Likkutei Sichos, Vol. VIII, p. 186ff.

I

This week's Torah reading relates that the tribes of Reuven and Gad had many herds. Therefore they spoke to Moshe, saying:[1] "The land which G-d has smitten before the congregation of Israel is a land fit for herds, and your servants possess herds." Therefore they asked Moshe:[2] "Give this land to your servants as an inheritance. Do not have us cross the Jordan."

Moshe answered them:[3] "Will your brothers go out to war while you dwell here?! Why discourage the hearts of the children of Israel from crossing into the land?", concluding with the words of censure: "This is what your ancestors did...," as will be explained.

The question arises: How could these tribes even suppose that the land for which the entire Jewish people fought would be given to them as an inheritance? [Why] should they - the tribes of Gad and Reuven - dwell on that land, while the remainder of the Jewish people go out and wage war in Eretz Yisrael?[4]

The saintly Or HaChayim[5] resolves this difficulty, explaining that [the tribes of Gad and Reuven] clarified this issue by [the way they described the land]: "the land which G-d has smitten before the congregation of Israel." Since G-d would wage war on behalf of the Jewish people, their help would not be necessary in conquering the lands on the other side of the Jordan.

[In this light,] Moshe's answer to them: "Will your brothers go out to war while you dwell here?!" can be interpreted to mean: Yes, it is G-d who wages the war, but [the Jews] must at least [make the effort of] going out to war. Therefore it is inappropriate for you to settle here while your brothers go out to war.

Moshe also added another point: "Why discourage the hearts of the children of Israel from crossing into the land?" By staying in Transjordan, the tribes of Gad and Reuven would have a demoralizing effect on the Jewish people and discourage them from entering Eretz Yisrael. The people at large would interpret the decision of the tribes of Gad and Reuven to remain on the eastern side of the Jordan as stemming from fear. (And they would explain that the statement: "The land which G-d has smitten before the congregation of Israel" is merely a facade to camouflage these feelings.) This would weaken the resolve of the people as a whole.

Moshe then continued, rebuking them: "This is what your ancestors did." He was referring to the spies who had discouraged the Jewish people from entering Eretz Yisrael. And Moshe concluded:[6] "Behold! You have arisen in the place of your ancestors."

This interpretation raises several questions, among them:

1. By saying: "which G-d has smitten before the congregation of Israel," the tribes of Gad and Reuven desired to clarify not only that the Jewish people could conquer Eretz Yisrael, but that they would not even have any difficulty in this endeavor. Seemingly, this is the direct opposite of the argument of the spies who stated:[7] "We cannot ascend." Why then should Moshe compare them to the spies, saying:6 "Behold! You have arisen in the place of your ancestors, a society of sinful people," because of the mere possibility that their decision to remain on the eastern side of the Jordan came as a result of fear.[8]

2. The tribes of Gad and Reuven approached Moshe with a request: "If we have found favor in your eyes, do not have us cross the Jordan." It is obvious that if Moshe would have denied their request, they would have been ready to enter Eretz Yisrael, and thus they would not "discourage the hearts of the children of Israel." When Moshe did not accept their request, why did he have to rebuke them in such a lengthy manner, saying: "You have arisen in the place of your ancestors." Why such a [serious] rebuke?

3. After the tribes of Gad and Reuven volunteered to "proceed as a vanguard," Moshe immediately accepted their request without any further rebuke. This implies that their settling on the eastern bank of Jordan was in accordance with the Divine intent. We find, however, that our Sages[9] describe their decision to settle there with the verse:[10] "An inheritance seized hastily at the outset, whose end was not blessed." And they explain that [because the tribes of Gad and Reuven "seized their inheritance hastily,"] they were exiled before the other Jewish people.

II

On the surface, it is possible to explain that Moshe's complaint was (not [directed] only against [these tribe's apparent] unwillingness to go to war, but also) against their choice of another land instead of Eretz Yisrael,[11] and their praise of that land, stating that it possessed an advantage over Eretz Yisrael in being "a land fit for herds."[12]

This is reflected in Moshe's words "Why will you discourage...? This is what your ancestors did." The spies convinced (themselves and) the Jews not to enter Eretz Yisrael (not only by saying: "We cannot ascend," but also) by speaking unfavorably about Eretz Yisrael, saying: "This is its fruit."[13] (This was said even before they said:[14] "But the nation that dwells in the land is powerful.") Similarly, by saying that this land [Transjordan] is better than Eretz Yisrael, the tribes of Gad and Reuven[15] would prevent (themselves) and the other Jews from entering[16] "the land which G-d gave them."[17]

{On this basis, we can appreciate why, when saying "This is what your ancestors did," Moshe said: "They went up from the wadi of Eshkol."[18] [Here, Moshe was making an allusion, for eshkol means "a cluster," referring] to "the cluster of grapes which the children of Israel cut from there."[19] The spies [showed the Jewish people this cluster when they] said: "This is its fruit."}

This also enables us to appreciate why even after the tribes of Gad and Reuven promised to proceed as "a vanguard before the Jewish people"[20] and Moshe agreed,[21] [settling in Transjordan] was considered an undesirable act (as mentioned in section I). Moshe's agreement to their stipulation related only to the effect their decision would have on other Jews. [By proceeding as a vanguard, they would not discourage them.] For the tribes of Gad and Reuven themselves, [however,] settling in a land which is "outside of Eretz Yisrael" is considered undesirable.[22]

This explanation, however, raises another question: Moshe was concerned, not only with our people as a whole, but with every member of our people. Certainly, he was concerned with two and a half tribes. Why then did Moshe agree to a plan which - although it forewarned the possibility of problems arising with regard to the other tribes - appears to show a lack of concern for the fact that the tribes of Gad and Reuven would not receive an inheritance in Eretz Yisrael?[23]

III

[The above difficulty can be resolved on the basis of] the explanations in Chassidus[24] why the tribes of Reuven and Gad desired to remain in Transjordan and occupy themselves with pasturing flocks. Working as a shepherd does not involve that many disturbances[25] [or intense involvement with worldly matters]. While pursuing that occupation, it is still possible to remain connected to G-d.

For this reason,[26] the Patriarchs and Yaakov's sons

(- with the exception of Yosef -) chose to work as shepherds, so they would not be distracted by worldly matters and [would] remain a "chariot," [i.e., a medium for the expression] of G-dliness.

On this basis, we can appreciate [how] the comparison between the tribes of Gad and Reuven and the spies [reflects] the inner dimension [of their conduct]. The spies desired to remain in the desert [for a spiritual motive]:[27] They knew that when they entered Eretz Yisrael, the manna would cease to descend and they would have to survive on ordinary bread. This would require the performance of many different labors: plowing, sowing, and the like. Therefore, [the spies] desired to remain in the desert, sequestered from the world. [In the desert,] even their physical eating (and drinking) was "bread from heaven" (and water from Miriam's well).

The Patriarchs and Yaakov's sons conducted themselves in a [similar] manner. Nevertheless, for the spies, this was considered as a sin. Such conduct was acceptable before the giving of the Torah. [The giving of the Torah, however, changed the spiritual focus of the world.] The Torah was given to make the physical world a medium for G-dliness.[28] Hence, from that time onward, [our Divine service] must involve [working] with material entities, transforming [the world into] a dwelling for G-d.

The above, however, reinforces the question asked previously (at the conclusion of section II): Why did Moshe agree to allow the tribes of Gad and Reuven to remain in Transjordan and not enter Eretz Yisrael?

IV

These questions can be resolved as follows: Even after the giving of the Torah, the Jewish people are divided into two groups: scholars and businessmen,[29] Yissachar and Zevulun, masters of Torah and masters of good deeds.[30]

On the surface, since the intent of the giving of the Torah is, as explained above, making the world a medium for G-dliness, seemingly, the entire Jewish people should be involved in worldly affairs, [so that they will bring G-dliness to this sphere of activity].

The resolution of the matter [depends on the conception that] {G-d's dwelling is not only a dwelling for His essence, but also that His essence will be revealed there.[31]} Therefore for this intent to be consummated, [two types of Divine service] are necessary:

1. the performance of mitzvos with material entities which draws down G-d's essence, and also,

2. the study of the Torah which enables the essential influence (drawn down through the observance of mitzvos) to be revealed.

For this reason, there must be "masters of Torah" [among the Jewish people]. For the study of the Torah endows the observance of the mitzvos performed by "the masters of good deeds" with light.[32] This enables the essential influence drawn down by these good deeds to be revealed.

Nevertheless, the essential influence is drawn down (primarily) by (the masters of) good deeds, and (the Divine service of the masters of) Torah is (primarily) to illuminate and reveal the achievement accomplished through the performance of the mitzvos.[33] Therefore, it has been established that there be few "masters of Torah," with the majority of the Jews involved in worldly tasks.[34]

V

This is one of the differences between the tribes of Gad and Reuven, and the spies. The spies desired that the entire Jewish people remain outside of Eretz Yisrael. This is certainly the opposite of G-d's intent. The tribes of Gad and Reuven, by contrast, desired that (only) they remain in Transjordan [and be occupied as shepherds]. This is not the opposite of the Divine intent. On the contrary, a small proportion of the Jewish people must follow this thrust of Divine service.

This said, Moshe still rebuked [the tribes of Gad and Reuven], telling them: "This is what your ancestors did." For the mission of the masters of the Torah is to illuminate and increase the vitality of the Divine service of the masters of good deeds.

As has been mentioned on other occasions,[35] one of the interpretations of [the new development brought about by the giving of the Torah:] "the upper realms will descend to the lower realms,"[36] is that the Torah scholars should extend themselves to establish contact with working people and influence them.[37]

Therefore, their request, "Do not have us cross the Jordan," i.e., that they be separated from Eretz Yisrael, was the opposite of G-d's intent. Nevertheless, after Moshe's rebuke called forth their mesirus nefesh for the (conquest of Eretz Yisrael, which was intended to lead to the) Divine service of Eretz Yisrael,[38] as they said: "We will proceed as the vanguard before the Jewish people," Moshe agreed to allow them to take their portion in Transjordan.

Their willingness to advance as the vanguard demonstrated that their desire to remain in Transjordan (came not because they desired to remain apart from worldly affairs,[39] but) rather because within the intent of the Divine service of creating a dwelling for G-d, [there are two thrusts,] and they chose the service of "masters of Torah."

VI

Nevertheless, despite the above explanation, [their choice of Transjordan] represented - on a refined level - a deviation from [G-d's] ultimate inner intent.[40] Therefore, their choice is described as "An inheritance seized hastily at the outset"; it followed the approach of Tohu, the opposite of the settled approach that characterizes [the realm of] Tikkun.

For the essence and the inner dimension of G-d's intent is drawing down lights into vessels, making a dwelling for Him in the lower realms.

(Adapted from the maamar entitled U'Mikneh Rav, 5720 and Sichos Shabbos Parshas Mattos-Maasei, 5719)

   

Notes:

1. (Back to text) Bamidbar 32:4.

2. (Back to text) Ibid.:5.

3. (Back to text) Ibid.:6-8.

4. (Back to text) The Alshich raises a similar question in his commentary to the parshah (question 12).

   The Ramban (in his commentary to 32:2) states: "Moshe suspected that they made these statements because of their fear of the inhabitants of the land of Canaan. They answered him: 'Heaven forbid, that we should fear them. On the contrary, we will proceed as the vanguard.'"

   It appears from the Ramban's words that the tribes of Gad and Reuven were willing to cross the Jordan at the outset. According to a simple interpretation of the passage, however, their statement: "Do not have us cross the Jordan," (not "do not grant us an inheritance") [indicates that they did not desire to enter the land of Canaan at all]. Moreover, it is difficult to say that Moshe misunderstood their intent. Therefore (according to the simple meaning of the verse) the interpretations of the Alshich and the Or HaChayim appear most appropriate.

5. (Back to text) In his commentary to Bamidbar 32:3 [see also the commentary of the Alshich].

6. (Back to text) Bamidbar 32:14.

7. (Back to text) Ibid., 13:31.

8. (Back to text) The Alshich explains Moshe's statements as follows:

   Perhaps this is not what is in your hearts, for your words do not contain any perverseness or obstinacy. [Nevertheless, although] you have begun in a praiseworthy manner, you might conclude in an undesirable manner. This is what your ancestors did. At the outset, they showed signs of purity and began [speaking] in a praiseworthy manner but they concluded in an undesirable manner. Perhaps you have the same intent in your hearts.

   This explanation, however, requires explanation: The words [of the tribes of Gad and Reuven] did "not contain any perverseness or obstinacy." Moshe merely suspected that "you might conclude in an undesirable manner." Why then did he condemn them with definity, employing strict words of censure: "You have arisen in the place of your ancestors, a society of sinful people"?

9. (Back to text) Bamidbar Rabbah 22:7, 9.

10. (Back to text) Mishlei 20:21.

    Rashi (in his commentary to Mishlei, ibid.; see similar statements in Bamidbar Rabbah) states that the tribes of Gad and Reuven "spoke rashly, considering entities that deserve primary importance, secondary. For they mentioned their sheep before mentioning their children."

    [Nevertheless,] after Moshe reproved them, saying (Bamidbar 32:24, see Rashi, Bamidbar 32:16): "Build cities for your children (first) and (afterwards,) pens for your sheep," we can certainly presume that they followed Moshe's directive (as indicated by Bamidbar 32:47). Therefore, it is not logical to assume that they were exiled before all the other tribes, [just] because [originally,] they mentioned their sheep before their children. Instead, we must assume that they actually did something that was undesirable.

    This is reflected in the statements Rashi makes previously, that the phrase "an inheritance seized hastily at the outset," refers to the fact that "they hurried to take their inheritance in Transjordan." Similarly, the Midrash (22:7) explains [that their error was] "to settle outside of Eretz Yisrael. Therefore they were exiled before the other tribes."

    See also the Matnas Kehunah (quoting Rashi) commenting on Bereishis Rabbah 72:1 which states: "They took [an inheritance] in Transjordan which became available to them first even though Eretz Yisrael was preferable to it." See also Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 50b, which explains that this is what is meant by "an inheritance seized hastily at the outset."*

    ---

    * Likkutei Torah states "that what was incorrect in what they did was that they gave primacy to entities of secondary importance." However:

    1. This explanation is quoted in continuation of the interpretation of the verse (Mishlei 22:7): "Educate a child according to his path," which explains that "it is desirable and praiseworthy to do such." The beginning of the maamar, however, states: "Note the interpretation of the simple meaning in the Matanas Kehunah and the Yidai Moshe which cites the explanation of Rashi. It is correct."

    2. Even after explaining the advantage of "grazing land," Likkutei Torah states: "Eretz Yisrael is unique. They, however, chose to settle permanently in the grazing land."

11. (Back to text) Note also the commentary of the Or HaChayim (to verses 3 and 9) which states that by saying "the land which G-d has smitten before the children of Israel," they also explained "the complaint that they rejected the Holy Land." [For since the Jewish people as a communal entity conquered the land, their land] is also considered as part of Eretz Yisrael, and is granted the sanctity of the Holy Land.] With the words, "to the land which G-d grants you," Moshe, by contrast, was explaining that the lands of Sichon and Og were "not included in the land which G-d gave to Avraham."

    See also Keilim 1:6; Bamidbar Rabbah 7:8, 22:7; Or HaTorah, Mattos, p. 1340; and Likkutei Sichos, Vol. VII, p. 279, Vol. XIII, p. 124-125, note 20, [which explain the status of Transjordan].

12. (Back to text) See the Tzror HaMor who writes: "Moshe replied to them: 'This land is cherished above all lands. It is given to you by G-d. How can you reject it? You are angering G-d and repudiating the holy land.'"

13. (Back to text) Bamidbar 13:27; see Sotah 34a; Rashi, Bamidbar 13:23 [which explains that their intent was to imply that just as the fruits of Eretz Yisrael are uniquely large, so too, are the people who dwell there].

14. (Back to text) Bamidbar 13:28.

15. (Back to text) On the basis of the explanation above, we can appreciate the translation Targum Yonason ben Uziel offers to verses 7 and 9: "nullify the will of the children of Israel," and "nullify the desire of their heart." On the surface, if the question was fear of war, not only would they lack the desire to ascend to Eretz Yisrael, their desire would have been the direct opposite.

    [Nevertheless,] in this situation, we are speaking (not about an argument like that of the spies: "We cannot ascend,") but only an insinuation that Eretz Yisrael is not a good land. (More specifically, the tribes of Gad and Reuven [did not speak negatively against Eretz Yisrael]. They just stated that [for them] there was an advantage in the lands of Sichon and Og. Thus although this negated the desire of the Jewish people to ascend to Eretz Yisrael, (it did not create an opposite will).

16. (Back to text) Rashi (in his commentary to Bamidbar 32:7) states: "They will think that you are afraid to cross [the Jordan] because of the war." It is, however, difficult to say that because "they will think that you are afraid," Moshe would [condemn the tribes of Gad and Reuven so severely,] saying: "You have arisen in the place of your ancestors, a society of sinful people."

    Thus we are forced to say that Moshe's statements involved two dimensions:

    1. "Why discourage?" - because they will think that you are afraid; and

    2. "This is what your ancestors did" - speaking unfavorably about the land itself, as explained.

17. (Back to text) Bamidbar 32:7,9. See the Tzror HaMor who states that because of the actions of the tribes of Gad and Reuven, the remainder of the Jewish people might think that there is a great liability or a hidden difficulty [with the land].

18. (Back to text) Bamidbar 32:9.

19. (Back to text) Ibid. 13:24.

20. (Back to text) Ibid. 32:17.

21. (Back to text) Ibid.:20ff.

22. (Back to text) Bamidbar Rabbah 22:7. See also note 6. Note also the commentary of R. Ovadiah Seforno (Bamidbar 32:33) which states that Moshe agreed to their suggestion only as not to create a controversy.

23. (Back to text) The question becomes even stronger with regard to the half tribe of Menasheh who, according to the simple meaning of passage (see Bamidbar 32:33, 40), did not seek to settle outside of Eretz Yisrael, but as the Ramban explains, were granted these lands by Moshe.

24. (Back to text) See Or HaTorah, Mattos, p. 1339, and the maamarim entitled U'Mikneh Rav, 5629 and 5666.

25. (Back to text) See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V, p. 74, note 59.

26. (Back to text) See Toras Chayim, Vayechi, p. 102b.

27. (Back to text) See Likkutei Torah, beginning of Shlach; Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, Parshas Shlach.

28. (Back to text) For this reason, the Torah was given on this mortal plane. See Shabbos 88b ff., and the maamar entitled Vichol HaAm, 5700, et al.

29. (Back to text) See Torah Or, Parshas Terumah; note also our Sages' discussion with regard to which is the higher rung of Divine service: Torah study or deed (Kiddushin 40b; Tikkunei Zohar 6a); see also Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 9.

30. (Back to text) See also Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 5 (p. 109a); the Mitteler Rebbe's Biurei HaZohar, Parshas Vayeishev (p. 25a,b) and the Tzemach Tzedek's Biurei HaZohar, Vol. I, p. 134.

31. (Back to text) See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, p. 1054.

32. (Back to text) Similarly, within every individual's [Divine service, there must be a fusion of both thrusts]. Therefore even businessmen are required to study at least [a minimal amount,] one chapter in the morning and one chapter in the evening, [each day].

33. (Back to text) See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V, p. 245, translated in Vol. I, p. 43ff., of this series, which explains that the concept that the essence must [ultimately] be revealed is (not an incremental factor, but rather) fundamental to drawing down the essence itself. [For an essential truth cannot be forced to remain hidden forever. Since our world is a dwelling for G-d, not only is His essence found here, but ultimately, that essence will be revealed.]

    {This explains the reason: "A person should always occupy himself with the Torah, (even) without the desired intent, because from involvement without the proper intent will come involvement with the proper intent" (Pesachim 50b). Since G-d's essence is above being defined as hidden or revealed, were the influence from His essence (drawn down through the observance of mitzvos) forced to remain hidden [and never be expressed in observance with the desired intent], that would be a proof that this influence does not stem from His essence.

    Nevertheless, since His essence is drawn down through the performance of mitzvos, the deed [- and not the intent - of the mitzvos] is of primary importance.

34. (Back to text) See Berachos 35b which states: "Many followed the approach of Rabbi Yishmael [which advocates combining worldly activity and Torah study] and they were successful. Others followed the approach of Rabbi Shimon [which advocates dedicating oneself solely to Torah study] and they were not successful."

35. (Back to text) See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. VIII, p. 117ff.

36. (Back to text) Shmos Rabbah 12:3; Midrash Tanchuma, Va'eira, sec. 15.

37. (Back to text) Indeed, we find that with regard to the students of the Torah themselves, it is said (Yevamos 109b; Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 5a): "Whoever says I possess only the Torah, does not even possess the Torah." Instead, the study of the Torah must be coupled with deeds of kindness.

38. (Back to text) This concept can be associated with the passage that begins the Torah reading: "And Moshe spoke to the heads of the tribes (Bamidbar 30:2 ff.) [which speaks about vows]. As our Sages say (Avos 3:13): "Vows are a safeguard to austerity." [Austerity] parallels the Divine service of shepherds, [remaining separate from worldly activity], as appropriate for "a land fit for pasture."

    Releasing the vows (- i.e., that one does not have to separate oneself from material activity, and on the contrary, one should refine and elevate [the world's] material substance -) parallels the Divine service of Eretz Yisrael.

    The potential for the "heads of the tribes" to release vows came through Moshe speaking to them (Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar 85b; the end of the maamar entitled Vayidaber Moshe, 5672). Similarly, it was Moshe's [rebuke] which empowered the tribes of Gad and Reuven to attain (mesirus nefesh for) the Divine service of Eretz Yisrael.

39. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: An approach which is not appropriate after the giving of the Torah.]

40. (Back to text) A parallel can be drawn to the conduct of Ben Azzai [who did not marry, because he desired to devote all of his energies to the study of Torah] (Yevamos 63b). "There is no prohibition involved if a person desires to study Torah throughout his life and never marry at all" (Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Hilchos Talmud Torah, Kuntres Acharon, the beginning of ch. 3). Nevertheless, "this is not the counsel of the wise who instruct a person to choose a direct path" (ibid.).

    It can be explained that after the tribes of Gad and Reuven volunteered to proceed as a vanguard for the Jewish people, their efforts could be considered as "a rung of holiness." Therefore, Moshe agreed to it. Afterwards, however, [this approach] led to "an inheritance seized hastily."

    [To develop the parallel to] Ben Azzai's [conduct]: At the outset, his unwillingness to marry because "my soul desires the Torah" (Yevamos, loc. cit.) reflected a level of ratzu, yearning for G-dliness, within the approach of Tikkun. Nevertheless, [this approach ultimately] led to [his entry into the Pardes (the lush profusion of mystic experience possible through the Kabbalah) at which time he] "peered in [and died]" (Chagigah 14b), an approach which paralleled the ratzu of Tohu.

    [With regard to both the tribes of Gad and Reuven and Ben Azzai, at the outset, there was a positive tendency - but one which reflected a slight deviation from G-d's intent. Ultimately, this approach led to a greater deviation which had more far-reaching negative consequences.]

    Rabbi Akiva, by contrast, although he studied 24 years while separated from his wife - did this with her permission. Indeed, she sent him. And ultimately, he returned to her (Kesubos 62b). Similarly, when he entered the Pardes, he "entered in peace and departed in peace" (Chagigah, loc. cit.). [His ratzu reflected the balanced thrust of the realm of Tikkun.]