Weekly Torah Reading, June 27, 2020
In Israel, Ḥukkat (Numbers 19:1-22:1)
A Bit Too Confident
This week’s reading relates that, toward the end of their forty years of wandering in the wilderness, the Israelites ran out of water. They complained bitterly to their leaders, Moses and Aaron: “Why did you take us out of Egypt only to have us die here of thirst?” Thereupon, God instructs Moses to pick up his staff and go with Aaron to a certain rock. “Speak to the rock,” He tells them, “so that it gives forth water, and there will be enough to drink for all the Israelites and their flocks.” The two then proceed to carry out this instruction:
Moses took the staff from before the Lord as He had commanded him. Then Moses and Aaron gathered the people in front of the rock, and he said to them: “Hear me now, you rebellious ones: can we get water for you from out of this rock?” Moses lifted up his hand and struck the rock twice with his staff, and abundant water flowed from the rock, so that the congregation and their flocks could drink. Then the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “Since you did not show your trust in Me, sanctifying Me in the Israelites’ sight, you will not lead this congregation to the land that I am giving them.” (Numbers 20:9-12)
The last sentence comes as a shock. Didn’t Moses and Aaron do exactly as they were told? Then why should they now be prevented from finishing their mission of leading the Israelites into the Promised Land?
This passage has posed something of a challenge to biblical interpreters in every period. Some have suggested that Moses had erred in striking the rock. After all, God had told Moses to speak to the rock, but He didn’t say anything about Moses hitting it with his staff—so he was punished. But this explanation seems unlikely on two counts. First, this wasn’t the first time that Moses was told to produce water from a rock. The same thing had happened years earlier, at the very start of the Israelites’ wanderings in the wilderness. On that occasion, too, there was not enough water for the people to drink; then as well, the people quarreled with Moses, and God instructed Moses to go to a certain rock with his staff.
[God said:] “I will be present there, next to the rock at Horeb, and you will strike the rock with your staff and water will come out of it for the people to drink.” And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel. (Exod 17:6)
In that incident, there was apparently no problem with striking the rock: it gave up its water and God said nothing to Moses in the way of a reproach. So if there was no problem the first time, what was wrong the second time?
Those who blame Moses for striking the rock instead of talking to it have another problem as well. In the incident with which we began, no less than in the one just cited, God orders Moses to take his staff. What would be the point of such an order if all that Moses had to do was speak to the rock? What is more, the Hebrew word for “speak” (here dibbartem) seems to be connected to the root that appears elsewhere as a verb meaning “strike” or “smash.” True, in the latter sense it is usually in the hiph‘il (“causative”) form, but some scholars have suggested that dibbartem here may simply be an alternative to that form with the same meaning—that is, “strike.” After all, what sense does it make for Moses to speak to a rock? At least hitting it is an action that might conceivably open some crevice through which water could then flow, perhaps from an underground stream beneath it. What would talking accomplish?
Considering such evidence, other commentators have ventured that Moses’ big mistake was striking the rock twice. After all, God had said nothing about striking it two times; if Moses had deviated from his instructions even in this one detail, wouldn’t this be enough to merit punishment? But this, too, seems unlikely. God’s instructions did not specify that Moses was to strike the rock any specific number of times; He certainly didn’t say “once and no more.” Even if Moses had struck it ten or twenty times, could that really be construed as disobeying God’s order?
Actually, the thing that has misled many commentators is what God says to Moses immediately after Moses strikes the rock. “Your mistake,” He tells Moses and Aaron, “is that you did not he’emantem bi” (Num 20:12). Normally, this form of the root ’-m-n would mean “believe, put one’s trust in”—and indeed, that is how many modern translators render this verse, “Because you did not trust in Me…” “Because you did not trust me enough…” and so forth. But this makes little sense in context. Moses had plenty of trust that everything would turn out well; that’s why he could give his swaggering challenge to the people, “Hear me now, you rebellious ones: can we get water for you from out of this rock?” Rather, it was precisely his overconfidence that led him to omit a crucial step, namely, his failure to declare publicly his reliance on God. The correct translation of this verse is: “Since you did not show your trust in Me, [thereby] sanctifying Me in the Israelites’ sight, you will not lead this congregation to the land that I am giving them.” In other words, Moses and Aaron did not give all the credit to God for this miracle, implying instead that it was their own doing.
(A technical matter: this sense of the hiph‘il form of the root ’-m-n is paralleled in the root b-y-n, whose hiph‘il form usually means “understand.” But while it usually refers to the verb’s subject understanding something, it sometimes refers to the subject causing someone else to understand, thus Neh 8:7 “The Levites who were explaining (mebinim) the Torah to the people” (cf. Neh. 8:9, Ezr 8:16). Similarly, in our passage, Moses’ fault was that he did not he’emin b- in the sense of causing others to put their trust in, or believe in, God.)
Moses’ slipup is somewhat understandable. After all, faced with the same situation some years earlier, Moses had been ordered by God to strike the rock and everything turned out fine. Moses was silent that first time; perhaps it was hard for him to believe that striking a rock would produce anything. But now, God gives Moses what looks like the same order, and Moses—having no reason to fear that the outcome would be any different this time—confidently used the occasion to reprove the Israelites for their lack of faith: “Hear me now, you rebellious ones: can we get water for you from out of this rock?” But it was precisely his overconfidence that led him to omit a crucial step, namely, his failure to declare publicly his reliance on God—“to show your trust in Me”— and thereby “sanctify Me in the Israelites’ sight.”
Shabbat shalom!
Outside Israel, Koraḥ (Numbers 19:1-22:1)
The Whole Garment
Koraḥ is the villain of this week’s Torah reading, the leader of a foiled rebellion against Moses and Aaron. “Look, all of us are holy,” Koraḥ says to them. By this he meant that he and his family were, like Moses and Aaron, all members of the sacred tribe of Levi. As such, Koraḥ argued, they all ought to have an equal claim on the priesthood—so there was no reason for Aaron and his descendants to be the only kohanim (priests) serving in Israel’s sanctuary.
An ancient midrash connected Koraḥ’s attempted rebellion to what immediately preceded the Torah’s account of it: the law of tassels (Num 15:37-41). Midrashists sometimes asked what the connection was between two apparently unrelated items that appear one after the next in the Torah (even when, as in this case, they occur in two different Torah readings, the end of last week’s and the beginning of this week’s).
In the case of Koraḥ, interpreters asked whether the law of tassels might have had something to do with his attempted rebellion. After all, putting tassels dyed with the bluish color tekhelet on the four corners of a garment would certainly be expensive, and Koraḥ was a rabble-rouser eager to recruit followers to his cause. An early, perhaps pre-rabbinic midrashic text called the Book of Biblical Antiquities (originally written in Hebrew, it survives only in Latin translation) thus reports that after Moses had promulgated the law of tassels, Koraḥ exclaimed, “Why is an unbearable law imposed upon us?”
A later version of this midrash goes into greater detail. According to this account, Koraḥ immediately asked Moses, “Does a garment that has already been dyed completely tekhelet still need the tekhelet-colored tassel on its four corners?” “Yes,” replied Moses. “And a room that is full of Torah scrolls—does it still need a mezuzah on the doorway?” “Yes,” Moses again answered.
It’s clear that Koraḥ was trying to impugn Moses’ authority by showing the laws he was transmitting to be illogical. After all, if seeing a single thread of the color tekhelet served to remind people of the accoutrements of the tabernacle (mishkan) and the priestly garments—and thereby led them to remember God’s holiness and to seek to be holy themselves—then surely that connection could be made far more strikingly by a garment that was entirely tekehelet-colored! Why would it need the special tassel? And if the mezuzah was intended to remind people of the Torah’s commandments, wouldn’t that act of reminding be far more striking if one were entering a room full of Torah scrolls? Would such a room still need the mezuzah at its entrance?
But there was a hidden message in these two questions. What was on Koraḥ’s mind was the special status of Aaron and his descendants. “We’re all Levites,” Koraḥ had said, and in that sense they were all equal threads in an all-tekhelet garment. If so, why single out one particular thread—Aaron and his descendants—from all the others? Similarly, if all Levites were comparable to room full of Torah scrolls, all of them containing the words of God, why should a special little parchment be singled out and put at the room’s entrance?
Perhaps this is why Koraḥ’s rebellion was viewed by the Rabbis as so insidious. He was a clever politician intent only on his own gain, but he succeeded in masking his intentions and persuading other people that he was actually their representative in opposing an elite. It’s a shabby tactic, but it worked for Korah for a while, and it certainly has worked since.
Shabbat shalom!