Musar sobre Números 35:42

To what may this be compared? To one whose house is full of mud and mire. Even if he will bring into his house the finest golden vessels, it will not be beautified thereby. He must first remove the mud and mire and then bring in the vessels. And so is it in our instance. The Jew has been given the power through his cleaving to Torah and mitzvoth to root in his soul the holiness of the L-rd, as it is written (Bamidbar 35:34): "I, the L-rd, dwell in the midst of Israel." But when is this? When he does not allow the yetzer to reside there through his false ideas or filthy thoughts. And this is the intent of "And you shall not go astray after your hearts and after your eyes, after which you stray." (That is, [this will occur] only if you guard yourselves in the future against your straying). "so that you remember and do all of My mitzvoth, etc." That is, if you are careful not to go astray, as mentioned above, the great result will follow that through the doing of the mitzvoth you will be holy to the L-rd. (As the Men of the Great Assembly have formulated for the blessing over a mitzvah: "who sanctified us with His mitzvoth." ["so that" refers to "and you will be holy" (i.e., "so that, in remembering and doing My mitzvoth, you will be holy to your G-d")]. But if, G-d forbid, you do go astray, the mitzvoth will not avail for your becoming holy. And this is the prophet's intent in (Jeremiah 4:3): "Plow for yourselves a furrow and do not sow upon thorns." Happy is he who reflects upon this. It will be good for him in this world and in the next.

2) זרוז מצוה a display of eagerness to perform the commandment. That this is a higher level of performance is based on the verse אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם, "that man should do them and live (come to life) thereby," (Lev. 18,5). It means that performance should be joyful in order that a person may qualify for this level. One way of proving this is to perform the part of the מצוה one is capable of fulfilling even if one is fully aware that one will never be able to perform the מצוה in its entirety. An example of such זרוז was Moses establishing three cities of refuge on the East Bank of the Jordan, though these would not become operative until they would be matched by three more such cities on the West Bank. Moses could have left even the first three such cities to be set aside by his successor since he was aware that he would not be alive when they would begin to fulfil their designated purpose. Compare the Torah on this in Numbers 35,14-15, and Deut. 4,41.

We find that such is the case even when the souls in question had not been separated from their bodies through murder. A soul which is "exiled" may be released from such exile as a result of the death of a great person, i.e. a prominent צדיק. The Zohar Mekor Chokhmah finds an allusion to the statement of our sages that "the righteous may be granted children when they have died, though they had no children during their lifetime," in the words כי בעיר מקלטו ישב עד מות … "he has to remain in his city of refuge until the death." [This means that as long as the soul of the righteous was held captive by its body it could not become a parent. Ed.] This demonstrates retroactively that all G–d's actions are based on truth, and that He shows His mercy to all. A soul that is separated from its body and does not have any "clothing" to accompany it to the higher world (since it did not leave children behind in this world), and therefore lacks a גואל needs to remain for a while in the "city of refuge," i.e. a place where souls hover until the death of the High Priest who is the Torah scholar. He does not require a גואל. If the High Priest leaves a widow and no children, the levirate marriage rules do not apply to such widow (in the sense that she need not enter into a marriage with a brother of her late husband in order to perpetuate his name on this earth). If she does so nonetheless, it is for the benefit of other souls who are homeless in a region between this world and the world to come. These souls await the time when they can be suitably "dressed," in order to proceed to their ultimate destination. The High Priest widow's late husband's "continuity," שם, has been maintained even though he did not leave behind physical issue. So far the commentary of the Zohar Mekor Chokhmah. [The source in the Zohar for this seems to be in Parshat Vayeshev on 38,8, where Yehudah instructs Onan his son to marry Tamar the widow of his brother Er. Ed.]

When Israel sinned and as a result the Temple was destroyed, the שכינה went into exile with the Jewish people, seeing that it was a pledge G–d had entrusted to them. This is the mystical dimension of the verse: אלה פקודי המשכן, משכן העדות, "These are the "pledges" of the Tabernacle, the "pledges" of the "Testimony" (Exodus 38,21). This is the basis for the Rabbinic statement in Megillah 29 that Israel is beloved (by G–d) since wherever the people of Israel are exiled, the שכינה is exiled with them. When they were exiled to Egypt the שכינה was with them, as we know from Genesis 46,4, where G–d told Jacob: "I shall go down to Egypt with you." When the Jewish people went into exile in Babylonia the שכינה accompanied them, as we know from Isaiah 43,14: "For your sake I sent to Babylon." When Israel was exiled in Elam the שכינה accompanied them, as we know from Jeremiah 49,38: "I will set My throne in Elam." When the Jewish people went into the Roman exile the שכינה also went with them, as we know from Isaiah 63,1: "Who is this coming from Edom,…..it is I who contend victoriously, powerful to give triumph." When the people of Israel return to their land from exile the שכינה will also accompany them as we know from Deut. 23,35: ושב ה' אלוקיכם את שבותך ורחמך, "G–d will come back with your imprisoned ones and have mercy on you." We would have expected the Torah to say: והשיב, "He will bring back," instead of "He will come back." We also have a verse in Song of Songs 4,8: "With Me from Lebanon O bride, come with Me!" Rabbi Meir explains this as a parable: It is like a king saying to his servant "if you need to seek me out, I shall be with my son." This is the meaning of "who dwells with them in their defilement," which we have quoted earlier. All this although G–d had warned Israel not to defile their encampments or the land they would live on, for it is the land G–d Himself has His abode in.

Commandment 411 forbids a witness who has testified in a case that may lead to capital punishment to act as a judge in the proceedings.

In matters involving capital punishment the Torah does not allow a person who has testified as a witness to also function as a judge, as we deduce from Numbers 35,30. The reason is that people should not think that the judge has a personal motive in the outcome of the case. Only the Lord Himself, in Whose power is life and death, can function as both witness and jury. This ruling does not apply in financial matters. All matters involving crimes carrying the death penalty require the utmost care. The tribunal must consist of more than twenty people in order to provide for עדה שופטת ועדה מצלת, "a quorum of ten judges who vote "guilty" and a like quorum of ten judges who vote "innocent." All this in order to give the accused the benefit of any possible arguments in his favor. The wording of the Torah suggests that judgment is not to be proclaimed until it has been proven that all arguments in favour of the defendant have been exhausted Even when the judges themselves have observed the crime committed, a murderer is not to be executed until after he has been properly tried.

I have found a beautiful commentary concerning this amongst the writings of the Arizal. We must understand why Moses bothered to set aside these three cities, seeing they could not perform their function until the other three cities of refuge on the West Bank of the Jordan had been set aside also (Numbers 35,13; compare Makkot 9). When we understand the Arizal's commentary on the problem of the cities of refuge, we will also understand why the Torah interrupted the report about the gift of the Torah to the Jewish people by mentioning already at this point that Moses set aside the three cities of refuge which were to be on the East Bank of the Jordan. The Ari zal sees in Moses' action an attempt at rehabilitation for when he had committed manslaughter and had taken it upon himself to slay the Egyptian who had tortured a Jew (Exodus 2,12). He had considered this killing in the category of a murder inadvertently committed because he had felt at the time that he was performing a מצוה by doing so. The first letters of the words הירדן מזרחה שמה, which describe what Moses did, form the acronym משה. The following words, אשר ירצח את רעהו are also an allusion to Moses. We have already described that Moses was the re-incarnation of Abel. The Torah here alludes to the first murder i.e. fratricide, when Cain slew his brother Abel. This is also alluded to in Exodus 2,11, when the Torah describes Moses as observing an Egyptian man: מכה איש עברי מאחיו, "torturing a Jewish man, one of his brothers." The Torah hints that the Egyptian was a former brother of Moses, i.e. a re-incarnation of Cain. In this instance the evil which had been part of Cain's character had re-surfaced in the character of this Egyptian. We have explained on another occasion that the נפש of Cain, i.e. his lowest spiritual part, was re-incarnated in the body of this Egyptian, whereas Cain's רוח, the superior part of his soul, was re-incarnated in the body of Yitro. The highest part of Cain's soul, i.e. the נשמה, was re-incarnated in the body of Korach. Korach made the mistake of quarrelling with Moses; this resulted in his גלגול failing to achieve its ultimate purpose. Yitro was of mixed feelings. When he became aware that he was wrong, had sinned, he converted to Judaism. At the end of the paragraph dealing with the cities of refuge the Torah writes: וזאת התורה אשר שם משה. This means that Moses determined the need to set aside these three cities of refuge at this time for his own sake.

Until now we have spoken about setting to rights the faculty of speech, the first fundamental, the demarcation between "man" and "animal," for which reason Scripture gives it precedence, viz. (Devarim 30:19): "For the thing is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart [i.e., your thoughts] to do it." And now we shall speak a little about the faculty of thought, which resides in a man's heart, viz.: "and in your heart to do it." Scripture writes (Psalms 24:3-4): "Who shall ascend the mountain of the L-rd, etc.? …The clean of hands [i.e., one who is clean of theft] and the pure of heart." We learn from this that a man's thoughts must be pure and not intermixed with vanity. We say every day: "Make our hearts one, to love and to fear Your name, and let us not be ashamed, forever." This means what it says. It is known that what resides in a Jew's heart always, is faith in the L-rd, the G-d of the heavens and His Torah, this being the essence of holiness [as intimated in Bamidbar 35:39: "I am the L-rd who dwells in the midst of the children of Israel."] For this reason we ask the Blessed L-rd that He make our hearts one, to love and to fear His name, and that there not be intermixed in this another love. For if in his heart, the locus of thought, there also is planted a love for the vanities of the world, in the end, he will be shamed and mortified by it forever. For it is known that all of a man's affairs — both his acts and his thoughts, all will ascend above, before the L-rd, as we say in the Rosh Hashanah prayer: "For the remembrance of every creation comes before You, the acts of a man, etc., the thoughts of a man and his stratagems." And all will be set forth before the man, as it is written (Psalms 54:21): "I shall reprove you and I shall set it before your eyes," and the man will be greatly shamed.

עמוד גמילות חסדים . The last of the six pillars which is part of the legislation in our פרשה concerns first and foremost something one does for the dead. The latter cannot repay us as our performance of any service for them is the true rendering of kind deeds. The first such example the Torah deals with in our פרשה concerns the person who has killed inadvertently and is protected against the vengeance of the victim's blood relations by taking refuge in one of the cities set aside for such a purpose (19,2-10). He must remain there until the death of the High Priest during whose tenure the killing occurred, and who represents the attribute of חסד. We have alluded to these details in our commentary on Numbers 35,9-36 where we pointed out the element of חסד inherent in this legislation.

The legislation of the עגלה ערופה, the apparently senseless killing of an innocent heifer which has not had a chance to perform a useful function in life (21,1-9), is also an act of true kindness, חסד. It is both an act of kindness towards the victim of the murder as well as towards the inhabitants of the town near which the foul deed was perpetrated. By performing the rite of breaking the neck of the heifer in question the chances of finding the murderer are enhanced, which in turn would lead to justice for the murdered person when his murderer is punished. Rabbi Menachem Habavli comments on this paragraph as follows: "The reason for this legislation is that the publicity surrounding the breaking of the neck of the heifer in a valley of virgin soil will lead to the unmasking of the murderer. The procedure bestows honour both on the deceased and on the living. The murderer attacked from behind, i.e. the neck of the victim. This is why the neck of the heifer is broken. The murderer committed his act secretly. Therefore the act of atonement is also performed in a spot which is not used by the public. During periods when the general public observed the laws of the Torah and murder was almost unknown, the worms which infested the carcass of the heifer would gradually travel in the direction of the home of the murderer and lead to his discovery. Although it would, of course, be impossible to make such a murderer stand trial on the basis of such "evidence" seeing there had not been reliable witnesses to his act, the murderer would be ashamed once he realised that the people all were certain in their hearts that he was the guilty person." Thus far the commentary of Rabbi Menachem. The "honour" this procedure provided for the living was that the implied suspicion is removed that someone from the nearest town to where the victim had been found might have committed the murder is removed. The Zohar (Rosenberg Montreal edidtion page 133 on Parshat Shoftim) quoting Rabbi Shimon, explains that when someone is murdered the victim's soul is not perceived as having been snatched by the angel of death but by the murderer instead. This means that the murdered person was not allowed to live out the span allocated to him on earth. This single act of murder set back the time of the coming of the Messiah by denying the angel of death his task of helping to rehabilitate mankind from the pollutant of the serpent (and therefore mortality brought about by Adam's sin) and thereby bringing closer the time of the ultimate redemption (which frees mankind from mortality). This crime is especially serious when it happens in ארץ ישראל, where the earth itself needs atonement for having accepted the blood of the victim. G–d took pity on us and legislated the procedure of עגלה ערופה so that we may compensate for any setback in the time-table of redemption due to the murder that has been committed on holy soil by a person or persons unknown. Thus far the Zohar.

In some instances one scholar may see as many as three distinct negative commandments involving the consumption of חמץ, leavened things, whereas another scholar considers that there is only a single culpability for all of these prohibitions of חמץ, be it before Passover, during Passover, or after Passover. Even such universally known precepts as the recital of קריאת שמע, are subject to debate, one Rabbi claiming it is a Biblical precept, another saying that it is merely a Rabbinic injunction.

An example of how the number "ten" is relevant in דינין is the composition of the collegium of judges that can adjudicate capital crimes. The total number of judges required is twenty three. This is arrived at in the following manner. The Torah writes in Numbers 35,24, and 25, ושפטו העדה … והצילו העדה. This means that there has to be an עדה, i.e. ten people who are capable of voting innocent, whereas there also has to be a מנין who are capable of voting guilty. Since the Torah demands a minimum majority of two judges in order to make a "guilty" verdict legal, we have to add another two judges to the twenty we have just mentioned. Since we must avoid a "hung jury," a third judge is added to provide us with an odd number as the total (No judge is allowed to abstain). We have seen that the number "ten" is significant then both as "ten" and as "twenty," i.e. the "ten" spelled as יוד that we mentioned previously.

An example of how the number "ten" is relevant in דינין is the composition of the collegium of judges that can adjudicate capital crimes. The total number of judges required is twenty three. This is arrived at in the following manner. The Torah writes in Numbers 35,24, and 25, ושפטו העדה … והצילו העדה. This means that there has to be an עדה, i.e. ten people who are capable of voting innocent, whereas there also has to be a מנין who are capable of voting guilty. Since the Torah demands a minimum majority of two judges in order to make a "guilty" verdict legal, we have to add another two judges to the twenty we have just mentioned. Since we must avoid a "hung jury," a third judge is added to provide us with an odd number as the total (No judge is allowed to abstain). We have seen that the number "ten" is significant then both as "ten" and as "twenty," i.e. the "ten" spelled as יוד that we mentioned previously.

Reuben, for instance, believed that from a strictly legal point of view Joseph deserved to be executed because he rebelled against the concept that Royalty was reserved for the house of David, i.e. the tribe of Yehudah. On the other hand, he considered the legislation in Numbers 35,24 and 25, according to which one must try and find every possible extenuating circumstance before subjecting the accused to the ultimate penalty. In actual fact, however, Joseph was not guilty at all, since he neither coveted Royalty for himself nor tried to deny Yehudah's claim to Royalty. Quite the contrary, he tried to advance Yehudah's cause so that the kingdom of David would come about sooner. We have explained earlier that there were three "crowns" to be acquired, the "crown" of Torah being primary. Since Joseph symbolized the "crown" of Torah, the other two "crowns" could be acquired only by means of Joseph paving the way for such a development. Joseph's being the antithesis of Esau enabled the Jewish people to develop, and in due course helped the other two "crowns" to become meaningful. Perhaps this is the reason why the Jewish people carried two arks with them during their trek through the desert to the land of Canaan. One ark contained the tablets with the Ten Commandments as well as the original Torah scroll, the other contained the remains of Joseph. The people paid Joseph a tremendous compliment by carrying both arks side by side, since this conveyed the idea that "this one (Joseph) observed what is recorded in the other one (Torah)." The ark was carried on the shoulders (בכתף ישאו, Numbers 7,9). Because of this little detail, the Midrash phrased the enthusiasm imputed to Reuben, had he been aware of the Torah's compliment to him, in the words: "He would have carried Joseph back to his father on his shoulders."

Reuben, for instance, believed that from a strictly legal point of view Joseph deserved to be executed because he rebelled against the concept that Royalty was reserved for the house of David, i.e. the tribe of Yehudah. On the other hand, he considered the legislation in Numbers 35,24 and 25, according to which one must try and find every possible extenuating circumstance before subjecting the accused to the ultimate penalty. In actual fact, however, Joseph was not guilty at all, since he neither coveted Royalty for himself nor tried to deny Yehudah's claim to Royalty. Quite the contrary, he tried to advance Yehudah's cause so that the kingdom of David would come about sooner. We have explained earlier that there were three "crowns" to be acquired, the "crown" of Torah being primary. Since Joseph symbolized the "crown" of Torah, the other two "crowns" could be acquired only by means of Joseph paving the way for such a development. Joseph's being the antithesis of Esau enabled the Jewish people to develop, and in due course helped the other two "crowns" to become meaningful. Perhaps this is the reason why the Jewish people carried two arks with them during their trek through the desert to the land of Canaan. One ark contained the tablets with the Ten Commandments as well as the original Torah scroll, the other contained the remains of Joseph. The people paid Joseph a tremendous compliment by carrying both arks side by side, since this conveyed the idea that "this one (Joseph) observed what is recorded in the other one (Torah)." The ark was carried on the shoulders (בכתף ישאו, Numbers 7,9). Because of this little detail, the Midrash phrased the enthusiasm imputed to Reuben, had he been aware of the Torah's compliment to him, in the words: "He would have carried Joseph back to his father on his shoulders."