Kommentar zu Bamidbar 31:2

מאת המדינים [AVENGE THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL] OF THE MIDIANITES — but not of the Moabites, for the Moabites entered into the matter out of fear, because they feared that they might plunder them, since about them it was stated only, (Deuteronomy 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. Another explanation of why God forbade them to wage war against the Moabites, and which explains at the same time why they had been forbidden to wage war against the Ammonites (cf. Deuteronomy 2:19): because, said He, of the two goodly doves (virtuous women) which I am to bring forth from them, — Ruth the Moabitess, and Naamah the Ammonitess [Solomon's wife] (Bava Kamma 38b).

AVENGE THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL OF THE MIDIANITES; AFTERWARD SHALT THOU BE GATHERED UNTO THY PEOPLE. It was decreed upon our teacher Moses not to cross over the Jordan, but on the other [eastern] side of the Jordan he fulfilled all the commandments [that were necessary] for Israel. Thus he conquered the two great Amorite kings, and divided their land up as an inheritance [amongst the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half of the tribe of Menasheh], and it was he who was worthy of executing vengeance upon the enemies of the Eternal, leaving Joshua only the commandment of [conquering and dividing] the Land. Furthermore [this commandment was given to Moses because] the Holy One, blessed be He, gave him honor so that the righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance,⁵⁹Psalms 58:11 — Since the Midianites had enticed the people of Israel to immorality and the worship of Baal-peor (see Ramban above Balak 25:1 and Pinchas 25:11) the triumph of right over evil was thus a source of rejoicing to the righteous one [Moses]. this being the meaning of afterward shalt thou be gathered unto thy people. And Moses showed honor to Phinehas⁶⁰Verse 6. because he had begun the meritorious task [of punishing the Midianites, by killing Cozbi]⁶¹Above, 25:15. and it was up to him to finish it, and therefore he appointed him the anointed priest for this war.⁶²See Deuteronomy 20:2. It was not fitting that Eleazar should go [as the anointed priest of the war], because he was the High Priest [after the death of Aaron].⁶³Above, 20:28 — The position of the anointed priest of the war was always distinct from that of the High Priest (see Rambam, Hilchoth Klei Hamikdash, Chapter 3). Hence “it was not fitting,” as Ramban expresses it, that Eleazar the High Priest should go with the army and function in the role of the anointed priest of the war.

נקם נקמת, "avenge the Israelites, etc." The plain meaning of the verse is that G'd delegated Moses to carry out this task. How is it possible then that he did not even accompany the soldiers into battle? Although I have explained previously that the vengeance Moses took consisted of telling the people to launch this campaign, the plain meaning of the verse cannot be ignored. Who allowed Moses to send Pinchas instead when G'd had told him to take vengeance? Furthermore, why did the Torah make Moses' death depended on the completion of this punitive expedition?

נקום נקמת בני ישראל מאת המדינים, “Take vengeance for the Children of Israel against the Midianites.” Actually, it would have been appropriate for Moses to take this vengeance on this people who hated Hashem, but in view of Pinchas having been the one who commenced the reversal of the damage Midian had done to the Jewish people, Moses wanted him also to be the one who completed the mitzvah. (Compare verse 6)

נקום נקמת בני ישראל מאת המדינים, אחר תאסף לעמיך, “take vengeance for the Children of Israel from the Midianites; after that you will be gathered in to your people.” G’d told Moses that He did not reconsider His oath that Moses and Aaron would not lead the people into the Holy Land because they had failed to sanctify His name, etc. The above consideration is the reason why the Torah wrote this paragraph in conjunction with that describing that the privately made vows and oaths of individuals are subject to annulment.

But not against the Moavites. Rashi wishes to answer the question: Why were they commanded to take revenge against the Midianites? Surely the Moavites hired Bil’am, as it is written in Parshas Balak (22:5). You might ask: Why does Rashi bring two reasons here, but in Parshas Pinchas (25:18) he brings only one? The answer is that he is answering another question: Why did the Torah here change its language and write “take revenge” while there it is written (25:17), “Antagonize the Midianites”? Rather, one must say that it was in order to make the inference: “Against the Midianites,” but not against the Moavites. Consequently, we see from the inference of “take revenge” that it was specifically killing them that was forbidden, while hating them was permitted. However, above (ibid.) it is implied that even hating them was forbidden, as it is written, “Antagonize the Midianites” [implying that they could not even antagonize the Moavites]. Thus the verses apparently contradict each other. In response, Rashi here brings two reasons: [Firstly] it is forbidden to kill them, “For the Midianites entered the matter out of fear…” [And secondly] regarding the implication that it is permitted to hate them, this was after the conversion of the "two doves," because the main reason [for not killing them] was for the sake of "two doves," etc. Therefore once the two doves had emerged it was permitted to hate them, however beforehand it was forbidden.

V. 2. נקם נקמת וגו׳: Mosche, der dem Volke das auf Keuschheit und Gottestreue gebaute Gottesgesetz zu überbringen gehabt hatte, soll nun auch vor seinem Scheiden den zur Sicherstellung dieser zwei Grundsäulen seiner Sendung, zum Schutze seines Volkes vor ג׳׳ע und ע׳׳ז notwendigen Schlag gegen die Midjaniten ausführen. נקם וגו׳. Wir haben schon Bereschit 4, 15, auf die Verwandtschaft von ”נקם“ mit ”קום“ hingewiesen. (Vergl. ”זור” ”זול“ ”נזל“ ”הום“ ”נהם“ ”דוח“ ”נדח“ ”אוץ“ ”נאץ“ ”פוץ“ ”נפץ“ ”סוג“ ”נסג“ ”נזר“ und a.) Es ist die Wiederaufrichtung eines mit Füßen getretenen Rechts oder einer zu Boden geworfenen Persönlichkeit. Der נוקם identifiziert sich mit dem aufzurichtenden Objekt. Daraus wohl die reflexive Form נקם. Dies erklärt auch die Konstruktion mit נקם ,מ נקמת בני ישראל מאת המדינים. Der Zweck ist nicht Wiedervergeltung, das Niederwerfen des Feindes; es wäre dies die Konstruktion mit ב. Zweck ist die Wiederaufrichtung Israels von den Midjanitern, seine geistige und sittliche Befreiung aus der Macht ihrer Künste.

נקום נקמת, “wreak vengeance!” the plain text appears to charge Moses personally with having to wreak this vengeance. However, seeing that he had been raised in Midian and had been saved from Pharaoh’s vengeance during all his years there, it would not have been moral for him to do this himself, just as he did not strike the river Nile during the plagues, as that river, i.e. its banks, had helped to save his life when he was an infant. He sent delegates as we read in verse 6, where the Torah quotes Moses as dispatching the 12000 soldiers to conduct the punitive campaign. [all righteous men who had not been involved in the shameful episode at Shittim, Ed.]

אחר תאסף, “after (that) you will be gathered in, etc.” Some commentators, such as Nachmanides, see in this a promise that Moses will live to see and enjoy the revenge on his enemies. Tanchuma Mattot 3 points out that whereas the Torah (G’d) speaks of a vengeance for Israel, Moses in turn speaks about a vengeance for G’d when he tells the Israelites the purpose of the punitive campaign against Midian in verse 3. Moses is quoted (by the Midrash) as saying to G’d: “O Lord if we had been uncircumcised, or even circumcised but worshipping idols, the Midianites would not have hated us. Why then do they hate us? Because of the Torah and the commandments which You have given to us. Therefore it is Your vengeance.” The concept behind all this is that anyone who attacks the Jewish people actually aims at the G’d of the Jewish people and uses the Jewish people as G’d’s alter-ego.

Enraged over a dispute which was not theirs. Meaning: They became enraged to quarrel with Yisroel when they, i.e. Yisroel, had not traveled through their land. Thus, they had no reason to quarrel with Yisroel.

The command: "take vengeance" is capable of two interpretations. 1) Moses was to prepare the campaign logistically and make all the preparations to ensure it would be militarily successful; 2) the actual battle which is the act of revenge. Moses understood correctly that what G'd wanted him to do was to prepare the groundwork to insure that the campaign would be successful. Moses reasoned that since G'd had not said to him הלחם במדין, "go into battle against Midian" -which would have been an unmistakable command- that what G'd wanted him to do was to plan the strategy. Moses also realised that he had to proceed with great astuteness as after all, in their previous encounter with the women of Midian the Israelites had become embroiled in the sin of גלוי עריות, some of them actively others only in their fantasies. While it was true that G'd had killed a substantial number of the active participants in that sin by the plague whereas others had been miraculously saved by Pinchas' deed, the accuser would certainly be at hand when the Israelites who had been steeped in sin were going to attack these people claiming moral superiority as their justification to kill all the male Midianites. It stood to reason that the Israelites were going to suffer a great number of casualties in such a campaign. There is some comparison here to the sin of the golden calf which resulted in Aaron being forbidden to enter the Holy of Holies in gold-trimmed garments so as not to endanger himself through arousing Satan and the attribute of Justice by reminding G'd of that sin (compare Rosh Hashanah 27). According to Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer chapter 4, G'd also commanded the angels described in Isaiah's vision (Isaiah 6,2) to cover their feet with their wings in order that G'd should not be reminded of the sin of the golden calf as the feet of these angels were like those of calves. If this was so during normal times, in times of war the chances are even greater that the "accusers" will remind G'd of sins the Israelites had committed in order to cause their deaths in battle. Sotah 44 affords us an insight into the types of relatively minor sins that are capable of causing a soldier going to war to become a casualty. If someone was aware that he had engaged in conversation between putting on the phylacteries on the arm and the phylacteries on the head, he was sent home before the army joined the enemy in battle so that he would not become a casualty on account of that sin. All the Israelites who had been guilty of entertaining sexual fantasies involving the Moabite or Midianite women were not fit to be part of the punitive expedition as they would have exposed themselves to Satan and his forces at such a time. Clearly, when G'd told Moses to exact vengeance from the Midianites, He expected Moses to have such considerations in mind.

מאת המדינים, “from the Midianites.” Why single out the Midianites? Did not the Moabites initiate the whole scheme of cursing the Jewish people and, when that failed, the seduction by their women as we know from Numbers 22,7 and 25,1? The fact is that whatever the Moabites did was prompted by a genuine fear of the Israelites as reported in the Torah in detail in Numbers 22,3. After all, although G’d had told the Jewish people not to harass and make war against the Moabites, this did not preclude them from robbing their belongings, etc. The Midianites, however, had gotten involved in an argument which did not concern them at all. The Jewish people had no designs on their country and posed no threat to them. Furthermore, [Moab is not specified] because King David is a descendant of theirs.

For the sake of two doves. פרידות means “doves.” [You might ask: How could he say this] even though only one of them came from Moav. The answer is that Rashi used the language of the Gemara (Bava Kamma 38b). The other interpretation is necessary because according to the first reason there is the difficulty that above it was implied that even Midianites were fearful of Yisroel, as Rashi explained above that, “They made peace between themselves…” (22:4), therefore Rashi brings the other interpretation. However, according to the second interpretation there is the difficulty that Hashem could have arranged that Yisroel would not kill the ancestors of the family of Rus, so why did he command them regarding the entire nation, [saying] not to antagonize Moav? Therefore, Rashi also brings the first reason.

The Torah continues ואחר תאסף אל עמיך. It would appear that until the campaign had been successfully completed Moses could not die peacefully as his people had not been rehabilitated. It would not do for Moses to leave behind his people in need of spiritual rehabilitation. His soul would not be able to face the hereafter with peace of mind. According to the Kabbalists the place one occupies in the hereafter while awaiting final judgment is called עמיו, "his people." G'd examines every single one of our sins during that judgment. We know all this from Psalms 50,3 וסביביו נשערה מאד, "around Him it stormed fiercely." The cause that would prevent Moses from occupying this place called עמיו was the affair of Zimri ben Salu which had found Moses paralysed, inactive, as described by Bamidbar Rabbah 20,24. Moses' hands were weakened by Zimri's challenge to him. [Zimri had asked Moses why he could not sleep with a Midianite woman seeing that Moses himself had married a Midianite woman. Ed.] G'd was angry that Moses had not avenged Him until Pinchas had done so. As a result, G'd told Moses that he could not die peacefully until he had rehabilitated himself by organising the punitive expedition against Midian. Once Moses had taken care of this assignment he would be able to die without the need to face an accuser after his death. This was one of the great acts of kindness G'd performed for Moses.

מאת המדינים. "from the Midianites." Why did the Torah write the word מאת instead of merely writing מהמדינים? Perhaps the Torah wanted to hint at an ex Midianite who was in his birthplace at that time, i.e. Bileam. As a result of Bileam's being in the land of Midian at the time of this expedition the Israelites killed him by the sword (compare 31,8). Perhaps the reason G'd was in a hurry for this campaign to be launched was precisely because He was aware that Bileam was in that land at that time. Sanhedrin 106 tells us that the reason Bileam had travelled to Midian which was a long way from his home in Petorah was in order to collect his reward for having given the advice to seduce the Israelites as a result of which 24.000 of them died. G'd prepared a net for him to fall into when He ordered this campaign at that time.