The Hitting of the Stone

Every year anew, we are faced with the challenge of understanding why it was that Moshe and Aharon were forbidden from entering the land of Israel. Most people know what Rashi has to say about the matter: they should have spoken to the rock, not smitten it. So many questions abound: Why did Moshe strike the stone twice, if one time would have sufficed? Why are Moshe and Aharon, the Ramban asks, chastised only after they have smit the stone the second time? Why was Moshe told to take his staff? These questions all lead the Ramban to reject Rashi's view. 

The Ramban, though, treated Rashi with silk gloves; when the Ramban comments on the Rambam's opinion, he minces no words: "He ("The Rambam") adds insult to injury" - or in Hebrew hosif hevel l'havalim, "vanity to vanity." The Ramban rejects the Rambam's opinion with such vigor, attacking it from every angle. The Rambam wrote that it was Moshe's anger that precipitated the severe punishment, to which the Ramban states, God himself voiced his vociferous anger towards the people, calling them "wayward;" Moshe simply was resonating Hashem's own consternation, mediating it so that it would be more palatable, so that the masses could understand and endure the wrath. 

And what, asks the Ramban was the real answer? Moshe asked - presumably rhetorically - "Can we extract water from this rock?!" The attribution of the feat to their own prowess and acumen what was piqued God's anger. Interestingly, the contrast is stark; it says that Moshe was the one who made the rhetorical utterance, namely, the employing of the word "we," whereas when the Torah states the reason that Aharon died prematurely, the verse harkens back to the sin of Moshe and Aharon. 

“Let Aaron be gathered to his kin: he is not to enter the land that I have assigned to the Israelite people, because you (pl.) disobeyed My command about the Waters of Meribah."

To what extent was Aharon complicit in Moshe's deeds? Could perhaps some reciprocity have been expected from Aharon after Moshe Rabbeinu had saved his older brother after the former's sin in the golden calf? It would seem that regardless of what interpretation one adopts, one has to explain in the context of the simple meaning of the text why Aharon was considered culpable, a question I hope to be able to answer better by the time next year rolls around. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

No More Mr. Nice Guy

Parshat Kdoshim makes us think twice about how we treat people who are mean to us. "You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against members of your people. Love your fellow man as yourself: I am Hashem." The sages teach that taking a revenge takes the following pattern. One man asks his fellow man to lend him a sickle because his has broken and he needs to harvest his wheat and trim the weeds that threaten his wheat. His friend says no. A month later the same scenario plays out, just this time, the one who refused needs one himself. His friend says no. Why, he asks himself, would he lend his friend a sickle if his friend didn't lend him one? The rationale even makes sense. In the business world, there's a new term, "coopetition," companies usually do compete but sometimes cooperate for their mutual benefit. The thinking makes sense when it comes to the nitty gritty of human relations; Nobel Prize winner, Professor Israel Aumann talks about w...
Read more

Can Moshe Have Misheard God?

Sometimes we hear something, but we don't really hear what has been said. Or, we understand a message differently from how it was intended. That was what happened in this past week's parsha, Shemini, when Moshe's wrath flared against Aharon's sons, Elazar and Itamar for not eating the he-goat of their sin offering. He chastised them. "Hashem gave it to you to procure forgiveness for the community's sin and to atone on their behalf before Hashem. Its blood was not brought into the sanctuary within; it should have been eaten in the holy domain as I had commanded." For a little bit of background, for Aharon HaCohen, it had been a fraught day to say the least; Elazar and Itamar's older brothers, Nadav and Avihu, had been eaten alive in a heavenly flame that took their lives but left their bodies intact. Moshe commanded Mishael and Elzaphan, their cousins, to then remove them by their tunics and place them outside of the camp. The day, in essence, ha...
Read more

What if God Was One of Us

The answer is, it would be pretty darn bad.  This week's parsha speaks to four different situations where one accidentally sins, and the consequent atonement process.  On Shabbat, a friend asked me, "Why does the verse  say, ' When a chieftain (i.e. leader) sins, unwittingly bearing guilt by performing an act Hashem has commanded him not to do (Vayikra 4:22)..?' Why doesn't the Torah say " If " like it says for all of the other transgressors, 'If the annointed priest sins...If the high assembly sins...If a layman sins..?' What distinguishes between the Nasi or tribal chief, or head of Israel, and every other potential sinner'"? I told him, "You see, it's like the expression, ' She'elat Chacham, Chatzi Teshuva ' (the question of a wise person, is already half the answer). A person who has to lead others, will inevitably get his hands dirty." You can't lead without making mistakes, you can't be human withou...
Read more