Commento su Numeri 25:18

כי צררים הם לכם וגו׳ על דבר פעור FOR THEY SHOWED THEMSELVES YOUR ENEMIES etc. IN THE MATTER OF PEOR — i.e., in that they abandoned their daughters to prostitution in order to lead you astray after Peor; but He did not command them to destroy the Moabites — on account of Ruth who would later on issue from them, just as we state in Bava Kamma 38b.

FOR THEY [the Midianites] HARASS YOU BY THEIR WILES. The meaning [of the expression by their wiles] is, as I have explained,¹¹Above, 25:1. that this evil plan [to lead the Israelites astray through their seduction by the Moabite women] was contrived by the elders of Midian, as it is said, And Moab said unto the elders of Midian,¹²Ibid., 22:4. [thus showing] that it was with them [the elders of Midian] that the Moabites originally took counsel. And they gave this advice [later on] to Moab, to encourage their daughters to prostitute themselves with them [the Israelites], and thereby cause them to join Baal-peor, and to draw them away from G-d, even though this advice is not [explicitly] mentioned there. Moreover, [a proof that the Midianites gave this idea to the Moabites is] that they even sent them their own king’s daughter to commit harlotry with them, this being the meaning of the expression, and in the matter of Cozbi, the daughter of the prince of Midian, their sister.¹³Verse 18 here. For were this not done with the knowledge [and encouragement] of the counsellors of the [Midianite] kingdom, what was the distinguished Midianite princess seeking in Shittim, in the plains of Moab, that she should come to the camp of a foreign people, for Israel was in the plains of Moab, in Shittim, and how did this [important] Midianite woman come to be there? But [the only reasonable explanation of this is that] she was very beautiful, and therefore the elders of Midian sent her there, because they said: “Through the figure of a beautiful woman many people become corrupted.”¹⁴This saying is quoted in Tractate Yebamoth 63b, from the book Ben Sira. It is probable that Balaam was also involved in [giving] this counsel, for on his return from the land of Moab [after he departed from Balak]¹⁵Above, 24:25. he passed through Midian, from where he had come, and he deliberated with the counsellors of the kingdom. Perhaps Balaam stayed there a while in order to know what would [ultimately] happen to them [i.e., the Israelites], and that is why the Israelites found him in Midian and killed him.¹⁶Further, 31:8. In that case the meaning [of the verse], And Balaam rose up, and went and returned to his place¹⁵Above, 24:25. is that Balaam “went on his way [with the intention] of returning to his land” [but he did not actually get there, since he stayed on the way in Midian]. And it indeed appears so [that Balaam participated in giving this evil advice], for the Israelites would not have killed one who had prophesied except after [receiving a special] permission of the Torah [to do so, and we do not find any mention of such permission]. But after they had been told [that they were to punish the Midianites because] they harass you by their wiles wherewith they have beguiled you etc.,¹⁷Verse 18 here. [it is self-understood] that all those who took part in this beguilment were liable to the death penalty, and therefore they killed Balaam as well, since they knew that he was the one who had proposed this evil design.
Now the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded [the Israelites] to avenge themselves of them [the Midianites], but as for the Moabites, He had already warned them, Be not at enmity with Moab.¹⁸Deuteronomy 2:9. For Israel had at first come to the border of Edom, and He had warned them [against fighting] them, [as it is said], and take ye good heed unto yourselves;¹⁹Ibid., Verse 4. and afterwards they arrived at the border of Moab, and He told Moses, Be not at enmity with Moab.¹⁸Deuteronomy 2:9. He said furthermore, Thou art this day to pass over the border of Moab, even Ar; and when thou comest nigh over against the children of Ammon, harass them not,²⁰Ibid., Verses 18-19. and He [further] stated, Rise ye up, take your journey, and pass over the valley of Arnon; behold, I have given into thy hand Sihon.²¹Ibid., Verse 24. And after all this Balak saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites,²²Above, 22:2. that is, to the two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og, and then this whole episode [of the blessings of Balaam, and the seduction at Shittim by the Moabite women] took place. If so, [we must perforce say] that the warning Be not at enmity with Moab¹⁸Deuteronomy 2:9. was declared before the command Harass the Midianites.⁹Verse 17. And therefore I am astonished at the expression of the Agadah [homiletic exposition], where the Rabbis say in Tractate Baba Kamma:²³Baba Kamma 38 a-b. “Be not at enmity with Moab, [neither contend with them in battle].¹⁸Deuteronomy 2:9. But would it have entered Moses’ mind to wage war [against Moab] without the permission [of G-d, so that he had to be especially told to refrain from doing so]! But Moses of his own accord reasoned by [the syllogism of] a kal vachomer,²⁴“Minor and major.” See Vol. II, p. 133, Note 208 for a full explanation of this term. saying: ‘If, in the case of the Midianites, who only came to assist the Moabites, the Torah said, Harass the Midianites, and smite them,⁹Verse 17. surely [this duty applies] even more so to the Moabites!’ But the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: ‘It is not so as it has entered your mind! I have two [good] doves who are to come forth from them — Ruth the Moabitess, and Naamah the Ammonitess.’”²⁵See Ruth 1:4; Kings 14:21. Naamah was the mother of Rehoboam, who was one of the righteous kings of the kingdom of Judah. But He had already warned Moses [against waging war on Moab] long before the kal vachomer [could have occurred to Moses, since He had, as explained above, given the command not to harass Moab before the incident with the women, and thus before the command to punish Midian for their share in that incident]! Moreover, if [it was only to negate] Moses’ kal vachomer [that he had to be warned against fighting Moab], why did He have to warn him [also] not to fight the children of Ammon²⁰Ibid., Verses 18-19. [since they played no part at all in the incident at Shittim]! Perhaps the Rabbis were not so particular in their language in the Agadah [about the actual chronological order of events]; since their main [intention] was to say that it was known [beforehand] to Him, blessed be He, that when He would command Moses, Harass the Midianites,⁹Verse 17. Moses would have [an opportunity to argue by the syllogism of] a kal vachomer²⁴“Minor and major.” See Vol. II, p. 133, Note 208 for a full explanation of this term. that he ought to wage war against Moab, without any other [special] permission, therefore He warned him in advance not to do so. And because He warned him about Moab, therefore He also admonished him with respect to the children of Ammon, so that Moses should not think that [the fact that] He only forbade him [not to fight] Moab was [tantamount to an implied] permission to [wage war] against the children of Ammon who had also dealt evil to the Israelites because they met them not with bread and with water.²⁶Deuteronomy 23:5. Ramban there explains that it was only the Ammonites mentioned in Verse 4 ibid., who were guilty of this, whereas the Moabites [also mentioned there] did meet the Israelites with bread and water. They are excluded, however, from the assembly of the Eternal because they hired Balaam to curse the Israelites. According to another Midrash²⁷Also quoted by the Rabbis in Baba Kamma 38b. [the reason why Israel was commanded to punish Midian but not to attack Moab], was because the Moabites acted out of fear that they [the Israelites] would plunder them, but the Midianites meddled with a strife not their own,²⁸See Proverbs 26:17. as Rashi wrote in the section of Eileh Mas’ei.²⁹In our text of Rashi this explanation is found in the section of Matoth — further, 31:2.
According to the plain meaning of Scripture, a further reason [for the different treatment that G-d commanded with respect to the Midianites and with respect to the Moabites] is that the lands of Ammon and Moab G-d had given unto the children of Lot for a possession,³⁰Deuteronomy 2:19. because of Lot their father who ministered to the righteous one [Abraham] and went into exile with him to that Land; therefore He did not allow [anyone] to do them evil in their countries. However, because of their sin in showing hostility to Israel and not treating them in a friendly manner, He punished them by excluding them from [the possibility of joining] His people, by commanding, An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of the Eternal,³¹Ibid., 23:4. measure for measure.

בנכליהם, “with their conspiracies,” according to Nachmanides the Midianites were the ones who originated the plot to seduce the Israelites by even supplying their own socially high ranking women for the purpose. They also conspired to make sleeping with their women dependent on at least a superficial show of respect for their deity the Baal Pe-or. According to tradition, the manner in which that deity was worshipped was so revolting, i.e. one excreted in front of that idol, that no one in their right minds could have believed that this was a form of worship rather than an insult to their deity. Having dispatched Cosbi, whose rank the Torah describes here, to seduce the highest-ranking Israelite she could find, is an indication of the Midianites’ hatred for the Israelites. It is most likely that even if he did not think up this devious plot himself, Bileam was at least aware of it. This Cosbi, no doubt, was a woman of great physical allure, and she was sent on her ill-fated mission precisely because she was so attractive. It is quite possible that the reason why Bileam detoured on his way home via the land of Midian was in order to find out how the plot to seduce the Israelites had worked out. As a result, the army of the Israelites found him there and killed him. The officers were well aware that he must have had a hand in that plot. Israelites do not kill people who prophesy something negative concerning them unless specifically ordered to do so by the Torah or its authorized representatives. Incitement is a different story, however. In this instance, G’d had ordered all those that had been part of that incitement actively or by not protesting it, to be killed. The campaign was aimed only at the Midianites, as G’d had already forbidden the Israelites to harass the Moabites in any way. I am somewhat at a loss how to understand the wording of the aggadah according to which (Baba Kamma 38) it had never occurred to the Israelites to either harass or invade Moav so that G’d had to specifically for bid this? Where had there ever been a precedent that Moses would initiate warfare without express permission by G’d? The Talmud there answers that Moses used his logic, reasoning that if G’d had told him to launch a punitive expedition against the Midianites who had only been involved in the plot at arm’s length, so to speak, and G’d ordered us to punish them, how much more must we launch a similar expedition against the Moabites who were the instigators of all of this? The Talmud appears to have put the cart before the horse seeing that the warning not to harass Moav or wage war against it had been issued by G’d before the incident at Shittim or Bileam’s being hired to curse the Israelites! We may have to answer that it was clear to Hashem that once Israel had defeated and occupied the lands of Sichon and Og, with G’d’s permission, of course, Moses would reason that it was natural that the next step would be to cross into Moabite territory by crossing the river Arnon. G’d pre-empted such reasoning by Moses by forbidding the Israelites to provoke any confrontation with the Moabites. [The Talmud there has G’d explain to Moses why He forbade this, also in light of future events. Ed.] The matter was especially hard for Moses to understand because the very people who were not to be harassed were the people that because of hostility to the Israelites in the past, had been forbidden forever to convert to Judaism and become part of our nation. (Compare Deut. 23,4-8) Looking at the plain text, the reason why at this stage at least, no confrontation with either Moav or Bney Ammon was permitted, is the fact that G’d had allocated their lands to them in recognition of the years when their founding father Lot had faithfully served Avraham and had kept his secret and not reveled that Sarah was not only a blood-relation to him but was also his wife. Lot had joined Avraham at the time when the former moved to the land of Canaan, and this was akin to voluntary exile, all in order to keep company with his uncle whom he admired. The eventual commandment not to accept proselytes from either of those two nations, was explained as an act of מדה כנגד מדה, the punishment fitting the crime, as the Torah explained in Deut.

בנכליהם אשר נכלו לכם, “by their trickery they practiced against you.” This verse is proof that it was the elders of Midian who advised their Moabite partners to trick the Israelites into committing sexual promiscuity with their daughters. The allure of the Moabite women was to be the tool by which to get the Israelites to commit idolatry by prostrating themselves before the Baal-peor.

In order to cause you to stray… Rashi is obliged to explain so because a person only antagonizes others in response to the evil that they had caused him, however we do not find that Yisroel did anything malicious to them. Therefore he explains, “Since they abandoned…” because according to their reasoning they were compelled to abandon their daughters to promiscuity in order to cause Yisroel to stray after Pe’or. Re’m.

V. 18. כי צררים וגו׳, denn sie bedrohen euch noch mit feindlichem Verderben. So Haman: צורר היהודים (Esther 8, 1). Sie setzen ihre Verführungskünste, die sie nur mit zu vielem Erfolg bereits geübt, noch gegen euch fort und unterscheiden sich da von den Moabitern, die, nachdem sie einmal das Verderben über euch gebracht, von weiteren Versuchen abstehen. Die Midjaniter verharren aber noch in dieser eurer Gottestreue und eurer Sittlichkeit drohenden Feindseligkeit, und diese ihre euch bereits bewiesene Feindseligkeit wird bei ihnen noch durch das besondere Rachegefühl genährt, da ihre Fürstentochter nicht in dem allgemeinen Sterben der Seuche, sondern durch jüdische Menschenhand gefallen ist, und sie "Blutrache" für ihre "Schwester" nehmen zu müssen glauben. Der Charakter ראש אמות des Vaters lässt die gefallene Kosbi als ihrer aller Schwester betrachten.

כי צוררים הם לכם, “for they have initiated hostilities with you by their wiles. The Israelites therefore would now be instructed to carry out the principle that if someone has demonstrated that he means to kill you, it is up to you to preempt him before he can carry out his evil plan. The Midianites’ sin was to try and seduce the Israelites into committing sexually forbidden carnal activities with their wives. Therefore the Israelites, instead of avenging themselves on Pinchas, were to avenge themselves on the Midianites who had even sacrificed a princess as part of that scheme. [The Land of Midian was hundreds of kilometers south of the land of Canaan on the Arabian peninsula. Ed.]

ועל דבר כזבי בת נשיא מדין, “and because of the affair of Cozbi daughter of a Midianite prince.” The Torah could have written: “daughter of Tzur” as it had done in verse 15. In this verse the Torah wanted to place the emphasis on the word “Midianite,” seeing that it was the advice of the elders of Midian to send one of their princesses to lure the Israelites to commit harlotry with her.

However, He did not order [the destruction] of Moav because of Rus. You might ask: Why did Rashi only bring one reason, while in Parshas Matos (Bamidbar 31:2) he brought two reasons why they merited [to be saved]? The reason is that Rashi was answering the question: Here the Torah writes, “Antagonize the Midianites and kill them” (v. 17). Thus [one may ask] why was the word “antagonize” necessary given that it is written “kill [them]? Rather, one must say that it said “antagonize” because you must always treat them as enemies. This is [also] why it was said in the present tense. This raises the difficulty: Why were the Moavites not treated as enemies, at least so far as not marrying them and prohibiting the females [from converting]? Rashi answers that it was “because of Rus…” With this it is understandable why Rashi’s view is different from that of all the grammarians, who hold that [צרור, "antagonize,"] is a verb root that is used to denote a command, as Re’m writes.

Although Cosbi was not literally the daughter of the highest ranking Midianite, “their sister,” as stated in our verse, seeing that three verses previously she had been described as of lower rank, i.e. the daughter of Tzor, one of the princes of Midian, but not the highest one, the fact that she sacrificed her life for what she perceived as her highest patriotic duty, was the reason that she was accorded a higher rank here, as equivalent to being a leader of her nation.