DEVARIM_DEUTERONOMIO I:1-III:22

El quinto libro del Pentateuco, el Jumash, recoge los discursos y admoniciones de Moshé al colectivo. Dios había dictaminado que este líder no conduciría al pueblo en la conquista de la Tierra Prometida y Moshé sabía que sus días estaban contados. Era impostergable una evaluación sobria de su actuación y un examen sincero del comportamiento del pueblo hebreo durante los años de su travesía por el desierto. Un período que destaca las dificultades de nuestros antepasados para aceptar el yugo de la ley, porque no habían tenido que regir su actuación en Egipto por ningún imperativo moral. Tendrían que reconocer que sólo con el cumplimiento de un conjunto de reglas, las Mitsvot, podrían convivir en armonía, formar una sociedad que eventualmente se convirtiera en un pueblo soberano en una tierra propia.

Los espías que fueron enviados a examinar si la Tierra Prometida era apropiada para el desarrollo del pueblo y evaluarla posibilidad de su conquista regresaron con un informe desalentador, porque observaron que sus habitantes eran gigantescos y sus ciudades estaban fortificadas. ¿Porqué no confiaron en el Dios que los había redimido de la esclavitud egipcia, que partió las aguas del mar para que pudieran salvarse de las carrozas egipcias que los perseguían? 

En realidad, los exploradores que informaron negativamente sobre la Tierra Prometida no negaron las proezas que Dios había realizado en el pasado. Pero estaban conscientes de que la conquista tendría que ser efectuada por el esfuerzo del pueblo, que debería demostrar que sabría administrar la soberanía que asumiría con el establecimiento de un Estado independiente. Dios sería un observador en esta etapa. Mientras que en la zaga egipcia la Biblia reza HaShem yilajem lajem veatem tajarishún, “Dios batallará por ustedes y ustedes deben permanecer en silencio”, esta vez el pueblo tendría que librar las batallas mientras Dios observaba y evaluaba el comportamiento de Israel.

Hacemos un paréntesis para señalar que estos capítulos de Devarim se leen generalmente en el Shabat que precede a Tishá BeAv, fecha conmemorativa de la destrucción de los 2 Templos de Jerusalén. Varios comentaristas formulan la interrogante de si durante la existencia del segundo Beit HaMikdash se ayunaba en Tishá BeAv. La pregunta es pertinente, porque si la fecha recuerda la destrucción, la reconstrucción del Templo debía haber sido un motivo suficiente para el regocijo. Al contrario, Tishá BeAv debía haberse convertido en una fecha festiva, porque se había corregido la tragedia perpetrada por los babilonios que destruyeron el primer Beit HaMikdash. 

Tal vez había razones para continuar con el ayuno, porque el segundo Beit HaMikdash nunca igualó la gloria del primer Templo. La Tablas de la Ley habían desaparecido al igual que algunos otros enseres del culto religioso. Pero hay una razón adicional de mayor significación. La destrucción del primer Beit HaMikdash fue una demostración de que la Casa de Dios no ofrecía protección permanente: no era indestructible. Aparentemente, el factor decisivo era el comportamiento humano, el cumplimiento de las Mitsvot, y no una edificación. 

“¿De qué sirven sus ofrendas cuando la conducta humana no se rige por los instructivos contenidos en la Torá?”, es la reflexión divina de acuerdo con las palabras del profeta. La destrucción del primer Beit HaMikdash se produjo debido a la presencia de la idolatría en el seno del pueblo. El segundo Beit HaMikdash fue destruido por la enemistad gratuita que existió en la sociedad judía. El ayuno de Tishá BeAv recuerda la destrucción física de la Casa de Dios pero, más que ello, testimonia el incumplimiento de las ordenanzas, la deslealtad con Dios y la insinceridad con el prójimo.

La reconstrucción del tercer Beit HaMikdash sólo puede producirse por medio de un acto excepcional que depende de la intervención Divina. Pero para que se realice el milagro, es menester que el hombre corrija su comportamiento, que se reconcilie con la Mitsvá, el amor por el prójimo que excluye la enemistad y el odio, invitando al respeto mutuo ya la convivencia armónica.

MITSVÁ: ORDENANZA DE LA TORÁ EN ESTA PARASHÁ

CONTIENE 2 PROHIBICIONES

1. Deuteronomio 1:17 No designar un juez que no es estudioso de la Torá, aunque sea un erudito en otras materias
2. Deuteronomio 1:17 El juez no debe temer a un malvado durante un juicio

oshe

DEVARIM_DEUTERONOMY I:1-III:22

The fifth book of the Pentateuch, the Chumash, collects Moshe’s speeches and admonitions to the collective. God had ruled that this leader would not lead the people in conquering the Promised Land, and Moshe knew his days were numbered. A sober evaluation of his performance and a sincere examination of the behavior of the Hebrew people during the years of their journey through the desert could not be postponed. It is A period that highlights our ancestors’ difficulties in accepting the yoke of the Law because they did not govern their actions in Egypt by any moral imperative. They would have to recognize that only by complying with one set of rules, the Mitsvot, could they live together in harmony, forming a society that would eventually become a sovereign people on their own land.

The spies sent to examine whether the Promised Land was suitable for the development of the people and to evaluate the possibility of its conquest returned with a discouraging report. They observed that its inhabitants were gigantic, and its cities were fortified. Why didn’t they trust in the God who had redeemed them from Egyptian slavery, who parted the waters of the sea so they could be saved from the Egyptian chariots that persecuted them?

The explorers who reported negatively on the Promised Land did not deny the feats God had performed in the past. But they were aware that the conquest would have to be accomplished by the efforts of the people, who would have to demonstrate that they knew how to administer the sovereignty by establishing an independent State. God would be an observer at this stage. While in the Egyptian years, the Bible reads HaShem yilachem lachem veatem tacharishun, “God will fight for you, and you must remain silent” This time, the people would have themselves fight the battles. At the same time, God observed and evaluated Israel’s behavior.

We make a parenthesis to point out that these chapters of Devarim are usually read on the Shabbat that precedes Tisha B’Av, the commemorative date of the destruction of the 2 Temples of Jerusalem. Several commentators ask the question of whether, during the existence of the second Beit HaMikdash, fasting was done on Tisha B’Av. The question is pertinent because if the date recalls the destruction, the rebuilding of the Temple must have been a sufficient reason for rejoicing. On the contrary, Tisha B’Av should have become a holiday because the tragedy perpetrated by the Babylonians who destroyed the first Beit HaMikdash had been corrected. 

Perhaps there were reasons to continue fasting because the second Beit HaMikdash never equaled the glory of the first Temple. The Tablets of the Law had disappeared, as well as some other items of religious worship. But there is an additional reason of greater significance. The destruction of the first Beit HaMikdash demonstrated that the House of God offered no permanent protection: it was not indestructible. The decisive factor was human behavior, the fulfillment of the Mitsvot, and not an edification. 

“What good are your offerings when the instructions in the Torah do not govern human conduct?” is the divine reflection according to the prophet’s words. The destruction of the first Beit HaMikdash occurred due to idolatry among the people. The gratuitous enmity in Jewish society destroyed the second Beit HaMikdash. The fast of Tisha B’Av recalls the physical destruction of the House of God. More than that, it testifies to the non-observance of ordinances, disloyalty to God, and insincerity to one’s neighbor.

The reconstruction of the third Beit HaMikdash can only occur through an exceptional act that depends on Divine intervention. But for the miracle to be realized, man must correct his behavior to be reconciled with the Mitsvah, love for one’s neighbor that excludes enmity and hatred, inviting mutual respect and harmonious coexistence.

MITZVAH: ORDINANCE OF THE TORAH IN THIS PARSHA

CONTAINS 2 PROHIBITIONS

1. Deuteronomy 1:17 Do not appoint a judge who is not a Torah scholar, even if he is a scholar in other matters.
2. Deuteronomy 1:17 The judge should not fear a wicked during a trial.

MATOT_NÚMEROS XXX:2-XXXII:42 – MAS’EI_NÚMEROS XXXIII:1-XXXVI:13

Moshé había enfrentado numerosas rebeliones durante sus 40 años de liderazgo. El pueblo se había quejado por la falta de comida, agua y carne. En una ocasión se escuchó el murmullo del descontento, sin que se alegara alguna razón específica para ello. Era una reacción a la monotonía del desierto, por un lado, y por otro lado, estaban los peligros que acechaban a diario. 

Obligados a enfrentar los reinos que no les permitieron el paso a través de sus tierras, también tuvieron que responder al reto de Bileam, el profeta gentil que, de acuerdo con el consejo que de los ancianos de Midyán, había sido contratado por Balak, rey de Moav. Según el comentario de Rashí, los dos pueblos eran adversarios, pero al hallarse ante un enemigo común, unieron esfuerzos para vencer el reto que significó la presencia del pueblo hebreo en la región.

Moshé respondió con energía y decisión para enfrentar al enemigo. Cuando la falta se debía a la debilidad espiritual del pueblo hebreo, su respuesta se traducía en una admonición y una advertencia, al mismo tiempo que defendía la integridad física del pueblo ante Dios para no permitir su destrucción por causa de la desobediencia. Moshé, el líder que supuestamente era muy estricto y severo, siempre fue fiel a su pueblo de manera afectiva y emocional. 

En los capítulos de nuestra lectura, Moshé tiene que enfrentar con una situación novedosa. Las tribus de Reuvén y Gad, a las cuales se unió la mitad de la tribu de Menashé, decidieron permanecer en la orilla oriental del Yardén para establecer allí su campamento de residencia. Construyeron establos para sus animales y casas para sus mujeres e hijos. Afirmaron que estaban dispuestos a acompañar a sus hermanos en la conquista de las tierras ubicadas en la otra orilla del Yardén, para volver a reunirse con sus familias en el lado oriental del río.

Los exegetas toman nota del hecho de que construyeron primero los establos para los animales, anteponiendo de esta manera la seguridad económica al bienestar familiar. Obviamente, fueron cautivados por aquellas tierras que prometían un futuro material de abundancia, y su primera consideración fue canjear un desierto improductivo por un área donde visualizaron la construcción de un entorno estable y prometedor.

No estamos frente a una rebelión contra el mensaje Divino que había sido pronunciado en el monte Sinaí. Las tribus declaran su disposición de regir sus vidas de acuerdo con el pacto que los patriarcas habían establecido con Dios y, en conformidad con la Torá que había sido transmitida y enseñada por Moshé. Se trata de una secesión de carácter nacional, porque desean establecer un hogar aparte de las demás tribus. 

El lazo histórico de una experiencia común de esclavitud y sufrimiento sería suplantado por el interés tribal y las necesidades personales. Moshé no estuvo de acuerdo. Instintivamente, sabía que la conducta de aquellas tribus era reprochable, pero no se había violado ninguna ley. En una sociedad que se conduce de acuerdo con un conjunto de reglas (que en el caso del judaísmo está contenido en la Torá), la forma como se juzga un comportamiento –que, no obstante, que permanece dentro del marco de la legalidad– es una señal de falta de lealtad con el destino del pueblo entero.

En siglos posteriores, las disidencias comenzaron por motivos religiosos, pero en el fondo siempre había un elemento de carácter nacional: la lucha por el poder de decisión. La rebelión de Kóraj que ostensiblemente se basó en un reto a los fallos religiosos de Moshé y Aharón, tenía como objetivo real el cuestionamiento de su liderazgo. Kóraj sentía que tenía igual derecho a una de las coronas del mando, que, en su opinión, habían usurpado 2 hermanos: Moshé y Aharón.

La decisión de estas tribus amenazaba con debilitar al colectivo, por el rompimiento de la unidad que sería inmediatamente percibido por los habitantes de la región. Esta escisión podía convertirse en un precedente peligroso. Efectivamente, después de la muerte del rey Shelomó, el reino fue dividido y, por ende, debilitado, para abrir un compás que facilitaría su eventual destrucción, primero por los asirios-babilonios y luego por los romanos. Siglos más tarde, el pueblo fue dividido por el movimiento reformista, que asumió su postura con argumentos teológicos. Pero no se puede escapar del hecho que esta división obedeció a otros intereses de carácter social y económico.

Sin embargo, la situación presente es diferente debido al establecimiento del moderno Estado de Israel, que ofrece un punto de referencia e intersección de propósitos que no había existido por milenios y que apunta a un renovado vigor, no obstante, las diferencias que siempre han caracterizado al pueblo judío como una manifestación de su compromiso ineludible con la libertad pensamiento y expresión.

MITSVÁ: ORDENANZA DE LA TORÁ EN ESTA PARASHÁ

CONTIENE 1 MITSVÁ POSITIVA Y 1 PROHIBICIÓN

1. Números 30:3 Ley sobre anular promesas
2. Números 30:3 No incumplir una promesa

LA ACCIÓN TERRENAL Y LA INTENCIÓN CELESTIAL

En la víspera de la conquista de la Tierra Prometida, los dirigentes de las dos tribus, Reuvén y Gad, y de la mitad de otra adicional, Menashé, se acercaron a Moshé para solicitar se les permitiera permanecer en el lugar sin tener que cruzar el río Yardén. El argumento para la petición se basó en el hecho de que había abundante pasto en la región que proveería alimento para su ganado y por ello estaban dispuestos a permanecer allí. 

Después de una reflexión, Moshé respondió que no era correcto que estas tribus abandonaran al resto del pueblo en esa hora crucial. Lo propio sería luchar por la conquista de la Tierra Prometida y luego retornar a ese lugar para asentarse sobre esas tierras. Las tribus construyeron casas provisorias para sus mujeres y niños, así como establos para su ganado y decidieron acompañar al resto de las filas del pueblo para cruzar el Yardén.

De alguna manera este episodio trae a memoria el momento de unas décadas atrás, cuando los exploradores regresaron de espiar la tierra y entregaron un informe negativo acerca del posible éxito de una conquista. El resultado fue que el pueblo no entró a la Tierra Prometida, porque de acuerdo con el informe, cualquier intento de conquista estaba destinado al fracaso. 

Está claro que un elemento indispensable para el éxito es la confianza, y el informe de estos espías desterró este sentimiento. Es posible que el castigo de Moshé, que consistió en prohibirle que concluyera su misión con la conquista de Erets Israel, fuera una consecuencia del episodio de los Meraglim, aquellos exploradores que informaron que la tierra estaba habitada por gigantes y que sus ciudades eran inconquistables debido a sus fortificaciones.

Tal vez la osadía de las tribus de Reuvén, Gad y Menashé fue una consecuencia del castigo que recibió Moshé. Sabiendo que Moshé no entraría a la tierra, ¿cómo podría oponerse a que ellos tampoco lo hicieran? Además, con su presencia en la orilla oriental del Yardén, estarían ampliando la extensión de la Tierra Prometida. Consideraron que estaban actuando acordes con la promesa Divina y serían los primeros en poblar esa tierra.

Tal vez el mayor yerro de estas tribus que querían permanecer en la orilla oriental del Yardén fue que se preocuparon primero por las necesidades de su ganado, tal como hizo Lot, sobrino del patriarca Avraham, cuando escogió el valle fértil de Israel, no obstante, la conducta inmoral reinante entre los habitantes de la región. Los Jajamim apuntaron hacia este hecho, al señalar que el texto bíblico testimonia que primero construyeron corrales para el ganado antes de ocuparse de erigir casas para las mujeres y niños que dejarían detrás.

Desde un prisma humano, la intención es secundaria a la acción. Le importa probablemente poco al pobre, por ejemplo, saber cuál es la intención del donante, si éste anda tras el reconocimiento de la sociedad o actúa movido por la consideración de que es importante ayudar al pobre. Lo que es fundamental es la acción: la ayuda efectiva a quien la necesita en el momento. En muchísimas edificaciones en las grandes ciudades queda plasmado el nombre del donante. Los hospitales nunca podrían haberse desarrollado y ampliado sin la generosidad de algunos filántropos. Sin embargo, para los enfermos que se benefician de estas instalaciones, el nombre de la institución en nada afecta la efectividad de los servicios de salud que allí se dispensan.

En cambio, desde un prisma espiritual, desde el punto de vista Divino, la intención puede ser más importante quela acción. Rajmaná libá ba’i, la Torá desea la buena voluntad, valora la intención representada por la bondad del corazón. Mientras que en el mundo de los hombres y las mujeres prevalece la acción, en el ámbito espiritual, la Kavaná, la intención pura y desinteresada es el barómetro que mejor evalúa el mérito.

MITSVÁ: ORDENANZA DE LA TORÁ EN ESTA PARASHÁ

CONTIENE 2 MITSVOT POSITIVAS Y 4 PROHIBICIONES

1. Números 35:2 Proveer ciudades para los Levitas que también servían como Ciudades de Refugio.
2. Números 35:12 No ejecutar una persona considerada culpable antes del juicio.
3. Números 35:25 Obligar a la persona que mató sin intención a ir a una Ciudad de Refugio.
4. Números 35:30 El testigo en un caso capital no puede juzgar el evento.
5. Números 35:31 No aceptar un pago de redención para salvar a un asesino de la pena de Muerte.
6. Números 35:32 No aceptar un pago de redención para liberar a una persona de tener que ir a una Ciudad de Refugio.

MATOT_NUMBERS XXX:2-XXXII:42 – MAS’EI_NUMBERS XXXIII:1-XXXVI:13

Moshe had faced numerous rebellions during his 40 years of leadership. The people had complained about the lack of food, water and meat. On one occasion the murmur of discontent was heard, without any specific reason being given for it. It was a reaction to the monotony of the desert, on the one hand; and on the other hand, there were the dangers that lurked daily. 

Forced to face the kingdoms that did not allow them passage through their lands, they also had to respond to the challenge of Bile’am, the Gentile prophet who, according to the advice of the elders of Midyan, had been hired by Balak, king of Mo’av. According to Rashi‘s commentary, the two peoples were adversaries, but when faced with a common enemy, they joined forces to overcome the challenge posed by the presence of the Hebrew people in the region.

Moshe responded energetically and decisively to face the enemy. When the fault was due to the spiritual weakness of the Hebrew people, his response was translated into an admonition and a warning, while he defended the physical integrity of the people before God so as not to allow their destruction because of disobedience. Moshe, the leader who was supposedly very strict and severe, was always faithful to his people Intellectually and emotionally. 

In the chapters of our reading, Moshe had to face a novel situation. The tribes of Re’uven and Gad, joined by half of the tribe of Menashe, decided to remain on the eastern bank of the river Yarden to establish their residence camp there. They built stables for their animals and houses for their wives and children. They stated that they were willing to accompany their brothers in the conquest of the lands located on the other bank of the Yarden, to reunite with their families on the eastern side of the river.

The exegetes take note of the fact that they built the stables for the animals first, thus putting economic security before family welfare. Obviously, they were captivated by those lands that promised material future and abundance. And their first consideration was to exchange an unproductive desert for an area where they envisioned the construction of a stable and promising environment.

We are not facing a rebellion against the Divine message that had been delivered at Mount Sinai. The tribes declared their readiness to live their lives according to the covenant that the patriarchs had established with God and, in accordance with the Torah that had been transmitted and taught by Moshe. On the other hand, it may considered a national secession, because they wanted to establish a home apart from the other tribes. 

The historical bond of a common experience of slavery and suffering would be supplanted by tribal interest and personal needs. Moshe disagreed. Instinctively, he knew that the conduct of those tribes was reprehensible, but no law had been broken. In a society that conducts itself according to a set of rules (which in the case of Judaism is contained in the Torah), the way a behavior is judged – which, however, remains within the framework of legality – is a sign of lack of loyalty to the fate of the entire people.

In latter centuries, dissent began for religious reasons, but in the background, there was always an element of national character: the struggle for decision-making power. Korach’s rebellion, ostensibly based on a challenge to the religious failings of Moshe and Aharon, had as its real objective the questioning of their leadership. Korach felt he had an equal right to one of the crowns of command, which, in his opinion, had been usurped by two brothers: Moshe and Aharon.

The decision of these tribes threatened to weaken the collective, by breaking the unity that would be immediately perceived by the inhabitants of the region. This split could become a dangerous precedent. Indeed, after the death of King Shelomo, the kingdom was divided and, therefore, weakened, to open a compass that would facilitate its eventual destruction. Initially by the Assyrian-Babylonians and then by the Romans. Centuries later, the people were divided by the reform movement, which took its position with theological arguments. But one cannot escape the fact that this division was driven by other interests of a social and economic nature.

Nowadays, the situation is different because of the establishment of the modern State of Israel, which offers a point of reference and intersection of purposes that had not existed for millennia and which points to renewed vigor. Yet the differences that have always characterized the Jewish people remain as a manifestation of their inescapable commitment to freedom of thought and expression.

MITZVA: ORDINANCE OF THE TORAH IN THIS PARSHA

CONTAINS 1 POSITIVE MITSVA AND 1 PROHIBITION

1. Numbers 30:3 Law on canceling promises.
2. Numbers 30:3 Do not break a promise.

MAS’EI

EARTHLY ACTION AND HEAVENLY INTENT

On the eve of the conquest of the Promised Land, the leaders of the two tribes, Re’uven and Gad, and the middle of an additional tribe, Menashe, approached Moshe to request that they be allowed to remain in the place without having to cross the Yarden River. The argument for the petition was since there was abundant grass in the region that would provide food for their cattle, they were willing to stay there. 

After reflection, Moshe replied that it was not right for these tribes to abandon the rest of the people at that crucial hour. The proper thing would be to fight for the conquest of the Promised Land and then return to that place to settle on those lands. The tribes built temporary houses for their women and children, as well as stables for their cattle and decided to accompany the rest of the ranks of the people to cross the Yardén.

Somehow this episode recalls the moment a few decades ago, when explorers returned from spying on the land and delivered a negative report about the possible success of a conquest. The result was that the people did not enter the Promised Land, because according to the report, any attempt at conquest was destined to fail.

An indispensable element for success is trust, and the report of these spies banished this feeling. It is possible that Moshe’s punishment, which consisted in forbidding him to conclude his mission with the conquest of Erets Israel, was a consequence of the episode of the Meraglim, the explorers who reported that the land was inhabited by giants and that their cities were unconquerable due to their fortifications.

Perhaps the daring of the tribes of Re’uven, Gad, and Menashe was a consequence of Moshe’s punishment. Knowing that Moshe would not enter the earth, how could he object to them not entering either? In addition, with their presence on the eastern bank of the Yarden, they would be expanding the extent of the Promised Land. They considered that they were acting in accordance with the Divine promise and would be the first to populate that land.

Perhaps the greatest mistake of these tribes who wanted to remain on the east bank of the Yarden was that they first concerned themselves with the needs of their livestock, just as Lot, nephew of the patriarch Avraham, did when he chose the fertile valley of Israel, despite the immoral behavior prevailing among the inhabitants of the region. The Chachamim pointed to this fact, noting that the biblical text testifies that they first built pens for cattle before taking care of erecting houses for the women and children they would leave behind.

From a human perspective, intention is secondary to action. It probably matters little to the poor, for example, to know what the donor’s intention is, whether he is pursuing the recognition of society or acting out of the consideration that it is important to help the poor. What is fundamental is action: effective help to those who need it now. In many buildings in large cities the name of the donor is reflected. Hospitals could never have developed and expanded without the generosity of some philanthropists. However, for the patients who benefit from these facilities, the name of the institution in no way affects the effectiveness of the health services provided there.

On the other hand, from a spiritual prism, from the Divine point of view, intention may be more important than action. Rachmana liba ba’i, the Torah desires goodwill, values the intention represented by the goodness of the heart. While in the world of men and women action prevails, in the spiritual realm, Kavana, pure and disinterested intention is the barometer that best evaluates merit.

MITZVAH: ORDINANCE OF THE TORAH IN THIS PARSHA

CONTAINS 2 POSITIVE MITSVOT AND 4 PROHIBITIONS

1. Numbers 35:2 Provide cities for the Levites that also served as Cities of Refuge.
2. Numbers 35:12 Not to execute a person found guilty before trial.
3. Numbers 35:25 Forcing the person who killed unintentionally to go to a City of Refuge.
4. Numbers 35:30 The witness in a capital case cannot judge the event.
5. Numbers 35:31 Do not accept a redemption payment to save a murderer from the death penalty.
6. Numbers 35:32 Not accepting a redemption payment to free a person from having to go to a City of Refuge.

PINJÁS_NÚMEROS XXV:10-XXX:1

Moshé no logró todas sus metas. Está claro que, además deliberar al pueblo judío de las cadenas de la esclavitud, tenía el propósito de conducirlo triunfalmente a la Tierra Prometida. Había preparado al pueblo espiritualmente en el monte Sinaí, donde escucharon las Diez Palabras de Dios que dan marco al comportamiento humano indispensable tanto para la dicha personal como para el éxito de la sociedad.

Dios había librado batallas por el pueblo hebreo, tal como reza el texto bíblico: HaShem yilajem lajem veatem tajarishún. Seguramente lo haría de nuevo cuando el pueblo se encontrará en las fronteras de la Tierra Prometida: Canaán.´Pero no sería así. El diseño divino era diferente. La conquista de Canaán exigía un liderazgo diferente. Más aún, de ese momento en adelante, el pueblo tendría que librar sus propias batallas. Las Diez Palabras de Dios en el Sinaí les había revelado el secreto de la superación: confianza en su propia energía espiritual como resultado de una vida ordenada, respetuosa de los derechos del prójimo. 

Nuestro texto bíblico reseña el caso de las hijas de Tselofjad, que querían heredar de su padre. Moshé presenta el interrogante ante Dios, quien responde que en la ausencia de hijos varones las hijas heredan al padre, pero tienen que casarse con un miembro de la misma tribu para que el patrimonio no pase a otra tribu. Moshé pensó que el caso de las hijas de Tselofjad era propicio para aclarar la sucesión en su caso personal. ¿Acaso no deberían heredar el mando sus propios hijos? ¿Por qué se seleccionaría a Yehoshúa para la conquista de Canaán? 

Se estaba dando una lección muy importante. Mientras que los bienes materiales pasan de generación en generación, el mundo de la espiritualidad y del mando no se rige por esta simple regla. Cada persona tiene que adquirir personalmente el conocimiento por medio del estudio y la dedicación. El mando exige una personalidad con características especiales: empatía por la suerte del prójimo y la necesidad de ganar la confianza del colectivo.

En el momento de la transmisión del mando, Moshé “colocó sus manos sobre la cabeza” de Yehoshúa, ritual de Semijá que será utilizado para el nombramiento de los rabinos. Según el Midrash, esta Semijá se puede comparar con el encendido de una vela mediante el uso de una vela ya encendida. Otra versión la compara con el derrame de un líquido a otro receptáculo.

Un examen de los ejemplos citados destaca una diferencia: mientras que al encender una vela no disminuye la llama de la primera, al derramar un líquido se reduce el contenido del primer receptáculo. El segundo ejemplo tal vez se refiere al mando social, económico o político: el líder cede parte o la totalidad de su poder a quien le sucede. En cambio, en el caso del liderazgo espiritual, la transmisión de mando no merma la cualidad inherente del otorgante, es como la llama que al encender otra luz no pierde su energía o efectividad. Al contrario, el maestro avanza intelectualmente gracias a cada discípulo que instruye.

En el caso del sacerdocio, el Kohén hereda la condición clerical de su padre. Desde luego, el Kohén tiene que prepararse para asumir el liderazgo espiritual, pero dado que no se trata de una condición indispensable, inicialmente se dieron casos en la historia de personas no preparadas para asumirla posición de Kohén Gadol. En efecto, en ciertos casos, el nombramiento respondía a las necesidades políticas del momento.

Aunque Yehoshúa eventualmente asumió la posición de liderazgo que había sido ocupada por Moshé, a diferencia de éste, Yehoshúa no era un Kohén. Aunque Aharón había sido seleccionado por Dios para el sacerdocio, su hermano Moshé había ocupado ese rol en ciertas ocasiones. De tal manera que Moshé no tenía que consultar con Aharón, porque también tenía la característica de Kohén. En cambio, Yehoshúa tenía un liderazgo menor que Moshé, porque tenía que consultar con el Urim veTumim que portaba Eleazar, el sucesor de Aharón como Kohén Gadol.

MITSVÁ: ORDENANZA DE LA TORÁ EN ESTA PARSHÁ

CONTIENE 6 MITSVOT POSITIVAS

1. Números 27:8 – Leyes sobre herencia.
2. Números 28:2 La ofrenda incinerada diaria.
3. Números 28:9 La ofrenda adicional de Shabat.
4. Números 28:11-15 La ofrenda adicional Rosh Jódesh.
5. Números 28:26 La ofrenda adicional de Shavuot.
6. Números 29:1 Sonar el Shofar en Rosh HaShaná.

PINCHAS_NUMBERS XXV:10-XXX:1

Moshe (Moses) did not achieve all his goals.  In addition to delivering the Jewish people from the chains of slavery, he intended to lead them triumphantly to the Promised Land. He had prepared the people spiritually at Mount Sinai, where they heard the “Ten Words” of God that gave a structure to human behavior indispensable for both personal bliss and the success of society.

God had fought battles for the Hebrew people, as the biblical text says: HaShem yilachem lachem veatem tacharishun: ”God will fight for us while we remain silent.” Surely, He would do so again when the people arrived on the borders of the Promised Land: Canaan. But it was not going to be like that. The divine design was different. The conquest of Canaan required different leadership. Moreover, the people would have to fight their own battles from that moment on. God’s “Ten Words” at Sinai revealed to them the secret of overcoming by trusting in their spiritual energy because of orderly life and respect for the rights of others. 

Our biblical text outlines the case of the daughters of Tselofchad, who wanted to inherit their father.  Moshe presents the question before God and receives the answer that in the absence of sons, the daughters inherit the father. However, they must marry a member of the same tribe so that the patrimony does not pass to another tribe. Moshe thought that the case of the daughters of Tselofchad was conducive in clarifying the succession in their case. Should not then his sons inherit the command from him? Why would Yehoshua be selected for the conquest of Canaan?

A very important lesson was being given. While material goods are passed down from generation to generation, this simple rule does not govern the world of spirituality and command. Each person must personally acquire knowledge through study and dedication. Command demands a personality with special characteristics: empathy for the fate of others and gaining the trust of the collective.

At the time of the command transmission, Moshe “placed his hands on the head” of Yehoshua, a ritual of Semicha that will be used to appoint rabbis. According to the Midrash, this Semicha can be compared to the lighting of a candle by using an already lit candle. Another version compares it to the spillage of a liquid into another receptacle.

An examination of the examples cited highlights a difference. While lighting a candle does not diminish the first flame, spilling a liquid reduces the contents of the first receptacle. The second example perhaps refers to social, economic, or political command: the leader cedes all of his power to the one who succeeds him. On the other hand, in the case of spiritual leadership, the transmission of command does not diminish the inherent quality of the teacher; it is like the flame that, when turning on another light, does not lose its energy or effectiveness. On the contrary, the teacher advances intellectually due to the disciple he instructs.

In the case of the priesthood, the Kohen inherits the clerical status of his father. Of course, the Kohen must prepare to assume spiritual leadership. Still, since it is not an indispensable condition, there were cases in the history of people who were not prepared to assume the position of Kohen Gadol. Indeed, in certain cases, the appointment responded to the political needs of the day.

Although Yehoshua eventually assumed the leadership position that Moshe had occupied, unlike Moshe, Yehoshua was not a Kohen nor a Leví. Although God had selected Aharon for the priesthood, his brother Moses had held that role on certain occasions. Moshe did not have to consult with Aharon because he also had the characteristics of a Kohen. However, Yehoshua had lesser leadership than Moshe because he had to consult with the Urim veTumim carried by Eleazar, Aharon’s successor as Kohen Gadol.

MITSVAH: TORAH ORDINANCE IN THIS PARASHAH

CONTAINS 6 POSITIVE MITSVOT

400.  Numbers 27:8 – Inheritance Laws

401.  Numbers 28:2 The Daily Cremated Offering

402.  Numbers 28:9 The Additional Shabbat Offering

403.  Numbers 28:11-15 The Additional Offering of Rosh Chodesh

404.  Numbers 28:26 The Additional Offering of Shavuot

405.  Numbers 29:1 Sounding the Shofar on Rosh HaShanah

CHUKAT_NUMBERS XIX:1-XXII:1 and BALAK_NUMBERS XXII:2-XXV:9

The name of this Parsha points to the irrationality – from a human prism – of certain Mitzvot, such as the Para Aduma, the “red cow” that is used to purify the impure, while those who deal with the process acquire ritual impurity. The unknown focuses on the fact that the same substance purifies some while contaminating others. In reality, many events that seem “normal” at first glance result from miraculous interventions, such as the universe, whose continued existence depends on the Creator. The biblical text does not allow a pristine differentiation between the event that is the result of Yad Chazaka, the “strong hand” of God – as in the case of the exodus from Egypt – and the events in which man performs. Ultimately, without Divine providence, there is no existence. 

The Chachamim pointed out that the Torah “speaks with human language”; that is, it uses a language that is accessible, and, therefore, on many occasions, we stumble upon anthropomorphic expressions which attribute human qualities to God. This is necessary so that all people understand the message of the biblical text. At the same time, the existence of different levels of understanding are contemplated, levels that arise from the same written text but that depend on the erudition and spirituality of the reader because the reading or study of a text is, in effect, an interaction between the author and the reader. 

Thus, even the Mitsvah, which responds directly to human logic, can be seen from a different prism that gives it a deeper scope and meaning. Among the episodes that stand out in these chapters is the disobedience of Moshe and Aharon, who squandered an opportunity to “sanctify” God’s Name in the case of water that flowed from a stone. This disobedience resulted in Moshe’s punishment and prevented him from leading the Hebrew people to the conquest of the Promised Land. 

Moshe’s disappointment can be felt when God instructs him to climb the mountain from which he can see the land he cannot tread. He will die and be buried in an unknown place so that, perhaps, his burial will not become a place of pilgrimage and veneration, so that the human being who reached the highest level of spirituality will not be confused with the Creator, the unique Being and different from everything that was created.

According to Rabenu Chananel, Moshe’s sin was to have used an expression that could create confusion. It seemed that Moshe made the water gush from the stone. Therefore God’s direct intervention had not been necessary. Other commentators suggest that Moshe’s sin was to have referred to the Hebrews as “rebels,” a label inconsistent with the role of the leader of the people’s destiny. When human behavior is placed under a magnifying glass, errors can be perceived, even in the case of a spiritual giant like Moshe. 

The biblical teaching that emerges is an alert to the care that the person must exercise, especially in the use of language, which can lead to serious and unforeseen consequences.

Another outstanding episode of these chapters concerns the poisonous snakes that harassed the people. How was this pest eliminated? God instructed Moshe to make a copper serpent to be hung on a pole, and anyone who looked up at this effigy was healed. 

The Talmud questions the effectiveness of a “copper serpent” because this fact directly conflicts with Judaism’s firm stance against idolatry. The answer offered is that it was not the serpent itself that healed; it was the looking up that brought cure. In other words, by looking to heaven, the people recognized the sovereignty of God. The punishment of poisonous snakes was due to a fault in this regard.

We see that the cure for the bite of a venomous snake involves the depiction of another snake. So, the antidote to the word aggressive, for example, is probably found in another word, affectionate and effective.

MITZVAH: ORDINANCE OF THE TORAH IN THIS PARSHA

CONTAINS 3POSITIVE MITSVOT

1. Numbers 19:2 Laws governing Pará adumá, the “red cow”.
2. Numbers 19:14 Laws concerning ritual impurity because of a corpse.
3. Numbers 19:19 and 21 Laws about splashing water of atonement that purifies the one who is ritually unclean because of a corpse.

STRENGTH LIES IN UNION

Balak, king of Moav, gives his name to these chapters; however, the dominant character in the story is Bil’am, the Gentile prophet of spiritual stature comparable to Moshe Rabenu’s. The presence of this prophet precludes other peoples from justifying their errors and claiming that, had they had a spiritual leader comparable to that of the Hebrew people, they would have reached higher levels.

Our text tells that Bil’am was invited by Balak to curse the Hebrew people, concluding that the traditional way of facing an adversary could not be applied in the Hebrew case. In this sense, other peoples had failed in battle with weapons. Balak concluded that the energy of the Hebrews had a spiritual quality. Therefore, it was in this field that the confrontation should be conducted. Balak was disillusioned with Bil’am, who, instead of cursing, blessed the Hebrew people. Observing the people from the top of a mountain, Bil’am could not help his admiration for the Hebrew camp and be forced to exclaim: “Ma tovu ohalecha Yaacov, mishkenotecha Israel“, “How good are your tents, Yaakov, your habitations, Israel“, a phrase that is used to begin the daily morning prayers.

Bilham intended to curse the people, to use his powers to hurt the Hebrews. Why did he bless them? Perhaps, as a man inspired by God, he could not change what he saw and, therefore, applauded the peaceful and harmonious life that reigned in the Hebrew camp.

The Midrash, Ohalecha, and Mishkenotecha refer to synagogues and houses of study. Bil’am had to recognize that he was in the presence of a human group that had broken the patterns of idolatry and was climbing levels of spirituality hitherto unknown. Parents passed on to their children the values Moshe had instilled. 

The Rebbe of Slonim, author of Netivot Shalom, suggests that the nefarious power of Bil’am could only influence one individual but was ineffective against the collective. When Bil’am visualized the Hebrew community and observed the spirit of harmony and understanding among the people, his cursing powers were nullified. The obvious moral is that in the face of unity and coincidence in values, no enemy or adversity can destroy. 

Therefore, Bil’am advised the Mo’avites to send their maidens to seduce the people sexually, to lead them to adultery to idolatry. The idea was to divide the Hebrew people into those who succumbed to temptation and those who resisted it. The biblical text states that 24,000 Hebrews could not resist the advances of the Mo’avite women. 

Jewish history bears witness to this. The solidarity and unity among the people allowed them to survive all attacks against them. If one considers the diversity resulting from the dispersion of the Jewish people to the ends of the earth, it can be concluded that the coincidence and harmony reigning within the people have a philosophical or spiritual root. The biblical text, the Torah, is the cement that turned a diverse group into a unity.

Bialik expressed this in his famous poem Im yesh et nafshecha lada’at. According to Bialik, the House of Study is the “source” of the exceptional energy of the Jewish people. The mystic Arizal maintains that the souls of those trapped by the seduction of the Mo’avite women transmigrated to the 24,000 students who perished in the time of Rabbi Akiva and in whose memory the period of mourning of the Omer is observed. According to tradition, their death was due to a lack of respect for each other. Disunity was their sin. And when the union fractures, the Jewish people become vulnerable.