Musar su Numeri 20:12

In the words of our sages there: "Surely Moses did not plead with G–d to let him enter the Holy Land merely to taste its fruit!" While on this subject let me explain Rashi's comment on 3,24. He divides his comment into פשט and דרוש. As far as the דרוש is concerned I find it difficult to follow him because, if he is correct, the Torah should have written אתה החילות והראית, "You have begun and shown me." I therefore prefer to deal with the פשט part of his commentary: that Moses felt that because he had been allowed to defeat the kings Sichon and Og on the East bank of the Jordan, this was a sign that G–d had rescinded His decree (Numbers 20,12) that he, Moses would not be allowed to lead Israel to the Holy Land. He considered the lands ruled by these kings as part of the land of Israel. Rashi quotes 2,31 where G–d had said: ראה החילותי תת לפניך את סיחון as proof that Moses thought that the decree had been rescinded. If Rashi's reasoning is correct, why did the Torah add the words בעת ההיא "at that time," in 3,23?

Rashi as well as other commentators also explain the words רב לך אל תוסף דבר אלי עוד בדבר הזה "Enough for you; do not continue to speak to me about this subject" in a variety of ways. Seeing that so many commentators have had their say on this subject, I will add something of my own. This was part of the wars of conquest. The fact that Moses distributed these lands to some of the tribes who made their homes there proved that it was part of the land of Israel. If G–d did not allow all the land to be conquered by Joshua surely this was because He had relented from the decree in Numbers 20,12! Moses had good reason to believe this. When Moses quoted G–d (3,27) as having said to him: "You will not cross this Jordan," he was guilty of an inaccuracy. The Torah had not mentioned this. When he quoted G–d as saying: "instruct Joshua, imbue him with strength and courage, for he shall go across at the head of the people, and he shall allot to them the land that you only see," this too is something that seems quite irrelevant at this juncture. Moses said: "You have begun," i.e. the beginning of conquest and distribution of the land of Israel has been carried out by me. Why did You not let Joshua do the whole thing seeing that he is prepared for this task? Moses' reasoning here is similar to what he had said to G–d (Exodus 4,13) at the burning bush: שלח נא ביד תשלח, which the Targum Jonathan ben Uzziel understands as a reference to Pinchas, i.e. the prophet Elijah who will proclaim the advent of the final Redemption in the future. Moses had felt then that Pinchas was the suitable candidate to lead the Jewish people into the Holy Land also on the first occasion. When considering the fact that he had been allowed to commence the conquest and the distribution of the land we understand why Moses thought that the decree to deny him this task had been lifted. Although Moses had been told the exact boundaries of ארץ ישראל in Numbers 34,3-12, and these boundaries did not include the lands formerly occupied by Sichon and Og, Moses thought that there had been no need for the Torah to list those boundaries as the lands had already been distributed Moses was convinced that these lands were part of the Holy Land, and he was proven right when the Jews returning from the Babylonian exile sanctified them. Moses surmised that the reason that G–d had rescinded His decree against his leading the Jewish people in the conquest could only have been to enable him to acquire still greater insights into the phenomenon of a G–d who rules in Heaven and on Earth as described in 3,24. As a result of such considerations he prayed: "Please let me cross and see the good land on the other side of the Jordan, the good Mountain and the Lebanon" (3,25). He prayed to remain the leader. The expression אעברה is basically the same as when Moses said in Numbers 27,17 that the leader of the Jewish people should be at their head when going to war and should be the last one to return from war. Moses' major concern was not that he wanted to continue to exercise authority, but that this authority would be the means whereby he would gain greater insights. As a result of Moses, Israel's leader, gaining greater spiritual insights, the spiritual level of the whole people would also be raised. When we look at Moses' request in this light we appreciate that he asked not only for himself but also for his people.

In view of this we can also understand Deut. 1,37, when Moses said: "G–d was also angry with me on your account." Moses employs the expression בי, against me. We find the same expression here when G–d said to him יען כי לא האמנתם בי להקדישני, "because you did not have enough faith in Me to sanctify Me" (20,12). In Deut. 1,32, however, the wording is ובדבר הזה אינכם מאמינים. The true significance is as I have explained, that a decree already existed, but the actions needed to trigger this decree had not yet occurred. Because of a previous sin Moses had committed, G–d had already become angry at Moses on account of Israel. Now this anger, i.e. decree, became translated into effective reality. This is the reason why the Torah stresses המה מי מריבה אשר רבו בני ישראל, "these are the very same waters of strife the children of Israel quarreled (already previously)." If it were not so, the expression המה, would be uncalled for. Now the various commentaries that have been offered on this passage.

There are numerous references to this in our Midrashic literature. Shemot Rabbah 30,11, quoting Job 23,3-4, "would that I could find Him, reach His dwelling place, I would set out my case, משפט, before Him, fill my mouth with arguments," explains this in the following parable. A drunken prison guard rebelled, opened the gates to let the prisoners escape, cursed the picture of the ruler, and demanded to see the king, threatening that he would tell the king to his face what he thought true justice should be. He even went as far as stoning the king's image. He was shown the ruler sitting on a platform, dispensing punishment to a lady of aristocratic bearing, he observed the king handing down a verdict against his provincial governor, etc. At that point the palace guard became frightened and apologised, explaining that his drunken stupor had been the reason for his outrageous conduct, which included not recognising his king when he saw him. Similarly Job 23,4. When Job cursed the day he was born (Job 3,3/4) he in fact cursed the angel in charge of who will be born when and under what mazzal. This angel is called לילה. Later on Job reflected how G–d had punished Miriam for speaking out against Moses (Numbers 12,10); he further observed how G–d had punished Moses not allowing him to enter the Holy Land because he had struck the rock instead of merely speaking to it (Numbers 20,12). He also noted that G–d had blinded Isaac (for having loved the wicked Esau), see Genesis 27,1. He realised moreover that G–d had punished Abraham for having asked: "how do I know that I will inherit?" (Genesis 15,8) G–d had responded by telling Abraham that his descendants would be slaves in a foreign land for four hundred years before being liberated (Genesis 15,13). G–d had also קרב קיסין, struck at Jacob with a piece of wood, causing the latter to limp as a result of the nocturnal encounter with the שרו של עשו, the guardian angel of Esau, to use the words of the Midrash. When Job had reflected on all this, he begged G–d's forgiveness for having spoken out rebelliously, and he excused himself by having been drunk. This is why it says in Job 19,4: “ואף אמנם שגיתי, אתי תלין משוגתי,” If indeed I have erred, my error stays with me overnight." All of this, because he did not realise the power of דין. So far the Midrash.