NUMBERS XXX:2-XXXII:42

THE FIRST DIVISION OF THE PEOPLE

Moshe (Moses) 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 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 Moav. According to Rashi‘s commentary, the two peoples were adversaries, but when they faced a common enemy, they joined forces to overcome the challenge posed by the presence of the Hebrew people in the region.

Moshe responded with energy and determination to confront 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 at the same time defending 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 in an affective and emotional way. 

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

The exegetes take note of the fact that they first built the stables for the animals, thus putting economic security before family well-being. Obviously, they were captivated by those lands that promised a material future of 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 spoken at Mount Sinai. The tribes declare their willingness to rule their lives according to the covenant that the patriarchs had established with God and in conformity with the Torah that had been transmitted and taught by Moshe. It is a secession of a national character, because they wish 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 laws 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 in which behavior is judged – which, however, remains within the framework of legality – is a sign of a lack of loyalty to the destiny of the entire people.

In later centuries, dissidence began for religious reasons, but deep down there was always an element of a national character: the struggle for decision-making power. Korach’s rebellion, which ostensibly was based on a challenge to the religious failures of Moshe and Aharon, had as its real objective the questioning of his leadership. Korach felt that 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, due to the breakdown of 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 Shlomo, the kingdom was divided and, therefore, weakened, to open a compass that would facilitate its eventual destruction, first 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 obeyed other interests of a social and economic nature.

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

MITZVAH: ORDINANCE OF THE TORAH IN THIS PARSHA

CONTAINS 1  POSITIVE MITSVAH AND 1 BAN

406. Numbers 30:3 Law on Voiding Promises

407. Numbers 30:3 Do not break a promise

MASE’I

NUMBERS XXXIII:1-XXXVI:13

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 half of an additional tribe, Menashe, approached Moses to request that they be allowed to remain there without having to cross the Yarden River. The argument for the petition was because there was abundant grass in the region that would provide food for their cattle and so 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 people’s ranks across the Yarden.

In some ways 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 doomed to failure.

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 of forbidding him to conclude his mission with the conquest of Eretz Israel, was a consequence of the episode of the Meraglim, those explorers who reported that the land was inhabited by giants and that their cities were unconquerable because of their fortifications.

Perhaps the boldness of the tribes of Re’uven, Gad and Menashe was a consequence of the punishment Moshe received. Knowing that Moshe would not enter the land, how could he object to them not doing so either? In addition, with their presence on the eastern bank of the Yarden, they would be expanding the extension of the Promised Land. They felt 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 were first concerned with the needs of their livestock, as did Lot, nephew of the patriarch Avraham, when he chose the fertile valley of Israel, notwithstanding the immoral conduct prevailing among the inhabitants of the region. The Chachamim pointed to this fact, noting that the biblical text testifies that they first built corrals for the cattle before setting about 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 intention of the donor is, whether he is seeking 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 in the moment. In many buildings in large cities, the name of the donor is inscribed. Hospitals could never have developed and expanded without the generosity of a few 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 can be more important than action. Rachmanah 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, Kavanah, pure and unselfish intention is the barometer that best evaluates merit.

MITZVAH: ORDINANCE OF THE TORAH IN THIS PARSHA

CONTAINS 2  POSITIVE MITSVOT AND 4 PROHIBITIONS

408. Numbers 35:2 To provide cities for the Levites who also served as Cities of Refuge

409. Numbers 35:12 Failure to execute a person found guilty before trial

410. Numbers 35:25 Forcing the Person Who Unintentionally Killed to Go to a City of Refuge

411. Numbers 35:30 The Witness in a Capital Case Cannot Judge the Event

412. Numbers 35:31 Not Accepting a Redemption Payment to Save a Murderer from the Death Penalty

413. Numbers 35:32 Not accepting a redemption payment to free a person from having to go to a City of Refuge