Parshas Matos
On Line
"...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 anthropomorphically 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.Avos 5:1, 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