In the opening verses (30:1-2) of our Parasha Moshe is seen addressing
the “heads of the tribes of the sons of Israel .” The word used here for tribes is “ma’tot”
(plural, while singular is “ma’teh”). In Parashat Chu’kat we discovered that
“ma’teh” is a rod or a staff (like the one Moshe used to hit the rock, Num.
20:8-11), and that this word is rooted in the verb to “stretch out” but also
means to “incline, turn, or turn away”.
Thus, by implication, “ma’teh” is used for “tribe”, emanating from the
‘rod of authority’ in the hand of the respective tribal leaders. (The other
word for tribe, “shevet”, also means a “rod”.)
In both of our Parashot, “mateh” is used solely for “tribe” or “tribes”
(e.g. 31:4; 32:28). In Vayikra
(Leviticus) 26:26 we encountered another “staff”, that is “ma’teh lechem” which
is the “staff of bread”. There it was used metaphorically for that which is
leaned (or depended) upon, as indeed our bodies cannot do without bread (used
there as a generic term for “food”).
The first part of Parashat Ma’tot deals with oaths
and prohibitions, and the annulment thereof (see Matt. 18:18-19). In 30:3-5 we read: “And when a woman vows a
vow to YHVH, and has bound a bond in the house of her father in her youth, and
her father has heard her vow… and her father has remained silent… then all her
vows shall stand... But if her father has prohibited her in the day he heard,
none of her vows and her bond with which she has bound her soul shall stand.
And YHVH will forgive her because her father prohibited her.” “Prohibited” in both instances in this
passage is “heh’nee,” of the root n.o.h (noon, vav, alef) meaning “hinder,
restrain, or frustrate.” Similarly, in verse 8, the same verb is
used: “If in the day her husband hears, he prohibits her…” (emphasis
added). (Here there is a fascinating
connection to the book of Esther).*
The latter part of Parashat Ma’tot (chapter 32)
presents the story of the sons of Re’uven and Gad who express to Moshe their
desire to settle in the land
of Gil’ad , on the eastern
shore of the Yarden (Jordan). However, Moshe, being concerned that they may be
separating themselves from their brethren and that their move could have a
negative impact on the rest of the people, voices his misgivings and says: “And
why do you discourage the heart of the sons of Israel from passing over to the
land which YHVH has given to them? So
your fathers did when I sent them from Kadesh Barnea to see the land. And they
went up to the valley of Eshcol and saw the land, and discouraged the hearts
of the sons of Israel ”
(32:7-9). Here we find the verb n.o.h once again, but this time translated as “discourage
or discouraged”. Moshe attributes
the same motives that operated in the hearts of the ten spies (in Parashat
Sh’lach Lecha, Num. 13-15) to the two and a half tribes wishing to settle on the Yarden’s
eastern shore. He construes their wish
as being one that would frustrate YHVH’s will, while at the same
time incurring frustration in his listeners, who no doubt were concerned lest
their leader would frustrate their plans. Frustration and a feeling
of hindrance would also be the experience of a woman, who after taking a
vow and/or restricting herself in some way for Godly reasons and in good
conscious, is prevented from going through with her commitments.
The origin of the verb n.o.h is “rise with
difficulty” [1] illustrating what we have noticed time and again, namely that
Hebrew is a very concrete language and thus most of its abstract terms are
actually borrowed from the tangible world.
Two other such terms in this Parasha are “bind” (see 30:3,4,5,6
ff), which is “assor” (a.s.r., alef, samech, resh) and literally means “imprison or imprisoned”
(e.g. Gen. 40:3; Jud. 15:12-13; 1Sam. 6:7 etc.). Another one is “annul or
make void” – “ha’fer” (in 30:12), whose root is “porer” (p.r.r.
pey, resh, resh) and means to “crumble, break, shatter or destroy”.
Returning to Moshe’s exhorting address to the two
and a half tribes; the aging leader expresses his
concern lest their actions would give rise to a “brood of sinful men”
(32:14). The word used there is “tarbut,” which is of the root “rav”
meaning “much, many, or great”, and is therefore simply a derivation of “increase
or add” Thus, Moshe is literally
talking about an increase or spread of evil among them, without pointing to an
existing grouping or a particular “brood.”
In verses 14b and 15 he adjoins: “[Lest] you still [will] add more
to the burning anger of YHVH against Israel . For if you turn away from
Him, He will add more to His abandoning of them [i.e. Yisrael] in
the desert…” (literal translation).
Moshe is worried that the actions of the Reuvenites, Gaddaites and
Menashites would bring about an increase of evil and in this manner add
to YHVH’s anger, adding disciplinary measures, resulting in more
suffering for the people as a whole.
Another main theme in our Parasha is the command
directed at Moshe to “execute vengeance… against the Midianites, afterward you
[Moshe] shall be gathered to your people” (31:2). In the preparations leading to this eventuality,
Moshe calls out for men to be “prepared for the army” (31:3 literal
translation). However, “he-chal’tzu” (with root ch.l.tz,
chet, lamed, tzadi), which is the command used here for “be prepared,”
actually means to “draw, pull out, or remove” (such as
“removing” one’s foot out of a shoe,
Deut. 25:9). Thus, the literal rendering of 31:3 should be: “Draw out from
amongst yourselves men for the army…” Rabbi Mordechai Eilon, quoting Rabbi
Yitzchak Arama, stresses that although the expression “draw out from amongst
yourselves” is in reference to a select group, it actually points to the
‘whole’ from which this group is to be drawn, implying the involvement of the
entire group. In this way, by virtue of being represented by the “cha’luztim”
(plural for “cha’lutz”, “those who plod ahead;” see also 32:20, 21 translated
“arm yourself”), the whole army will be participating in the battle. Aside from
meaning “drawn out”, the root ch.l.tz also speaks of being removed from one’s
customary environment and comfort zone, indicating that the vanguards were
willing to venture and forge the way ahead of everyone else. The additional
meaning of the verb cha’letz - “to rescue and deliver” (used a number of times
in the Psalms) - is totally compatible
with the readiness of the two and a half tribes to help their brethren.
In view of this, when the Re’uvenites and Gaddites
declare later (in 32:17): “We shall
ourselves go armed” (which reads, “va’necha’letz”, again of the root ch.l.tz),
their intent appears much clearer. They are saying in fact that after making
basic provisions for their families and livestock, they will “remove”
themselves from all that is familiar to them and will “hurry and go ahead of
the sons of Israel
until we bring them to the place which is theirs…” (32:17, literal
translation). In his response Moshe
states that each of them is to be a “cha’lutz” for his brother, (while
stressing that failing to do so will be considered a sin “before YHVH” vs.
20-23). Their response is again marked
by the term “cha’lutz” (v. 27). Moshe repeats this condition; namely, that only
if they will act as “chalutzim” will they be entitled to land on the Yarden’s
eastern shore. In their reply, the
Gaddaites and Re’uvenites confirm their readiness to “go over… as chalutzim…
before YHVH into the land of Canaan , so that the land of our inheritance on that
side of Jordan
may be ours” (v. 32).
Interestingly,
the first time the root ch.l.tz shows up in Scripture is in Genesis 35:11,
where the Almighty promises Abraham that, “…a nation and a company of nations
shall come from you, and kings shall come out of your loins” (sometimes
translated “body”). “Loins” in that text
is “chalatza’yim” - the strong body part. The root ch.l.tz also lends itself to
festive or royal robes. Yehoshua the High Priest was dressed in such robes
(ma’ch’la’tzot) in exchange for his filthy ones (ref. Zech. 3:4). Finally, in the Hebrew translation of Hebrews
6:20, Yeshua, as the forerunner who entered behind the veil for us, is called
“Yeshua he’cha-lutz”.
* When Mordechai begged Esther to
plead the Jews’ case before king Achashverosh, he added that she could to
forfeit her life is she were to “keep silent” (Esther 4:14). Esther was to go
and try to annul the king’s “vow”, much like the husband or father in our
Parasha in the case of his wife’s/daughter’s vow making. In the Parasha, if the
male were to keep silent (same word used in Esther) for more than a day, the
vow would remain valid but the said male would bear its consequences, if there
were any, just like Esther would have
done had she kept silent. Typical of the book of Esther’s “technique of
opposites”, there it is the female who was in position to annul a harmful vow
taken by her husband.
This point was extracted from
Rabbi Fohrman’s study on Esther
https://www.alephbeta.org/
[1] The New Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon,
Francis Brown
Hendrickson.
Publishers, Peabody ,
Mass. 1979
Hebrew Tools for Everyday
Use
The literal word for “bind”
– “assar” - is more commonly used in Modern Hebrew for “prohibit”, while the
“binding” finds expression in the term for prison – “Bet Sohar” (literally,
“house of binding”). We paid quite a bit of attention to the root ch.l.tz. When
the pioneers started coming to the land
of Israel at the end of
the 19th century and into the 20th, there arose a need
for a fitting word by which to name them. Thus “chalutz” was chosen.
Interestingly, “brood” – “trabut” – (with its negative connotation in our text)
is used for “culture” or for a given civilization.
In the prison there are
prisoners there are male prisoners and female prisoners
Be’vet ha’so’har yesh
asirim ve’asirot
The pioneers forbade the
usage of foreign culture (lit. “in culture/civilization foreign”)
Ha’cha’lutzim asru shimush be’tarbut
zara
(“shimush” – usage, “zar”, “zara” – foreign,
m.f).
No comments:
Post a Comment