Parshat Chukat 5770 - The Ultimate Battle: Morality

Parshat Chukat 5770

Rabbi Ari Kahn

The Ultimate Battle: Morality

As Parshat Chukat begins, the Jews have moved away from Mount Sinai and begun their trek to the Promised Land. The path would not be a simple one, for while the desert was relatively uninhabited, and they were therefore generally[1] able to make progress unmolested, they had now left the desert. From this point on, they must cross population centers, coming into contact with different nations, in order to enter the Land of Israel.[2] As we shall see, not all of the nations whose paths they cross are treated equally.

When they meet up with Edom, Moshe begins with warm words: he notes their close genealogical relationship, going so far as to call the two nations “brothers”. Moshe "catches up" on what the Jewish People have been doing over the past few hundred years:

במדבר כ: יד-טז

וַיִּשְׁלַח מֹשֶׁה מַלְאָכִים מִקָּדֵשׁ אֶל מֶלֶךְ אֱדוֹם כֹּה אָמַר אָחִיךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל אַתָּה יָדַעְתָּ אֵת כָּל הַתְּלָאָה אֲשֶׁר מְצָאָתְנוּ: וַיֵּרְדוּ אֲבֹתֵינוּ מִצְרַיְמָה וַנֵּשֶׁב בְּמִצְרַיִם יָמִים רַבִּים וַיָּרֵעוּ לָנוּ מִצְרַיִם וְלַאֲבֹתֵינוּ: וַנִּצְעַק אֶל ה' וַיִּשְׁמַע קֹלֵנוּ וַיִּשְׁלַח מַלְאָךְ וַיֹּצִאֵנוּ מִמִּצְרָיִם וְהִנֵּה אֲנַחְנוּ בְקָדֵשׁ עִיר קְצֵה גְבוּלֶךָ:

And Moshe sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Edom: 'Thus says your brother Israel: You know all the travail that has befallen us; how our fathers went down into Egypt, and we dwelt in Egypt a long time; and the Egyptians dealt ill with us, and with our fathers. And we cried out to God, and He heard our voice and sent an angel, and brought us out of Egypt; and, behold, we are in Kadesh, a city at the outer limits of your territory. (Bamidbar 20:14-16)

Beneath the surface of the pleasantries is a powerful message: Edom is another name for Esav, who was, of course, the brother of Yaakov/Yisrael. Esav detested the responsibilities of the firstborn, and happily sold his birthright for a pot of beans.[3] Being firstborn meant living up to the covenant that God had made with Avraham, a covenant that promised the Land of Israel at the cost of hundreds of years of slavery.[4] Moshe seems to be politely communicating to our “brother”: the Children of Yisrael made a "down payment" on the Land of Israel with the slavery we endured in Egypt, and we are now ready to come home and take what is ours.

Moshe then makes a request; he asks, as a long-lost brother, if Israel can pass through the land of Edom. His request is denied:

במדבר פרק כ: יז-כא

נַעְבְּרָה נָּא בְאַרְצֶךָ לֹא נַעֲבֹר בְּשָׂדֶה וּבְכֶרֶם וְלֹא נִשְׁתֶּה מֵי בְאֵר דֶּרֶךְ הַמֶּלֶךְ נֵלֵךְ לֹא נִטֶּה יָמִין וּשְׂמֹאול עַד אֲשֶׁר נַעֲבֹר גְּבוּלֶךָ: וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו אֱדוֹם לֹא תַעֲבֹר בִּי פֶּן בַּחֶרֶב אֵצֵא לִקְרָאתֶךָ: וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֵלָיו בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּמְסִלָּה נַעֲלֶה וְאִם מֵימֶיךָ נִשְׁתֶּה אֲנִי וּמִקְנַי וְנָתַתִּי מִכְרָם רַק אֵין דָּבָר בְּרַגְלַי אֶעֱבֹרָה: וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא תַעֲבֹר וַיֵּצֵא אֱדוֹם לִקְרָאתוֹ בְּעַם כָּבֵד וּבְיָד חֲזָקָה: וַיְמָאֵן אֱדוֹם נְתֹן אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל עֲבֹר בִּגְבֻלוֹ וַיֵּט יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵעָלָיו:

Please let us pass through your land; we will not pass through field or through vineyard, nor will we drink of the water of the wells; we will go along the king's highway, we will not turn aside to the right nor to the left, until we have crossed your border.' And Edom said to him: 'You shall not pass through me, lest I come out with the sword against you.' And the Children of Israel said to him: 'We will go up by the highway; and if we drink your water, I and my cattle, I will pay full price for it; let me only pass through on my feet; there is no harm in it.' And he said: 'You shall not pass through.' And Edom came out against him with a heavy force of people, and with a strong hand. Thus Edom refused to give Israel passage through his border; and Israel turned away from him. (Bamidbar 20: 17-21)

In this instance conflict is averted; Moshe leads the people on a more circuitous route. Earlier confrontations with descendents of Esav did not end so quietly: Amalek did not wait for the People of Israel to establish contact, to stake their claim or even to approach the Land of Israel. Immediately after the Jews left Egypt, Amalek attacked - but their onslaught was thwarted: Moshe sent Yehoshua to lead the charge and repel the Amalekite onslaught.

In fact, these two scenes of confrontation are closely related, even though their respective resolutions are so divergent: The hatred articulated by Edom was acted upon by Amalek. It is the “stolen” birthright and blessings that enraged the descendents of Esav. They felt they had a moral claim against Yaakov who had behaved with deceit, but they staked this claim only when the positive aspects of the birthright were about to come to fruition. When the children of Yaakov went down to Egypt, in fulfillment of the first part of the Covenant forged with Avraham, namely the slavery, Esav and his descendants were nowhere to found. Only now that the Israelites had endured unspeakable hardship, the hatred of these self-righteous adversaries bubbled up to the surface and they did what they could to prevent the Nation of Israel from reaping the rewards of their foresight, their patience, their unwavering faith in God's promise to their forefathers.

Yehoshua, from the tribe of Yosef, is particularly able to offer a moral counter- claim to Esav's charges. Esav claimed that Yaakov had not treated him in a brotherly fashion; Yaakov's treachery had cost him the birthright – which he did not even want. Yet Yosef's brothers acted in a manner so far beyond anything Yaakov had done to Esav: they plotted to kill him, and in the end “only” sold him as a slave. And how did Yosef repay this treachery? He took care of his brothers, supported them, supplied them with food, jobs and homes for over 50 years. Esav’s moral outrage would fall on deaf ears with Yehoshua; that is why Yehoshua was the right man to lead the people in the battle against the descendents of Esav: It is Yosef's moral superiority that defeats Amalek.

The next nation that crosses paths with the Israelites is the Canaanites. They, too, make a preemptive strike, even managing to take prisoners:

במדבר כא:א

וַיִּשְׁמַע הַכְּנַעֲנִי מֶלֶךְ עֲרָד יֹשֵׁב הַנֶּגֶב כִּי בָּא יִשְׂרָאֵל דֶּרֶךְ הָאֲתָרִים וַיִּלָּחֶם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּשְׁבְּ מִמֶּנּוּ שֶׁבִי:

And the Canaanite, the king of Arad, who dwelt in the South, heard that Israel came by way of the Atarim; and he fought against Israel, and took some of them captive. (Bamidbar 21:1)

The Jews respond by turning to God for help, and they make vows in an attempt to cajole God to hear their prayers:

במדבר כא: ב -ג

וַיִּדַּר יִשְׂרָאֵל נֶדֶר לַיקֹוָק וַיֹּאמַר אִם נָתֹן תִּתֵּן אֶת הָעָם הַזֶּה בְּיָדִי וְהַחֲרַמְתִּי אֶת עָרֵיהֶם: וַיִּשְׁמַע ה’ בְּקוֹל יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּתֵּן אֶת הַכְּנַעֲנִי וַיַּחֲרֵם אֶתְהֶם וְאֶת עָרֵיהֶם וַיִּקְרָא שֵׁם הַמָּקוֹם חָרְמָה:

And Israel made a vow to God, and said: 'If You will indeed deliver this people into my hand, then I will utterly destroy their cities.'  And God heard the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed them and their cities; and the name of the place was called Hormah.  (Bamidbar 21:2-3)

Victorious, the Israelites continue their trek. They bypass Edom[5] and come to the territories of the Emorites and the Midianites[6]; again, they send a message asking to transverse land:

במדבר כא: כא-כב

וַיִּשְׁלַח יִשְׂרָאֵל מַלְאָכִים אֶל סִיחֹן מֶלֶךְ הָאֱמֹרִי לֵאמֹר: אֶעְבְּרָה בְאַרְצֶךָ לֹא נִטֶּה בְּשָׂדֶה וּבְכֶרֶם לֹא נִשְׁתֶּה מֵי בְאֵר בְּדֶרֶךְ הַמֶּלֶךְ נֵלֵךְ עַד אֲשֶׁר נַעֲבֹר גְּבֻלֶךָ:

And Israel sent messengers unto Sihon king of the Amorites, saying: 'Let me pass through your land; we will not turn aside into field, or into vineyard; we will not drink of the water of the wells; we will go by the king's highway, until we have crossed your border.'  (Bamidbar 21:21-22)

The request is denied and they are met by an army sent to fight:

במדבר כא: כג

וְלֹא נָתַן סִיחֹן אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל עֲבֹר בִּגְבֻלוֹ וַיֶּאֱסֹף סִיחֹן אֶת כָּל עַמּוֹ וַיֵּצֵא לִקְרַאת יִשְׂרָאֵל הַמִּדְבָּרָה וַיָּבֹא יָהְצָה וַיִּלָּחֶם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל:

And Sihon did not allow Israel to pass through his border; Sihon gathered all his people together, and went out against Israel into the wilderness, and came to Yahaz; and he fought against Israel. (Bamidbar 21:23)

The Israelites are victorious. Not only do they capture the land of the Emorites, they also liberate land that was taken by the Emorites from the Moavites:

במדבר כא: כד-כה

וַיַּכֵּהוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְפִי חָרֶב וַיִּירַשׁ אֶת אַרְצוֹ מֵאַרְנֹן עַד יַבֹּק עַד בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן כִּי עַז גְּבוּל בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן: וַיִּקַּח יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵת כָּל הֶעָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וַיֵּשֶׁב יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּכָל עָרֵי הָאֱמֹרִי בְּחֶשְׁבּוֹן וּבְכָל בְּנֹתֶיהָ: כִּי חֶשְׁבּוֹן עִיר סִיחֹן מֶלֶךְ הָאֱמֹרִי הִוא וְהוּא נִלְחַם בְּמֶלֶךְ מוֹאָב הָרִאשׁוֹן וַיִּקַּח אֶת כָּל אַרְצוֹ מִיָּדוֹ עַד אַרְנֹן:

And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, and possessed his land from the Arnon to the Yabbok, even unto the children of Ammon; for the border of the children of Ammon was strong. And Israel took all these cities; and Israel dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites, in Heshbon, and in all the towns thereof. For Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto the Arnon.  (Bamidbar 21:24-25)

While Edom and Moav are from the larger Avraham family, the Emorites are descendents of Cham[7], via Canaan[8]. Their ownership of the land was temporary, in fact part of the promise which God made to Avraham, when he forged the covenant was that this land would be given to his descendants, but only when the Emorites sin to the extent that they forfeit the Land.

בראשית טו: טז

וְדוֹר רְבִיעִי יָשׁוּבוּ הֵנָּה כִּי לֹא שָׁלֵם עֲוֹן הָאֱמֹרִי עַד הֵנָּה:

And the fourth generation will return here, for the iniquity of the Emorites will not be complete until that time. (Bereishit 15: 16)

Apparently not allowing the Jews to cross through their land, and instead waging war on them, was the final straw; this was the sin that tipped the scales against them, a sin significant enough to cause forfeit of the Land. As we see, not only did they lose their own land, they also lost lands they had conquered from others.[9]

Generations later, the people of Ammon had not forgotten. They let it be known that they still wanted "their" land back:

שופטים יא: יג

וַיֹּאמֶר מֶלֶךְ בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן אֶל מַלְאֲכֵי יִפְתָּח כִּי לָקַח יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת אַרְצִי בַּעֲלוֹתוֹ מִמִּצְרַיִם מֵאַרְנוֹן וְעַד הַיַּבֹּק וְעַד הַיַּרְדֵּן וְעַתָּה הָשִׁיבָה אֶתְהֶן בְּשָׁלוֹם:

And the king of the Ammonites answered to the messengers of Yiftach: 'Because Israel took away my land, when they came up from Egypt, from Arnon to Yabbok, and to the Jordan; now therefore give back those lands peacefully.' (Shoftim 11:13)

The people of Ammon claim that the Jews captured their land, and declare that they are willing to work out a deal which could be called “land for peace”.

The chosen warrior, Yiftach, seems to have a well-developed and well-informed historical consciousness, refutes the Ammonites' claim.

ספר שופטים יא: יד-כח

וַיּוֹסֶף עוֹד יִפְתָּח וַיִּשְׁלַח מַלְאָכִים אֶל מֶלֶךְ בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן: וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ כֹּה אָמַר יִפְתָּח לֹא לָקַח יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת אֶרֶץ מוֹאָב וְאֶת אֶרֶץ בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן: כִּי בַּעֲלוֹתָם מִמִּצְרָיִם וַיֵּלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּמִּדְבָּר עַד יַם סוּף וַיָּבֹא קָדֵשָׁה ויִּשְׁלַח יִשְׂרָאֵל מַלְאָכִים אֶל מֶלֶךְ אֱדוֹם לֵאמֹר אֶעְבְּרָה נָּא בְאַרְצֶךָ וְלֹא שָׁמַע מֶלֶךְ אֱדוֹם וְגַם אֶל מֶלֶךְ מוֹאָב שָׁלַח וְלֹא אָבָה וַיֵּשֶׁב יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּקָדֵשׁ: וַיֵּלֶךְ בַּמִּדְבָּר וַיָּסָב אֶת אֶרֶץ אֱדוֹם וְאֶת אֶרֶץ מוֹאָב וַיָּבֹא מִמִּזְרַח שֶׁמֶשׁ לְאֶרֶץ מוֹאָב וַיַּחֲנוּן בְּעֵבֶר אַרְנוֹן וְלֹא בָאוּ בִּגְבוּל מוֹאָב כִּי אַרְנוֹן גְּבוּל מוֹאָב: וַיִּשְׁלַח יִשְׂרָאֵל מַלְאָכִים אֶל סִיחוֹן מֶלֶךְ הָאֱמֹרִי מֶלֶךְ חֶשְׁבּוֹן וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל נַעְבְּרָה נָּא בְאַרְצְךָ עַד מְקוֹמִי: וְלֹא הֶאֱמִין סִיחוֹן אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל עֲבֹר בִּגְבֻלוֹ וַיֶּאֱסֹף סִיחוֹן אֶת כָּל עַמּוֹ וַיַּחֲנוּ בְּיָהְצָה וַיִּלָּחֶם עִם יִשְׂרָאֵל: וַיִּתֵּן ה' אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת סִיחוֹן וְאֶת כָּל עַמּוֹ בְּיַד יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיַּכּוּם וַיִּירַשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵת כָּל אֶרֶץ הָאֱמֹרִי יוֹשֵׁב הָאָרֶץ הַהִיא: וַיִּירְשׁוּ אֵת כָּל גְּבוּל הָאֱמֹרִי מֵאַרְנוֹן וְעַד הַיַּבֹּק וּמִן הַמִּדְבָּר וְעַד הַיַּרְדֵּן: וְעַתָּה ה' אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל הוֹרִישׁ אֶת הָאֱמֹרִי מִפְּנֵי עַמּוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאַתָּה תִּירָשֶׁנּוּ: הֲלֹא אֵת אֲשֶׁר יוֹרִישְׁךָ כְּמוֹשׁ אֱלֹהֶיךָ אוֹתוֹ תִירָשׁ וְאֵת כָּל אֲשֶׁר הוֹרִישׁ ה' אֱלֹהֵינוּ מִפָּנֵינוּ אוֹתוֹ נִירָשׁ: וְעַתָּה הֲטוֹב טוֹב אַתָּה מִבָּלָק בֶּן צִפּוֹר מֶלֶךְ מוֹאָב הֲרוֹב רָב עִם יִשְׂרָאֵל אִם נִלְחֹם נִלְחַם בָּם: בְּשֶׁבֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּחֶשְׁבּוֹן וּבִבְנוֹתֶיהָ וּבְעַרְעוֹר וּבִבְנוֹתֶיהָ וּבְכָל הֶעָרִים אֲשֶׁר עַל יְדֵי אַרְנוֹן שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וּמַדּוּעַ לֹא הִצַּלְתֶּם בָּעֵת הַהִיא: וְאָנֹכִי לֹא חָטָאתִי לָךְ וְאַתָּה עֹשֶׂה אִתִּי רָעָה לְהִלָּחֶם בִּי יִשְׁפֹּט ה' הַשֹּׁפֵט הַיּוֹם בֵּין בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וּבֵין בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן: וְלֹא שָׁמַע מֶלֶךְ בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן אֶל דִּבְרֵי יִפְתָּח אֲשֶׁר שָׁלַח אֵלָיו:

And Yiftach sent messengers again to the king of the Ammonites, and said to him, 'Thus said Yiftach: Israel did not take away the land of Moav, nor the land of the Ammonites; when Israel came up from Egypt, and walked through the wilderness to the Red Sea, and came to Kadesh; then Israel sent messengers to the king of Edom, saying, Please let me pass through your land; but the king of Edom would not listen to it. And in like manner they sent to the king of Moav; but he would not consent; and Israel stayed in Kadesh. Then they went along through the wilderness, and around the land of Edom, and the land of Moav, and came by the east side of the land of Moav, and camped on the other side of Arnon, but did not come within the border of Moav; for Arnon was the border of Moav. And Israel sent messengers to Sihon king of the Ammorites, the king of Heshbon; and Israel said to him, Let us pass, we beseech you, through your land into my place. But Sihon trusted not Israel to pass through his border; but Sihon gathered all his people together, and camped in Yahaz, and fought against Israel. And the Almighty, God of Israel, delivered Sihon and all his people to the hand of Israel, and they defeated them; so Israel possessed all the land of the Ammorites, the inhabitants of that country. And they possessed all the borders of the Ammorites, from Arnon to Yabbok, and from the wilderness to the Jordan. So now the Almighty, God of Israel, has dispossessed the Ammorites from before his people Israel, and should you possess it? Will not you possess that which Kemosh your god gives to you to possess? So whoever the Almighty our God shall drive out from before us, them will we possess. And now are you any better than Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moav? Did he ever strive against Israel, or did he ever fight against them, while Israel lived in Heshbon and her towns, and in Aroer and her towns, and in all the cities that are along the borders of Arnon, for three hundred years? Why therefore did you not recover them during that time? Therefore I have not sinned against you, but you do me wrong to war against me; the Almighty God of Judgement shall be judge this day between the people of Israel and the Ammonites.' And the king of the Ammonites did not listen to the words of Yiftach which he sent him. (Shoftim 11:14-28)

Yiftach had learned our Parsha well, and he cited it with ease and conviction.[10] It is no coincidence that he concludes his message with a very particular phrase: “The Almighty God of Judgement shall be judge this day between the people of Israel and the Ammonites.” This turn of phrase was first used by Sarah when she insisted that Avraham banish Hagar, her pregnant slave,[11] and exclude any child born to her from the inheritance and birthright. Likewise the children of Lot, Ammon and Moav, are not Avraham's rightful heirs, even though there was a time that Lot seemed to be Avraham's heir apparent, the only blood relative who would inherit Avraham's physical and spiritual empire. As with Lot, any rights they may have had to the Land are a result of their relationship to Avraham. Therefore, only behavior in line with Avraham’s mores will allow them residence; any other type of behavior causes their exile.

The land which Lot himself receives is given to him by Avraham, its' rightful owner – by virtue of God's covenant:

בראשית יג: ז-יא

וַיְהִי רִיב בֵּין רֹעֵי מִקְנֵה אַבְרָם וּבֵין רֹעֵי מִקְנֵה לוֹט וְהַכְּנַעֲנִי וְהַפְּרִזִּי אָז יֹשֵׁב בָּאָרֶץ: וַיֹּאמֶר אַבְרָם אֶל לוֹט אַל נָא תְהִי מְרִיבָה בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶיךָ וּבֵין רֹעַי וּבֵין רֹעֶיךָ כִּי אֲנָשִׁים אַחִים אֲנָחְנוּ: הֲלֹא כָל הָאָרֶץ לְפָנֶיךָ הִפָּרֶד נָא מֵעָלָי אִם הַשְּׂמֹאל וְאֵימִנָה וְאִם הַיָּמִין וְאַשְׂמְאִילָה: וַיִּשָּׂא לוֹט אֶת עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא אֶת כָּל כִּכַּר הַיַּרְדֵּן כִּי כֻלָּהּ מַשְׁקֶה לִפְנֵי שַׁחֵת ה’ אֶת סְדֹם וְאֶת עֲמֹרָה כְּגַן ה’ כְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם בֹּאֲכָה צֹעַר: וַיִּבְחַר לוֹ לוֹט אֵת כָּל כִּכַּר הַיַּרְדֵּן וַיִּסַּע לוֹט מִקֶּדֶם וַיִּפָּרְדוּ אִישׁ מֵעַל אָחִיו:

And there was strife between the herdsmen of Avram's cattle and the herdsmen of Lot's cattle. And the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelt then in the land. And Avram said to Lot: 'Please let there be no strife between me and you, and between my herdsmen and your herdsmen; for we are brethren. Is not the whole land before you? Please, separate yourself from me; if you will take the left, then I will go to the right; or if you take the right, then I will go to the left.' And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of the Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere, before God destroyed Sodom and Amorrah, like the garden of God, like the land of Egypt, as you go to Zoar. So Lot chose for himself all the plain of the Jordan; and Lot journeyed east; and they separated themselves from one another. (Bereishit 13:7-11)

Here too the word “brother” is used to describe the relationship, however the shepherds of Lot caused an untenable situation, and hence they needed to separate – Avraham allowed Lot to choose which land he wanted. Lot’s right to the Land is by proxy, because it was given to Avraham. Lot has two son’s Ammon and Moav, when they lost their land in battle, and that land is subsequently captured, Yiftach feels no moral compunction to return the land to Ammon or Moav, they had forfeited the land in war.

In fact Ammon and Moav, did not exactly behave like relatives should, when a relative comes to visit, you welcome him in and you provide food and drink, just like their great- uncle Avraham.

דברים כג: ד-ה

לֹא יָבֹא עַמּוֹנִי וּמוֹאָבִי בִּקְהַל ה’ גַּם דּוֹר עֲשִׂירִי לֹא יָבֹא לָהֶם בִּקְהַל ה’ עַד עוֹלָם: עַל דְּבַר אֲשֶׁר לֹא קִדְּמוּ אֶתְכֶם בַּלֶּחֶם וּבַמַּיִם בַּדֶּרֶךְ בְּצֵאתְכֶם מִמִּצְרָיִם וַאֲשֶׁר שָׂכַר עָלֶיךָ אֶת בִּלְעָם בֶּן בְּעוֹר מִפְּתוֹר אֲרַם נַהֲרַיִם לְקַלְלֶךָּ:

An Ammonite or a Moavite shall not enter into the Congregation of God; even to the tenth generation none of them shall enter into the Congregation of God forever; because they did not meet you with bread and with water on the way, when you came out of Egypt; and because they hired against you Bil'am the son of Beor from Petor of Aram-Naharaim, to curse you. (Dvarim 23:4-5)

Instead of providing food they tried to curse us. The punishment for this behavior is they are no longer considered “brothers”[12] and can not marry into the Jewish People. When they behaved as they did, in a manner that went against everything their great-uncle Avraham stood for, they severed their connection with the land which belonged to Avraham, and from the people who were Avraham's legitimate heirs.

Conversely, Edom is still considered our brother:[13]

דברים כג: ח

לֹא תְתַעֵב אֲדֹמִי כִּי אָחִיךָ הוּא לֹא תְתַעֵב מִצְרִי כִּי גֵר הָיִיתָ בְאַרְצוֹ:

You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother; you shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were a stranger in his land. (Dvarim 23:8)

With his keen sense of history, Yiftach - who hails from the tribe of Yosef - prepares for battle. He, too, like the Jewish People generations before, makes a vow:

שופטים יא: כט-לא

וַתְּהִי עַל יִפְתָּח רוּחַ ה' וַיַּעֲבֹר אֶת הַגִּלְעָד וְאֶת מְנַשֶּׁה וַיַּעֲבֹר אֶת מִצְפֵּה גִלְעָד וּמִמִּצְפֵּה גִלְעָד עָבַר בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן: וַיִּדַּר יִפְתָּח נֶדֶר לַה' וַיֹּאמַר אִם נָתוֹן תִּתֵּן אֶת בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן בְּיָדִי: וְהָיָה הַיּוֹצֵא אֲשֶׁר יֵצֵא מִדַּלְתֵי בֵיתִי לִקְרָאתִי בְּשׁוּבִי בְשָׁלוֹם מִבְּנֵי עַמּוֹן וְהָיָה לַה' וְהַעֲלִיתִהוּ עוֹלָה:

Then the spirit of God came upon Yiftach, and he passed over Gilead, and Menasheh, and passed over Mizpeh Gilead, and from Mizpeh Gilead he passed over to the Ammonites. And Yiftach made a vow to God, and said, 'If you shall deliver the Ammonites completely into my hands, then it shall be, that whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the Ammonites, shall be God’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering. (Shoftim 11: 29-31)

Yiftach promises that the first to walk out his door to greet him will be dedicated to God.

שופטים יא: לד

וַיָּבֹא יִפְתָּח הַמִּצְפָּה אֶל בֵּיתוֹ וְהִנֵּה בִתּוֹ יֹצֵאת לִקְרָאתוֹ בְּתֻפִּים וּבִמְחֹלוֹת וְרַק הִיא יְחִידָה אֵין לוֹ מִמֶּנּוּ בֵּן אוֹ בַת:

And Yiftach came to Mizpah, to his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances; and she was his only child; beside her he had neither son nor daughter. (Shoftim 11: 34)

As luck would have it, his only child walked out the door, and now Yiftach would seem to have a dilemma – does he keep his word or break it? To this point, Yiftach has lived by a finely-tuned moral compass, and this episosde is no exception. He does not consider breaking his vow, and his daughter follows in his footsteps:

שופטים יא: לה-לו

וַיְהִי כִרְאוֹתוֹ אוֹתָהּ וַיִקְרַע אֶת בְּגָדָיו וַיֹּאמֶר אֲהָהּ בִּתִּי הַכְרֵעַ הִכְרַעְתִּנִי וְאַתְּ הָיִית בְּעֹכְרָי וְאָנֹכִי פָּצִיתִי פִי אֶל ה' וְלֹא אוּכַל לָשׁוּב:וַתֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו אָבִי פָּצִיתָה אֶת פִּיךָ אֶל ה' עֲשֵׂה לִי כַּאֲשֶׁר יָצָא מִפִּיךָ אַחֲרֵי אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לְךָ ה' נְקָמוֹת מֵאֹיְבֶיךָ מִבְּנֵי עַמּוֹן:

And it came to pass, when he saw her, he tore his clothes, and said: 'Alas, my daughter! you have brought me down, and you have become my troubler; for I have opened my mouth to God, and I cannot go back.' And she said to him: 'My father, you have opened your mouth to God; do to me what you have spoken; for God has taken vengeance for you on your enemies, the children of Ammon.' (Shoftim 11: 35-36)

There is a tradition that Yiftach actually saw it through to the bitter end, went ahead and sacrificed his daughter - an act that certainly would be considered a moral outrage. However, there are other choices: Jewish tradition allows a person to question the vow; in such a case, if an opening (a petach[14]) is found, the vow may be canceled. Yiftach did not seek a petach;[15] he made a vow – albeit one that is difficult to understand:[16] He only had one child. How surprised should he have been when she, and no other, is the first to come out of the door of his home (also called petach) to welcome him?

Is it possible that this is precisely what Yiftach was thinking –to a greater or lesser degree? The text never states that his daughter was turned into a sacrifice; in fact, this would be an absurdity. The law is very specific as to what types of animals may be brought as offerings. In fact, at most Yiftach would have been required to offer the monetary value of a person to the Temple. We may assume, based on Yiftach’s detailed knowledge[17] of the Book of Bamidbar, that he was conversant with the other books of the Torah as well.[18] It would illogical to think that Yiftach and all of the kohanim were totally ignorant[19] of the laws of sacrifice. What, then, was Yiftach thinking, and how did he fulfill the vow that he made- apparently in full awareness of what would or could happen?

The text uses very specific language in describing the results of Yiftach's vow: not murder, not slaughter, rather olah, an 'elevation'[20] or 'uplifting' sacrifice:

שופטים יא: לז-מ

וַתֹּאמֶר אֶל אָבִיהָ יֵעָשֶׂה לִּי הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה הַרְפֵּה מִמֶּנִּי שְׁנַיִם חֳדָשִׁים וְאֵלְכָה וְיָרַדְתִּי עַל הֶהָרִים וְאֶבְכֶּה עַל בְּתוּלַי אָנֹכִי וְרֵעֹיתָי \{וְרֵעוֹתָי\}: וַיֹּאמֶר לֵכִי וַיִּשְׁלַח אוֹתָהּ שְׁנֵי חֳדָשִׁים וַתֵּלֶךְ הִיא וְרֵעוֹתֶיהָ וַתֵּבְךְּ עַל בְּתוּלֶיהָ עַל הֶהָרִים: וַיְהִי מִקֵּץ שְׁנַיִם חֳדָשִׁים וַתָּשָׁב אֶל אָבִיהָ וַיַּעַשׂ לָהּ אֶת נִדְרוֹ אֲשֶׁר נָדָר וְהִיא לֹא יָדְעָה אִישׁ וַתְּהִי חֹק בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל: מִיָּמִים יָמִימָה תֵּלַכְנָה בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְתַנּוֹת לְבַת יִפְתָּח הַגִּלְעָדִי אַרְבַּעַת יָמִים בַּשָּׁנָה:

And she said to her father: 'Let this thing be done for me: let me alone two months, that I may depart and go down upon the mountains, and bewail my virginity, I and my companions.' And he said: 'Go.' And he sent her away for two months; and she departed, she and her companions, and bewailed her virginity upon the mountains. And it came to pass at the end of two months, she returned to her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed; and she had not known a man. And it was a custom in Israel, that the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the daughter of Yiftach the Gileadite four days a year. (Shoftim 11: 37-40)

The daughter's lament seems clear: she mourned for the life she would not live, for the love a man she would never meet, for the family she would not have. The verses that deal with Yiftach's fulfillment of his vow are far more difficult to understand: What exactly was the vow? Was it to slaughter her, or was it to sanctify her? A number of commentaries[21] understand that Yiftach’s daughter led a life of celibacy and isolation, in some sort of Jewish version of a nunnery,  and these same commentaries severely chastise Yiftach for bringing upon her this completely un-Jewish fate.

Let us consider Yiftach's motivation: If we assume that Yiftach was neither mad nor ignorant, we may say that he had a specific moral motivation for making the vow that he did. The key to his motivation must surely lie in the identity of his enemy, Ammon. We have already noted that Ammon and Moav where the children of Lot; in fact, they were the products of incest:

בראשית יט : לה-לח

וַתַּשְׁקֶיןָ גַּם בַּלַּיְלָה הַהוּא אֶת אֲבִיהֶן יָיִן וַתָּקָם הַצְּעִירָה וַתִּשְׁכַּב עִמּוֹ וְלֹא יָדַע בְּשִׁכְבָהּ וּבְקֻמָהּ: וַתַּהֲרֶיןָ שְׁתֵּי בְנוֹת לוֹט מֵאֲבִיהֶן: וַתֵּלֶד הַבְּכִירָה בֵּן וַתִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ מוֹאָב הוּא אֲבִי מוֹאָב עַד הַיּוֹם: וְהַצְּעִירָה גַם הִוא יָלְדָה בֵּן וַתִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ בֶּן עַמִּי הוּא אֲבִי בְנֵי עַמּוֹן עַד הַיּוֹם:

And they made their father drink wine that night also; and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he did not know when she lay down, nor when she arose. Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father. And the firstborn daughter bore a son, and called his name Moav; he is the father of the Moavites to this day. And the younger, she also bore a son, and called his name Ben-Ammi; the same is the father of the Ammonites to this day.

Perhaps realizing that at the enemy's very core, the Ammonites' proverbial Achilles heel was sexuality, Yiftach decided to consecrate his own daughter and keep her far away from sexuality and sin. Hence she mourned her virginity, which would be perpetual; other young women would make pilgrimages to cry with Yiftach’s daughter.

At the door of his tent Lot showed bravery; he saved the angels from the marauding mob, who wanted to "know them" in the biblical sense.

בראשית יט: ד-ז

טֶרֶם יִשְׁכָּבוּ וְאַנְשֵׁי הָעִיר אַנְשֵׁי סְדֹם נָסַבּוּ עַל הַבַּיִת מִנַּעַר וְעַד זָקֵן כָּל הָעָם מִקָּצֶה: וַיִּקְרְאוּ אֶל לוֹט וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ אַיֵּה הָאֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר בָּאוּ אֵלֶיךָ הַלָּיְלָה הוֹצִיאֵם אֵלֵינוּ וְנֵדְעָה אֹתָם: וַיֵּצֵא אֲלֵהֶם לוֹט הַפֶּתְחָה וְהַדֶּלֶת סָגַר אַחֲרָיו: וַיֹּאמַר אַל נָא אַחַי תָּרֵעוּ:

But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both old and young, all the people from every quarter; And they called to Lot, and said to him, 'Where are the men who came in to you this night? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.' And Lot went out the door to them, and closed the door after him, and said: 'I beg you, my brothers, do not do this wicked deed. (Bereishit 19:4-7)

Therefore, at the door of his own tent, Yiftach felt he needed to equal and offset the possible moral superiority of his enemy. In actuality, Lot was not a formidable foe: he left the holiness of Avraham’s tent, and when pressured, in an act which exemplifies his own moral failure, he offered his daughters as the consolation prize to the lecherous masses:

בראשית יט: ח

הִנֵּה נָא לִי שְׁתֵּי בָנוֹת אֲשֶׁר לֹא יָדְעוּ אִישׁ אוֹצִיאָה נָּא אֶתְהֶן אֲלֵיכֶם וַעֲשׂוּ לָהֶן כַּטּוֹב בְּעֵינֵיכֶם רַק לָאֲנָשִׁים הָאֵל אַל תַּעֲשׂוּ דָבָר כִּי עַל כֵּן בָּאוּ בְּצֵל קֹרָתִי:

Behold now, I have two daughters who have not known man; let me, I beg you, bring them out to you, and do to them as is good in your eyes; only to these men do nothing; seeing that they have come under the shadow of my roof. (Bereishit 19:8)

Yiftach[22] was correct: we must be far more moral than our enemies; unfortunately for his daughter, he overreacted to the moral challenge posed by Lot's descendents.

Today, as we face opponents of many different kinds, as we engage in both physical and moral battles, we must retain our moral superiority[23] on an individual and national level. If we are able to do so, God will be with us, and victory over our physical and spiritual foes is assured.

---

[1] An exception was the attack waged by Amalek which transpired soon after the Israelites left Egypt. See Shmot 17.

[2] One premature, aborted attempt to enter Israel was the ill-advised attempt recorded in Bamidbar 14:44-45; in that instance they met resistance from Amalek and Canaan.

[3] See Bereishit 25:34.

בראשית פרק כה:לד

וְיַעֲקֹב נָתַן לְעֵשָׂו לֶחֶם וּנְזִיד עֲדָשִׁים וַיֹּאכַל וַיֵּשְׁתְּ וַיָּקָם וַיֵּלַךְ וַיִּבֶז עֵשָׂו אֶת הַבְּכֹרָה:

[4] See Bereishit 15:12-21.

בראשית טו:יב-יח

וַיְהִי הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ לָבוֹא וְתַרְדֵּמָה נָפְלָה עַל אַבְרָם וְהִנֵּה אֵימָה חֲשֵׁכָה גְדֹלָה נֹפֶלֶת עָלָיו:  וַיֹּאמֶר לְאַבְרָם יָדֹעַ תֵּדַע כִּי גֵר יִהְיֶה זַרְעֲךָ בְּאֶרֶץ לֹא לָהֶם וַעֲבָדוּם וְעִנּוּ אֹתָם אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה:… בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא כָּרַת ה’ אֶת אַבְרָם בְּרִית לֵאמֹר לְזַרְעֲךָ נָתַתִּי אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת מִנְּהַר מִצְרַיִם עַד הַנָּהָר הַגָּדֹל נְהַר פְּרָת:

[5] See Bamidbar 21:4

במדבר כא:ד

 וַיִּסְעוּ מֵהֹר הָהָר דֶּרֶךְ יַם סוּף לִסְבֹב אֶת אֶרֶץ אֱדוֹם וַתִּקְצַר נֶפֶשׁ הָעָם בַּדָּרֶךְ:

[6] See Bamidbar 21:13

במדבר כא :יג

מִשָּׁם נָסָעוּ וַיַּחֲנוּ מֵעֵבֶר אַרְנוֹן אֲשֶׁר בַּמִּדְבָּר הַיֹּצֵא מִגְּבֻל הָאֱמֹרִי כִּי אַרְנוֹן גְּבוּל מוֹאָב בֵּין מוֹאָב וּבֵין הָאֱמֹרִי:

[7] Bereishit 10:6.

בראשית י:ו

 וּבְנֵי חָם כּוּשׁ וּמִצְרַיִם וּפוּט וּכְנָעַן:

[8] Bereishit 10:16.

בראשית י: טו-יח

וּכְנַעַן יָלַד אֶת צִידֹן בְּכֹרוֹ וְאֶת חֵת: וְאֶת הַיְבוּסִי וְאֶת הָאֱמֹרִי וְאֵת הַגִּרְגָּשִׁי: וְאֶת הַחִוִּי וְאֶת הַעַרְקִי וְאֶת הַסִּינִי: וְאֶת הָאַרְוָדִי וְאֶת הַצְּמָרִי וְאֶת הַחֲמָתִי וְאַחַר נָפֹצוּ מִשְׁפְּחוֹת הַכְּנַעֲנִי:

[9] See Talmud Bavli Gittin 38a.

תלמוד בבלי מסכת גיטין דף לח עמוד א

אמר רב פפא: עמון ומואב טהרו בסיחון.

[10] Perhaps this is the reason that the Haftorah reading for Parshat Chukat is this section of the Book of Shoftim.

[11] See Bereishit 16:5.  "And Sarai said to Avram: 'My wrong be upon thee: I gave my handmaid into thy bosom; and when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her eyes: God will judge between me and you.'

בראשית טז:ה

וַתֹּאמֶר שָׂרַי אֶל אַבְרָם חֲמָסִי עָלֶיךָ אָנֹכִי נָתַתִּי שִׁפְחָתִי בְּחֵיקֶךָ וַתֵּרֶא כִּי הָרָתָה וָאֵקַל בְּעֵינֶיהָ יִשְׁפֹּט ה’ בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶיךָ:

[12] See Bamidbar 23:7.

דברים כג: ז

לֹא תִדְרֹשׁ שְׁלֹמָם וְטֹבָתָם כָּל יָמֶיךָ לְעוֹלָם: ס

[13] Edom also did not provide food and drink, perhaps they did have a reason for their displeasure, due to the birthright and blessings, while Amon and Moav should have had no reason to hate the Jews.

[14] See Mishna Nedarim 3:4.

משנה מסכת נדרים פרק ג

…בית שמאי אומרים לא יפתח לו בנדר ובית הלל אומרים אף יפתח לו…

[15] See Midrash Tanchuma Bchukotai chapter 5.

מדרש תנחומא בחוקותי פרק ה

…שהעלים הקב"ה מהם את ההלכה שלא ימצאו פתחו להתיר לו את נדרו עלה ושחטה ורוח הקדש צווחת נפשות הייתי רוצה שתקריב לפני אשר לא צויתי ולא דברתי ולא עלתה על לבי (ירמיה ז) אשר לא צויתי לאברהם שישחוט את בנו אלא אמרתי לו אל תשלח ידך להודיע לכל האומות חיבתו של אברהם שלא חשך את יחידו ממני לעשות רצון בוראו ולא דברתי ליפתח להקריב את בתו רבי יוחנן ורשב"ל רבי יוחנן אמר דמים היה חייב כענין שכתוב בערכין ורשב"ל אמר ולא כלום שהתנה על דבר שאי אפשר להקריב ולא היה עליו כלום ולא עלתה על לבי זה מישע מלך מואב שכתוב בו בשעה שנפל ביד מלך ישראל ויקח את בנו הבכור אשר ימלוך תחתיו ויעלהו עולה (מלכים ב ג) מי גרם למישע שיקריב את בנו על שלא היה בן תורה שאלו קרא בתורה לא אבד את בנו שכתוב בתורה איש כי יפליא נדר והיה ערכך הזכר ואם נקבה היא וגו' הוי ולוקח נפשות חכם:

[16] The TalmudBavli,  Ta’anit 4a, states that he was in fact mistaken to make such a vow, and the implication is that he brought her as a sacrificial offering.

תלמוד בבלי מסכת תענית דף ד/א

אמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר רבי יונתן שלשה שאלו שלא כהוגן לשנים השיבוהו כהוגן לאחד השיבוהו שלא כהוגן ואלו הן אליעזר עבד אברהם ושאול בן קיש ויפתח הגלעדי אליעזר עבד אברהם דכתיב והיה הנערה אשר אמר אליה הטי נא כדך וגו' יכול אפילו חיגרת אפילו סומא השיבו כהוגן ונזדמנה לו רבקה שאול בן קיש דכתיב והיה האיש אשר יכנו יעשרנו המלך עשר גדול ואת בתו יתן לו יכול אפילו עבד אפילו ממזר השיבו כהוגן ונזדמן לו דוד יפתח הגלעדי דכתיב והיה היוצא אשר יצא מדלתי ביתי וגו' יכול אפילו דבר טמא השיבו שלא כהוגן נזדמנה לו בתו

[17] The Midrash Tanchuma Bchukotai chapter 5, states explicitly that Yiftach was not a scholar (ben Torah).

מדרש תנחומא בחוקותי פרק ה

(ה) דבר אחר איש כי יפליא נדר בערכך נפשות זש"ה פרי צדיק עץ חיים ולוקח נפשות חכם (משלי יא) אם יהיה אדם צדיק ואע"פ שהוא צדיק ואינו עוסק בתורה אין בידו כלום אלא פרי צדיק עץ חיים זו תורה שמתוך שהוא בן תורה הוא למד האיך לוקח נפשות שנאמר ולוקח נפשות חכם שאם ידור לערוך נפשות הוא למד מן התורה היאך עושה ואם אין בידו תורה אין בידו כלום כן את מוצא ביפתח הגלעדי מפני שלא היה בן תורה אבד את בתו אימתי בשעה שנלחם עם בני עמון ונדר באותה שעה שנא' (שופטים יא) וידר יפתח נדר וגו' והיה היוצא וגו' והיה לה' והעליתיהו עולה באותה שעה היה עליו כעס מן הקב"ה אמר אילו יצא מביתו כלב או חזיר או גמל היה מקריב אותו לפני לכך זימן לו בתו כ"כ למה כדי שילמדו כל הנודרים הלכות נדרים וקונמות שלא לנהוג טעות בנדרים

[18] See Bereishit Rabbah 60:3

 Yiftach asked in an unfitting manner, and God answered him in an unfitting manner. He asked in an unfitting manner, as it says, And Yiftach vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said: Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth... it shall be the Lord's and I will offer it up for a burnt-offering (Judg. XI, 30 f.). Said the Holy One, blessed be He, to him: ‘Then had a camel or a donkey or a dog come forth, thou wouldst have offered it up for a burnt-offering I ' What did the Lord do? He answered him unfittingly and prepared his daughter for him, as it says, And Yiftach came... and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him (ib. 34).

And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes (ib. 35). R. Johanan and Resh Lakish disagree. R. Johanan maintained: He was liable for her monetary consecration; Resh Lakish said: He was not even liable for her monetary consecration. For we learned: If one declared of an unclean animal or an animal with a blemish: ‘Behold, let these be burnt-offerings,’ his declaration is completely null. If he declared: ‘Let these be for a burnt offering,’ they must be sold, and he brings a burnt-offering for their money.2 Yet was not Phinehas there to absolve him of his vow? Phinehas, however, said: He needs me, and I am to go to him! Moreover, I am a High Priest and the son of a High Priest; shall I then go to an ignoramus? While Yiftach said: Am I, the chief of Israel's leaders, to go to Phinehas! Between the two of them the maiden perished. Thus people say: ' Between the midwife and the woman in travail the young woman's child is lost!’ Both were punished for her blood. Yiftach died through his limbs dropping off: wherever he went a limb would drop off from him, and it was buried there on the spot. Hence it is written, Then died Yiftach the Gileadite, and was buried in the cities of Gilead (ib. XII, 7) It does not say, ‘In a city of Gilead,’ but, ’In the cities of Gilead’ Phinehas was deprived of the divine afflatus. Hence it is written, And Phinehas the son of Eleazar had been ruler over them (I Chron. IX, 20): it is not written, He was ruler over them, but ‘Had been ruler in time past, [when] the Lord was with him (ib.).

בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשת חיי שרה פרשה ס

יפתח (שופטים יא) והיה היוצא אשר יצא וגו' והעליתיהו עולה לה', הא אילו יצא חמור או כלב אחד או חתול אחת, היה מעלהו עולה וזימן לו הקב"ה שלא כהוגן, הה"ד (שם /שופטים י"א/) ויבא יפתח וגו' והנה בתו יוצאת לקראתו, ר"י ור"ל, ר' יוחנן אמר הקדש דמים היה חייב ור"ל אמר אפילו הקדש דמים לא היה חייב, דתנן אמר על בהמה טמאה ועל בעלת מום הרי אלו עולה לא אמר כלום, אמר הרי אלו לעולה ימכרו ויביא בדמיהם עולה, ולא היה שם פנחס שיתיר לו את נדרו, אלא פנחס אמר הוא צריך לי ואני אלך אצלו, ויפתח אמר אני ראש קציני ישראל ואני הולך לי אצל פנחס, בין דין לדין אבדה הנערה ההיא, הדא דברייתא אמרה בין חייתא למחבלתא אזל ברא דעלובתא, ושניהם נענשו בדמיה של נערה, יפתח מת בנשילת אברים בכל מקום שהיה הולך בו היה אבר נישול הימנו והיו קוברין אותו שם, הה"ד (שם /שופטים/ יב) וימת יפתח ויקבר בערי גלעד בעיר גלעד לא נאמר אלא בערי גלעד, פנחס נטלה ממנו רוח הקדש, הה"ד (ד"ה =דברי הימים= א ט) פנחס בן אלעזר נגיד היה עליהם, הוא נגיד עליהם אין כתיב כאן, אלא נגיד היה, לפנים ה' עמו.

[19] Many sources speak of Yiftach in a derogatory fashion see Talmud Bavli Rosh Hashanah 25b.

תלמוד בבלי מסכת ראש השנה דף כה עמוד ב

ואומר +תהלים צט+ משה ואהרן בכהניו ושמואל בקראי שמו. שקל הכתוב שלשה קלי עולם כשלשה חמורי עולם, לומר לך: ירובעל בדורו - כמשה בדורו, בדן בדורו - כאהרן בדורו, יפתח בדורו - כשמואל בדורו. ללמדך שאפילו קל שבקלין ונתמנה פרנס על הצבור - הרי הוא כאביר שבאבירים, ואומר +דברים יז+ ובאת אל הכהנים הלוים ואל השפט אשר יהיה בימים ההם. וכי תעלה על דעתך שאדם הולך אצל הדיין שלא היה בימיו? הא אין לך לילך אלא אצל שופט שבימיו, ואומר +קהלת ז+ אל תאמר מה היה שהימים הראשונים היו טובים מאלה.

[20] See my article on Akeidat Yitzchak: http://arikahn.blogspot.com/2008/11/parshat-vayera-5769.html, which will be  a chapter in my forthcoming book, “Echoes of Eden”(Jerusalem: OU/Geffen Publishers).

[21] See Radak and Ralbag, Shoftim 11:31.

רד"ק, שופטים יא: לא

 והעליתיהו עולה - דעת רז"ל בזה ידוע וא"א ז"ל פירש והעליתיהו הוי"ו במקום או ופירש והיה לה' הקדש אם אינו ראוי לעולה או העליתיהו עולה אם ראוי לעולה וכמו זה הוי"ו מכה אביו ואמו או אמו ויפה פי' וכן נראה מהפסוק כי לא המיתה שאמר ואבכה על נפשי לאות כי לא המיתה אך לא ידעה איש כמו שאמר והיא לא ידעה איש ומה שאמר גם כן ויעש לה את נדרו אשר נדר ולא אמר ויעלה עולה לאות כי פרושה היתה וזהו את נדרו אשר נדר והיה להשם כך נראה לפי פשטי הפסוקים ודברי רז"ל אם קבלה היא בידם עלינו לקבלה:

רלב"ג על שופטים פרק יא פסוק לא

(לא) והנה היוצא מדלתי ביתו יהיה בהכרח בעל החיים ואם היה ממין האדם יהיה לה' ויהיה מיוחד לעבודת הש"י לבד ואם יהיה זכר לא יצטרך שיהיה פרוש מן האשה כי כבר יהיה מיוחד לעבודת הש"י בזולת זה האופן כמו שנמצא בכהנים ובלוים ומצאנו ג"כ זה הלשון בשמואל עם לקחו אשה והולידו בנים ממנה ואמנם אם היתה אשה יחוייב שתהיה פרושה מאיש שאם היה לה בעל לא תהיה מיוחדת לעבודת הש"י אבל תעבוד על זה בעלה כמשפט הנשים הנשואות ולזה קרע יפתח את בגדיו בראותו בתו יוצאה לקראתו כי זה הנדר יחייב שלא תהיה לאיש ידמה שעשה לה יפתח בית מחוץ לא ראתה אדם בו ולא אשה וישבה שם אך המתין לה שנים חדשים תלך בהם עם רעותיה לבכות על בתוליה על ההרים ובזה הזמן הסגירה בבית הוא ולא היתה רואה אפילו אשה שם זולתי ארבעה ימים בשנה שהיה חק לישראל שתלכנה בנות ישראל לתנות לבת יפתח על בתוליה והיא היתה פרושה מאיש כל ימיה...

[22] Yiftach is introduced at the outset as the son of a prostitute; perhaps this contributed to his sensitivity. See Shoftim 11:1. "Now Yiftach the Gileadite was a mighty man of valor, and he was the son of a harlot; and Gilead begot Yiftach."

שופטים יא: א

וְיִפְתָּח הַגִּלְעָדִי הָיָה גִּבּוֹר חַיִל וְהוּא בֶּן אִשָּׁה זוֹנָה וַיּוֹלֶד גִּלְעָד אֶת יִפְתָּח:

[23] During the recent Second Lebanon War, I received a phone call from a group of soldiers who were in southern Lebanon. They had run out of supplies, and had entered a store that had been abandoned by the proprietors. Based on the signs and pictures hanging all around them, the soldiers had no doubt that the shopkeeper, as well as the entire town, were supporters of the ruthless terrorists with whom we were at war. The question they posed was whether they should leave money behind for the goods taken from the store. It is, quite frankly, impossible to imagine that soldiers in any other army in the world would be occupied with similar questions of ethics and morality in the middle of a war. It is the moral strength of these soldiers, and thousands more like them, that protect us.

Parshat Korach 5770 - Perfidy

Parshat Korach 5770

Rabbi Ari Kahn

 Perfidy

While the story of the rebellion of Korach is well known, the very idea of a rebellion against Moshe seems strange to us. Moshe was surely the greatest leader the Jewish people has ever known. More than that, he was our greatest teacher, prophet, and spiritual leader. Additionally, Moshe was the most modest man to ever live. Adding these characteristics together should produce an extremely attractive package, a leader of unparalleled stature. How was Korach able to convince anyone to join him in a rebellion against such a man? Undoubtedly, Korach was sly and devious; the Midrash stresses his manipulative demagoguery and deception. But how did the movement he spearheaded gain a foothold within the Israelite community?

A number of the steps are clear: Korach gathers the disenfranchised, namely the tribe of Reuven who had lost the rights and privileges and the preferred status and stature of the eldest tribe. The timing is also significant: the people had just been sentenced to wander in the desert for forty years. Although this was not Moshe’s doing, there most likely was whispered criticism of Moshe’s perceived mismanagement of the spies - murmuring that called Moshe’s leadership into question.

However, the seeds of the insurrection may go back even farther, to a most unexpected source: The most important and debilitating attack on Moshe came from his own brother and sister, Aharon and Miriam.

במדבר יב: א-ד

וַתְּדַבֵּר מִרְיָם וְאַהֲרֹן בְּמֹשֶׁה עַל אֹדוֹת הָאִשָּׁה הַכֻּשִׁית אֲשֶׁר לָקָח כִּי אִשָּׁה כֻשִׁית לָקָח: וַיֹּאמְרוּ הֲרַק אַךְ בְּמֹשֶׁה דִּבֶּר ה’ הֲלֹא גַּם בָּנוּ דִבֵּר וַיִּשְׁמַע ה’: וְהָאִישׁ מֹשֶׁה ענו עָנָיו מְאֹד מִכֹּל הָאָדָם אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה: וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ פִּתְאֹם אֶל מֹשֶׁה וְאֶל אַהֲרֹן וְאֶל מִרְיָם צְאוּ שְׁלָשְׁתְּכֶם אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וַיֵּצְאוּ שְׁלָשְׁתָּם:

And Miriam and Aharon spoke against Moshe because of the Kushite woman whom he had married; for he had married a Kushite woman. And they said, ‘Has God indeed spoken only by Moshe? Has he not spoken also by us?’ And God heard it. And the man Moshe was very humble, more than any other man upon the face of the earth. And God spoke suddenly to Moshe, and to Aharon, and to Miriam, ‘Come out you three to the Tent of Meeting.’ And the three came out. (Bamidbar 12:1-4)

Perhaps this talk against Moshe from such reputable people burst the bubble of Moshe’s unparalleled status in the eyes of the people. It is interesting that while Miriam was immediately punished, Aharon apparently escaped that episode unscathed.[1] Ironically, or perhaps in a masterful moment of cynical manipulation, Korach uses this seeming inequity as a weapon: When Korach wages his war against Moshe, he points his accusations at Aharon as the beneficiary of Moshe’s nepotism.

Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik[2] once pointed out a similar dynamic in the relationships between Ya’akov and his children. Where did the sons get the audacity to contemplate killing Yosef, when it was obvious to them that their father would take any harm to Yosef in the most severe manner? The answer is-- from Reuven.

There is a strange lacuna in the text describing the sale of Yosef, a gap which may shed light on this claim. The brothers see Yosef from afar and plot his demise:

בראשית לז: יח - כ

וַיִּרְאוּ אֹתוֹ מֵרָחֹק וּבְטֶרֶם יִקְרַב אֲלֵיהֶם וַיִּתְנַכְּלוּ אֹתוֹ לַהֲמִיתוֹ: וַיֹּאמְרוּ אִישׁ אֶל אָחִיו הִנֵּה בַּעַל הַחֲלֹמוֹת הַלָּזֶה בָּא: וְעַתָּה לְכוּ וְנַהַרְגֵהוּ וְנַשְׁלִכֵהוּ בְּאַחַד הַבֹּרוֹת וְאָמַרְנוּ חַיָּה רָעָה אֲכָלָתְהוּ וְנִרְאֶה מַה יִּהְיוּ חֲלֹמֹתָיו:

And when they saw him from afar, even before he came near them, they conspired against him to kill him. And they said to one another, 'Behold, this dreamer comes. Come now, and let us kill him, and throw him into some pit, and we will say, Some evil beast has devoured him; and we shall see what will become of his dreams.' (Bereishit 37:18-20)

Reuven heroically stands up against the others and declares that no blood should be spilled. Instead, he places Yosef in a pit – with the intention to save him soon after, when the time is right:

בראשית לז: כא-כב

וַיִּשְׁמַע רְאוּבֵן וַיַּצִּלֵהוּ מִיָּדָם וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא נַכֶּנּוּ נָפֶשׁ: וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם רְאוּבֵן אַל תִּשְׁפְּכוּ דָם הַשְׁלִיכוּ אֹתוֹ אֶל הַבּוֹר הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר בַּמִּדְבָּר וְיָד אַל תִּשְׁלְחוּ בוֹ לְמַעַן הַצִּיל אֹתוֹ מִיָּדָם לַהֲשִׁיבוֹ אֶל אָבִיו:

And Reuven heard it, and he saved him from their hands; and said, Let us not kill him. And Reuven said to them, Shed no blood, but throw him into this pit that is in the wilderness, and lay no hand upon him; that he might rid him from their hands, to deliver him to his father again. (Bereishit 37:21-22)

His well-laid plan notwithstanding, during the sale of Yosef– Reuven is nowhere to be found. His plan seems to have gone awry, for when he "returns" to the narrative, he expresses shock that Yosef is gone:

בראשית פרק לז: כט - ל

וַיָּשָׁב רְאוּבֵן אֶל הַבּוֹר וְהִנֵּה אֵין יוֹסֵף בַּבּוֹר וַיִּקְרַע אֶת בְּגָדָיו: וַיָּשָׁב אֶל אֶחָיו וַיֹּאמַר הַיֶּלֶד אֵינֶנּוּ וַאֲנִי אָנָה אֲנִי בָא:

And Reuven returned to the pit; and, behold, Yosef was not in the pit; and he tore his clothes. And he returned to his brothers, and said, The child is gone; and I, where shall I go? (Bereishit 37:29-30)

Where was Reuven during this critical gap? He knew that Yosef was in peril, and needed to be saved; why did Reuven “disappear”? Rashi explains that at that time, in those critical moments or hours, Reuven was involved in prayer and repentance for the indiscretion having moved his father’s bed.[3]

Rashi's comments regarding Reuven's role in the sale of Yosef refer us back to an earlier, seemingly unrelated episode – an episode that, taken at face value, incriminates Reuven of behavior that was almost too shocking to be understood.

בראשית לה: כב

וַיְהִי בִּשְׁכֹּן יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּאָרֶץ הַהִוא וַיֵּלֶךְ רְאוּבֵן וַיִּשְׁכַּב אֶת בִּלְהָה פִּילֶגֶשׁ אָבִיו וַיִּשְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל  וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי יַעֲקֹב שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר:

And it came to pass, when Yisrael lived in that land, that Reuven went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Yisrael heard it. Now the sons of Ya’aacob were twelve. (Bereishit 35:22)

The Talmud declares that Reuven was certainly not guilty of the nefarious crime of incest or adultery; he merely moved his father's bed from Bilhah's tent to the tent of his own mother:

          תלמוד בבלי מסכת שבת דף נה עמוד ב

אמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר רבי יונתן: כל האומר ראובן חטא - אינו אלא טועה, שנאמר )בראשית לה) ויהיו בני יעקב שנים עשר מלמד שכולן שקולים כאחת. אלא מה אני מקיים (בראשית לה) וישכב את בלהה פילגש אביו - מלמד שבלבל מצעו של אביו, ומעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו שכב עמה…אלא מה אני מקיים וישכב את בלהה פילגש אביו - עלבון אמו תבע. אמר: אם אחות אמי היתה צרה לאמי, שפחת אחות אמי תהא צרה לאמי?

R. Shmuel b. Nachman said in R. Yonatan's name: Whoever maintains that Reuven sinned is merely making an error, for it is said, ‘Now the sons of Ya’acov were twelve’, teaching that they were all equal. Then how do I interpret, ‘and he lay with Bilhah his father's concubine’? This teaches that he moved his father's bed, and the Torah imputes [blame] to him as though he had lain with her… He resented his mother's humiliation. Said he, 'If my mother's sister was a rival to my mother, shall the bondmaid of my mother's sister be a rival to my mother?' [Thereupon] he arose and switched the bed. (Shabbat 55b)

All of this seems quite strange; how can moving furniture be paralleled with one of the cardinal sins of Judaism, and what does this have to do with the sale of Yosef? Why would Reuven have chosen the moment of Yosef's sale to repent for that earlier indiscretion? The answer is that had Reuven not committed this act, the other brothers would never have dreamt of selling Yosef. Once the brothers saw that Reuven was able to act in such an impertinent manner toward their father, the reins of awe and respect were loosened, and the brothers’ impudence surged. This is evident from the explanation offered by the Midrash for Reuven’s disappearance during the sale of Yosef.

בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשת וישב פרשה פד סימן יט

וישב ראובן אל הבור, והיכן היה, ר' אליעזר ור' יהושע, רבי אליעזר אומר בשקו ובתעניתו, כשנפנה הלך והציץ לאותו בור הה"ד וישב ראובן אל הבור,

“And Reuven returned to the pit”. Where had he been? R. Eleazar said: He was taken up with his fasting and sackcloth, and when he became free he went and looked into the pit. Hence it is written, “and Reuven repented”[4].  (Midrash Rabbah – Bereishit 84:19)

Why would Reuven pick this particular moment for his religious awakening? Yosef is in the pit awaiting someone to come and save him. Apparently, at that point, Reuven understood the ramifications of his own actions; his own impertinence led directly to the sale of Yosef. His moving of furniture almost led to murder – one of the cardinal sins of Judaism.[5]

         

In much the same way, the episode of Aharon and Miriam empowered Korach: their criticism had opened the door that no one else could ever have opened, paving the way for irreverence. In fact, the substance of Aharon and Miriam’s criticism of Moshe, and not just the form, served Korach well.

Rashi, based on the Midrash Tanchuma, explains the sin of Miriam. The Torah had said “And Miriam and Aharon spoke against Moshe because of the Kushite woman whom he had married; for he had married a Kushite woman.” According to Rashi, the problem was not the marriage, but Moshe’s decision to separate himself from his wife. In the opinion of Miriam and Aharon, this was undue, excessive asceticism;[6] after all, God had spoken to them as well and had never made such demands. This separation is arguably one of the decisions Moshe had taken on his own:

שמות רבה (וילנא) פרשת כי תשא פרשה מו סימן ג

זה אחד מג' דברים שעשה משה מדעתו והסכימה דעתו לדעת הקב"ה, פרש מן האשה ר' שמעון בן יוחאי אומר דרש ואמר מה אם הר סיני שקדושתו לשעה נאמר בו (שם /שמות/ יט) אל תגשו אל אשה, אני שבכל שעה הוא מדבר עמי אינו דין שאהיה פרוש מהאשה, ר' עקיבא אומר מפי הקב"ה נאמר לו (במדבר יב) פה אל פה אדבר בו,

This was one of the three things which Moshe did of his own accord, but which received the full approval of God. He separated himself from his wife, because- said R. Shimon ben Yochai--Moshe thus reasoned to himself: ' If in connection with Mount Sinai, which was hallowed only for the occasion [of Revelation], we were told: ‘Come not near a woman’ (ib. 19:15), then how much more must I, to whom He speaks at all times, separate myself from my wife?’ R. Akiva said: [No!] it was God Himself who told him [to separate himself from his wife], (Midrash Rabbah – Sh’mot 46:3)

Whether God had actually told Moshe to separate from his wife or merely agreed ex post facto, it is clear that Aharon and Miriam had not known that Moshe’s actions had God's blessing or sanction. This opened the door for Korach’s insidious claim that Moshe was “making things up” and overstepping the Divine mandate. Korach would never have been able to make such a claim had Aharon and Miriam not said as much before him.

במדבר רבה (וילנא) פרשת קרח פרשה יח סימן יב

וכך קרח נחלק על משה ואמר מלבו ומעצמו אמר משה כל הדברים הללו

It was the same with Korach. He contended with Moshe, and said that the latter had invented all these things from his own mind and on his own initiative. (Midrash Rabbah Bamidbar 18:12)

Interestingly, all three decisions mentioned in the Talmud as independent decisions by Moshe may be connected to the insurrection and demagoguery of Korach:

תלמוד בבלי מסכת שבת דף פז עמוד א

דתניא: שלשה דברים עשה משה מדעתו והסכים הקדוש ברוך הוא עמו: הוסיף יום אחד מדעתו, ופירש מן האשה, ושבר את הלוחות.

הוסיף יום אחד מדעתו. מאי דריש? היום ומחר - היום כמחר, מה למחר - לילו עמו, אף היום - לילו עמו. ולילה דהאידנא נפקא ליה. שמע מינה - תרי יומי לבר מהאידנא. ומנלן דהסכים הקדוש ברוך הוא על ידו - דלא שריא שכינא עד צפרא דשבתא. ופירש מן האשה. מאי דריש? נשא קל וחומר בעצמו, אמר: ומה ישראל שלא דברה שכינה עמהן אלא שעה אחת, וקבע להן זמן, אמרה תורה +שמות יט+ והיו נכנים וגו' אל תגשו, אני שכל שעה ושעה שכינה מדברת עמי, ואינו קובע לי זמן - על אחת כמה וכמה! ומנלן דהסכים הקדוש ברוך הוא על ידו - דכתיב +דברים ה+ לך אמר להם שובו לכם לאהליכם וכתיב בתריה ואתה פה עמד עמדי, ואית דאמרי +במדבר יב+ פה אל פה אדבר בו. שבר את הלוחות. מאי דריש? אמר: ומה פסח שהוא אחד מתרי"ג מצות, אמרה תורה +שמות יב+ וכל בן נכר לא יאכל בו, התורה כולה [כאן], וישראל משומדים - על אחת כמה וכמה! ומנלן דהסכים הקדוש ברוך הוא על ידו - שנאמר +שמות לד+ אשר שברת ואמר ריש לקיש: יישר כחך ששיברת.

For it was taught, Three things did Moshe do of his own understanding, and the Holy One, blessed be He, gave His approval: he added one day of his own understanding, he separated himself from his wife, and he broke the Tablets. ‘He added one day of his own understanding’: what [verse] did he interpret? Today and tomorrow: ‘today’ [must be] like ‘tomorrow: just as tomorrow includes the [previous] night, so ‘today’ [must] include the [previous] night, but the night of today has already passed! Hence it must be two days exclusive of today. And how do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, gave his approval? — Since the Shechinah did not rest [upon Mount Sinai] until the morning of the Sabbath. And ‘he separated himself from his wife’: What did he interpret? He applied an a minori argument to himself, reasoning: If the Israelites, with whom the Shechinah spoke only on one occasion and He appointed them a time [thereof], yet the Torah said, ‘Be ready for the third day: come not near a woman’: I, with whom the Shechinah speaks at all times and does not appoint me a [definite] time, how much more so! And how do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, gave his approval? Because it is written, ‘Go say to them, Return to your tents’, which is followed by, ‘But as for you, stand here by me’. There are some who quote, ‘with him [sc. Moshe] will I speak mouth to mouth’. ‘He broke the Tablets’: how did he learn [this]? He argued: If the Passover sacrifice, which is but one of the six hundred and thirteen precepts, yet the Torah said, there shall no alien eat thereof: here is the whole Torah, and the Israelites are apostates, how much more so! And how do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, gave His approval? Because it is said, ‘which you broke’, and Resh Lakish interpreted this: ‘All strength to you that you broke them’. (Talmud - Shabbat 87a)

Korach's initial claim was that the “entire people are holy”

במדבר טז:ג 

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

You take too much upon you, being that all of 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? (Bamidbar 16:3)

What is the nature of this “holiness”? The Midrash takes Korach's words as a reference to the theophony at Sinai:

במדבר רבה (וילנא) פרשת קרח פרשה יח סימן ו

ויקהל עליהם קרח אמר להם כל העדה כולם קדושים וכולם שמעו בסיני אנכי ה' אלהיך ומדוע תתנשאו על קהל ה'

And they assembled themselves together against Moshe and against Aharon [Bamidbar 16:3]. Korach said to them: all the congregation are holy, every one of them (ib.) and they have all heard at Sinai the commandment: I am the Almighty your God (Shmot 20:2); Wherefore, then, do you lift yourselves above the assembly of God? (Midrash Rabbah – Bamidbar18:6)

This argument echoes Miriam's claim: “We too are prophets”, Moshe is not the only one to have been privileged to hear the Divine Word. Korach takes up the same claim, but uses it on a less personal level: “You, Moshe, are not the only prophet – we all experienced God at Sinai”.

On the other hand, perhaps there is a deeper, more cynical sentiment being articulated. As we saw, the substance of Miriam's slander was Moshe’s separation from his wife. In preparation for Sinai, Moshe had instructed all of Israel to practice abstinence. We know that the phrase “holiness” is often a catchword or a synonym for 'separateness', sepration, strict boundaries of ritual purity.[7] Perhaps Korach is making reference to the other action Moshe took on his own initiative: calling on the entire community to practice abstinence for an extra day before receiving the Torah. Reminding Moshe that “all the congregation is holy,” is in fact a claim that the congregation has been coerced unnecessarily into abstinence which God did not require - Korach's proof of the more general charge that Moshe had played “fast and loose” with the Divine decree.

The third action Moshe is said to have initiated was the breaking of the Tablets when he descended from the mountain and saw the Golden Calf. Perhaps more than anything else, the Golden Calf symbolizes Korach's argument. His stated goal was to usurp the High Priesthood, a position he felt he deserved more than Aharon. One can imagine his argument: If Aharon was guilty of complicity – at the very least – in the Golden Calf episode, why is he worthy to be Kohen Gadol? Alternatively, if Aharon was innocent, why did Moshe break the Tablets, especially when we recall that the tribe of Levi, Korach’s tribe, did not sin with the Golden Calf?

There is another way to solve this conundrum: Moshe’s action may be understood in terms of the rules of marriage. The relationship between the People of Israel and God is likened to that of bride and groom, and Mount Sinai to the marriage ceremony. Standing at Mount Sinai and declaring “We will listen we will obey” was analogous to accepting vows of matrimony. The sin of the Golden Calf, then, is analogous to adultery.

שמות רבה (וילנא) פרשת כי תשא פרשה מג סימן א

מה עשה משה נטל את הלוחות מתוך ידו של הקב"ה כדי להשיב חמתו, למה"ד לשר ששלח לקדש אשה עם הסרסור הלך וקלקלה עם אחר, הסרסור שהיה נקי מה עשה נטל את כתובתה מה שנתן לו השר לקדשה וקרעה אמר מוטב שתדון כפנויה ולא כאשת איש, כך עשה משה כיון שעשו ישראל אותו מעשה נטל את הלוחות ושברן כלומר שאלו היו רואין עונשן לא חטאו.

So what did Moshe do? He took the Tablets from the hands of God in order to appease His wrath. It can be compared to a king who sent a marriage-broker to betroth a wife for him, but while the broker was on his way, the woman corrupted herself with another man. What did the broker, who was entirely innocent, do? He took the marriage document which the prince had given him to betroth her with, and tore it, saying: ‘It is better that she be judged as an unmarried woman than as one married.’ This is what Moshe did; when Israel perpetrated that act, he took the Tablets and shattered them, as if to imply that had Israel foreseen the punishment awaiting them, they would not have thus sinned. (Midrash Rabbah Sh’mot 43:1)

Moshe hoped to extricate the Jews from their precarious position, and broke the Tablets, which would be analogous to the wedding band. If the band is broken before it is placed on the bride's finger, if the Tablets of Testimony are broken before they are delivered into the possession of the Jewish People, the Jews are still "unwed," and therefore technically innocent of infidelity. They are far less accountable for their sin; their punishment will be far less stringent. Korach, on the other hand, argues that Moshe had no right to act as he did; the entire congregation is holy – and married to God. How dare Moshe break the tablets on his own authority and go against the Will of God![8]

The marriage theme continues through the aftermath of the sin of the Golden Calf: Moshe makes the people drink water that is mixed with the dust of the Golden Calf, much as a woman suspected of infidelity is given bitter waters mixed with the dust of the  Mishkan to prove her innocence:

שמות לב: כ

וַיִּקַּח אֶת הָעֵגֶל אֲשֶׁר עָשׂוּ וַיִּשְׂרֹף בָּאֵשׁ וַיִּטְחַן עַד אֲשֶׁר דָּק וַיִּזֶר עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם וַיַּשְׁקְ אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל:

And he took the calf which they had made, and burned it in the fire, and ground it to powder, and scattered it upon the water, and made the people of Israel drink of it. (Sh’mot 32:20)

The theme of marriage and fidelity of the nation of Israel is intertwined with an even more bizarre and shocking claim made by Korach:     

תלמוד בבלי מסכת סנהדרין דף קי עמוד א

וישמע משה ויפל על פניו)במדבר ט"ז(, מה שמועה שמע? - אמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר רבי יונתן: שחשדוהו מאשת איש, שנאמר )תהלים ק"ו) ויקנאו למשה במחנה. אמר רבי שמואל בר יצחק: מלמד שכל אחד ואחד קנא את אשתו ממשה, שנאמר (שמות ל"ג) ומשה יקח את האהל ונטה לו מחוץ למחנה.

And when Moshe heard it, he fell upon his face. What news did he hear? — R. Shmuel b. Nahmani said in R. Yonatan's name: That he was suspected of [adultery with] married women, as it is written, ‘They were jealous of Moshe in the camp,' [Tehilim106:16] which teaches that every person warned his wife on Moshe’s account, as it is written: “And Moshe took the tent, and pitched it outside the camp [Sh’mot 33:7]. (Sanhedrin 110a)

It seems difficult to fathom that the people could have suspected Moshe of so heinous a crime, but the tradition is clear: The verse that tells us that Moshe moved his tent outside the camp is found immediately after the Golden Calf episode. We know that the women did not take part in this sin; they did not heed the men, and remained loyal to God and to Moshe:

במדבר רבה (וילנא) פרשת פינחס פרשה כא

אותו הדור היו הנשים גודרות מה שאנשים פורצים שכן את מוצא שאמר להן אהרן [שמות לב] פרקו נזמי הזהב אשר באזני נשיכם ולא רצו הנשים ומיחו בבעליהן שנאמר ויתפרקו כל העם את נזמי הזהב וגו' והנשים לא נשתתפו עמהן במעשה העגל

In that generation the women built up the fences which the men broke down. Thus you find that Aharon told them: Break off the golden rings, which are in the ears of your wives [Shmot 32: 2], but the women refused and checked their husbands; as is proved by the fact that it says, “And all the people broke off the golden rings which were in their ears” (ib. 3). The women did not participate with the men in making the Calf. (Midrash Rabbah Bamidbar 21:10)[9]

This had actually been part of Aharon's strategy: He knew that the women would not listen to their husbands, that they would remain loyal.[10] The fact that the women were more dedicated to Moshe and God than to their own husbands certainly caused strife in the camp. Korach’s claim that Moshe had unnatural control over the women was articulated as “suspicion” vis a vis Moshe:[11] The men had warned their wives against taking sides with Moshe, of preferring Moshe to their own husbands.

Against this backdrop, another bit of intrigue in the parsha is explained: The verses that describe the beginning of the rebellion enumerate several members of Korach's party:

במדבר פרק טז: א-ב

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

Now Korah, the son of Yizhar, the son of Kehath, the son of Levi, and Dathan and Aviram, the sons of Eliav, and On, the son of Pelet, sons of Reuven, took men. 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)

Of these leaders, one is mentioned only in this first verse and never mentioned again in the Torah: On the son of Pelet. While the text returns to the other leaders and their respective ignominious fates, the text tells us nothing about On’s fate. The Talmud and Midrash relate a tradition that On’s wife saved him from Korach's manipulative counsel:

תלמוד בבלי מסכת סנהדרין דף קט עמוד ב

אמר רב: און בן פלת אשתו הצילתו, אמרה ליה: מאי נפקא לך מינה? אי מר רבה - אנת תלמידא, ואי מר רבה - אנת תלמידא. אמר לה: מאי אעביד, הואי בעצה, ואשתבעי לי בהדייהו: אמרה ליה: ידענא דכולה כנישתא קדישתא נינהו, דכתיב (במדבר ט"ז) כי כל העדה כלם קדשים. אמרה ליה: תוב, דאנא מצילנא לך. אשקיתיה חמרא, וארויתיה, ואגניתיה גואי, אותבה על בבא, )קי עמוד א( וסתרתה למזיה, כל דאתא חזיה, הדר. אדהכי והכי אבלעו להו.

איתתיה דקרח אמרה ליה חזי מאי קעביד משה איהו הוה מלכא לאחוה שוויה כהנא רבא לבני אחוהי שוינהו סגני דכהנא אי אתיא תרומה אמר תיהוי לכהן אי אתו מעשר דשקילתו אתון אמר הבו חד מעשרה לכהן ועוד דגייז ליה למזייכו ומיטלל לכו כי כופתא עינא יהב במזייכו אמר לה הא איהו נמי קא עביד אמרה ליה כיון דכולהו רבותא דידיה אמר איהו נמי תמות נפשי עם פלשתים ועוד דקאמר לכו עבדיתו תכלתא אי סלקא דעתך תכלתא חשיבא [מצוה] אפיק גלימי דתכלתא וכסינהו לכולהו מתיבתך היינו דכתיב חכמות נשים בנתה ביתה זו אשתו של און בן פלת ואולת בידה תהרסנה זו אשתו של קרח.

Rav said: On, the son of Pelet, was saved by his wife. Said she to him, ‘What matters it to you? Whether the one [Moshe] remains master or the other [Korah] becomes master, you are but a disciple.’ He replied, ‘But what can I do? I have taken part in their counsel, and they have sworn me [to be] with them.’ She said, ‘I know that they are all a holy community, as it is written, “seeing all the congregation are holy, everyone of them.” She proceeded, ‘Sit here, and I will save you.’ She gave him wine to drink, intoxicated him and laid him down within [the tent]. Then she sat down at the door and loosened her hair. Whoever came [to summon him] saw her and retreated. Meanwhile, Korah's wife joined them [the rebels] and said to him [Korah], ‘See what Moshe has done. He himself has become king; his brother he appointed High Priest; his brother's sons he has made the vice High Priests. If terumah is brought, he decrees, ‘Let it be for the priest’; if the tithe is brought, which belongs to you [i.e., to the Levite], he orders, ‘Give one tenth to the priest’. Moreover, he has had your hair cut off, and makes sport of you as though you were dirt; for he was jealous of your hair.’ … Thus it is written, “Every wise woman builds her house” — this refers to the wife of On, the son of Pelet; “but the foolish plucks it down with her hands” — to Korah's wife. (Sanhedrin 109b-110a) (See Midrash Rabbah - Bamidbar 18:20)

On was saved by his wife's heroism, while the wickedness of Korach’s wife led him to the abyss.[12] While Korach’s wife egged him on, nurturing his anger from a perceived slight, On’s wife employed the same logic as Korach, but in a reverse: The entire congregation is indeed holy, she says, yet the conclusion is not that they therefore have a right to lead. Instead, she concludes that every member of the congregation will adhere strictly to the laws of modesty and purity; no member of such a holy congregation would enter a house where a woman’s hair is uncovered.

Why did she choose this particular expression of holiness? Uncovering her hair may also have been related to the ritual of sotah, the woman suspected of adultery whose hair is uncovered as part of the trial. Perhaps by uncovering her hair in the doorway, On's wife was making a statement: her home, her community, and she herself are untainted. She is innocent,[13] the community is indeed holy,[14] and Moshe is innocent as well. They have passed the test.

The tragedy of the Korach episode is how one man with a grudge, encouraged by one woman, could lead an entire community to death and despair. Additionally, it is frightening how a “minor” comment by Miriam and Aharon could be escalated into a full-scale rebellion. When speaking about a man like Moshe, extreme caution must be exercised, for the slightest disrespect could have severe implications. In fact, when speaking about any person we should use the utmost care and exercise good judgment – for sometimes flippant statements, seemingly inconsequential actions or insignificant comments, can have severe and far-reaching implications.[15]

The anonymous heroine of the episode is the wife of On who took her husband’s destiny in her own hands, and forced him back to Moshe’s side,[16] in the tradition of all the women who refused to sin throughout the years in Egypt, in the desert[17] – and ever since. They preserved their families and the community through their dedication to God, Moshe and Torah - very much unlike Korach.

---

[1]  See Midrash Rabbah, Devarim 6:11, where Aharon’s guilt is mentioned.

[2]  See the comments of the Beis Halevi on Bereishit 37:29. This may be the source of the Rov’s teaching.

[3] Rashi gives two explanation: first, that Reuven in order to go and care for his father. Given the logistical impossibility of travelling from Dotan to Hebron and back, in order to rescue Yosef from the pit, Rashi offers this second interpretation: Reuven was immersed in fasting and prayer.

רש"י בראשית פרק לז פסוק כט

וישב ראובן - ובמכירתו לא היה שם, שהגיע יומו לילך ולשמש את אביו. דבר אחר עסוק היה בשקו ובתעניתו על שבלבל יצועי אביו:

[4] A play on the word vayashav, “returned,”the same word used to describe repentence.

[5]  According to the Zohar, Reuven did not know about the sale. Zohar Bereishit 185b: 'And Reuven returned to the pit; and, behold, Yosef was not in the pit; and he tore his clothes. And he returned to his brothers, and said, The child is gone; and I, where shall I go?' For even Reuven did not know that Yosef had been sold. As has already been said, the brothers associated the Shekinah with them in the oath of secrecy…"

[6]  The Midrash connects her comments with the news that Eldad and Meidad were prophesying in the camp. Miraim overheard Zippporah lament the future of the wives who would now suffer the fate of separation that Zipporah herself has experienced.

[7]  See Rashi, Vayikra 19:2.

[8]  Rav Yonatan Eybeshitz in his Tiferet Yonaton, Bamidabar 16:4, makes a similar observation.

[9]  According to the Midrash in Pirkei d’Rebbi Eliezer, the reward of the women was that they would not work on Rosh Chodesh.

[10]  Zohar 2:192a: “And Aharon said to them, Break off the golden earrings." (Shmot 32: 2). Did they have no other gold? Aharon's idea, however, was that while they were arguing with their wives and children, time would be gained and Moshe might return before harm was done.”

[11]  See Margaliyot Hayam, Sanhedrin 110a note 5.

[12] The Midrash blames Korach’s wife for instigating his rebellion. Midrash Rabbah 18:4 "Now Korach... took" implies that he took his cloak and went to take counsel with his wife." Also see Midrash Rabbah 18:15.

[13]  It is also noteworthy that she gets On drunk, which is also related to the Sotah. See my notes on Parshat Naso.

[14] In fact, the passage that immediately follows in the Talmud is the one in which the people accuse Moshe of indiscretion with married women.

[15] According to the Zohar, Moshe did not make any decisions independently:

But, in fact, there is no word in the Torah which Moshe spoke on his own authority. Hence it says, “Moshe spoke” with his own voice, “and God answered him with that mighty Voice”, confirming what he said. (Zohar, Vayikra Page 7a).

[16] According to the Midrash, On spends the rest of his life repenting: Midrash Rabbah Bamidbar, 18:20  "And On, the son of Pelet"; Why was he called by the name of On? Because he spent all the rest of his days in mourning. Why "the son of Pelet"? Because he was a son for whom miracles  (pela'ot) were wrought.

[17]  See Midrash Rabbah Devarim 21:10, for details of many episodes in the desert in which the women remained steadfast to G-d, Moshe and Torah.