Commentaire de citation sur Isaïe 45:9

Apart from this, he derides Job's arrogance and stupidity for complaining that man was ever created, as though he was the first person ever created. Countless generations have already passed, that saw life and rejoiced in their toil, all of whom have given thanks to the Lord for His lovingkindness (Psalms 107: 8,15,21,31). Would he gainsay the whole world? Will the clay ask the potter what he is making; or his handiwork say 'You are unskilled'? (Isaiah 45:9) (Chapter 15:7-11).

AND HE BREATHED INTO HIS NOSTRILS THE BREATH OF LIFE. This alludes to the superiority of the soul, its foundation and secret, since it mentions in connection with it the full Divine Name.²⁸⁴And the ‘Eternal G-d’ formed… and He breathed into his nostrils…. And the verse says that He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life in order to inform us that the soul did not come to man from the elements, as He intimated concerning the soul of moving things, nor was it an evolvement from the Separate Intelligences.²³⁷Intelligences without matter, generally referring to the angels and spheres. See Rambam, Hilchoth Yesodei Hatorah 3:9. Also Moreh Nebuchim, I, 49: “The angels are likewise incorporeal; they are intelligences without matter, etc.” (Friedlander’s translation.) Rather, it was the spirit of the Great G-d: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and discernment.²⁸⁵Proverbs 2:6. For he who breathes into the nostrils of another person gives into him something from his own soul.²⁸⁶Similarly, since G-d breathed into man’s nostrils, it follows that the soul in man is of Divine essence. It is this which Scripture says, And the breath of the Almighty giveth them understanding,²⁸⁷Job 32:8. since the soul is from the foundation of binah (understanding) by way of truth and faith.²⁸⁸Truth and faith here signify Cabalistic concepts. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 33. This corresponds to the saying of the Rabbis in the Sifre:²⁸⁹Numbers, beginning of Seder Matoth. “Vows are like swearing ‘by the life of the King:’ oaths are like swearing ‘by the King Himself.’ Although there is no proof for it in Scripture, there is an allusion to it: By the living G-d, and by the life of your soul.”²⁹⁰II Kings 4:30. Here in the verse where an oath is being expressed, it says, by the living G-d. It does not say “by the life of G-d,” which would indicate that His life is independent of Him; rather it says, by the living G-d, thus indicating that life is His very essence. (The correctness of this translation is indicated by the patach under the word chai, which is not in the construct state, and therefore means “the living G-d.”) See my Hebrew commentary, p. 33, for further elucidation of this point. Thus there is an allusion here to the teaching of the Sifre that “an oath is like swearing ‘by the King Himself,’” since in this verse quoted, where an oath is being given, it says, by the living G-d. This is an oath “by the King Himself.” In the case of a person, however, it says “by the life of your soul,” thus indicating that in a human being his life and his soul are two independent things. This explains the tzere under the word chei, which indicates a construct state combining two independent nouns. Thus there is an allusion to “Vows are like swearing ‘by the life of the King.’” See also Note 293. And in the Midrash of Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakanah we find:²⁹¹Sefer Habahir, 57. See above, Note 42. “What is the meaning of the word vayinafash (and He rested)?²⁹²Exodus 31:17. It teaches us that the day of the Sabbath preserves all souls, for it is vayinafash” [i.e., from the word nefesh, soul]. It is from here that you will understand the expression, speaking the oath of G-d.²⁹³Ecclesiastes 8:2. This denotes that an oath is like swearing “by G-d Himself.” See Note 290 above. The person learned in the mysteries of the Torah will understand.
Know that those who engage in research have differed concerning man. Some say that man has three souls. One is the soul of growth, like that in a plant; or you may call this “the force of growth.” Then there is also a soul of movement in him, which Scripture mentioned concerning fish, animals, and everything that creeps upon the earth. The third is the rational soul. And there are some philosophers who say that this soul in man which comes from the Most High comprises these three forces while the soul is but one.²⁹⁴The division of opinion among the philosophers as to the nature of the soul is clearly marked in Jewish philosophy. Ibn Ezra (Ecclesiastes 3:7) writes at length to prove that the soul in man consists of three parts. He quotes Saadia Gaon to be of the same opinion. The poet-philosopher Solomon ibn Gabirol (M’kor Chayim 5:20) also held this theory. Rambam, however, in his Sh’monah P’rakim, Chapter 1, holds that man’s soul is but one. This verse in its plain meaning so indicates for it states that G-d formed man of the dust of the ground, but he lay there lifeless like a dumb stone, and the Holy One, blessed be He, breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and then man became a living soul, able to move about by virtue of this soul, just like the animals and the fish, concerning which He said: ‘Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures,’²⁹⁵Above, 1:20. and ‘Let the earth bring forth the living creature.’²⁹⁶Ibid., Verse 24. This is the meaning of the expression here, ‘lenefesh chayah’ (into a living soul) man was made, meaning man turned into a soul in which there is life, after having been as a potsherd with the potsherds of the earth.²⁹⁷Isaiah 45:9. For the letter lamed in the word lenefesh indicates the opposite, [namely, that from being a potsherd he became a living soul]. And so it is in the verses, And the water shall turn ‘ledam’ (into blood) upon the dry land;²⁹⁸Exodus 4:9. And it turned ‘lenachash’ (into a snake);²⁹⁹Ibid., Verse 3. And He made the sea ‘lecharavah’ (into dry land).³⁰⁰Ibid., 14:21.
Onkelos, however, said: “And it became a speaking soul in man.” From this it would appear that his opinion coincides with those who say that man has various souls and that this rational soul which G-d breathed into his nostrils became a speaking soul.
It appears to me that this also is the opinion of our Rabbis, as we may deduce from what they said:³⁰¹Sanhedrin 65b. “Rava created a man. He sent him to Rabbi Zeira who spoke to him but he did not answer. Said Rabbi Zeira to him: ‘You are created by one of the colleagues; return to your dust.’”³⁰²This story indicates that man has various souls, since Rava was able to bestow the soul of movement upon the man he created, but he could not give him the soul of speech. And in Midrash Vayikra Rabbah we find written:³⁰³32:2. “Said Rabbi Avin: When a man sleeps, the body tells the neshamah (the moving spirit), and the neshamah tells the nefesh (the rational soul), and the nefesh tells the angel.”³⁰⁴The Midrash there concludes that each soul in man communicates to the other its sense of agreement that G-d’s judgment is just. At the same time it is obvious from this Midrash that the Rabbis are of the opinion that there are various souls in man. So also the verse, He gathers unto Himself his spirit and his breath,³⁰⁵Job 34:14. indicates, according to its plain meaning, that his spirit and breath are two distinct things.
That being so, the verse, And the Eternal G-d formed man, states the formation of movement, that man was formed into a creature capable of movement since “formation” denotes life and perception by virtue of which he is a man and not a kneaded mass of dust, just as it is said, And the Eternal G-d formed out of the ground every beast of the field, and He brought them unto the man.³⁰⁶Further, Verse 19. And after He formed him with the power of perception, He breathed into his nostrils a living soul from the Most High, this soul being in addition to the formation mentioned, and the whole man became a living soul since by virtue of this soul he understands and speaks and does all his deeds and all other souls and their powers in man are subject to it. The letter lamed in the word lenefesh is thus the lamed indicating possession, just as in the following verses: My lord, O king, ‘lecha ani’ (I am thine), and all that I have;³⁰⁷I Kings 20:4. ‘lakoneh’ (to him that bought) it, throughout his generations;³⁰⁸Leviticus 25:30., ‘lecha ani’ (I am thine), save me.³⁰⁹Psalms 119:94. Or, it may be that the verse is stating that man wholly became a living soul and was transformed into another man, as all His formations were, from now on, directed towards this soul.

The sin of Moses and Aaron in the [matter of the] waters of Meribah⁸³Further, Verses 7-13. I.e., the verses do not state explicitly what constituted the sin of Moses and Aaron, but it was clearly considered a grave one. Ramban proceeds to discuss various explanations at length. is not clearly expressed in Scripture. Rashi explains⁸⁴Verses 11-12. that [their sin consisted of hitting the rock], because He had commanded them, and speak ye unto the rock,⁸⁵Verse 8. and did not say “and ye shall strike it.” For had they spoken [to the rock and it had brought forth water] the Holy One, blessed be He, would have been sanctified before the whole congregation, since the people would have said: “If [even] this rock, which does not hear and does not speak, nonetheless obeys the command of the Holy One, blessed be He, how much more so should we [obey His commands]!” These words are [in the nature of] a homiletic interpretation,⁸⁶Found in Midrash Agadah, here on Verse 8. — In other words, Ramban does not question the homiletic truth of this interpretation, for it is surely conducive to gaining the proper awe for the word of G-d. But it does not clarify the matter of the verses. but they do not clarify [the matter]. For since G-d had commanded Moses: Take the rod,⁸⁵Verse 8. it implied that he should smite [the rock] with it, for had He only wanted that he should speak to it, what was [the point of] this rod in his hand? Similarly, in the [case of the] plagues of Egypt where He said, and the rod which was turned to a serpent shalt thou take in thy hand⁸⁷Exodus 7:15. it was in order to smite with it;⁸⁸Ibid., Verse 17: I will smite with the rod that is in my hand upon the waters which are in the river. and sometimes He said, Stretch forth thy hand [with thy rod],⁸⁹Ibid., 8:1. when the meaning is: “to smite with the rod,” since Scripture writes briefly when the subject-matter is self-understood. Moreover, the miracle [involved in the rock giving forth water] is no greater if [accomplished] by speech than by smiting, for as far as the rock is concerned both are equal. Furthermore [if the sin consisted of smiting the rock], why did He say about this: ye [Moses and Aaron] trespassed against Me?⁹⁰Deuteronomy 32:51. [It cannot be because they failed to speak to the rock], for the [fulfillment of the] command to [Moses to] speak to the rock is indeed [also] mentioned at the occurrence [of the event]! Thus He commanded [Moses and Aaron] to say whilst the rock “listens” that G-d will bring forth water out of this rock, similar to [that which Joshua said about a stone which he put up as a witness to the covenant which he made with the people], for ‘it hath heard’ all the words of the Eternal.⁹¹Joshua 24:27. And they [Moses and Aaron] indeed did so, as Scripture states, And Moses and Aaron gathered the assembly together before the rock, and he said unto them etc.⁹²Further, Verse 10. Thus it is obvious that Moses did utter the Divine message whilst the rock “listened.” And so why did Rashi attribute to Moses the lack of speaking in this event! Thus the rock did “hear” when he [Moses] spoke these words to all the people!
Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra has already refuted many claims of the commentators in [their explanations of the nature of] this sin. But the secret⁹³Ibn Ezra alludes to the Cabalistic concept that when a person’s mind cleaves solely to G-d, he can accomplish miracles. Now G-d told Moses to speak to the rock, and had he done so with single-minded devotion to G-d, he would have been able thereby to bring forth water. But when he began rebuking the people for their complaints, he lost that complete concentration of mind which was required for invoking G-d’s miraculous intervention to bring forth water, and he then proceeded to smite the rock. When this failed to produce any water, he smote it a second time, by which time he had regained his original complete concentration of mind on G-d, so that the water then came forth. Ramban rejects this interpretation. to which he alluded is also incorrect. For if Moses lost his concentration of mind because of the strife of the people, and [therefore] did not speak to the rock, so that the water did not come forth [when he smote the rock] the first time, and only when he hit the rock again, a second time, with concentration of cleaving unto [the Creator of] all, did the water come forth [as Ibn Ezra explains] — then they [indeed] sinned the first time, but it was not such [a sin] about which He would say: ye believed not in Me, to sanctify Me,⁹⁴Verse 12. since there was no lack of “faith” here at all!
Now Rabbeinu Rabbi Moshe [ben Maimon] advanced the following reasoning,⁹⁵In his Shemonah Perakim (The Eight Chapters), Chapter 4. These chapters are Maimonides’ introduction to the Tractate Aboth, which contains the roots of ethical and moral teachings of the Rabbis of the Mishnah. and explained “that the sin of Moses our teacher, of blessed memory, consisted of tending towards anger, when he said, Hear now ye rebels,⁹⁶Verse 10. and G-d, blessed be He, treated this as a failing, that a man like him should show anger in front of the congregation of Israel, in a situation in which anger was not warranted. All similar actions of such a man are treated as a profanation of G-d’s Name, because the people take an example from all his [Moses’] movements and words, hoping thereby to achieve successes⁹⁷In our “Shemonah Perakim” it is in the singular: “success.” The word is here indicative of achievement of those qualities of character which make one’s life “a success” in the noblest sense of the word. in this world and the World to Come. How could he [permit himself to] appear angry, since it [anger] is an evil trait, and is derived only from a bad characteristic of the features of the soul! But when He said of this sin: ye trespassed against Me,⁹⁰Deuteronomy 32:51. [the meaning thereof] is as I shall explain. Moses was not speaking to simpletons, nor to those of insignificant status, for the least important of their women was [equal in prophetic vision] to [the prophet] Ezekiel the son of Buzi, as the Sages have mentioned.⁹⁸“A maidservant saw at the [splitting of the Red] Sea what the prophet Ezekiel never saw” (Mechilta, Exodus 15:25). See Vol. II, p. 228. Thus whatever Moses said or did the people would examine, so that when they saw him becoming angry, they said that he — may his memory be blessed — did not lack moral perfection, and therefore ‘unless he knew that G-d was angry with us for demanding water, and that we have aroused His anger, blessed be He, Moses also would not have been angry with us.’ But we do not find that G-d, praised be He, was angry [with the people] when He spoke to Moses on this matter. But [instead] He said: Take the rod, and assemble the congregation, thou, and Aaron thy brother, and speak ye unto the rock before their eyes, that it give forth its water; and thou shalt bring forth to them water out of the rock; so thou shalt give the congregation and their cattle drink.⁸⁵Verse 8. [This statement does not indicate that G-d was angry with the people for having demanded water, and hence Moses’ anger was unjustified.] Thus we have solved one of the most difficult problems in the Torah, concerning which many things have been said, and which has been asked many times, namely: ‘what was the sin which Moses committed?’ Consider what has been said [by others] about it, and what we ourselves have explained, and let the truth prevail.” These are the words of Rabbi Moshe [ben Maimon] of blessed memory.
He has added vanity upon vanities!⁹⁹See Ecclesiastes 1:2. — In other words, yet another interpretation has been added to those of the previous commentators which are not satisfactory. For Scripture says ye trespassed against Me,⁹⁰Deuteronomy 32:51. meaning that they transgressed His command, and He [further] stated, ye believed not in Me,⁹⁴Verse 12. meaning that they lacked faith in Him, [and if so] the punishment [of Moses] was not because he showed anger! [Were this to be his sin], Moses would have deserved punishment [not so much here as] when he was wroth with the officers of the host¹⁰⁰Further, 31:14. for no reason. Moreover, Scripture [here] does not mention anything about him being angry, for the expression Hear now, ye rebels⁹⁶Verse 10. is [merely a form of] rebuke, similar to that which he [Moses] said: Ye have been rebellious against the Eternal.¹⁰¹Deuteronomy 9:24. Furthermore, Aaron never in his life became angry, for he always walked in peace and uprightness.¹⁰²Malachi 2:6. — Yet Verse 12 clearly states that Aaron too, was to be punished, although according to Rambam’s explanation he had not sinned! Besides, it is impossible [to suggest, as Rambam does], that G-d was not very angry with them [the people] for their strife with Moses! For throughout all their [previous] trials in the wilderness, their greatest sin was when they said, wherefore hast thou brought us up out of Egypt?¹⁰³Exodus 17:3. and they preferred to be slaves to their enemies doing rigorous work, rather than to be G-d’s [people], like a son who serves his father. Thus Scripture says: because that ye have rejected the Eternal Who is among you, and have troubled Him with weeping, saying: ‘Why, now, came we forth out of Egypt?’¹⁰⁴Above, 11:20. On the first occasion they said even less than this, [namely], Wherefore hast thou brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst?¹⁰³Exodus 17:3. and yet there was great [Divine] wrath against them, and [it was considered] a great sin, just as it is said, And the name of the place was called Massah [Trying] and Meribah [Strife], because of the striving of the children of Israel etc.¹⁰⁵Exodus 17:7. And here it says expressly, These are the waters of Meribah [Strife], where the children of Israel strove with the Eternal!¹⁰⁶Further, Verse 13. Thus Scripture here emphasizes that the people’s sin consisted of striving with the Eternal, and this is not so according to Maimonides’ explanation, as Ramban continues. What greater transgression can there be than this! Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker!¹⁰⁷Isaiah 45:9. And Moses said, Also the Eternal was angry with me for your sakes, saying: ‘Thou also shalt not go in thither.’¹⁰⁸Deuteronomy 1:37. If so, it was they [the people] who sinned and brought about all this misfortune! But according to the explanation of the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon], they did not commit any transgression and sin at all in this whole affair! And as for that which Rabbi Moshe said: “We do not find that G-d, praised be He, was angry [with the people when He spoke to Moses on this matter], but instead He said: Take the rod etc.”⁸⁶Found in Midrash Agadah, here on Verse 8. — In other words, Ramban does not question the homiletic truth of this interpretation, for it is surely conducive to gaining the proper awe for the word of G-d. But it does not clarify the matter of the verses. — know that whenever the people needed something for their sustenance, even though they murmured and transgressed [in asking] for it, He, being full of compassion, forgiveth iniquity … and does not stir up all His wrath,¹⁰⁹Psalms 78:38. nor does He hold [their sin against them], but He gives them their request.¹¹⁰See ibid., 106:15. Similarly in the [case of the] first [request for] water He said in a peaceful manner, Pass on before the people etc.,¹¹¹Exodus 17:5. even though there was trial and strife there,¹⁰⁵Exodus 17:7. such that He warned them [not to try G-d] in future generations [using it as an example].¹¹²Deuteronomy 6:16 — Ye shall not try the Eternal your G-d, as ye tried Him in Massah. (See also “The Commandments,” Vol. II, pp. 63-64). So also in connection with the manna [He said], Behold, I will cause to rain bread from heaven for you,¹¹³Exodus 16:4. Thus G-d showed them love and affection although they sinned in murmuring and complaining. in a phrase indicating love and affection. Only at the end, in the second communication, He said, I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel,¹¹⁴Ibid., Verse 12. merely in order to tell them that they had sinned. But [it is only] when they complained for no [good] reason, that He poured upon them the fury of His anger.¹¹⁵Isaiah 42:25. And here there is an additional allusion to great wrath, and [the people] being liable to a plague, as it is said, and the glory of the Eternal appeared unto them.¹¹⁶Verse 6. [The expression unto them] refers to the assembly mentioned [in the first part of the verse], which indicates “the hand of the Eternal” that is present in plagues, as you may note in [incidents of] the spies,¹¹⁷Above, 14:10-12: and the glory of the Eternal appeared … ‘I will smite them with the pestilence.’ the day of Korach’s punishment,¹¹⁸Ibid., 16:19: and the glory of the Eternal appeared … The destruction of Korach and his company followed, as related ibid., (Verses 31-33). and the following day.¹¹⁹Ibid., 17:7: and the glory of the Eternal appeared … This was followed by a plague, as related there in Verses 11-14. And one must [moreover] wonder at the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon, who wrote that the people committed no sin in this affair] since the verse explicitly states, They angered Him also at the waters of Meribah, and it went ill with Moses because of them!¹²⁰Psalms 106:32. — See my Hebrew commentary, pp. 274-276 for various defenses of Rambam’s interpretation of Moses’ sin at Meribah. In his Sefer Hazikaron (see Vol. I, Preface pp. x-xi) Rabbi Yom Tov ben Abraham (Ritba) concludes his defense of Rambam’s opinion as follows: “And although I know that the tradition of our master, Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman (Ramban) of blessed memory, in the matter of Moses’ sin is the true tradition which one cannot criticize, yet there are seventy [different] interpretations of the Torah, and they are all the words of the living G-d.” Ramban’s own explanation follows now in the text. And the verse [there] counts this sin amongst the great trials with which they [the people] tested G-d in the wilderness!
The most likely explanation amongst all those that have been said about this matter, and the one best suited to answer a questioner, is that of Rabbeinu Chananel,¹²¹See above, Seder Korach, Note 48. who wrote [in his commentary] that the sin consisted of their saying, are ‘we’ to bring you forth water out of this rock?⁹⁶Verse 10. They should [not have said “are we”, but] “shall the Eternal bring you forth water?” just as they had said when ‘the Eternal shall give’ you in the evening flesh to eat etc.,¹²²Exodus 16:8. and similarly in [the case of all the] miracles they [Moses and Aaron] informed them that the Eternal would do wonders for them. And [since they did not say so here], perhaps the people thought that Moses and Aaron brought forth the water for them out of the rock through their own wisdom [and that it was not a Divine miracle]. This is [what G-d referred to in saying], ye sanctified Me not.¹²³Deuteronomy 32:51. Now in the case of the first episode with the rock, He said, Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb,¹²⁴Exodus 17:6. and the seventy elders saw the pillar of the cloud¹²⁵Ibid., 13:21. hovering over the rock, and thus it was made apparent to all that the miracle was the deed of the Great G-d. But here, since the people saw nothing, they misunderstood the words of Moses and Aaron [as explained above].¹²⁶See the comments of later scholars on Rabbeinu Chananel’s explanation of this topic, quoted in my edition of Rabbeinu Chananel al Hatorah (Mosad Harav Kook, Jerusalem, 5732).
It is possible that He said ‘m’altem bi’ (ye ‘trespassed’ against Me),¹²³Deuteronomy 32:51. because if one derives benefit from a sacred object, it is called me’ilah.¹²⁷Here too, a deed which was in reality a Divine miracle came to be ascribed to Moses’ and Aaron’s own doing, as explained above, because they said, are ‘we’ to bring you forth water out of this rock? In a way, then, Moses and Aaron thereby “derived benefit” from a sanctified matter. Similarly, He said ‘m’rithem pi’ (ye rebelled against My commandment)¹²⁸Further, 27:14. because He had commanded them to speak unto the rock before their eyes,¹²⁹Verse 8. in order that I should become sanctified in their eyes. Or [it may be that m’rithem pi¹²⁸Further, 27:14. means] “you have ‘changed’ My commandment,” related to the expression ‘vatemer’ (and she changed) My ordinances,¹³⁰Ezekiel 5:6. since I did not command you to speak in this manner [are ‘we’ to bring you forth water out of this rock?]. And [according to Rabbeinu Chananel’s explanation, the criticism that] lo he’emantem bi¹³¹Verse 12. (ye believed not in Me) refers [not to Moses and Aaron themselves lacking in belief, but] to the children of Israel [i.e., it does not mean, as it is generally translated, “ye believed not in Me,” but “‘ye did not cause the children of Israel to believe in Me’ because you did not attribute to Me the bringing forth of the water from the rock”]. Or [the word he’emantem] may mean “strengthening,” as if to say: “you did not strengthen yourselves to sanctify Me in their eyes,” related to these expressions: ‘va’amanah’ (and a ‘sure’ ordinance) concerning the singers;¹³²Nehemiah 11:23. Meaning: “a strong” ordinance. the peg that was fastened ‘bimkom ne’eman’ (in a ‘sure’ place).¹³³Isaiah 22:25. Meaning “a strong” place.
The Truth [Cabalistic explanation] is that this subject [i.e., the nature of Moses’ sin in the incident of the waters of Meribah] is one of the great secrets amongst the mysteries of the Torah. For on the first [occasion with the rock] He said to Moses, Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock,¹²⁴Exodus 17:6. meaning to say: “My Great Name will be upon the rock in Horeb,” which is the Glory of the Eternal, the devouring fire on the top of the mount.¹³⁴Exodus 24:17. The verse reads: ‘like’ devouring fire. Therefore he only hit it there once, and a great amount of water came forth. But here He did not tell him so, and so both of them [Moses and Aaron] agreed that they would smite the rock twice — and that was their sin. Therefore He said, lo he’emantem bi,¹³¹Verse 12. “you did not put faith in My Name [when you should have known]¹³⁵Abusaula. See my Hebrew commentary p. 276. that by faith [alone] the miracle will be done.” It states, ‘m’rithem pi’ (ye rebelled against My commandment),¹²⁸Further, 27:14. because they rebelled against His holy spirit,¹³⁶See Isaiah 63:10. which is always called pi Hashem (the commandment of the Eternal).¹³⁷See Ramban above, 10:6. Therefore He said, ‘m’altem’ bi,¹²³Deuteronomy 32:51. and the term me’ilah always denotes “untruth.”¹³⁸In this case the “untruth” consisted of thinking that there would be no water unless they would hit the rock twice (Abusaula). Thus the sin [of Moses and Aaron] is clearly expressed in Scripture. And so did the Psalmist say, [Tremble thou earth …] at the presence of the G-d of Jacob; Who turneth the rock into a pool of water.¹³⁹Psalms 114:7-8. And you can understand this from Moses’ prayer, when he said, O G-d Eternal, Thou hast begun,¹⁴⁰Deuteronomy 3:24. pleading before the Glorious Name¹⁴¹Ibid., 28:58. to forgive him.
And in the opinion of our Rabbis¹⁴²Sifre, Matoth 157. who mention Moses’ anger [as a factor in his sin], it is possible that he hit the rock but [only] a few drops came forth as a result of the diminution in his concentration because of his anger, and they both [Moses and Aaron] were astonished at this, and decided to hit the rock a second time, as I have mentioned, and that was the sin of both of them.
In my opinion, the meaning of the phrase, and speak ye ‘el’ (unto) the rock¹²⁹Verse 8. is like ‘al’ (concerning) the rock. Similarly, Thus saith the Eternal of hosts ‘el’ the pillars, and concerning the sea, and concerning the bases … they shall be carried unto Babylon.¹⁴³Jeremiah 27:19; 22. The verse clearly does not mean “unto the pillars,” but “concerning the pillars.” Thus He commanded them [Moses and Aaron] to say in the presence of the congregation, when they are all gathered together, that G-d will bring them forth water out of the rock, as He indeed did. Now do not find a difficulty¹⁴⁴The difficulty is as follows: If we explain [as we have done hitherto] that speak ye ‘el’ the rock means “to” the rock, and the rock will listen, then the following word l’eineihem (before their eyes) fits in perfectly. The speaking by Moses and Aaron with the rock listening, is to be done before “the eyes” of the people. But if as we now explain speak ye ‘el’ the rock as meaning ‘al’ the rock [“concerning” the rock] while the people are to listen, how is the word l’eineihem in accord with the thought, since people do not listen with “their eyes?” Hence Ramban proceeds to remove this difficulty by pointing out that the word l’eineihem is Scripturally not always used in a literal sense and here it means “in their presence.” in the verse, and ‘speak’ ye unto the rock ‘before their eyes,’¹²⁹Verse 8. for the meaning thereof is like “in their presence”, so that they should all hear it. Similarly [we find]: And Hananiah ‘spoke before the eyes of’ [which means: “in the presence of”] all the people, saying: ‘Thus saith the Eternal: Even so will I break the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon etc.’¹⁴⁵Jeremiah 28:11. There are many cases like this. Or the meaning of the word l’eineihem (before their eyes) here may be that [Moses’] speaking [to the rock] should be when the people are all gathered there, and the rock is before their eyes, as it says when the event [actually took place], And Moses and Aaron gathered the assembly together ‘before the rock’.⁹⁶Verse 10. For when they had gathered together there and saw the rock face to face, they [Moses and Aaron] said, are we to bring you forth water out of this rock?⁹⁶Verse 10. — as the Sages have mentioned¹⁴⁶Tanchuma, Chukath 6. — so that they should not say that there were springs [hidden at that place]. It is possible that the verse is to be [interpreted] as if it were transposed, meaning: “assemble the congregation unto the rock, and speak ye before their eyes, that it give forth water.”