MISSING NUANCES IN MOSHEӓ SIN
INTRODUCTION TO PARASHAT
HASHAVUA
**************************************************************
In memory of
Yakov Yehuda ben Pinchas Wallach
and Miriam Wallach bat Tzvi
Donner
**************************************************************
PARASHAT
CHUKAT
MISSING NUANCES
IN MOSHES SIN
By Rabbi Yaakov
Beasley
A.
INTRODUCTION
Our parasha
contains one of the most perplexing episodes in the Torah. The faithful shepherd of the Jewish
people for forty years, the man who grew up in Pharaohs palace and ultimately
confronted him, who led the slaves from Egypt through the Yam Suf and the
Sinai desert, suffering their serial ingratitude all along the way, who ascended
Har Sinai to bring the word of Hashem to his people and who prayed
to Hashem for mercy on their behalf Moshe Rabbenu is told by
Hashem that he will not live to cross the Jordan River and enter Eretz
Yisrael.
When we read the text,
the story seems lucidly clear. Almost forty years have passed since the Exodus.
Most of the generation that remembered Egypt has died, as has Miriam, Moshes
beloved sister. Close to their
final destination, the people arrive at Kadesh, where they find themselves
without water. Once again, as they have done so many times before, they
complain:
If only we had
perished when our brothers perished in the presence of Hashem. Why have
you brought the assembly of the Hashem into this wilderness for us and
our livestock to die? Why did you take us up from Egypt to bring us to this vile
place, where nothing grows, not of seed nor figs, not vines nor pomegranates?!
There is not even any water to drink!
Just as the complaint
seems familiar so, too, does the response of Moshe and
Aharon:
Moshe and Aharon went
from the presence of the congregation to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting and
fell on their faces. The glory of Hashem appeared to them. Hashem
spoke to Moshe and said, Take the staff, and then with Aharon your brother
assemble all the community and, in front of them all, speak to the rock and it
will yield water. You shall bring forth for them water from the rock, for them
and their livestock to drink.
Moshe took the staff
from before Hashem, as he had commanded him. Then he and Aharon gathered
the assembly together in front of the rock, and said to them, Listen to me, you
rebels. Shall we bring forth water for you from this rock?
Moshe raised his hand and struck the rock
twice with his staff. Water gushed forth in abundance, and they all drank, men
and beasts.
Once again, another
miracles, and the problem is solved.
The people have water but Hashem is not
happy:
But Hashem said
to Moshe and Aharon, Because you did not believe in Me to sanctify Me in the
eyes of the children of Israel, therefore you shall not lead this assembly into
the land which I promised to give them.
What had Moshe done wrong? What was
his sin? In Sefornos words There are many opinions regarding the sin of the
waters of Merivah. Many are confused about what it was that Moshe and Aharon did
that would justify statements like you did not believe in me. In this weeks
study, we will examine several of the traditional explanations of the sin and
present a modern suggestion as well.
B.
ANALYSIS
In an effort to
uncover Moshes failing and sin in this episode, Professor Nechama Leibowitz
ztl was wont to quote the nineteenth century Italian exegete R. Shmuel
David Luzzatto as a warning: Moshe committed one sin, yet the commentators have
accused him of thirteen or more each inventing some new iniquity!
Similarly, at the beginning of his interpretation to this issue, the Or
Ha-Chayim Ha-Kadosh lists ten separate sins (as does the Abravanel
on Devarim 1:37, who summarizes ten different opinions; and proves why
each one is incorrect!). Among them, the following suggestions
are the most prevalent among the commentators:
[1] Rashi offers the
simplest and best-known explanation.
Accordingly to him, Moshes sin lay in striking the rock rather than
speaking to it. Had Moshe done as he was commanded, the people would have
learned an unforgettable lesson: If a rock, which neither speaks nor hears nor
is in need of sustenance, obeys the word of Hashem, how much more so
should we do no less.
[2] The Rambam says
that Moshes sin lay in his harsh anger and fury, as demonstrated by his
intemperate words to the people, Listen to me, you rebels. Hashem
considered it a desecration that someone like Moshe should express anger when
there was no reason (Introduction to Pirkei Avot, Shemoneh
Perakim ch. 4). For anyone
else, this slip would have been a minor offence. However, Hashem sets
higher standards for greater people.
Moshe was not only the leader; he was also the Jewish Peoples supreme
role model, and he failed to meet Hashems exacting expectations. From his behavior, the people may have
concluded that either Hashem was angry with them, which He was not, or
that anger is permissible.
[3] The Ramban rejects
the Rambams suggestion, preferring instead the suggestion of Rabbeinu Chananel:
The verse states, You rebelled
against My word (20:24), which implies that they sinned against His command
The most acceptable of the explanations one that at least serves to put off
those disturbed by this issue is the one offered Rabbeinu Chananel, who
suggests that the sin lies in the statement, Shall we bring forth water
for you from this rock? as opposed to Shall Hashem bring forth
water for you from this rock? What
was at issue was the people mistaking a Divine miracle for human
accomplishment.
[4] R. Joseph Albo in
Sefer Ha-Ikkarim and others (including the Ibn Ezra) suggest that the sin
lies in the fact that Moshe and Aharon fled from the congregation and fell on
their faces, rather than standing their ground, confident that Hashem
would answer their prayers. Their
mistake was in the tepidity of their original response to the crisis until
Hashem instructed them what to do.
[5] In addition, the Ibn Ezra notes that
Moshe strikes the rock not once, but twice: ... and
Moshe lifted his hand and hit the rock with his staff TWO times; then much water
came out... (20:11).
[6] In a modern
variation of the approach of R. Joseph Albo that the error was in the original
response, Rabbi Menachem Leibtag suggests that Moshes mistake arose from his
failure to fulfill the instructions given to him at the end of last weeks
parasha, when the rebellion of Korach was finally extinguished with the
contest of the staffs. In
Bamidbar 17:25-26, Hashem told Moshe that the next time
the Jewish
people complain or rebel, he should take out Aharons staff from the Ohel
Moed and remind them of what happened to the participants in Korach's
rebellion. His failure to due
follow those instructions suggested that a change was necessary.
[7] Skirting the
issue, perhaps due to the difficulties we have outlined above, the Abarvanel
makes the ingenious suggestion that Moshe and Aharon were not punished for what
they did at Merivah, but due to offences that lay in the distant past: Aharon
sinned by making the Golden Calf, while Moshe sinned in sending the spies. For
these reasons, Hashem did not allow them to enter the land. However, Hashem chose to defend
Moshes and Aharons honor and did not made the connection between sin and
punishment explicit in the narrative.
The actions at the rock were the proximate rather than underlying cause
of their punishments (a hurricane may be the proximate cause of a bridge
collapsing; the underlying cause, however, was a structural weakness in the
bridge itself).
Having reviewed the
various approaches, we note that difficulties remain, not only with each
individual suggestion, but in general.
First, Moshe himself attributes Hashems refusal to let him enter
the land to Divine anger with the Jewish people, and not just with himself: At
that time, I pleaded with Hashem, Hashem, You have begun to show
Your servant Your greatness and Your strong hand
Let me cross over and see the
good land that is on the other side of the Jordan, the fine hill country and the
Lebanon. But Hashem was angry with me because of you
(Devarim 3). More
explicitly, in Tehillim (106:32), the Psalmist states, By the waters of
Merivah they angered Hashem and trouble came to Moshe because of
them. Second, the reader senses
that whatever the sin that occurred, the punishment is entirely
disproportionate, despite Moshes lofty stature. Moshes sin was at most shogeg
unintentional. If, because of
Moshes prayers, Hashem could forgive the Jewish people for idolatry and
disbelief, why couldnt Hashem forgive Moshe? Depriving Moshe of seeing
the culmination of a lifetimes efforts seems exceptionally harsh, and the loss
of their beloved leader would have untold consequences and ramifications on the
Jewish People throughout their history, despite the best efforts of Yehoshua and
those who followed in Moshes footsteps.
Finally, we note that in similar circumstances on a previous occasion,
Hashem told Moshe to take his staff and strike the rock - precisely the
act for which (at least according to Rashi) he was now punished.
Because of these
reservations, I wish to, with the deepest respect and trepidation, suggest a
different approach that focuses on the punishment that Hashem meted
out.
C.
LISTENING THROUGH THE CRIES
If we were to ask people what punishment Moshe and Aharon received at
Merivah, most would instinctively answer that they were forbidden from ENTERING the land of
Israel. However, this popular
assumption is not precise. Lets look at how the Chumash explains their
punishment:
And God told Moshe... because you did not trust Me enough to sanctify
Me... Therefore you shall NOT BRING this nation into the LAND which I promised
them... (20:12)
Note
that Hashem does not state
that they cannot ENTER the Land; Hashem states that they cannot LEAD the
people into the Land. In other
words, the punishment is not addressing personal failings, but qualities of
leadership. As the Chief Rabbi of
Britain, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, points out eloquently in his discussion of this
issue:
One of the most
striking features of Judaism is that it is not centered on a single figure a
founder who dominates its entire history. To the contrary, each age gave rise
to its own leaders, and they were different from one another, not only in
personality but in the type of leadership they exercised. First came the age of
the patriarchs and matriarchs. Then came Moshe and his disciple Joshua. They
were followed by a succession of figures known generically as judges, though
their role was more military than judicial. With Saul, monarchy was born
though even then, kings were not the only leaders; there were prophets and
priests as well
Leadership is a
function of time. There is a famous dispute about Noah, whom the Torah describes
as perfect in his generations. According to one view, had Noah lived in a more
righteous age, he would have been greater still. According to another, he would
have been merely one of many. The fact is that each generation yields the
leadership appropriate to it
Yerubaal (Gideon) in his generation was like
Moshe in his generation; Bedan in his generation was like Aharon in his
generation; Jepthah in his generation was like Samuel in his
generation.
Each age produces its
leaders, and each leader is a function of an age. There may be indeed there
are certain timeless truths about leadership. A leader must have courage and
integrity. He must be able, say the sages, to relate to each individual
according to his or her distinctive needs. Above all, a leader must constantly
learn (a king must study the Torah all the days of his life). But these are
necessary, not sufficient, conditions. A leader must be sensitive to the call
of the hour this hour, this generation, this chapter in the long story of a
people. And because he or she is of a specific generation, even the greatest
leader cannot meet the challenges of a different generation. That is not a
failing. It is the existential condition of humanity.
With Rabbi Sacks
dictum that the leader must match the age in which he leads, let us return to
the story of Moshe. Moshe, in his
behavior, observes the precedent that he set for himself years before. At
Refidim, a generation earlier and facing similar circumstances, Hashem
told him to take his staff and strike the rock. At Merivah, Hashem told
him once again to take his staff, and apparently Moshe inferred that he was
being told to act as he had before.
What did he fail to comprehend?
That times had changed. He
was facing a new generation. The people he confronted the first time were those
who had spent much of their lives as slaves in Egypt; those he now faced were
born in freedom in the wilderness.
What was the critical difference between the generations? Let us compare their words with a
similar phrase uttered forty years earlier:
NOW at
Merivah |
FORTY YEARS
EARLIER at Kivrot Taavah |
Why did you take
us up from Egypt to bring us to this vile place, where nothing grows, not
of seed nor figs, not vines nor pomegranates! |
And the Jewish
people wept again, and said, O, that we had meat to eat? We remember the fish that we ate
in Egypt for nothing, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions,
and the garlic! |
Comparing the foods
listed in each, we reach one, inescapable conclusion. The generation of Kivrot Taavah,
despite all the miracles done for it, still dreams of Egypt. At Merivah, the new generation also
dreams of leaving the desert - but for Israel. They are impatient, not
ungrateful. Sadly, Moshe did not
hear this distinction; at the moment of crisis, Moshe reverts to behavior
appropriate forty years ago, not for the new generation. His inability to discern this was not a
sin, but his inability to listen beyond the peoples complaints and understand
what motivated them demonstrated that he was no longer the person to lead them
to their dream. To his credit,
Moshe recognized this as well; he took the initiative in asking Hashem
(in Bamidbar ch. 27) to appoint a successor who would go out before them
and come in before them, who shall lead them out, and BRING them in.
(27:17)