Parshios Matos & Masei
On Line
By Rabbi Yochanan Zweig
“...This is the thing that Hashem has commanded” (30:2)
In this week’s parsha, the Torah informs us that man is endowed with the
ability to create new
realities through his power of speech. By pronouncing a vow or an oath, new
prohibitions can be established,
restricting oneself or others from deriving benefit from various objects or
performing certain actions. The prohibition
created is so powerful that it subjects those who violate its restrictions
to corporal punishment.1
The chapter is introduced with the expression “zeh hadavar asher tziva
Hashem” - “this is the thing that Hashem commanded”. Rashi cites the Midrash
which
derives certain laws pertaining to vows and oaths from the use of this
expression. Rashi
adds that this expression also defines the unique quality of Moshe’s
prophecy known as
“aspaklaria hame’ira” - “the clear lens”. All other prophets begin their
prophecies with
the expression “ko amar Hashem” - “so says Hashem” which denotes a certain
level of
approximation, “aspaklaria she’eina me’ira” - “an unclear lens”. However,
Moshe’s
prophecies begin with “zeh hadavar” - “this is the thing” which denotes
clarity and
precision of transmission.2 Why is this unique aspect of Moshe’s prophecy taught
through the use of the same expression that introduces the laws of vows and
oaths?
The Sifri states that pronouncing a vow is akin to “utilizing the life of
the King”
and it is this force which effectuates a change in reality, conferring a new
Halachic status
upon objects and actions.3 What does “utilizing the life of the King” mean?
The Torah relates through anthropomorphic terms that when Hashem created
man He blew into his nostrils. The Zohar comments that “the One who blew,
blew of
Himself”.4 This implies that man’s soul was created from Hashem’s own
“essence”. The
Targum describes the breath that was blown into man’s nostrils as “ruach
me’alela” - “a
speaking soul”; man was imbued by Hashem with the ability to speak.5 The Mishna
teaches that Hashem created the heavens and the earth with the power of
speech.6 When
making a vow, a person utilizes the unique form of speech that emanates from
his soul,
thereby tapping into the creative force which was used to create all
reality. Making use
of this force is what the Sifri describes as “utilizing the life of the
King”, i.e. the Divine
“essence”.
The Zohar states that when Moshe spoke it was the “Shechina midaberes misoch
gerono” - “Shechina speaking from his throat”.7 Moshe’s prophecy emanated
from the
Divine source with which he was imbued. The strength of his connection with his
Creator allowed for a clarity in transmission unparalleled by any prophet
past or future.
The same Divine connection that we posses, enabling us to create new
realities through
speech, is the vehicle through which Moshe was able to convey his prophetic
message to
the world.
1.Yad Hilchos Nedarim 1:5
2.30:2, See Mizrachi and Maharal
3.See Ramban 30:3
4.Bereishis 2:7, See Ramban, Sefer Hakaneh
5.2:7
6.Avos5:1, See Tehillim 33:6
7.Pinchas 232
GRATITUDE IS SWEETER
“Take vengeance for the Children of Israel against the Midyanites…”
(31:2)
Hashem instructs Moshe to avenge the harm inflicted upon Bnei Yisroel by the
Midyanites whose
actions caused twenty-four thousand Jews to perish in a plague.1 Although
Hashem instructs Moshe to
ensure Midyan’s destruction, Moshe sends Pinchas to carry out the mission.2
The Midrash explains that
Moshe had benefited from Midyan when fleeing Mitrayim; Yisro opened his home
and offered him a
place of refuge. Therefore, Moshe reasons that it would be a lack of
“hakaras hatov” - “gratitude” for him
to lead the attack; “bor sheshasisa mimeno al tizrok bo even” - “into a well
from which you drank, you
should not cast stones”.3 Therefore, he concludes that Hashem could
not have meant that he should lead the charge. What is the rationale
which prevents a person from taking punitive measures against an
individual who has wronged him, based solely upon a previously
received benefit?
There is a significant difference between a response which is
defined as punitive and one which is defined as vengeful. The course
of action mandated depends upon the nature of the crime. Most
crimes are motivated by the perpetrator’s perceived benefit in
committing the act. The unfortunate victim is only the vehicle for
satisfying the needs of the perpetrator. In these cases punitive
measures are called for. Vengeance is the appropriate response for an
act which is an attack upon the victim’s existence; the victim’s very
being is the focus of the attack. The root of the word “nekama” -
“revenge” is “makom” – “place”, for its purpose is to restore the
violated party’s place in existence. This is achieved by eradicating
the perpetrator’s own place in existence.
If a person has benefited from another, gratitude does not
preclude his taking punitive actions against him, for he is not
attacking the very essence of the individual being punished and
furthermore, the punishment is ultimately therapeutic to the receiver for it
corrects the negative behavior
or trait. If, however, the required course of action calls for vengeance,
which is an attack against the actual
existence of the person, having previously received a benefit restricts an
individual from taking such
actions.
Moshe understands that since Hashem is instructing him “n’kom” - “to take
vengeance against”
Midyan, Hashem must intend for someone else to be actively involved. Hakaras
hatov is the cornerstone
of our relationship with Hashem and therefore, it behooves Moshe to seek a
solution which both fulfills
Hashem’s wishes and does not undermine a Torah-mandated sensitivity.
1.24:9
2.31:3
3.Bamidbar Rabbah 22:4