CHAMISHOH MI YODEI'A - FIVE QUESTIONS ON THE WEEKLY SEDRAH - PARSHAS DVORIM 5766 - BS"D
1) Ch. 1, v. 3: "Va'y'hi b'arbo'im shonoh" Rashi explains that Moshe waited
to rebuke bnei Yisroel until it was close to the time of his death. How was
Moshe allowed to wait to fulfill the mitzvoh of rebuking one's neighbor"
(Vayikra 19:17)?
2) Ch. 1, v. 13: "Chachomim" - Rashi comments, "K'SUFIM." What does this word
mean?
3) Ch. 1, v. 16: "Vo'atza'veh es shofteichem bo'eis ha'hee leimore" - The
Sifri #16 says that even if a similar case has come in front of the judges
numerous times, they should not be hasty to judge, but rather, they should
investigate the details meticulously. Perhaps there are factors that could change the
ruling that only come to light after in-depth investigation. How is this
concept derived from these words?
4) Ch. 1, v. 23: "Vayitav b'einai hadovor" - If Moshe was amenable to
sending the spies, why is this included in the admonition?"
5) Ch. 1, v. 16: "Bo'eis ha'hee" - What is being pointed out with the words
"at that time?"
Answer to questions on parshios Matos-Massei:
MATOS
1) Ch. 30, v. 2: "Va'y'da'beir Moshe el roshei hamatos" - And Moshe spoke to
the heads of the tribes - Why is this parsha placed here after the parshios of
sacrifices at the end of parshas Pinchos?
1) In the parsha of sacrifices the vowing to give sacrifices is mentioned
(29:39). Our parsha continues with the laws of vows pertaining to secular
matters. (Ramban)
2) The previous parsha deals with sacrifices that take place on Yomim Tovim.
During Yom Tov, when people aren't occupied with their regular work, there is
the opportunity to become light headed and to sin, in particular after
imbibing in intoxication beverage. One of the strongest safeguards against sinning
in this matter is to take an oath against doing this sort of act. (Tzror Hamor)
3) Mentioning that our parsha was told to the heads of the tribes alludes to
the Rabbinic institution of placing officers on Yom Tov in places of public
gatherings where there is the fear of light-headedness, especially where there
is mingling of men and women. (Tzror Hamor) This does not touch on the vow
aspect of our parsha.
4) This alludes to the ruling that one who has made a vow to offer a
sacrifice and has been tardy in bringing it, officers come to him to remind him, and
if this doesn't help, they force him to fulfill his promise (see gemara R.H.
6a). (Baal Haturim)
5) This alludes to the ruling that one who promises to bring a sacrifice,
must do so before three festivals pass. (Paa'nei'ach Rozo)
6) This alludes to the fact that the heads of the tribes, i.e. the
Rabbinical court, decides when the Yomim Tovim will take place. (Paa'nei'ach Rozo)
7) This parsha takes place chronologically after the war against Midyon and
the conquest of its land was completed. The ensuing conversation among Moshe,
the tribe of Gad, and the tribe of Reuvein also took place ahead of this
parsha. Since Moshe told the bnei Gad and the bnei Reuvein that they must keep
their promise, our parsha of oaths is mentioned adjacent to it, albeit ahead of
it. (Ibn Ezra)
2) Ch. 31, v. 4: "L'chol Matos Yisroel" - Rashi quotes the Sifri 35 that
this includes the tribe of Levi. We find in the next verse that 12,000 soldiers
were conscripted. If we include Levi, it should have been a total of 13,000
soldiers.
1) Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrachi answers that Ephraim and Menashe are considered
two tribes only regarding matters pertaining to inheritance of the land, e.g.
with the spies. Here, however, regarding the revenge of Hashem in the war
against Midyon, they are considered one tribe.
2) The Imrei Emes answers that in total there were 13,000 soldiers. Rashi
in v. 5 on the word "vayimosru" (they were given over), explains that they were
conscripted against their will, knowing that Moshe would die shortly after
the war with Midyon. We know that the tribe of Levi would not take Moshe's
imminent death into consideration, but rather would pursue the command of Hashem,
as it says in Dvorim 33:9, regarding the sin of the golden calf, "And his
brothers he did not recognize, and his sons he did not know." Nothing stood in
the way of their fulfilling Hashem's will. So we have a total of 13,000
soldiers, of whom only 12,000 were "vayimosru," conscripted against their will.
3) Ch. 31, v. 21: "Habo'im LAmilchomoh" - The literal translation of these
words is "Who are coming TO war." Earlier, in verse 14 we find that they had
already come back from waging war, "Habo'im mi'tzvo hamilchomoh." If so,
shouldn't our verse also have similarly said "habo'im Mimilchomoh?" Indeed, Targum
Yonoson ben Uziel translates, "D'OSU misidrei krovo," - who HAVE COME from waging
war.
1) The use of words indicating a future battle alludes to the words of the
Chovos Halvovos, shaar yichud hamaa'seh chapter 5. He says that a general
returned home from the battlefront having very successfully waged war. A wise man
said to him that although he had won the small war against his fellow man, he
still had an ongoing major war to fight, the battle with his evil inclination.
Elozor hinted to the warriors that they still had this future war, as does all
of mankind. (Gan Ro'veh)
If you wonder why this wasn't pointed out earlier during the wars against
Sichon and Og, the Holy Admor of Kotzk answers that since Elozor was about to
tell the warriors the laws of "gi'ul keilim," the requirement to purge vessels of
their non-kosher absorbed flavours, this taught them the lesson that even if
no improper matter is seen externally, we must still cleanse ourselves
internally, i.e. thoughts. Therefore this was a most appropriate time to allude to
the war against the evil inclination, who is especially proficient in pushing
people to have improper thoughts.
The Yeitev Leiv answers this by saying that the major battle against the evil
inclination is in matters of haughtiness. This trait is the source of many
sins. The battles against Sichon and Og involved a large army. When the enemy
was vanquished there was not much room for haughtiness. This is not the case
with the war against Midyon. The bnei Yisroel were limited to 12,000 (according
to other opinions, up to a maximum of 36,000) people. Upon winning so
decisively with such a small army against the large nation of Midyon there was much
room for haughtiness, hence the allusion to the words of the Chovos Halvovos.
2) This choice of words indicates that Elozor will have authority in the
future. Moshe told him to express himself this way while Moshe was still alive,
so that the nation will follow the commands of Elozor haKohein Hagodol.
(Meshech Chochmoh based on the Sifri #45)
3) This war itself was not yet completed since some of the people who were
captured had to be put to death (verse 17). (Rabbi M. Schwab in Ma'yon Beis
Hasho'eivoh)
4) Ch. 32, v. 33: "V'lachatzi shei'vet Menasheh ven Yoseif" - And to half the
tribe of Menasheh the son of Yoseif - We do not find that the tribe of
Menasheh requested a portion of land in the Trans-Jordan. If so, why is half the
tribe given a portion there?
1) The Ibn Ezra says that they did request their inheritance there, but it
was not mentioned, as only one-half their tribe requested it. (This opinion
seems to be contradicted by the gemara Yerushalmi Bikurim chapter 1 that states
that according to Rabbi Yossi of Galilee one does not bring the first ripened
fruit as Bikurim from the Trans-Jordan because the verse says that one must
bring it from "the land that You have given me," (Dvorim 26:10). The Trans-Jordan
was not given from Hashem's volition, but rather as a result of the request
of the tribes. The gemara says that according to this Bikurim should be brought
from the area of the half of Menasheh tribe. We clearly see that they did not
request it.)
2) The Ramban writes that when Moshe realized that there was so much land
available he offered any other tribe that was willing to live there apportion.
Half the tribe of Menasheh accepted this offer.
3) The Chizkuni on Breishis 44:13, "Va'yik'r'u simlosom," writes that since
Menasheh was sent to retrieve the stolen goblet, a false trumped up charge,
and caused the tribes to rent their garments, his descendants were punished by
having their inheritance ripped into two parcels, one in Eretz Yisroel and one
outside Eretz Yisroel.
4) The Tzror Hamor writes that Moshe gave them a portion with the tribes of
Gad and Reuvein so that the merit of Yoseif should protect them.
5) The N'tzi"v on Dvorim 3:16 writes that they were given a portion in the
Trans-Jordan because the level of Torah there would be very weak and half the
tribe of Menasheh, in particular the family of Mochir, would inject a powerful
dose of Torah into the Trans-Jordan community.
6) The Sha"ch writes that this was done to avoid the bnei Yisroel later
claiming that those living on the other side of the Jordan River are not part of
the bnei Yisroel. The tribe of Menasheh was picked because Yoseif embodies all
the bnei Yisroel, as indicated by verse in T'hilim and Amos. As well, the
daughter's of Tzelofchod resided in Eretz Yisroel, while their fathers-in-law
resided in the Trans-Jordan. This created an awareness that they were a brethren.
MASSEI
Ch. 35, v. 27: "V'rotzach go'eil hadam es horotzei'ach" - We find two terms
in the Torah for killing a person, "harigoh" and "r'tzichoh," killing and
committing murder. As a rule, "harigoh" is used when a person justifiably kills,
and "r'tzichoh" is used when a murder has been committed. There are two
exceptions with the use of "r'tzichoh." Our verse says "v'rotzach" as does verse 30,
"Kol ma'kei nefesh l'fi eidim yirtzach es horotzei'ach." Why is a term that
means "murder" used where killing is permitted?
Rabbi Chaim Kanievski shlit"a in Taamo Dikro answers that our verse discusses
the blood avenger. Permission is granted to him to avenge the blood of one
who was accidentally killed. This is not a court decreed punishment carried out
by a private citizen, hence the term "r'tzichoh." Rather, permission is
granted to treat the accidental killer in kind. He was somewhat negligent, and death
was brought about by his not being careful to avoid bloodshed. In kind, his
life is cheapened and a blood avenger may kill him. Similarly in verse 30, it
discusses a case where a person was found guilty by a court of committing
murder, on the strength of testimony by eyewitnesses. The verse says that if the
court did not carry out the death penalty the blood avenger may do so, again
justifying the use of the term "r'tzichoh."
A GUTTEN SHABBOS KODESH. FEEL FREE TO DISTRIBUTE BY COPY OR ELECTRONICALLY.
FEEDBACK IS APPRECIATED. TO SUBSCRIBE, KINDLY SEND REQUEST TO: SHOLOM613@AOL.COM
See also Sedrah Selections, Oroh
V'Simchoh - Meshech Chochmoh on the Weekly Parsha and Chasidic Insights |
