JUKAT_NÚMEROS XIX:1-XXII:1

El nombre de esta Parashá apunta hacia la irracionalidad–desde el prisma humano– de ciertas Mitsvot, tal como la Pará Adumá, la “vaca bermeja” que se utiliza para purificar a los impuros, mientras que quienes se ocupan del proceso adquieren impureza ritual. La incógnita se centra en el hecho de que la misma sustancia purifica a unos mientras contamina a otros. En realidad, muchos eventos que lucen “normales” a primera vista son resultado de una intervención milagrosa, como el universo, cuya continua existencia depende del Creador. Aparentemente, el texto bíblico no permite una diferenciación prístina entre el suceso que es resultado de Yad Jazaká, la “mano fuerte” de Dios –como en el caso del éxodo de Egipto–, y los eventos que el hombre protagoniza. En última instancia, sin la providencia Divina no hay existencia. 

Los Jajamim señalaron que la Torá “habla con el lenguaje humano”, o sea que utiliza un idioma que es accesible y, por ello, en muchas oportunidades, tropezamos con expresiones antropomórficas, que atribuyen cualidades humanas a Dios. Esto es necesario para que todas las personas puedan comprender el mensaje del texto bíblico. Al mismo tiempo, se plantea la existencia de diferentes niveles de comprensión, niveles que surgen del mismo texto escrito pero que dependen de la erudición y espiritualidad del lector. Porque la lectura o el estudio de un texto es, en realidad, una interacción entre el autor y el lector. 

Así, incluso la Mitsvá que responde directamente a la lógica humana, puede ser vista desde un prisma diferente que le da un alcance y sentido más profundos. Entre los episodios que sobresalen en estos capítulos está la desobediencia de Moshé y Aharón, quienes desperdiciaron una oportunidad para “santificar” el Nombre de Dios en el caso del agua que brotó de una piedra. Esta desobediencia produjo el castigo de Moshé, y le impidió que condujera al pueblo hebreo hasta el final de la conquista de la Tierra Prometida. 

Se puede palpar la desilusión de Moshé cuando Dios le instruye que suba al monte desde el cual podrá ver la tierra que no podrá pisar. Morirá y será enterrado en un lugar desconocido para que, tal vez, su sepultura no se convierta en un lugar de peregrinaje y veneración, para que no se confunda al ser humano que alcanzó el mayor nivel de espiritualidad con el Creador, el Ser único y totalmente diferente de todo lo que fue creado.

De acuerdo con Rabenu Jananel, el pecado de Moshé consistió en haber utilizado una expresión que podía crear cierto grado de confusión. Daba la impresión de que quien hizo brotar el agua de la piedra fue Moshé y, por lo tanto, no había sido necesaria la intervención directa de Dios. Otros comentaristas sugieren que el pecado de Moshé consistió en haberse referido a los hebreos como “rebeldes”, calificativo inconsistente con el rol del conductor del destino del pueblo. Aparentemente cuando se coloca el comportamiento humano bajo una lupa, se pueden percibir errores, incluso en el caso de un gigante espiritual como Moshé. 

La enseñanza bíblica que se desprende es una alerta al cuidado que debe ejercer la persona, sobre todo en el uso del lenguaje, que puede conducir a consecuencias serias e imprevistas. 

Otro episodio resaltante de estos capítulos se refiere a las serpientes venenosas que acosaron al pueblo. ¿Cómo se eliminó esta plaga? Dios le instruyó a Moshé que elaborara una serpiente de cobre que debía ser colgada en un poste: todo aquel que elevaba su mirada hacia esta efigie quedaba curado. El Talmud cuestiona la efectividad de una “serpiente de cobre”, porque este hecho entra en conflicto directo con la firme actitud del judaísmo contra la idolatría. La respuesta que se ofrece es que no era la serpiente, en sí misma, la que curaba, sino el mirar hacia arriba. O sea que, al elevarla vista hacia lo celestial, el pueblo reconocía la soberanía de Dios. El castigo de las serpientes venenosas se debió a una falta en este sentido.

Vemos que la cura para la mordida de una serpiente venenosa involucra la representación de otra serpiente. De manera que, el antídoto para la palabra agresiva, por ejemplo, se encuentra probablemente en otra palabra, la palabra cariñosa y afectiva.

MITSVÁ: ORDENANZA DE LA TORÁ EN ESTA PARASHÁ

CONTIENE 3 MITSVOT POSITIVAS

1. Números 19:2 Leyes que rigen la Pará adumá, “vaca bermeja”
2. Números 19:14 Leyes sobre impureza ritual por causa de un cadáver
3. Números 19:19, 21 Leyes acerca de salpicar agua de expiación que purifica al que está ritualmente impuro por causa de un cadáver

The name of this Parshah points to the irrationality–from a human prism–of certain Mitzvot, such as the Parah Adumah, the “red heifer” that is used to purify the unclean, while those who deal with this process acquire ritual impurity. The unknown centers on the fact that the same substance purifies some while contaminating others. Many events that look “normal” at first glance are the result of miraculous intervention, such as the universe, whose continued existence depends on the Creator. Apparently, the biblical text does not allow a clear differentiation between the event that is the result of Yad Chazakah, the “strong hand” of God – as in the case of the exodus from Egypt – and events where man is the protagonist. Ultimately, without Divine providence, there is no existence. 

The Chachamim pointed out that the Torah “speaks in human language”, that is, it uses 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 everyone can understand the message of the biblical text. At the same time, there are different levels of understanding, 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 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 Moses and Aharon, who squandered an opportunity to “sanctify” the Name of God in the case of the water that gushed from a stone. This disobedience brought about Moses’ punishment and prevented him from leading the Hebrew people to complete the conquest of the Promised Land. 

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

According to Rabbenu Chananel, Moses’ sin consisted in having used an expression that could create some degree of confusion. It gave the impression that it was Moses who brought forth the water from the stone, and, therefore. no direct intervention from God had been necessary. Other commentators suggest that Moses’ sin consisted in referring to the Hebrews as “rebels,” a qualifier inconsistent with his role as the leader of the people’s destiny. Apparently, when human behavior is placed under a magnifying glass, mistakes can be perceived, even in the case of a spiritual giant like Moses. 

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

Another episode of these chapters concerns the poisonous snakes that harassed the people. How was this pest eliminated? God instructed Moses to make a copper serpent to be hung on a pole: everyone who raised his gaze to this effigy was healed. The Talmud questions the effectiveness of a “copper serpent,” because this conflicts directly with Judaism’s firm attitude against idolatry. The answer offered is that it was not the serpent that healed, it was the fact that the individual looked up. By raising their sight heavenward, the people recognized God’s sovereignty. The punishment of poisonous snakes was due to a fault in this regard, their lack of faith in God’s rule of the universe.

We see that the cure for the bite of a poisonous snake involves the representation of another snake. In fact, the antidote to the word aggressive, for example, is probably found in another word, the word affectionate and effective.

MITSVAH: TORAH ORDINANCE IN THIS PARSHAH

CONTAINS 3 POSITIVE MITSVOT

1. Numbers 19:2 Laws governing the Parah Adumah, “red heifer”
2. Numbers 19:14 Laws on ritual impurity because of a corpse
3. Numbers 19:19, 21 Laws about splashing water of atonement that purifies the one who is ritually impure because of a corpse

KÓRAJ_NÚMEROS XVI:1-XVIII:32

El mayor desafío para el liderazgo de Moshé se produjo con la rebelión de Kóraj y sus seguidores. El argumento fue muy preciso: ¿por qué Moshé y Aharón acapararon los puestos más importantes del liderazgo? Kóraj pensó que debía haber sido considerado para compartir el mando, porque también pertenecía a la familia de los Leviyim. No centró el argumento en su persona, sino que, valiéndose del principio de la equidad, alegó que todo el pueblo había sido consagrado y, por lo tanto, ninguna persona podía ejercer el liderazgo sobre el resto de la sociedad. 

La respuesta de Moshé fue que Dios decidiría este asunto. La frase que utilizó fue: bóker veyodá HaShem, “amanecerá y Dios hará saber…”. La pregunta obvia es por qué Moshé decidió esperar hasta el próximo día, cuando podía haber sometido a Kóraj y a Aharón a una prueba inmediata para, de esta manera, disipar cualquier duda sobre el liderazgo. 

Surgen diferentes respuestas. Primero, Moshé quiso darle la oportunidad a Kóraj para que cambie su actitud. Tal vez el consejo de la almohada le permitiría reflexionar acerca de las posibles consecuencias de retar el liderazgo de Moshé en el ambiente inhóspito del desierto, donde el nerviosismo de la gente era una constante.

Boaz Spiegel cita al Ketav Sofer, que señala que la mujer judía nunca participó en las rebeliones. Al contrario, las mujeres jugaron un papel muy importante en Egipto, pues fueron las primeras en desafiar las órdenes del Faraón: procrearon sin temor por el destino de sus hijos, porque tenían absoluta confianza en la Providencia Divina. Por ello, al postergar la prueba para el día siguiente, Moshé quería involucrara las esposas de los disidentes, para que pudieran influenciar positivamente a sus esposos, a fin de que desistieran de su actitud de rebeldía.Al mismo tiempo, Moshé estaba dando una lección muy importante para quienes imparten justicia en la sociedad. Ante cualquier toma de decisión, el juez debe ponderar cuidadosamente el caso, porque cualquier fallo inmediato puede estar influenciado por las emociones del momento y no permite una evaluación correcta del suceso.

Concluimos estas líneas sugiriendo que la controversia que se transforma en desobediencia e insubordinación se debe muchas veces a la oscuridad, a la falta de conocimiento y al prejuicio, a la sustitución de la búsqueda de la verdad por las ambiciones personales. La luz del amanecer, bóker, también es una metáfora de claridad y transparencia. La sana controversia entre intelectuales y eruditos no es necesariamente negativa; al contrario, según la Mishná, el enfrentamiento de las ideas es constructivo, siempre y cuando sea leShem Shamáyim, esto es, que se produzca con el propósito de arrojar luz sobre los hechos, para el esclarecimiento, cuando el argumento es sustentado con un razonamiento lógico. 

Los argumentos ad hominem son inadmisibles, porque desvían la atención que debe centrarse en la búsqueda de la justicia y de la equidad. En el caso de nuestro texto bíblico, Kóraj estaba luchando por sus derechos personales, hecho que puede tener validez individual, pero cuyo resultado puede ser perjudicial para el colectivo. 

Se pueden citar muchos casos en los cuales los intereses personales figuran por encima de las necesidades de la sociedad. Son las personas que pierden la ocasión histórica de hacer un aporte duradero para el desenvolvimiento de la sociedad y que enceguecen debido al egoísmo. Por ello se requiere bóker, la luz que siempre brinda el nuevo amanecer.

MITSVÁ: ORDENANZA DE LA TORÁ EN ESTA PARASHÁ

CONTIENE 5 MITSVOT POSITIVAS Y 4 PROHIBICIONES

1. Números 18:4 Cuidar el Templo
2. Números 18:3 Kohanim no deben hacer el servicio de Levitas y viceversa
3. Números 18:4, 22 Quien no es Kohén no puede servir en el Templo
4. Números 18:5 No cesar de cuidar el Templo
5. Números 18:15 Redimir al niño primogénito
6. Números 18:17 No redimir el primogénito del animal domesticado
7. Números 18:23 El servicio de los Levitas en el Templo
8. Números 18:24 Apartar el primer diezmo para los Levitas
9. Números 18:26, 28 Los Levitas deben dar al Kohen un diezmo del diezmo que reciben

KORACH_NUMBERS XVI:1-XVIII:32

The greatest challenge to Moses’ leadership came with the rebellion of Korach and his followers. The argument was very precise: why did Moses and Aharon monopolize the most important positions of leadership? Korach thought he should have been considered to share command because he also belonged to the Leviyim family. He did not focus the argument on his person, but, using the principle of equity, argued that the whole people had been consecrated and, therefore, no person could exercise leadership over the rest of society. 

Moses’ answer was that God would decide this matter. The phrase he used was: Boker Veyoda HaShem, “when dawn comes, and God will make known…”. The obvious question is why Moses decided to wait until the next day, when he could have subjected Korach and Aharon to an immediate test to dispel any doubts about leadership. 

Different answers are given. First, Moses wanted to give Korach the opportunity to change his attitude. Perhaps his pillow’s advice would allow him to reflect on the possible consequences of challenging Moses’ leadership in the inhospitable environment of the desert, where people’s nervousness was a constant.

Boaz Spiegel quotes Ketav Sofer, who points out that Jewish women never participated in the rebellions. On the contrary, women played a very important role in Egypt, because they were the first to defy Pharaoh’s orders: they procreated without fear for the fate of their children, because they had absolute confidence in Divine Providence. Therefore, by postponing the test to the next day, Moses wanted to involve the wives of the dissidents, so that they could influence their husbands so that they desist from their rebellious attitudes. At the same time, Moses was giving a very important lesson to those who impart justice in society. Before any decision-making, the judge must carefully weigh the case, because any immediate ruling may be influenced by the emotions of the moment and will not allow for a correct evaluation of the event.

We conclude these lines by suggesting that the controversy that turns into disobedience and insubordination is often due to darkness, lack of knowledge and prejudice, to the substitution of the search for truth for personal ambitions. The light of dawn, Boker, is also a metaphor for clarity and transparency. The healthy controversy between intellectuals and scholars is not necessarily negative; on the contrary, according to the Mishnah, the confrontation of ideas is constructive, as long as it is LeShem Shamayim, that is, that it occurs with the purpose of shedding light on the facts, for clarification, when the argument is supported by logical reasoning. 

Ad hominem arguments are inadmissible because they divert the attention that should be focused on the search for justice and equity. In the case of our biblical text, Korach was fighting for his personal rights, a fact that may have validity for the individual, but the results can be harmful to the collective. 

Many cases can be cited in which personal interests are above the needs of society. They are the people who lose the historical opportunity to make a lasting contribution to the development of society and who become blind due to selfishness. That is why Boker is required, the light that always provides the new dawn.

MITSVAH: TORAH ORDINANCE IN THIS PARSHAH

CONTAINS 5 POSITIVE MITSVOT AND 4 BANS

1. Numbers 18:4 Caring for the Temple
2. Numbers 18:3 Kohanim should not do the service of Levites and vice versa
3. Numbers 18:4, 22 Whoever is not a Kohen cannot serve in the Temple
4. Numbers 18:5 Do Not Cease to Care for the Temple
5. Numbers 18:15 Redeem the firstborn child
6. Numbers 18:17 Do not redeem the firstborn of the domesticated animal
7. Numbers 18:23 The Service of the Levites in the Temple
8. Numbers 18:24 Set aside the first tithe for the Levites
9. Numbers 18:26, 28 The Levites must give the Kohen Terumah of the tithe they receive

While the first chapters of Bemidbar mention the number of those who left Egypt and describe the organization of the camp of the Hebrews during the long journey through the desert, this weekly text describes the grave error of the emissaries who went to investigate the characteristics of the Promised Land. One explorer per tribe was the instruction of Moses, so there were 12 in total. Two reports were given: the majority of 10 opined that conquest was not possible while a minority of 2, Kalev and Yehoshua, who would assume leadership after Moses’ death, without contradicting the description offered by the majority, tried to encourage the people to undertake the task of conquest immediately. 

The report had been exhaustive, an assessment was made of the conditions of the cities, an evaluation of the character of their inhabitants, and an estimate of whether nature was generous enough to feed the Hebrew people. But the real questions were different. Had Pharaoh’s slaves also broken the chains of spiritual and emotional bondage or only the yoke of physical bondage? Had they internalized the value of freedom and acquired enough self-esteem to start a new stage: an independent national life in a land of their own?

The majority report pointed to national immaturity, an unwillingness to embark on a new stage, which would transform the mentality of obedience to a foreman into an attitude of sovereignty and self-determination.

The Netsiv, Rabbi Naphthalali Zvi Yehuda Berlin, father of Rabbi Meir Bar Ilan, the great leader of the Zionist Mizrahi movement, whose name bears the Bar Ilan University of Israel, cites the correspondence established by the Midrash between the five mentions of the word “light” in Bereshit with the 5 Books of the Torah. According to this order, the mention of “light” in our book corresponds to the act of separation between light and darkness. While the early Books of the Torah refer to light, however, Bemidbar gives birth to the period of “darkness”; that is, those who will eventually conquer the Promised Land belong to the group of “darkness”. The Nets argue that the period of “light” refers to the Divine light that guided the Hebrews during the first stage of their history. God was present in the life of the patriarchs, “accompanied” them symbolically during their suffering in Egypt, and protected them in the desert. God sent 10 plagues to the Egyptians to allow the Hebrews to escape the yoke of slavery. He revealed to them the Ten Commandments, which would promote coexistence and lead to human solidarity. 

It was a long period of “light,” the source of which was the Creator. Our chapters begin in a different period. The “light” coming from God would no longer be apparent, as it was in the previous stage. They would have to learn that there is another “light,” the energy that comes from self-effort. They had received the instruction represented by the Mitsvah, the legacy of behavior attached to the Word of God contained in the Torah. With this Torah in hand, they would be able to generate an inner and proper “light” from that moment on.

The report of the explorers and the following rebellion led by Korach are episodes that reflect the anxiety, the uneasiness of having to make decisions of their own, without a celestial “cloud” that indicates each step to follow. The path that the Hebrew people will follow will be uncertain, but sobering. Each challenge will become a learning experience and each challenge will allow them to take a step forward towards national maturity, as represented in our days by Medinat Israel.

MITSVAH: TORAH ORDINANCE IN THIS PARSHAH

CONTAINS 2 POSITIVE MITZVOT AND 1 BAN

1. Numbers 15:20 Separate Challah from the dough and deliver it to the Kohen.
2. Numbers 15:38 Place Tsitsit (fringes) on a garment that is worn.
3. Numbers 15:39 Do not deviate by way of the thoughts of the heart or what the eyes see.

SHELAJ_NÚMEROS XIII:1-XV:41

Mientras los primeros capítulos de Bemidbar mencionan el conteo de los que salieron de Egipto y describen la organización del campamento de los hebreos durante la larga travesía por el desierto, el texto semanal describe el grave error cometido por los emisarios que fueron a investigar las características de la Tierra Prometida. Un explorador por tribu era la orden de Moshé, de tal manera que fueron 12 en total. Se dieron dos informes: la mayoría de 10 opinó que no era posible la conquista mientras que una minoría dedos, Calev y Yehoshúa, quien asumiría el liderazgo después de la muerte de Moshé, sin contradecir la descripción ofrecida por la mayoría, intentó animar al pueblo para emprender de inmediato la tarea de la conquista. 

El informe había sido exhaustivo, se hizo una apreciación de las condiciones de las ciudades, la evaluación del carácter de sus habitantes y una estimación de si acaso la naturaleza era suficientemente generosa para alimentar al pueblo hebreo. Pero las verdaderas interrogantes eran otras. ¿Acaso los esclavos del Faraón habían fracturado también las cadenas de la esclavitud espiritual y emocional o solamente las ataduras físicas? ¿Habían interiorizado el valor de la libertad y adquirido suficiente autoestima para iniciar una nueva etapa: una vida nacional independiente en una tierra propia?

El informe mayoritario apuntó a la inmadurez nacional, una falta de voluntad y decisión para emprender una nueva etapa, que transformaría la mentalidad de obediencia a un capataz en una actitud de soberanía y autodeterminación. 

El Netsiv, Rabí Naftalí Zvi Yehudá Berlin, padre de Rabí Meir Bar Ilan, gran líder del movimiento sionista Mizrahi, cuyo nombre ostenta la Universidad Bar Ilan de Israel, cita la correspondencia establecida por el Midrash entre las cinco menciones de la palabra “luz” en Bereshit con los 5 Libros de la Torá. Según este ordenamiento, la mención de “luz” para nuestro libro corresponde al acto de la separación entre la luz y la oscuridad. Mientras que los primeros Libros de la Torá se refieren a la luz, empezando con Bemidbar se inicia el período de la “oscuridad”; o sea que, los que eventualmente conquistarán la Tierra Prometida pertenecen al grupo de la “oscuridad”. El Netsiv argumenta que el período de “luz” se refiere ala luz Divina que guió a los hebreos durante la primera etapa de su historia. Dios se hizo presente en la vida de los patriarcas, “los acompañó” simbólicamente durante el sufrimiento en Egipto, los protegió en el desierto. Lanzó 10 plagas contra los egipcios para permitir que los hebreos escaparan del yugo de la esclavitud. Les reveló los Diez Mandamientos, que posibilitarían la convivencia y conducirían a la solidaridad humana. 

Fue un largo período de “luz”, cuya fuente era el Creador. Nuestros capítulos inician un período diferente. La “luz” proveniente de Dios ya no sería aparente, tal como lo fue en la etapa anterior. Tendrían que aprender que hay otra “luz”, la energía que proviene del esfuerzo propio. Habían recibido el instructivo representado por la Mitsvá, el legado de un comportamiento apegado a la Palabra de Dios contenida en la Torá. Con esta Torá en la mano, ¿serían acaso capaces de generar una “luz” interna y propia en adelante? 

El informe de los exploradores y la siguiente rebelión liderada por Kóraj, son episodios que reflejan la ansiedad, la intranquilidad de tener que tomar decisiones propias, sin una “nube” celestial que indique cada paso a seguir. El sendero que seguirá el pueblo hebreo será incierto, pero aleccionador. Cada reto será aleccionador y cada desafío permitirá dar un paso adelante hacia la madurez nacional, dignamente representada en nuestros días por Medinat Israel.

MITSVÁ: ORDENANZA DE LA TORÁ EN ESTA PARASHÁ

CONTIENE 2 MITSVOT POSITIVAS Y 1 PROHIBICIÓN

1. Números 15:20 Separar jalá de toda masa y entregarla al Kohén
2. Números 15:38 Colocar tsitsit (flecos) en una vestimenta que se viste
3. Números 15:39 No desviarse hacia los pensamientos del corazón o lo que los ojos ven

It is very difficult to penetrate the spirit of Mosheh, Moses, and understand his reaction to the constant difficulties he had to face while leading the Jewish nation. Although the people had emerged practically unscathed from the Egyptian persecution, there is no doubt that their travels in the desert that would last 40 years in that inhospitable and hostile environment, became fertile for complaint and depression, conducive to insurrection. For Moses it was an unprecedented adventure, even more so when from the beginning – as will be expressed in the episode of Sneh, the burning bush – he had at first declined the invitation to lead the people.

Moses listened to the counsel of his father-in-law Yitro and appointed 70 sages to accompany him in the task of teaching, settling differences between litigants, and passing judgment when necessary. Although he exercised leadership in conjunction with this body, which eventually led to the establishment of the Sanhedrin, the people knew that authentic leadership rested upon Moses’ shoulders. Hence Moses’ personal desperation in the case of the people’s discouragement while eating Man, the manna that rained daily from heaven, and their insatiable appetite for meat consumption, which is clearly in short supply in the wilderness.

Because of the discontent of the people and their lack of appreciation for all that had been done, God expressed anger with our ancestors and Moses reacted in the same way. But in Moses’ case, the disgust was probably twofold: although he was enraged at the people, perhaps he was also angry with himself. That is why Moses desired death, but preferably at the hands of God and not at the hands of an ungrateful people.

Although Moses intervened on behalf of the people so that God would not exchange them for another, at the same time he could not hide his disappointment at the lack of chivalry of the masses. Ultimately, the cause of the protest was not the tasteless taste of the Man which, according to the Midrash, reflected the taste of each individual. The protest was a manifestation of discontent with a life of routine while in the desert, the absence of change, and the consequent boredom.

Actually, it was a rebellion against Divine Providence, because after receiving a set of laws at Sinai that had put a brake on their carnal appetites and demanded general ethical behavior, the uniformity of the desert landscape produced no spiritual satisfaction.

They are even nostalgic for slavery on the banks of the Nile River, with its changing nature, a melting pot in the midst of the most important cultural environment of the time. But an authentic leader does not let himself be carried away by disappointment and ingratitude, he reflects and feels empathy for human weaknesses and, above all, highlights the virtues that emerge from the people because of the challenge and rigor of the desert.

Notwithstanding setbacks and personal reservations, Moses becomes the great defender of the Hebrew people and argues with God so that He does not choose another people, even assuming responsibility for the mistakes of others. The leader has an ambivalent role: he must keep his distance from those he leads and, on the other hand, must identify totally with their destiny. The leader must feel in his own flesh the pain and anguish that surround his people. 

Moses prepared for eighty years to assume the leadership that ended after 40 years on the borders of the Promised Land. He didn’t set foot in the Promised Land, but he visualized it. He climbed Mount Nevo, and got a panoramic view of the nature of Israel, but perhaps something more forceful: he reviewed the events of the last 40 years and formulated a perspective on what the tomorrow would be for that rebellious but heroic person, complex but willing to spread to the ends of the earth the idea of the existence of the one Creator, the God of Humanity.

MITSVAH: TORAH ORDINANCE IN THIS PARASHAH

CONTAINS 3 POSITIVE MITZVOT AND 2 BANS

1. Numbers 9:11 Offering Pesach Sheni on the 14th of Iyar
2. Numbers 9:11 Eating the Pesach Sheni offering on the 14th of Iyar
3. Numbers 9:12 Leave nothing of the Pesach Sheni offering for the next day
4. Numbers 9:12 Do not break any bones of the offering Pesach Sheni
5. Numbers 10:9-10 During battles and each offering, the Trumpets sound in the Temple