Rabbi David Etengoff

Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The saddest part of our parasha is Hashem’s declaration to Moshe forbidding him from entering Eretz Yisrael: “Hashem said to Moshe, ‘Go up to this mount Abarim and look at the land that I have given to b’nai Yisrael. And when you have seen it, you, too, will be gathered to your people, just as Aharon your brother was gathered.’” (Sefer Bamidbar 27:12-13, this and all Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)  One can only imagine the pain and sorrow Moshe felt upon being banned from the Land he longed to explore, his dream lying crushed, in ruins, at his feet.
 
Regardless of his personal misery, however, Moshe’s first response was to seek assurance from the Almighty that the Jewish people would have the fitting leader to bring them into Eretz Yisrael:

Moshe spoke to Hashem, saying: “Let Hashem, the G-d of spirits of all flesh (Elokei haruchot l’kol basar), appoint a man over the congregation, who will go forth before them and come before them, who will lead them out and bring them in, so that the congregation of Hashem will not be like sheep without a shepherd.” (27:15-17)
 
In his Commentary on the Torah on these verses, Rashi (1040-1105), citing Sifrei Bamidbar, Parashat Pinchas 138, notes that Moshe’s response to Hashem’s decree is emblematic of the manner in which tzaddikim (truly righteous individuals) react when their death is imminent: “This comes to make known to you the praise of tzaddikim when they are about to pass on from this world, [that is,] they ignore their own wants and actively focus on the needs of the community (v’oskin b’tzorchei tzibbur). (Leipzig manuscript, translation and brackets my own)  Perhaps because of Moshe’s consummate altruism, the Almighty immediately consented to his request:

Hashem said to Moshe, “Take for yourself Yehoshua the son of Nun, a man of spirit, and you shall lay your hand upon him. And you shall present him before Eleazar the kohane and before the entire congregation, and you shall command him in their presence. You shall bestow some of your majesty upon him so that all the congregation of the children of Israel will take heed. He shall stand before Eleazar the kohane and seek [counsel from] him through the judgment of the Urim before Hashem. By his word they shall go, and by his word they shall come; he and all b’nai Yisrael with him, and the entire congregation.” (27:18-21)
 
At first glance, Hashem’s choice of Yehoshua as the next leader of the Jewish people seems perfectly apropos. After all, as we find at the end of Parashat Beshalach, Yehoshua was an outstanding military leader:

So Moshe said to Yehoshua, “Pick men for us, and go out and fight against Amalek. Tomorrow I will stand on top of the hill with the staff of G-d in my hand…” Yehoshua weakened Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword. (Sefer Shemot 17:9 and 13)
 
Moreover, and perhaps even more significantly in the overall view of Jewish history, following the Sin of the Golden Calf, we are explicitly informed of the special relationship that obtained between Moshe and Yehoshua, the latter never leaving his teacher’s tent of Torah learning (Rashi): “…but his [Moshe’s] attendant, Yehoshua, the son of Nun, a lad, would not depart from the tent.” (Sefer Shemot 33:11)  On measure, Yehoshua seemed the ideal candidate to carry the mantle of Moshe’s leadership into a glorious Jewish future.
 
There are, however, passages in Chazal that paint a very different picture of Yehoshua’s worthiness to succeed his rebbe. In Sefer Mishle 21:20 we find: “Precious treasure and oil are in the dwelling of the wise man (chacham), but man's foolishness (uchsile) will swallow it up.” The Midrash Yalkut Shimoni on this verse presents a startling interpretation, “Chacham—this refers to Moshe, uchsile—this refers to Yehoshua, for he was not a Torah scholar. Therefore, the Jewish people called him a fool!” An even more powerful indictment against Yehoshua’s candidacy is found in the following Talmudic passage:

Rab Judah reported in the name of Rab: When Moshe departed [this world] for the Garden of Eden, he said to Yehoshua: “Ask me concerning all the doubts you have [concerning any halacha].” He replied to him: “My Master, have I ever left you for one hour and gone elsewhere? [that is. “I have no doubts.”] Did you not write concerning me in the Torah: “…but his attendant Yehoshua, the son of Nun, a lad, would not depart from the tent?” Immediately the strength [of Moshe] weakened, [since it seemed that Yehoshua no longer needed him,] and [Yehoshua] forgot three hundred laws and there arose [in his mind] seven hundred doubts [concerning various areas of Torah]. Then all the Jews rose up to kill him. (Talmud Bavli, Temurah 16a, translation, The Soncino Talmud, with my emendations)
 
Why, then, did Hashem choose Yehoshua as the next leader of the Jewish people? The previously cited section from the Midrash Yalkut Shimoni provides us with the underlying rationale: “Because he [Yehoshua] was Moshe’s attendant, he merited the appointment as leader of the people (literally, zacha l’yerushato).” What did he do? The Midrash teaches us, “He [Yehoshua] honored him [Moshe] and arranged the covers on the benches [so the classes could be held.] Moreover, he sat at his [master’s] feet.”
 
Why did these behaviors qualify Yehoshua to be the next leader of our people? My rebbe and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), known as “the Rav” by his students and followers, provides us with a deeply insightful answer to this question:

Often, a leader’s successor was chosen not only because of his intellectual prowess but also because of his devoted service to his teacher. When the Baal Shem Tov passed away, the mantle of leadership was not given to Rav Yaakov Yosef, a Torah giant and the author of Toldot Yaakov Yosef. Rather, it passed to the Maggid of Mezeritch, who had served the Baal Shem Tov with great devotion and loyalty. Similarly, Rav Chaim of Volozhin became the successor to his teacher, the Vilna Gaon, partly because he was not only his student but his confidant. (Chumash Mesoras HaRav, with commentary based upon the teachings of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Sefer Bamidbar, edited by Dr. Arnold Lustiger, page 218, underlining my own)
 
The Rav continues his assessment of Yehoshua’s candidacy in the following manner:

Joshua was not a greater scholar than Phineas or Eleazar, but the service of Torah [scholars] is greater than its study] (Talmud Bavli, Berachot 7b). Service does not merely signify physical toil; it also represents a special closeness and friendship between the teacher and disciple, a type of partnership. The chosen disciple not only receives information from his rebbe, but absorbs a way of life, until they are practically identical in their essence. Moses knew that through his student-colleague, the Torah would be transmitted to future generations. (Page 219)
 
Based upon the Rav’s trenchant analysis, we are now better able to understand Hashem’s choice of Yehoshua to be the next leader of the Jewish people. Yehoshua, and not Pinchas, Elazar, or even Moses’ sons, was the one person who had completely absorbed Moshe’s values and way of life to the extent that he was able to emulate his rebbe’s very essence. Little wonder, then, that the Midrash Sifrei famously declares: “The face of Moshe was like the face of the sun, and the face of Yehoshua was like the face of the moon.” (Parashat Pinchas, 140)  This teaches us that Yehoshua’s very being reflected not only Moshe’s knowledge, but his entire persona. As such, he was the one disciple who was truly fitting to lead the Jewish people into Eretz Yisrael.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The namesake of our parasha is Balak, King of Moab. He correctly believed that his country was existentially threatened by the fledgling Jewish nation. As such, he sought to annihilate us before we could become any stronger and wreak havoc upon his people. In order to achieve his malevolent goal, he hired Bilam ben Beor to curse our people and “stop us in our tracks.”
 
Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 106a focuses on Bilam’s authentic nature: “[It states in Sefer Yehoshua 13:22:] ‘… and Bilam, the son of Beor, the sorcerer (hakosame)…’ Was he a sorcerer? He is a prophet (navi)! Rabbi Yochanan says: ‘Initially he was a prophet, but ultimately, he lost his capacity for prophecy and remained merely a sorcerer.’” (Translation with my emendations, The William Davidson Talmud, Koren Press, Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz zatzal, editor)  This passage helps us understand that even though Bilam was labelled a sorcerer in Sefer Yehoshua, he had been an authentic prophet at an earlier time. This transformation is trenchantly analyzed by the Maharal (Rabbi Yehudah Loew ben Bezalel zatzal, d. 1609):

Here is the explanation: He was initially a prophet, as his prophecies were vouchsafed to him prior to the Jewish people having left Egypt; in addition, at that time, he was also a navi to the nations of the world. Afterwards, when the Jewish people left Egypt, Moshe asked [the Almighty] to no longer allow His Shechinah to dwell among the nations of the world, but rather. solely among the Jewish people. Prior to this request, however, it had not been determined that prophecy would be removed from the peoples of the world; as such, Bilam, himself, who was from the nations of the world, agreed to the brachot for the Jewish people. At this juncture, the Shechinah departed completely from the nations of the world forevermore…” (Chidushei Aggadot, Sanhedrin 106a, translation and brackets my own)
 
According to the Maharal, Bilam was, indeed, a prophet prior to Moshe Rabbeinu’s entreaty to Hashem to cease His prophetic involvement with the nations of the world. Subsequently, however, Hashem honored Moshe’s request and Bilam was reduced to an ordinary sorcerer.
 
What kind of navi was Bilam? How did he compare to Moshe Rabbeinu? At least two midrashim speak directly to these questions:

Bilam had three characteristics that Moshe lacked: He knew Who was speaking to him, he knew when the Holy One blessed be He was going to speak to him, and he could speak with Him whenever he so desired. (Midrash Bamidbar Rabbah 14:20)
 
There were three things that made Bilam greater than Moshe: He could look upon the Shechinah (Hashem’s Divine Presence), he could join himself to the Shechinah, and he could immediately open his eyes and speak [at will] with the Shechinah. (Midrash Aggadah 24:17, translations and underling my own)
 
Based upon the metrics in these midrashim, Bilam’s prophetic characteristics, and the nature of his encounters with the Shechinah, surpassed even those of Moshe Rabbeinu.
 
Bilam’s status as an authentic navi, however, has not been universally accepted. One of the earliest sources that rejects this idea is Targum Onkelos. Throughout his interpretative Aramaic translation of the Torah, Onkelos (c.35-120 CE) utilizes the term, “itgali Hashem (Hashem revealed Himself),” in regard to authentic prophets. By way of example, he deploys this phrase ten times in reference to Hashem’s revelations to Avraham, Yitzchak and Ya’akov. In stark contrast, however, there is not one pasuk wherein Onkelos uses a form of “itgali Hashem” in reference to Bilam, this strongly suggesting that he did not recognize Bilam as a bona fide prophet. (See Rambam, Moreh HaNevuchim II:41for the basis of this analysis)
 
In his Commentary on Sefer Yehoshua, the Abarbanel (Rabbi Don Isaac Abravanel zatzal, 1437-1508) explains the phrase, “and Bilam, the son of Beor, the sorcerer,” (13:22) in a straightforward manner in consonance with Onkelos’ approach: “He was a sorcerer in his very nature and true essence (kosame m’tivo v’amitato). For everything that is cited from his prophecy [in Parashat Balak] is simply something that he was gifted—solely for that moment—in honor of the Jewish people so that he could bless them.” (Translation and brackets my own)
 
Ultimately, Bilam attained infamy for having caused the death of 24,000 men of our nation through his nefarious plan concerning the b’not Moab (Daughters of Moab, Sefer Bamidbar 25:1-9). Little wonder, then, that Chazal gave him the appellation, “Bilam HaRasha (Bilam the Evil One, Pirkei Avot 5:19),” the name by which he will be known forevermore.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Chapter five of Pirkei Avot tells a poignant tale: “With ten tests our forefathers tested Hashem in the desert, as is stated (Sefer Bamidbar 14:22), ‘… they tested Me these ten times, and did not listen to My voice.’” (Mishna 4)  In his Commentary on the Torah on this pasuk, Rashi (1040-1105) notes that two of the ten challenges against Hashem concerned the manna that He provided to our forebears for 40 years. One of these instances appears in this week’s parasha: “The people spoke against Elokim and against Moshe, ‘Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in this desert, for there is no bread and no water, and we are disgusted with this rotten bread [that is, the manna, Rashi].’” (Sefer Bamidbar 21:5, this and all Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)
 
Hashem’s response to this challenge was swift and powerful; “[He] sent venomous snakes against the people, and they bit the people, and many of the people died.” (21:6)  Realizing their fundamental error, the people immediately reached out to Moshe, begging him to intervene on their behalf: “The people came to Moshe and said, ‘We have sinned, for we have spoken against Hashem and against you. Pray to Hashem that He remove the snakes from us.’ So Moshe prayed on behalf of the people.” (21:7)  Hashem then agreed to end the plague of the poisonous snakes and instructed Moshe to undertake the following action in order to achieve this outcome:

“Hashem said to Moshe, ‘Make yourself a serpent and put it on a pole, and all who are bitten will look at it and live.’” As always, Moshe fulfilled Hashem’s mitzvah: “Moshe made a copper snake and put it on a pole, and whenever a snake bit a man, he would gaze upon the copper snake and live.” (21:8-9)
 
A well-known mishnah in Talmud Bavli, Rosh Hashanah 29a presents the classic question regarding Hashem’s solution to end the makkah of the snakes and contextualizes it by noting its parallels to our victory over Amalek as found in Parashat Beshalach:

“And it came to pass, when Moshe held up his hand, that Israel prevailed; and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed” (Sefer Shemot 17:11). It may be asked: “Did the hands of Moshe make war when he raised them or break war when he lowered them?” Rather, the verse comes to tell you that as long as the Jewish people turned their eyes upward and subjected their hearts to their Father in Heaven, they prevailed, but if not, they fell. Similarly, you can say: The verse states: “Make for yourself a fiery serpent and set it upon a pole; and it shall come to pass, that everyone that is bitten, when he sees it, he shall live.” (Sefer Bamidbar 21:8). Once again it may be asked: “Did the serpent kill, or did the serpent preserve life?” Rather, when the Jewish people turned their eyes upward and subjected their hearts to their Father in Heaven, they were healed, but if not, they rotted from their snakebites. (Translation, The William Davidson Talmud, Koren Press, Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz zatzal editor)
 
The two questions presented in this mishnah, “Did the hands of Moshe make war when he raised them or break war when he lowered them?” and “Did the serpent kill, or did the serpent preserve life?” have the same answer: Salvation from trial and tribulation has but one source, Avinu she’b’Shamayim (Our Father in Heaven). If we raise our eyes, and turn our hearts and minds to Hashem, we will achieve the outcome for which we long. This essential principle of emunah (faith) is reminiscent of one of my favorite chapters from Sefer Tehillim:

A song for ascents. I shall raise my eyes to the mountains, from where will my help come? My help is from Hashem, the Maker of heaven and earth. He will not allow your foot to falter; Your Guardian will not slumber. Behold the Guardian of Israel will neither slumber nor sleep. Hashem is your Guardian; Hashem is your shadow; [He is] by your right hand. By day, the sun will not smite you, nor will the moon at night. Hashem will guard you from all evil; He will guard your soul. Hashem will guard your going out and your coming in from now and to eternity. (121)
 
May these powerful words of Dovid HaMelech ever be our guide as we strive to sanctify the Almighty in our lives. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The primary focus of our parasha is the rebellion of Korach and his minions against Moshe, Aharon, and Hashem:

Korach the son of Yitzhar, the son of Kahat, the son of Levi took [himself to one side] along with Datan and Aviram, the sons of Eliav, and On the son of Pelet, descendants of Reuven. They confronted Moshe... They assembled against Moshe and Aharon, and said to them, “You take too much upon yourselves…” Therefore [said Moshe], you and your entire company who are assembled are against Hashem, for what is Aharon that you should complain against him? (Sefer Bamidbar 16:1-3 11, this and all Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach, underlining and brackets my own)
 
These individuals were punished by being swallowed by the earth:

[Moshe said:] “If these men die as all men die and the fate of all men will be visited upon them, then Hashem has not sent me. But if Hashem creates a creation, and the earth opens its mouth and swallows them and all that is theirs, and they descend alive into the grave, you will know that these men have provoked Hashem.” As soon as he finished speaking all these words, the earth beneath them split open. The earth beneath them opened its mouth and swallowed them and their houses, and all the men who were with Korah and all the property. (16:29-32)
 
In his interpretation of this narrative in Toldot Yitzchak, Sefer Bamidbar, chapter 17, Rav Yitzchak ben Rav Yosef Karo zatzal (1458-1535), uncle of the author of the Shulchan Aruch, focuses on three specific topics: The identity of those who rebelled, their goals, and the substance of their complaints. He identifies four factions in the rebellion: Korach, Datan and Aviram, the levi‘im, and the bechorot (first born sons), asserting that these distinct groups shared the same objective: to be recognized as bona fide kohanim. He then presents the key elements of each of their claims to the kahuna.
 
According to Rav Yitzchak, the bechorot sought the kahuna, since they had initially been the ones to offer the korbanot. “As a result of the Chet HaEgel (Sin of the Golden Calf), however, the Holy One blessed be He removed the kahuna from them and gave it to the Tribe of Levi.” (This and the following translations and brackets my own)  Moreover, Rav Yitzchak maintains the bechorot did not trust Moshe, “as he was from the Tribe of Levi, and [they] claimed that it was he, and not the Holy One blessed be He, who took the kahuna from them and gave it to the members of his tribe.”
 
In Rav Yitzchak’s view, the group of rebellious levi‘im demanded to be kohanim, since, after all: “They were from the Tribe of Levi and direct descendants of Levi; as such, why were they not kohanim like Aharon and his sons—all of whom were from the Tribe of Levi? They mistrusted Moshe, and claimed that he chose his brother, Aharon, for this position [himself, instead of this having been a direct command from the Almighty].”
 
Rav Yitzchak describes Datan and Aviram as “gedolim b’Yisrael,” in the sense that they had gravitas in the eyes of the nation. He notes that they were from the Tribe of Reuven, who was the bechor of The Tribes of Israel, and that, on this basis, Datan and Aviram insisted that they had full rights to the kahuna. In addition, like the bechorot, and the relatively small group of breakaway levi’im, they believed that Moshe had chosen Aharon and his descendants for the kahuna for nepotistic reasons.
 
In Rav Yitzchak’s estimation, Korach demanded the kahuna based upon two prerogatives: Like Aharon, he was from The Tribe of Levi, and he was a bechor. Korach believed these two “facts on the ground” made him destined for the kahuna, and given his overall egotistical orientation, deserving of being chosen as the Kohane Gadol.
 
Rav Yitzchak’s analysis of Korach’s rebellion is a conceptual tour de force. With penetrating insight, he demonstrates that, while various claims for the kahuna were presented, all four segments of the insurrection were equally blind to the anavah (humility) that was the heart of Moshe’s very being. Moreover, each group failed to comprehend that their participation in the uprising was, in essence, a revolt against the Master of the Universe Who had commanded that the kahuna be entrusted to Aharon and his descendants forevermore.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The namesake of our parasha is found in its second verse: “Send out for yourself (shelach lecha) men who will scout the Land of Canaan, which I am giving to the children of Israel. You shall send one man each for his father’s tribe; each one shall be a chieftain in their midst.” (Sefer Bamidbar 13:2, this and all Tanach and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)  In his Commentary on the Torah, Rashi (1040-1105) asks the following celebrated question based upon Midrash Tanchuma, Parashat Shelach Lecha 5: “Why is the section dealing with the spies (meraglim) juxtaposed with the section dealing with Miriam?” and answers: “Because she [Miriam] was punished over matters of slander (iskei dibbah), for speaking against her brother, and these wicked people [that is, the spies] witnessed [it], but did not learn their lesson.” Herein, Rashi suggests that just like Miriam spoke slanderously against Moshe and was punished for this act, so, too, should the meraglim have known that if they spoke in a degrading manner about Eretz Canaan they would be punished.
 
Most readers take Rashi’s answer at face value, that both Miriam and the meraglim engaged in speaking iskei dibbah and were punished for their actions; therefore, the narrative of the spies follows Miriam’s ignominious story. Yet, we are left wondering how Miriam and the meraglim could have erred so grievously. My rebbe and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), known as the “Rav” by his students and followers, addresses this concern in his novel interpretation (chiddush) of the above-cited passage from Midrash Tanchuma:

[What lesson should the spies have taken from Miriam?] It was not the lesson of lashon hara, of not engaging in slander. Miriam had overlooked the segullah [chosen and unique] element in Moses, and they overlooked the segullah element in the land. Miriam ignored the chosenness of her brother Moses, his numinous character and charisma. The spies, likewise, could not grasp the secret of a segullah land and its unique metaphysical relationship to the people. There was a common denominator in the two episodes, in her protest against Moses and in their report submitted to Moses. The element of segullah was absent from both. (Vision and Leadership: Reflections on Joseph and Moses, David Shatz, Joel B. Wolowelsky, and Reuven Ziegler editors, page 186, brackets and underlining my own)
 
The Rav further expands the concept of segullah when he contrasts Moshe’s perception of Eretz Canaan with that of the meraglim:

Moses regarded the land not only in a political or physical light, but also as an exalted everlasting union. A singular segullah people, special to God, was being joined to a singular land, from which God’s attention is never withdrawn. Destinies were being joined… Moses expected the scouts to note the segullah singularity of the land, to perceive its worthiness in terms of Abraham’s covenant with God.
 
Sadly, the meraglim represented the polar opposite of Moshe’s perspective:

They explored the area from the desert of Zin to Rehob, leading to Hamath, but they viewed the land as one would appraise property. Their report was that of spies, not that of scouts; they balanced debits against credits and declared the entire enterprise hopeless. With grandeur looking down on them, all they could see was the mundane. (Reflections of the Rav: Lessons in Jewish Thought, Vol. I, Rabbi Abraham R. Besdin ed., pages 122-123, underlining my own)
 
As I write these words, many among us are, once again, challenged in their perception of Medinat Yisrael. A great number of Jews today believe that Israel is just another country, a political entity and nothing more. In my view, this is a continuation of the meraglim mentality that, according to Chazal, is inextricably connected to Tisha b’Av, the destruction of the two Holy Temples, and the seemingly never-ending period of Galut. In contrast, I believe the proper response to the miracle of Medinat Yisrael can be found in the stirring words of Yehoshua and Kalev, the two true scouts in the midst of the meraglim, who were the sole individuals to recognize the segullah nature of the Land: “They spoke to the entire congregation of the children of Israel, saying, ‘The land we passed through to scout is an exceedingly good land. If Hashem desires us, He will bring us to this land and give it to us, a land flowing with milk and honey.’” (14:7-8) 
 
May the time come soon, and in our day, when, like Yehoshua and Kalev, our entire people will recognize the segullah qualities of Eretz Yisrael; and may we be zocheh to behold the complete fulfillment of kibbutz galuyot: “Sound the great shofar of our freedom, raise the banner to gather our exiles and gather us together from the four corners of the earth. Blessed are You, Hashem, Who gathers in the dispersed of His people Israel.” (Translation, The Complete ArtScroll Siddur) V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Our parasha contains Hashem’s command to Moshe to create the first Sanhedrin (Supreme Court of Jewish Law), to assist him in his juridic responsibilities:

Then Hashem said to Moshe, “Assemble for Me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom you know to be the people’s elders and officers, and you shall take them to the Tent of Meeting, and they shall stand there with You. I will come down and speak with you there, and I will increase the spirit that is upon you and bestow it upon them. Then they will bear the burden of the people with you so that you need not bear it alone.” (Sefer Bamidbar 11:16-17, this and all Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)
 
Shortly thereafter, Moshe fulfilled Hashem’s charge: “Moshe went out and told the people what Hashem had said, and he assembled seventy men of the elders of the people and stood them around the Tent.” (11:24)  Hashem, in turn, conferred Moshe’s additional spirit upon them: “Hashem descended in a cloud and spoke to him [Moshe], and He increased some of the spirit (haruach) that was on him and bestowed it on the seventy elders…” (1:25)  This ruach hakodesh immediately enabled them to prophesy: “And when the spirit rested upon them [the 70 elders], they prophesied, but they did not continue.”
 
At this juncture we are met with Eldad and Medad, whose story diverges from the seventy men of the elders of the people: “Now two men remained in the camp; the name of one was Eldad and the name of the second was Medad, and the spirit rested upon them. They were among those written, but they did not go out to the Tent, but prophesied in the camp.” (11:26)  In his Commentary on the Torah, Rashi (1040-1105) interpreted the cryptic phrase, “they were among those written,” as “among those chosen for the Sanhedrin.” As such, instead of joining their peers “around the Tent” and vying for a seat in the Sanhedrin, Eldad and Medad remained in the camp, received ruach hakodesh, and began to prophesy.
 
Why did Eldad and Medad elect to remain in the camp? This question is addressed by Rabbi Shimon in Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 17a:

... at the time the Holy One blessed be He said to Moshe, “assemble for Me seventy men of the elders of Israel,” Eldad and Medad said: “We are not fitting for this greatness.” The Holy One blessed be He then said: “Since you have rendered yourselves small [that is, humbled yourselves], I will add greatness to your greatness.” And what greatness did he add to them? All the other prophets [that is, the seventy men of the elders of the people] prophesied and then ceased so doing, they, however, prophesied, continued, and did not stop. (Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 17a, translation and brackets my own)
 
According to Rabbi Shimon, Eldad and Medad did not believe they were worthy of being members of the Sanhedrin; accordingly, Hashem recognized their exceptional anavah (humility) and, like Moshe Rabbeinu, rewarded them with the gift of ongoing prophecy. While the Torah is silent regarding the substance of their prophecy, our Gemara presents three possible answers, in this order:

• Moshe will die and Yehoshua will bring the Jewish people to the Land of Israel. (Anonymous opinion)
• Abba Chanin said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer that they prophesied about the great piles of s’lav (quail) that would soon be found in and around the camp.
• Rav Nachman said: “They were prophesying about the matter of Gog and Magog.” (Sefer Zechariah 14:1-21)

 
These approaches differ both in timeframe and content. Abba Chanin in the name of Rabbi Eliezer focused on the immediate future, wherein the s’lav would be dumped before the lusting people and eventuate in a “makka rabah m’ode—very mighty blow” as punishment for their unfettered hedonism. (11:33)  The anonymous opinion maintained Eldad and Medad prophesied that Yehoshua, rather than Moshe, would lead the people into Eretz Yisrael. In stark contrast to these views, Rav Nachman suggested that Eldad and Medad did not speak about the foreseeable future at all but, instead, gave voice to the violent war and universal upheavals that would precede the coming of Mashiach. On the aggadic level, this plurality of interpretations is an outstanding example of “eilu v’eilu divrei Elokim chayim—these and those are the words of the living G-d,” one of the essential principles of Rabbinic analysis that contributes to the dynamic nature of the Torah.
 
Each of these prophecies reflect the extraordinary level of ruach hakodesh bestowed upon Eldad and Medad. As noted earlier, their divine gift was a spiritual middah k’neged middah (quid pro quo) that resulted from their thoroughgoing humility. As such, they were true students of Moshe Rabbeinu, who is described in our parasha as the master of anavah: “Now this man Moshe was exceedingly humble (anav m’ode), more so than any person on the face of the earth.” (12:3)  I believe this anavah is the key to understanding the radically different ways Moshe and Yehoshua reacted to Eldad’s and Medad’s prophesying:

The lad ran and told Moshe, saying, “Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp!” Yehoshua the son of Nun, Moshe’s servant from his youth, answered and said, “Moshe, my master, imprison them!” Moshe said to him, “Are you jealous for my sake? If only all of Hashem’s people were prophets, and Hashem would bestow His spirit upon them!” (11:27-29 with my emendations)
 
The narrative of Eldad and Medad teaches a crucial lesson: Authentic anavah leads to genuine greatness. This idea was given powerful voice by the Ramban (1194-1270) when he declared humility the most valuable middah (behavioral trait) one can cultivate: “When you consistently act with the middah of anavah… the spirit and divine illumination of the Shechinah will rest upon you, and you will [merit] the World to Come.” (Iggeret HaRamban, translation my own)  V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Our parasha concludes with the following pasuk:

When Moshe came into the Ohel Moed to speak with Him (l’dabare eto) he would hear the Voice (HaKol) speaking to him from between the two cherubs (me’bain shnai HaK’ruvim) on the ark cover over the Ark of Testimony; He [Hashem] thus spoke to him (vayidabare aluv). (Sefer Bamidbar 7:89, translation, The Living Torah, Rav Aryeh Kaplan zatzal, with my emendations)
 
This verse contains several exegetical challenges: What does the phrase l’dabare eto connote? Why does the Torah write “HaKol--the Voice,” with the definite article, “the?” Why did Hashem speak to Moshe, “me’bain shnai HaK’ruvim,” rather than from a different part of the Ohel Moed? Then, too, what is added by the expression, “vayidabare aluv,” since the beginning of the verse makes it quite clear that it refers to Moshe?
 
Our first question is answered by the Netziv zatzal (Rav Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin, 1816-1893) in his Torah commentary, HaEmek Davar. (Sefer Bamidbar 7:89, s.v. u’v’vo Moshe) He maintained that the expression, “eto,” implies “the two of them [Hashem and Moshe] spoke [directly] to one another.” Moreover, their dialogue focused on “Torah She’Ba’al Peh (Oral Law), wherein Moshe asked [his questions] of the Holy One blessed be He and He responded.” Alternately, the Netziv suggests eto could mean, “Moshe learned through the divine illumination of the holy spirit that went forth from Heaven (b’shefa Ruach HaKodesh min HaShamayim). Both of these interpretations lead the Netziv to suggest, “Moshe’s came to the Ohel Moed on a daily basis[to learn] Torah She’Ba’al Peh [from the Almighty], as it is both boundless and endless.” (Translations my own)  This analysis coincides with the Netziv’s consistent emphasis upon the exceptional import of Torah She’Ba’al Peh.
 
Answers to our second question, “Why does the Torah write “HaKol--the Voice?” were offered by Rashi (1040-1105) and the Sforno (c. 1450-c.1550) in their Torah commentaries on our verse. Rashi writes that “one might have thought that it was a quiet voice; the text, however, states, ‘HaKol,’ the same Voice with which He spoke to him [Moshe] at Sinai,” that Dovid HaMelech describes as powerful and magnificent. (Sefer Tehillim 29:4)  The Sforno also interprets this term as referring to a highly specific voice. He maintains that it was “the very same Voice that he [Moshe] heard prior to the [grievous] actions associated with the Eigel (Golden Calf).” He notes, as well, that this voice was truly unique in the sense that, “it was not present in the first Beit HaMikdash, and all the more so, in the second Beit HaMikdash, as in these cases, a prophet could not go to the Mikdash to prophesize and immediately receive a prophetic vision.” (Translations my own)  While Rashi and the Sforno identify “the Voice” in different ways, both analyses stem from the singularity of Moshe’s prophecy, which was different in kind and degree from that of all other nevi’im.
 
In his Torah commentary, Bat Ayin, the Avritcher Rebbe zatzal (Rav Avraham Dov Baer of Ovruch, Ukraine, d. 1840) directly addresses the question, “Why did Hashem speak to Moshe, “me’bain shnai HaK’ruvim,” rather than from a different part of the Ohel Moed?”

This entire matter is based upon the notion that the indwelling of the Shechinah takes place solely with broken-hearted and people of crushed spirit, as the text states: “Hashem is close to the broken-hearted and He will save the crushed of spirit.” (Sefer Tehillim 34:19) … And this was the level that Moshe Rabbeinu, aluv hashalom, achieved. As such, he merited to receive the Torah, and it is called after his name, as the text says: “Remember the Torah of Moshe My servant.” (Sefer Malachi 3:22)  [Why was this so?] — because he achieved the ultimate level of humility. As the text states: “And the man, Moshe, was exceedingly humble, more so than any other person on the face of the planet.” (Sefer Bamidbar 12:3) … And all our words are hinted at in the text when it states, “…he would hear the Voice (HaKol) speaking to him from between the two cherubs on the ark cover over the Ark of Testimony.” For Moshe was like the shnai K’ruvim [that had faces like young children]… who represented flawless humility. [Therefore, Hashem’s Voice spoke to him from between the K’ruvim whom he emulated on the human level.] (Parashat Behalotecha, s.v. vayitba’er zot, translation and brackets my own)
 
Our final question, “What is added by the expression, ‘vayidabare aluv,’ since the beginning of the verse makes it quite clear that it refers to Moshe?” is explained by Rashi as, “l’ma’ate et Aharon min hadibrot — to exclude Aharon from these words.” This statement is a brief synopsis of a much longer midrashic passage found in Midrash Sifrei Bamidbar 58, wherein Rabbi Yehudah ben Baterah cites “thirteen exclusionary statements [in the Torah] that prevented Aharon from participating in many of the prophetic declarations from Hashem,” one of which is “vayidabare aluv.” In my estimation, Moshe, alone, was vouchsafed these prophecies because of his unequaled status, as illuminated in next week’s parasha:

Hashem descended in a pillar of cloud and stood at the entrance of the Tent. He called to Aharon and Miriam, and they both went out. He said, “Please listen to My words. If there be prophets among you, [I] Hashem will make Myself known to him in a vision; I will speak to him in a dream. Not so is My servant, Moshe; he is faithful throughout My house. With him I speak mouth to mouth; in a vision and not in riddles, and he beholds the image of Hashem. (Sefer Bamidbar 12:5-8, translation, The Judaica Press complete Tanach with my emendations)
 
On measure, our pasuk bespeaks the true greatness of Moshe Rabbeinu. According to the Netziv, Moshe is Hashem’s dialogical partner in the exploration and understanding of Torah She’Ba’al Peh. For Rashi and the Sforno, he is the sole human being in the post-Har Sinai world capable and worthy of hearing the direct Voice of the Almighty. As we have seen, “With him I [Hashem] speak mouth to mouth; in a vision and not in riddles, and he beholds the image of Hashem.” Then, too, for the Avritcher Rebbe, Moshe emerges as the one person in history with whom Hashem’s Shechinah could always dwell, due to his boundless humility. Little wonder, then, that in the concluding verses of Sefer Nevi’im, Malachi the Prophet urges, “Remember the Torah of Moshe My servant--Zichru Torat Moshe avdi.”
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, and the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
One of the most famous sources in all Rabbinic literature that discusses the relationship between G-d, man, Torah, and truth is found in Talmud Bavli, Baba Metziah 59b:

On that day Rabbi Eliezer brought forward every imaginable argument, but they did not accept them. Said he to them: “If the halacha agrees with me, let this carob-tree prove it!” Thereupon the carob-tree was torn a hundred cubits out of its place... “No proof can be brought from a carob-tree,” they retorted. Again, he said to them: “If the halacha agrees with me, let the stream of water prove it!” Whereupon the stream of water flowed backward. “No proof can be brought from a stream of water,” they rejoined. Again, he urged: “If the halacha agrees with me, let the walls of the schoolhouse prove it,” whereupon the walls inclined to fall. But Rabbi Yehoshua rebuked them, saying: “When scholars are engaged in a halachic dispute, what have you to interfere?” ... Again, he [Rabbi Eliezer] said to them: “If the halacha agrees with me, let it be proved from Heaven!” Whereupon a Heavenly Voice (bat kol) cried out: “Why do you dispute with Rabbi Eliezer, seeing that in all matters the halacha agrees with him!” But Rabbi Yehoshua arose and exclaimed: “Lo va’shamayim he—it is not in Heaven!” (Sefer Devarim 30:12, Talmud translation, The Soncino Talmud with my emendations)
 
Rabbi Yeshoshua’s creative use of the pasuk, “lo va’shamayim he,” creates a question that begs to be answered: “What exactly does he mean when he cites this verse in the context of our passage?” We are fortunate that Rabbi Yeremiah was focused on this very same issue in the continuation of our Gemara:

What did he mean by this? Said Rabbi Yeremiah: “That the Torah had already been given at Mount Sinai; we pay no attention to a Heavenly Voice, because You have long since written in the Torah at Mount Sinai (Sefer Shemot 23:2), ‘After the majority must one incline.’”
 
The Talmud’s words are extraordinary, to say the least. They confirm that imperfect human reason, and the principle of majority rule, are the determinants in any halachic dispute—even when one of the disputants is the Voice of Heaven!
 
HaRav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik zatzal (1820-1892), known as “the Beit HaLevi,” after the name of his works by this title, builds upon our Talmudic passage when he explains the Torah’s role in our lives. (Beit HaLevi, Sefer Shemot 19:5) He asserts that the Torah was given to the Jewish people in its ideal heavenly form (Torah She’Bichtav), in conjunction with the obligation to interpret it and arrive at practical solutions to the problems of daily living (halacha l’ma’aseh). He further notes that, since our Sages were tasked with the explication and application of the Torah She’Ba’al Peh, these conclusions are our truth. Moreover, based upon Rabbi Yehoshua’s utilization of the verse, “lo va’shamayim he,” the Beit HaLevi concludes that earthly truth can only be apprehended through intense Torah study and analysis, since, lo nitnah haTorah l'malachei hashareit —the Torah was not given to the Ministering Angels—but rather, to the Jewish people.
 
Rabbi Asher Weiss shlita, in his introduction to Sheilot u’Teshuvot Minchat Asher, volume I, expands upon the Beit HaLevi’s analysis. In a thought-provoking essay entitled, “Din Emet l’Amito” (“True Law According to its Truth”), Rav Asher examines the essence of Torah and Jewish Law:

It appears that we can explain the following: When the Holy One blessed be He gave the Torah to the Jewish people, He did not give them wisdom alone. Instead, He gave them the ability and strength to rule over the Torah (“lishlot ba’Torah”) and render an absolute decision even if this decision, so to speak, is against the opinion of Hashem (“da’at elyon”). For this is the path of the Torah and the nature of Halacha: The Torah Sages are those to whom the Torah was passed down to reveal its mysteries, to decrypt its underlying principles, to decide the cases in doubtful matters and to render conclusive judgments regarding its laws. Their decision, in consonance with the wisdom of the Torah that man’s Creator gave to them, are the essence of the Torah itself. (Translation and bolding my own)
 
In very few words, Rav Asher elucidates the two-fold nature of the Sinaitic Revelation. In addition to the revealed wisdom of the Torah, Chazal were given permission, through Torah She’Ba’al Peh, “to rule over the Torah and render an absolute decision even if this decision, so to speak, is against the opinion of Hashem.” This idea goes a long way in helping us understand the role of Chazal in the overall Torah enterprise, namely, “… to decrypt its [the Torah’s] underlying principles, to decide the cases in doubtful matters and to render conclusive judgments regarding its laws.” Rav Asher continues his analysis by noting that when the earthly-accessible Torat emet arrived at by our Sages’ determination of the halacha is in harmony with the ultimate truth of Shamayim, both the Heavens and earth rejoice as one. As Dovid HaMelech declared so long ago: “The heavens will rejoice, and the earth will exult…” (Sefer Tehillim 96:11)
 
Shabbat Shalom and Chag Sameach
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

Parashat Bechuchotai 5782, 2022:
 
I Will Walk Among You and Be Your G-d
 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, and the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Our parasha is best known for the 31 pasukim that comprise the Tochacha (Admonition or Reproof, Sefer Vayikra 26:14-41, and 43-46). Although these frightening verses far overshadow the preceding Brachot section (26:3-13), to the extent that the blessings are nearly eclipsed, these very same brachot have been a powerful force in the creation of the Jewish faith structure. This idea is given poignant voice in the early midrashic work, Pesikta d’Rav Kahana (19):

In our time, the nations of the world ceaselessly deride the Jewish people and say to them: “For how long will you be murdered for your G-d, give up your very souls for Him and be killed for Him? How much misery He brings upon you, how mush embarrassment He brings upon you, how much anguish He brings upon you! Come and join us and we will make you commanders, town governors and treasurers!” (Midrash translations and brackets my own)
 
[And how do the Jewish people respond?] And the Jews enter their synagogues and houses of study and take a Sefer Torah and read therein [from the Brachot]: “I will walk among you and be your G-d,” (26:12) “and I will make you fruitful and increase you, and I will set up My covenant with you.” (26:9), and they are comforted. (All Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach) 
 
And when the time of ultimate redemption arrives, the Holy One blessed be He will say to the Jewish people, “I am amazed! How have you waited for Me for all these years?” And they will respond before the Holy One blessed be He: “Master of the Universe! Were it not for the Sefer Torah You have written for us, the nations of the world would already have destroyed our relationship with You! As the text writes: “This I reply to my heart; therefore, I have hope.” (Megillat Eichah 3:21) And so, too, did Dovid [HaMelech] declare: “Were not Your Torah my delight, then I would have perished in my affliction.” (Sefer Tehillim 119:92)
 
This midrash is comprised of three distinct sections: The mockery of the nations of the world regarding our relationship to the Almighty and their “offer” to abandon Him, our Torah-centric response to their abuse, and the dialogue that will b’zman karov (one day soon) take place between Hashem and our storied nation. I believe it is the middle portion that is of singular import and, in particular, the verse, “I will walk(v’hithalachti) among you and be your G-d, and you will be My people.”
 
In my view, one of the most cogent analyses of this verse is offered by the Sforno (Rabbi Ovadiah ben Ya’akov, c. 1475-c. 1550) in his examination of the term, mithalech, the nounal form of v’hithalachti:

The term, “mithalech,” connotes one who walks to multiple locations rather than to one place alone. Therefore, it as if [Hashem] said: “I will walk among you, and my divine illumination will not flow to one place alone as it did in the Mishkan and in the Beit HaMikdash.” As the text states: “And they shall make Me a sanctuary and I will dwell in their midst.” (Sefer Shemot 25:8)  That is, in this manner and in this place alone I will dwell among you… Instead, I will walk among you and you will see My glory in every place where there will be the righteous ones of the generation, for they are “the holy place of the dwellings of the Most High.” (Sefer Tehillim 46:5)  This is where His ultimate intention (kavanah) is realized…
 
The Sforno’s explanation of mithalech is reminiscent of a pasuk that appears in Parashat Bereishit: “And they [Adam and Chava] heard the voice of Hashem Elokim going— mithalech—in the garden toward the direction of the sun and the man and his wife hid from before Hashem Elokim in the midst of the trees of the garden.” (3:8)  The fact that Adam and Chava immediately recognized “the voice of Hashem” indicates that they were accustomed to hearing it prior to having eaten from the Pri Eitz HaDa’at (Tree of Knowledge). In other words, in their pre-sin state, when they had a perfect relationship with the Almighty, He was accessible to them 24/7. After their sin, however, this state of bliss would no longer be.
 
In my estimation, the Sforno is teaching us a very profound lesson, namely, in the time of the Mashiach, when our pasuk, “I will walk (v’hithalachti) among you and be your G-d, and you will be My people” is finally realized, we will return to the kind of relationship that obtained between Hashem and Adam and Chava: His divine presence will be palpable in “every place where there will be the righteous ones of the generation.” With the Almighty’s help and our fervent desire, may this time come soon and in our days. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, and the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The prohibition of charging a fellow indigent Jew interest on a loan is one of the many subjects addressed in our parasha:

If your brother becomes destitute and his hand falters beside you, you shall support him [whether] a convert or a resident, so that he can live with you (v’chai imach). You shall not take from him interest (neshech) or increase, and you shall fear your G-d, and let your brother live with you (v’chai achicha imach). You shall not give him your money with interest (neshech), nor shall you give your food with increase. (Sefer Vayikra 25:35-37, this and all Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)
 
While the topic of neshech is analyzed and expanded upon throughout Rabbinic thought, on the peshat-level, our pasukim are quite clear: one may not charge interest on a loan to a fellow Jew in order for “your brother [to] live with you” without additional financial stress. An entirely different approach, however, to the words, “v’chai achicha imach,” are offered by Talmud Bavli, Baba Metzia 62a:

The Gemara asks: And Rabbi Yoḥanan, what does he do with this verse: “And your brother shall live with you”? The Gemara answers: He requires the verse for that which is taught in a baraita: If two people were walking on a desolate path and there was a jug [kiton] of water in the possession of one of them, and the situation was such that if both drink from the jug, both will die, as there is not enough water, but if only one of them drinks, he will reach a settled area, there is a dispute as to the halakha. Ben Petora taught: It is preferable that both of them drink and die and let neither one of them see the death of the other. This was the accepted opinion until Rabbi Akiva came and taught that the verse states: “And your brother shall live with you,” indicating that your life takes precedence over the life of the other. (The William Davidson Talmud, translation, Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz zatzal)
 
This baraita discusses a scenario wherein one of two individuals traveling together owns a very limited supply of water. Ben Petora opines that the water must be shared so that one of them does not witness the other’s death. As such, he interprets, “in order that your brother should live--v’chai achicha,” in a literal manner and maintains that the water should be shared at all costs. In stark contrast, Rabbi Akiba stresses the importance of the very end of our verse “with you--imach.” In his view, while you should do everything in your power to enable your fellow Jew to live, nonetheless, “chayecha kodmim l’chayeh chaveircha—your life takes precedence over your fellow Jew’s life” when you are the sole owner of the limited resource. It should be noted that the Rif (Rabbeinu Yitzhak Alfasi, 1013-1103), and the Rosh (Rabbi Asher ben Yechiel, 1250-1328), quote this baraita verbatim in their respective works, indicating that they concur with Rabbi Akiba’s opinion as a matter of actual halachic practice.
 
As we have seen, our baraita focuses upon a case of first party possession of a scarce resource. According to Rabbi Akiba, the owner is entitled to fully exercise his rights of possession and drink the water, even though this will result in the death of his companion. At first glance, this p’sak din seems to contradict another highly celebrated position of this mishnaic period sage: “Rabbi Akiva stated: ‘V’ahavta l’reicha kamocha, zeh klal gadol baTorah—And you should love your neighbor as you love yourself, this is the overarching principle of the Torah.’” (Talmud Yerushalmi, Nedarim 9:4)  The question is clear: How can Rabbi Akiva simultaneously maintain, “chayecha kodmim l’chayeh chaveircha,” and “v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha, zeh klal gadol baTorah?” That is, if you maintain the first position, the second seems impossible to fulfill.
 
We are fortunate that the universally recognized gadol of his generation, Rav Moshe Sofer zatzal (Chatam Sofer, 1762-1839) addresses this exact question:

If it is the case that “chayecha kodmim l’chayeh chaveircha,” how is it possible to fulfill “v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha?” [When Rabbi Akiva stated,] “chayecha kodmim l’chayeh chaveircha,” however, this was said regarding matters that pertain to this world (b’inyanei olam hazeh), but in regard to those things that refer to Eternal Life (b’chayeh hanitzchi’yi), that is Torah study, one is obligated to teach others—even if he will diminish his own Torah study—nonetheless, he is obligated to learn with others. Therefore, Rabbi Akiva said: “zeh klal gadol baTorah,” that is, regarding Torah study, it is the overarching principle to love your fellow Jew as you love yourself… (Torat Moshe, Parashat Kedoshim, s.v. v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha, translation, brackets and underlining my own)
 
In many ways, this analysis is an intellectual tour de force. The Chatam Sofer interprets the phrase, “zeh klal gadol baTorah,” in such a singular fashion that he was able to explain this ruling of Rabbi Akiva’s as referring specifically to Torah study, rather than as a universal Torah principle. In so doing, he deftly removes any seeming contradictions in Rabbi Akiva’s thought and reveals to us that “chayecha kodmim l’chayeh chaveircha” pertains to matters of this world, whereas “v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha zeh klal gadol baTorah” refers solely to teaching Torah to others.
 
It is crucial to note that the Chatam Sofer’s unique interpretation of Rabbi Akiva’s axiom does not refer to his view regarding the mitzvah of “v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha” per se. In this regard, I am convinced he embraced the famous words of the Rambam (Maimonides, 1135-1240):

It is a positive commandment of Rabbinic origin to visit the sick, comfort mourners, to prepare for a funeral, prepare a bride, accompany guests, attend to all the needs of a burial, carry a corpse on one's shoulders, walk before the bier, mourn, dig a grave, and bury the dead, and also to bring joy to a bride and groom and help them in all their needs. These are deeds of kindness that one carries out with his person that have no limit (gemilut chasadim sh’b’gufo sh’ain lahem shiur). Although all these mitzvot are of Rabbinic origin, they are included in the Scriptural commandment “v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha. That charge implies that whatever you would like other people to do for you, you should do for your comrade in the Torah and mitzvot. (Sefer Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Avel 14:1, translation, Rav Eliyahu Touger)
 
With Hashem’s help and our fervent desire, may we ever participate in acts of gemilut chasadim sh’b’gufo sh’ain lahem shiur, and may we thereby bring shalom to our world. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav