TORAH SPARKS ניצוצות תורה
פרשת מטות
PARASHAT MATTOT
July 23, 2011 – 21 Tammuz 5771 – כ"א תמוז תשע"א
Annual: Numbers 30:2 – 32:42 (Etz Hayim, p. 941; Hertz p. 702)
Triennial: Numbers 30:2 – 31:54 (Etz Hayim, p. 941; Hertz p. 702)
Haftarah: Jeremiah 1:1 – 2;3 (Etz Hayim, p. 968; Hertz p. 710)
Prepared by Rabbi Joseph Prouser
Baldwin, New York
Anticipating the familiar Kol Nidre liturgy of Yom Kippur Eve both thematically and linguistically, Parshat Matot begins with a discussion of vows – the general principle of their binding nature and the prospect of their annulment under certain circumstances. A father is entitled to annul the vow of his youthful daughter, and a man has a brief window of opportunity to annul his wife’s vows – it is the day when he learns of those commitments.
Moses dispatches an armed force, with conscripts from all twelve tribes, to attack the Midianites in retribution for their earlier, idolatrous incitement and moral corruption of the men of Israel. The Midianites, including five kings and Balaam son of Beor, are annihilated; the Israelites suffer no casualties in the engagement. The victorious army of Israel returns with spoils of war: vast wealth including livestock (which is subsequently distributed), women, and children. Midianite cities and encampments are burnt. Moses orders that all males among the young Midianite captives and all but the virgins among the women be put to death. Purification of both warriors and implements that became ritually impure through contact with dead bodies – alas, a common occurrence in so brutal and lethal a military campaign – is prescribed and effected.
In gratitude for the safe return of all Israelite fighting men, the military officers bring Moses an offering for God of the gold they had taken as booty: “armlets, bracelets, signet rings, earrings, and pendants” totaling 16,750 shekels of gold. Rank-and-file soldiers are permitted to keep their share of the spoils. Moses and Eleazar accept they offering, and bring it to the Tent of Meeting “as a reminder” to the Israelites of God’s beneficence, and to God of Israel’s gratitude.
The parashah concludes with a crisis of apparent national disunity averted. The tribes of Gad and Reuben – later joined by the half-tribe of Manasseh – ask Moses to permit them to settle in Trans-Jordan – i.e., on the east side of the Jordan. Moses at
first understands this as a betrayal of the Israelite mission of conquest and settlement of the Promised Land, as well as an abdication of their tribal share in responsibility for Israel’s military efforts. A compromise is effected: The tribes in question will be permitted to settle east of the Jordan, provided they serve as a vanguard – the advance military force, the shock-troops in the front of Israel’s campaign of conquest.
Theme #1: “Belief in a Higher Vower”
“If a man makes a vow to the Lord or takes an oath imposing an obligation on himself, he shall not break his pledge; he must carry out all that has crossed his
lips.” Numbers 30:3
Study: Derash
“The violation of a vow or ‘bond’ is at once an offence before God, and an act of
profanation of man’s personality. There is a tendency in human nature to forget in health and security the vows that were made in sickness and danger; but the rule remains. Whatever a man has promised unto God, that he must fulfill.” Rabbi Joseph H. Hertz
“Of him who is careful in his utterances so that no word of his should lose its binding force or should have been spoken in vain, it is said: ‘He shall carry out all that has crossed his lips,’ with the pronoun ‘He’ referring not to that righteous man but to God Himself. This is to teach us that the Lord will cause all that proceeds from the mouth of the righteous to come true. The blessings he utters will be fulfilled. Indeed, all his words will be considered as enactments to be fulfilled by God.” The Kozienice Maggid, Avodat Yisrael
“The length of the chapter signals the importance, or rather the sacredness, of an oath in ancient Israel; it stood as uttered unless an annulment procedure was followed. Human words, and not only divine ones, were seen as having effects in the real world.” Everett Fox
“A vow is a purely religious act that cannot be taken in a fit of passion. It can be taken only with a mind purified and composed and with God as witness.” Mahatma Gandhi
“Rarely promise, but, if lawful, constantly perform.” William Penn
Questions for Discussion
What is the difference between telling the truth and keeping your word? Why is keeping your word – fulfilling your vow – treated as such an absolute, while
examples of deception and constructive lies abound in biblical narrative?
Mahatma Gandhi and Rabbi Joseph Hertz (the first alumnus of JTS and chief rabbi of Great Britain) both address the problem of rash vows, commitments made
in desperation or out of fear. Are such vows less meaningful or less binding than
commitments that result from careful consideration and calculation? Or do the extreme conditions under which rash vows are adopted actually make their fulfillment more of a moral imperative?
Does a commitment require verbalization to become a binding obligation? What are our unspoken yet non-negotiable duties?
The Torah begins with God’s creation of the universe by means of the spoken
word. In such a tradition, what does it mean to say, as Everett Fox does, that “human words, and not only divine ones” also have an effect in the real world?
Consider “the sacredness of an oath in ancient Israel” in the context of the
Covenant at the heart of the Israelite national mission, and the Jewish experience today. How does the covenantal relationship between God and Israel translate into the Jewish view of personal vows?
Is the divine treatment of the righteous asserted by the Kozienice Maggid an entirely positive dynamic? What would happen – and how would we conduct ourselves differently – if everything we said came true?
Theme #2: “Gad Be With You”
“Moses said to the Gadites and the Reubenites: ‘Are your brothers to go to war while you stay here?’” Numbers 32:6
Study: Derash
“Do you think that when the enemy goes to war against your brethren on the western side of the Jordan, he will let you dwell tranquilly in your portion? Don’t think such a thing! If you sit complacently and fail to help your brethren in wars that
are destined to occur in the land of Israel, the enemy is likely to attack you as well, after he defeats the other tribes. The Jewish nation’s strength lies in unity. When it is
united, it can defeat all of its adversaries.” Rabbi Yonatan Eybeshitz, Papera’ot La- Torah
“Diaspora-Israel relations have never been simple. Yet this story indicates that those who seek to bring the Diaspora to an end are wasting their time. It has existed
from the time Israel entered its land and will always exist, at least until the ‘end of days.’ Moses reconciled himself to the desire of these tribes not to cross the Jordan.
Once he ascertained that they were not trying to cause Israel to turn away from the land, he granted their request – but required them to keep their word to fight at the
forefront of the Israelites. Rabbi Reuven Hammer
“Gad and Reuben’s petition is curious for two reasons. First, their apparently self- centered wish to remain behind seems to ignore the larger ramifications for the
entire community of b’nei Yisrael. Secondly, the focus on material goods even at the
expense of human life and welfare seems reckless and even provocative. What does this mean for our own communities? We are not to be like Gad and Reuben and focus on material matters before everything else. We must not build sheepfolds for our flocks before the fortresses for our children. While personal and work issues may cloud our minds, it is important to safeguard our first priority – our community of Jewish students.” David Bernay, Hillel Campus Advancement Associate
“Hillel said: Do not separate yourself from the community, and do not be sure of yourself until the day you die; do not judge your fellow until you have been put in his position.” Pirkei Avot 2:5
Questions for Discussion
Is Moses’ indignant response to the Gadites and Reubenites merely strategic? That is, is Moses concerned only that the absence of these two tribes would
compromise the military strength of the nation? Or is there an inherent moral wrong in a decision to “separate yourself from the community”?
Could the dissident tribes be viewed as visionary? Is not the opportunity to engage in commerce and to build homes for our children instead of engaging in
armed conflict the sign of an enlightened and forward-looking people? Is that not what all Israelites would want? Did Moses misjudge his countrymen?
Rabbi Eybeshitz’s comment echoes a major theme in the book of Esther: “Do not imagine that you, of all the Jews, will escape with your life. If you keep silent in this
crisis, relief and deliverance will come to the Jews from another quarter, while you and your father’s house will perish.” How do the messages of both Mordechai and
Moses speak to diaspora Jews today? What are our obligations to the national defense and military needs of the Jewish state?
What other biblical texts and themes teach the significance and sanctity of the diaspora? How might these shape the self-perception and mission of Jews living outside the state of Israel? How should these texts shape the attitudes of Israelis to their fellow Jews around the world?
How does the rest of Hillel’s statement (“Do not be sure of yourself” and “Do not judge”) relate to Moses’ interaction with Gad and Reuben?
Historic Note
In parashat Matot, read on July 23, 2011, Moses is commanded to “avenge the Israelite people on the Midianites.” This Shabbat is the 65th anniversary of the bombing of Jerusalem’s King David Hotel by the Irgun, carried out at the order of Menachem Begin on July 23, 1946.
Halachah L’Maaseh
“Gold and silver, copper, iron, tin, and lead – any article that can withstand fire –
these shall pass through fire and they shall be clean, except that they must be cleansed with water of lustration; and anything that cannot withstand fire, you must pass through water” (Numbers 31:22-23). Parashat Matot’s treatment of the purification of ritually contaminated objects provides a historic basis for the procedures used for koshering utensils, whether to render implements previously used in violation of the laws of kashrut either accidentally or on purpose, or to render a kosher utensil pareve, or to render a year-round utensil permissible for use on Passover. Cooking utensils (pots, cutlery) are rendered kosher (and pareve – neutral) by boiling. Utensils used over an open fire, as for broiling (as, too, stove-top burners) are heated until red-hot, or until a piece of paper is singed by the touch. Utensils used only for cold food may be koshered by thorough cleansing. (See Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 451:4,5, 22.) Underpinning the koshering process is the principle that “as a vessel absorbs (food particles), so does it expel what is absorbed” (BT Pesachim 30A, Rashi ad loc.). Cutlery with handles attached present a difficulty; if the handles allow food particles to get stuck between it and the rest of the utensil, the item cannot be koshered. Handles that are joined tightly enough so that no particles can penetrate may be koshered. (See Shulcahn Aruch Orach Chaim
451:3, Magen David #5.) All items to be koshered should be thoroughly cleaned first (Ibid., 451:17-18).