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.