הֲצֹ֧אן וּבָקָ֛ר יִשָּׁחֵ֥ט לָהֶ֖ם וּמָצָ֣א לָהֶ֑ם אִ֣ם אֶֽת־כָּל־דְּגֵ֥י הַיָּ֛ם יֵאָסֵ֥ף לָהֶ֖ם וּמָצָ֥א לָהֶֽם׃ (פ)
Apakah kambing domba dan lembu sapi akan disembelih bagi mereka, sehingga cukup bagi mereka? Ataukah semua ikan di laut akan dikumpulkan bagi mereka, sehingga cukup bagi mereka?”
Rabbeinu Bahya
Tanchuma on Chukat 8 comments as follows on the words: “they shall take a red cow to you.” The words “a cow to you,” mean that I, G’d, will reveal the meaning of this legislation to you, but for everyone else it will remain in the realm of a חוקה, a statute, beyond their understanding. This interpretation is based on an illuminating comment by Rav Huna on two verses (Psalms 75,3 and Zecharyah 14,6). In the former verse the psalmist writes: At the time I choose I will give judgment equitably.” [At that time the justice of My ways will become revealed to everyone, seeing G’d did not mean to imply that up until that time His justice had been inequitable. Ed.]. In the other verse the prophet quotes G’d as saying: “in that day there shall be neither sunlight nor cold moonlight, but there shall be a continuous day -only the Lord knows when- of neither day or night, and there shall be light at eventide.” The meaning of the verse is that there will remain matters which while they are not revealed to you in this world will be revealed to you in that future, such as the blind man who gains his sight, of whom Isaiah 42,16 writes: “I will guide the blind by a road they did not know, and I will make them walk by paths they never knew I will turn darkness before them to light.....these are the things which I have done and I will not abandon them.” The crucial word in that verse is the word עשיתים, instead of אעשה אותם, i.e. “I have done them,” instead of “I am going to do them” (as we would have expected). This means (according to Tanchuma) that what is described here as a view of the future G’d has already shown to Rabbi Akiva and his companions (who descended into the Pardess).
A different approach to the same verse: Even matters which have not been revealed to Moses will be revealed to Rabbi Akiva. This is based on Job 28,10: “his eyes behold every precious thing.” These words which describe someone as seeing “every precious thing” refer to Rabbi Akiva. Solomon said in Kohelet 7,23: “All this I tested with wisdom; I thought to myself that I would become wise, but it is beyond me.” The words: “I would become wise,” are a reference to the testimony in Kings I 5,9: “the Lord had given wisdom to Solomon and discernment in great measure....and his wisdom was greater than that of all the Kedemites and all the wisdom of Egypt.” What precisely did the wisdom of the Kedemites consist of? They knew how to interpret zodiac signs, were experts in astrology; they were also familiar with the tiar, a bird (raven?) based on Kohelet 10,20: “for a bird of the sky may carry the sound, and some winged creature may betray the matter.”
Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel used to say that he liked three customs of the Orientals. They do not kiss on the mouth but on the hand; when they cut meat they always employ a knife; when they ask someone’s advice on a matter they invariably do this in the field (where they cannot be overheard). This latter practice is based on Yaakov consulting with his wives in the field on his decision to leave Lavan (compare Genesis 31,4). What did the wisdom of the Egyptians which Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel praised consist of? You will find that when Solomon was about to build the Temple he sent word to Pharaoh Necho asking him to supply him with artisans on loan to help him in the construction. How did Pharaoh answer this request? He consulted his astrologers to determine which of his artisans would not live out the year and he then dispatched these artisans to Solomon. When Solomon saw these people he realized with the aid of Holy Spirit that they were all going to die during that year. He provided each one with a shroud and sent them back to Pharaoh with a note reading: “were you short of shrouds in Egypt? Here I send you your artisans back with a gift of shrouds.” When the Book of Kings wrote that Solomon was wiser than “כל האדם, “any man” (or “Adam,”) what precisely did the unique wisdom of Adam consist of? You will find a discussion in the Midrash that when G’d was about to create Adam He consulted with the ministering angels about His plan saying: “let us make Adam in our image and in our likeness.” The angels countered: “what is so special about Adam that You want to bother with him?” G’d responded that the Adam He intended to create would be wiser than they. How did G’d proceed to prove His point? He assembled all the beasts, the birds, etc., and asked the angels to name them. The angels were unable to do this. After G’d had created Adam, He paraded all the animals in front of him and asked him: “what is the name of this animal, etc.?” Adam replied: “this one is called “lion,” this one is called “giraffe,” this one is called “sheep,“ etc.; etc. This is the meaning of Genesis 2,20: “Adam called the names of all the beasts.”‘ All these names Adam gave the beasts were not merely arbitrary names he chose to call them by, but they reflected the essence of each animal respectively. I have already discussed this in greater detail in my commentary on Genesis 2,19. When G’d asked Adam what his own name was, he answered: “Adam.” He explained that he said this seeing he had been created out of אדמה, raw material taken from the soil. Thereupon G’d asked Adam what His name was. Adam answered that G’d’s name was the tetragram. When G’d wanted to know what had given him this idea, (seeing he had not been told) he answered: for You are the Master of all creatures. We know that Adam was correct from Isaiah 42,8 אני י-ה-ו-ה הוא שמי, “I am the Lord, this is My name.” G’d meant that He adopted (or retained this name) seeing the first human being Adam had bestowed it upon Him. This was a pact between Adam and G’d that G’d would henceforth be known by the name bestowed upon him by His first intelligent creature.
When we read in Kings I 5,11 that Solomon was wiser than Eytan the Ezrachi, whom did Jeremiah (author of that Book) have in mind when he wrote these words? It was a reference to Avraham. Psalm 89 is attributed to Avraham as the word האזרחי, at the beginning of that psalm is a reference to the “East” according to our sages in Baba Batra 15. Heyman is understood to be Moses (ibid). The philological connection is established by the word נאמן in Numbers 12,7 that G’d said of Moses בכל ביתי נאמן הוא, “he is trusted in My entire House.” כלכל, another of the wise men mentioned in the chapter of the Book of Kings extolling Solomon’s wisdom is a reference to Joseph (who “provided” for all of Egypt economically with his wisdom). The Egyptians recognized that the only reason a man whom they considered a slave was able to rule over them was the extreme wisdom of Joseph which enabled him to maintain himself in that position. The Egyptians who had been suspicious of Joseph and his ability brought him seventy different pieces of paper, each in a different language, asking him to explain what was written thereon. Joseph was able to read each in its respective language. Not only that; Joseph also knew Hebrew, a tongue which the Egyptians did not understand. We base this on Psalms 81,6: עדות ביהוסף שמו, i.e. an allusion that Joseph knew something in addition to what anyone else knew. The word דרדע, another person named as very wise in Kings 5,11 is a reference to the generation of Israelites who had experienced the revelation at Mount Sinai in the desert and who had been granted insights exceeding that of any other generation. They were known as the דור דעה, “the generation imbued with knowledge.” The בני מחול who are also listed in the Book of Kings as possessing outstanding wisdom are an allusion to the people of the period of the golden calf whom G’d had forgiven their participation in that sin, hence they were called בני מחול, “people who had been pardoned.”
The Book of Kings there continues in quantifying Solomon’s wisdom by attributing to him no fewer than three thousand parables (proverbs) and over one thousand poems. Concerning this enigmatic statement Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmeni opines that he made a search of the entire Bible and could not come up with more than approximately 800 verses in which Solomon is mentioned as saying anything of significance. We are therefore forced to interpret these numbers mentioned in the Book of Kings not as original sayings recorded in the Bible but as the number of interpretations offered by Solomon on a far smaller number of texts. When Kings I 5,13 speaks about Solomon “speaking about trees,” one such example may be that Solomon examined the phenomenon of a person afflicted with the skin disease tzoraat requiring some of the wood from the tallest tree (cedar) and some of the wood from the most lowly tree (hyssop) to effect his purification. Solomon suggested that the cause of the affliction was that the person so stricken was guilty of arrogance, considering himself superior to his contemporaries. In order to be cured of this psychological defect he had to “lower” himself (even in his own eyes) to the level of the hyssop, the lowest of the trees in order to be fit to rejoin society. The Book of Kings goes on to describe part of Solomon’s wisdom as his ability to speak על הבהמה ועל העוף ועל הרמש ועל הדגים, “on the mammals, the birds, the creeping creatures and the fish.” He defined the reason why mammals, if fit to eat, require the severing of both the gullet and the windpipe, whereas birds require the severing of only one of these organs. He explained that this was related to the raw material these creatures were made of, i.e. the mammals were created from the soil (Genesis 1,24), whereas the birds were created from a mixture of water and soil, i.e. from mud (Genesis 1,20).
When Solomon is reported as speaking about the creeping things, the meaning is that he explained why eight of these species confer ritual impurity on contact with their carcass, etc. He also explained why people who hunt or injure these species on the Sabbath are guilty of a major infraction of the Sabbath legislation, whereas other related creeping creatures are not treated in that way by halachah, i.e. because these eight species are covered by skin (Shabbat 107). Concerning the statement in Kings that Solomon spoke about the fish, he explained why they do not require ritual slaughter in order to make them fit to eat for Israelites, as we know from Numbers 11,22 where Moses speaks of slaughter for mammals and fowl, but implies that the mere gathering in of fish make them fit to be eaten. In short, Solomon declares that whereas he was able to figure out satisfactory reasons for all the legislations of the Torah concerning these creatures, the reason for the red cow legislation had escaped him. It is interesting that the numerical value of the words והיא רחוקה, which Solomon uses to describe his inability to fathom the meaning of something, is the same as that of פרה אדומה, “red cow” (341).
A different approach to the same verse: Even matters which have not been revealed to Moses will be revealed to Rabbi Akiva. This is based on Job 28,10: “his eyes behold every precious thing.” These words which describe someone as seeing “every precious thing” refer to Rabbi Akiva. Solomon said in Kohelet 7,23: “All this I tested with wisdom; I thought to myself that I would become wise, but it is beyond me.” The words: “I would become wise,” are a reference to the testimony in Kings I 5,9: “the Lord had given wisdom to Solomon and discernment in great measure....and his wisdom was greater than that of all the Kedemites and all the wisdom of Egypt.” What precisely did the wisdom of the Kedemites consist of? They knew how to interpret zodiac signs, were experts in astrology; they were also familiar with the tiar, a bird (raven?) based on Kohelet 10,20: “for a bird of the sky may carry the sound, and some winged creature may betray the matter.”
Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel used to say that he liked three customs of the Orientals. They do not kiss on the mouth but on the hand; when they cut meat they always employ a knife; when they ask someone’s advice on a matter they invariably do this in the field (where they cannot be overheard). This latter practice is based on Yaakov consulting with his wives in the field on his decision to leave Lavan (compare Genesis 31,4). What did the wisdom of the Egyptians which Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel praised consist of? You will find that when Solomon was about to build the Temple he sent word to Pharaoh Necho asking him to supply him with artisans on loan to help him in the construction. How did Pharaoh answer this request? He consulted his astrologers to determine which of his artisans would not live out the year and he then dispatched these artisans to Solomon. When Solomon saw these people he realized with the aid of Holy Spirit that they were all going to die during that year. He provided each one with a shroud and sent them back to Pharaoh with a note reading: “were you short of shrouds in Egypt? Here I send you your artisans back with a gift of shrouds.” When the Book of Kings wrote that Solomon was wiser than “כל האדם, “any man” (or “Adam,”) what precisely did the unique wisdom of Adam consist of? You will find a discussion in the Midrash that when G’d was about to create Adam He consulted with the ministering angels about His plan saying: “let us make Adam in our image and in our likeness.” The angels countered: “what is so special about Adam that You want to bother with him?” G’d responded that the Adam He intended to create would be wiser than they. How did G’d proceed to prove His point? He assembled all the beasts, the birds, etc., and asked the angels to name them. The angels were unable to do this. After G’d had created Adam, He paraded all the animals in front of him and asked him: “what is the name of this animal, etc.?” Adam replied: “this one is called “lion,” this one is called “giraffe,” this one is called “sheep,“ etc.; etc. This is the meaning of Genesis 2,20: “Adam called the names of all the beasts.”‘ All these names Adam gave the beasts were not merely arbitrary names he chose to call them by, but they reflected the essence of each animal respectively. I have already discussed this in greater detail in my commentary on Genesis 2,19. When G’d asked Adam what his own name was, he answered: “Adam.” He explained that he said this seeing he had been created out of אדמה, raw material taken from the soil. Thereupon G’d asked Adam what His name was. Adam answered that G’d’s name was the tetragram. When G’d wanted to know what had given him this idea, (seeing he had not been told) he answered: for You are the Master of all creatures. We know that Adam was correct from Isaiah 42,8 אני י-ה-ו-ה הוא שמי, “I am the Lord, this is My name.” G’d meant that He adopted (or retained this name) seeing the first human being Adam had bestowed it upon Him. This was a pact between Adam and G’d that G’d would henceforth be known by the name bestowed upon him by His first intelligent creature.
When we read in Kings I 5,11 that Solomon was wiser than Eytan the Ezrachi, whom did Jeremiah (author of that Book) have in mind when he wrote these words? It was a reference to Avraham. Psalm 89 is attributed to Avraham as the word האזרחי, at the beginning of that psalm is a reference to the “East” according to our sages in Baba Batra 15. Heyman is understood to be Moses (ibid). The philological connection is established by the word נאמן in Numbers 12,7 that G’d said of Moses בכל ביתי נאמן הוא, “he is trusted in My entire House.” כלכל, another of the wise men mentioned in the chapter of the Book of Kings extolling Solomon’s wisdom is a reference to Joseph (who “provided” for all of Egypt economically with his wisdom). The Egyptians recognized that the only reason a man whom they considered a slave was able to rule over them was the extreme wisdom of Joseph which enabled him to maintain himself in that position. The Egyptians who had been suspicious of Joseph and his ability brought him seventy different pieces of paper, each in a different language, asking him to explain what was written thereon. Joseph was able to read each in its respective language. Not only that; Joseph also knew Hebrew, a tongue which the Egyptians did not understand. We base this on Psalms 81,6: עדות ביהוסף שמו, i.e. an allusion that Joseph knew something in addition to what anyone else knew. The word דרדע, another person named as very wise in Kings 5,11 is a reference to the generation of Israelites who had experienced the revelation at Mount Sinai in the desert and who had been granted insights exceeding that of any other generation. They were known as the דור דעה, “the generation imbued with knowledge.” The בני מחול who are also listed in the Book of Kings as possessing outstanding wisdom are an allusion to the people of the period of the golden calf whom G’d had forgiven their participation in that sin, hence they were called בני מחול, “people who had been pardoned.”
The Book of Kings there continues in quantifying Solomon’s wisdom by attributing to him no fewer than three thousand parables (proverbs) and over one thousand poems. Concerning this enigmatic statement Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmeni opines that he made a search of the entire Bible and could not come up with more than approximately 800 verses in which Solomon is mentioned as saying anything of significance. We are therefore forced to interpret these numbers mentioned in the Book of Kings not as original sayings recorded in the Bible but as the number of interpretations offered by Solomon on a far smaller number of texts. When Kings I 5,13 speaks about Solomon “speaking about trees,” one such example may be that Solomon examined the phenomenon of a person afflicted with the skin disease tzoraat requiring some of the wood from the tallest tree (cedar) and some of the wood from the most lowly tree (hyssop) to effect his purification. Solomon suggested that the cause of the affliction was that the person so stricken was guilty of arrogance, considering himself superior to his contemporaries. In order to be cured of this psychological defect he had to “lower” himself (even in his own eyes) to the level of the hyssop, the lowest of the trees in order to be fit to rejoin society. The Book of Kings goes on to describe part of Solomon’s wisdom as his ability to speak על הבהמה ועל העוף ועל הרמש ועל הדגים, “on the mammals, the birds, the creeping creatures and the fish.” He defined the reason why mammals, if fit to eat, require the severing of both the gullet and the windpipe, whereas birds require the severing of only one of these organs. He explained that this was related to the raw material these creatures were made of, i.e. the mammals were created from the soil (Genesis 1,24), whereas the birds were created from a mixture of water and soil, i.e. from mud (Genesis 1,20).
When Solomon is reported as speaking about the creeping things, the meaning is that he explained why eight of these species confer ritual impurity on contact with their carcass, etc. He also explained why people who hunt or injure these species on the Sabbath are guilty of a major infraction of the Sabbath legislation, whereas other related creeping creatures are not treated in that way by halachah, i.e. because these eight species are covered by skin (Shabbat 107). Concerning the statement in Kings that Solomon spoke about the fish, he explained why they do not require ritual slaughter in order to make them fit to eat for Israelites, as we know from Numbers 11,22 where Moses speaks of slaughter for mammals and fowl, but implies that the mere gathering in of fish make them fit to be eaten. In short, Solomon declares that whereas he was able to figure out satisfactory reasons for all the legislations of the Torah concerning these creatures, the reason for the red cow legislation had escaped him. It is interesting that the numerical value of the words והיא רחוקה, which Solomon uses to describe his inability to fathom the meaning of something, is the same as that of פרה אדומה, “red cow” (341).
Rabbeinu Yonah
[With] ten trials did our ancestors test the Omnipresent, blessed be He, in the Wilderness, as it is said (Numbers 14:22): "Yet have they tested Me these ten times, and have not hearkened to My voice:" The first is that they said (Exodus 14:11), "Are there not enough graves in Egypt?" And the second is (Exodus 15:24), "And the people grumbled against Moses, saying, 'What shall we drink?'" And a miracle happened that the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded Moshe to throw wood into the bitter waters, as it is stated (Exodus 15:25), "And he cried out to the Lord, and the Lord showed him a piece of wood." And they said in Tractate Pesachim that this tree [that the wood come from] was a hardofanei, which is bitter. He threw bitter into bitter and it turned sweet. (The editor said, I did not find this in Pesachim, but rather in Rashi on Pesachim 39 in the name of the Mekhilta on Parshat Beshalach. And Tosafot on Pesachim 36 cites the Mekhilta that it was an olive tree; and in truth these are two [different] opinions in the Mekhila - see there.) The third was in the Wilderness of Sin when they asked for bread, as it stated (Exodus 16:3), "when we sat over the fleshpot." The fourth is (Exodus 17:7) "Is the Lord amongst us or not?" There is a parable [relevant to this] about a man who carried his son on his shoulder; and [the son] was competent, but he said, "Have you seen Father?" What did his father do? He flung him from his shoulder. So did the Holy One, blessed be He, carry them 'on the wings of eagles' - [and yet they] ask, "Is the Lord amongst us?" What did He do? He brought Amalek upon them. The fifth is that they left manna over. The sixth is that in Refidim 'they did not have water for the congregation' (the editor says, I could not understand this, as he already counted this in the fourth test; and further study is also required about his whole count regarding this, and see Arakhin 16). The seventh was at Chorev with the story of the [golden] calf, as it is stated (Exodus 32:1), "the people gathered against Aharon, etc." The eighth was (Numbers 11:1), "And the people were like grumblers of evil in the ears of the Lord." And 'He set a fire of the Lord against them and it consumed the edge of the camp,' 'as the Lord, your God, is a consuming Fire, He is a jealous God.' The ninth was at the Graves of Desire (Kivrot HaTaavah) when they said (Numbers 11:4), "Who will feed us meat?" And did they not have meat; and did they not have the quail at each and all times, as it is stated (Exodus 16:8), "in that the Lord will give you meat to eat in the evening and bread in the morning to satiation." And [just] like the manna did not cease, the quail [also] did not cease. Rather they wanted meat in the evening to satiation, [just] like they had the bread. And about this our teacher Moshe, peace be upon him, stated, (Numbers 11:22), "Could enough flocks and herds be slaughtered to suffice them, etc." Our teacher Moshe, peace be upon him said in front of the Holy One, blessed be He, "They have much meat; their request is [only] from the evil of their hearts. And 'since they are a stiff-necked people,' even if You give them much more, they will continue to say [there is] not enough. 'Could enough flocks and herds be slaughtered' - and their mouths will [still] not be satiated." The Holy One, blessed be He, said [back] to Him, "'Is the hand of the Lord short?' I will give them meat until they are satisfied and they will no [longer] be able to open their mouths to say, 'we are not satiated'." And He added and brought them much more of the quails 'and they spread them all around' 'and the least gathered ten chomer' and they could not eat it [all]. Such is the simple meaning of the verse. And you will [hence] come to say that Moshe did not sin with his words. But our rabbis in the Talmud (Yoma 75a) did not interpret it thus. And the tenth was in Midbar Paran when they sent the scouts. And there it states (Numbers 14:22), "and they have tried Me these ten times."
Rav Hirsch
ונח מצא חן בעיני ד׳, nicht: Noach fand Gnade, in dem Sinn, daß er verschont blieb. מצא חן בעיני־ heißt nie: Gnade bei jemandem finden, daß dieser ihn mit Strafe etc. verschone. Vielmehr steht es überall, wo von jemandem für jemanden eine Gewährung, eine Willfahrung, eine Begünstigung zu erwarten steht. So wenn Abraham wünscht, daß die Engel bei ihm einkehren sollen, wenn die Ägypter das Volk beschenken sollen usw. Es ist zwischen Gott und dem Menschen eigentlich das Allerhöchste, das der Mensch Gott gegenüber erreichen kann. So bei Mosche למען אמצא חן בעיניך, damit ich wisse, was ich zu tun habe, um auch ferner deines Wohlwollens würdig zu sein. — Wurzel von חנן :חן, verwandt mit ענן, rad. von ענן, Wolke, die die Bedingung der Fruchtbarkeit und des Gedeihens für die Erde in sich trägt. Die Wolke ist für den Ort, über dem sie schwebt, dasjenige, von dem dieser alles zu erwarten hat. Verwandt ferner mit הנן, wovon חֵן, die Partikel des Darreichens. חנן heißt: zu jemandem geistig in daßelbe Verhältnis treten, in welchem die Wolke zur Erde steht. חֵן ist noch nicht das gewährte Wohlwollen, sondern die Würdigkeit dazu. Nun heißt es nicht לפני, sondern בעיני־, nach der Beurteilung, der Einsicht. Wenn jemand so ist, daß Gott ihm חונן sein könne, so hat er מצא — .חן בעיניו ist in den meisten Fällen nicht ein zufälliges Finden, sondern das Erreichen eines erstrebten Zieles. Daher מצא vom Erreichen derjenigen geistigen Güter, חכמה ,דעת. usw., die nie zufällig, die nur nach ernstem Streben zu erlangen sind. So auch von den Schickungen Gottes, die den Menschen treffen, weil sie ihn aufsuchen, את כל התלאה אשר מצאתם בדרך (Schmot 18, 8). So das: ,הצאן ובקר ישחט להם ומצא להם (Bamidbar 11, 22), "und wird es ihnen das (von ihnen gewollte) Ziel erreichen? So auch מצא חן בעיני ד׳ nicht zufällig. Es kommt nur bei denen vor, die Gott mit ganz besonderen Kräften und Mitteln für ganz besondere Zwecke ausrüstet, so Mosche, so Israel (מצא חן במדבר) so auch hier von Noach: Während alles entartet war, so daß es vernichtet werden musste, "ward Noach in der Beurteilung Gottes würdig befunden, auf ihn das ganze Rettungswerk der Zukunft zu übertragen." In ihm konzentrierte sich alles, was Gottes "Herz" für die Menschheit gewollt. Er hatte alle Keime in die Zukunft hinüber zu retten. —
Kli Yakar
Hanya tersedia untuk anggota PremiumTze'enah Ure'enah
Hanya tersedia untuk anggota PremiumRashi
shall not suffice Heb. לֹא יִמְצְאוּ, usually translated ‘shall not find.’ They shall not suffice. Comp. (Num. 11:22) “and suffice (וּמָצָא) for them.” But it cannot be explained: כָֹּל-יְגִיעַי, all those who toil to seek my iniquity shall not find any iniquity with me, for, were that the case, it should be spelled יְגֵעַי without a “yud,” and it should be vowelized with a “tseireh,” but now it is not an expression of one who toils but an expression of toil.
Rashi
כאישון עינו AS THE אישון OF HIS EYE — that is the black in the eye from which the light comes. Onkelos, however, rendered ימצאהו by “He provided Him” with all He needed in the wilderness. It took the words to be of the same meaning as, (Numbers 11:22) “[Shall the flocks … be slain for them] to suffice (ומצא) them?” and (Joshua 17:16) “The hill is not enough (ימצא) for us”.
Rashi
יען לא האמנתם בי BECAUSE YE BELIEVED ME NOT — Scripture discloses the fact that but for this sin alone, they would have entered the land of Canaan, in order that people should not say of them, “Even as the sin of the generation of the Wilderness (a term used of those who left Egypt) on whom it was decreed that they should not enter the Land was the sin of Moses and Aaron” (cf. Rashi on Numbers 27:13). But was not the doubting question (cf. Rashi on Numbers 11:22), “shall the sheep and oxen be slaughtered for them?” a more grievous lack of faith in God than this? But because that had been said in private (no Israelites being present and therefore it could have no evil influence upon them), Scripture (God) spared him (and did not make his lack of faith public by pronouncing punishment for it), but here, where all Israel were standing by, Scripture does not spare him because of the Hallowing of the Divine Name (cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Chukat 10).