THE DESCENDANTS OF GAD AND THE DESCENDANTS OF REUBEN CAME, AND THEY SPOKE TO MOSES AND TO ELEAZAR THE PRIEST AND TO THE PRINCES OF THE COMMUNITY, SAYING, "...THE LAND THAT THE LORD STRUCK DOWN BEFORE THE CONGREGATION OF ISRAEL IS A LAND FOR LIVESTOCK, AND YOUR SERVANTS HAVE LIVESTOCK." THEY SAID, "IF IT PLEASES YOU, LET THIS LAND BE GIVEN TO YOUR SERVANTS AS A HERITAGE; DO NOT TAKE US ACROSS THE JORDAN."...THEY APPROACHED HIM AND SAID, "WE WILL BUILD SHEEPFOLDS FOR OUR LIVESTOCK HERE AND CITIES FOR OUR CHILDREN.

(Bamidbar 32)

 

We shall build sheepfolds for our livestock here They were more concerned about their possessions than about their sons and daughters, since they mentioned their livestock before [mentioning] their children. Moses said to them, "Not so! Treat the fundamental as a fundamental, and the matter of secondary importance as a matter of secondary importance. First build cities for your children, and afterwards, enclosures for your sheep."

(Rashi on Bamidbar 32:16, Judaica Press translation)

 

And you shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your means.

(Devarim 6:5)

 

One is required to recite a blessing on evil events just as one recites a blessing on good events, for it is said, And you shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your means.

With all your heart - with both your inclinations, the good inclination and the evil inclination.

And with all your soul - even if He takes your soul.

And with all your means - with all your wealth. Another view: With all your means [me'odekha] - For every measure and measure [mida umida] that He grants you, you should be very, very [me'od me'od] thankful.

(Mishnah Berakhot 9:5)

 

And you shall love the Lord, your God etc. It has been taught: R. Eliezer says: If it says, with all your soul, why should it also say, with all your means, and if it says with all your means, why should it also say, with all your soul? Should there be a man who values his life more than his money, for him it says; with all your soul; and should there be a man who values his money more than his life, for him it says, with all your means.

(Berakhot 61b)

 

The Legal Sublimation of Anger

Moshe Meir

Just as they are about to complete their trek to the Land of Israel, the Children of Gad and the Children of Reuben turn to Moses with a surprising request:

"Ataroth, Dibon, Jazer, and Nimrah, Heshbon, Elealeh, Sebam, Nebo, and Beon, the land that the Lord struck down before the congregation of Israel is a land for livestock, and your servants have livestock." They said, "If it pleases you, let this land be given to your servants as a heritage; do not take us across the Jordan."

Moses' shock is unbearable. How can they give up the goal of the whole journey for the sake of economic advantages? It is all the more painful, given that Moses himself will not be allowed to cross the Jordan:

I entreated the Lord at that time, saying, "O Lord God, You have begun to show Your servant Your greatness and Your strong hand, for who is [like] God in heaven or on earth who can do as Your deeds and Your might? Pray let me cross over and see the good land that is on the other side of the Jordan, this good mountain and the Lebanon." But the Lord was angry with me because of you, and He did not listen to me, and the Lord said to me, "It is enough for you; speak to Me no more regarding this matter. Go up to the top of the hill and lift up your eyes westward and northward and southward and eastward and see with your eyes, for you shall not cross this Jordan. But command Joshua and strengthen him and encourage him, for he will cross over before this people, and he will make them inherit the land which you will see. (Devarim 3)

Moses is furious; in his anger he jumbles together two counterarguments:

"Shall your brethren go to war while you stay here? Why do you discourage the children of Israel from crossing over to the land which the Lord has given them?

The children of Gad and Reuben accept his criticism and attempt to reformulate their request:

They approached him and said, "We will build sheepfolds for our livestock here and cities for our children. We will then arm ourselves quickly [and go] before the children of Israel until we have brought them to their place. Our children will reside in the fortified cities on account of the inhabitants of the land.

Moses accepts the new request, offering his own restatement of it:

If you do this thing, if you arm yourselves for battle before the Lord, and your armed force crosses the Jordan before the Lord until He has driven out His enemies before Him, and the Land will be conquered before the Lord, afterwards you may return, and you shall be freed [of your obligation] from the Lord and from Israel, and this land will become your heritage before the Lord.

Moses' reformulation of the request points to the difference between the world view of the children of Gad and Reuben, who see themselves as standing before the Israelite nation, and that of Moses, who stands before God. Now the two sides have reached agreement, a summary of which is presented to the leaders of the people:

"If the descendants of Gad and Reuben cross the Jordan with you before the Lord, and the Land is conquered before you, you shall give them the land of Gilead as a heritage. But if they do not cross over with you armed [for battle], they shall receive a possession among you in the land of Canaan."

The stipulation is clearly stated in a double format; it reflects all of the anger and distrust that Moses felt towards the tribes who had betrayed his dream. The Sages used these conditional statements as a paradigm for the formulation of conditional statements in law:

From where do we learn about all conditional statements? From the stipulations of the Children of Gad and the Children of Reuben. (Gittin 75a)

For any stipulation to be halakhically valid it must fulfill three criteria learned from the stipulations of Children of Gad and the Children of Reuben. First - it must be a double conditional ["If you do X, then X will happen; if you don't do X then Y will not happen"], and the principle that "the positive conditional implies the negative conditional" must not be applied. Second - the conditional term must precede the resulting act ["if" precedes "you shall give"]. Third - the positive conditional precedes the negative one ["If the descendants of Gad and Reuben cross" precedes, "But if they do not cross"].

Anger born of disappointment and feelings of betrayal can give rise to aggressive and violent deeds. A culture's power finds expression in the restraint of human inclinations, even when they are justified. When anger is transformed into a binding legal framework the crisis is transformed into an eternal institution of law. It allows Moses to accept the children of Gad and Reuben despite his feelings of alienation from them.

Moses spoke to the heads of the tribes of the children of Israel, saying: This is the thing the Lord has commanded. (Bamidbar 30:2)

This is the thing the Lord has commanded - It is not stated where Moses was told this, as occurs in several other prophecies, such as: Thus said the Lord concerning the plague of locusts (Shemot 10:3), and, Thus says the Lord: "At around midnight..." (Shemot 11:4), and, Let each man wear his sword on his thigh in connection with the calf (Shemot 32:27), and many other prophets prophesized with [the words], Thus says the Lord but we don't know where it was said. Of this it is said: He fulfills the word of His servant. (Hizkuni Bamidbar 30:2)

He fulfils the word of His servant - This refers to Moses, for it is said, to speak of My servant of Moses; and the counsel of His messenger He completes - this refers to Moses, for it is said, and He sent an angle and took us out of Egypt. The Holy One blessed be He said to Moses: Go tell Israel, I will pass through the land of Egypt on this night. Moses went and told them, Thus says the Lord: At midnight... The Holy One blessed be He said: "I to will act at midnight in order to fulfill Moses' decrees," that is: He fulfils the word of His servant. (Yalkut Shimoni Isaiah 461)

The meaning of and Moses spoke to the leaders of the tribes is this– There was no reason to teach all the Israelites that a father or husband can render void a [woman's] ascetic vow, and perhaps these laws should be kept secret from them so that they not act frivolously regarding vows. But he did teach the law to Israel's sages, the leaders of the tribes.

Our Rabbis' midrash (Nedarim 78a) further alludes to the tribal leaders having more to do with vows than did the rest of the people, since a solitary expert can void a vow. The release from vows is not mentioned explicitly in the Torah, rather it is a halakhah received by Moses at Sinai. They connected it to Scripture with a link as thin as a hair, as it is written, "The nullifications of vows floats in the air and have nothing supporting them" (Hagigah 10a), but it is hinted at by Scripture in the verse, lo yehal devaro - he shall not violate his word (Bamidbar 30:3), that is to say, he will not transgress his words, but the commandment is lo yehallel devaro that his word should not be made hollow, for when he comes to court and they find a loophole and they comfort him and forgive him, he is not violating it. The point of this is as I have explained, the nullification of vows and oaths were made secrets of the Torah that should only be disclosed to those worthy of them, and they were [only] hinted at in Scripture... regarding all [vows], he shall not violate his word, but others can forgive them for him. (RaMBaN 30:2)

 

 

And Moses said to the Children of Gad and to the Children of Reuben: "Shall your brothers come to war while you stay here?"

(Bamidbar 32:6)

 

Shall your brothers come to war

Usually Scripture uses the expression "went out to war" [yatza lamilhama], while the expression "came to war" [ba lamilhama] is unusual. Moses uses the latter when addressing the children of Gad and the children of Reuben: Shall your brothers come to war. He who goes out to war sets forth to battle promptly and willingly. He takes joy in combat, going out to fight beyond his country's borders. In contrast, one who comes to war or especially one who comes towards war [ba milhama] (Bamidbar 10:9) takes the dangers of combat upon himself only after finding himself entangled in war. The war came without provocation on his part, and he is forced to endanger himself. That is why Moses asks: Shall your brothers come to war? while in contrast, you sit here. Your brothers want to reach rest and claim their estates just as you do. However, war is necessary, it has come to us, and your brothers must enter the fight - and you would shrug off that duty?

(Rabbi S.R. Hirsch on Bamidbar 10:9)

 

Gather the people, prepare the congregation, assemble the elders, gather the infants and the sucklings; let a bridegroom come out of his chamber and a bride from her canopy.

(Joel 2:16)

 

And the officers shall speak further unto the people, etc. R. Akiva says: Fearful and fainthearted is to be understood literally viz., one who is unable to stand in the battle-ranks and to see a drawn sword. R. Yossi HaGalili says: Fearful and fainthearted alludes to one who is afraid because of the transgressions he had committed, therefore the Torah connected all these with him that he may return home on their account. R. Yossi says: A High Priest who married a widow, an ordinary priest who married a divorcee or haluzah, a lay Israelite who married an illegitimate or a netinah, and the daughter of an Israelite who married an illegitimate or a natin - behold such a one is fearful and fainthearted... .

To what does all the foregoing apply? To voluntary wars, but in the wars commanded by the Torah all go forth, even a bridegroom from his chamber and a bride from her canopy (Joel 2). R. Yehudah says: To what does all the foregoing apply? To the wars commanded by the Torah, but in obligatory wars all go forth, even a bridegroom from his chamber and a bride from her canopy.

(Mishnah Sotah 8:5, 7, Soncino translation)

 

R. Yohanan said: The difference between them [R. Yehudah and the Sages] is terminological. R. Yehudah called [what the Sages referred to as] "voluntary wars" - [milhemet reshut] by the term a "commanded war" [milhemet mitzvah], but in an obligatory war [milhemet hova], all go out [to battle], even a bridegroom from his chamber and a bride from her canopy.

Rav Hisda said: They are in [genuine] disagreement. The Rabbis say: A commanded war is a war of David, an obligatory war is the war of Joshua. R. Yehudah would call a war which we initiate a "voluntary war," while he called a defensive war an "obligatory war."

(J. Sotah 8:10)

 

They agree that the wars against the Seven Nations and Amalek are obligatory. They also agree that wars against other lands belonging to other nations are voluntary. They only disagreed regarding wars against nations which fight against them, [wars fought by the Israelites] so as to weaken them [the nations] to keep them from fighting against the Israelites and attacking their land. Regarding this the first Tanna cited calls it a voluntary [war, while R. Yehudah calls it a commanded war. According to R. Yehudah, one who is engaged in fighting such a war or in supporting the war effort is exempt from observing the commandments, because, as you know, we have a principle that one engaged in the performance of a commandment is exempt from [the other] commandments. The first Tanna cited does not think [that someone fighting such a war] is engaged in the performance of a commandment. And the halakhah is not in accordance with R. Yehudah.

(RaMBaM's Commentary on the Mishnah ad loc)

 

At first, the king may only fight a commanded war, and which is a commanded war? It is the war against the Seven Nations, and the war against Amalek, and rescue of Israelites from the oppressor who comes upon them. Afterwards he can fight voluntary wars, which are wars fought against the other nations to broaden Israel's borders and to magnify his greatness and reputation.

He is not required to gain the court's permission to prosecute a commanded war, rather he can go of his own accord and at any time, and force the people to go out [to fight], but he can only take out the people [to fight] a voluntary war with the permission of the Court of Seventy-One...

The annihilation of the Seven nations is a positive commandment, for it says surely annihilate them, and anyone who comes across one of them and does not kill him transgresses a negative commandment, for it is said, do not allow any soul [to live] - but their memory is already lost.

Similarly, the destruction of Amalek's memory is a positive commandment, for it is said, Erase the memory of Amalek. It is a positive commandment to always remember its evil deeds and the way it lay in ambush [to attack Israel] in order to awaken hostility against it, for it is said, Remember what Amalek did to you. Tradition teaches that remember is with the mouth and do not forget is in the heart, that it is prohibited to forget its hostility and hatred.

 

 

 

 

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 yet 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 OzVe Shalom/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.