Parshat Pinchas

Parshat Pinchas 5769

Rabbi Ari Kahn

To Fight for Peace

The Reward

In the aftermath of the debacle that had unfolded in the camp, Pinchas killed the lecherous Zimri, and was rewarded by Divine decree:

ספר במדבר פרק כה

(י) וַיְדַבֵּר ה' אֶל משֶׁה לֵּאמֹר:(יא) פִּינְחָס בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן הֵשִׁיב אֶת חֲמָתִי מֵעַל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּקַנְאוֹ אֶת קִנְאָתִי בְּתוֹכָם וְלֹא כִלִּיתִי אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּקִנְאָתִי:(יב) לָכֵן אֱמֹר הִנְנִי נֹתֵן לוֹ אֶת בְּרִיתִי שָׁלוֹם:(יג) וְהָיְתָה לּוֹ וּלְזַרְעוֹ אַחֲרָיו בְּרִית כְּהֻנַּת עוֹלָם תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר קִנֵּא לֵאלֹהָיו וַיְכַפֵּר עַל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:

And God spoke to Moshe, saying: 'Pinchas, the son of Elazar, the son of Aharon the Kohen, has turned My wrath away from the Children of Israel, in that he was very jealous for My sake among them, so that I did not consume the Children of Israel in My jealousy. Therefore say: 'Behold, I give unto him My covenant of peace; and it shall be for him and his descendents after him, the covenant of everlasting kehuna; because he was jealous for his God, and made atonement for the Children of Israel.' Bamidbar 25:10-13

Had it not been for the action of Pinchas, the Jews might well have been annihilated. Pinchas zealously restored order to the camp. God therefore rewards Pinchas with a covenant of peace. Pinchas and his descendents will enjoy the status of Kohen, as payment for his zeal.

It is unclear if these are two separate rewards, or if they are in fact one and the same. Indeed, a careful reading of the verses indicates that two separate rewards are enumerated. One is the covenant of peace and the other is eternal kehuna (priesthood).

The things with which God rewards Pinchas are far from random. When we consider that Pinchas' actions may have been looked upon askance by many in the camp, that his method for restoring harmony in the camp was to kill another Jew, we may conclude that peace was the one thing Pinchas desperately needed. It may be safe to assume that there were many people who would have taken umbrage at Pinchas' zeal, and still others who would seek to further the cycle of violence by taking revenge for the murder of Zimri.[1] God gives Pinchas a covenant of peace; He endorses Pinchas and the extreme measures Pinchas took to restore peace in the camp, while at the same time effectively protecting Pinchas from his detractors.[2] These practical and specific goals might be seen as quite separate from the reward of kehuna described in the next verse.

On the other hand, it is not difficult to support the opposite claim, that the covenant of peace and kehuna are, in fact, one and the same. “Peace” is so closely intertwined with the kehuna that the equation is almost inescapable: When the kohanim bless the people, it is specifically a blessing of peace that they transmit, and this blessing is recited specifically within the context of the blessing of peace at the conclusion of the amida.[3] The equation of kehuna and peace goes all the way back to the first kohen, the quintessential kohen. In the words of Hillel:

משנה מסכת אבות פרק א

הִלֵּל אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי מִתַּלְמִידָיו שֶׁל אַהֲרֹן, אוֹהֵב שָׁלוֹם וְרוֹדֵף שָׁלוֹם, אוֹהֵב אֶת הַבְּרִיּוֹת וּמְקָרְבָן לַתּוֹרָה:

Hillel used to say: Be of the disciples of Aharon, loving peace and pursuing peace, loving your fellow creatures and bringing them close to Torah. Avot 1:12

Aharon was the perfect example of the man of peace; he uncomplainingly played the role of his younger brother's second, he made peace with himself and with God even when challenged by personal loss. When the people press Aharon to make for them a Golden Calf he complies, effectively sacrificing truth for the sake of peace. Pinchas’s road is very different: while both Aharon and Pinchas pursue peace, they take divergent paths: When the plague of peor spreads like a cancer in the Israelite camp, and culminates in an inappropriate public display of sexuality, Pinchas leaps into action and sacrifices peace for the sake of truth. While Aharon’s essence was peace, Pinchas killed for the sake of peace - certainly a circuitous route of achieving peace. Pinchas surely needed the covenant of peace to protect him, but even more so, he needed the covenant of peace to realign him with the role of kohen, to reconnect with that essential nature that was passed down from his grandfather Aharon.

Covenant of Kehuna

The commentaries are divided regarding the meaning and significance of the covenant of eternal kehuna. Rashi teaches that Pinchas was not originally a kohen, and was only anointed in the aftermath of the Zimri affair. This approach is found in rabbinic literature, yet is somewhat problematic: Being that Pinchas' father and grandfather were kohanim, why should Pinchas have been initially excluded from kehuna? According to this approach, Pinchas was an anomaly, the victim of a strange clause: Aharon was made a kohen, [4] his son Elazar was made a kohen, [5] and any male child subsequently born to this family line would automatically be born a kohen. However, Pinchas "suffered" from having already been born; he was therefore not among those specifically anointed, nor was he among “those who would subsequently be born”[6]. Rashi explains that Pinchas is here granted kehuna by Divine directive:

רש"י במדבר פרק כה פסוק יג

(יג) והיתה לו - בריתי זאת:

ברית כהנת עולם - שאע"פ שכבר נתנה כהונה לזרעו של אהרן, לא נתנה אלא לאהרן ולבניו, שנמשחו עמו ולתולדותיהם שיולידו אחר המשחתן, אבל פינחס שנולד קודם לכן ולא נמשח, לא בא לכלל כהונה עד כאן. וכן שנינו בזבחים (קא ב) לא נתכהן פינחס עד שהרגו לזמרי:

A covenant of eternal kehuna: Although the kehuna had already been given to Aharon's descendants, it was given solely to Aharon and his sons who were annointed with him, and to their generations who would be born after their anointment. Pinchas, however, who was born before, and was not annointed, was not included in the kehuna until here. Similarly, we learned in Zevachim (101b), 'Pinchas was not rendered a kohen until he killed Zimri.' (Rashi Bamidbar 25:13)

Other commentaries disagree: Pinchas was already a kohen, was always a kohen along with his father and grandfather and uncles and cousins. The meaning of the verse is that the covenant that was forged granted him and his descendents the position of Kohen Gadol.[7]

The Riva[8] has a different approach. Jewish law states that a Kohen who kills is invalid to serve; therefore, when Pinchas killed Zimri and Kosbi, he should have been disqualified as a kohen. Only divine intervention in the form of a promise of everlasting kehuna allowed him to remain a kohen.[9] In fact, the text supports this approach: When he was awarded the kehuna, the Torah describes Pinchas' actions as bringing about atonement:

ספר במדבר פרק כה

(יג) וְהָיְתָה לּוֹ וּלְזַרְעוֹ אַחֲרָיו בְּרִית כְּהֻנַּת עוֹלָם תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר קִנֵּא לֵאלֹהָיו וַיְכַפֵּר עַל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:

… and it shall be for him, and for his descendents after him, the covenant of everlasting kehuna; because he was jealous for his God, and made atonement for the Children of Israel.' Bamidbar 25:13

Taking the wider view, we realize that the role of the kohen is to bring about atonement for the People of Israel. Most kohanim achieve this by bringing offerings. Pinchas brought an unorthodox offering – he killed Zimri. Instead of being seen as an outrage, God accepted this offering, and spared the People.[10]

Aharon was elevated to the position of Kohen Gadol when he attempted to maintain peace by sacrificing truth. In essence, every kohen who brought about atonement for the People through offerings was involved in a similar gesture: Truth is sacrificed for the sake of atonement, for the sake of peace. In a world of absolute truth, every sin should be followed by punishment; the very idea that God could choose to accept a sacrifice for repentant man is antithetical to the concept of truth. Nonetheless, this is one of the ruling principles with which God created and continues to sustain the universe. God chooses peace over truth.[11] Man, with his myriad sins great and small, would not survive without God’s enormous capacity for forgiveness, without God's willingness to put aside absolute truth. The price to be paid for human existence is just this: truth is trampled upon.

Pinchas embraced truth. He would not, could not ignore the outrage transpiring in the camp. He therefore acted with violence, and upset the balance, broke the peace. The “festival of free love” spearheaded by Zimri was shattered with stark truth - the truth of Torah. Those embracing peor, with its scatological practices[12] and pantheistic theology, were involved in idolatry. Zimri and Kosbi hoped to bring a message of false peace and universal love - love of nature and natural love; Pinchas showed them and all of the congregation that this was not service of God through nature, but avoda zara, foreign theology. Zimri and Kozbi, who may have viewed their carnal performance as a “natural” act, part and parcel of the worldview of worship of peor, were in fact guilty of a terrible outrage, a transgression against the boundaries of holiness and purity which are dictated by belief in One God and the Torah's path to achieve kedusha.

Pinchas embraced truth and sacrificed peace; God accepted this sacrifice and stopped the plague. Pinchas averted the annihilation of the Jewish People, and in doing so, showed that that he was truly a son of Aharon, a true kohen.

---

[1] See comments of Hizkuni, Daat Zekanim Baale Tosfot and Rabbenu Bachaya Bamidbar 25:12

חזקוני על במדבר פרק כה פסוק יב

את בריתי שלום - אין לו לירא מקרובי זמרי וכזבי.

דעת זקנים מבעלי התוספות על במדבר פרק כה פסוק יב

(יב) לכן - שעשה דבר הגון לפני הנני נותן לו את בריתי שלום ואם ישנאוהו ישראל לא יחוש ואין לו לירא לא מקרובי זמרי ולא מקרובי כזבי שהיתה בת מלך ובקידושין פרק האומר מסיק וי"ו דשלום קטיעה היא למדרש כשהוא שלם ולא כשהוא חסר מכאן לכהן בעל מום שעבודתו פסולה:

רבנו בחיי על במדבר פרק כה פסוק יב

הנני נותן לו את בריתי שלום. על דרך הפשט הבטיחו בברית שלום שלא יפחד מאחי זמרי שלא ינקמו נקמתו, ומה יהיה שכרו, והיתה לו ולזרעו אחריו ברית כהונת עולם, שתהיה לו הכהונה נצחית:

[2] Rashi Bamidbar 25:11, notes that many thought that Pinchas has acted inappropriately, and his behavior was influenced from pagan influences.

רש"י במדבר פרק כה פסוק יא

פינחס בן אלעזר בן אהרן הכהן - לפי שהיו השבטים מבזים אותו, הראיתם בן פוטי זה שפיטם אבי אמו עגלים לעבודה זרה והרג נשיא שבט מישראל, לפיכך בא הכתוב ויחסו אחר אהרן:

Verse 11: Pinchas the son of Elazar, the son of Aharon the kohein: Because the tribes disparaged him, [saying] 'Have you seen that son of "Puti," whose mother's father fattened calves for idol worship, and who murdered the chieftain of a tribe of Israel?' Therefore, Scripture traces his lineage to Aharon.

[3] The blessing of Sim Shalom – give peace

סדור תפלה - נוסח אשכנז - סדר עמידה

והכהנים מברכים:

בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה יְהׂוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ מֶלֶךְ הָעוֹלָם אֲשֶׁר קִדְּשָׁנוּ בִּקְדֻשָּׁתוֹ שֶׁל אַהֲרׂן, וְצִוָּנוּ לְבָרֵךְ אֶת עַמּוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּאַהֲבָה:

...וְיָשֵׂם לְךָ שָׁלוֹם:

שִׂים שָׁלוֹם טוֹבָה וּבְרָכָה...בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה'. הַמְבָרֵךְ אֶת עַמּוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּשָּׁלוֹם:

[4] Shmot 28:1

ספר שמות פרק כח

(א) וְאַתָּה הַקְרֵב אֵלֶיךָ אֶת אַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ וְאֶת בָּנָיו אִתּוֹ מִתּוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְכַהֲנוֹ לִי אַהֲרֹן נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא אֶלְעָזָר וְאִיתָמָר בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן:

And take to you Aaron your brother, and his sons with him, from among the people of Israel, that he may minister to me in the priest’s office, Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron’s sons.

[5] See Rabbi M Kasher, Torah Shelemah volume 20, Shmot chapter 28, section 12.

[6] Shmot 28:43

ספר שמות פרק כח

(מג) וְהָיוּ עַל אַהֲרֹן וְעַל בָּנָיו בְּבֹאָם אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד אוֹ בְגִשְׁתָּם אֶל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לְשָׁרֵת בַּקֹּדֶשׁ וְלֹא יִשְׂאוּ עָוֹן וָמֵתוּ חֻקַּת עוֹלָם לוֹ וּלְזַרְעוֹ אַחֲרָיו:

43. And they shall be upon Aaron, and upon his sons, when they come in to the Tent of Meeting, or when they come near to the altar to minister in the holy place; that they bear not iniquity, and die; it shall be a statute forever to him and his seed after him.

[7] Ibn Ezra Bamidbar 28:12

אבן עזרא על במדבר פרק כה פסוק יב

(יב) את בריתי שלום - טעמו את בריתי ברית שלום כמו כסאך אלהים ורבים כן והטעם שלא יגור מאחי זמרי כי הוא נשיא בית אב ושכרו שתהיה לו ולזרעו אחריו ברית כהונת עולם ונצח כי הכהנים הגדולים היו מבני פינחס ויתכן שהיו בנים אחרים לאלעזר:

[8] Riva Bamidbar 25:12, citing Rav Moshe MiCoucy, known as the S”mag (Sefer Mitzvot Gedolot)

פירוש הריב"א על במדבר פרק כה פסוק יב

הנני נותן לו את בריתי שלום. לפי שכפיו נגואלו בדם וכהן שהרג את הנפש לא ישא את כפיו והיה מתירא שמא יפסיד כהונתו לכך נתן לו הקב"ה את בריתו שלם. כפר"מ מקוצ"י:

[9] The Zohar makes a similar suggestion. I have seen it suggested that in fact God knew that Pinchas would kill Zimri and therefore suffer disqualification, Pinchas' kehuna was purposely held in abeyance until after he killed Zimri in order to avoid this problem: at the moment he killed Zimri, Pinchas was not a Kohen. He became a kohen only subsequently. Zohar Volume 3 214a: "Now it is a rule that a priest who kills a human being becomes disqualified for the priesthood, and therefore by rights Pinchas should have been disqualified. But because he was jealous for the Holy One, blessed be He, the priesthood was assigned to him and to his descendants in perpetuity."’

שפתי כהן על במדבר פרק כה פסוק יא

לזה אמר בן אהרן הכהן, מאחר שתפס במדותיו של אהרן ראוי הוא לכהונתו של אהרן, וכמו שאהרן אוהב שלום ורודף שלום כן פינחס נאמר לו הנני נותן לו את בריתי שלום:

אמר בזוהר (ח"ג רי"ז.) למה אמר בן בן, אלא כשהרגו לזמרי, נתקבצו שבטו של שמעון להורגו ופרחה נשמתו של פינחס, ובני אהרן נדב ואביהוא שהיו ערטלאין, לפי שלא נשאו נשים, נכנסו בגופו, ואף על פי שהם שנים ואין גוף אחד יכול לקבל שתי נשמות, לפי שלא נשאו נחשבים כל אחד כחצי גוף, ולזה לא נתכהן פינחס עד שהרגו לזמרי, שנכנסו בגופו, והם היו כהנים, לזה רמז בפרשת וארא (שמות ו', כ"ה) ואלעזר בן אהרן הכהן לקח לו מבנות פוטיאל ותלד לו את פינחס, אלה ראשי אבות הלוים, לומר מראשי בית אבותם שהן נדב ואביהוא שהיו סגני כהונה, הן נכללין בפינחס. ואם תאמר נשמתו היכן הלכה, אלא לפי שאלעזר לקח מבנות פוטיאל, לא אמר בת פוטיאל, אלא כדי שלא תאמר שהוא לכתחילה עשה כן ולא הלך אחר היחס, לפי שישרה בעיניו, לזה לא אמר בת פוטיאל אלא מבנות פוטיאל, תהיה מה שתהיה, לפי שהדבר הוא מאתו יתברך, והיה קשה בעיניו איך יקח בת כהן לעבודה זרה, ולזה לא נמשח, וכשפרחה נשמתו מת אותו גוף, והנשמה חזרה להיות גוף בערך נשמות נדב ואביהוא, אם כן הוא בן אלעזר שהוא הגוף שנזדכך, והנשמה בן אהרן, לזה נתן לו חיים לעולם, שגופו היה נשמה, ואין מיתה אלא לגוף:

[10] It is interesting that after the Golden Calf, the tribe of Levi is distinguished from the mainstream when they answer Moshe’s call “Whoever is with God – join me” )Shmot 32:26). There, too, an act of violence catapults the Tribe of Levi into their special status.

שמות פרק לב

(כו) וַיַּעֲמֹד מֹשֶׁה בְּשַׁעַר הַמַּחֲנֶה וַיֹּאמֶר מִי לַה' אֵלָי וַיֵּאָסְפוּ אֵלָיו כָּל בְּנֵי לֵוִי: (כז) וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם כֹּה אָמַר ה’ אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל שִׂימוּ אִישׁ חַרְבּוֹ עַל יְרֵכוֹ עִבְרוּ וָשׁוּבוּ מִשַּׁעַר לָשַׁעַר בַּמַּחֲנֶה וְהִרְגוּ אִישׁ אֶת אָחִיו וְאִישׁ אֶת רֵעֵהוּ וְאִישׁ אֶת קְרֹבוֹ: (כח) וַיַּעֲשׂוּ בְנֵי לֵוִי כִּדְבַר מֹשֶׁה וַיִּפֹּל מִן הָעָם בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא כִּשְׁלֹשֶׁת אַלְפֵי אִישׁ:

[11] See Yerushami Makot 7a, Yalkut Shimoni Yehchezkel 358.

תלמוד ירושלמי מסכת מכות דף ז/א

אמר רבי פינחס (תהלים כה) טוב וישרא למה הוא טוב שהוא ישר ולמה הוא ישר שהוא טוב על כן יורה חטאים בדרך שמורה דרך תשובה. שאלו לחכמה חוטא מהו עונשו אמרו להם חטאים תרדף רעה שאלו לנבואה חוטא מהו עונשו אמרה להן הנפש החוטאת היא תמות שאלו לקודשא בריך הוא חוטא מהו עונשו אמר להן יעשו תשובה ויתכפר לו.

ילקוט שמעוני יחזקאל - פרק יח - רמז שנח

הנפש החוטאת היא תמות, שאלו לחכמה חוטא מהו ענשו א"ל חטאים תרדף רעה, שאלו לנבואה חוטא מהו ענשו, א"ל הנפש החוטאת היא תמות, שאלו לתורה חוטא מהו ענשו א"ל יביא אשם ויתכפר לו. שאלו להקב"ה חוטא מהו ענשו מהו ענשו א"ל יביא אשם ויתכפר לו. שאלו להקב"ה חוטא מהו ענשו א"ל יעשה תשובה ויתכפר לו הה"ד טוב וישר ה' על כן יורה חטאים בדרך.

[12] See Talmud Bavli Sanhedrin 60b, 64a

“Rau Yehudah said in Rab's name: A gentile woman once fell sick. She vowed, 'If I recover, I will go and serve every idol in the world.' She recovered, and proceeded to serve all idols. On reaching Peor, she asked its priests, 'How is this worshipped?' They replied, 'People eat beets, drink strong drink, and then uncover themselves before it.' She replied, 'I would rather fall sick again than serve an idol in such a manner.' But you, O House of Israel, were not so [as it is written, Slay ye every one his men) that were joined unto Baal Peor: you were attached to it like an air-tight lid. Whereas, 'While you that did cleave unto the Lord your God,' implies merely like two dates sticking to each other. In a Baraitha it has been taught: that were joined unto Baal Peor: [loosely] like a bracelet on the hands of a woman; whereas 'While you that did cleave unto the Lord your God' indicates that they were firmly attached.

Our Rabbis taught: Sabta, a townsman of Avlas, once hired an ass to a gentile woman. When she came to Peor, she said to him, Wait till I enter and come out again. On her issuing, he said to her, Now do you wait for me too until I go in and come out again. But, said she, are you not a Jew? He replied, 'What does it concern you?' He then entered, uncovered himself before it, and wiped himself on the idol's nose, whilst the acolytes praised him, saying, 'No man has ever served this idol thus.'’He that uncovers himself before Baal Peor thereby serves it, even if his intention was to degrade it. He who casts a stone at Merculis thereby serves it, even if his intention was to bruise it.

Parsshat Balak

Parshat Balak 5769

Rabbi Ari Kahn

Opening the Mouth of the Donkey

Of all the biblical characters, one of the most intriguing is a man named Bil'am. Despite the fact that he does not seem to "walk with God", he is a seer, a prophet, and is privileged to hear and see much more than other men. At the point Bil'am is introduced, the fear of the Israelites has spread to neighboring countries. The story of the Exodus has apparently traveled far and wide; as a nation that enjoys divine protection, the Jews have become an obsession of the nations that occupy the area surrounding what would soon be called the Land Of Israel.

במדבר פרק כב

(ב) וַיַּרְא בָּלָק בֶּן צִפּוֹר אֵת כָּל אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה יִשְׂרָאֵל לָאֱמֹרִי:(ג) וַיָּגָר מוֹאָב מִפְּנֵי הָעָם מְאֹד כִּי רַב הוּא וַיָּקָץ מוֹאָב מִפְּנֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:(ד) וַיֹּאמֶר מוֹאָב אֶל זִקְנֵי מִדְיָן עַתָּה יְלַחֲכוּ הַקָּהָל אֶת כָּל סְבִיבֹתֵינוּ כִּלְחֹךְ הַשּׁוֹר אֵת יֶרֶק הַשָּׂדֶה וּבָלָק בֶּן צִפּוֹר מֶלֶךְ לְמוֹאָב בָּעֵת הַהִוא:

2. And Balak the son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites. 3. And Moav was very afraid of the People, because they were many; and Moav was distressed because of the People of Israel. 4. And Moav said to the elders of Midian, 'Now shall this company lick up all who are around us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field.' And Balak the son of Zippor was king of the Moavites at that time. 5. He sent messengers therefore to Bil'am, the son of Beor, to Petor, which is by the river of the land of the sons of his people, to call him, saying, Behold, there is a people come out from Egypt; behold, they cover the face of the earth, and they are dwelling opposite me; Bamidbar 22:2-5

Bil'am was chosen as the conduit to curse Israel. Apparently, he enjoyed a stellar reputation: Balak's emissaries travelled quite far to procure Bil'am's services; they believed that he was uniquely qualified for this task. In fact, there are even biblical commentaries who share this high regard for Bil'am’s skills. Rabbinic literature describes Bil'am, son of Beor, as a singular prophet for the non-Jewish world, on the same level of prophecy as Moshe, prophet for the Jewish People.

מדרש תנאים לדברים פרק לד

ולא קם נביא עוד ביש' כמ' בישראל לא קם כמשה אבל קם באומות העולם ואיזה זה בלעם בן בעור:

There never arose in Israel a prophet like Moshe, but among the nations of the world there did arise; and who is that? Bil'am son of Beor. Midrash Tanaim Dvarim chapter 34

The Rabbis even enumerate ways that Bil'am’s prophesy may have been greater than Moshe's; for example, Bil'am was capable of anticipating when he would receive a prophetic vision.

This position seems somewhat problematic in light of certain biblical passages. The first and foremost statement regarding the uniqueness of Moshe's prophecy is made by God Himself: When Miriam presumptuously equates her own stature as a prophetess with that of Moshe, God makes it perfectly clear: Moshe’s prophesy is on a completely different level, unequalled in human experience:

במדבר פרק יב

(ב) וַיֹּאמְרוּ הֲרַק אַךְ בְּמֹשֶׁה דִּבֶּר ה’ הֲלֹא גַּם בָּנוּ דִבֵּר וַיִּשְׁמַע ה’: (ג) וְהָאִישׁ מֹשֶׁה עָנָיו מְאֹד מִכֹּל הָאָדָם אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה: ס

(ד) וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ פִּתְאֹם אֶל מֹשֶׁה וְאֶל אַהֲרֹן וְאֶל מִרְיָם צְאוּ שְׁלָשְׁתְּכֶם אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וַיֵּצְאוּ שְׁלָשְׁתָּם:(ה) וַיֵּרֶד ה’ בְּעַמּוּד עָנָן וַיַּעֲמֹד פֶּתַח הָאֹהֶל וַיִּקְרָא אַהֲרֹן וּמִרְיָם וַיֵּצְאוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם:

(ו) וַיֹּאמֶר שִׁמְעוּ נָא דְבָרָי אִם יִהְיֶה נְבִיאֲכֶם ה’ בַּמַּרְאָה אֵלָיו אֶתְוַדָּע בַּחֲלוֹם אֲדַבֶּר בּוֹ:

(ז) לֹא כֵן עַבְדִּי מֹשֶׁה בְּכָל בֵּיתִי נֶאֱמָן הוּא:(ח) פֶּה אֶל פֶּה אֲדַבֶּר בּוֹ וּמַרְאֶה וְלֹא בְחִידֹת וּתְמֻנַת ה’ יַבִּיט וּמַדּוּעַ לֹא יְרֵאתֶם לְדַבֵּר בְּעַבְדִּי בְמֹשֶׁה:

2. And they said, 'Has God indeed spoken only by Moshe? Has he not spoken also through us?' And God heard it. 3. And the man Moshe was very humble, more than any other man upon the face of the earth.4. And God said suddenly to Moshe, and to Aharon, and to Miriam, 'Come out you three to the Tent of Meeting.' And the three came out.5. And God came down in the pillar of the cloud, and stood in the door of the Tent, and called Aharon and Miriam; and they both came forth.6. And he said, 'Hear now my words; If there is a prophet among you, I, God, will make myself known to him in a vision, and will speak to him in a dream.7. Not so with my servant Moshe, for he is the trusted one in all my house.8. With him I speak mouth to mouth, manifestly, and not in dark speech; and he behold the form of God. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moshe?' Bamidbar 12:2-8

The Torah attests that there was never a prophet in Israel of the stature of Moshe:

דברים פרק לד פסוק י

וְלֹא קָם נָבִיא עוֹד בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל כְּמֹשֶׁה אֲשֶׁר יְדָעוֹ ה’ פָּנִים אֶל פָּנִים:

10. And there has not arisen since in Israel a prophet like Moshe, whom God knew face to face. Dvarim 34:10

Despite these statements, the rabbinic tradition persists: "There never arose in Israel a prophet like Moshe, but among the nations of the world there did arise - Bil'am son of Beor." The Rabbis even enumerate ways that Bil'am’s prophesy may have been greater than Moshe's; for example, Bil'am was capable of anticipating when he would receive a prophetic vision.

Prophet For Profit

The Midrash ultimately concludes that Bil'am was like a servant of the king, and therefore privy to certain intimate details that remained hidden from even a great friend of the king.[1] Nonetheless, the very comparison is disturbing. Moshe was the most modest man who ever lived; presumably, he had the smallest ego, and was God's most selfless, devoted servant.[2] In contrast, Bil'am gives the impression of arrogance, and displays willingness to deviate from God’s command for financial gain.[3]

An analysis of the verses leaves us with the impression that Bil'am relished the opportunity to curse the Jews – either for ideological or for financial reasons. Despite his reputation, he seems not only far from the prophetic ability of Moshe, he seems inferior to others as well.

The Introduction

When Bil'am is first approached he is asked to curse the Israelites, we quickly learn that this is no simple task for him. He needs to consult:

במדבר פרק כב

(ו) וְעַתָּה לְכָה נָּא אָרָה לִּי אֶת הָעָם הַזֶּה כִּי עָצוּם הוּא מִמֶּנִּי אוּלַי אוּכַל נַכֶּה בּוֹ וַאֲגָרְשֶׁנּוּ מִן הָאָרֶץ כִּי יָדַעְתִּי אֵת אֲשֶׁר תְּבָרֵךְ מְבֹרָךְ וַאֲשֶׁר תָּאֹר יוּאָר: (ז) וַיֵּלְכוּ זִקְנֵי מוֹאָב וְזִקְנֵי מִדְיָן וּקְסָמִים בְּיָדָם וַיָּבֹאוּ אֶל בִּלְעָם וַיְדַבְּרוּ אֵלָיו דִּבְרֵי בָלָק:(ח) וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵיהֶם לִינוּ פֹה הַלַּיְלָה וַהֲשִׁבֹתִי אֶתְכֶם דָּבָר כַּאֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר ה’ אֵלָי וַיֵּשְׁבוּ שָׂרֵי מוֹאָב עִם בִּלְעָם:

6. Come now therefore, I pray you, curse this People for me; for they are too mighty for me; perhaps I shall prevail, that we may defeat them, and that I may drive them out of the land; for I know that he whom you bless is blessed, and he whom you curse is cursed. 7. And the elders of Moav and the elders of Midian departed with divination in their hand; and they came to Bil'am, and spoke to him the words of Balak. 8. And he said to them, 'Lodge here this night, and I will bring back word to you, as God shall speak to me'; and the princes of Moav stayed with Bil'am. Bamidbar 22:6-8

Whereas Bil'am must wait for the night, in hope of a message, one of the elements which God stressed as evidence of the superior level of Moshe's prophecy was his ability to prophesize during waking hours:

במדבר פרק יב

(ו) וַיֹּאמֶר שִׁמְעוּ נָא דְבָרָי אִם יִהְיֶה נְבִיאֲכֶם ה’ בַּמַּרְאָה אֵלָיו אֶתְוַדָּע בַּחֲלוֹם אֲדַבֶּר בּוֹ:

(ז) לֹא כֵן עַבְדִּי מֹשֶׁה בְּכָל בֵּיתִי נֶאֱמָן הוּא:

6. And he said, Hear now my words; If there is a prophet among you, I, God, will make myself known to him in a vision, and will speak to him in a dream.7. Not so with my servant Moshe, for he is the trusted one in all my house. Bamidbar 12:6,7

Still, remarkably, God appears to Bil'am; the message is forthcoming:

במדבר פרק כב

(יב) וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים אֶל בִּלְעָם לֹא תֵלֵךְ עִמָּהֶם לֹא תָאֹר אֶת הָעָם כִּי בָרוּךְ הוּא:

12. And God said to Bil'am, You shall not go with them; you shall not curse the People; for they are blessed. Bamidbar 22:12

The suggestion to curse the Jews is shot down. God says two things to Bil'am: first, 'you shall not go', and second, 'you shall not curse'. Then, the reason: 'for they are blessed'. When relaying the answer, Bil'am neglects to relate the entire prophesy; he very selectively says:

במדבר פרק כב

(יג) וַיָּקָם בִּלְעָם בַּבֹּקֶר וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל שָׂרֵי בָלָק לְכוּ אֶל אַרְצְכֶם כִּי מֵאֵן ה’ לְתִתִּי לַהֲלֹךְ עִמָּכֶם:

13. And Bil'am rose up in the morning, and said to the princes of Balak, 'Go to your land; for God refuses to give me leave to go with you.' Bamidbar 22:13

He says only that he cannot go. He neglects to say that he cannot curse the Jews; for that matter, he does not tell them that the Jewish People are blessed - implying that no one can curse them, and the entire venture is folly.[4]

Despite God's very clear statement, when Balak's emissaries return, Bil'am enters into two-sided negotiations - with the messengers on the one hand, and God on the other:

במדבר פרק כב

(יח) וַיַּעַן בִּלְעָם וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל עַבְדֵי בָלָק אִם יִתֶּן לִי בָלָק מְלֹא בֵיתוֹ כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב לֹא אוּכַל לַעֲבֹר אֶת פִּי ה’ אֱלֹהָי לַעֲשׂוֹת קְטַנָּה אוֹ גְדוֹלָה: (יט) וְעַתָּה שְׁבוּ נָא בָזֶה גַּם אַתֶּם הַלָּיְלָה וְאֵדְעָה מַה יֹּסֵף ה’ דַּבֵּר עִמִּי:

18. And Bil'am answered and said to the servants of Balak, 'If Balak would give me his house full of silver and gold, I would not transgress the word of the Almighty, my God, to do less or more. 19. Now therefore, I beg you, remain you also here this night, that I may know what God will say further to me.' Bamidbar 22:18,19

Despite the previous rejection Bil'am thinks it worthwhile to try again:

במדבר פרק כב

(כ) וַיָּבֹא אֱלֹהִים אֶל בִּלְעָם לַיְלָה וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ אִם לִקְרֹא לְךָ בָּאוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים קוּם לֵךְ אִתָּם וְאַךְ אֶת הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אֲדַבֵּר אֵלֶיךָ אֹתוֹ תַעֲשֶׂה:

20. And God came to Bil'am at night and said to him, 'If the men come to call you, rise up, and go with them; but only that word which I shall say to you, that shall you do.' Bamidbar 22:20

The nuances are critical, and Bil'am ignores them. God says that he should accompany the emissaries “if the men come to call you” - but that is not what these men do. They did not really come for him, they came for him to curse the Jews.[5] This is the direct result of Bil'am's failure to repeat God's earlier instructions in their entirety. Bil'am "forgot" to mention that the Jewish People were un-cursable, that he will be unable to fulfill Balak's request because the Jews are blessed. Had he mentioned this part of the message, the emissaries would not have returned “to call on him”.

God treats man as he wishes to be treated; when a person chooses a path, God facilitates. Bil'am wanted to go with these men; he wanted to curse the Jewish People. Had he truly wished to heed the Word of God as it was revealed to him, he would not have been presented with a second opportunity to go on Balak's mission. He could have faithfully and fully transmitted his first divine message, or informed the emissaries on their second visit what God had communicated to him. Even if the men had come seeking honest counsel, seeking Bil'am's insight and vision, he had no good reason to accompany them; this was the content of God's second communication, the part that Bil'am's selective hearing screened out.[6]

Bil'am enthusiastically sets out on his mission. God is understandably upset:

במדבר פרק כב

(כא) וַיָּקָם בִּלְעָם בַּבֹּקֶר וַיַּחֲבֹשׁ אֶת אֲתֹנוֹ וַיֵּלֶךְ עִם שָׂרֵי מוֹאָב: (כב) וַיִּחַר אַף אֱלֹהִים כִּי הוֹלֵךְ הוּא וַיִּתְיַצֵּב מַלְאַךְ ה’ בַּדֶּרֶךְ לְשָׂטָן לוֹ וְהוּא רֹכֵב עַל אֲתֹנוֹ וּשְׁנֵי נְעָרָיו עִמּוֹ:

21. And Bil'am rose up in the morning, and saddled his donkey, and went with the princes of Moav. 22. And God’s anger was kindled because he went; and the angel of God stood in the way as an adversary against him. Now he was riding upon his donkey, and his two servants were with him. Bamidbar 22:21,22

A Talking Donkey

Along the way there is an epiphany, but the great seer is blind. He cannot see the danger that looms before him; he cannot sense that God is displeased with him. But someone – or, to be more precise, something - can see:

במדבר פרק כב

(כג) וַתֵּרֶא הָאָתוֹן אֶת מַלְאַךְ ה’ נִצָּב בַּדֶּרֶךְ וְחַרְבּוֹ שְׁלוּפָה בְּיָדוֹ וַתֵּט הָאָתוֹן מִן הַדֶּרֶךְ וַתֵּלֶךְ בַּשָּׂדֶה וַיַּךְ בִּלְעָם אֶת הָאָתוֹן לְהַטֹּתָהּ הַדָּרֶךְ: (כד) וַיַּעֲמֹד מַלְאַךְ ה’ בְּמִשְׁעוֹל הַכְּרָמִים גָּדֵר מִזֶּה וְגָדֵר מִזֶּה: (כה) וַתֵּרֶא הָאָתוֹן אֶת מַלְאַךְ ה’ וַתִּלָּחֵץ אֶל הַקִּיר וַתִּלְחַץ אֶת רֶגֶל בִּלְעָם אֶל הַקִּיר וַיֹּסֶף לְהַכֹּתָהּ: (כו) וַיּוֹסֶף מַלְאַךְ ה’ עֲבוֹר וַיַּעֲמֹד בְּמָקוֹם צָר אֲשֶׁר אֵין דֶּרֶךְ לִנְטוֹת יָמִין וּשְׂמֹאול: (כז) וַתֵּרֶא הָאָתוֹן אֶת מַלְאַךְ ה’ וַתִּרְבַּץ תַּחַת בִּלְעָם וַיִּחַר אַף בִּלְעָם וַיַּךְ אֶת הָאָתוֹן בַּמַּקֵּל: (כח) וַיִּפְתַּח ה’ אֶת פִּי הָאָתוֹן וַתֹּאמֶר לְבִלְעָם מֶה עָשִׂיתִי לְךָ כִּי הִכִּיתַנִי זֶה שָׁלֹשׁ רְגָלִים:

23. And the donkey saw the angel of God[7] standing on the path, and his sword drawn in his hand; and the donkey turned aside out of the path, and went into the field; and Bil'am struck the donkey, to turn it to the path. 24. But the angel of God stood in the pathway of the vineyards, a wall being on this side, and a wall on that side. 25. And when the donkey saw the angel of God, it pushed itself to the wall, and crushed Bil'am’s foot against the wall; and he struck her again. 26. And the angel of God went further, and stood in a narrow place, where there was no way to turn either to the right hand or to the left. 27. And when the donkey saw the angel of God, it fell down under Bil'am; and Bil'am’s anger was kindled, and he struck the donkey with a staff. 28. And God opened the mouth of the donkey, and it said to Bil'am, 'What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?' Bamidbar 22:23-28

The donkey can see that which the seer cannot; the donkey can speak as eloquently as the loquacious prophet. The donkey is an emissary of God, and sees danger where Bil'am sees an open road to opportunity, riches and fame. The donkey is the true seer. Bil'am, still suffering from blindness, wants to kill the divinely-inspired donkey:

במדבר פרק כב

(כט) וַיֹּאמֶר בִּלְעָם לָאָתוֹן כִּי הִתְעַלַּלְתְּ בִּי לוּ יֶשׁ חֶרֶב בְּיָדִי כִּי עַתָּה הֲרַגְתִּיךְ:(ל) וַתֹּאמֶר הָאָתוֹן אֶל בִּלְעָם הֲלוֹא אָנֹכִי אֲתֹנְךָ אֲשֶׁר רָכַבְתָּ עָלַי מֵעוֹדְךָ עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה הַהַסְכֵּן הִסְכַּנְתִּי לַעֲשׂוֹת לְךָ כֹּה וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא:(לא) וַיְגַל ה’ אֶת עֵינֵי בִלְעָם וַיַּרְא אֶת מַלְאַךְ ה’ נִצָּב בַּדֶּרֶךְ וְחַרְבּוֹ שְׁלֻפָה בְּיָדוֹ וַיִּקֹּד וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ לְאַפָּיו:

29. And Bil'am said to the donkey, because you have mocked me; I wish there was a sword in my hand, for now would I kill you. 30. And the donkey said to Bil'am, Am not I your donkey, upon which you have ridden ever since I was yours to this day? Was I ever wont to do so to you? And he said, No. 31. Then God opened the eyes of Bil'am, and he saw the angel of God standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand; and he bowed down his head, and fell on his face. Bamidbar 22:29-31

Who is the Donkey and Who the Prophet?

Just as God had opened the mouth of the donkey, God (finally) opened Bil'am’s eyes, enabling him to see what his donkey had seen all along. Clearly, Bil'am is not like Moshe; his vision is on a lower level than that of the donkey. And yet, he is granted vision: Just as God can use even an animal, grant it vision and allow it to speak, so, too, God can grant Bil'am an epiphany and allow him to speak. This is not evidence of an enlightened, spiritually elevated level; it seems to be a case of God using a particular individual for a specific purpose.[8]

Bil'am was more magician[9] than prophet. He bragged about his powers, inviting desperate people to flock to him. Ultimately, his “gift” of prophesy was like that of all the other prophets - in service of the Jewish People. Therefore perhaps he came to curse and ended up blessing.

Rav Zadok haKohen points out a similarity between the prophecies of Bil'am and Moshe: Whereas most prophets saw visions, or were given specific words to repeat, God spoke from Moshe’s throat. [10] Similarly, when Bil'am finally received his prophecy, he blessed the People of Israel because God spoke through his lips. Unlike Moshe, Bil'am's intention was to curse, not bless. Bil'am was a sociopath, and his participation in Balak's plot was motivated by a combination of greed and hatred. God had other plans, and Balak was allowed to pursue his chosen path up to the point that it impacted the Jewish People; at that point, Bil'am was used as a tool to bless.[11]

Comparing Bil'am to Moshe seems like a cruel joke: The vast difference in spiritual capabilities, in purity of spirit and purpose, is extreme; the chasm separating the two men cannot be approximated. It seems more appropriate to compare Bil'am to his own donkey, but even in that comparison, Bil'am falls short: The donkey sees more, understands more, is more loyal to its master. None of this can be said about Bil'am. He is remembered for all eternity as a failed anti-Semite, a pathetic Moshe-wannabe who squandered his opportunity for true greatness.

---

[1] Midrash Tanaim Dvarim Chapter 34

מדרש תנאים לדברים פרק לד

מה בין נבואתו שלמשה לנבואתו שלבלעם: בלעם מידבר עמו והוא נופל שנ' (במד' כד ד) נפל וג' עי' בלעם היה יודע אימתי המקום מדבר עמו שנ' (שם) מחזה שדי יחז': בלעם היה יודע מה עתיד לידבר עמו שנ' (שם כד טז) ויודע דע' על' מושלו מלה"ד לטבחו שלמלך שהיה יודע מה קרב על שלחנו שלמלך כך היה בלעם יודע מה עתיד לידבר עמו: מה בין נבואתו שלבלעם לנבואתו שלמשה משה מידבר עמו והוא עומד שנ' (ה כז) ואתה פה עמד עמדי: משה מידבר עמו פה אל פה ידבר שנ' (במד' יב ח) פה אל פה אד' בו: משה מידבר עמו פנים בפנים שנ' (ע' שמות לג יא) ודבר ה' אל משה פנים בפנים: אשר ידעו ה' פנים אל פנים למה נאמ' לפי שאמר משה לפני הקב"ה רבון העולם הראני נא את כבו' (שם לג יח) אמ' לו בעולם הזה שנמשל בפנים אין אתה רואה שנ' (שם לג כ) לא תוכל לר' את פני אבל לעולם הבא שנמשל באחור אתה רואה שנ' (שם לג כג) והסירתי את כפי ור' את אחרי אע"פ כן הראהו בשעת המיתה הא למדנו שכל המתים רואים:

[2] The verse cited above, in which we are told that Moshe was the most humble man, is the same verse in which God describes the uniqueness of Moshe's prophecy; presumably these two elements are related.

[3] See Rashi’s comments on Bamidbar 22:18

רש"י במדבר פרק כב פסוק יח

(יח) מלא ביתו כסף וזהב - למדנו שנפשו רחבה ומחמד ממון אחרים. אמר, ראוי לו ליתן לי כל כסף וזהב שלו, שהרי צריך לשכור חיילות רבות, ספק נוצח ספק אינו נוצח, ואני ודאי נוצח:

[4] There is another subtlety: Bil'am speaks of the Eternal, while (only) the Almighty speaks with him.

[5] The Seforno Bamidbar 22:22makes this point, albeit somewhat tersely.

ספורנו במדבר פרק כב פסוק כב

(כב) כי הולך הוא. שלא היה ענינו בדרך כמי שיוליכוהו אחרים כענין ויקם וילך אחריה (מלכים - ב ד, ל) אבל היה הולך הוא כבעל דבר וכמשתדל נגד רצון האל יתברך, כי לא באו לקרוא לו לעצה כלל:

[6] See Chizkuni Bamidbar 22:22

חזקוני במדבר פרק כב פסוק כב

(כב) ויחר אף ה' כי הולך הוא שהרי לא נתן לו רשות בפנים מאירות כדכתיב אם לקרא לך וגו' והיה לו להבין מפעם ראשונה שלא היה בדעתו של הקב"ה שילך הוא, ודוגמא זו מצינו במרגלים שלח לך אנשים וגלוי וידוע לפניו שלא היה בדעתו של הקב"ה שישתלחו, ד"א ויחר אף ה' כי הולך הוא שהרי אמר ואך את הדבר אשר אדבר אליך אותו תעשה ולא היה לו לבלעם ללכת עד שידע אותו הדבר והוא מיהר עצמו מרוב שנאה ולא המתין הדבור,

[7] Here the name YHVH is used, the Donkey sees that which Bilam can not.

[8] See the Drashot HaRan, drash 5.

דרשות הר"ן הדרוש החמישי בסגנון אחר

ומה שאמר כאן רבי (יונתן) [יוחנן] אין הקב"ה משרה שכינתו אלא על מי שישלמו בו התנאים הללו, אין הכונה שלא יהיה כן לעולם, שכבר אמרו רבותינו ז"ל (ספרי וזאת הברכה על הכתוב דברים לד י) ולא קם נביא עוד בישראל כמשה (דברים שם), בישראל לא קם, אבל באומות העולם קם, ואיזה זה בלעם. ואף על פי שאמר בספרי (שם) חילוקים הרבה שהיו בין נבואת משה לבלעם כמו שמפרש שם, אין ספק שהשרה הקב"ה שכינתו עליו, ואי אפשר שהגיע בלעם למדרגת הענוה, שכבר עליו אמרו בהרבה מן המסכתות (סנהדרין קה ב ע"ז ד ב) ולא עוד אלא שאנכי אתונך ביום ואשתך בלילה כתיב הכא (במדבר כב ל) ההסכן הסכנתי וכתוב התם (מ"א א ג) ותהי לו סוכנת, ואין לספק אחרי זאת המימרא, שהאיש הזה לא נתקדש בפרישות וביראת חטא, וכל שכן בענוה שהיא למעלה מהן. אלא אין ארבעה דברים דרבי (יונתן) [יוחנן] בכאן במה שיהיה תמיד, אבל לפעמים ישתנה זה לפי צורך השעה. וכבר אמרו (בספרי) (במדרש רבה בהעלותך על הכתוב במדבר ז פט) מפני מה השרה הקב"ה שכינתו על בלעם, ואף על פי שלא היה ראוי לה, כדי שלא יהא פתחון פה לאומות העולם לומר אילו היה לנו נביא כמה היינו עובדים להקב"ה.

[9] See book of Joshua 13:22

יהושע פרק יג

(כב) וְאֶת בִּלְעָם בֶּן בְּעוֹר הַקּוֹסֵם הָרְגוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּחֶרֶב אֶל חַלְלֵיהֶם:

22. Also Balaam, the son of Beor, the soothsayer, did the people of Israel slay with the sword among those who were slain by them.

[10] For more on this see my book Explorations Parshat Dvarim page 407 especially footnotes 1,2. See Zohar Dvarim 265a.

[11] Rav Zadok Pri Zadik Parshat Balak

ר' צדוק הכהן מלובלין - פרי צדיק במדבר פרשת בלק

אך נראה הענין על פי מה שאמרו בספרי (וזאת הברכה ט"ז) ולא קם נביא עוד בישראל כמשה אבל באומות העולם קם ואיזה זה בלעם וכו' והוא על פי מה שאמרו (ספרי מטות א') שהנביאים נתנבאו בכה אמר מוסיף עליהם משה שנתנבא בזה הדבר. והיינו דהנביאים נתנבאו בכה אמר שמתחילה שמעו הנבואה מה' יתברך ואחר כך אמרוה ומשה נתנבא בזה הדבר היינו שבשעה שאמר הנבואה אז שכינה מדברת מתוך גרונו והיינו זה הדבר כמורה באצבע ובזוה"ק (פרשה זו ר"י ב) הרי כ"ה וכו' דכד תפתח פומך היא תמלל מילין וכו'. והיינו שהוא לא היה מדבר רק השכינה היא המדברת. וזהו הענין מה שנאמר מקודם במאמר ה' לבלעם ואך את הדבר אשר אדבר אליך אותו תעשה ומה לשון תעשה והוה ליה למימר תדבר. ומקודם לעשות קטנה או גדולה שייך לשון עשיה אבל כאן שהוא רק דיבור מהו הלשון תעשה. אך הוא על פי האמור שהוא לא ידבר רק השכינה והוא יהיה עושה רק תנועות מוצאות הפה ועל דרך שאמרו (בבא מציעא צ' ב) עקימת פיו הויא מעשה. ואחר כך במאמר המלאך לבלעם אשר אדבר אליך אותו תדבר כתיב גם כן לשון אותו שמורה כמו זה והיינו אותו הדבר זה הדיבור אשר ישים אלהים בפיו בלא שום שינוי. ובלעם לבלק פעם הראשון אמר גם כן אותו אדבר בלא שום שינוי כנזכר ואחר כך שראה יותר שאין בכוחו בדיבורו אמר אותו אשמור לדבר דהיינו שהוא רק כשומר על הדברים אשר ישים ה' בפיו. ואחר כך דכתיב וישם דבר בפיו ואיתא (במדבר רבה כ', כ') הקב"ה פוקם את פיו וכו' וראה יותר שאין בכוחו אף לשתוק אמר כל אשר ידבר ה' אותו אעשה והיינו שהוא רק העושה בעקימת פיו דהוי מעשה. ואחר כך דכתיב ותהי עליו רוח אלהים שכתב הרמב"ן שהיה מעין נבואה ולכן התפאר אז נאום שומע אמרי אל וגו' אמר בלעם אשר ידבר ה' אותו אדבר התפאר עצמו שיש לו גם כן חלק בהדיבור.

וזה ענין דכל התורה כולה גם הסיפורים אף שהם סיפורים על ידי שנכתבו על ידי משה נעשו דברי תורה כמו מילין דהגר מילין דעשו מילין דלבן על זה אמר משה כתב ספרו שהם כולן בכלל ספרו. וכן מילין דבלק מה שדיבר והמעשיות הוא גם כן בכלל כתב ספרו שעל ידי כתיבתו אותם בהתורה נעשה הכל תורה. ואף שהתורה קדמה לעולם אלפים שנה מכל מקום כתיב (מלאכי ג', כ"ב) תורת משה עבדי שנקרא על שמו וזה כתב ספרו ומשום הכי לא הוזכר פרשת בלק. אך פרשת בלעם שבזה לא היה צריך לחדש דבר שהרי באמת היו דבר ה' רק שהיה בלעם עוקם שפתיו ועושה מעשה מוצאות הפה על זה אמרו ביחוד ופרשת בלעם שאינו בכלל כתב ספרו. מה שאין כן שם בגמרא ביקשו לקבוע פרשת בלק בקריאת שמע היינו כל הפרשה מן וירא בלק עד אחר נבואת בלעם דלקבוע פרשת בלעם היינו נבואתו לבד לא היה אפשר כמו שאמרו בגמרא שם כל פרשה וכו' דלא פסקה משה רבינו לא פסקינן ובפרשת בלק אין הפסקת פרשה עד אחר גמר נבואת בלעם והיה צריך לקבוע גם מילין דבלק דבריו עם המעשיות ולכן קראו בגמרא פרשת בלק כל הפרשה מילין דבלק ומילין דבלעם עד גמר הפרשה:

parshat chukat

Parshat Chukat 5769

Rabbi Ari Kahn

To Truly Believe

After the death of Miriam a crisis developed in the camp; there was no water to drink:

במדבר פרק כ

(א) וַיָּבֹאוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כָּל הָעֵדָה מִדְבַּר צִן בַּחֹדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן וַיֵּשֶׁב הָעָם בְּקָדֵשׁ וַתָּמָת שָׁם מִרְיָם וַתִּקָּבֵר שָׁם:(ב) וְלֹא הָיָה מַיִם לָעֵדָה וַיִּקָּהֲלוּ עַל מֹשֶׁה וְעַל אַהֲרֹן:(ג) וַיָּרֶב הָעָם עִם מֹשֶׁה וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֵאמֹר וְלוּ גָוַעְנוּ בִּגְוַע אַחֵינוּ לִפְנֵי ה’:(ד) וְלָמָה הֲבֵאתֶם אֶת קְהַל ה’ אֶל הַמִּדְבָּר הַזֶּה לָמוּת שָׁם אֲנַחְנוּ וּבְעִירֵנוּ:(ה) וְלָמָה הֶעֱלִיתֻנוּ מִמִּצְרַיִם לְהָבִיא אֹתָנוּ אֶל הַמָּקוֹם הָרָע הַזֶּה לֹא מְקוֹם זֶרַע וּתְאֵנָה וְגֶפֶן וְרִמּוֹן וּמַיִם אַיִן לִשְׁתּוֹת:

1. Then the People of Israel, the whole congregation, came into the desert of Zin in the first month; and the people abode in Kadesh; and Miriam died there, and was buried there. 2. And there was no water for the congregation; and they gathered themselves together against Moshe and against Aharon. 3. And the people quarreled with Moshe, and spoke, saying, 'and would that we had died when our brothers died before God! 4. And why have you brought up the congregation of God into this wilderness, that we and our cattle should die there? 5. And why have you made us come out of Egypt, to bring us in to this evil place? This is no place of seed, or of figs, or of vines, or of pomegranates; nor is there any water to drink. Bamidbar 20:1-5

Rabbinic tradition connects the death of Miriam with the sudden lack of water in the camp: The miraculous well that followed them in the desert and supplied their needs was in the merit of Miriam; with her death, the water ceased.

במדבר רבה (וילנא) פרשת במדבר פרשה א סימן ב

והבאר בזכות מרים מה כתיב (במדבר, כ, א) ותמת שם מרים ותקבר שם ומה כתיב אח"כ (במדבר כ, ב) ולא היה מים לעדה

And the well was due to the merit of Miriam. For what does Scripture say? And Miriam died there, and was buried there (Bamidbar 20, 1). And what is written after that? And there was no water for the congregation (Bamidbar 20, 2). Midrash Rabba Bamidbar 1:2

The water shortage served as the impetus for yet another confrontation between the Jewish People and Moshe. Their litany of complaints had by this point become a familiar chorus. Over the years, they had demanded meat as well as water, complained about the Manna, complained about leaving Egypt, complained about being in the desert, even complained about the Land of Israel. Unfortunately, this latest complaint does not surprise us. Yet in all previous episodes, their complaints were answered in one of two ways: either their wishes were fulfilled, or the People were punished. In this new incident, a third outcome is introduced: Moshe and Aharon are severely punished.

במדבר פרק כ

(י) וַיַּקְהִלוּ מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן אֶת הַקָּהָל אֶל פְּנֵי הַסָּלַע וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם שִׁמְעוּ נָא הַמֹּרִים הֲמִן הַסֶּלַע הַזֶּה נוֹצִיא לָכֶם מָיִם: (יא) וַיָּרֶם מֹשֶׁה אֶת יָדוֹ וַיַּךְ אֶת הַסֶּלַע בְּמַטֵּהוּ פַּעֲמָיִם וַיֵּצְאוּ מַיִם רַבִּים וַתֵּשְׁתְּ הָעֵדָה וּבְעִירָם: ס

(יב) וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ אֶל מֹשֶׁה וְאֶל אַהֲרֹן יַעַן לֹא הֶאֱמַנְתֶּם בִּי לְהַקְדִּישֵׁנִי לְעֵינֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לָכֵן לֹא תָבִיאוּ אֶת הַקָּהָל הַזֶּה אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נָתַתִּי לָהֶם: (יג) הֵמָּה מֵי מְרִיבָה אֲשֶׁר רָבוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת ה’ וַיִּקָּדֵשׁ בָּם: ס

10. And Moshe and Aharon gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said to them, Hear now, you rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock? 11. And Moshe lifted up his hand, and with his rod he struck the rock twice; and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also. 12. And God said to Moshe and Aharon, Because you did not believe in me to sanctify me before the eyes of the People of Israel, therefore you shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them. 13. This is the water of Merivah, because the People of Israel strove with God, and He was sanctified in them. Bamidbar 20:10-13

Moshe cannot lead these people into the Land of Israel because of a lack of faith in God; Rashi stresses that had it not been for this sin Moshe would have entered the Land. On its own, Rashi's comment here would have been somewhat perplexing: Rashi goes to great lengths to stress that this particular sin, and no other, is the cause of Moshe's ultimate exile. Had he not hit the rock, Moshe would have entered the Land of Israel. In Rashi's view, the Torah includes the rationale for Moshe's punishment in order to forestall any conjecture that Moshe was guilty of the same sin as the rest of his generation - the sin of the spies.[1]

The Midrash seems to address this same problem from a slightly different perspective: It is Moshe himself who asks that the nature of his sin be spelled out in the text, recorded for all posterity.

דברים רבה (וילנא) פרשה ב

ד"א מהו לאמר אמר לפניו רבש"ע תכתב חטייה שלי לדורות … כך אמר משה רבש"ע תכתב חטיה שלי לדורות שלא יהיו ישראל אומרים זייף משה בתורה או אמר דבר שלא נצטווה וידעו שלא היה אלא על המים הרי בעת ההיא לאמר.

So Moshe said before God: ' Let my actual sin be written down for future generations that Israel may not say, "Moshe falsified something in the Torah." or, "he spoke something which he had not been commanded"; and they shall know that it was merely because of the water [that I was punished].’ This is the force of the words, AT THAT TIME, SAYING. Midrash Rabba Dvarim, 2:6

Moshe chose transparency and accurate reporting over revisionism. He feared that cynical readers in future generations might suspect that the Torah is less than accurate, a whitewashed account penned by his own hand and not the Hand of God. He hoped to leave no room for suspicions that he had corrupted the Torah itself, embellished or edited the Word of God; he wanted the record to reflect that his only sin was in the matter of the Waters of Meriva, the "Waters of Strife".

Ironically, despite this plea, the precise nature of Moshe’s sin is a question that has been answered in various ways, a topic that has become confused and confusing. On the one hand, there are abundant explications of the “Waters of Strife” incident, each proposing different motivations or understandings of Moshe's sin.[2] On the other hand, despite the unequivocal statement by God Himself in these very verses attributing this incident as the cause of Moshe's punishment, other sources point to different episodes in Moshe’s life to explain the seemingly harsh decree.

The Mechilta of Rav Shimon Bar Yochai, a very ancient source, cites a much earlier episode in Moshe’s life as the cause of Moshe's banishment: As the Jewish People languished in slavery, God appeared to Moshe and tasked him with leading the people to freedom; Moshe demurred. Only after being asked numerous times, Moshe half-heartedly acquiesced:

שמות פרק ד

(יג) וַיֹּאמֶר בִּי אֲדֹנָי שְׁלַח נָא בְּיַד תִּשְׁלָח:

And he said, O my Lord, send, I beseech you, by the hand of him whom you will send. Shmot 4:13

It was this belated, halfhearted response that caused God to foreswear Moshe's entry to the Land.[3] While it seems difficult to reconcile this opinion with the explanation given by God regarding the “Waters of Strife”, this commentary is not unique in its apparent contradiction of the text. In fact, Rashi himself offers an alternative motivation in comments on an earlier episode, contradicting both the text of our present parsha and his own comments on that text! The incident in question is Moshe's dialogue with God in Egypt: Moshe delivers God's message to Pharoh, but the situation seems to worsen rather than improve. Moshe then questions God:

שמות פרק ה

(כב) וַיָּשָׁב מֹשֶׁה אֶל ה’ וַיֹּאמַר אֲדֹנָי לָמָה הֲרֵעֹתָה לָעָם הַזֶּה לָמָּה זֶּה שְׁלַחְתָּנִי: (כג) וּמֵאָז בָּאתִי אֶל פַּרְעֹה לְדַבֵּר בִּשְׁמֶךָ הֵרַע לָעָם הַזֶּה וְהַצֵּל לֹא הִצַּלְתָּ אֶת עַמֶּךָ: ]פרק ו[ (א) וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ אֶל מֹשֶׁה עַתָּה תִרְאֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶעֱשֶׂה לְפַרְעֹה כִּי בְיָד חֲזָקָה יְשַׁלְּחֵם וּבְיָד חֲזָקָה יְגָרְשֵׁם מֵאַרְצוֹ: ס

22. And Moshe returned to God, and said, Lord, why have You done evil to this People? Why have You sent me? 23. For since I came to Pharoh to speak in Your Name, he has done evil to this People; neither have You saved Your People at all. [Chapter 6] 1. And God said to Moshe, Now shall you see what I will do to Pharoh; for with a strong hand shall he let them go, and with a strong hand shall he drive them out of his land. Shmot 5:22,23 6:1

Rashi comments on the words “now you shall see,” implying that Moshe will see the fall of Pharoh, but will not live to see the fall of the kings who occupy Israel.[4] The implication is that Moshe's fate had already been sealed in Egypt, long before the Exodus, long before the incident at Meriva. This seems to contradict Rashi’s own commentary on our current parsha, discussed above: Was Moshe punished for striking the rock, or for his complaints about the progress of liberation from Egypt, some 39 years earlier?

Among those who offer alternative reasons for Moshe's punishment is Moshe himself! While recounting the events of the sin of the spies, Moshe says:

דברים פרק א

(לד) וַיִּשְׁמַע ה’ אֶת קוֹל דִּבְרֵיכֶם וַיִּקְצֹף וַיִּשָּׁבַע לֵאמֹר: (לה) אִם יִרְאֶה אִישׁ בָּאֲנָשִׁים הָאֵלֶּה הַדּוֹר הָרָע הַזֶּה אֵת הָאָרֶץ הַטּוֹבָה אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּעְתִּי לָתֵת לַאֲבֹתֵיכֶם: (לו) זוּלָתִי כָּלֵב בֶּן יְפֻנֶּה הוּא יִרְאֶנָּה וְלוֹ אֶתֵּן אֶת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר דָּרַךְ בָּהּ וּלְבָנָיו יַעַן אֲשֶׁר מִלֵּא אַחֲרֵי ה’: (לז) גַּם בִּי הִתְאַנַּף ה’ בִּגְלַלְכֶם לֵאמֹר גַּם אַתָּה לֹא תָבֹא שָׁם:

34. And God heard the sound of your words, and was angry, and swore, saying, 35. Surely not one of the men of this evil generation shall see that good land, which I swore to give to your fathers, 36. Save Caleb the son of Yefuneh; he shall see it, and to him will I give the land that he has trodden upon, and to his children, because he has wholly followed God. 37. Also God was angry with me on your account, saying, You also shall not go there. Dvarim 1:34-37

Not only does Moshe recount his own punishment within the context of the punishment of the spies, he blames the People for his harsh sentence. This was the very conclusion that Rashi wished to avoid, yet Moshe seems quite clear in associating his own exclusion from Israel with the sin of the spies and the People's reaction to it. This same association is echoed at a later juncture, when Moshe prays for the punishment to be rescinded. When his prayers are rebuffed, he once again points an accusing finger.

דברים פרק ג

(כג) וָאֶתְחַנַּן אֶל ה’ בָּעֵת הַהִוא לֵאמֹר: (כד) אֲדֹנָי ה’ אַתָּה הַחִלּוֹתָ לְהַרְאוֹת אֶת עַבְדְּךָ אֶת גָּדְלְךָ וְאֶת יָדְךָ הַחֲזָקָה אֲשֶׁר מִי אֵל בַּשָּׁמַיִם וּבָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה כְמַעֲשֶׂיךָ וְכִגְבוּרֹתֶךָ: (כה) אֶעְבְּרָה נָּא וְאֶרְאֶה אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַטּוֹבָה אֲשֶׁר בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן הָהָר הַטּוֹב הַזֶּה וְהַלְּבָנֹן: (כו) וַיִּתְעַבֵּר ה’ בִּי לְמַעַנְכֶם וְלֹא שָׁמַע אֵלָי וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ אֵלַי רַב לָךְ אַל תּוֹסֶף דַּבֵּר אֵלַי עוֹד בַּדָּבָר הַזֶּה: (כז) עֲלֵה רֹאשׁ הַפִּסְגָּה וְשָׂא עֵינֶיךָ יָמָּה וְצָפֹנָה וְתֵימָנָה וּמִזְרָחָה וּרְאֵה בְעֵינֶיךָ כִּי לֹא תַעֲבֹר אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן הַזֶּה: (כח) וְצַו אֶת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְחַזְּקֵהוּ וְאַמְּצֵהוּ כִּי הוּא יַעֲבֹר לִפְנֵי הָעָם הַזֶּה וְהוּא יַנְחִיל אוֹתָם אֶת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר תִּרְאֶה: (כט) וַנֵּשֶׁב בַּגָּיְא מוּל בֵּית פְּעוֹר: פ

23. And I pleaded with God at that time, saying, 24. Almighty God, you have begun to show Your servant Your greatness, and Your mighty hand; for what god is there in heaven or on earth, that can achieve Your works and Your might? 25. I beg You, let me go over, and see the good land that is beyond the Jordan, that goodly mountain region, and the Levanon. 26. But God was angry with me for your sakes, and would not hear me; and God said to me, Let it suffice you; speak no more to Me of this matter. 27. Get up to the top of Pisgah, and lift up your eyes westward, and northward, and southward, and eastward, and behold it with your eyes; for you shall not go over this Jordan. 28. But charge Joshua, and encourage him, and strengthen him; for he shall go over before this people, and he shall cause them to inherit the land which you shall see. 29. So we remained in the valley opposite Beth-Peor. Dvarim 3:23-29

A careful reading shows that Moshe isn’t blaming them as much as saying that he must stay on the other side of the Jordan for their sake. The Midrash notices this nuance and explains:

דברים רבה (וילנא) פרשה ב

ט כי לא תעבור את הירדן הזה, אמר לו הקב"ה למשה אם אתה נקבר כאן אצלן בזכותך הן באין עמך …כך אמר לו הקב"ה למשה אם נקבר אתה אצלם במדבר הן באים בזכותך ואת בא בראשם שנאמר (דברים לג) וירא ראשית לו וגו' ויתא ראשי עם.

9. FOR YOU SHALL NOT GO OVER THIS JORDAN (3, 27). God said to Moshe: 'If you are buried here, near those [who died in the wilderness], then they will enter the land for your sake [at the time of Resurrection]…' Similarly, God said to Moshe: 'Should you be buried near those who died in the wilderness, they will enter the land for your sake, and you will be at their head, as it is said, 'And he chose a first part for himself, for there a portion of a ruler was reserved; and there came the heads of the people (Devarim 33, 21). Midrash Rabba Dvarim, 2:9

Moshe is not the only one to provide a retrospective of his crime and punishment. When the time for Moshe to die arrives, God speaks:

דברים פרק לב

(מח) וַיְדַבֵּר ה’ אֶל מֹשֶׁה בְּעֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה לֵאמֹר:(מט) עֲלֵה אֶל הַר הָעֲבָרִים הַזֶּה הַר נְבוֹ אֲשֶׁר בְּאֶרֶץ מוֹאָב אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי יְרֵחוֹ וּרְאֵה אֶת אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי נֹתֵן לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לַאֲחֻזָּה:(נ) וּמֻת בָּהָר אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה עֹלֶה שָׁמָּה וְהֵאָסֵף אֶל עַמֶּיךָ כַּאֲשֶׁר מֵת אַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ בְּהֹר הָהָר וַיֵּאָסֶף אֶל עַמָּיו:(נא) עַל אֲשֶׁר מְעַלְתֶּם בִּי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּמֵי מְרִיבַת קָדֵשׁ מִדְבַּר צִן עַל אֲשֶׁר לֹא קִדַּשְׁתֶּם אוֹתִי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:(נב) כִּי מִנֶּגֶד תִּרְאֶה אֶת הָאָרֶץ וְשָׁמָּה לֹא תָבוֹא אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי נֹתֵן לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל: פ

48. And God spoke to Moshe that same day, saying, 49. Go up to this Mountain Avarim, to Mount Nevo, which is in the land of Moav, that is opposite Yericho; and behold the land of Canaan, which I give to the People of Israel for a possession; 50. And die in the mount where you go up, and be gathered to your people; as Aharon your brother died in Mount Hor, and was gathered to his people; 51. Because you trespassed against me among the People of Israel at the waters of Merivat-Kadesh, in the wilderness of Zin; because you did not sanctify me in the midst of the People of Israel. 52. Yet you shall see the land before you; but you shall not go there to the land which I give the people of Israel. Dvarim 32:48-52

Here the reader is offered a unique perspective. God Himself speaks, and explains why the narrative unfolds as it does: Moshe will die in exile due to the sin at the “Waters of Strife”. How can there be any further discussion, any alternative interpretation? Twice God speaks in the Torah about the death of Moshe, and in both instances it is related to the “Waters of Strife”; all other commentary is nullified, pointless – even presumptuous.

Our assumption must be that Moshe and the later commentaries knew full well what crime God Himself associated with this punishment; the verses of the Torah were as at least as familiar them as to they are to us. Surely, then, our task is to find the relationship between the various perspectives on Moshe's punishment, the common denominator between each explanation of Moshe's crime. Only such a common thread can explain why more than one interpretation – God's interpretation – exists.

In describing Moshe's sin here in Parshat Chukat, God raises two distinct objections: “ma'altem bi - you trespassed against Me”, and “you did not sanctify Me”. The language in the Book of Devarim used to describe the same sin is different: “Because you did not believe in me to sanctify me in the eyes of the People of Israel”. Both verses speak of a missed opportunity to sanctify God's Name, but it is the charge that Moshe did not believe in God which is particularly frightening. If Moshe, who stood alone with God on Mount Sinai, who spoke to God "face to face", whom God Himself described as the most loyal to Him of any of His servants, doesn’t “believe” in God, what chance do the rest of us have of achieving "belief"? How can the entire nation possibly believe if even Moshe was found lacking? Perhaps this problem may relate to a different incident regarding Moshe's faith: When Moshe was first told of the mission that God intended for him, Moshe questioned the belief of the entire nation. Moshe tries to avoid his own destiny; he stalls, he declines the appointment to the role of savior of the Jews – and he expresses reservations about the ability of the slaves to believe.

שמות פרק ד

(א) וַיַּעַן מֹשֶׁה וַיֹּאמֶר וְהֵן לֹא יַאֲמִינוּ לִי וְלֹא יִשְׁמְעוּ בְּקֹלִי כִּי יֹאמְרוּ לֹא נִרְאָה אֵלֶיךָ ה’:

1. And Moshe answered and said, 'But, behold, they will not believe me, nor listen to my voice; for they will say, God has not appeared to you. Shmot 4:1

Apparently Moshe thought that these people, who had been abused and enslaved, had lost hope. He assumed that they had lost faith in their own redemption, in the possibility that a redeemer was sent by God. Moshe underestimated the People of Israel. This was the reason he was less than enthusiastic about accepting the position of redeemer; he feared that the mission was doomed to failure because the people had lost faith. Not only was Moshe questioning the people, he was questioning the educational and spiritual accomplishments of their forefathers. The doubts he had about their continued commitment to the Covenant implied that Avraham and Sarah, Yitzchak and Rivkah, Yaakov Rachel and Leah had failed, as parents and grandparents, to instill their own belief in their children and grandchildren -- belief that could withstand exile and slavery, that could transcend geographic distance from the Holy Land, belief that would allow them to enthusiastically accept the redeemer when he finally arrived. [5]

The Talmud says that God defended the People against Moshe’s accusation:

תלמוד בבלי מסכת שבת דף צז עמוד א

אמר ריש לקיש: החושד בכשרים לוקה בגופו, דכתיב (שמות ד) והן לא יאמינו לי וגו', וגליא קמי קודשא בריך הוא דמהימני ישראל. אמר לו: הן מאמינים בני מאמינים, ואתה אין סופך להאמין. הן מאמינים - דכתיב (שמות ד) 'ויאמן העם'; בני מאמינים (בראשית טו) 'והאמין בה'.' אתה אין סופך להאמין - שנאמר (במדבר כ) 'יען לא האמנתם בי וגו'.

Resh Lakish said: He who entertains a suspicion against innocent men is bodily afflicted, for it is written, [And Moshe . . . said,] 'But they will not believe me'; but it was known to the Holy One, Blessed be He, that Israel would believe. Said He to him: They are believers, [and] the descendants of believers, whereas you will ultimately disbelieve. They are believers, as it is written, "and the people believed"; the descendants of believers: "and he [Avraham] believed in God." You will ultimately disbelieve, as it is said, "[And God said unto Moshe and Aharon,] 'Because you did not believe in me.'[6] Talmud Bavli Shabbat 97a

Moshe casts aspersions on the faith of the Jewish People, but he does not stop there.

Why have you sent me? 23. For since I came to Pharaoh to speak in your name, he has done evil to this people; neither have you saved your people at all. [Chapter 6] 1. And God said to Moshe, Now shall you see what I will do to Pharaoh.

By this point, Moshe has reluctantly accepted the task; he begins to work toward redeeming the Jewish People, but there are setbacks. Moshe questions God, questions the mission on which he has been sent, and questions his own place in the larger picture. Moshe was faced with his first real setback, and once again he suspects that the people will lose faith. If before his mission began he thought the people had no faith, he reverted to this same mindset; now he fears that due to the reversal of fortune the people again would not continue to believe. Rashi notes the 'superfluous" word 'now': Moshe would see victory over Pharoh, but he would not see the ultimate, future victory in the Land of Israel.

Much later, in the Book of Devarim, Moshe explains that his own death is part and parcel of the generation of the spies: "Also God was angry with me for your sakes (biglalchem), saying, 'You also shall not go there'." Dvarim 1:34. Was this, or was this not, the reason Moshe was punished? In fact, the answer is – yes and no. The sin of the spies might not have had anything to do with Moshe's death, were it not actually one and the same as his earlier sin: breach of faith. The sin of the spies caused the People of Israel to lose faith in their destiny. It caused a setback on the route of their march to the Promised Land, a reversal of the process of redemption – not unlike the manner in which Pharoh's defiance of Moshe's message increased the slaves' burden. The path to redemption seemed longer, the fulfillment of the dream eluded their grasp just when it was in sight.

When Moshe relates his punishment to the sin of the spies, he is, in fact, taking a longer view of the circumstances: Had the spies not led the people astray, his own sin would not have taken on such weight. Had the route to the Promised Land not become so long and circuitous as a result of the sin of the spies, the People would have entered the Land of Israel without ever having stopped at Meriva; Miriam would not have died on the 40-year trek that never was, and the water source would never have run dry. There would have been no sin at the rock of Merivat-Kadesh. Had the People of Israel never been infected by the spies' faith-shaking report, Moshe's own breach of faith would have seemed an isolated, forgivable lapse. Only when this malady of faith is seen to have spread through the nation, Moshe's sin is seen as part of a far more widespread phenomenon, a defining spiritual flaw of the entire generation that perished in the desert. A careful reading of the verses in Devarim reveals this very claim in Moshe's interpretation of his punishment: “But God was angry with me (lma'anchem) for your sakes, and would not hear me; and God said to me, Let it suffice you; speak no more to me of this matter.”

Moshe's proper place of rest was in exile, with the generation he led out of Egypt, with the people he had personally committed to leading to the Promised Land. If they weren’t going, neither could he. Only at the End of Days will he finally lead them to the Promised Land.[7]

The idea of emuna - belief - may be related to Moshe's sin and his punishment in more ways than we had realized. The Netziv's comments on our parsha highlight one very important aspect of Moshe's sin that we might otherwise have overlooked: In general, the Netziv understands the main theme of the Book of Bamidbar as being the shift from supernatural existence to natural existence: God's relationship with the Jewish People, from the moment Moshe appeared before Pharoh, through the period of the plagues, the Redemption, the splitting of the sea, and throughout their sojourn in the desert, was supernatural. God's involvement in Jewish history was direct, explicit, unmistakable; the People of Israel were sustained by miraculous means. As they approached their final destination, the relationship with God would necessarily change: the people were being prepared for life in their own land, a life of natural existence.[8] The Netziv sees Moshe's sin in this larger context. Moshe's leadership up to this point had also been supernatural. He was the agent of God's direct involvement in the day –to- day existence of the nation. At the point that their supernatural water source was no longer available, the Jewish People stood to learn a vital lesson, and it was Moshe who was meant to teach it to them. It was time to make the shift to a more natural way of life, to a more permanent method of fulfilling their human needs. The Jewish People were meant to learn how they should behave in a situation of distress, in a crisis that threatened their physical existence. Their supernatural water source would not accompany them into the Promised Land; how, then, were they to proceed into this new era?

The instructions Moshe received were very specific: Take the staff with which all of the miracles were performed, but do not use it. Do not resort to the supernatural. Begin to teach the People the power of speech – the power of prayer. Teach them that as individuals and as a nation, they have the ability to have a "natural" relationship with God, through prayer. Moshe was instructed not to hit the rock, but rather to teach the people to pray, as the farmers would one day when they enter the Land and are faced with drought.

העמק דבר על במדבר פרק כ פסוק יב

לכן לא תביאו וגו'. לא היה העונש שימותו במדבר שא"כ לא היה משה מתפלל להחל שבועת ה' אלא הגזירה היה מדה במדה. שבשביל שלא הראו לישראל הדרך להתנהג בא"י בעת עצירת גשמים וכדומה ע"כ. לא תביאו וגו'. ובמ"א כתיב על אשר מעלתם בי מעילה הוא שנוי בדבר ה' כמש"כ בספר ויקרא כ"ו מ'. והכונה כאן שעשה משה נס ושנוי בהליכות הטבע בעת שלא היה הרצון בכך וזה נקרא מעילה כמו שנענש רבא בעת שעשה נס שלא ברצון ה' כדאיתא בתענית פ"ג והיה נזוף מחמת זה כדאי' בחולין דף קל"ג א:

It is in this context that the Netziv explains the use of the word me'ila “trespass” (Dvarim 32:51) in God’s description of the sin: The purpose of the episode was to teach the people to pray, to instill within their hearts more emuna (faith) in God in times of need. Instead, Moshe “misappropriated” the miracle, and gave the impression that it was his own stature as a prophet which brought the desired results. Rather than wean them off their dependence on supernatural sustenance, hitting the rock reinforced the people's dependence on Moshe and the miracles he facilitated. He misappropriated the emunah of the nation.

The opportunity that Moshe missed was no trifling matter; the lesson that Moshe was meant to teach is one of the most basic tenets of Judaism, and one of the most critical tools for life in the Land of Israel. As an agricultural society, the nation will need belief, above all else. Indeed, the Jewish view of the symbiotic relationship of the Children of Israel and the Land of Israel is this very fine line of emunah: the line between natural existence as a farming society on its land - and faith in the supernatural, in God's involvement in our history. It is the belief of the farmer that the tremendous investment of time and toil will bring results, but that the results of this physical, natural labor are dependent on God's "investment" in the process. In this sense, agriculture is a wonderful metaphor for all of Judaism; as the Talmud teaches, agriculture is related to faith.[9] We work as hard as we can – yet still recognize the need to lift our ours heavenward and pray for rain. This was the lesson that was to have been taught at Meriva. This was the lesson Moshe did not teach when, instead of “speaking” to the rock, lifting his voice in a prayer for physical sustenance, he reverted to the "desert mentality" and struck with his staff, bringing one more miracle like all the others the nation had seen in the desert.

The Land of Israel is hardwired for belief; it is a land which requires its inhabitants to look heavenward. Unlike Egypt, Israel has no overflowing rivers to sustain life. All of its water, its life-source, comes from above.

דברים פרק יא

(י) כִּי הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה בָא שָׁמָּה לְרִשְׁתָּהּ לֹא כְאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם הִוא אֲשֶׁר יְצָאתֶם מִשָּׁם אֲשֶׁר תִּזְרַע אֶת זַרְעֲךָ וְהִשְׁקִיתָ בְרַגְלְךָ כְּגַן הַיָּרָק:(יא) וְהָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אַתֶּם עֹבְרִים שָׁמָּה לְרִשְׁתָּהּ אֶרֶץ הָרִים וּבְקָעֹת לִמְטַר הַשָּׁמַיִם תִּשְׁתֶּה מָּיִם:(יב) אֶרֶץ אֲשֶׁר ה’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ דֹּרֵשׁ אֹתָהּ תָּמִיד עֵינֵי ה’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ בָּהּ מֵרֵשִׁית הַשָּׁנָה וְעַד אַחֲרִית שָׁנָה: ס

10. For the land, which you enter to possess, is not as the land of Egypt, from where you came out, where you sowed your seed, and watered it with your foot, as a garden of vegetables; 11. But the land, which you are going over to possess, is a land of hills and valleys, and drinks water from the rain of the skies; 12. A land which God your God cares for; the eyes of God your God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year to the end of the year. Dvarim 11:10-12

The Land of Israel is therefore the perfect partner for the People of Israel who are also “hardwired” for belief. As the Sfat Emet teaches, the Forefathers were successful in instilling faith. If we look at a fellow Jew and the faith is not evident, if they seem distant from belief and far from tradition, we must not be quick to judge, for the Forefathers transmitted something so durable and powerful that belief in God is deep inside the soul of every Jew. In the words of the Sfat Emet, "just as the ways of God are often beyond man's comprehension, the way of the Jewish soul is often impenetrable to the casual observer."[10]

In Judaism, belief in God is axiomatic. The Rambam insists that belief in the Jewish People is equally axiomatic. Though these two foundations of Judaism may be obscured by the tribulations of human history, they will ultimately be revealed in their full force in the Messianic Age. Indeed, the clear and unmistakable affirmation of these parallel foundations of Judaism is the very definition of the Messianic Age: The Messianic redemption is defined as a period in which God's involvement in our personal and collective lives becomes clear, unmistakable, immediately obvious to each and every one of us. The process of this future redemption, the ultimate redemption, is actuated by the return to emunah: Jews will return to God, will find the belief which is all too often hidden deep within.

רמב"ם הלכות תשובה פרק ז הלכה ה

כל הנביאים כולן צוו על התשובה ואין ישראל נגאלין אלא בתשובה, וכבר הבטיחה תורה שסוף ישראל לעשות תשובה בסוף גלותן ומיד הן נגאלין שנאמר והיה כי יבאו עליך כל הדברים וגו' ושבת עד ה' אלהיך ושב ה' אלהיך וגו'

Moshe's sin was the failure to establish the ongoing dialogue of faith between the People and God. The irony is so sharp, the tragedy so human: Moshe had suspected that the People of Israel lacked emunah; he had cast a shadow of doubt on the founding Mothers' and Fathers' success in instilling emunah in the following generations. Now it was Moshe's turn to teach emunah – and he missed the opportunity. Years earlier, when Moshe questioned Jewish belief, he questioned the efficacy of the tradition of belief passed on from the Forefathers. When he hit the rock instead of speaking to it, he forfeited his role as the conduit of this belief to the next generation. In both instances, the sin is the same: When Moshe saw the redemptive process stall, or regress, he didn’t think the people could continue. He didn’t think they had enough faith. When the sin of the spies overshadowed their faith, Moshe again thought that they didn’t have the faith to continue.

God disagreed. God believes in the Jewish People. He knew that we could enter the Land, that we would have the emunah to lift our hearts and voices heavenward, to remember that God is involved in our lives through the natural processes of history – and to pray. And when we do, God will answer. For our part, we must not lose sight of the faith that is our legacy, our very identity: faith in God, and faith in His People.

אנחנו מאמינים בני מאמינים
ואין לנו על מי להישען
אלא על אבינו
שבשמיים

---

[1] See Rashi Bamidbar 20:12

רש"י על במדבר פרק כ פסוק יב

(יב) יען לא האמנתם בי - גלה הכתוב שאלולי חטא זה בלבד היו נכנסין לארץ כדי שלא יאמרו עליהם כעון שאר דור המדבר שנגזר עליהם שלא יכנסו לארץ כך היה עון משה ואהרן. והלא (במדבר יא) הצאן ובקר ישחט קשה מזו אלא לפי שבסתר חסך עליו הכתוב וכאן שבמעמד כל ישראל לא חסך עליו הכתוב מפני קדוש השם:

[2] See comments of the Ohr Hachaim who lists ten different opinions regarding Moshe’s sin.

אור החיים על במדבר פרק כ פסוק ח

(ח) קח את המטה וגו' ויקדש בם פרשה זו רבו עליה כל מפרשי התורה, ותרתי בה לאור באור החיים, וקודם שנעמוד על פשטן של כתובים נקדים להבין מה היתה שגגתו של משה בענין זה, אשר היה סיבה לגזירתו, וראיתי שנאמרו עשרה דרכים בענין בדברי מפרשי התורה, והן הנה בקצרה:

[3] Mechilta of Rav Shimon Bar Yochai 3:8

מכילתא דרבי שמעון בר יוחאי פרק ג פסוק (ח)

משלו משל למה הדבר דומה למלך שהיה לו עבד והיה אוהבו אהבה גמורה (ו)בקש המלך לעשותו אפטרופוס שלו להיות מפרנס בני פלטין של מלך מה עשה (אותו) המלך תפס את העבד בידו והכניסו לבית גנזיו והראהו כלי כסף וכלי זהב אבני' טובות ומרגליות וכל מה שיש לו בבית גנזיו ומאחר כן הוציאו והראהו אילנות גנים ופרדסים וקרפיפות וכל מה שיש לו בשדות. לאחר כן כבש העבד את ידו ואמר איני יכול לעשות אפטרופוס להיות מפרנס בני פלטין של מלך. אמ' לו המלך הואיל ולא היית יכול לעשות אפטרופוס למה הטרחתני כל הטורח הזה וכעס עליו המלך וגזר עליו שלא יכנס לפלטין שלו. כך כבש הקב"ה למשה ששה ימים ובשביעי אמר לו שלח נא ביד תשלח. נשבע לו הקב"ה שלא יכנס לארץ ישראל שנא' לכן לא תביאו וגו' (במ' כ יב).

[4] See Rashi Shmot 6:1

רש"י שמות פרק ו פסוק א

(א) עתה תראה וגו' - הרהרת על מדותי, לא כאברהם שאמרתי לו (בראשית כא יב) כי ביצחק יקרא לך זרע, ואחר כך אמרתי לו (שם כב ב) העלהו לעולה, ולא הרהר אחרי, לפיכך עתה תראה. העשוי לפרעה תראה, ולא העשוי למלכי שבעה אומות, כשאביאם לארץ:

[5] See comments of the Chatam Sofer Talmud Bavli 97a

ספר חתם סופר על מסכת שבת דף צז/א

יען לא האמנתם בי, אמר ריש לקיש החושד בכשרים לוקה בגופו דכתיב והן לא יאמינו לי וכו' ויאמן העם בני מאמינים. פי' דמה שחשד משה רבינו ע"ה שישראל לא יאמינו אין זה חשד על ישראל כי מהיכי תיתי יאמינו אי לא היו מקובלים מאבותיהם, אך החשד נגע באבות הקדושים שלא ציוו בניהם אחריהם והתקיעו האמונה בלבותם, וע"ז אמר לו הקב"ה אתה אין סופך להאמין כי חלילה שמרע"ה לא האמין אלא שע"י הכאת הסלע לא גרם לקדש השם שיאמינו ישראל נמצא נכשל הוא באותו דבר עצמו שחשד האבות:

[6] Rav Zadok in Ohr Zarua Lazadik section 7, asserts that this Moshe's negativity was due to the influence of his adoptive mother Bitya, and his father –in- law Yitro.

ספר אור זרוע לצדיק - אות ז

זה מצד יחוסם שמצד זה שורשם טוב וקדוש וכמו שנתבאר לעיל כמה פעמים. וכן מורה מצה שנקרא בזוהר (ח"ב קפ"ג ע"ב) מיכלא דמהימנותא רצה לומר אמונה כמו שנאמר (שמות י"ב, ל"ט) כי לא חמץ כי גורשו וגו' וגם צידה לא וגו' רק האמינו בה' שיפרנסם. ואמונה מצד ירושת היחוס כלשון חז"ל מאמינים בני מאמינים [ואתה אין סופך להאמין מצד לשון הרע שדברת על בני זה מורה חסרון ביחוס כנ"ל לכך אין סופך להאמין. והחסרון מצד בתיה שגדלתו ויתרו חמיו]. וכנודע שכנסת ישראל נקראת אמונה וכמו שכתבתי במקום אחר על ואמונתך בלילות:

[7] Chizkuni Dvarim 3:26

חזקוני על דברים פרק ג פסוק כו

)כו) ויתעבר ה' בי למענכם - אמר הקב"ה למשה אם אתה עובר בארץ יאמרו מה שנגזר על דור המדבר שלא ליכנס לארץ היינו לפי שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא ואם תכנס לארץ בתפלתך יאמרו לא חש משה אלא על עצמו אלא תיקבר אצלם ותביא עמך לעתיד היינו ויתא ראשי עם.

[8] See introduction of Netziv to Bamidbar

[9] See Tamud Bavli Shabbat 31a

תלמוד בבלי מסכת שבת דף לא/א

אמר ריש לקיש מאי דכתיב והיה אמונת עתיך חוסן ישועות חכמת ודעת וגו' אמונת זה סדר זרעים

Resh Lakish said, 'What is meant by the verse, "and there shall be faith in thy times, strength, salvation, wisdom and knowledge?" Faith refers to the Order of Seeds.

[10] Sfat Emet Vaera 5663

שפת אמת ספר שמות - פרשת וארא - שנת [תרס"ג]

ואיתא בגמ' שהקב"ה השיב לו בנ"י מאמינים בני מאמינים ואתה אין סופך להאמין דכ' יען לא האמנתם כו'. פי' בנ"י יש בכחם מושרש האמונה בכח האבות. ואפי' שבגלות אין יכולין להוציא מכח אל הפועל זו האמונה. אבל הם בני מאמינים. ובאמת כמו שצריכין להאמין בהקב"ה אף שאין יכולין להבין הנהגה הנעלמת של הקב"ה. כמו כן צריכין להאמין בבנ"י אפי' שנראין כעורין ושחורין כמ"ש שחורה אני ונאוה. ולכן התרעם עליו הקב"ה שהי' לו להאמין בבנ"י. וגם במאמר יען לא האמנתם כו' להקדישני לעיני בנ"י. הי' ג"כ רק חסרון אמונה בבנ"י שסבור שלא יוכלו לקבל זו ההנהגה שנצטוה ודברתם אל הסלע. לפי שהמרו את רוחו. אבל הי' צריך להאמין שהחטא רק במקרה בבנ"י. וכן גם עתה אע"פ שלא שמעו אל משה מ"מ הדיבור נכנס בהם בכח שצירף הקב"ה מעשה אבות וצירף אהרן שיקבל ממשה. והם יקבלו מן אהרן. וגם צירף ראשי בית אבותם כמ"ש במד'. וע"ז נאמר קול דודי כו' זה בא מדלג על ההרים. שהקול בא לבנ"י בכח ההרים והגבעות שהכין להם הקב"ה ברחמיו עצות שיוכלו לקבל הדברים:

Parshat Korach 5769

Parshat Korach 5769

Rabbi Ari Kahn

Collateral Damage

One of the most manipulative characters in the Torah is a man named Korach. He was filled with jealousy[1], but rather than remain isolated, frustrated and angry, he shared his venom and spread his poison. In a brilliantly constructed plan, he attacked what he perceived to be the soft underbelly of Moshe’s leadership and attempted to catapult himself to a position of stature. Eventually, he brought about his own disgrace and death, but not before he brought down many others - people he willingly sacrificed, for whom he had no regard, and who were of little or no concern to him. Those who joined his rebellion were, to his mind, no more than the faceless, nameless tools needed to accomplish his nefarious goals; his victims were "collateral damage".

ספר במדבר פרק טז:א

וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח בֶּן-יִצְהָר בֶּן-קְהָת בֶּן-לֵוִי וְדָתָן וַאֲבִירָם בְּנֵי אֱלִיאָב וְאוֹן בֶּן-פֶּלֶת בְּנֵי רְאוּבֵן: ב וַיָּקֻמוּ לִפְנֵי מֹשֶׁה וַאֲנָשִׁים מִבְּנֵי-יִשְֹרָאֵל חֲמִשִּׁים וּמָאתָיִם נְשִֹיאֵי עֵדָה קְרִאֵי מוֹעֵד אַנְשֵׁי-שֵׁם:

1. Now took Korach, the son of Yitzhar, the son of Kehat, the son of Levi, and Datan and Aviram, the sons of Eliav, and Ohn, the son of Pelet, sons of Reuven; 2. And they rose up before Moshe, with certain of the people of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, regularly summoned to the congregation, men of renown; Bamidbar 16:1,2

Delusions of Grandeur

The narrative, while not completely clear, provides enough clues to enable us to reconstruct the story and sort out the characters. The main protagonist is Korach. He comes from an illustrious family that has been entrusted with a prestigious position: they are the Ark-bearers. When the Mishkan travelled, it was Korach's family that was entrusted with safeguarding the Ark of the Covenant, the epicenter of the Mishkan's holiness. But Korach was not satisfied. As the firstborn son of his family, Korach saw himself as privileged.[2] He was Moshe's first cousin, and he demanded that Moshe share leadership positions within the larger family unit.[3] Korach's strategy was clear: first, he attacked Aharon. This was an easy choice: Aharon's role in the Golden Calf debacle made him vulnerable to attack. Korach reasoned that deposing Aharon would leave the position of Kohen Gadol vacant. Korach saw himself as doubly entitled to fill the void: With Moshe’s older brother out of the way, who would be a better choice than Moshe’s first cousin, firstborn son of a prestigious Levite family?

The First Born

Korach builds a coalition, beginning with Datan, Aviram and Ohn, all from the tribe of Reuven. This is no random coalition: Reuven was the first disposed firstborn in the family of Yaakov. While previously Yishmael and Esav were rejected outright, and not considered part of the Jewish people[4], Reuven was by right of birth theoretically destined to enjoy the benefits of his position. But in a moment of instability, he loses his birthright, and is replaced[5] as the leader of the brothers, and of the Tribes of Israel. If ever a tribe felt disenfranchised, surely it was the tribe of Reuven; they were natural coalition partners for Korach’s insurrection against Moshe and Aharon.[6]

Another 250 men are recruited; the identity of these men is never expressly stated, leaving the commentaries free to make suggestions. Rashi suggests that the majority of the 250 were, like Datan and Aviram, from the Tribe of Reuven.[7] Rabbenu Bachaya suggests that all the 250 were firstborn sons.[8] Both of these suggestions point to a common denominator of alienation and entitlement shared by Datan, Aviram and the 250 men, either by virtue of being first-born who have been replaced by Aharon and his sons, or by virtue of their tribal affiliation - the Tribe of Reuven, the quintessential displaced firstborn, passed over for leadership.

Moshe proposes the test of the incense; while we are not told whether God instructed Moshe to conduct this test, surely the symbolism of the incense is immediately understood by every person witnessing the scene: The association with Nadav and Avihu, two bonafide kohanim, sons of Aharon who brought incense which they were not commanded, was unavoidable.

ויקרא פרק י

(א) וַיִּקְחוּ בְנֵי אַהֲרֹן נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא אִישׁ מַחְתָּתוֹ וַיִּתְּנוּ בָהֵן אֵשׁ וַיָּשִׂימוּ עָלֶיהָ קְטֹרֶת וַיַּקְרִבוּ לִפְנֵי ה’ אֵשׁ זָרָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא צִוָּה אֹתָם:(ב) וַתֵּצֵא אֵשׁ מִלִּפְנֵי ה’ וַתֹּאכַל אוֹתָם וַיָּמֻתוּ לִפְנֵי ה’:

1. And Nadav and Avihu, the sons of Aharon, took each of them his censer, and put fire in it, and put incense on it, and offered strange fire before God, which He had not commanded them. 2. And there went out fire from God, and devoured them, and they died before God. Vayikra 10:1,2

It is quite possible that Moshe suggested they resolve the dispute by bringing incense in order to dissuade the rebels with this poignant reminder: serving God in a manner not commanded is dangerous – even deadly. Perhaps Moshe assumed that Korach and his party would abort their ill-conceived plan as soon as they heard the word "incense"; the recollection of the tragic deaths of Nadav and Avihu was intended to stop them in their tracks and bring this unfortunate episode to an end before it went too far.

Inexplicably, inexorably, Korach and the 250 men proceed. They were united in their motivation, bound by their feelings of entitlement and resentment for Moshe and Aharon. Yet if they were all of one mind, if they shared the same motivation and committed the same sin, why were their punishments so different? Whereas Korach, Datan and Aviram were swallowed by the ground, the 250 men were consumed by fire:

ספר במדבר פרק טז

(לא) וַיְהִי כְּכַלֹּתוֹ לְדַבֵּר אֵת כָּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וַתִּבָּקַע הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר תַּחְתֵּיהֶם: (לב) וַתִּפְתַּח הָאָרֶץ אֶת פִּיהָ וַתִּבְלַע אֹתָם וְאֶת בָּתֵּיהֶם וְאֵת כָּל הָאָדָם אֲשֶׁר לְקֹרַח וְאֵת כָּל הָרְכוּשׁ... (לה) וְאֵשׁ יָצְאָה מֵאֵת ה’ וַתֹּאכַל אֵת הַחֲמִשִּׁים וּמָאתַיִם אִישׁ מַקְרִיבֵי הַקְּטֹרֶת:

And it came to pass, as he finished speaking all these words, that the ground split beneath them; And the earth opened its mouth, and swallowed them up, and their houses, and all the men who belonged to Korach, and all their goods…And there came out a fire from God, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men who offered incense. Bamidbar 16, 31-35

This is spelled out more clearly later in the book of Bamidbar, where their different punishments are recounted in a single verse:

במדבר פרק כו

(ט) וּבְנֵי אֱלִיאָב נְמוּאֵל וְדָתָן וַאֲבִירָם הוּא דָתָן וַאֲבִירָם קְרִיאֵי הָעֵדָה אֲשֶׁר הִצּוּ עַל מֹשֶׁה וְעַל אַהֲרֹן בַּעֲדַת קֹרַח בְּהַצֹּתָם עַל ה’: (י) וַתִּפְתַּח הָאָרֶץ אֶת פִּיהָ וַתִּבְלַע אֹתָם וְאֶת קֹרַח בְּמוֹת הָעֵדָה בַּאֲכֹל הָאֵשׁ אֵת חֲמִשִּׁים וּמָאתַיִם אִישׁ וַיִּהְיוּ לְנֵס:

9. And the sons of Eliav; Nemuel, and Datan, and Aviram. These are the Datan and Aviram, who were regularly summoned to the congregation, who strove against Moshe and against Aharon in the company of Korach, when they strove against God; 10. And the earth opened its mouth, and swallowed them up together with Korach, when that company died, the time the fire devoured two hundred and fifty men; and they became a sign. Bamidbar 26:9,10

If all 253 men sinned in the same manner, logic would dictate that all would receive the same punishment. Yet there were two different punishments: the earth opening, and the consuming fire. A first attempt at resolving this problem is the suggestion that those who took the incense died by fire, while the others were swallowed by the earth. The difficulty with this resolution is that it seems that Korach was among those who had the incense in his hand:

במדבר פרק טז

(טז) וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל קֹרַח אַתָּה וְכָל עֲדָתְךָ הֱיוּ לִפְנֵי ה’ אַתָּה וָהֵם וְאַהֲרֹן מָחָר: (יז) וּקְחוּ אִישׁ מַחְתָּתוֹ וּנְתַתֶּם עֲלֵיהֶם קְטֹרֶת וְהִקְרַבְתֶּם לִפְנֵי ה’ אִישׁ מַחְתָּתוֹ חֲמִשִּׁים וּמָאתַיִם מַחְתֹּת וְאַתָּה וְאַהֲרֹן אִישׁ מַחְתָּתוֹ:(יח) וַיִּקְחוּ אִישׁ מַחְתָּתוֹ וַיִּתְּנוּ עֲלֵיהֶם אֵשׁ וַיָּשִׂימוּ עֲלֵיהֶם קְטֹרֶת וַיַּעַמְדוּ פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וּמֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן:(יט) וַיַּקְהֵל עֲלֵיהֶם קֹרַח אֶת כָּל הָעֵדָה אֶל פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וַיֵּרָא כְבוֹד ה’ אֶל כָּל הָעֵדָה: פ

16. And Moshe said to Korach, Be you and all your company before God, you, and they, and Aharon, tomorrow; 17. And take every man his censer, and put incense in them, and bring before God every man his censer, two hundred and fifty censers; you also, and Aharon, each of you his censer. 18. And they took every man his censer, and put fire in them, and laid incense on it, and stood in the door of the Tent of Meeting with Moshe and Aharon. 19. And Korach gathered all the congregation against them to the door of the Tent of Meeting; and the glory of God appeared to all the congregation. Bamidbar 16:16-19

Korach brought incense just as the other 250 did; why is the method of his punishment so different? The most logical conclusion is that if the punishments were so different, even though the actions were identical, the crimes must have been different as well. In fact the Netziv suggests that careful attention to the disparate punishments is the key to unraveling the entire episode.[9]

The Faux Kohanim

The Netziv posits that the 250 men were quite earnest and sincere in their desire to serve God. For this reason, the language with which the Torah refers to them denotes honor and respect.[10] They are described as kri'ay moed, which could mean they were often called to the Ohel Moed, the Tent of Meeting. The Netziv explains that these men were often invited for consultations; they were leaders among the nation, and Moshe often called upon as advisors.

An alternative reading of the description kri'ay moed, is that in this particular instance they were invited to come to the Tent of Meeting. 250 men were handed personal invitations to visit the Tent of Meeting; of course, the salient question is – who sent these invitations? Was it Moshe, seeking support and advice, or perhaps Korach, Datan and Aviram - seeking chaos?

The Seforno understands that Korach invited the 250 men, each of whom was part of the plot. They feigned innocence, as if they all happened to visit upon the Tent of Meeting that fateful day, providing Korach with a "random" background chorus of support. Their jeering helped create an atmosphere of general unrest, a scene of intimidation. Their chance attendance at the Tent of Meeting that day was part of the well-staged plot to challenge Moshe. Their cynicism is encapsulated in Korach’s short speech:

ספר במדבר פרק טז:ג

וַיִּקָּהֲלוּ עַל-מֹשֶׁה וְעַל-אַהֲרֹן וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֲלֵהֶם רַב-לָכֶם כִּי כָל-הָעֵדָה כֻּלָּם קְדֹשִׁים וּבְתוֹכָם ה’ וּמַדּוּעַ תִּתְנַשְּׂאוּ עַל-קְהַל ה’:

3. And they gathered themselves together against Moshe and against Aharon, and said to them, You take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and God is among them. Why then do you lift up yourselves above the congregation of God?

The Seforno understands this as a cynical complaint: "All are holy" – kulam kedoshim." We are all holy – from head to toe[11]- as if to say “We are too holy; Moshe, you have created a religion overly concerned with holiness, which is all-encompassing, and dominates every aspect of our lives.” Korach and all those who joined him rejected kedusha. What they challenged was not only the leadership; they sought to empty Judaism of the spiritual quest for holiness. They sought to overthrow the religious leadership and replace it with civil, cultural Judaism. Korach and his followers were united, not by tribal affiliation or family position but by their ideological crusade against Jewish spirituality. And yet, they were punished in different ways; our question is unanswered by the Seforno's approach.

Old School Leadership

In one short statement, the Ibn Ezra provides insight into the identity and psychology of these 250 men as well as the Machiavellian machinations of Korach. The Ibn Ezra explains that these men were summoned:

אבן עזרא על במדבר פרק טז פסוק ב

קראי מועד - שהיו נקראים אל אהל מועד:

Kri'ay Moed - called to the tent: They were summoned to the Tent of Meeting. Ibn Ezra Bamidbar 16:2

These 250 men were not originally part of the rebellion; they received invitations, and innocently arrived at the Tent of Meeting. They were not seeking glory, nor were they seeking confrontation. They were unaware that they were being manipulated.

It is the Ibn Ezra’s second point which is even more intriguing.

אבן עזרא על במדבר פרק טז פסוק ב

אנשי שם - קודם צאתם ממצרים

Men of (name) renown: before they left Egypt. Ibn Ezra on Bamidbar 16:2

These were well - known people, leaders of the community before the Jews left Egypt. What had caused their subsequent loss stature?

The Midrash tells us that the hierarchy of enslavement was composed of Egyptian taskmasters and Jewish officers. The Egyptian taskmasters tyrannized the Jewish officers, who in turn forced the Jews to work. Presumably, these Jewish officers were physically intimidating men who exerted brute force on the Jewish slaves. In fact, one of these officers is identified by name: he is no other than Datan!

We recall that on one occasion, Moshe left the comforts of the palace of Pharoh to "seek his brothers", and he witnesses an altercation between an Egyptian taskmasters and a Jew:

שמות פרק ב

(יא) וַיְהִי בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם וַיִּגְדַּל מֹשֶׁה וַיֵּצֵא אֶל אֶחָיו וַיַּרְא בְּסִבְלֹתָם וַיַּרְא אִישׁ מִצְרִי מַכֶּה אִישׁ עִבְרִי מֵאֶחָיו:(יב) וַיִּפֶן כֹּה וָכֹה וַיַּרְא כִּי אֵין אִישׁ וַיַּךְ אֶת הַמִּצְרִי וַיִּטְמְנֵהוּ בַּחוֹל:

11. And it came to pass in those days, when Moshe was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens; and he spied an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his brothers.12. And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand. Sh’mot 2:11,12

The Midrash provides the background for this altercation: The Egyptian taskmaster had raped the wife of a Jewish officer:

שמות רבה (וילנא) פרשת שמות פרשה א סימן כח

וירא איש מצרי, מה ראה א"ר הונא בשם בר קפרא ... ומנין שלא נחשדו על הערוה שהרי אחת היתה ופרסמה הכתוב שנאמר (ויקרא כד) ושם אמו שלומית בת דברי וגו', אמרו רז"ל נוגשים היו מן המצריים ושוטרים מישראל, נוגש ממונה על עשרה שוטרים, שוטר ממונה על עשרה מישראל, והיו הנוגשים הולכים לבתי השוטרים בהשכמה להוציאן למלאכתן לקריאת הגבר, פעם אחת הלך נוגש מצרי אצל שוטר ישראל ונתן עיניו באשתו שהיתה יפת תואר בלי מום, עמד לשעת קריאת הגבר והוציאו מביתו וחזר המצרי ובא על אשתו והיתה סבורה שהוא בעלה ונתעברה ממנו, חזר בעלה ומצא המצרי יוצא מביתו שאל אותה שמא נגע בך אמרה לו הן וסבורה אני שאתה הוא, כיון שידע הנוגש שהרגיש בו החזירו לעבודת הפרך והיה מכה אותו ומבקש להרגו, והיה משה רואה אותו ומביט בו וראה ברוח הקודש מה שעשה בבית וראה מה שעתיד לעשות לו בשדה, אמר ודאי זה חייב מיתה, כמו שכתוב (ויקרא כד) ומכה אדם יומת, ולא עוד אלא שבא על אשתו של דתן על כך חייב הריגה, שנא' (שם /ויקרא/ כ) מות יומת הנואף והנואפת, והיינו דכתיב ויפן כה וכה וגו', ראה מה עשה לו בבית ומה עשה לו בשדה.

AND HE SAW AN EGYPTIAN SMITING A HEBREW. What did he see? R. Huna in the name of Bar Kappara said: … Whence do we know that (the Jewish slaves) were not guilty of adultery? Because there was only one immoral woman and the Bible published her name, as it is said: And his mother's name was Shlomit, the daughter of Divri (Vayikra 24, 11). The Rabbis said: The taskmasters were Egyptians but the officers were Israelites, one taskmaster being appointed over ten officers and one officer over ten Israelites. The taskmasters used to go to the officers’ houses early in the morning to drag them out to work at cock-crow. Once an Egyptian taskmaster went to a Jewish officer and set eyes upon his wife who was beautiful without blemish. He waited for cock-crow, when he dragged the officer out of his house and then returned to lie down with the woman who thought that it was her husband, with the result that she became pregnant from him. When her husband returned, he discovered the Egyptian emerging from his house. He then asked her: ‘Did he touch you?’ She replied: ‘Yes, for I thought it was you.’ When the taskmaster realized that he was caught, he made (the Jew) go back to his hard labor, smiting him and trying to slay him. When Moshe saw this, he knew by means of the Holy Spirit what had happened in the house and what the Egyptian was about to do in the field; so he said: ' This man certainly deserves his death, as it is written: And he that smiteth any man mortally shall surely be put to death (Vayikra 17). Moreover, since he cohabited with the wife of Datan he deserves slaying, as it is said: Both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death’ (Vayikra 20, 10). Hence does it say: AND HE LOOKED THIS WAY AND THAT WAY (2, 12), namely, he saw what he did to him [Datan] in the house and what he intended doing to him in the field. Midrash Rabbah Sh’mot 1:28

Moshe saw to it that the abusive Egyptian taskmaster would abuse no more. Rather than thanking Moshe for ridding him of his tormenter, when Datan, the cuckolded, humiliated husband, sees Moshe again, he attacks. Datan is an Israelite officer, a necessary cog in the Egyptian slave enterprise. Datan and another Jew are fighting; Moshe steps in to break it up, and is subjected to Datan's vitriol:

שמות פרק ב

(יג) וַיֵּצֵא בַּיּוֹם הַשֵּׁנִי וְהִנֵּה שְׁנֵי אֲנָשִׁים עִבְרִים נִצִּים וַיֹּאמֶר לָרָשָׁע לָמָּה תַכֶּה רֵעֶךָ:

(יד) וַיֹּאמֶר מִי שָׂמְךָ לְאִישׁ שַׂר וְשֹׁפֵט עָלֵינוּ הַלְהָרְגֵנִי אַתָּה אֹמֵר כַּאֲשֶׁר הָרַגְתָּ אֶת הַמִּצְרִי וַיִּירָא מֹשֶׁה וַיֹּאמַר אָכֵן נוֹדַע הַדָּבָר:

13. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews struggled together; and he said to the one who did the wrong, Why do you strike your fellow? 14. And he said, Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you intend to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian? And Moshe feared, and said, Certainly this thing is known. Sh’mot 2:13,14

Once again, the protagonist remains anonymous in the verses, and once again the Midrash identifies the protagonist as Datan, struggling with Aviram.

שמות רבה (וילנא) פרשת שמות פרשה א

וכן אתה מוצא שלא נשמע הדבר אלא ע"י העברים שנא' ויצא ביום השני והנה שני אנשים עברים נצים, זה דתן ואבירם קראם נצים על שם סופם, הם הם שאמרו דבר זה הם היו שהותירו מן המן, הם היו שאמרו (במדבר יד) נתנה ראש ונשובה מצרימה, הם שהמרו על ים סוף, ד"א נצים שהיו מתכוונין להרוג זה את זה, כמה דתימא (דברים כה) כי ינצו אנשים יחדו, ואמר ר"א במצות של מיתה הכתוב מדבר, ויאמר לרשע למה תכה רעך הכית לא נאמר אלא תכה, מכאן שמשעה שאדם מרים ידו להכות חבירו אע"פ שלא הכהו נקרא רשע, רעך, שהוא רשע כיוצא בך מלמד ששניהם רשעים.

AND HE WENT OUT THE SECOND DAY, AND BEHOLD, TWO MEN OF THE HEBREWS WERE STRIVING TOGETHER (ib. 13). This refers to Datan and Aviram, who are described as ’striving’ on account of their subsequent record; for it was they who said this thing; it was they who left over of the Manna; they it was who said: Let us make a captain, and let us return to Egypt (Bamidbar14, 4). It was they who rebelled at the Red Sea. Another explanation of STRIVING is that they intended to slay one another; as it says: When men strive together one with another (Devarim 25, 1), and R. Eleazar said: The verse speaks of a strife involving death. AND HE SAID TO HIM THAT DID THE WRONG, WHEREFORE WILT THOU SMITE THY FELLOW. It does not say: ' Wherefore hast thou smitten? ' but WHEREFORE WILT THOU SMITE? To teach us that from the moment one lifts up his hand to smite his fellow, though he has not yet smitten him, he is called wicked. THY FELLOW, who is as wicked as thou art; this tells us that both were wicked. Midrash Rabbah Sh’mot 1:29

Every step of the way Datan and Aviram tried to thwart Moshe’s leadership; simply stated, they wanted to return to Egypt: “Let us make a captain, and let us return to Egypt (Bamidbar 14, 4)”. Once we grasp the full import of the information supplied by the Midrash, we can more easily understand why Datan and Aviram would want to turn the clock back and return to the land of enslavement: These two men had been officers in the Egyptian slave machine, best described by a term familiar to us from our more recent history: They had been kapos in Egypt; they enjoyed positions of power and prestige - leadership positions. It was no wonder they longed to return to Egypt. When Datan and Aviram join Korach, a brilliant plan is hatched: They create an alliance with the other 250 now-demoted and disgraced ex-kapos. They bring them all to the Tent of Meeting, and erect a façade of bullies and thugs, creating the impression of a unified front against Moshe.

Born Again

Korach then begins his sermon. In light of what we now know about the background of those present, his message is and his methods are all the more shocking:

ספר במדבר פרק טז:ג

וַיִּקָּהֲלוּ עַל-מֹשֶׁה וְעַל-אַהֲרֹן וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֲלֵהֶם רַב-לָכֶם כִּי כָל-הָעֵדָה כֻּלָּם קְדֹשִׁים וּבְתוֹכָם ה’ וּמַדּוּעַ תִּתְנַשְּׂאוּ עַל-קְהַל ה’:

3. And they gathered themselves together against Moshe and against Aharon, and said to them, You take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and God is among them. Why then do you lift up yourselves above the congregation of God?

These former officers must have had intense feelings of guilt for every time they raised a hand against a fellow Jew. In their minds, they had no choice; they served as a buffer between the ruthless Egyptians and their fellow Jews. They believed that their brethren were better off with the blows delivered by one of their own than the blows of the sadistic Egyptians. They may have acted out of love, out of a desire to shield the Jews as best they could from the cruelty of the Egyptians, but now that they had been set free, all that remained was their own sense of guilt.

To these scarred psyches, Korach's words were like a salve: “All the congregation are holy, every one of them”; even the former Jewish officers. Rashi explains:

רש"י במדבר פרק טז פסוק ג

כלם קדושים - כולם שמעו דברים בסיני מפי הגבורה:

All are Holy: All heard the words at Sinai from the mouth of the Almighty. Rashi Bamidbar 16:3

This was a message of hope, a message of rebirth – a message that was particularly meaningful for the guilt-ridden officers: Finally, someone understood their pain. A leadership crisis had emerged, and these former leaders felt impotent. They stood on the sides and watched as the dream of entering the Promised Land unraveled before their eyes, and they felt tainted, inadequate – and useless. Then came Korach with his message of hope.

Explotation

Korach exploited these men, first for their “muscle” as he gathered them around the Tent in a show of physical strength to intimidate Moshe. Then, he spoke to their fragile egos, manipulating them, using their guilt as a motivational tool. He coaxed them into believing that they were as holy as the kohanim. Unlike Korach, the motives of these 250 men were pure. They were misguided, vulnerable men looking for a way to find penance, but they were pawns in Korach’s power play. Like Nadav and Avihu, they were holy and pure, but misguided; like Nadav and Avihu they marched to their deaths bearing incense which they were not asked to bring. And like Nadav and Avihu the 250 men are consumed by fire, and die "before God" in the Mishkan.

Korach, Datan and Aviram made use of the pure motives of these 250 men, but did not share these motives. They were driven by a different force. Rather than seeking absolution, forgiveness, holiness – they were motivated by jealousy. They craved power. Their motivation was different, as was their punishment: The Earth opened its mouth and swallowed them. The lesson is a powerful one: Man is no more than dust, the lowliest physical stuff, and infused with spiritual power.

בראשית פרק ב פסוק ז

וַיִּיצֶר ה’ אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָאָדָם עָפָר מִן הָאֲדָמָה וַיִּפַּח בְּאַפָּיו נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים וַיְהִי הָאָדָם לְנֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה:

7. And God God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Bereishit 2:7

The sins of Korach, Datan and Aviram had nothing to do with spirit; they had no interest in the issues of soul, purity, holiness. Not only did they rebel against God and Moshe, not only did they attack Moshe and Aharon, they led 250 men to their deaths, and ascribed them no more significance than collateral damage in their unholy battle. Their punishment led them to the unavoidable end of their own chosen path; they were relegated to the status as dust of the earth, with no means of elevation of their souls. They had no business with the heavenly fire that consumed Nadav and Avihu or the 250 men; their bodies descended into the earth, enveloped by earth. They had divorced themselves from holiness, and so they remained, far away from the souls which were breathed into them.

The tragedy does not end when the rebels are punished; subsequently, many more people lose their lives. The rest of the nation knew how contrite and holy these officers were. The larger community understood how tragic the situation was; they found it difficult to accept their deaths, and they complained:

במדבר פרק יז

(ו) וַיִּלֹּנוּ כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִמָּחֳרָת עַל מֹשֶׁה וְעַל אַהֲרֹן לֵאמֹר אַתֶּם הֲמִתֶּם אֶת עַם ה’:

6. But on the next day all the congregation of the people of Israel murmured against Moshe and against Aharon, saying, You have killed the people of God. Bamidbar 17:6

Soon a plague spread through the camp, and another 14,700 people die:

במדבר פרק יז

(יד) וַיִּהְיוּ הַמֵּתִים בַּמַּגֵּפָה אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר אֶלֶף וּשְׁבַע מֵאוֹת מִלְּבַד הַמֵּתִים עַל דְּבַר קֹרַח:

14. And those who died in the plague were fourteen thousand and seven hundred, beside those who died about the matter of Korach. Bamidbar 17:14

It is Aharon who stops the plague:

במדבר פרק יז

(יא) וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל אַהֲרֹן קַח אֶת הַמַּחְתָּה וְתֶן עָלֶיהָ אֵשׁ מֵעַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְשִׂים קְטֹרֶת וְהוֹלֵךְ מְהֵרָה אֶל הָעֵדָה וְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיהֶם כִּי יָצָא הַקֶּצֶף מִלִּפְנֵי ה’ הֵחֵל הַנָּגֶף:(יב) וַיִּקַּח אַהֲרֹן כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר מֹשֶׁה וַיָּרָץ אֶל תּוֹךְ הַקָּהָל וְהִנֵּה הֵחֵל הַנֶּגֶף בָּעָם וַיִּתֵּן אֶת הַקְּטֹרֶת וַיְכַפֵּר עַל הָעָם:(יג) וַיַּעֲמֹד בֵּין הַמֵּתִים וּבֵין הַחַיִּים וַתֵּעָצַר הַמַּגֵּפָה:

11. And Moshe said to Aharon, Take a censer, and put fire in it from the altar, and put on incense, and go quickly to the congregation, and make an atonement for them; for anger has come out from God; the plague has begun. 12. And Aharon took as Moshe commanded, and ran into the midst of the congregation; and, behold, the plague had begun among the people; and he put on incense, and made atonement for the people. 13. And he stood between the dead and the living; and the plague was stopped. Bamidbar 17:11-13

Korach wanted to replace Aharon, yet all he brought was death and tears. It was Aharon who stopped the plague that Korach started. It was Aharon's selfless love, the exact and total opposite of Korach's self-centered and cynical manipulation of other Jews' weaknesses, that allowed him to stand between the dead and the living and to prevent more death. Aharon was and always will be the true Kohen Gadol.

---

[1] See Rabenu Bachya Bamidbar 16:1

רבינו בחיי על במדבר פרק טז פסוק א

והסבה לקרח במחלוקת הזה שני דברים, האחת שהתלבש במדת הקנאה, והיא מדה רעה ומכה שאין לה רפואה, והשנית שטעה בשלשלת העתידה לצאת ממנו.

[2] See Rabenu Bachya Bamidbar 16:1

רבינו בחיי על במדבר פרק טז פסוק א

ולפי שהיה קרח בכור כענין שכתוב (שמות ו) ובני יצהר קרח ונפג וזכרי...

[3] Rabenu Bachya Bamidbar 16:1 says they thought Moshe was responsible for Reuven losing their rights as firstborn. They thought because of the affection that Moshe had for Yehoshua, he gave Yosef the birthright so Yehoshua from Efraim (Yosef’s son) can have his own tribe.

It is surprising that they wouldn’t know that Yaakov himself took away the birthright from Reuven.

רבינו בחיי על במדבר פרק טז פסוק א

והנה דתן ואבירם ואון שלקח קרח לעצמו החזיקו במחלוקת הזה ואחזו דרכו ותמכו אשורו ונתרצו בה מפני שחשבו כי משה רבינו ע"ה הסיר הבכורה מראובן אביהם ונתנה ליוסף, וחשדו למשה שעשה כן בעבור יהושע משרתו שהיה משבט אפרים ועשה לו דגל בפני עצמו,

[4] For a Talmudic discussion on the legal status of Esav see Talmud Bavli Kiddushin 18a.

[5] Yaakov uses the word “unstable” in his “blessing” of Reuven, see Bereishit 49:4.

[6] See Kli Yakar Bamidbar 16:1

כלי יקר על במדבר פרק טז פסוק א

ויקח קרח בן יצהר בן קהת בן לוי, בקיחה זו באו הרבה פירושים יען כי לא פורש אם קיחה בידים או בדברים כמו קח את הלוים (במדבר ח ו). וי"א שכל הסיפור נמשך עד בני ראובן שלקח לו למחלוקתו את בני ראובן כי ראה ללקט אליו כל מרי נפש וידע כי נפשם מרה על הבכורה שנלקחה מראובן, ואע"פ שיעקב נטלה ולא משה מ"מ על ידי שתחזור כל שררה לבעליה יחשבו שגם להם תחזור הבכורה ויסכימו עם קרח. וי"א שלקח לו לטענה את בן יצהר כי זאת היתה עיקר טענתו לומר אחי אבא ארבעה הוו כו' מאחר שאני בן יצהר מי ראוי ליטול השניה כפירש"י. וי"א וי"ו של ודתן נוספת כו"יו של ואיה וענה (בראשית לו כד) וביאורו שלקח את דתן ואבירם לצרפם אליו, ונכון לומר שתרווייהו איתנהו שלקח לו לטענה מה שהוא בן יצהר, ולקח לו גם את דתן ואבירם ואון, ולפי זה לא תהיה הוי"ו נוספת:

[7] See Rashi Bamidbar 16:1

רש"י על במדבר פרק טז פסוק א

ודתן ואבירם - בשביל שהיה שבט ראובן שרוי בחנייתם תימנה שכן לקהת ובניו החונים תימנה נשתתפו עם קרח במחלוקתו אוי לרשע אוי לשכנו. ומה ראה קרח לחלוק עם משה נתקנא על נשיאותו של אליצפן בן עוזיאל (תנחומא) שמינהו משה נשיא על בני קהת על פי הדבור. אמר קרח אחי אבא ארבעה היו שנא' (שמות ו) ובני קהת וגו' עמרם הבכור נטלו שני בניו גדולה אחד מלך ואחד כהן גדול מי ראוי ליטול את השניה לא אני שאני בן יצהר שהוא שני לעמרם והוא מנה נשיא את בן אחיו הקטן מכולם הריני חולק עליו ומבטל את דבריו. מה עשה עמד וכנס ר"נ ראשי סנהדראות רובן משבט ראובן שכיניו והם אליצור בן שדיאור וחביריו וכיוצא בו שנאמר נשיאי עדה קריאי מועד ולהלן הוא אומר (במדבר א) אלה קרואי העדה והלבישן טליתות שכולן תכלת באו ועמדו לפני משה אמרו לו טלית שכולה של תכלת חייבת בציצית או פטורה אמר להם חייבת התחילו לשחק עליו אפשר טלית של מין אחר חוט אחד של תכלת פוטרה זו שכולה תכלת לא תפטור את עצמה:

[8] See Rabenu Bachya Bamidbar 16:1

רבינו בחיי על במדבר פרק טז פסוק א

ולפי שהיה קרח בכור כענין שכתוב (שמות ו) ובני יצהר קרח ונפג וזכרי, וכן חמשים ומאתים נשיאי העדה היו גם כן בכורות, ועבודת הקרבנות היתה בבכורות גם הקטרת קטרת מימים רבים, ועל כן לקחם קרח לחבורתו לטעון כנגד משה רבינו ע"ה בחליפי הבכורות:

[9] Commentary of the Netziv Bamidbar 16:1

העמק דבר על במדבר פרק טז פסוק א

אבל יש לדעת ולהתבונן מכל ענין הפרשה. מהליכות המחלוקת. ומעונש שהגיע להם. כי לא נשתוו בערכם ובכוונת מחלוקתם קרח. ודתן ואבירם. ור"ן איש. שהרי אנו רואים שלא היו בכלל לוקחי המחתות אלא קרח ור"ן איש. ולא דו"א.

[10] Ibid

וגם הנהיג המקום ית"ש כבוד בר"ן איש ולא בקרח ודו"א כאשר יבואר. ע"כ יש להבין שר"ן איש היו באמת גדולי ישראל בכל פרט גם ביראת ה'. והיה מניעת הכהונה שהוא גורם דבקות ואהבת ה' כאשר בוער בקרבם. לא לשם שררה וכבוד המדומה כי אם להתקדש ולהשיג מעלה זו ע"י עבודה. וגם המה ידעו אשר דבר ה' אמת בפי שמה. ואין להרהר אחריו ח"ו. רק הרהרו בלבם אחר רצון ה' ומסרו עצמם למסירת נפש ולמות על אהבת ה' כי עזה כמות אהב.

[11] See Seforno 16:3

ספורנו עה"ת ספר במדבר פרק טז פסוק ג

כי כל העדה. כל אחד מהם. כלם קדושים. מכף רגל ועד ראש.

Parshat Shlach 5769 Ye-hoshua

Parshat Shlach 5769
Rabbi Ari Kahn

Ye-hoshua

Twelve men are chosen for a mission. The mission will take them to the Promised Land; soon the entire nation will follow. In the end, the mission is a dismal failure: Ten of the twelve emissaries prove to be treacherous, and instead of bringing the People of Israel closer to the Promised Land they cause the entire nation to remain in the desert for forty years.

Even the most casual reading of this episode raises many questions, not least of which is most primary question of all: Why were these twelve men sent – and at whose bidding? Whose idea was this? The textual evidence seems self-contradictory: In this week’s parsha, God Himself initiates the expedition:

ספר במדבר פרק יג
(א) וַיְדַבֵּר ה’ אֶל משֶׁה לֵּאמֹר: (ב) שְׁלַח לְךָ אֲנָשִׁים וְיָתֻרוּ אֶת אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי נֹתֵן לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אִישׁ אֶחָד אִישׁ אֶחָד לְמַטֵּה אֲבֹתָיו תִּשְׁלָחוּ כֹּל נָשִׂיא בָהֶם:
1. And God spoke to Moshe, saying, 2. Send men, that they may spy the land of Canaan, which I give to the People of Israel; of every tribe of their fathers shall you send a man, every one a leader among them. Bamidbar 13:1,2

On the other hand, in Moshe's retrospective of the events, he recounts that the initiative came from the people, and he gave his approval:

דברים פרק א
(כב) וַתִּקְרְבוּן אֵלַי כֻּלְּכֶם וַתֹּאמְרוּ נִשְׁלְחָה אֲנָשִׁים לְפָנֵינוּ וְיַחְפְּרוּ לָנוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ וְיָשִׁבוּ אֹתָנוּ דָּבָר אֶת הַדֶּרֶךְ אֲשֶׁר נַעֲלֶה בָּהּ וְאֵת הֶעָרִים אֲשֶׁר נָבֹא אֲלֵיהֶן: (כג) וַיִּיטַב בְּעֵינַי הַדָּבָר וָאֶקַּח מִכֶּם שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר אֲנָשִׁים אִישׁ אֶחָד לַשָּׁבֶט:
22. And you came near me every one of you, and said, We will send men before us, and they shall search us out the land, and bring us word again by which way we must go up, and to what cities we shall come. 23. And the idea pleased me; and I took twelve men of you, one from each tribe; Dvarim 1:22,23

The more complete picture is that the idea to send scouts ahead of the camp was a grassroots initiative which eventually received official approval: The people asked for the mission, Moshe agreed and God acquiesced. This is actually a very significant nuance in understanding the way the story unfolds. We begin to sense that the mission itself was flawed from the very outset: God knew that the plan was doomed to failure, but He nonetheless allowed the people to follow their chosen path, despite its folly. God directs them to send the leaders of each tribe.

The names of the twelve spies are enumerated, and the we are informed that one name was changed:

ספר במדבר פרק יג
(טז) אֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹת הָאֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר שָׁלַח משֶׁה לָתוּר אֶת הָאָרֶץ וַיִּקְרָא משֶׁה לְהוֹשֵׁעַ בִּן נוּן יְהוֹשֻׁע:
16. These are the names of the men which Moshe sent to spy out the land. And Moshe called Hoshea the son of Nun - Yehoshua. Bamidbar 13:16

Why was this name changed? We are offered two different interpretations – one by the Midrash and one by Rashi (based on the Talmud[1]). Both are somewhat ominous:

According to the Midrashic tradition, Moshe renames Yehoshua in preparation for the transfer of the mantle of leadership. Moshe knew that it would be Yehoshua who would lead the People into the Land. The prophecy of Eldad and Meidad, recorded in last week’s parsha, echoed through the camp:

תלמוד בבלי מסכת סנהדרין דף יז עמוד א
ומה נבואה נתנבאו? אמרו: משה מת, יהושע מכניס את ישראל לארץ.
And what did they prophesy? They said, Moshe shall die and Yehoshua shall bring Israel into the Land.’Talmud Bavli Sanhedrin 17a

Moshe knew that eventually Yehoshua would lead the nation; as they stood on the threshold of the Land of Israel, he thought the time had arrived. Moshe changed Hoshea's name as a symbol of his new status as leader of the nation, just as God changed Avraham and Sarah's names to reflect their new status as progenitors of great nations. But Moshe had no illusions about the task which he would leave to Yehoshua; he had witnessed his share of rebellion on the part of the people. Their behavior had pushed him to the brink.[2] Moshe had every reason to suspect that the People of Israel would present Yehoshua with the same challenges they had presented him, and he prayed on Yehoshua's behalf:

במדבר רבה (וילנא) פרשת שלח פרשה טז סימן ט
ד"א כיון שראה משה אותן שהיו רשעים אמר ליהושע יה יושיעך מן הדור הזה.
Another exposition: When Moshe saw that the others were wicked men he said to Yehoshua: “May God save you from this generation”. Midrash Rabbah Bamidbar 16:9

Rashi's comments are of a similar vein, but offer an alternative reading of Moshe's prayer: Moshe had a premonition about the group chosen as scouts; he believed them capable of treachery and feared for his protégé's spiritual health. In order to spiritually fortify Hoshea, Moshe calls him Yehoshua.

רש"י על במדבר פרק יג פסוק טז
(טז) ויקרא משה להושע וגו' - התפלל עליו י’ה יושיעך מעצת מרגלים:
He prayed for him, may God (Y-A) save you from the plot of the spies. Rashi Bamidbar 13:16

This explanation presents problems of its own: If Moshe had a negative premonition, why did he proceed? Why not delay or cancel the mission, or change the personnel? And if Moshe felt the need to pray – why not pray for all of them?[3] Moreover, Hoshea ben Nun is called Yehoshua in various earlier junctures in the narrative, a fact that led some commentaries to posit that the name change took place prior to the mission of the spies. They explain that it was standard practice for leaders to rename people when they began their duties in service of the king. [4]
In fact, at no point before this mission is Hoshea referred to by any name other than Yehoshua, leading the Ramban to surmise that Moshe had changed his name to Yehoshua long before this episode. Moshe's premonition was not new; he had foreseen this mission, and its dangers, from the beginning of Yehoshua's service, and changed his name long before the mission set out.[5] While this would account for earlier usages of the name Yehoshua, we must now face the question of the origins and impetus of the spies' mission with even greater scrutiny: Did Moshe know, much earlier on, that the people would ask to send spies and that the mission would result in disaster? If so, why did he take no steps to avert this chain of events?

We have noted the Ramban’s comments regarding the timing of Yehoshua's name change; we should not fail to note the context in which the Ramban makes these comments. Yehoshua is first introduced in the Book of Sh’mot; even then, the Ramban notes, he is referred to as Yehoshua, not as Hoshea. The context is the battle against Amalek: Moshe summons Yehoshua to lead the forces:

ספר שמות פרק יז
(ח) וַיָּבֹא עֲמָלֵק וַיִּלָּחֶם עִם יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּרְפִידִם: (ט) וַיֹּאמֶר משֶׁה אֶל יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בְּחַר לָנוּ אֲנָשִׁים וְצֵא הִלָּחֵם בַּעֲמָלֵק מָחָר אָנֹכִי נִצָּב עַל רֹאשׁ הַגִּבְעָה וּמַטֵּה הָאֱלֹהִים בְּיָדִי: (י) וַיַּעַשׂ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ כַּאֲשֶׁר אָמַר לוֹ משֶׁה לְהִלָּחֵם בַּעֲמָלֵק וּמשֶׁה אַהֲרֹן וְחוּר עָלוּ רֹאשׁ הַגִּבְעָה:
8. Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim. 9. And Moshe said to Yehoshua, Choose for us men, and go out, fight with Amalek; tomorrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in my hand. 10. So Yehoshua did as Moshe had said to him, and fought with Amalek; and Moshe, Aharon, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. Sh’mot 17:8-10

We should also note that this earlier episode shares a key theme with the episode of the spies: In both cases we find the phrase “choose for us men” – in the earlier case, to fight against Amalek, and in our present parsha, to ascertain the lay of the Land of Israel. In fact, these two episodes may have more in common than meets the eye: At the end of the battle against Amalek we are told that Amalek was weakened, and Moshe is commanded to transmit a message to Yehoshua:

שמות פרק יז
(יג) וַיַּחֲלשׁ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֶת עֲמָלֵק וְאֶת עַמּוֹ לְפִי חָרֶב: (יד) וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ אֶל משֶׁה כְּתֹב זֹאת זִכָּרוֹן בַּסֵּפֶר וְשִׂים בְּאָזְנֵי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ כִּי מָחֹה אֶמְחֶה אֶת זֵכֶר עֲמָלֵק מִתַּחַת הַשָּׁמָיִם:
13. And Yehoshua weakened Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword. 14. And God said to Moshe, 'Write this for a memorial in a book, and recite it in the ears of Yehoshua; for I will completely put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. Sh’mot 17:13

Of all of Israel, it is specifically Yehoshua who is addressed; the message is directed to Yehoshua above all others. On one hand, this is understandable: Yehoshua was the one chosen to lead the first battle against Amalek, but the enemy was defeated yet not vanquished. Yehoshua had won the battle, but the war was still undecided. There would be another battle, and Yehoshua would be there – waiting to defeat the enemy once and for all.

As a descendant of Yosef, Yehoshua was particularly well-suited to defeat Amalek. At Yosef’s birth Rashi tells us of the special trait that Yosef possesses that will allow him to defeat Israel’s sworn and mortal enemy.

בראשית פרק ל
(כה) וַיְהִי כַּאֲשֶׁר יָלְדָה רָחֵל אֶת יוֹסֵף וַיֹּאמֶר יַעֲקֹב אֶל לָבָן שַׁלְּחֵנִי וְאֵלְכָה אֶל מְקוֹמִי וּלְאַרְצִי:

רש"י בראשית פרק ל פסוק כה
(כה) כאשר ילדה רחל את יוסף - משנולד שטנו של עשו, שנאמר (עובדיה א יח) 'והיה בית יעקב אש ובית יוסף להבה ובית עשו לקש', אש בלא להבה אינו שולט למרחוק, משנולד יוסף בטח יעקב בהקב"ה ורצה לשוב:

Yosef and his descendants are the spiritual antidote to "Amalekism"; only when Yosef is born does Yaakov feel he will be capable of surviving the confrontation with Esav/Amalek. Similarly, it is Yosef's descendant Yehoshua who is chosen to lead the first battle against this old-new enemy. Yet the war with Amalek had yet to be won; Yehoshua knew it, as did Moshe. And so, when men are sent to explore the Land of Israel, Moshe's instructions are very precise:

ספר במדבר פרק יג
(יז) וַיִּשְׁלַח אֹתָם משֶׁה לָתוּר אֶת אֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם עֲלוּ זֶה בַּנֶּגֶב וַעֲלִיתֶם אֶת הָהָר:
17. And Moshe sent them to spy out the land of Canaan, and said to them, 'Go up this way through the Negev (i.e., southward), and go up into the mountain; Bamidbar 13:17

They are instructed to climb the mountain from the south. When the so-called spies eventually return, this is one of the few truthful elements of their dire report: The hated and feared Amalekites occupied the land in the south.

במדבר פרק יג
(כט) עֲמָלֵק יוֹשֵׁב בְּאֶרֶץ הַנֶּגֶב וְהַחִתִּי וְהַיְבוּסִי וְהָאֱמֹרִי יוֹשֵׁב בָּהָר וְהַכְּנַעֲנִי יֹשֵׁב עַל הַיָּם וְעַל יַד הַיַּרְדֵּן:
29. The Amalekites live in the land of the Negev; and the Hittites, and the Jebusites, and the Amorites, live in the mountains; and the Canaanites live by the sea, and by the side of the Jordan. Bamidbar 13:29

Moshe's instructions set them on a course that might well have led to confrontation with the tribe of Amalek. Therefore, the choice of Yehoshua as a member of the scouting party becomes understandable: It was he who led the first battle against Amalek; it was his ancestry and his personal attributes that made him most suitable then, as now, to lead the battle. It was clear from the start that Hoshea ben Nun was the man for this job. Therefore, before the first battle against Amalek, Moshe changed Hoshea’s name – reflecting the primary task for which Yehoshua was destined, the battle against Amalek. This task was part and parcel of the mission on which the twelve men were sent. Yehoshua, who led the first battle, might here be given a chance to complete the mission for which he had been chosen.

Was this Moshe's purpose in directing the emissaries along this specific route? We must consider that Moshe had fully intended to precipitate a decisive victory over Amalek at this point. The nation stood on the verge of the Land of Israel, about to fulfill God's covenant with Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov. The only element still missing to usher in this new era, the missing piece in the picture of a redeemed world which Moshe saw unfolding before him, was the eradication of the forces of evil represented by the descendants of Amalek.

In changing Hoshea’s name to Yehoshua, Moshe sought to address this last remaining element. Moshe's choice of the new form of Hoshea's name was not random: adding the letter “yud” to Hoshea created a string of letters which constitute the first three of Tetragrammaton, the four-lettered Name of God. "Hoshea" indicates salvation; by transforming this name to include the Name of God, Moshe includes God in the equation. Hoshea becomes Yehoshua: God will be within him, there to aid, to bring about their salvation.

Surprisingly, Yehoshua is the first person in the Torah whose name includes the Name of God. The only other person whose name has the same string of letters is Yehuda, though his name comes from the word hodaya, “thanks” and not from the Divine Name. And yet, the only other “successful” member of the group of twelve scouts, the only other to join ranks with Yehoshua and reject the libelous report of the spies, was Calev - from the tribe of Yehuda.

Yehoshua's name connects with a very particular Divine Name. Rashi and the Talmud recount Moshe’s prayer for Hoshea; in both versions, the Name of God that Moshe employs is not a common form: “May God (Y-A) protect you.” The form of the Divine Name Moshe invokes is composed of two letters - “yud heh”. This particular form appears only two other times in the Torah to this point. The first is in the Song at the Sea:

שמות פרק טו
(ב) עָזִּי וְזִמְרָת יָהּ וַיְהִי לִי לִישׁוּעָה זֶה אֵלִי וְאַנְוֵהוּ אֱלֹהֵי אָבִי וַאֲרֹמְמֶנְהוּ: (ג) ה’ אִישׁ מִלְחָמָה ה’ שְׁמוֹ:
2. God (Yud-heh)is my strength and song, and he has become my salvation; he is my God, and I will praise him; my father’s God, and I will exalt him. 3. God (the Tetragrammaton) is a man of war; God is his name. Sh’mot 15:2,3

The second instance occurs immediately after the battle with Amalek:

שמות פרק יז
(טז) וַיֹּאמֶר כִּי יָד עַל כֵּס יָהּ מִלְחָמָה לה’ בַּעֲמָלֵק מִדֹּר דר.
16. For he said, Because God (Yud-heh) has sworn that God (the Tetragrammaton) will have war with Amalek from generation to generation. Sh’mot 17:16

Both of these sources refer to God in the context of war; we might say they describe a God of War or God who goes to war with the enemies of His People. Rashi notes that in the latter source, which describes the unfinished battle against Amalek, the word kes (throne), is written defectively, in a shortened form of the more common word kiseh. The truncated form teaches us that God’s throne is incomplete, His Kingdom on Earth not fully realized, as long as Amalek walks the earth, sowing seeds of hatred and attacking all that is good. Rashi connects this incomplete form with another word in the verse that is written defectively: the two-letter Name of God, Yud-heh. The message is the same: as long as Amalek exists, God’s Name is incomplete:[6]

רש"י שמות פרק יז פסוק טז
כי יד על כס יה - ידו של הקב"ה הורמה לישבע בכסאו להיות לו מלחמה ואיבה בעמלק עולמית, ומהו כס, ולא נאמר כסא, ואף השם נחלק לחציו, נשבע הקב"ה שאין שמו שלם ואין כסאו שלם עד שימחה שמו של עמלק כולו, וכשימחה שמו יהיה השם שלם והכסא שלם, שנאמר (תהלים ט ז) האויב תמו חרבות לנצח, זהו עמלק שכתוב בו (עמוס א יא) ועברתו שמרה נצח, (תהלים שם) וערים נתשת אבד זכרם המה, מהו אומר אחריו (תהלים ט ח) וה' לעולם ישב, הרי השם שלם, (תהלים שם) כונן למשפט כסאו, הרי כסאו שלם:


Hoshea's name is changed to Yehoshua. When he is given the extra yud, his name now also has reflects the "incomplete" Name of God, with three of the four letters of the Tetragrammaton. He is now ready for the battle against Amalek; he is prepared to complete God's throne, to complete God's Name. The question is, are those accompanying him worthy? Will they rise to the occasion? If faced with battle, will they have the courage and moral fortitude to defeat Amalek? The answer is – no. They did not face battle, but they were so terrified by the prospect of confronting Amalek that they infected the hearts of the entire nation with their own fear. They were not prepared for the battle of the future; overcome by fear, they retreated into the past. The time to enter Israel had arrived; the fulfillment of the hopes of their fathers, the prophecies bestowed upon their ancestors, the realization of the dream that had sustained them through their years of slavery was within reach - yet they chose to remain in the desert. If the way to the Promised Land was via war with Amalek, they chose exile. Amalek was a feared enemy, and they were unwilling to fight. Their names did not contain God’s name, as their hearts did not contain God’s presence: they were unprepared to fight God’s battle.

The Talmud records an Oral Tradition that the names of the spies listed in the parsha were assigned ex post facto; these were their names after the debacle:

תלמוד בבלי מסכת סוטה דף לד/ב
"וְאֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹתָם, לְמַטֵּה רְאוּבֵן שַׁמּוּעַ בֶּן זַכּוּר", אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק, דָּבָר זֶה מָסֹרֶת בְּיָדֵינוּ מֵאֲבוֹתֵינוּ, מְרַגְּלִים - עַל שֵׁם מַעֲשֵׂיהֶם נִקְרְאוּ, וְאָנוּ לֹא עָלָה בְיָדֵינוּ אֶלָּא אֶחָד, "סְתוּר בֶּן מִיכָאֵל", "סְתוּר" - שֶׁסָּתַר מַעֲשָׂיו שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, "מִיכָאֵל", שֶׁעָשָׂה שׂוֹנְאוֹ מָךְ. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, אַף אָנוּ נֹאמַר, "נַחְבִּי בֶּן וָפְסִי". "נַחְבִּי" - שֶׁהֶחְבִּיא דְבָרָיו שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא. "וָפְסִי" - שֶׁפָּסַע עַל מִדּוֹתָיו שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא:
And these were their names: of the tribe of Reuven, Shammua the son of Zaccur. R. Yitzchak said: It is a tradition we received from our forefathers that the spies were named after their actions, but only with one has it survived with us: S'tur the son of Michael. [He was named] S'tur because he undermined [satar] the works of the Holy One, blessed be He; and Michael [was so named] because he suggested that God [El] was weak [mak]. R. Johanan said: We can also explain [the name] Nahbi the son of Vofsi. [He was named] Nahbi because he hid [hikbi] the words of the Holy One, blessed be He; and Vofsi [was so named] because he stepped over [pasa] the attributes of the Holy One, blessed be He. Talmud Bavli Sotah 34b

Yehoshua, who had God in his heart, received God in his name; the other members of the group who rejected God, were given names of calumny, and are remembered in infamy to this very day.

We might say that Moshe’s prayer – both of the versions of his prayer - came true in an unexpected way: Because of the sin of the spies the entire generation perished; Yehoshua was saved from the plot of the spies, and from the wickedness of that entire generation. The time to pass the baton of leadership had not arrived; Moshe continued to lead the nation for an entire generation – some 39 years after the sin of the spies. Yehoshua would indeed lead the People into the Land of Israel, but not the generation that sent the scouts to the land; the next generation, the generation of their children and grandchildren, joined Yehoshua in his march of conquest.

When Yehoshua led the People into the Promised Land, they did not travel from the south; they entered from the East. The confrontation with Amalek was avoided once again – postponed, but not cancelled. The battle against Amalek still awaits us. To win this war, we must put God on our lips and in our hearts. Only when we are able to rise to that challenge, to face our enemy without fear, with complete faith in the salvation of God, will we truly fulfill our destiny. Only then will God's Name and God's throne be complete.



[1] Talmud Bavli Sotah 34b
תלמוד בבלי מסכת סוטה דף לד עמוד ב
יהושע כבר בקש משה עליו רחמים, שנאמר: +במדבר יג+ ויקרא משה להושע בן נון יהושע, יה יושיעך מעצת מרגלים.
[2] See especially Bamidbar 11:10-15: 'Then Moshe heard the people weep throughout their families, every man in the door of his tent; and the anger of God was kindled greatly; and Moshe also was displeased. 11. And Moshe said to God, Why have you afflicted your servant? and why have I not found favor in your sight, that you lay the burden of all this people upon me? 12. Have I conceived all this people? Have I fathered them, that you should say to me, carry them in your bosom, like a nursing father carries the sucking child, to the land which you swore to their fathers? 13. From where should I have meat to give to all this people? for they weep to me, saying, Give us meat, that we may eat. 14. I am not able to carry all this people alone, because it is too heavy for me.15. And if you deal thus with me, kill me, I pray you, at once, if I have found favor in your sight; and let me not see my wretchedness.
[3] These question were posed by the Akaidat Yitzchak Gate 77
ספר עקידת יצחק - שער עז
ד במאמר ויקרא משה להושע בן נון יהושע, ועל דרך חז"ל (סוטה ל"ד ע"ב) יה יושיעך מעצת המרגלים הנה היה לו להתפלל על כלם או להמנע מהשליחות לגמרי אחר שלבו ראה הרבה מדוע עצתם:

[4] A well-known biblical precedent is Yosef being renamed Tzafnat Paneach by Pharoh; see Bereishit 41:45. Some of the commentators to offer this explanation are Rashbam, Chizkuni, Baaley haTosafot. Rashi himself gives this interpretation in his commentary to Chronicles 2, 36:4
רשב"ם על במדבר פרק יג פסוק טז
(טז) ויקרא משה להושע בן נון יהושע - כמו כך פירושו הושע בן נון שאמרנו למעלה שנקרא כן בבית אביו הוא אותו שקרא משה [יהושע] כשנעשה משרתו והפקידו על ביתו שכך היה מנהגם כמו ויקרא פרעה שם יוסף צפנת פענח וכמו שאמר נבוכדנצר ועד אחרי על קדמי דניאל די שמיה בלטשצר כשם אלהי:

חזקוני על במדבר פרק יג פסוק טז
(טז) אלה שמות האנשים - משבט לוי לא נשתלח מרגל לפי שלא היה לו חלק בארץ ויקרא משה להושע בן נון יהושע לא שקראו עתה יהושע אלא כך הפירוש הוא שקראו משה יהושע כבר כשנעשה משרתו ומצא חן בעיניו שכן הוא המנהג שכן מצינו באברהם ושרה ויעקב דניאל חנניה מישאל ועזריה צדקיה שכבר שמו מתניה ונחמיה שנקרא התרשתא. וי"מ שינה שמו על שהוצרך להיות מן המרגלים ולעבור דרך עמלק בשם הושע.

דעת זקנים מבעלי התוספות על במדבר פרק יג פסוק טז
(טז) ויקרא משה להושע בן נון יהושע - מדרש תנחומא מה ראה לקרותו יהושע אלא ראה כלב שנטל שכרו בארץ שנאמר ויבא עד חברון וכתיב במקום אחר ויתנו לכלב את חברון ויהושע נטל חלק עשרה אנשים של מרגלים ולכך הוסיף יו"ד בשמו שעולה עשרה. ולפי שקראה תגר כשנתחלקה משמה של שרי ופרע לה בכאן. וי"א שנתחלקה ה"א בשם שרה וה"א בשם אברהם. ובפ' ואלו נאמרין מסיק שאמר לו משה יה יושיעך מעצת מרגלים:

פירוש בעלי התוספות על במדבר פרק יג פסוק טז
ויקרא משה להושע בן נון יהושע. לפי הפשט לא עתה נקרא אלא מתחלה כשנעשה משרתו מצא חן בעיניו ושנה שמו לטוב כמו שעשה הקב"ה לאברהם ולהבדיל בין קדש לחול בין טמא לטהור כן עשה פרעה ליוסף ונבוכדנצר לחנניה מישאל ועזריה. לפי שקורא אותו כאן הושע ובכל התורה כולה קורא אותו יהושע אומ' לך ששמו הושע אלא משה שינה שמו ומשבט לוי לא שלח מרגלים לפי שאין להם חלק בארץ ואין עליהם לרגל:

רש"י דברי הימים ב פרק לו פסוק ד
ויסב את שמו יהויקים - כך דרך המלכים והשרים שמכנים למשרתיהם שם שהם רוצים דוגמא (בראשית מ"א) ויקרא פרעה שם יוסף וגומר וכן (במדבר) ויקרא משה להושע בן נון יהושע וכן (דניאל א) וישם שר הסריסים שמות וגו' והכל כדי להודיע שהוא מושל בו לכנות לו שם כרצונו.

[5] Ramban Sh’mot 13:9
רמב"ן על שמות פרק יז פסוק ט
(ט) ויאמר משה אל יהושע נראה מכאן כי משה מיום היותו לפניו היה קורא אותו יהושע, וכן כתוב (להלן לב יז) וישמע יהושע את קול העם והכתוב שאמר בענין המרגלים ויקרא משה להושע בן נון יהושע (במדבר יג טז), למבראשונה ידבר, הודיענו כי זה הושע בן נון אשר בחרו במרגלים הוא אשר קראו משה יהושע וכדברי רבותינו (סוטה לד:) שאמר יה יושיעך מעצת מרגלים, להגיד כי בעבור זה המעשה שהיה משה יודע שהוא עתיד ללכת עם המרגלים קרא לו השם הזה או נאמר כי אז קבע לו משה אותו השם בפני העדה שלא יקרא שמו עוד הושע ויהיה שמו יהושע:

[6] See comments of Kli Yakar, Haamek Davar and Meshech Chochma to Bamidbar 13:16, they all note this connection between the battle with Amalek and the mission of the spies.
כלי יקר על במדבר פרק יג פסוק טז
ויקרא משה להושע כן נון יהושע. יה יושיעך מעצת מרגלים. יש להתבונן למה דווקא שם של יה, ולמה לא התפלל גם על כלב, ונראה לפי שאמר להם עלו זה בנגב. והמרגלים אמרו עמלק יושב בארץ הנגב. פירש רש"י לפי שנכוו בו ישראל, וחשב בו שמסתמא בעצה זו לא יהיה יהושע כי אדרבה הוא החליש את עמלק ואת עמו לפי חרב. ולדורות מאותה מלחמה והלאה הוא ג"כ בטוח במה שנאמר (שמות יז טז) כי יד על כס יה מלחמה לה' בעמלק מדור דור, ובאותה שבועה שהיתה בשם יה יהיה בטוח לנצח את עמלק, ע"כ הוסיף לו משה יה על שמו כדי שיהיה נזכר לשבועה שהיתה בשם יה ובסבה זו לא יהיה בעצת מרגלים שהפחידו את ישראל בעמלק:

העמק דבר על במדבר פרק יג פסוק טז
(טז) ויקרא משה להושע בן נון יהושע. ידוע המדרש בפרש"י יה יושיעך מעצת מרגלים. והוא פלא אם ידע משה שמרגלים יקלקלו כ"כ לא היה לו לשלחם. אלא כך הדבר. דכבר נקרא יהושע במלחמת עמלק ומזה הטעם שהתפלל משה עליו שיושיעו במלחמתו. אך לא היה זה השם כי אם לשעה זו בשעת מלחמה. ואח"כ נשתקע זה השם וחזרו וקראו אותו הושע. עד אותה שעה שנתברר שיהושע מכניס ישראל לארץ אם ע"י נבואת אלדד ומידד. אם מזה שהבין משה שלא תהי' ביאתם לארץ בדרך נס נגלה כ"כ שהרי הסכים הקב"ה למרגלים. וא"כ יהי' ע"י יהושע ע"כ ברכו לחלוטין בזה השם. מיהו נסמך זה השם לכאן. ללמדנו שבזו התפלה נכלל מלחמת היצר ג"כ. אם תהיה עצתם לרעה יהיה נושע בה' גם בזה. וע' מש"כ ס' דברים ל"ב מ"ד:

משך חכמה על במדבר פרק יג פסוק טז
(טז) ויקרא משה להושע בן נון יהושע - יה יושיעך מעצת מרגלים (סוטה לד:).
פירוש, דהעם יראו אחרי מלחמת עמלק ממנו וכיו"ב, ולזה אמרו המרגלים עמלק יושב בארץ הנגב כו', ולזה ירא משה אם ישמעו מהלוחם מלחמת עמלק, כי הוא הנלחם עם עמלק (ס"פ בשלח), אם הוא ירפה ידי העם, הלא תאבד תקוה מנהם. ופשוט.

Parshat Bahalotcha 5769

Parshat Bahalotcha 5769
Rabbi Ari Kahn
A Little Pesach


The Second Pesach
An entire year has passed. It had certainly been an eventful year. The year began with the word of God – and the gift of time, the Israelites were told about the Pesach – the Passover offering, and the grand exodus which would follow. Indeed soon the people were on their way, through the sea into the desert, arriving at a mountain. They had glorious highs – like receiving the Torah, and humiliating lows, like serving a molten calf. They built the Mishkan, but the consecration was marred by the deaths of Nadav and Avihu.

Now they stood one year after the first Pesach, and are told to do it again, this time not in anticipation of leaving Egypt, but now a national observance would be celebrated; commemorating the Exodus.

במדבר פרק ט
(א) וַיְדַבֵּר ה’ אֶל משֶׁה בְמִדְבַּר סִינַי בַּשָּׁנָה הַשֵּׁנִית לְצֵאתָם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם בַּחֹדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן לֵאמֹר: (ב) וְיַעֲשׂוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת הַפָּסַח בְּמוֹעֲדוֹ: (ג) בְּאַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר יוֹם בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַזֶּה בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם תַּעֲשׂוּ אֹתוֹ בְּמֹעֲדוֹ כְּכָל חֻקֹּתָיו וּכְכָל מִשְׁפָּטָיו תַּעֲשׂוּ אֹתוֹ: (ד) וַיְדַבֵּר משֶׁה אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לַעֲשׂת הַפָּסַח: (ה) וַיַּעֲשׂוּ אֶת הַפֶּסַח בָּרִאשׁוֹן בְּאַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר יוֹם לַחֹדֶשׁ בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם בְּמִדְבַּר סִינָי כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה ה’ אֶת משֶׁה כֵּן עָשׂוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:

1. And the Lord spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the first month of the second year after they came out of the land of Egypt, saying, 2. Let the people of Israel also keep the Passover at its appointed season. 3. In the fourteenth day of this month, at evening you shall keep it in its appointed season; according to all its rites, and according to all its ceremonies, shall you keep it. 4. And Moses spoke to the people of Israel, that they should keep the Passover. 5. And they kept the Passover on the fourteenth day of the first month at evening in the wilderness of Sinai; according to all that the Lord commanded Moses, so did the people of Israel. Bamidbar 9:1-5

There were however a group of people who felt disenfranchised, those who were ritually impure and could not participate felt as if they were excluded from the Jewish people.

במדבר פרק ט
(ו) וַיְהִי אֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר הָיוּ טְמֵאִים לְנֶפֶשׁ אָדָם וְלֹא יָכְלוּ לַעֲשֹׂת הַפֶּסַח בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא וַיִּקְרְבוּ לִפְנֵי מֹשֶׁה וְלִפְנֵי אַהֲרֹן בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא: (ז) וַיֹּאמְרוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים הָהֵמָּה אֵלָיו אֲנַחְנוּ טְמֵאִים לְנֶפֶשׁ אָדָם לָמָּה נִגָּרַע לְבִלְתִּי הַקְרִב אֶת קָרְבַּן ה’ בְּמֹעֲדוֹ בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:
6. And there were certain men, who were defiled by the dead body of a man, so that they could not keep the Passover on that day; and they came before Moses and before Aaron on that day; 7. And those men said to him, We are defiled by the dead body of a man; Why are we kept back, so that we may not offer an offering to the Lord in his appointed season among the people of Israel? Bamidbar 9:6,7

Their feelings are understandable, this defining practice, which in a sense created the nation, separated between life and death. It separated between the Israelites who were headed for freedom, and the Egyptians, whose every home – which did not have the paschal lamb, and blood on the doorposts suffered death. The blood on the doorposts was not to be repeated, but the paschal offering would be repeated, and those who could not participate felt as if they were separated from the people.

Moreover, the defilement by a dead body is part of vicissitudes of life. A thriving bustling community will have births and sadly will also have deaths.[1] Those who deal with the dead are performing an important mitzva, an unparalleled mitzvah of chesed.[2] The members of the group who prepare the body for burial, and take care of the burial are called to this very day the chevra kadisha the holy society. Why should the performance of a mitzva, certainly an important mitzva cause the practitioners to suffer religiously, by being excluded from the paschal service?[3]

A Second, Second Pesach
Moshe feels that the question is a valid one and asks God what should be done:

במדבר פרק ט
(ח) וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם מֹשֶׁה עִמְדוּ וְאֶשְׁמְעָה מַה יְצַוֶּה ה’ לָכֶם: פ
8. And Moses said to them, Wait, and I will hear what the Lord will command concerning you. Bamidbar 9:8

The answer received is extraordinary; an answer which flies in the face of the laws of offerings. Under normal circumstances the time an offering can be brought is precise, if the day in missed the opportunity is forfeited.[4]
Nonetheless, they are told that there would be a second opportunity to bring this offering:

במדבר פרק ט
(ט) וַיְדַבֵּר ה’ אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר: (י) דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר אִישׁ אִישׁ כִּי יִהְיֶה טָמֵא לָנֶפֶשׁ אוֹ בְדֶרֶךְ רְחֹקָה לָכֶם אוֹ לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם וְעָשָׂה פֶסַח לַ ה’: (יא) בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשֵּׁנִי בְּאַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר יוֹם בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם יַעֲשׂוּ אֹתוֹ עַל מַצּוֹת וּמְרֹרִים יֹאכְלֻהוּ: (יב) לֹא יַשְׁאִירוּ מִמֶּנּוּ עַד בֹּקֶר וְעֶצֶם לֹא יִשְׁבְּרוּ בוֹ כְּכָל חֻקַּת הַפֶּסַח יַעֲשׂוּ אֹתוֹ: (יג) וְהָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר הוּא טָהוֹר וּבְדֶרֶךְ לֹא הָיָה וְחָדַל לַעֲשׂוֹת הַפֶּסַח וְנִכְרְתָה הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא מֵעַמֶּיהָ כִּי קָרְבַּן ה’ לֹא הִקְרִיב בְּמֹעֲדוֹ חֶטְאוֹ יִשָּׂא הָאִישׁ הַהוּא:

9. And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 10. Speak to the people of Israel, saying, If any man of you or of your posterity shall be unclean because of a dead body, or is in a journey far away, he shall still keep the Passover to the Lord. 11. The fourteenth day of the second month at evening they shall keep it, and eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. 12. They shall leave none of it to the morning, nor break any bone of it; according to all the ordinances of the Passover they shall keep it. 13. But the man who is clean, and is not in a journey, and refrains from keeping the Passover, that same soul shall be cut off from among his people; because he brought not the offering of the Lord in his appointed season, that man shall bear his sin. Bamidbar 9:9-13

The normal rules of offering are ignored; the people would receive a second chance. Why in this case were the rules changed? What is it about this situation that allowed a second chance? Perhaps understanding why they were impure would help us unravel this mystery. We saw earlier that they were defiled due to an anonymous death in the camp. This question is debated in the Talmud, and three explanations for the defilement are offered. The Talmud was discussing the principle of osek bmitzva patur mmitzva, if someone is involved with the performance of one mizvah they are then absolved from the performance of second mitzva:

תלמוד בבלי מסכת סוכה דף כה עמוד א
והעוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה מהכא נפקא? מהתם נפקא, דתניא: +במדבר ט+ ויהי אנשים אשר היו טמאים לנפש אדם וכו' אותם אנשים מי היו? נושאי ארונו של יוסף היו, דברי רבי יוסי הגלילי, דף כה: רבי עקיבא אומר: מישאל ואלצפן היו שהיו עוסקין בנדב ואביהוא. רבי יצחק אומר: אם נושאי ארונו של יוסף היו - כבר היו יכולין ליטהר, אם מישאל ואלצפן היו - יכולין היו ליטהר. אלא עוסקין במת מצוה היו, שחל שביעי שלהן להיות בערב פסח.
But is the law that he who is engaged on one religious duty is free from any other deduced from here? Is it not deduced from elsewhere, As it has been taught: And there were certain men who were unclean by the dead body of a man, etc. Who were these men? They were those who bore the coffin of Joseph, so R. Jose the Galilean. R. Akiba said, They were Mishael and Elzaphan who were occupied with [the remains of] Nadab and Abihu. R. Isaac said, If they were those who bore the coffin of Joseph, they had time to cleanse themselves [before Passover,] and if they were Mishael and Elzaphan they could [also] have cleansed themselves [before the Passover]. But it was those who were occupied with a meth mizwah, the seventh day [of whose purification] coincided with the eve of Passover, as it is said, They could not keep the Passover on that day, on ‘that’ day they could not keep the Passover, but on the morrow they could? Talmud Bavli Sukka 25a,b

While the Talmud gravitates to the opinion that those who died were anonymous people, the opinion of Rabbi Yose; that it was those who were entrusted with carrying the remains of Yosef, which has captured the imagination of later authorities. The Midrash clearly states that the creation of Pesach Sheni was not the performance of a pedestrian deed; it was the remains of Yosef which generated this extraordinary law.

שמות רבה (וילנא) פרשה כ ד"ה יט וחמושים עלו
וחמושים עלו בני ישראל שעלו מזוינין, ויקח משה את עצמות יוסף עהכ"א (משלי י) חכם לבב יקח מצות שכל ישראל היו עסוקים בכסף וזהב ומשה היה עסוק בעצמות יוסף שנאמר ויקח משה את עצמות וגו',... והיו עצמותיו של יוסף מחזרין עמהם במדבר מ' שנה, א"ל הקב"ה אתה אמרת לאחיך (שם /בראשית נ'/) אנכי אכלכל אתכם חייך אתה נפטר ויהיו עצמותיך מחזרין עמהם במדבר מ' שנה שנאמר (במדבר ט) ויהי אנשים אשר היו טמאים לנפש אדם ואין אדם אלא יוסף שנאמר (תהלים עח) אהל שכן באדם, וכתיב (שם /תהלים ע"ח/) וימאס באהל יוסף, בזכות עצמותיך הם עושים פסח קטן,
AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL WENT UP ARMED (XIII, 18)--They went up armed against all attacks. AND MOSES TOOK THE BONES OF JOSEPH (ib. 19). Concerning him does it say: The wise in heart will take good deeds (Prov. X, 8), for at the time when the whole of Israel were busily occupied in collecting gold and silver, Moses was occupied with collecting the bones of Joseph, as it says: AND MOSES TOOK THE BONES OF JOSEPH. … During the entire forty years’ wanderings in the wilderness, the bones of Joseph traveled with them. God had said to him [Joseph]: ‘Because thou hast said: "I will feed you" to thy brothers, I assure thee that when thou art dead, thy bones will journey with them for forty years in the wilderness,’ as it says: But there were certain men, who were unclean by the dead body of a man (Num. IX, 6). The word ’man’ refers to Joseph, for it says: The tent which He had made to dwell among men (Ps. LXXVIII, 60), and then: Moreover He abhorred the tent of Joseph (ib. 67) For the sake of thy bones shall they celebrate the lesser Passover. Midrash Rabba Sh’mot 20:19

The Midrash connects the Pesach Sheni with Yosef, as reward for a specific deed of Yosef, his remains travelled with the community, because he took care of and fed his brothers. To fully appreciate this gesture we need to appreciate the context. Yaakov has died and the brothers and Yosef have returned to Egypt. The brothers are apparently frightened; therefore they take a preemptive action, and offer to be slaves to Yosef. One who is not scared would not offer themselves to a life of servitude, the sad case was that the brothers were scared of something worse than servitude; they were scared of death.

בראשית פרק נ
(יד) וַיָּשָׁב יוֹסֵף מִצְרַיְמָה הוּא וְאֶחָיו וְכָל הָעֹלִים אִתּוֹ לִקְבֹּר אֶת אָבִיו אַחֲרֵי קָבְרוֹ אֶת אָבִיו:(טו) וַיִּרְאוּ אֲחֵי יוֹסֵף כִּי מֵת אֲבִיהֶם וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוּ יִשְׂטְמֵנוּ יוֹסֵף וְהָשֵׁב יָשִׁיב לָנוּ אֵת כָּל הָרָעָה אֲשֶׁר גָּמַלְנוּ אֹתוֹ: (טז) וַיְצַוּוּ אֶל יוֹסֵף לֵאמֹר אָבִיךָ צִוָּה לִפְנֵי מוֹתוֹ לֵאמֹר:(יז) כֹּה תֹאמְרוּ לְיוֹסֵף אָנָּא שָׂא נָא פֶּשַׁע אַחֶיךָ וְחַטָּאתָם כִּי רָעָה גְמָלוּךָ וְעַתָּה שָׂא נָא לְפֶשַׁע עַבְדֵי אֱלֹהֵי אָבִיךָ וַיֵּבְךְּ יוֹסֵף בְּדַבְּרָם אֵלָיו:(יח) וַיֵּלְכוּ גַּם אֶחָיו וַיִּפְּלוּ לְפָנָיו וַיֹּאמְרוּ הִנֶּנּוּ לְךָ לַעֲבָדִים: (יט) וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם יוֹסֵף אַל תִּירָאוּ כִּי הֲתַחַת אֱלֹהִים אָנִי: (כ) וְאַתֶּם חֲשַׁבְתֶּם עָלַי רָעָה אֱלֹהִים חֲשָׁבָהּ לְטֹבָה לְמַעַן עֲשֹׂה כַּיּוֹם הַזֶּה לְהַחֲיֹת עַם רָב:(כא) וְעַתָּה אַל תִּירָאוּ אָנֹכִי אֲכַלְכֵּל אֶתְכֶם וְאֶת טַפְּכֶם וַיְנַחֵם אוֹתָם וַיְדַבֵּר עַל לִבָּם:
14. And Joseph returned to Egypt, he, and his brothers, and all who went up with him to bury his father, after he had buried his father. 15. And when Joseph’s brothers saw that their father was dead, they said, Joseph will perhaps hate us, and will certainly pay us back for all the evil which we did to him. 16. And they sent a messenger to Joseph, saying, Your father did command before he died, saying, 17. So shall you say to Joseph, Forgive, I beg you now, the trespass of your brothers, and their sin; for they did to you evil; and now, we beg you, forgive the trespass of the servants of the God of your father. And Joseph wept when they spoke to him. 18. And his brothers also went and fell down before his face; and they said, Behold, we are your servants. 19. And Joseph said to them, Fear not; for am I in the place of God? 20. But as for you, you thought evil against me; but God meant it to good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive. 21. Now therefore do not fear; I will nourish you, and your little ones. And he comforted them, and spoke kindly to them. Bereishit 50:14-21

A Second Chance
Yosef’s response to their offer, was not just non belligerence or non-violence, he offered to care for them, to feed them. He offered to treat them as brothers, as family. The reason they feared, was there was a time long ago, before Yosef became a viceroy in Egypt, that they wished to thrust him out of the family, an act which would have cut him out of the Jewish people. Now with his father dead and buried Yosef could have his sweet revenge. Instead of intimidation and violence Yosef offers a gesture of love. Ironically had he accepted their offer, he would have been again separated from his family. But Yosef offers to feed them; he wants to be with them. His reward was that he remained with his family, with his people, and when they leave he will leave with them.[5]

This may allow us to understand why Yosef is connected with Pesach Sheni. When those who could not bring the offering complained, they described their plight not just that they would not be able to fulfill the command – but they would be unable to fulfill the command among the rest of the people:

במדבר פרק ט
(ז) וַיֹּאמְרוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים הָהֵמָּה אֵלָיו אֲנַחְנוּ טְמֵאִים לְנֶפֶשׁ אָדָם לָמָּה נִגָּרַע לְבִלְתִּי הַקְרִב אֶת קָרְבַּן ה’ בְּמֹעֲדוֹ בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:
Why are we kept back, so that we may not offer an offering to the Lord in his appointed season among the people of Israel? Bamidbar 9:7

Non performance of the Pesach offering is related to separation from the people of Israel:

במדבר פרק ט
(יג) וְהָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר הוּא טָהוֹר וּבְדֶרֶךְ לֹא הָיָה וְחָדַל לַעֲשׂוֹת הַפֶּסַח וְנִכְרְתָה הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא מֵעַמֶּיהָ כִּי קָרְבַּן ה’ לֹא הִקְרִיב בְּמֹעֲדוֹ חֶטְאוֹ יִשָּׂא הָאִישׁ הַהוּא:
13. But the man who is clean, and is not in a journey, and refrains from keeping the Passover, that same soul shall be cut off from among his people; because he brought not the offering of the Lord in his appointed season, that man shall bear his sin. Bamidbar 9:13

The punishment is described as karet, which means to be spiritually separated from the Jewish people. This punishment is usually reserved for severe crimes, when someone has done something severely wrong. In this instance it is not that something was done, rather it was for being passive and not performing a task required task – eating from the paschal lamb. The only other punishment of karet meted for nonperformance of a positive commandment is non-performance of circumcision. These two commandments have a commonality, they both define peoplehood, and non-performance is a bill of divorce from the Jewish people. Karet as punishment for these omissions may be more of a result of not doing an act which defines the Jewish people, rather than as a punishment per se.

Yosef was thrust out of his people, and he had an opportunity to thrust out his people. Instead he chose the moral high road. He chose love, he chose peace he chose camaraderie. He chose family.

Yosef’s heroic gesture resulted in a second chance; another attempt for the nation to be one. As a result of this gesture Yosef’s remains would travel with them on their journey. He would leave and finally go back home to Israel with his family. Nonetheless his remains, like all Jewish corpses generated impurity, however it was deemed inconceivable, that those who tended to Yosef, would feel separated from the community, with beautiful poetic justice God gave them a second chance. The normal rules of sacrifices could be suspended. Yosef’ benevolence is mirrored by God’s benevolence. A new holiday representing second chances would be established.[6] A fitting holiday for Yosef.[7]

The enslavement in Egypt resulted from the sale of Yosef. The callus meal eaten as Yosef languished in the pit required a tikun. They broke bread as Yosef screamed. They were impervious to his screams, for they had deemed him no longer part of the Jewish people. It was a meal which brought the brothers together, together in a dastardly deed, with one brother missing. When the Jews leave Egypt they are commanded to have a meal and eat the Paschal lamb, but now they are told they must bring the family together when they eat.

שמות פרק יב
(ג) דַּבְּרוּ אֶל כָּל עֲדַת יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר בֶּעָשֹׂר לַחֹדֶשׁ הַזֶּה וְיִקְחוּ לָהֶם אִישׁ שֶׂה לְבֵית אָבֹת שֶׂה לַבָּיִת:(ד) וְאִם יִמְעַט הַבַּיִת מִהְיֹת מִשֶּׂה וְלָקַח הוּא וּשְׁכֵנוֹ הַקָּרֹב אֶל בֵּיתוֹ בְּמִכְסַת נְפָשֹׁת אִישׁ לְפִי אָכְלוֹ תָּכֹסּוּ עַל הַשֶּׂה:
3. Speak to all the congregation of Israel, saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for a house; 4. And if the household is too little for the lamb, let him and his neighbor next to his house take it according to the number of the souls; according to every man’s eating shall you make your count for the lamb. Sh’mot 12:3,4

Bring the family together, and even invite the neighbors if you can. The offering must be eaten with Matzah, perhaps bread which symbolized haughtiness – and that horrific meal eaten within earshot of the pit was deemed unacceptable. In fact all bread and bread products must be exorcized from the home. However Pesach Sheni has no such requirement, now bread and matzah can reside together in one home – truly an extraordinary holiday[8]. A holiday of unity[9], a holiday which shows the love that God has for His people, a holiday of second chances.[10]

[1] See Comments of Ibn Ezra
אבן עזרא על במדבר פרק ט פסוק ו
ויהי אנשים - לא יתכן שיהיה מחנה ישראל גדול ושלא ימותו שם מתים בכל יום:
[2] See Rashi Bereishit 47:29
רש"י בראשית פרק מז
חסד ואמת - חסד שעושין עם המתים הוא חסד של אמת, שאינו מצפה לתשלום גמול:
[3] In the words of the Seforno Bamidbar 9:7 – why should our mitzva cause a sin – by non-compliance to the pesach mitzva.
ספורנו עה"ת ספר במדבר פרק ט פסוק ז
אנחנו טמאים לנפש אדם, למה נגרע. מאחר שהיתה טומאתנו לדבר מצוה למה תהיה גוררת עבירה. במועדו. שזו מצוה עוברת:

[4] The principle is known as עבר זמנו בטל קרבנו avar zmano batel korbano. See Tosfot Brachot 26a SV Ibaya Lihu. It is there explained that the daily prayers, which were instituted by the forefathers, and commemorate a sacrifice from the Mishkan, can be said even if the proper time passed, because of the aspect of the prayers which were instituted by the forefathers. However musaf (the additional prayer said on holidays) can not be made up, for this is a commemoration of the additional offering brought on holidays.
תוספות מסכת ברכות דף כו עמוד א
איבעיא להו טעה ולא התפלל תפלת מנחה כו' - לא בעי אם טעה ולא התפלל תפלת מוסף דהא ודאי אינו מתפלל בערבית דהיאך יקרא את הקרבנות וכבר עבר זמן מוסף וגם לא תיקנו שבע ברכות של מוסף אלא משום ונשלמה פרים שפתינו ובזה ודאי עבר זמנו בטל קרבנו אבל שאר תפלות דרחמי נינהו ולואי שיתפלל אדם כל היום כולו ואין כאן עבר זמנו בתפלה אחרת.
[5] The Midrash Sh’mot Rabbah 20:19, stresses that Yosef was taken from Shechem, in order for the sale of Yosef to have full and final closure, he will need to be returned to Shechem
שמות רבה (וילנא) פרשה כ ד"ה יט וחמושים עלו
כך משכם גנבו אחיו של יוסף אותו ומכרו אותו וכשבא ליפטר מן העולם השביע אותם אמר להם בבקשה מכם אחי משכם גנבתם אותי חי החזירו את עצמותי לשכם לכך נאמר (יהושע כד) ואת עצמות יוסף אשר העלו בני ישראל ממצרים קברו בשכם.
Similarly, it was from Shechem that the brothers of Joseph had stolen him and had sold him: and when he was about to die, he adjured them: ' My brothers! ye have stolen me from Shechem while I was alive, I pray you, return my bones to Shechem.’ For this reason does it say: And the bones of Joseph, which the children of Israel brought up out of Egypt, buried they in Shechem (Josh. XXIV, 32)
[6] According to the Zohar (Bamidbar 152b) the spiritual feeling of Pesach Sheni can be felt for seven days:
זוהר - רעיא מהימנא כרך ג (במדבר) פרשת בהעלותך דף קנב עמוד ב
פקודא (ל) למעבד פסח שני על אינון דלא יכילו או דאסתאבו במסאבו אחרא, אי רזא דפסח רזא דמהימנותא דישראל עאלין בה שלטא בניסן וכדין איהו זמנא לחדוה איך יכלין אלין דלא יכילו או דאסתאבו למעבד בירחא תניינא דהא אעבר זמנא, אלא כיון דכ"י מתעטרא בעטרהא בניסן לא אתעדיאת כתרהא ועטרהא מנה תלתין יומין וכל אינון ל' יומין מן יומא דנפקו ישראל מפסח יתבא מטרוניתא בעטרהא וכל חילהא בחדוה, מאן דבעי למחמי למטרוניתא יכיל למחמי, כרוזא כריז כל מאן דלא יכיל למחמי מטרוניתא ייתי ויחמי עד לא ינעלון תרעיה, אימתי כרוזא כריז בארבעה עשר לירחא תניינא דהא מתמן עד שבעה יומין תרעין פתיחן, מכאן ולהלאה ינעלון תרעי, ועל דא פסח שני ע"כ: (פקודא דא לספור ספירת העומר צז א):
There is a commandment to bring a Pesach sheni for those who were unable to fulfill the mitzvah in the proper time, or were impure with some other impurity. If the secret of Pesach is the secret of the faith which Israel entered, this rules (only) in the month of Nisan, then is the time for joy, how can someone who was impure or missed the (proper) time bring the offering in the second month – the (correct) time has passed?
The answer is that the community of Israel is endowed with the crown in the month of Nisan, the crown is not removed for thirty days. And for these thirty days the matron sits with her crown and all the hosts rejoice. And whoever wishes to see the matron can see. The crier then goes and announces whomever can not see the matron can come and look before the gates are closed. When does the crier go out? On the fourteenth of the second month and from that day the gates are opened for seven more days, from that day onward the gates are closed, this is the Pesach Sheni

[7] See Shem Mishmuel Bahalotcha 5672
ספר שם משמואל פרשת בהעלותך - שנת תרע"ב
ויהי אנשים וגו' אותם אנשים מי היו נושאי ארונו של יוסף היו, והנה יוסף השביע את ישראל שיעלו את עצמותיו עמהם, והם שנשאו את ארונו היו במקום כל ישראל, ע"כ חשבו שיהי' הדין אצלם כמו בכל ישראל שטומאה דחוי' בציבור. ואולי הטעם שלא הסכים עמהם הש"י הוא, מפני שעדיין יש להם תקנה בפסח שני, וכמו חגיגה שאינה דוחה שבת, אבל ציבור ממש שדוחין הוא משום דאין להם תקנה בשני, דאי אמרת שאין דוחין ולא עבדי ציבור בראשון שוב אינם עושין את השני כלל וכמו שהי' הציבור זבין בראשון, ודו"ק:
ובזה יש לפרש דברי המדרש (שמו"ר פ' כ') שבזכות יוסף עושין פסח קטן, דהנה אמרו ז"ל (דב"ר פ"ב סי' ה') יוסף שהודה בארצו נקבר בארצו, ובזכותו היו כל ישראל משועבדים להעלותו, והי' הדין נותן שידחה טומאה ויעשו בראשון כנ"ל, אלא שנעשתה להם תקנה שיעשו בשני, אבל בשאר טמאים אי לא היתה נתחדשה ההלכה לעשות פסח שני ע"י נושאי ארונו של יוסף היו נדחין לגמרי, אבל כשנתחדשה הלכה ע"י נושאי ארונו של יוסף שוב גם שאר הטמאים עושין פסח שני, א"כ כל ענין פסח שני הוא רק בזכות יוסף, ודו"ק

[8] See Rashi Bamidbar 9:10
רש"י במדבר פרק ט פסוק י
פסח שני מצה וחמץ עמו בבית ואין שם יום טוב, ואין איסור חמץ אלא עמו באכילתו:

[9] Yosef represents unity see Sfat Emet Miketz 5652
שפת אמת ספר בראשית - פרשת מקץ - שנת [תרנ"ב]
ובאמת יוסף הצדיק הוא בחי' השבת והשבת הוא כולל כל ימי השבוע. ויוסף הוא הכולל כל נפשות בני ישראל ולכן קרבנו הוא קרבן ציבור וקרב בשבת:

[10] See Shem Mishmuel Vayikra –Chodesh 5674
ספר שם משמואל פרשת ויקרא - וחודש שנת תרע"ד
והנה יוסף באשר מיאן להתדבק לדבר שאינו ראוי לו זכה שנדבקו בו כל הכחות הקדושים, וע"כ בכחו לחבר ולאחד את הכל, ומדתו צדיק יסוד עולם כי כל בשמים ובארץ ובתרגום דאחיד בשמיא ובארעא, ע"כ אמרו אין אדם אלא יוסף, ומייתי לה מאוהל שיכן באדם התחברות עליונים ותחתונים. ומעתה יש לומר דכל שם אדם לדורות הוא כשהוא שומר הברית, הוא ראוי לחבר מה שראוי לחבר, וע"כ אתם קרוים אדם ולא אומה"ע כי כתיב (ישעי' ס') ועמך כולם צדיקים, ולהיפוך (ירמי' ט') כי כל הגוים ערלים היפוך מדת צדיק, דצדיק לא נקרא אלא דנטר האי ברית:
והנה קרבן הוא כשמו לקרב את הכחות שראויים לקרב, וע"כ בראשית דיני קרבנות פריש האי שמא להורות מי הוא הראוי להקריב קרבן, ואף שגם הגויים מתנדבין קרבנות ונתרבו מאיש איש, מ"מ אין קרבנם ענין אחד עם קרבן ישראל:
ולפי האמור יש ליתן טעם דערל אסור בפסח, ועיקר ענין פסח ומילה שניתן להם אז, כי קרבן פסח לקרב כל הכחות ואפי' כל האכילות לגבוה, ומצד זה עצמו היתה הגאולה שגם הם נתקרבו ונדבקו בהשכינה וכשעלתה ממצרים נתעלו עמה. אך א"א הי' לקרב ולאחד את כל הכחות כי אם בכח שמירת הברית ברישא כנ"ל, וע"כ צריכין למילה ברישא:
ולפי האמור תובן טענת נושאי ארונו של יוסף (במדבר ט') אנחנו טמאים לנפש אדם למה נגרע לבלתי הקריב את קרבן ה' וגו', דמאחר שהם נושאי ארונו של יוסף שהוא שורש ויסוד כל הקרבנות אינו בדין שידחו הם מקרבן ה'. וזה שהשיבם משה דין פסח שני, אדרבה בזכות יוסף נתגלגל על ידיהם עוד קרבן והוא פסח שני לאחד ולקרב אפי' הרחוקים מפסח ראשון, וזה שבמדרש (שמ"ר סו"פ כ') שבזכות יוסף הם עושין פסח קטן

Parshat Naso 5769 -A Head Full of Holiness

Parshat Naso 5769
Rabbi Ari Kahn

A Head Full of Holiness

More Prohibitions
In Parshat Naso we are introduced to a new type of individual, a person who is not satisfied with the multitude of other commandments and prohibitions which all Jews are commanded; instead he/she looks for further limitation, with a vow becoming a Nazir.

במדבר פרק ו
(א) וַיְדַבֵּר ה’ אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר: (ב) דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם אִישׁ אוֹ אִשָּׁה כִּי יַפְלִא לִנְדֹּר נֶדֶר נָזִיר לְהַזִּיר לה’: (ג) מִיַּיִן וְשֵׁכָר יַזִּיר חֹמֶץ יַיִן וְחֹמֶץ שֵׁכָר לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה וְכָל מִשְׁרַת עֲנָבִים לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה וַעֲנָבִים לַחִים וִיבֵשִׁים לֹא יֹאכֵל: (ד) כֹּל יְמֵי נִזְרוֹ מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר יֵעָשֶׂה מִגֶּפֶן הַיַּיִן מֵחַרְצַנִּים וְעַד זָג לֹא יֹאכֵל: (ה) כָּל יְמֵי נֶדֶר נִזְרוֹ תַּעַר לֹא יַעֲבֹר עַל רֹאשׁוֹ עַד מְלֹאת הַיָּמִם אֲשֶׁר יַזִּיר לה’ קָדֹשׁ יִהְיֶה גַּדֵּל פֶּרַע שְׂעַר רֹאשׁוֹ: (ו) כָּל יְמֵי הַזִּירוֹ לה’ עַל נֶפֶשׁ מֵת לֹא יָבֹא: (ז) לְאָבִיו וּלְאִמּוֹ לְאָחִיו וּלְאַחֹתוֹ לֹא יִטַּמָּא לָהֶם בְּמֹתָם כִּי נֵזֶר אֱלֹהָיו עַל רֹאשׁוֹ: (ח) כֹּל יְמֵי נִזְרוֹ קָדֹשׁ הוּא לה’:
1. And God spoke to Moshe, saying, 2. Speak to the People of Israel, and say to them, When either man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazirite, to separate themselves for God; 3. He shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shall drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink, nor shall he drink any liquor of grapes, nor eat moist grapes, or dried. 4. All the days of his separation shall he eat nothing that is produced from the grape vine, from the seeds to the grape skin. 5. All the days of the vow of his separation no razor shall come upon his head; until the days are fulfilled, during which he separates himself for God, he shall be holy, and shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow. 6. All the days that he separates himself for God he shall not come near a dead body. 7. He shall not make himself unclean for his father, or for his mother, for his brother, or for his sister, when they die; because the consecration of his God is upon his head. Bamidbar 6:1-7

In his commentary on these verses, the Recanati observes that the holiness which the Nazir accepts is reminiscent of a Kohen - or even of a Kohen Gadol. [1] The wine which he has sworn off is one of the conditions of a Kohen who is on active duty, serving in the Temple.[2] The prohibition of defiling himself to the dead is like the Kohen, though in this case it is even more severe than the normal restriction: A regular Kohen is permitted to defile himself if a member of his immediate family passes away, whereas the Nazir is prohibited from doing so even in these circumstances.

Internal and External Holiness
This additional level of prohibition against defilement (tum'ah) may be understood as an indication of the holiness achieved by the Nazir, placing him on a level equal to that of a Kohen Gadol. Yet the commentaries offer a more technical explanation: A regular Kohen achieves his holiness from his bloodline; had his father not been a Kohen – neither would he. Had his mother not possessed the requirements necessary to marry a Kohen, he – her son - would not be a Kohen. However the Kohen Gadol achieves his higher level of holiness due to external factors: He is chosen for this exalted task, not as an automatic result of his bloodline. He therefore cannot defile himself for family.[3] Likewise, the Nazir’s status is based on a vow, and is independent of his family line and his parents' level of holiness; hence, he may not defile himself even for his parents.[4]

Wildness
The third aspect of the Nazir’s “holiness” manifests itself in the proscription against cutting his hair. This stands in stark contrast to the law of the Kohen, and of the Kohen Gadol. A person whose hair is long is not permitted to function as a Kohen, and a Kohen Gadol must always see to it that his hair is not wild. In fact, the length of hair prohibited to the Kohen is derived from the minimum length that a Nazir must grow his hair: 30 days' growth.[5]

Why is it specifically regarding the Nazir's hair that we find a deviation from the laws of the Kohen? The Torah contains a precedent regarding wild hair - in the section immediately preceding the discussion of Nazir, where the Torah describes the ordeal endured by the Sotah: A woman is known to have secluded herself with a man other than her husband, a man her husband specifically asked her not to be alone with. While she denies infidelity and claims virtue, the circumstantial evidence is damning. The Torah introduces a rite that will prove her innocence – or guilt.

This woman, who is guilty of poor judgment at least insofar as her choice to place herself in this compromising situation, is brought to the Beit Hamikdash. Her hair is uncovered – literally, "made wild”:

במדבר פרק ה
(יח) וְהֶעֱמִיד הַכֹּהֵן אֶת הָאִשָּׁה לִפְנֵי ה’ וּפָרַע אֶת רֹאשׁ הָאִשָּׁה וְנָתַן עַל כַּפֶּיהָ אֵת מִנְחַת הַזִּכָּרוֹן מִנְחַת קְנָאֹת הִוא וּבְיַד הַכֹּהֵן יִהְיוּ מֵי הַמָּרִים הַמְאָרֲרִים:
18. And the Kohen shall set the woman before God, and loosen the hair of the woman’s head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the meal offering of jealousy; and the Kohen shall have in his hand the bitter water that causes the curse; Bamidbar 5:18.

Rashi defines the word para' as 'to make wild': her hair should be released, her braids undone.[6] This is the same word (see Bamidbar 6:5 cited above) used to describe the Nazir, and what happens when he refrains from cutting his hair. This linguistic connection strengthens the textual bond created by the proximity of these two sections, a connection amplified by the rabbinic tradition that delves into the psychology of the Nazir: The reason a person takes such stringency upon themselves, the impetus for becoming a Nazir, is the trauma of the Sotah ritual. A bystander or witness to the Sotah's disgrace would not be left untouched by the entire scenario. Having witnessed a Sotah in her moment of embarrassment, any man or woman might be led to seek out a spiritual remedy. This tradition is recorded by Rashi:

רש"י על במדבר פרק ו פסוק ב
למה נסמכה פרשת נזיר לפ' סוטה לומר לך שכל הרואה סוטה בקלקולה יזיר עצמו מן היין שהוא מביא לידי ניאוף (סוטה ב.)
Why is the section of Nazir placed next to Sotah, to tell you that whoever sees a Sotah in her disgrace should take upon himself to abstain from wine, for it leads to adultery (Rashi Bamidbar 6:2)

Rashi traces the scenario back to its roots cause: Wine causes confusion;[7] when intoxicated, ones' judgment is impaired. This woman displayed poor judgment by secluding herself with a man –not just any man, but specifically one whom her husband didn’t trust – and has thus caused damage to her relationship with her husband. She is sent to the Kohen, who is himself prohibited from having any wine when he performs the service in the Beit Hamikdash. Meanwhile the “innocent” onlooker witnesses the disgrace, sees how the delicate balance between spiritual and physical is upset by wanton desire, and makes a gesture in the opposite direction. He swears off wine, and grows his own hair. Simply stated, the laws of the Nazir combine the laws of the Kohen with a reaction to the disgrace of the Sotah.

The Talmud regards the Nazir's vow of asceticism as a concession, a necessary though drastic measure undertaken by the onlooker who attempts to regain his own equilibrium. Even an outsider, an innocent bystander, is affected and impacted by witnessing the sexually charged situation. The Torah laws surrounding the Nazir bear out this attitude: While on the one hand the Torah condones this method of spiritual healing (for a period of thirty days), the Nazir concludes this process by bringing a sin offering, penance for the legitimate pleasure that could have been enjoyed but was voluntarily forfeited.[8]

The complex set of reactions and attitudes of the Nazir to sin may help explain a very difficult relationship recorded in the Prophets. King David was the first anointed king, the founder of the Davidic dynasty. Clearly, David would have preferred to choose the son who would rule after him, and would certainly have expected the succession to take place only after his own passing. Yet one of his sons, Avshalom, declared himself king - regardless of the fact that his father, King David, was still quite alive at the time.
Avshalom’s rebellion began when his half-brother Amnon (they shared a father, but had different mothers) developed an obsession for his own half sister: the beautiful Tamar, Avshalom’s full sister. Amnon plotted until he was secluded with his sister and then took her by force.

שמואל ב פרק יג
(א) וַיְהִי אַחֲרֵי כֵן וּלְאַבְשָׁלוֹם בֶּן דָּוִד אָחוֹת יָפָה וּשְׁמָהּ תָּמָר וַיֶּאֱהָבֶהָ אַמְנוֹן בֶּן דָּוִד: (ב) וַיֵּצֶר לְאַמְנוֹן לְהִתְחַלּוֹת בַּעֲבוּר תָּמָר אֲחֹתוֹ כִּי בְתוּלָה הִיא וַיִּפָּלֵא בְּעֵינֵי אַמְנוֹן לַעֲשׂוֹת לָהּ מְאוּמָה:
(ו) וַיִּשְׁכַּב אַמְנוֹן וַיִּתְחָל וַיָּבֹא הַמֶּלֶךְ לִרְאֹתוֹ וַיֹּאמֶר אַמְנוֹן אֶל הַמֶּלֶךְ תָּבוֹא נָא תָּמָר אֲחֹתִי וּתְלַבֵּב לְעֵינַי שְׁתֵּי לְבִבוֹת וְאֶבְרֶה מִיָּדָהּ:
(יא) וַתַּגֵּשׁ אֵלָיו לֶאֱכֹל וַיַּחֲזֶק בָּהּ וַיֹּאמֶר לָהּ בּוֹאִי שִׁכְבִי עִמִּי אֲחוֹתִי:
(יד) וְלֹא אָבָה לִשְׁמֹעַ בְּקוֹלָהּ וַיֶּחֱזַק מִמֶּנָּה וַיְעַנֶּהָ וַיִּשְׁכַּב אֹתָהּ:
1. And it came to pass after this, that Avshalom the son of David had a beautiful sister, whose name was Tamar; and Amnon the son of David loved her. 2. And Amnon was so tormented, that he fell sick for his sister Tamar; for she was a virgin; and Amnon thought it hard for him to do any thing to her.
6. So Amnon lay down, and feigned to be sick; and when the king came to see him, Amnon said to the king, I beg you, let Tamar my sister come, and make me a couple of cakes in my sight, that I may eat of her hand.
11. And when she had brought them to him to eat, he took hold of her, and said to her, Come lie with me, my sister.
14. But he would not listen to her voice; but, being stronger than she, forced her, and lay with her. 2 Shmuel 13

When Avshalom found out he plotted what he thought to be the proper revenge – and saw to it that Amnon would die. Soon after, Avshalom declared himself king.

According to the Talmud, Avshalom (and Tamar) were children of a relationship which David had with a woman captured in battle – a beautiful captive (Yefat Toar).[9]

The Talmud teaches that the permissibility of taking such captives in war is a concession to man’s frailty, a compromise with the Yetzer Hara (Evil Inclination).

 תלמוד בבלי מסכת קידושין דף כא/ב
... יפת תואר: לא דברה תורה אלא כנגד יצר הרע מוטב שיאכלו ישראל בשר )כב/א( תמותות שחוטות ואל יאכלו בשר תמותות נבילות
 ‘Of beautiful countenance": The Torah only provided for human passions: it is better for Israel to eat flesh of [animals] about to die, yet [ritually] slaughtered, than flesh of dying animals which have perished; Talmud Bavli Kiddushin 21b

Avshalom, as the product of such a union, may have drawn a mental and moral line connecting Amnon’s despicable behavior back to its roots in their father’s libidinous behavior.[10] Whether this idea was fully formed in his mind or not, we can never know; what we do know is that he decided to usurp the kingdom from his father after this episode. Presumably, he felt he had found a more deserving occupant for the throne - himself.

There is another aspect of Avshalom's personal story recorded in rabbinic tradition: Avshalom was a Nazir.

תלמוד בבלי מסכת נזיר דף ד עמוד ב
דתניא, רבי אומר: אבשלום נזיר עולם היה, שנאמר: (שמואל ב' טו) ויהי מקץ ארבעים שנה ויאמר אבשלום אל המלך אלכה נא ואשלם את נדרי אשר נדרתי לה' בחברון, ומגלח אחד לשנים עשר חדש...; ר' נהוראי אומר: מגלח אחת לל' יום; רבי יוסי אומר: מגלח מערב שבת לערב שבת, שכן מצינו בבני מלכים שמגלחים מע"ש לע"ש.
Rabbi said that Avshalom was a life-nazirite, for it says, And it came to pass at the end of forty years that Avshalom said to the king: 'I pray thee, let me go and pay my vow which I have vowed to God in Hevron'. He used to cut his hair every twelve months… R. Nehorai said: [Avshalom] used to cut his hair every thirty days. R. Jose said: He used to cut it on the eve of each Sabbath, for princes usually got haircuts on the eve of each Sabbath. Talmud Bavli Nazir 4b-5a

Perhaps this was his response to the corrupt world he saw around him. His personal response to the Yetzer Hara was to become a Nazir. Perhaps he convinced himself that asceticism would safeguard him from sin. But the battle against the Yetzer Hara is tricky: The opponent wears many different masks and costumes. Confidence of victory on this battlefield is almost a sure sign of defeat.

Ironically, it was Avshalom’s hair that brought about his demise:

ספר שמואל ב פרק יח
(ט) וַיִּקָּרֵא אַבְשָׁלוֹם לִפְנֵי עַבְדֵי דָוִד וְאַבְשָׁלוֹם רֹכֵב עַל הַפֶּרֶד וַיָּבֹא הַפֶּרֶד תַּחַת שׂוֹבֶךְ הָאֵלָה הַגְּדוֹלָה וַיֶּחֱזַק רֹאשׁוֹ בָאֵלָה וַיֻּתַּן בֵּין הַשָּׁמַיִם וּבֵין הָאָרֶץ וְהַפֶּרֶד אֲשֶׁר תַּחְתָּיו עָבָר:
9. And Avshalom met the servants of David. And Avshalom rode upon a mule, and the mule went under the thick boughs of a great oak, and his head caught hold of the oak, and he was taken up between the sky and the earth; and the mule that was under him walked on. 2 Shmuel 18:9

Not only was it his hair which brought his demise, the Talmud teaches that the rebellion was through his hair:

שמואל ב פרק יד
(כה) וּכְאַבְשָׁלוֹם לֹא הָיָה אִישׁ יָפֶה בְּכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל לְהַלֵּל מְאֹד מִכַּף רַגְלוֹ וְעַד קָדְקֳדוֹ לֹא הָיָה בוֹ מוּם: (כו) וּבְגַלְּחוֹ אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ וְהָיָה מִקֵּץ יָמִים לַיָּמִים אֲשֶׁר יְגַלֵּחַ כִּי כָבֵד עָלָיו וְגִלְּחוֹ וְשָׁקַל אֶת שְׂעַר רֹאשׁוֹ מָאתַיִם שְׁקָלִים בְּאֶבֶן הַמֶּלֶךְ:
25. But in all Israel there was none so much praised as Avshalom for his beauty; from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him. 26. And when he shaved his head, for it was at every year’s end that he shaved it; because the hair was heavy on him, therefore he shaved it; he weighed the hair of his head at two hundred shekels according to the king’s weight. 2 Shmuel 14:25,26

תלמוד בבלי מסכת סוטה דף י עמוד ב
אבשלום נתגאה בשערו וכו'. ת"ר: אבשלום בשערו מרד, שנאמר: )שמואל ב' יד( וכאבשלום לא היה איש יפה וגו' ובגלחו את ראשו (וגו') והיה מקץ ימים לימים אשר יגלח כי כבד עליו וגלחו ושקל את שער ראשו מאתים שקלים באבן המלך, תנא: אבן שאנשי טבריא ואנשי ציפורי שוקלים בה; לפיכך נתלה בשערו, שנאמר: )שמואל ב' יח) ויקרא /ו' בפתח, י' בחיריק, ק' בקמץ ר' בצירה/ אבשלום לפני עבדי דוד ואבשלום רוכב על הפרד ויבא הפרד תחת שובך האלה הגדולה ויאחז ראשו באלה ויותן בין השמים ובין הארץ והפרד אשר תחתיו עבר, [שקל ספסירא בעא למיפסקיה],
AVSHALOM GLORIED IN HIS HAIR etc. Our Rabbis have taught: Avshalom rebelled [against his father] through his hair, as it is said: There was none to be so much praised as Avshalom for his beauty . . . And when he cut his hair, at every year's end that he cut it because the hair was heavy on him. Therefore he cut it, and he weighed the hair of his head at two hundred shekels, in the king's weight. It has been taught that [the king's weight] was the weight with which the men of Tiberias and Sepphoris weigh. Therefore he was hanged by his hair, as it is said: And Avshalom chanced to meet the servants of David. And Avshalom rode upon his mule, and the mule went under the thick boughs of a great oak, and his head caught hold of the oak, and he was taken up between the heaven and the earth, and the mule that was under him walked on. He took a sword and wished to cut himself loose; Talmud Bavli Sotah 10b

Avshalom felt that his hair, the hair of a Nazir, “weighed” more than his father the king. His sense of superiority, of entitlement, was born of this self- righteousness. He took pride in his own virtue, his Nazirite vows of chastity and abstinence. He saw himself as clearly superior to David, for he, Avshalom, would not be tempted by beauty, he would not succumb to lust as David (and Amnon) had. He would sooner cut off his flowing Nazirite locks and dedicate them to God.

But Amnon's Yetzer Hara took a different form; his own personal Evil Inclination focused on a different weakness: obsession for power. Soon enough, his desire for power led him to commit an act that even he – especially he - should have seen as immoral.[11]

שמואל ב פרק טז
(כא) וַיֹּאמֶר אֲחִיתֹפֶל אֶל אַבְשָׁלֹם בּוֹא אֶל פִּלַגְשֵׁי אָבִיךָ אֲשֶׁר הִנִּיחַ לִשְׁמוֹר הַבָּיִת וְשָׁמַע כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי נִבְאַשְׁתָּ אֶת אָבִיךָ וְחָזְקוּ יְדֵי כָּל אֲשֶׁר אִתָּךְ:(כב) וַיַּטּוּ לְאַבְשָׁלוֹם הָאֹהֶל עַל הַגָּג וַיָּבֹא אַבְשָׁלוֹם אֶל פִּלַגְשֵׁי אָבִיו לְעֵינֵי כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל:
21. And Ahithophel said to Avshalom, 'Go in to your father’s concubines, whom he has left to keep the house; and all Israel shall hear that you have made yourself odious to your father; then shall the hands of all who are with you be strengthened.' 22. So they spread Avshalom a tent upon the top of the house; and Avshalom went in to his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel. 2 Shmuel chapter 16:21,22

Avshalom's lapse in judgment did not play out in seclusion, like the Sotah suspected of infidelity; his folly was placed on display, in broad daylight, demonstratively – "in the sight of all of Israel”. He thought that being a Nazir protected him. He believed himself to be more righteous than his father. In the end, the very hair that symbolized his “holiness” betrayed him, just as he had betrayed his own vows of purity, and as he had betrayed his father.

The First Nazir
The first time the word Nazir appears in the Torah is in connection with Yosef. It is part of a glorious blessing which Yaakov bestows upon his beloved son:

בראשית פרק מט
(כב) בֵּן פֹּרָת יוֹסֵף בֵּן פֹּרָת עֲלֵי עָיִן בָּנוֹת צָעֲדָה עֲלֵי שׁוּר:(כג) וַיְמָרֲרֻהוּ וָרֹבּוּ וַיִּשְׂטְמֻהוּ בַּעֲלֵי חִצִּים: (כד) וַתֵּשֶׁב בְּאֵיתָן קַשְׁתּוֹ וַיָּפֹזּוּ זְרֹעֵי יָדָיו מִידֵי אֲבִיר יַעֲקֹב מִשָּׁם רֹעֶה אֶבֶן יִשְׂרָאֵל: (כה) מֵאֵל אָבִיךָ וְיַעְזְרֶךָּ וְאֵת שַׁדַּי וִיבָרְכֶךָּ בִּרְכֹת שָׁמַיִם מֵעָל בִּרְכֹת תְּהוֹם רֹבֶצֶת תָּחַת בִּרְכֹת שָׁדַיִם וָרָחַם: (כו) בִּרְכֹת אָבִיךָ גָּבְרוּ עַל בִּרְכֹת הוֹרַי עַד תַּאֲוַת גִּבְעֹת עוֹלָם תִּהְיֶיןָ לְרֹאשׁ יוֹסֵף וּלְקָדְקֹד נְזִיר אֶחָיו: פ
22. Yosef is a fruitful bough, a fruitful bough by a wellspring; whose branches run over the wall; 23. The archers fiercely attacked him, and shot at him, and hated him; 24. But his bow abode in strength, and the arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the mighty God of Yaakov; from there is the shepherd, the Stone of Israel; 25. By the God of your father, who shall help you; and by the Almighty, who shall bless you with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lies under, blessings of the breasts, and of the womb; 26. The blessings of your father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors to the utmost bound of the everlasting hills; they shall be on the head of Yosef, and on the crown of the head of him who was separate from his brothers (literally," Nazir of his brothers"). Bereishit 49:22-26

The use of the word Nazir in this context is unclear. The Rashbam relates it to the word nezer - crown, for Yosef ruled over the others. In Yosef's dreams, he saw his father bowing down to him; perhaps Yosef, too, suffered from the sense of superiority and entitlement we saw in Avshalom? Perhaps Yosef, like Avshalom, would be guilty of usurping his father’s place? The brothers hated him for his dreams, suspected him of this very same sense of superiority; even his father was unsure, reserving judgment about his youngest son's attitude. What they all failed to understand was that Yosef would indeed rule, but not at the expense of his father or his family. Yosef would rule the mighty Egyptian empire.

The Talmud understands Yaakov's blessing more literally: Yosef was a Nazir.

תלמוד בבלי מסכת שבת דף קלט עמוד א
ואמר רב מלאי משום רבי יצחק מגדלאה: מיום שפירש יוסף מאחיו לא טעם טעם יין, דכתיב (בראשית מט) ולקדקד נזיר אחיו.
R. Melai also said in the name of R. Isaac of Magdala: From the day that Yosef departed from his brothers he did not taste wine, for it is written, "[The blessings of thy father...shall be on the head of Yosef], and on the crown of the head of him who was a nazirite [since his departure] from his brothers." Talmud Bavli Shabbat 139a

There are other details of Yosef's path to greatness that are bringus to an examination of Yosef as a Nazir. Most interesting is the incident in the House of Potiphar whichthat led to Yosef's incarceration. Yosef found himself secluded with a woman who had every intention to commit adultery with him.

בראשית פרק לט
(ו) וַיַּעֲזֹב כָּל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ בְּיַד יוֹסֵף וְלֹא יָדַע אִתּוֹ מְאוּמָה כִּי אִם הַלֶּחֶם אֲשֶׁר הוּא אוֹכֵל וַיְהִי יוֹסֵף יְפֵה תֹאַר וִיפֵה מַרְאֶה: (ז) וַיְהִי אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וַתִּשָּׂא אֵשֶׁת אֲדֹנָיו אֶת עֵינֶיהָ אֶל יוֹסֵף וַתֹּאמֶר שִׁכְבָה עִמִּי: (ח) וַיְמָאֵן וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל אֵשֶׁת אֲדֹנָיו הֵן אֲדֹנִי לֹא יָדַע אִתִּי מַה בַּבָּיִת וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יֶשׁ לוֹ נָתַן בְּיָדִי: (ט) אֵינֶנּוּ גָדוֹל בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה מִמֶּנִּי וְלֹא חָשַׂךְ מִמֶּנִּי מְאוּמָה כִּי אִם אוֹתָךְ בַּאֲשֶׁר אַתְּ אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֵיךְ אֶעֱשֶׂה הָרָעָה הַגְּדֹלָה הַזֹּאת וְחָטָאתִי לֵאלֹהִים: (י) וַיְהִי כְּדַבְּרָהּ אֶל יוֹסֵף יוֹם יוֹם וְלֹא שָׁמַע אֵלֶיהָ לִשְׁכַּב אֶצְלָהּ לִהְיוֹת עִמָּהּ: (יא) וַיְהִי כְּהַיּוֹם הַזֶּה וַיָּבֹא הַבַּיְתָה לַעֲשׂוֹת מְלַאכְתּוֹ וְאֵין אִישׁ מֵאַנְשֵׁי הַבַּיִת שָׁם בַּבָּיִת: (יב) וַתִּתְפְּשֵׂהוּ בְּבִגְדוֹ לֵאמֹר שִׁכְבָה עִמִּי וַיַּעֲזֹב בִּגְדוֹ בְּיָדָהּ וַיָּנָס וַיֵּצֵא הַחוּצָה: (יג) וַיְהִי כִּרְאוֹתָהּ כִּי עָזַב בִּגְדוֹ בְּיָדָהּ וַיָּנָס הַחוּצָה:
6. And he left all that he had in Yosef’s hand; and he knew not what he had, save for the bread which he ate. And Yosef was handsome and good looking.7. And it came to pass after these things, that his master’s wife cast her eyes upon Yosef; and she said, Lie with me. 8. But he refused, and said to his master’s wife, Behold, my master knows not what is with me in the house, and he has committed all that he has to my hand; 9. There is none greater in this house than I; nor has he kept back any thing from me but you, because you are his wife; how then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God? 10. And it came to pass, as she spoke to Yosef day by day, that he listened not to her, to lie by her, or to be with her. 11. And it came to pass about this time, that Yosef went into the house to do his business; and there was none of the men of the house there inside. 12. And she caught him by his garment, saying, Lie with me; and he left his garment in her hand, and fled, and got out. 13. And it came to pass, when she saw that he had left his garment in her hand, and had fled out, Bereishit 39:6-13

Yosef, like Avshalom, was good looking; ultimately, this caused his troubles and led to his incarceration. Yosef found himself in a situation fraught with sexual energy, at the verge of the abyss of moral decay: He was the object of the desire of a married woman, and indeed he entered her home and was secluded with her. But Yosef's purity remained untainted. He emerged victorious. Yosef responded to this situation by becoming the first Nazir, voluntarily abstaining from certain pleasures that had not been forbidden to him. He himself did not see the path that this would take him; he had no ulterior motives, seeking only to remain pure and true to God. He did not demand greatness or reward for his heroic behavior; he ended up in a cell, together with political prisoners. He did not see how his escape from Potifar’s wife would one day lead him to the Palace. Like Avshalom, Yosef was a Nazir – and he did, in fact, rule in Ya’akov’s lifetime. Unlike Avshalom, Yosef did not feel entitled because of his beauty, his virtue, his abstinence. Yosef is known for eternity as Yosef the Tzadik, Yosef the Righteous; Avshalom is remembered in infamy.

Yosef is the prototypical Nazir: The true Nazir should not feel entitled; he should see his chosen path as a necessary step in his personal battle against the Yetzer Hara. When his oath is fulfilled, the Nazir brings a sin offering, to atone for the very necessity of this path, for having been so profoundly impacted by the Yetzer Hara.

Many years later another Tzaddik came across a Nazir:

תלמוד בבלי מסכת נדרים דף ט עמוד ב
דתניא, אמר (רבי) שמעון הצדיק: מימי לא אכלתי אשם נזיר טמא אלא אחד; פעם אחת בא אדם אחד נזיר מן הדרום, וראיתיו שהוא יפה עינים וטוב רואי וקווצותיו סדורות לו תלתלים, אמרתי לו: בני, מה ראית להשחית את שערך זה הנאה? אמר לי: רועה הייתי לאבא בעירי, הלכתי למלאות מים מן המעיין ונסתכלתי בבבואה שלי, ופחז עלי יצרי ובקש לטורדני מן העולם, אמרתי לו: רשע! למה אתה מתגאה בעולם שאינו שלך, במי שהוא עתיד להיות רמה ותולעה? העבודה, שאגלחך לשמים! מיד עמדתי ונשקתיו על ראשו, אמרתי לו: בני, כמוך ירבו נוזרי נזירות בישראל, עליך הכתוב אומר: (במדבר ו) איש... כי יפליא לנדור נדר נזיר להזיר לה'.
For it was taught: Shimon the Tzaddik said: Only once in my life have I eaten of the trespass-offering brought by a defiled Nazir. On one occasion a Nazir came from the South country, and I saw that he had beautiful eyes, was of handsome appearance, and with thick locks of hair symmetrically arranged. Said I to him: ‘My son, what [reason] did you see to destroy this beautiful hair of yours?' He replied: ‘I was a shepherd for my father in my town. [Once] I went to draw water from a well, gazed upon my reflection in the water, whereupon my evil desires rushed upon me and sought to drive me from the world [through sin]. But I said unto it [my lust]: "Wretch! why do you vaunt yourself in a world that is not yours, with one who is destined to become worms and dust? I swear that I will shave off [this beautiful hair] for the sake of Heaven." Immediately [Rabbi Shimon] arose and kissed his head, saying: ‘My son, may there be many Nazirites such as you in Israel! Of you the Holy Torah says, 'When either a man or a woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazirite, to separate themselves unto God.' Talmud Bavli Nedarim 9b

Recognizing the Yetzer Hara as his enemy, this Nazir sets off to battle, and removes the object of his own pride. Seeing his own reflection jarred him into this new awareness, and with the very act that breaks the Nazir's vow, he became a Nazir.

One of the great Kabbalists of the middle ages, Rav Menachem Azarya DeFano, adds an interesting postscript to this passage. He says that this Nazir fixed the blemish in the soul of Avshalom. Whereas Avshalom allowed his hair to be the source of his pride, this man used his hair to truly serve God, and subdue his pride.[12] This is the challenge of the true servant of God: to identify their own personal Yetzer Hara and wage the battle against it, without any expectation of congratulation or reward but simply in order to overcome the artificial barriers that hinder our closeness to God. Each of us possess the capability to fight and win this war.


[1] Commentary of Recanati to Parshat Naso:
פירוש הרקאנאטי על התורה - פרשת נשא
איש או אשה כי יפליא לנדור נדר נזיר וגו' מיין ושכר יזיר וגו'. מצות הנזיר דומות לכהנים כי הוא נכנס בגדר החסד ועל כן נקרא קדוש. בכהנים כתיב יין ושכר אל תשת וכן בנזיר. וסוד ענבים לחים ויבשים הלחים רומזים למדת הדין הקשה שנאמר ודם ענב תשתה חמר והיבשים למדת הדין רפה היבשה לפעמים משפע העליון. בכהנים כתיב ועל כל נפשות מת לא יבא ובנזיר כתיב על נפש מת לא יבא בכהן כתיב וראשם לא יגלחו (יחזקאל מד' כ') ובנזיר ותער לא יעבור על ראשו. והנה הוא מעין דוגמה של מעלה ועל כן כתיב קדוש יהיה. וטעם תער לא יעבור על ראשו הוא הפך והעבירו תער על כל בשרם כי הנזיר כחותיו הם ממדת החסד ושערותיו רומזים לצינורות עליונות ולכחות אלהיות הנאצלות ממדת החסד ולפיכך אסור להשחיתן הלא תראה כי בהשחתתן חוזרין וצומחין רמז שהשם יתעלה מאציל אצילותו ונותן מהודו ואינו חסר. והבן כי שמשון בהתגלחו אבד כחו בעבור היותו נזיר כי ה' יתעלה סר מעליו שנפסקו ממנו צינורות השכינה שמשם ניזונין עליונים ותחתונים. אמנם בלוים באה המצוה בהפך כדי לכלות הקוצים מן הכרם כי צריך לבער כחות הטומאה שלא ישלטו:

[2] See Comments of the Rabbi Yeshayahu Horowitz in his Shnei Luchot Habrit Parshat Naso
ספר השל"ה הקדוש - ספר במדבר דברים - במדבר נשא בהעלותך תורה אור (יא)
והנה כתיב אצל הנזיר כי נזר אלהיו על ראשו, כמו שכתוב בכהן כי נזר שמן משחת אלהיו עליו. כי הנזיר הוא כמו כהן שלא יטמא למת, ונקרא קדוש. אמנם יש יותר מעלה בנזיר, כי הכהן לא זכה להנזר אלא על ידי שמן המשחה, אבל הנזיר נזר אלהיו עליו.

[3] There is, however, a preference to appoint a son, or someone who would otherwise inherit the position of Kohen Gadol – if the latter is worthy. See Rambam Laws of Klei Hamikdash 4:20
רמב"ם הלכות כלי המקדש פרק ד :הלכה כ
כשימות המלך או כהן גדול או אחד משאר הממונים מעמידין תחתיו בנו או הראוי ליורשו, וכל הקודם לנחלה קודם לשררות המת, והוא שיהיה ממלא מקומו בחכמה, או ביראה אע"פ שאינו כמותו בחכמה שנאמר במלך הוא ובניו בקרב ישראל, מלמד שהמלכות ירושה והוא הדין לכל שררה שבקרב ישראל שהזוכה לה זוכה לעצמו ולזרעו.
[4] See Sod Eser Sefirot by Rav Moshe DeLeon
סוד עשר ספירות - לרבי משה די ליאון ז"ל
דע והבן משה מפני מה לא היה כהן גדול שהשמוש של אהרן היה ומאותו שלשלת בא שהיתה אמו גרושה שאמר ז"ל בשעה שנגמרה גזרת פרעה דכתי' כל הבן הילוד היאורה תשליכוהו בא עמרם וגירש את אשתו ולימים החזירה בנבואת מרים בתו ולפי' אבד משה את הכהונה הואיל והיה בן גרושה ועיין במה שאמר ז"ל בספרים שאמרו בענין נזיר לאביו ולאמו לאחיו ולאחותו לא יטמא להם במותם ונאמ' בכהן גדול לאמו ולאביו וגו' ויש לומ' מפני מה הקדים לנזיר אביו בתחלה ולכהן גדול הקדים אמו בתחלה אלא נזיר שכל קדושתו תלויה בגופו ולא באביו ולא באמו הרי הוא כשאר כל אדם בענין זה. אבל כהן גדול כל קדושתו תלויה באמו ודרשינן הכי לאמו שלא היתה זונה לאמו שלא היתה חללה לאמו שלא היתה גרושה וודאי. על כן הוצרכנו לומ' משה נמי בכלל הוא כלומר לא היה כהן אבל מפני הצורך נכנס בכלל.

[5] See Rambam Hilchot Biat Hamikdash
רמב"ם הלכות ביאת המקדש פרק א :הלכה י
כשם שאין הכהנים מוזהרין על היין אלא בשעת ביאה למקדש כך אין אסורין לגדל פרע אלא בשעת ביאה למקדש, בד"א בכהן הדיוט אבל כהן גדול אסור לגדל פרע ולקרוע בגדיו לעולם, שהרי תמיד הוא במקדש ולכך נאמר בו את ראשו לא יפרע ובגדיו לא יפרום. +/השגת הראב"ד/ אלא בשעת ביאה. א"א ליתיה להאי כללא שאפילו שלא בשעת ביאה אסור לגדל פרע שהרי חייב להסתפר משלשים יום לשלשים יום כדכתיב ופרע לא ישלחו, (ביאה למקדש פירוש במשמרתם).+
הלכה יא:כמה הוא גידול פרע, שלשים יום כנזיר שנאמר בו גדל פרע שער ראשו ואין נזירות פחותה משלשים יום, לפיכך כהן הדיוט העובד מגלח משלשים יום לשלשים יום.
[6] See Rashi Bamidbar 5:18
רש"י במדבר פרק ה פסוק יח
ופרע - סותר את קליעת שערה כדי לבזותה, מכאן לבנות ישראל שגלוי הראש גנאי להן:
[7] According to the Mishna in Sotah (found in the Talmud Bavli Sotah 7a), this is one of the things said to the suspected woman, in hopes that she admit her guilt.

[8] See Rashi Bamidbar 6:11 based on Talmud Bavli Nazir 19a.
רש"י במדבר פרק ו
(יא) מאשר חטא על הנפש - שלא נזהר מטומאת המת, רבי אלעזר הקפר אומר שציער עצמו מן היין:
[9] The Talmud (Sanhedrin 21a) records this fact in the context of a discussion regarding Tamar, and we know from the Biblical text that she was Avshalom’s full sister.
Rav Yehuda further said in Rav's name: Tamar was a daughter of a yefat to'ar, as it is written, Now therefore I pray thee, speak unto the King, for he will not withhold me from thee. Now, should you imagine that she was the offspring of a legitimate marriage, how could his sister have been granted him [in marriage]? We must infer therefore, that she was the daughter of a yefat-to'ar.
[10] See the comments of Rav Tzadok Hakohen of Lublin in Yisrael Kedoshim section six, who says that Avshalom hated Amnon for his sexual indiscretions.
ספר ישראל קדושים - אות ו
ובושתי לא נאמר שהיתה יפה באמת רק להראות העמים והשרים את יפיה שלמראה עיניהם השקועים בתאוות רעות ופרוצים בעריות היו נראה יופי אבל בכל מקום שיספר הכתוב יופי בעצם ובאמת. אינו אלא במי שמוגדר מערוה. וכאבשלום שנאמר עליו (שמואל - ב י"ד, כ"ה) לא היה איש יפה בכל ישראל להלל וגו' היה נזיר המופרש מתאוות ועל כן קינא על זנות אמנון. וכן מה שנאמר עליו (שם) מכף רגליו ועד קדקדו לא היה בו מום ודאי הכוונה מה שהוא מום רע על האמת אצל התורה. דהיינו חסרון וקלקול בקדושת שום אבר כי היה בתכלית השלימות ועל כן טעו כל ישראל אחריו. ונאמר (שם ט"ו, ו') ויגנב אבשלום את לב אנשי ישראל היינו במה שהאמינו בו שהוא צדיק גמור:

[11] See the comments of Rav Tzadok Hakohen of Lublin, ibid.
ספר ישראל קדושים - אות ו
ובאמת היה בו חסרון בשורש, שהיה בן יפת תואר ועל ידי זה נעשה בן סורר ומורה. …
ואבשלום נתגאה בשערו כמו שאמרו בסוטה (ט' ע"ב) היינו שחשב שהוא נזר אלהיו שעל ראשו. ושורשו דרע מיפת תואר הוא בתאוה והוא היפך מזה מוגדר בכל תאוות גופניות וכן נזר אלהיו הוא היפך הגאות. אבל כל תאוה שלו היה לכתר המלכות וזה התאוה זרה שהיה בו בשורשו הנעלם בהעלם עצום ובגניבה גמור בכל שלושה חלקי נפש רוח נשמה שהם מתפשטים בכוחות הגוף ובמדותיו ואפשר למבין להכירם. וזהו השלושה לבבות ששנינו שם שגנב לב אביו היינו מצד החכמה שבמוח. ולב בית דין היינו מצד הבינה שבלב. ולב כל ישראל היינו מצד כוחות הנפש המתפשטים בכל איברי הגוף והיא שהביאתו להיות כסורר ומורה:

[12] Writings of Menachem Azarya Defano, Sefer Gilgulay Nishamot ot aleph section 20.
כתבי הרמ"ע מפאנו - ספר גלגולי נשמות - אות א
[כ] אבשלום בא באדם נזיר הנזכר בנדרים פרק קמא [ט' ב'], תניא אמר (רבי) שמעון הצדיק מימי לא אכלתי אשם נזיר [טמא] אלא (פעם) אחד, [פעם אחת] בא אדם אחד [נזיר] מן הדרום (ונזיר היה), וראיתיו [שהוא] יפה עינים וטוב רואי כו', הוא תיקונו של אבשלום, שם היה שערו סבה כי נתגאה בשערו, והיה נזיר כדאיתא בנזיר, והבחור הלזה היה נזיר לגלחם לשמים, וכאן בשערות היה תיקונו בסוד שערות אדם הראשון: