Parshas Matos -Masai: Defiantly in Plain View

In this week’s Parsha, Parshas Matos Masai, the thirty-third chapter of Sefer Vayikra provides a repetitively phrased detailing of the travelling of Bnei Yisrael. They traveled here. They travelled there. They travelled here. They travelled there, and so forth and so on.

Not surprisingly, the great list of journeying begins in Mitzrayim: “They set out from Ramses in the first month…” However, rather than just recording the journey, as is done for most of the rest of the perek, the Torah includes some extra details: “It was on the morrow of the Pesach offering that Bnei Yisrael started out defiantly, in plain view of all the Egyptians. And the Egyptians were burstory. We all known the joke about Jewish hoying the dead that Hashem had struck down among them – every first born – whereby Hashem executed judgement on their gods” (Vayikra 33:3-4).

These details are fascinating because, if you think about it, these two brief, dare I say poetic, verses stated a truth about Jewish history. The Mitzrim are the protype of our oppressors throughout hilidays– they came to kill us, we won, let’s eat… well, except for the eating part. Remember, almost all of our great enemies are gone from the world, but we are still here.

One of the hardest truths for we as people to understand is that every great oppression that we as a nation faced was purposeful. Let’s take a biblical step back to Bereishis. The oppression of Bnei Yisrael in Mitzrayim was not a twist of fate; it was divinely orchestrated. The Mitzrim, on a celestial level, were given a Divine role to help shape the descendants of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov by pressuring them – as promised to Avraham at the Bris Bein Habaturim. And the common question is: If Hashem told Avraham that the people would be oppressed, why were the Mitzrim punished in such a devastating way. The answer: they took it too far. And, really, it’s all there in the Torah.

If you think back to Shemos, the enslavement of the Israelites began with what could be seen as a logical concern. They were worried about a minority population taking power. Slavery seems like a terrible and drastic measure to us, but not 100% impossible to understand. This logical concern was the permitted oppression – the oppression that Hashem foretold to Avraham during the bris bein habaturim. However, Pharoah and his Egyptians found more and more reasons to be paranoid of the Jews. When Pharoah started ordering babies killed, this no longer had anything to do with the oppression Hashem needed Bnei Yisrael to go through. This was when they took the power Hashem had given them and abused it, and this is the reason that the Mitzrim eventually suffered so drastically that they could barely acknowledge Bnei Yisrael were leaving (as noted in our quoted pasukim, Vayikra 33:3-4).

In an era like the one that appears to be unfolding before us now, the world keeps trying to point to a legitimate reason for their hatred. They point to Israel but attack all Jews because, really, anti-Semitism is the super-natural vehicle pushing Bnei Yisrael in the direction of redemption. And in such an era, we cannot lose sight of these verses: “…Bnei Yisrael started out defiantly, in plain view of all the Egyptians. And the Egyptians were burying the dead that Hashem had struck down among them…” It is an incredible reminder. This too shall pass, and we shall remove ourselves from our enemies in their clear view, but they will be too busy picking up the pieces to be able to witness the Divine hand.

Those who have chosen to go beyond reason and logic in their hatred of the Jewish people will be struck down, and we, who have held fast to our faith, will walk out defiantly and in plain view.

Am Yisrael Chai and Shabbat Shalom.

 

Parshas Matos-Masai: Lessons in Communication

 Warning: This Dvar Torah may upset people with strong feminist views.

 Parshas Matos-Masai begins with a topic that, on first read, might seem troubling to a modern-day woman. After one verse (30:3) stating that a man who makes a vow is required to uphold that vow, the Torah goes into a rather detailed explanation of the vows of women and, some might say, how easily those vows can be nullified.

 Bamidbar 30:4 begins with basic terminology: v’eesha ki tidor neder – If a woman makes a vow… but the first example is quickly explained to be a woman still living in her father’s house for reason of her youth. This woman, living in her father’s house, can make a vow or a self-imposed obligation and must keep it…unless her father objects (30:6) that day. If she has taken it upon herself while single and then gets married, her new husband can nullify that vow (30:9). Verses 11-17 describe the similar rules that apply to a married woman making a vow or a self-imposed obligation but in more detail, details that offer us great insight into the importance of communication in marriage.

 The husband of a woman who makes a vow has the ability to nullify the vow of his wife, but only if he does so within the day of hearing of her vow. This, it should be pointed out, is an interesting use of language. The nullification does not have to occur on the day the vow was made, but rather on the day that her husband learns of the vow. She is not, it appears, under an obligation to tell her husband about her vow, which allows her time to lay down the foundations for him to understand her actions so that when he does learn of them, he will not object.

 The Torah is then very explicit: “If her husband offers no objection from that day to the next, he has upheld all the vows or obligations she has assumed: he has upheld them by offering no objection on the day he found out” (30:15).

 The Torah goes to great length stressing that the husband has one day to object to the vow or self-imposed obligation. If he objects two weeks later, or even two days later, he shall bear the guilt for every time his wife does something contrary to her vow or obligation.

 The Torah wants marriage and family to succeed. It recognizes a dynamic in the pairing of male and female for him to seek a sense of being respect and her to seek affection and “protection” (yes, this is a broad generalization and a far more complicated discussion). The husband is given the role of head of the house because he needs that respect. That role does not mean he is greater/she is lesser. It is practical in that, until most recent history, a man’s role was to be protector and provider. He needed a strong sense of importance to do his job well, a sense of others depending on him. This need has not changed, even in the world of white-collar jobs and two income families. Torah philosophy consistently defines the masculine as the giver, and the giver thrives on being needed and respected for his efforts.

 The feminine, on the other hand, is the receiver and thus the one who feels fulfilled by being given to. These definitions create the dynamic brought to fruition in halacha for a “Head of the Household.” This dynamic is precisely the issue at play in the question of vows, and the unstated solution to a sense of restriction is communication.

 It is easy to see the subject in these pasukim as seconding women, except that there are some very specific words that show it is not about women per se but about a woman’s place in her family. The first halacha stated above is for a woman living in her father’s household due to her youth. This may set off concern to the modern-day reader, but the actuality is clarified in the Shulchan Aruch: “After six months of adulthood (physical maturity as defined by halacha), she is fully independent, and the father no longer has authority over her vows” (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 234:1). One could see the time when the father can restrict her vows as the tumultuous time period of early adolescence, which to many parents might make sense.

 Bamidbar 30:10, set in-between the young bride whose husband nullifies vows she made in her youth and the vows of a wife, states: “The vow of a widow or of a divorced woman, however, whatever she has imposed on herself, shall be binding upon her” (30:10). They are the same category as a woman not living under her father’s household.

 A woman is not seen as less capable or less reliable than a man in determining her future. Rather, the Torah is here recognizing that the role of Baal HaBayit (Head of the House) is given to the man. He is set as the captain of the ship so that he may best fulfill his role of giver, as protector and provider. To maintain this dynamic, the Torah restricts ways in which a woman might undermine her husband but, at the same time, limits the ways in which a man might manipulate his wife. And this leaves us at a critical juncture in which reading deeper provides a valuable lesson. If a wife wants to make a vow that will affect the household (and that covers most things since each member of a household is a cog in its functioning), she should discuss it with the head of that household. If a husband does not like changes made by his wife by having taken a vow, he cannot just nullify it once it has been accepted; rather, he must speak to her in order that she agrees to nullify it for herself.

 And, thus, we come to the age old lesson on the importance of communication.

 I wish you all a beautiful Shabbas.  

 

 

 

 

Parshas Matos-Masai: Learning from War

 War… It means far more to us today than it did a year ago. Indeed, after the actions of this week it means far more to us today than it did a month ago. The war we hoped would come to a quick and victorious end hovers on the precipice of regional escalation. And this calls to the question the conundrum of the very existence of war.

 

One would think that in the ideal world there would be no such thing as war. Utopian fantasies are often premised on the very idea of a society so advanced and enlightened that there is no fighting. And, in truth, there are certainly ideas that in the coming days of Moshiach (bimhera, byamenu) the “lion shall lie down with the lamb” and “"nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.” But that’s the dream of the future, and this week’s parsha, parshas matos-massai, is just one of several parshios in the Torah that discuss Bnei Yisrael going to war.

 

Perek lamed -aleph actually presents a particularly relevant call to arms. “So Moshe spoke to the people, saying, ‘Arm from among you men for the army, that they can be against Midian, and carry out the revenge of the Lord against Midian’” (31:3). God has instructed Moshe to arm Bnei Yisrael to fight the Midianites as his final leadership act before he dies.

 

Quite clearly, this is neither a war of defense nor a war of conquest, but specifically a war of revenge against the Midianites. To those of us raised in the 20^th or 21^st century Western culture, the idea of a war of revenge seems anything but religious or Godly. Nevertheless, that is exactly what Hashem ordered.

 

What was it that needed to be avenged? Parshas Balak, it may be recalled, contains two nations trying to interfere with the Jewish people. Balak was the king of the Moabites, and, according to the commentaries, they had reason to be concerned about the Israelites. Chizkuni, on pasuk 25:17 states: “whatever the Moabites had done, they had done because they had believed that they had a legitimate reason to fear for their lives from the Israelites. Furthermore, the Israelites had already taken possession of lands which used to be theirs before Sichon had conquered it from them in war.”  The Midianites, however, also busied themselves with Balak’s war, and Rashi points out on Bamidbar 31:2 – “The Moabites entered into the matter out of fear, because they feared that they might plunder them, since about them it was stated only, (Devarim 2:9) “Do not contend with them in battle”; but the Midianites, however, had got excited (had interfered) in a quarrel that did not concern them.”

 

This is not so different from the world we live in today, when everyone seems to have an opinion and a sense of a permission to get involved in a quarrel that does not concern them.

As much as we may disagree with their ideology, the Palestinian battle has a morsal of reason to it (which is not to say that any of their means of fighting are legitimate or that their distortions of history are acceptable. There is a country for Palestinians as understood by the term as those who lived in the Ottoman entity of Palestine and that is the Kingdom of Jordan that was created from the majority of the original territory…but I digress). However, what have Houthis of Yemen to do with it? What does Iran have to do with it?

 

But there is a deeper issue at hand as well. What was it that the Midianites did to the Israelites? They followed the advice of Balaam of Moav and attacked Israel on a moral level. They lured them into licentious behavior so that Hashem would turn His favor away from them.

 

So much of the world today seems to believe that Israel wants to be aggressive, that Israel deserves to be judged and condemned. That sentiment is not just about Israel and Zionists, but as we see through the general increase in anti-Semitism, it is about all of Klal Yisrael. The global situation today, while it is actually bringing many Jews closer to their Judaism and the community, is derailing the Jewish nation from their greater responsibility, which is to be an Ohr LeGeula, a light unto the nations.

 

We are not in a world today where Hashem directly communicates. We have no great leader to tell us exactly what to do and how. But we do have to recognize that through all the trials and tribulations our nation is going through, it is up to us to remember our mission. It is up to us to make an even greater effort to make a Kiddush Hashem and show the world who we truly are. We also have to know and recognize that it is okay to fight, it is okay to engage in war, to let the truth shine through.

 

May Hashem protect Israel and all of the brave men and women who must stand strong in the face of so much danger and who protect our nation both physically and spiritually.

301 – BRING THEM HOME, please Hashem.

 

Good Shabbas

Parshas Matos-Masai – Small Borders

Dedicated to a refuah shelaima for Sofiya Sara bas Merah and for a continued refuah for Leah Nechama bas Shulamit.

Listen to the news in many Western countries and you might hear contradictory reports about there being too many people on the planet or direly low rate of population growth in a particular country. Obviously, these reports are focused on very different concerns; nevertheless, they highlight our natural interest in how the world fulfills the most basic human commandment, the first commandment of the Torah, which is to be fruitful and multiply.

It is well known that peru urevu is a mitzvah that Jewish law takes seriously, and so one must question the fact that the Jewish people are now, and have always been, a tiny sliver of the population. Of course we can point to the horrors of modern history as to why our population is small today, but the fact of the matter is that we have always been an insignificant percentage – numerically speaking.  The constant devastations that have limited our numbers are accounted for in many of the upcoming parshios in Sefer Devarim that make clear the consequences of our betrayal of the covenant, but perhaps we can find in this week’s parsha a different perspective – a hope filled perspective - on our size. Perhaps, looking at the description of the borders of the land, we might see that this was the plan all of long.

 

The borders of the Promised Land, as delineated in Perek 34, do not create an enormous territory. In the next Perek, Hashem specifies that the Leviim were to have 48 small cities, six of which were to be cities of refuge. The size of our land appears to be not much different than that of the State of Israel today, which we know is smaller that most states in the United States. There have always been kingdoms of far greater land mass. If Hashem had intended the Jewish people to grow strong in the way that other nations have grown strong – through physical presence and force of population - would He not have sanctified a far greater territory as that destined for Bnei Yisrael.

 

One could argue that more land was not needed for the nation that Hashem brought forth from slavery in Egypt, but the Promised Land (even with more territory as delineated elsewhere) was never large. It wasn’t large because it was something far greater. This small swath of land nestled against the Mediterranean is the land Hashem promised Avraham, it is the land walked and known by our forefathers. It was never “big,” but it was always holy.

 

Other than nodding our heads at the fact that we remain a small nation, what can we gain from considering the size of the Promised Land, the limitations this infers for the future population? Bnei Yisrael are pledged with being an “Am Kadosh” (a holy nation), a “mamleches kohanim” (a nation of priests), and so forth. The kohanim among the Jewish people were a small sliver of the population, descendants of one man out of thousands. And the kohanim were given the honor of replacing the firstborn sons of the nation, which is, again, a small percentage of a population. To be holy means to be separate, or to separate one’s selves, and to form a people that can truly live up to that title, implies that there will be limits. Bnei Yisrael is not destined to conquer the world with an army or to overpower the world with might. Bnei Yisrael is destined to present to the world the very real possibility of living a life dedicated to serving Hashem.

 

There is a frequently discussed Midrash that explains that when the Children of Israel left Egypt, only a fifth of the people followed Moshe. The other 80% perished in the plague of Darkness. In many ways, this Midrash is a key to understanding the steady disproportion of the Jewish people, and also, perhaps, modern day assimilation into Western society. Choosing to enter the wilderness in order to serve Hashem is not easy, even for those who are born into a fully observant lifestyle. Being an Am Kadosh requires dedication, and that dedication limits Bnei Yisrael. Those limitations, however, are the key to our destiny. Rather than worry over our size, our job is worry about being able to fill the role that merits the fullness of the Promised Land.

 

The Jewish people have never needed a vast population to influence the world; we have never needed to swarm over the earth and force people to join us. The power of the Jewish people, the secret of our survival for so many millenia, has been our choice to stay dedicated to our role. The Land of Israel was then and will be the perfect size for us in the coming days when the state of the world will recognize our sanctified role.

 

May we see the days of redemption and the coming of Moshiach swiftly in our time.

 

Parshos Matos-Masai: Using Our Roles

WARNING: THIS DVAR TORAH IS NOT POLITCALLY CORRECT BY 21^ST CENTURY STANDARDS

The Book of Numbers, Sefer Bamidbar, concludes just as Bnei Yisrael are ready to enter the Promised Land. All that remains is Moshe’s final speech, which is Sefer Devarim, the Book of Deuteronomy. In the last parshiot of Bamidbar, Matos-Masai, which are usually read together, we learn some interesting lessons on the importance of societal strength over personal happiness in the realm of family values.

One of the more well-known and “fun” to discuss portions of the parsha is the section pertaining to the tribes of Reuven and Gad. These two tribes see the lovely pasture-land where they are encamped and decided that they wish to remain there. When they ask Moshe for permission to do so, he rebukes them for stating: “Pens for the flock shall we build here for our livestock and cities for our small children” (Bamidbar 32:17). Their values are mixed up, he tells them. They understand then that their responsibility is to build cities for their small children and then pens for their livestock. But this passage does not just help them realize that their families come before their material security. In specifying that the men of Gad and Reuven must first build cities and pens and then leave to go and fight for the Promised Land, Moshe is subtly reinforcing the idea that as comfortable as a man’s home may be, he cannot enjoy the comforts of home until he has ensured its security and protection (which in this case means assisting in the conquest of Eretz Yisrael so that all of the people could build for their families).

To the 21^st century ear, this sounds old fashioned. We do not think of the world as dangerous in the ways it once was. And women can, and do, go out into the world to support and protect themselves and their homes.  Indeed, there is much that is in the parshios of Matos-Masai that would raise an eyebrow of any feminist – and perhaps of most women raised in modern society. In fact, the parshios are bookended by such subjects! Parshas Matos begins with the laws of vows and focuses heavily on the circumstances under which a woman’s vow is upheld or invalidated by her father or husband. And Parshas Masai concludes with the men of Menashe seeming to want to undo Hashem’s ruling that Tzelaphchad’s daughters – who had no brother – could inherit their father’s land. A complaint to which Moshe brings Hashem’s response that the five sisters, and any future women in a similar situation, can only marry men from within their tribe.

Shalom – peace – is a primary goal of halacha. Shalom comes from shelaimus, completion, and the societal dynamics set out by the Torah are meant to guide Bnei Yisrael into creating an ideal, Torah society. This is not about individual wants and needs, it is about the weave of the fabric of a strong, sustainable society.

Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsh wrote the following at the conclusion of the opening section of Matos:

…the general declaration of the gravity and binding force of the spoken word is only mentioned here as introduction and indeed as a contrast. A man has no power whatsoever to annul his own vows, for that he has to go to his national contemporaries, but towards his young daughter and his wife he has restricted authority to intervene… The calling of woman is, to be absorbed into the home of a man as the most important factor of the component parts of that home. But it is not her calling to found a home independently….

 

To this should be added his comments on 30:4 (earlier in the section on a woman’s vows):

The moral greatness of the woman’s calling in life itself demands entering and adopting herself to a position in life created by another. The woman herself does not provide the house. She enters the home provided by the man and rules in it as the happiness-bringing administrator of all that is to be found there, in the sanctity of manners, and morals and feeling directed towards God. Still more than the man has the woman to guard against making restrictions, abnormal arrangements in the course of her life, they could permanently stand in the way of the fulfilment of her calling…

The power of a father or husband to annul a vow is not about the individual. A woman can make a vow, but that vow cannot go against the current or future possibility of creating a peaceful home by creating a conflict with her husband (or future husband). And we know that a woman can make a vow because it is clearly stated that a vow made by a widow or a divorcee is binding. 

Understanding of the distinction between individual need and societal need is also important to understand the ruling at the end of Masai that states: “And every daughter that has an inheritance from the tribes of Bnei Yisrael shall marry one of the tribe of her father” (36:8). To maintain the larger society, property had to stay in its rightful portion, to its proper tribe. One must look at it from that point of view rather than a modern, feminist point of view as the suppression of women’s independence. If that had been the goal, then God’s immediate response through Moshe would not have been: “They may marry anyone they wish. But they shall marry into a clan of their father’s tribe.” The first statement is a woman’s right to make her own decisions, a very important point of Jewish law.

Twenty-first century society places a great deal of emphasis on making oneself happy. The Torah ideal, however, is to use one’s position in the world to find fulfillment and build toward shalom, then one can be happy. Yes, there are limitations, but those limitations – those rules and roles – are meant to help the larger society attain the ultimate goal of a society dedicated to Hashem.