THEY SPREAD AN [EVIL] REPORT ABOUT THE LAND WHICH THEY HAD SCOUTED, TELLING THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL,

"THE LAND WE PASSED THROUGH TO EXPLORE IS A LAND THAT CONSUMES ITS INHABITANTS, AND ALL THE PEOPLE WE SAW IN IT ARE MEN OF STATURE. THERE WE SAW THE GIANTS, THE SONS OF ANAK, DESCENDED FROM THE GIANTS. IN OUR EYES, WE SEEMED LIKE GRASSHOPPERS, AND SO WE WERE IN THEIR EYES."

(Bamidbar 13:32-33)

 

There we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, descended from the giants - Sparta, Athens and Jerusalem

We genuinely saw them in reality, those giants who are men of eternal renown (Bereishit 6:4) whose stature and valor are described in the ancient legends. They are the sons of Anak...

In the Land of Israel, then, there remained remnants of the giants of the pre-deluge period. This fact well suits the position (Zevahim 113a) that the flood did not affect the Land of Israel, and therefore all the original vitality of the land was preserved. But in equal measure, this strength can make the land appropriate for God's people, for this nation will observe God's Torah and thus will the world return to its days of youth, and the earth will be like the Garden of Eden. Let us not forget the dictum of the Sages to the effect that health and physical strength are among the conditions necessary for supreme spiritual development (Shabbat 92a). Perhaps we will not err when we say that this is the relationship between the strength of the land and the attributes of its inhabitants; Wherever spiritual endeavor is suspended, the earth has the power to grow giants of great physical stature; but if the dwellers of the land are of a spiritual inclination, the vigor of the earth will be exploited for spiritual activity and not for the giant body stature.

(Rabbi S. R. Hirsch, Bamidbar 13:33)

 

 

For all the people were in error

Ronen Ahituv

And if you should err and not fulfill all these commandments, which the Lord spoke to Moses. All that the Lord commanded you through Moses, from the day on which the Lord commanded and from then on, for all generations. If because of the eyes of the congregation it was committed inadvertently...The priest shall atone on behalf of the entire congregation of the children of Israel, and it shall be forgiven them, for it was an error, and they have brought their offering as a fire offering to the Lord and their sin offering before the Lord because of their error.

The entire congregation of the children of Israel and the proselyte who resides with them shall be forgiven, for all the people were in error. But if an individual sins inadvertently, he shall offer up a she goat in its first year as a sin offering. (15:22-28)

The section on sin-offerings which had already appeared in the beginning of Vayikra (chapter 4) is repeated in our parasha. As before, in our parasha the Torah tells those who have accidentally sinned to offer a sacrifice to atone for them, and also as before, Scripture distinguishes between the sin-offering of and individual at that offered by the community. There are some differences between the two accounts, and the very fact of repetition requires that we seek differences between them. The Sages dealt with this problem and suggested that "Scripture is referring to idolatry" (Sifrei Shelah 8). That is to say that the unintended sin referred to by our parasha is the sin of idolatry. This is not a matter of an error concerning some detail of law, but rather a far-reaching mistake that involves disregard for the Torah's very foundation. It involves the worship of a strange god and thus the abandonment of the entire halakhah, as hinted at by the verse and not fulfill all these commandments.

This interpretation invites a question: can an entire community which had completely deserted the worship of God be called in error and dealt with forgivingly?

RaMBaN in his commentary on the passage describes several ways in which error can turn an entire community away from the worship of God:

This is in accordance with its plain meaning, it is an offering for one who has accidentally rejected the entire Torah, such as someone who went and joined one of the nations to do as they do, not wanting to at all part of the Israelite collectivity, and all of that is unintentional...

And in the case of a community - such as when they come to believe that the Torah was not eternal and that its time had passed, or they speak in the manner mentioned in Sifrei (Shelah 115) "Why did the Omnipresent tell us [about the commandments], if not in order for us to perform them and receive a reward? We shall neither perform them nor take our reward!"

or as Israel spoke, asking Ezekiel, as it says Men of the elders of Israel came and sat before me (Ezekiel 20:1), and they said to him: "Our master Ezekiel, if a slave is sold by his master, has he not left his [master's] possession?" He told them, "Yes." They said to him: "Since the Omnipresent has sold us, we have left His possession and entered that of the nations!" he told them: "If a slave is sold by his master with the intention of getting him back, has he left his [master's] possession?

Or - they forgot the Torah. That has already happened to us due to our sins in the days of he wicked Israelite kings such as Jeroboam, when most of the nation forgot the Torah and commandments completely, and as the Book of Ezra relates regarding the men of the Second Temple.

RaMBaN describes four possible explanations of how the people could desert the Torah. Two of them are based on a midrash of the Sages regarding the tzitzit passage that appears in the conclusion of our parasha, and two of them seem to have been invented by RaMBaN himself. The two reasons that appear in midrashim concern the covenant between God and Israel and its stipulations. Apparently, the covenant which requires that we observe the Torah is dependent upon God's recompensatory actions: reward [in this world or in the world to come], or at least defense of Israel and maintenance of the tie with it in the historical sense by way of its continued independent existence in its own land. When the people of Israel feel that they have been sold out to foreign nations and that their historical tie with God has been broken, they would seem to be free to abandon their covenant with their God. Only the certainty of a redemption that will restore the historical tie - as announced by Ezekiel, or the hope for reward can dispose of these claims.

In the absence of certainty regarding redemption and assuming that the people have decided to make do without the rewards promised for the fulfillment of the commandments - it seems unsurprising that the covenant would be abandoned. Indeed, the Sages' position evokes astonishment; they have freed God from all responsibility for the people's historical condition and dared to pledge loyalty to Him without expectation of reciprocation: "even if He takes your life."

The two further reasons for abandonment of Judaism added by RaMBaN are: the well-known Christian claim that the Torah has passed its expiration date and the rare condition of total cultural disconnect in which the entire community becomes completely ignorant of the Torah and commandments.

Notice that the RaMBaN makes no mention of ideological atheism. All four explanations of community-wide error leave belief in God untouched but assume that it is possible to separate that belief from the obligation to the Torah and commandments.

A few years ago Rabbi Yoel Bin-Nun suggested that the RaMBaM's comments could be used to define a halakhic framework for relating to the secular public; they could be defined as a "community of people committing inadvertent error." This definition is certainly more befitting of the situation before us than is the accepted notion of "a kidnapped infant" - after all, we are talking about a group rather than a collection of individuals.

However, take note of an additional concern: the attitude towards error on the part of the community is essentially different from the attitude towards the individual's error, since a different kind of error is involved. Three of the examples of error offered by RaMBaN do not involve error due to ignorance, but rather what seem to be considered and logical - and therefore legitimate - judgments.

In contrast to the individual, who errs due to ignorance or faulty education [as per the modern interpretation of the "kidnapped infant"] and who deserves paternalistic forgivingness, the community's error stems from reasonable and reasoned judgment. Perhaps this is how we should R. Eliezer's dictum, "Scripture turned the community's deliberate sin into an inadvertent error" (Sifrei Shelah 5).

Actually, it is the decision to remain loyal to the Torah and commandments that requires explication and defense. Such a defense must be based upon the Sages' religious revolution, which reinterpreted the biblical notion of covenant, unlinking our commitment to the Torah and the commandments from practical reality. In this they acted in contradiction to the general attitude of scripture, excluding the Book of Job and some chapters of Psalms.

Anyone who bases his faith upon a revolution cannot complain about those who refuse to join him. That is why RaMBaN's comments contain more than just a tolerant and forgiving attitude towards the erring community. RaMBaN also offers us the seeds of a pluralistic approach which grants a kind of legitimacy to that community's decision to disengage itself from the covenant and the observance of the commandments.

In contrast to the judgment of history concerning Christianity and Karaism, the decision of what is called the "errant" community does not cut them off from the Jewish collectivity. True, it is impossible to agree with their choice, but it must be regarded with respect and understanding and with the hope that in due time the community will make an offering of atonement for its error.

In contrast to the historical error made by the people at the time of the sin of the spies - which became immediately clear by way of divine revelation and the ensuing mass repentance; and in contrast to the situation in Ezekiel's day, in our own times we do not witness revelation. And so we must continue through the wilderness of doubt, all of us together - those who "err" and those who are "faithful" [by our own subjective lights] - and avoid rushing into simplistic solutions that call for an aggressive and ill-considered dash towards the mountain.

Dr. Ronen Ahituv lives in Mitzpei Netufa and teaches at Bar Ilan University, the Midrasha at Oranim, and Kinneret College.  

 

 

You shall not follow the desires of your hearts - Does Man's Nature Tend to Good or to Evil?

When you look upon it you will remember all the commandments of the Lord - remember that you are servants of God, Blessed Be He, and that you accepted his commandments with pledge and vow. This will occur as you see the fringes, which are like the King's seal upon his subjects, and thus you will cease to follow the desires of your heart to obtain your goals through wealth, position, and even theft.

(Sforno, Bamidbar 15:39)

 

The soul of man and his powers were created in an upright fashion, and the nature of the heart tends to good, but man warps his nature and considers evil possibilities. Therefore, the passage does not say: "And you shall go after your hearts", for if one were to go according to the heart's paths carved in the nature of his being, his behavior would be good and straight.

(Malbim, Bamidbar 15:39)

 

Regarding Torah and "Natural Morality"

Morality, in its natural state, in all the depths of its glory and its great power, must be imprinted in the soul, and be a seedbed for those great influences which evolve from the power of Torah. All Torah matters must be preceded by Derekh Eretz (proper comportment). If it is a matter which is consonant with natural intelligence and integrity, it must proceed on the straight path, with the heart's proclivity and the assent of the pure desire imprinted in man.

The Torah was given to Israel so that gates of light - which are clearer, wider, and holier than all the gates of light of man's natural intelligence and spirit of natural morality - be opened to us, and through us, to the entire world.

(From "Orot HaTorah", Rav Kook, 69-71)

 

 

Why Was the Parasha [Passage] of Tzitzit Tacked On as a Third Parasha of Kriyat Shema?

The significance of the relationship between And you shall love and And these words shall be [the first two sentences of the first parasha of Kriyat Shema] in the Shema, and the relationship between this first parasha and the second parasha - And if you will carefully obey my commands is illuminated by the addition of the third parasha - the parasha of Tzitzit - to the two opening parshiyot. This portion deals with memory and action; it expressly directs man's awareness not to the subject of "God and Man" but the subject of "Commandments and Man" (...and you shall remember all God's commands, and you will observe them... so that you remember and perform all My commands...). Remembrance is a thing of the heart, and, at first blush, it would have seemed possible to combine it with "faith" and "love" in their abstract sense; but Scripture states the meaning of remembrance is the performance of the commandments. Remembrance of God exists in the believer's consciousness on one of two planes: that of Shema (pure belief lishema', with no ulterior motive) - God is the Lord; and the second plane, that of And if you will carefully obey (belief shelo lishmah - with ulterior motive) - God is the supra-Minister of Finance, supra-Minister of Health, supra-Minister of Security, etc.. But regardless of whether one remembers God on the Shema plane or on the And if you will carefully obey plane - both obligate the observance of mitzvoth.

At the conclusion of Parashat Tzitzit, which concludes the Kriyat Shema, there appears a concept with specifically religious significance, the concept of kedusha - holiness: And you shall be holy. This concept has no meaning outside the world of religious faith. True, the concept has filtered into the day-to-day vernacular, taking on secular meanings, such as: "The memory of my late mother is holy to me" - but in such as case it is no more than an idiom with emotional content. In its original and essential meaning, "holy" refers only to God; therefore it cannot be explained through concepts taken from human thought or in other terms from human language, and it cannot be applied to anything found in the world. In human reality the category of kedusha can be used only to designate activity directed toward the kadosh - the Holy One" - a designation of the service of God through observance of the mitzvoth. It designates the purpose and goal to which one must strive, and also the striving itself, but it does not designate any given or existing thing. In human reality, there is only functional kedusha; the essential kedusha is God's alone. Whoever attributes kedusha to anything from the natural or artificial reality - to man, to the land, to an institution, to an edifice, to an object - is guilty of idol worship; he raises it to the level of the divine. This is the great meaning presented to man by the mitzvah of Tzitzit: so that you remember and perform all My commands and you will be holy...; that is to say, you are not holy by virtue of your essence; your holiness is not something which exists in yourself; it is something for you to achieve. The mission is eternal, because it is tied to a condition which can be fulfilled only with eternal effort.

We bring the words of one of the greatest Torah scholars and believers, one of the greatest religious thinker of recent generations, Rabbi Meir Simkha HaKohen of Dvinsk, author of the Meshekh Hokhma. Many times, with great emphasis, he repeats in his book his explanation that "there is nothing holy in the world... only the Lord, Blessed Be He, is holy, and only He is deserving of praise and service"; no creation has holiness - only the Creator, Blessed Be He"; "all things considered holy - the Land of Israel, Jerusalem, the Temple Mount, the Temple, the Tablets of the Law - none of these possess intrinsic holiness, but they were sanctified through action and mitzvoth." Therefore, when Israel repudiates the Torah and violates the mitzvoth - all the above lose their holiness, they become profane. He repeats this idea again and again: "Do not imagine that the mount is something holy..."; "...Do not imagine that the Tabernacle and the Temple are, in themselves, holy entities" and many more such statements. In one place he adds the remark "This is a weighty matter" - as though he had foreseen how "religious" Jews, 50 years after his death, would disgrace and profane the concept of holiness by exploiting as cover for satisfaction of human needs and interests - private or communal.

It seems that Torah desired to instill in us the deep religious significance of holiness, and therefore it placed the story of Korah in juxtaposition to the parasha of Tzitzit. A space of only three lines separates between the great programmatic proclamation of faith voiced by our Teacher Moses (You shall be holy) and the programmatic proclamation of faith voiced by Korah: "The entire community is holy" - i.e., holiness is not a goal which Israel is charged to achieve but it already exists inherently and unconditionally. The great concept of faith - holiness - is profaned and becomes an idolatrous concept.

(From Y. Leibowitz: Paths to Faith in Judaism, in Emunah, Historiya, ve'Arakhim, pp. 18-19)

 

 

 

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.