the death penalty, so [Jeftah
thought] that if he uttered a vow at a time of war, to make an offering of a
certain person or persons, the vow is valid; but he did not know that a cheirem
declared by the king and Sanhedrin is valid [only] regarding the destruction of
rebels, or against one who transgresses their decrees and ordinances. But that
a vow should take effect to make a burnt-offering of something not appropriate
for God [as Jeftah thought] – Heaven forbid! Therefore the Rabbis have said in
Bereshit Rabbah that [Jeftah] was not even obliged to pay the price of [an
amount equivalent to his daughter's] value to the Temple treasury [as his vow
was totally invalid], and he was punished for her [innocent] blood!
(Ramban on Lev.27:29, tr.Chavel)
Jeftah is not to be regarded as a national hero. His deed is not
to be admired as one of self-sacrifice and greatness prompted by patriotic
feeling. It was a cruel and unwarranted deed. We may rely on our Sages who saw
him as an ignorant and unlettered person, a boor, empty, and rash. Enthusiasm
by itself is no guarantee of the desirability of a cause. Enthusiasm that is
not backed by conscience and the self-discipline of Torah is liable to bring
disaster. 'What caused Jeftah to take the life of his own daughter? His failure
to read and understand Torah.'
(From Studies in Bamidbar by Nehama Leibowitz, tr. A. Newman,
Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of a civil
It is committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice,
concepts that have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.
Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the
and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes that Jews
have both the religious and the national obligation to support the pursuit of
peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a fair and
just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an option but
copies of a 4-page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are
written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to
over 350 synagogues in
and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il.
Shalom is available on our website: www.netivot-shalom.org.il
For responses and arranging to write for Shabbat Shalom: