Rabbi Frand on Parshas Chukas-Balak
These divrei Torah were adapted from the hashkafa portion of Rabbi Yissocher
Frand's Commuter Chavrusah Tapes on the weekly portion: Tape #423, The
Tefilah of a Tzadik for a Choleh. Good Shabbos!
There Are None So Blind As Those Who Will Not See
In Parshas Chukas we read about a very upsetting incident -- the sin of the
"Waters of Contention" (Mei Merivah), concerning which we are taught that
Moshe and Aharon did something "wrong" commensurate to their lofty stature.
The pasuk says: Hashem said to Moshe and to Aharon, "Because you did not
believe in Me to sanctify Me in the eyes of the Children of Israel,
therefore you will not bring this congregation to the Land that I have given
them." [Bamidbar 20:12]. This is an example of G-d being exacting in his
expectation of the righteous -- like the width of a hair's breadth [Bava
Kamma 50a].
One of the most moving narratives in the Torah is contained in the Torah
reading that we read on Simchas Torah. We complete the Torah and read the
last 8 pasukim, beginning with the words "And Moshe died there..." [Devorim
34:5]. We know how much Moshe wanted to go into Eretz Yisrael and we
empathize with how difficult it was for Moshe to be denied this last request
because of the minute little slip that happened in Parshas Chukas by the
incident of Mei Merivah.
There are a dozen or more different interpretations as to what exactly Moshe
and Aharon did wrong. The Ramba"n cites an interesting interpretation in the
name of Rabbeinu Chananel. The sin was that Moshe said, "Shall 'We' bring
forth for you water from this rock?" [Bamidbar 20:10]. Rabbeinu Chananel
focuses on the use of the first person plural and suggests that people might
be mislead and think that it was by virtue of their own powers that Moshe
and Aharon would bring forth water from the rock. Moshe should have said,
according to Rabbeinu Chananel, "Will 'He' bring forth for you water from
this rock?"
They were punished for this slight error in grammatical inference, which
might cause people to think that Moshe and Aharon were more than just
intermediaries, and that it was not necessarily G-d who was 'calling the
shots'. That is the sin of Mei Merivah according to Rabbeinu Chananel.
Rav Simcha Zissel Brody (Rosh Yeshiva of the 'Chevron' Yeshiva) observed the
following: What is the context here? Rashi cites the teaching of Chazal that
this was one of the miraculous situations where a small geographical space
held a large multitude of people. The whole incident was clearly miraculous
from start to finish. Over 2 million people were surrounding the rock and
staring at it 'face to face'. Such a phenomenon is patently impossible
through normal rules of nature. The gushing flow of the water from the rock
certainly defied the laws of physics. Even if the rock had been hollow, more
water emerged from it than it would ever be capable of holding. The whole
context and environment of everything that occurred during this incident
screams out 'Nes!' [MIRACLE!]
So what is Rabbeinu Chananel suggesting? Could someone have thought to say
"this was accomplished by Moshe Rabbeinu, not by G-d"? How could anyone be
so blind?
The answer is that people who want to be blind and who want to deny miracles
have the ability to do so in the face of overwhelming evidence. We see this
throughout history. There are situations that the Jewish people have
experienced, which defy rational explanation. Even in our own time, in our
own days, we have seen it! The ONLY rational explanation is that they were
miracles from Heaven!
We do not even need to go back to the miraculous Six-Day War. We can go back
to the (first) Gulf War when only 3 people were killed by dozens of Scud
rockets aimed at Eretz Yisrael. This was an open miracle. And yet, the
entire population there did not become Ba'alei Teshuvah [repentant]. There
are never shortages of 'explanations' for how it could have happened or why
it happened. The whole situation can cry out Nes! Nes! Nes! But people who
want to deny will find ways to deny.
This is the practical lesson of Rabbeinu Chananel's interpretation. There
are none so blind as those who will not see.
A Lesson In Scrutiny
Rav Mordechai Gifter made an interesting point regarding the variety of
disparate interpretations given by the commentaries to the 'sin' of Mei
Merivah. At first glance, the situation seems quite innocuous. On the
surface, it seems that Moshe Rabbeinu did not do anything wrong. But what
emerges from all the interpretations is that when analyzing an act with a
microscope from every single angle, it is not hard to find many
'imperfections' in the act, even an act done by the likes of Moshe Rabbeinu.
If, Rav Gifter pointed out, it is so easy to come up with such a long
laundry list of 'crimes' committed by Moshe in this seemingly brief and
innocuous incident, what can be said about our own actions? Sometimes when
things 'go wrong' for us, we start asking theological questions: "I'm such a
good guy. Why are these things happening to me? What did I do wrong?"
The lesson is that if Moshe's one act could be so laden with "possibly wrong
nuances," there is certainly room to scrutinize our own actions. Actions
that we even think to be 'mitzvos' -- might sometimes fall far short of
pristine acts of nobility.
This is the basis of the Rabbinic statement "If one sees punishment
befalling him, he should scrutinize his actions" (ye-fash-pesh b'ma-sav)
[Brochos 5a]. Unfortunately, we sometimes look at our behavior superficially
and conclude, "I still do not understand what I am doing wrong". We should
scrutinize our own actions in the same fashion that the Torah commentaries
scrutinize the incident of Mei Merivah to determine the basis of Moshe's
punishment. Then we will perhaps find that our deeds are not as perfect as
we would like to think.
It All Stems From The Same Source
The parsha contains the plague of the attack of snakes [Bamidbar 21:8]. In
order to stop the plague, Moshe was told "Make for yourself a serpent and
place it upon a flagpole". The antidote for the attack by snakes was to
fashion a copper serpent and place it atop a banner. Anyone who was bitten
by the snake would look at the banner and become healed.
Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz notes the irony of the fact that the cure for the
snake bites should itself be a snake. It would be more logical to put the
opposite thing on the banner -- a vial of anti-snake serum or anti-poison
serum. One would think that the last thing in the world that would be
effective as a cure would be a snake itself!
What is the symbolism of the fact that the cause of the problem is itself
the item to look at in order to cure the problem?
Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz answers that when a person becomes angry with someone,
he may yell at or strike him. On the other hand when we love someone, we
kiss or embrace the person. These two different emotions -- anger and love -
- engender two different manifestations. With G-d, on the other hand,
everything is from the same source. When He punishes us, it is not out of
anger. It is either in order for us to grow from the experience or in order
for the experience to atone for us, or in order to test us in some way.
Whatever the explanation, G-d never acts out of spite or anger. Therefore,
the same source for the pain can be the source for the cure. The snake
caused the pain and the same snake can cause the cure because even the
'pain' was a form of G-d's love.
"For as a father disciplines his children, this is how the L-rd disciplines
you." [Devorim 8:5] When a father disciplines his children, it should never
be out of anger. Discipline should always serve the purpose of the child's
need to rectify him or her self.
Therefore, it is perfectly legitimate that the same snake that killed can be
the snake that brings life. It all comes from the same source of love and
concern for His children.
This week's write-up is adapted from the hashkafa portion of Rabbi Yissocher
Frand's Commuter Chavrusah Torah Tapes on the weekly Torah portion (# 423).
The corresponding halachic portion for this tape is: The Tefilah of a Tzadik
for a Choleh. The complete list of halachic portions for this parsha from
the Commuter Chavrusah Series are:
Also Available: Mesorah / Artscroll has published a collection
of Rabbi Frand's essays. The book is entitled:
and is available through your local Hebrew book store or from
Project Genesis, 1-410-654-1799.
