FOR HE SHALL REMAIN IN HIS CITY OF REFUGE UNTIL THE HIGH PRIEST DIES, AND ONLY AFTER THE HIGH PRIEST HAS DIED, MAY THE MURDERER RETURN TO THE LAND WHICH IS HIS POSSESSION.

(Bamidbar 35:28)

 

until the High Priest... dies For he causes the Divine Presence to rest upon Israel and thus prolongs their lives, whereas the murderer causes the Divine Presence to withdraw from Israel and thus shortens their lives. He is not worthy of standing before the High Priest. Another interpretation: Because the High Priest should have prayed that such a misfortune not befall Israel during his lifetime.

(Rashi 35:25)

 

The accidental manslayer was exiled in order to calm the blood-avenger. Exile kept the avenger from seeing the one who caused the accident, which would have enraged him because of his kinsman's death. In his anger he would have failed to distinguish between accidental and intentional [killing] and would be drawn to spill innocent blood. Scripture made his return dependent upon the death of the High Priest, who was the most honored of Israelites and beloved by all of Israel. There is a psychological reason why that [death of the High Priest] would calm the blood-avenger: the new incident causes the old to be forgotten and great trouble silences lesser troubles. Sorrow overcomes the heart and soothes rage. One finds solace for one's own individual problems in the problems of the community. Now comes a new situation - the death of the High Priest. The entire nation is sorry and troubled, and this will soothe the avenger's anger. He will forget what befell him or take notice of the difference between the accidental and the premeditated.

(R. Yitzhak Shemuel Reggio 35:25)

 

This is the statute of the Torah

Moshe Lanzman

Eleazar the kohen said to the soldiers returning from battle, "This is the statute of the Torah that the Lord commanded Moses... whatever is used in fire you shall pass through fire and then it will be clean; it must, however, [also] be cleansed with sprinkling water, and whatever is not used in fire you shall pass through water.

This is the second time that the Torah uses the expression hukkat hatorah ["statute of the Torah"]. The first time was in connection with the red heifer. There Rashi comments:

Because Satan and the nations of the world taunt Israel, saying, "What is this commandment, and what purpose does it have?" Therefore, the Torah uses the term "statute." I have decreed it; You have no right to challenge it. (Rashi on Bamidbar 19:2, Judaica Pres translation)

The words hukkat hatorah make a clear and direct demand for belief. At times, the Patriarchs had been called on to demonstrate their faith, as in Abraham's trial of the Akeda, but this is the first instance in which the nation, including future generations, faced such a demand. The call to faith offers an opportunity to think about faith and its place in our lives as thinking creatures endowed with critical faculties.

It seems to me that the essence of faith in Judaism involves a deep feeling of contradiction. On the one hand, there is rational, critical thought, which grants us the basic feeling of reality's existence. On the other hand, there is the categorical imperative of our direct experience of an entity that surpasses our understanding.

This dialectical relationship is vital to human development. Small children investigate both themselves and the world, since their acquaintance with the world includes unfathomable experiences that invite investigation. If children learn to depend both upon critical thinking as well as upon direct experience, they become hungry for development; they are open to the world and unafraid of that which is beyond them. If, however, they learn to fear this dialectic, they recoil from the new and lean upon the familiar in order to overcome their fear of the unknown.

HaRav Dessler called this developmental situation "the point of decision." In the course of one's life, one encounters many situations in which the known and the unknown are mixed up together. Sometimes one must choose one's way in such situations. When the situation is familiar and one has already been through it in the past and is satisfied with past decisions made in such situations, choosing is quicker and easier. However, when the situation is new and includes unfamiliar and distressing elements that give one no rest, then one has reached a "point of decision." If such a person is overcome by anxiety, he deludes himself into thinking that the situation is familiar and chooses the familiar and the accepted route. However, if the person is deeply aware of the point of decision and remains connected to the fundamental freedom of choice, he will take a risk and prepare himself for the consequences. That is the kind of faith that can propel one forward into a fuller humanity.

Agnon's story "The Abduction," which appears as a chapter in Chapters from the Book of the State, illustrates choice born of fear as opposed to choice born of freedom. Agnon tells of a state that is at the mercy of orators. It is never delivered from its woes because every time an important problem comes up the orators gather together and make speeches until the problem passes and is replaced by an even worse problem. It should be mentioned that Agnon wrote this story about twenty years before the creation of the State of Israel, so that it contains a spark of prophecy.

The leading orator, Mr. Shrienholtz, is kidnapped by a desperate gang of youths on his way to delivering an important speech. When he complains about the injustice committed against him, the boys answer him: "God forbid that we should wish evil to anyone, but many troubles have come upon the state and we have no doubt that most of them arise because we spend the better part of our days in lectures and we never get around to action. If we are incapable of turning the public's attention away from the speechifiers than we must remove the speechifiers from the public in order that each person's minds be free to think on its own about how he spends his days and years."

Shrienholtz is amazed when he realizes that they intend to hold him until after the occasion of the scheduled speech. Two of his guards suggest a number of possibilities that could help him pass the time until after the speech's scheduled hour. They ask him, "Which do you choose, sir?" He answers: "I choose that lightning come forth from heaven and destroy the both of you!" In his anxiety, Shrienholtz retreats to the developmental world in which he always thought that he could control even the forces of nature with his oratorical powers. By the way, the story ends on an optimistic note that shows Shrienholtz is not completely imprisoned by his fearful reactions. I recommend that people should study this short and wonderful story.

So - the necessity of dealing with a point of choice can bring one to employ either their fear or their freedom. The manner in which one makes this choice influences the manner in which he contends with the tension arising from the contradiction between rational-critical thought and the direct experience of the unknown. Often, the fearful reaction causes a person to make one of two choices: to choose rationally, and thus lose the direct climactic experience represented by artistic creativity, or to choose direct experience at the expense of forfeiting rationalism, thus losing the opportunity to deeply internalize the experience into one's essence through the struggle to achieve complete understanding of the experience to the greatest extent possible. Choice from freedom allows a person to continue - exactly like a child gradually making his first acquaintance with the world - to courageously confront his choice and sometimes to even achieve a solution that integrates the two components into a new and exciting creation.

Therefore, it is a mistake to claim that there is no choice in faith. On the contrary - complete faith is impossible without freedom.

Dr. Moshe Lanzman is a school and developmental psychologist

 

And Moses spoke to the leaders of the tribes

There is no doubt that all of the commandments including all of their principles and details were spoken to Moses at Sinai. However, Moses did not teach them immediately, but rather at the appropriate times and places. There was no reason for him to teach anyone the laws of the annulment of vows while he was still alive because he, may peace be upon him, served as the unique expert of his generation, annulling vows and oaths whenever necessary. Now, however, his death was nearing, and he saw fit to teach the leaders of the people the laws of the annulment of vows, for they would replace him in this matter. That is why he only commanded the leaders of the tribes; there was no reason to teach the laws of vows to all of the Israelites. It may have even been necessary to hide these laws from them lest they take to making oaths frivolously, but he did teach the law to the tribal leaders.

(R. Yitzhak Reggio, Bamidbar 30:2)

 

The vengeance of Children of Israel - the Vengeance of God?

Seek vengeance, the vengeance of the Children of Israel... We have already noted in our commentary on Bereishit 4:15 the relationship of nakam (revenge) to koom (stand)... vengeance reestablishes justice which was trampled by iniquitous feet, or it lifts up the personality that was degraded to dust. The avenger identifies with that which he desires to raise up. From this we can understand the preposition mem - Avenge the Israelite people from the Midianites. The goal is not to subdue the enemy and to give them their just deserts; had the Torah wished to say that, it would have used the grammatical form for take vengeance against - (using the preposition bet). But the goal is to return and raise up Israel from the Midianites, to liberate her spiritually and morally and to free her from the fear of their craftiness.

(Rabbi S. R. Hirsch on Bamidbar 31:2)

 

Expansion of Boundaries: Halutziut [pioneering] or Concern for Possessions

For the western boundary you shall have the coast of the great sea; that shall serve as your western boundary.

(Bamidbar 34:6)

 

Among the Sons of Gad and the Sons of Reuben were many wealthy people, and they possessed much livestock and they loved their possessions, and therefore they settled outside the land, and they separated themselves from their brothers for the sake of the property. Therefore they were first of the tribes to go into exile, as is written (I Chronicles 5) And they exiled them, the Reubenites, and the Danites, and half the tribe of Menasheh.

(Rabeinu Behayey on Bamidbar 32:2)

 

This is to say, their adding territory to the Land of Israel was in no way a matter of halutziut; rather, they were concerned about their own property. "Therefore they were exiled first"... The series of dispersions began with the exiling of the tribes of Reuben and half of Menasheh which had settled on the eastern side of the Jordan, and since these tribes had split from their brothers because of their property, they were the first to go into exile.

(Y. Leibowitz: Sheva Shanim shel Sihot al Parashiyot ha'Shavu'a p. 746)

 

You shall not defile the land in which you live, for I the Lord abide among the Israelite people.

 (Bamidbar 35:34)

 

You shall not defile: Corruption will not defile the Land. Alternatively, it may be read as a command, since I abide in it, and not for the land's sake, rather for the Israelites' sakes, that is why it says abide among the Israelite people.

(Ibn Ezra loc. cit)

 

...however, if the People Israel does not in its essence and behavior constitute a dwelling place for the Divine Presence, then clearly the Land will also not serve as a dwelling place for the Divine Presence. It should be pointed out that none of the long process during which Israel became a nation and was given the Torah took place in the Land, but rather in the course of the journey towards the Land. In other words, Israel did not become the Lord's nation because it entered the Land. The opposite is true: in consequence of its being the Lord's nation, Israel entered the Land.

(Y. Leibowitz: Sheva Shanim shel Sihot al Parashat HaShavu'a pg. 754)

 

And you shall not corrupt the land - do not cause the Land to be corrupted for you. For the blood corrupts Rabbi Yoshiya says: It [yahanif = corrupt] is an acronym [for] yahon af [will become angered] regarding the Land. The land cannot be atoned for - Why does it say this? Because it says, and there [in the valley,] they shall decapitate the calf (Devarim 21:4). Should I understand that if the murderer is found after the calf is decapitated that he would go unpunished? We learn the answer from the verse, The land cannot be atoned for. The land cannot be atoned for - the calf is like the man [the High Priest upon whose death the accidental murderer returns from exile], just as [punishment] is postponed by the man, so too it is [merely] postponed by the calf. You shall not defile the land - it is pure of defilement, while all other lands are not pure of defilement. Abide among the Israelite people - could [He abide] among a [mere] hundred or among a [mere] thousand [people]? The verse teaches us: among the Israelite people. Some say, among each individual tribe, while others say, among all the tribes [together]. Rabbi Nehorai says: for I the Lord abide [among the Israelite people] - even in exile? The verse teaches us: in the land. [Does God dwell] in the Land even while you are in exile? The verse teaches us, among the Israelite people - when the Israelites are in the Land and not when they are out of the Land. You shall not defile the land - Scripture tells us that bloodshed defiles the Land and expels the Divine Presence. It was because of bloodshed that the Temple was destroyed. There was an incident involving two priests who were of equal status and who were running and ascending the ramp [of the altar]. One of them entered the space of four cubits around the other - he took a knife and stabbed him in the heart. Rabbi Zadok stood on the steps of the hall and said: Our brothers, the House of Israel, listen! It says: If someone slain is found in the land... your elders and magistrates shall go out... (Devarim 21:1,2). On whose behalf shall we bring the eglah arufa (decapitated calf)? For the city or for the Temple?

The whole assembled public began to cry. Next, the boy's father came and said to them: Our brothers, I am [telling you of your] atonement, my son is still convulsing, and the knife has not been ritually defiled. This teaches us that they were more concerned with the ritual purity of objects than they were with blood shed. And so it says, he also spilt much innocent blood, etc. (II Kings 21:16). From this they said: The sin of bloodshed causes the Divine Presence to leave Israel and defiles the Temple.

(Yalkut Shimoni Bamidbar 35, 788)

 

I now establish my covenant with you (Bereishit 9:9) - On the condition that you do not shed innocent blood, I will establish my covenant with you not to destroy the earth again. However, the shedding of innocent blood will ruin the land, as it says, you shall not pollute the land, and the land can have no expiation, etc., but for all other transgressions only the perpetrator shall be struck but the land will not [be affected].

(Seforno Bereishit 9:9)

 

 

 

 

 

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.

5,000 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.