THE ENTIRE CONGREGATION OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL ARRIVED AT THE DESERT OF ZIN IN THE FIRST MONTH, AND THE PEOPLE SETTLED IN KADESH.  MIRIAM DIED THERE AND WAS BURIED THERE. THE CONGREGATION HAD NO WATER; SO THEY ASSEMBLED AGAINST MOSES AND AARON.

(Bamidbar 20:1-2)

 

Three good leaders had arisen for Israel, namely. Moses, Aaron and Miriam, and for their sake three good things were conferred [upon Israel], namely, the Well, the Pillar of Cloud and the Manna; the Well, for the merit of Miriam; the Pillar of Cloud for the merit of Aaron; the Manna for the merit of Moses. When Miriam died the well disappeared, as it is said, Miriam died there, and immediately follows [the verse], The congregation had no water; and it returned for the merit of the [latter] two. When Aaron died the clouds of glory disappeared, as it is written, And the Canaanite, the king of Arad heard. What news did he hear? He heard that Aaron had died, and that the clouds of glory had disappeared; he thought that he was free to make war on Israel. Therefore it is written, And all the congregation saw that Aaron was dead (Bamidbar 20). With reference to which R. Abahu said: Do not read, they saw [vayir-u] but, they were seen [vayyero-u]. This is also in accordance with the view of Resh Lakish who said: [The word] ki may be used in four different senses, namely, 'if', 'perhaps', 'but', 'because'. The two [the Well and the Cloud] returned because of the merit of Moses, but when Moses died all of them disappeared, as it is said, And I cut off the three shepherds in one month (Zachariah 11). Did they then all [three] die in one month? Did not Miriam die in Nisan, Aaron in Av and Moses in Adar? This therefore is meant to teach you that the three good gifts which were given because of their merit were nullified and they all disappeared in one month.

(Ta'anit 9a, Soncino translation)

 

R. Hiyya said: One who wishes to see Miriam's well should ascend to the top of the Carmel and gaze, when he will observe a kind of sieve in the sea, and that is Miriam's well.

(Shabbat 35a, Soncino translation)

 

According to the opinion of our Rabbis regarding Miriam's Well, they said that this rock was the boulder found in Horev, and therefore its waters which it would give ended now that its spring was sealed following Miriam's death. The Rabbis' intention regarding the well of Miriam was that there always existed a miraculous well, a source of living waters in any place which was desired. He raised it up for Ishmael in the wilderness of Beer Sheva, and it sprang from the rock that was there in Horev, and in the course of their other marches it sprang from a rock wherever they camped. When the righteous woman [Miriam] died the spring stopped [giving water], but now it was restarted by Moses to serve him as a source [of water] from within the very rock, and that is why it says to the rock as is known.

(RaMBaN 20:8)

 

Please let us pass through your land

Pinchas Leiser

Our parasha recounts two incidents in which the Israelites asked to pass through another land.

The Torah (Bamidbar 20:14-18) tells us how Moses first addressed the king of Edom:

Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Edom: "So says your brother, Israel, 'You know of all the hardship that has befallen us. Our fathers went down to Egypt, and we sojourned in Egypt for a long time. And the Egyptians mistreated us and our forefathers. We cried out to the Lord and He heard our voice. He sent an angel, and he took us out of Egypt, and now we are in Kadesh, a city on the edge of your border. Please let us pass through your land; we will not pass through fields or vineyards, nor will we drink well water. We will walk along the king's road, and we will turn neither to the right nor to the left until we have passed through your territory.'" Edom replied to him, "You shall not pass through me, lest I go out towards you with the sword!"

Edom refused to allow Israel to cross through its territory; so Israel turned away from it.

Moses asked the Edomite king to take into account all that this nation of slaves had gone through. They had just left Egypt, and given his promise that they would merely "pass through" Moses hoped that the king would agree to his request out of fraternal solidarity; after all, he had referred to the Israelites as your brother, an expression that echoes the expression your brother Esau used in parashat VaYishlah when Jacob returns from Haran. However, the king refuses and threatens to attack the Israelites if they try to cross his border.

The Israelites (is this the messengers' independent initiative, made without Moses' consent?) do not give up easily, and they reply: We will keep to the beaten path and if we or our cattle drink your water, we will pay for it. We ask only for passage on foot - it is but a small matter (verse 19).

Now the Edomite king does not merely refuse the request and threaten the Israelites, rather, he actually goes out to confront them in force: And he replied, "You shall not pass through! And Edom went out against them in heavy force, strongly armed (verse 20).

For some reason, the Israelites acquiesce to the king's refusal and do not fight him: So Edom would not let Israel cross their territory, and Israel turned away from them (verse 21).

The RaMBaN explains this "concession": "And Israel turned away from them - Scripture wrote briefly of this matter, because God had commanded them, be very careful, do not provoke them (Devarim 2:4-5), as Moses explained to them. Following God's command they turned way from them, since they had no other option given that he [the Edomite king] had not granted them permission to pass through." Indeed, there is yet another passage in which the Torah commands that the Edomites must receive special treatment: Do not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother (Devarim 23:8).

We are commanded to maintain brotherly relations with Edom, even though the Edomite king remained unimpressed by Moses' addressing him as your brother.

This situation repeats itself later in the parasha when the Israelites send a message to the Amorite king (21:21-26): Israel sent messengers to Sihon the king of the Amorites, saying: "Let me pass through your land. We will not turn into fields or vineyards, nor drink well water. We shall walk along the king's road, until we have passed through your territory." But Sihon did not permit Israel to pass through his territory, and Sihon gathered all his people and went out to the desert toward Israel. He arrived at Jahaz and fought against Israel. Israel smote him with the sword, and took possession of his land from Arnon to Jabbok, as far as the children of Ammon, for the border of the children of Ammon was strong. Israel took all these cities, and the Israelites dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites, in Heshbon and all its villages... For Heshbon was the city of Sihon, king of the Amorites, and he had fought against the first king of Moab, taking all his land from his possession, as far as Arnon.

There are a number of differences between this story and the earlier one involving Edom:

a) The Amorite king is not addressed in fraternal terms. In his commentary (see below) the NeTziV points out that the word na [please] is also not used in addressing the Amorites.

b) There is no dialogue here; Sihon immediately responds by going to war, a war that is won by the Israelites.

c) The Torah points out that Sihon had taken his land in battle from the first king of Moab, perhaps invalidating Sihon's sovereignty there.

The Torah offers two additional examples of people who did not treat the Israelites kindly; due to that behavior we are suppose we are commanded to keep them out of God's community: An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter the assembly of the Lord; even the tenth generation shall never enter the assembly of the Lord, because they did not greet you with bread and water on the way, when you left Egypt, and because he [the people of Moab] hired Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor in Aram Naharaim against you, to curse you (Devarim 23:4-5).

The RaMBaN argues at length against various explanations of the claim - which is not explicitly repeated anywhere else in Scripture - that they did not greet you with bread and water on the way. He offers his own explanation (see his commentary on 23:5), but it is not necessary to go into that here.

I think that there is room to consider the motives that lay behind the decision of various peoples not to show kindness to this nation of slaves that had left Egypt. It is true that the Torah never mentions these motives explicitly, but a passage from the Song of the Sea does describe the terror which the escapees from Egypt inspired in the minds of the peoples of the region: With Your loving kindness You led the people You redeemed; You led [them] with Your might to Your holy abode. People heard, they trembled; a shudder seized the inhabitants of Philistia. Then the chieftains of Edom were startled; [as for] the powerful men of Moab, trembling seized them; all the inhabitants of Canaan melted.

Pharaoh, King of Egypt also incites his people with fear of the Israelites, although he might be giving us an example of the kind of demagoguery used by any leader who wants to unite his people against the strangers dwelling in their midst: The children of Israel were fruitful and swarmed and increased and became very very strong, and the land became filled with them. A new king arose over Egypt, who did not know about Joseph. He said to his people, "Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more numerous and stronger than we are. Get ready, let us deal shrewdly with them, lest they increase, and a war befall us, and they join our enemies and depart from the land" (Shemot 1:7-10). Rashi interprets the words and depart from the land after the manner of the Sages: "Our Rabbis, however, interpreted [i. e., depicted Pharaoh] as a person who curses himself but ascribes his curse to others. And it is as if it were written: and we will depart from the land, and they will take possession of it."

We see, then, that the fear of strange peoples and alien individuals - that fear which we call the "demographic threat" - has a long history, be it whether leaders actually see it is a threat or whether they simply use it as a means to maintain control and unify the people against a common enemy. However, for some reason, Scripture tells us these stories about the Egyptians, about Ammon and Moab, about the king of Edom, and about Sihon, King of the Amorites.

Despite all of this, when the land was conquered the Israelites felt that they bore an obligation towards the Gibeonites, even though the latter had falsely claimed that they came from a distant place.

There is no need to write at length regarding the Torah's various commands to love the stranger and the prohibition against mistreating strangers.

Chapter twenty one of II Samuel tells us the following concerning the Gibeonites:

And the king called the Gibeonites and said to them-now the Gibeonites were not of the children of Israel, but of the remnant of the Amorites. Rashi, following the Sages, explains: "That is, they exhibited the characteristic of being merciless [which gave indication] that they are not of the seed of Abraham and were unworthy of joining Israel. As a result David decreed upon them that they may not enter the [Israelite] community. He said: This [Israelite] nation possesses three signs; they are compassionate, they are bashful, and they are benevolent. [Only] whosoever possesses these three virtues is worthy of joining it." (Judaica Press translation)

One might well ask whether the term "Israelites" refers to Jacob's biological descendants or whether it refers to those who walk in his path. If the term "Israelites" refers to a group of people who treat others, including strangers, compassionately, then it is not a designation that people merit at birth, but rather a mission with which we are charged.

Unfortunately, we have, of late, been witness to the terrible and degrading treatment of strangers and to the cold and hostile reception of war refugees seeking shelter in our land. None of this has benefited our honor; it causes one to question whether we are worthy of being called "Israelites" - performers of kind acts, compassionate people who are the children of compassionate people.

We have returned to the Land of Israel and established a sovereign state; I believe that this requires of us to treat all human beings born in the image of God with respect and to remember all the hardship that has befallen us in Egypt and in recent generations.

Pinchas Leiser, editor of Shabbat Shalom, is a psychologist.

 

Yiftah's Sin

And this was the mistake that Yiftah made with his daughter. He thought that just as a herem 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 [Yiftah 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 herem 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 Yiftah thought] -Heaven forbid! Therefore the Rabbis have said in Bereishit Rabbah (60:3) that [Yiftah] was not even obliged to pay the price of her market-value to the Temple treasury [as his vow was totally invalid], and he was punished for her [innocent] blood!

(RaMBaN Vayikra 27:29, Chavell translation)

 

Yiftah should not be seen as a national hero, nor should we be impressed by his act as if it were a matter of greatness and sacrifice brought about by patriotic fervor. His deed was cruel and indefensible. The Sages considered him an empty-headed and reckless ignoramus. There is no guarantee that mere enthusiasm will be properly directed towards the good. Enthusiasm undirected by good conscious and which is not reigned in by the Torah is likely to spell disaster. As the Midrash Tanhuma (Behukotai 5) says, "What caused Yiftah to lose his daughter? That he did not read from the Torah".

(Prof. Nehama Leibowitz, z"l, Iyyunim BeSefer Bamidbar )

 

Her paths are paths of pleasantness and all her ways are of peace

Now this is the Instruction for the slaughtered peace offering [shelamim]: That which is written, Its paths are paths of pleasantness and all its ways are of peace means that everything which is written in the Torah is written for the sake of peace. And even though the Torah speaks of wars, this too was written for the sake of peace. You find, that The Holy One, Blessed Be He, abolished his decree because of peace. When? When The Holy One, Blessed Be He said to Moses, When you set siege on a city for many days (Devarim 20:19), and all pertaining to that subject, The Holy One, Blessed Be He, said to him that no spoil may be taken, as is written, You are to devote them to destruction, yes, destruction (Ibid. 20:17) But Moses did not do so; rather he said, Shall I go and smite both he who sinned and he who sinned not? But I shall come upon them in peace, as is written, Now I sent messengers from the Wilderness of Kedemot... words of peace, saying, Let me cross through your land (Ibid. 2:26-27). When he saw that he (Sihon) did not come for peace, he smote him, as is written, So they struck him and his sons and all his people (Bamidbar 21:35). The Holy One, Blessed Be He, said: I said, You are to devote them to destruction, yes, destruction but you did not do so! By your life, as you spoke so will I do, as is written, When you approach a city to wage war against it, you shall call upon it to make peace (Devarim 20:10). Therefore it says, Its paths are paths of pleasantness and all its ways are of peace (Proverbs 3:17)

(Tanhuma Tsav, 3)

 

Let me pass through your land -Even though they had not been commanded to offer peace, they asked for peace. (Rashi, Bamidbar 21:22)

 

Let me pass through your land -They did not say please let us pass (Bamidbar 20:17) as they did to the king of Edom, for here they did not come to make a request but rather to announce that it was necessary. They told him because if he so wished they would not fight him, for Moses did not want to conquer Transjordan first [before conquering Canaan], since it says in Sifrei parashat Eikev that God was angry with David for having captured Syria before [capturing] he Land of Israel, and also because of a secret reason: that it caused great evil for a later generation.

(The NeTziV MiVolozhin's HaAmek Davar on Bamidbar 21:22)

 

The Sin of Moses

...God rebuked both Moses and Aaron in the most severe manner (in Deut. 32:51): You were unfaithful to Me, You did not uphold My sanctity - and that was why God decreed that they would die outside Canaan. We ask, How did Moses break faith with God? What was his sin? How did he not uphold God's sanctity?

These matters are not explained in the Torah. Those who studied and delved into the Torah raised many and varied hypotheses in attempting to find the meaning from the text itself, and could not find any... It is possible that this event has a most profound explanation. In any event, a Midrashic source states it - and I would like to relate to this. In order for us to understand the significance of the interpretation, we must realize one fact that is possibly decisive in every attempt to understand the affair: the fact that Moses himself is not aware that he sinned. On every occasion - and this is repeated three times in the Torah - when Moses pleads to God to annul His decree and to allow him to achieve the goal for which he worked for forty years - he never asks God for forgiveness for his sin, but merely asks for the decree to be annulled... Did Moses sin or did he not sin? If Moses, the most humble of all men, was not cognizant of having sinned, who are we to seek for sins in Moses? And why this decree against him?

And yet in the same Midrash, we are told that God told Moses in regard to his prayers for the decree to be annulled: "Moses, with what do you wish to enter the land?" The Midrash wishes to say, and explains it this way later: the generation that you led was not granted the privilege of entering the land - and you, the leader of that generation, wish to enter? This is analogous to a shepherd whose flock was torn to shreds by wild animals - can he then say: "I'm going home now"? In other words, the leader has a share in the sins of his generation, for the sins which were committed under his leadership, even if he himself is not - either legally or morally or by any other human criterion - responsible for the sins, the omissions, or the errors of those under him. Yet he has a share in their sins... And in modern day concepts, in the social and political spheres, we refer to this as the assumption of ministerial responsibility.

(From Notes and Remarks on the Weekly Parashah by Prof. Yeshayahu Leibowitz, Chemed Books, tr. S. Himelstein, pp. 146-49.)

 

 

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards its publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition distributed in Israel $700
• English edition distributed via email $ 100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc. Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in advance to appear in the English email.

In Israel, checks made out to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem 91043. Unfortunately there is no Israeli tax-exemption for local donations.

US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made through:

New Israel Fund, POB 91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588, USA

New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford Street, London W1H 2DD, Great Britain

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE NEW ISRAEL FUND IS NO LONGER ACCEPTING DONATIONS UNDER $100.

PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave., Suite 607, New York, New York 10017 USA

All contributions should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project.

 

About us

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of a civil society in Israel. It is committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts that have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of Israel 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 an imperative.

4,500 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 Israel and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il.