| |
Meriting the Land of Israel
Translated by Moshe-Yaakov Wisnefsky
from the Writings of the Ari, Behaalotecha.
Toward the end of this parasha, we are told how G-d
bestowed the gift of prophecy on the seventy elders. At that time, Miriam was
standing next to Moses' wife, Zipporah, when Gershom ran to Moses, saying, "Eldad
and Medad are prophesying in the camp." When Zipporah heard this, she said, "Woe
to their wives if they have become prophets, for they will now separate from
them, just as Moses has separated from me." Miriam overheard this and assumed
that Moses had done this because he felt it was inappropriate for a prophet to
become defiled by marital relations (See Lev. 15:18), just as G-d had bidden the
whole people to refrain from marital relations in preparation for the revelation
at the Giving of the Torah. (Ex. 19:15)
However, she also knew that she
and her brother Aaron had received prophetic revelations and had not been
required to separate from their spouses, so she assumed that it was Moses' own
idea to separate and thought that this was unfair to Zipporah. Miriam later told
Aaron about this, and Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses regarding how he was
treating Zipporah. The Torah describes this as follows: "Miriam and Aaron spoke
against Moses regarding the Cushite woman he had married, for he had married a
Cushite woman. They said, 'Has G-d spoken only to Moses? Has He not spoken to
us, too?'" (Num. 12:1-2)  | | " The Land of Israel is the earthly manifestation of the 'woman of valor'...." | | |
Zipporah is here referred to as "the Cushite woman" because her
physical beauty was as incontestable as the darkness of the skin of a Cushite
woman, and in addition, her deeds were also as faultless as a Cushite woman is
black. The absoluteness of her character contrasts with the way he was
mistreating her - at least in Miriam's and Aaron's eyes.
However, the Torah refers to Moses' wife as "the Cushite woman"
for another reason, as well.
My master [the Arizal], of blessed memory, told me that he
heard from a great sage in our generation by the name of Rabbi Kalonymus, of
blessed memory, an explanation of this passage of the Torah, as follows:
We have seen how the patriarch Jacob's body and skeleton
were both buried in the Land of Israel.
(Gen. 49:4-13)
"Body" here refers to the flesh.
Joseph's bones were buried [in the Land of Israel], but not
his body.
He was buried in Egypt.
(Gen. 50:26)
His body had decomposed by the time his bones were taken out of Egypt. (Ex.
13:19) They were buried in Shechem. (Joshua 24:32)
Neither Moses' body or bones [were buried in the Land of
Israel]. (Deut. 34:5-6)
The reason for this is that the Land of Israel is the
earthly manifestation of the "woman of valor" who "fears G-d" (Proverbs 31:10,
30).
The phrase "fears G-d" can also be read "the fear/awe of G-d".
Thus, mystically, the "woman of valor", Nukva of Zeir Anpin, is
also the (lower level of the) fear of G-d, the aspect of our relationship with
G-d associated with the sefira of malchut.
Because Jacob did not marry Timna, the sister of Lotan, as
our sages relate (Sanhedrin
99b; Yalkut Shimoni, Bereishit 129),
he merited to have both his body and skeleton buried in the Land of Israel.
In giving the genealogy of Esau and the history of his progeny,
the Torah also describes the people who originally inhabited the land he
eventually possessed, the Chorites. "These are the sons of Seir the Chorite, the
[original] inhabitants of the land: Lotan, Shoval, Tzivon, Anah, Dishon, Ezer,
and Dishan. These were the tribal chiefs of the Chorites among the sons of Seir
in the land of Edom. The sons of Lotan were Chori and Hemam, and Lotan's sister
was Timna."(Gen. 36:20-22)
The reason the Torah tells us who Lotan's
sister was is because she wanted to convert to Judaism, but neither Abraham,
Isaac, nor Jacob would accept her. She even offered to be Jacob's concubine, but
Jacob refused her. She then declared, "I would rather be a concubine to anyone
from this nation [i.e. a descendant of Abraham] than a princess in another
nation" and indeed, became Esau's son's concubine: "Timna was a concubine of
Esau's son Eliphaz, and she bore Amalek to Eliphaz."
(Ibid., v.12)
Regarding Joseph: he did sin in thought, and drops of his
semen issued from between his fingernails, but he did not complete the evil act
by injecting [his seed] into that foreign woman. Therefore, his skeleton was
buried [in the Land of Israel] but not his body.
Joseph sold as a slave to Potiphar, the priest of On, in Egypt.
Potiphar's wife tried to seduce Joseph, and although he initially demurred, he
eventually agreed. As he was about to complete the illicit act of relations, the
image of his father suddenly became fixed in his mind, and he relented. He dug
his fingernails into the ground in order to control himself, and miraculously,
the flow of semen issued from his fingers into the ground instead of issuing
into Potiphar's wife. (Gen.
39:7-12; Rashi on Gen. 49:26)
Regarding Moses: he went to the Land of Cush and lived there
for forty years, and actually married the wife of the [slain] Ethiopian king,
and lived with her [outwardly] as man and wife, as is recounted in the accounts
of Moses' life. Even though he did not approach her physically, he was still not
buried in the Land of Israel at all, neither his body nor his bones. | | " The Land of Canaan is associated with the moon...." | | |
The Written Torah does not tell us what happened to Moses
between the time when he fled Pharaoh's henchmen, at about the age of 18, and
when he became Jethro's shepherd and son-in-law, at about the age of 77. There
are a few versions in the Midrashim of what happened, but according to the most
detailed one, Moses slew the Egyptian in the year 2386, when he was 18 years
old. He fled to Ethiopia, where he joined the army and 9 years later was
coronated king. This is when he "married" the widow of the previous king of
Ethiopia, or "Cush". He remained king of Ethiopia for 40 years, from 2395 to
2435. In that year, at the age of 67, he left Ethiopia and went to Midian. After
the incident with the shepherds at the well, Jethro imprisoned Moses for ten
years. Zipporah fed Moses secretly during these ten years, and finally convinced
her father to release him. In 2445, at the age of 77, Moses and Zipporah were
married, and shortly after had their first son, Gershon. The incident of the
burning bush occurred in the year 2447, when Moses was 79 years old. (See
Seder HaDorot, s.v. 2386, 2387, 2392, 2435, 2444)
Thus far are the words of the said sage [Rabbi Kalonymus],
of blessed memory.
To this, my master added an explanation of this passage
[regarding Miriam's accusation of Moses], as follows:
It is stated prior [to this passage] that "Eldad and Medad
were prophesying in the camp".
(Num. 11:27)
Our sages teach us that they were prophesying that "Moses will die [in the
desert] and Joshua will bring Israel into the Land of Canaan" (Sanhedrin
17a ). Following this, "Miriam and Aaron spoke"
(Num. 12:1)
about this matter, and were discussing why Moses should die in the desert before
being able to enter the Land. It could not yet have been clear to them that the
reason for this was [Moses'] sin with regard to [bringing forth water from] the
rock, for this incident did not occur until [37 years later], after Miriam's
death, as recounted in parashat Chukat (Ibid.
20:1-13). They therefore concluded that the
reason must be that [Moses] fully and legally married a Cushite woman, and
therefore he was barred from entering the land, similar to what the above-quoted
sage said.
[Having said this,] they then proceeded to rule out another
explanation [for why Moses would not enter the Land of Israel]. Namely, as it is
written in the Zohar, the Land of Canaan is associated with the moon. Therefore,
Joshua, about whom our sages said, "Joshua's face was like the face of the moon
[relative to Moses' face, which was like the face of the sun]" (Baba Batra
75a), entered it. Moses, in contrast, whose "face was like the face of the sun",
which expresses a higher level [of spirituality] than the moon [does], did not
enter it.
The sun and moon are associated with Zeir Anpin and
Nukva, respectively. Zeir Anpin shines with the radiance of the
emotional sefirot, which are reflected in Nukva, their means of
expression. This is similar to the way the moon reflects the light of the sun.
Similarly, Joshua's spirituality - evidenced as the glow of his face - was a
reflection of his teacher Moses'.
The Land of Israel, the quintessential "land", is also
associated with malchut, inasmuch as heaven and earth are also
respectively associated with Zeir Anpin and Nukva.
It thus would appear that Moses did not enter the Land of Israel
because he was of a higher spiritual order than it; only his disciple, who was
of a lower spiritual order, was "low" enough to enter it. | | " The Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge are respectively associated with Zeir Anpin and Nukva...." | | |
It would follow that [Moses'] denial of entry [into the
Land] was to his credit, rather than the result of some lack on his part. [Aaron
and Miriam] ruled out this explanation by saying, "Has G-d spoken only to Moses?
Has He not spoken to us, too?" - meaning: "We are on the same level of prophecy
as he is; if so, why are we going to enter the Land and he not? Rather, it must
not be because of his preeminence but because of some lacking of his that he is
not entering the Land, namely, because 'he married a Cushite woman,'" etc., as
we have explained. They did not know [at this point] that they, too, would not
be entering the Land of Israel.
G-d then told them that the reason [Moses would not be
entering the Land] was indeed because of his preeminence, in accordance with the
explanation given in the Zohar. As for their argument that "has He not spoken to
us, too", G-d told them that it is faulty. For, "If there be a prophet among
you, [I, G-d, will make Myself known to him in a vision; I will speak to him in
a dream.] This is not so with My servant Moses; [he is faithful throughout My
household. With him I speak mouth to mouth; unambiguously, without riddles, so
he beholds the image of G-d. So why were you not afraid to speak against My
servant, against Moses?]"
(Num. 12:6-8) [In other words,] he alone is
"the face of the sun", and therefore will not enter the Land, which is referred
to mystically as the "holy moon".
Although Aaron and Miriam were correct that their level of
prophecy was higher than Joshua's, it was still not on the level of Moses'.
This is similar to the mystical explanation given in the
Zohar [of Moses' words] in the verse, "Is there a tree there, or not...." (Ibid.
13:20)
When Moses sent spies to report on the Land, he told them to see
"what [kind of] land it is. And the people who inhabit it: are they strong or
weak? Are there few or many? And what of the land they inhabit? Is it good or
bad? And what of the cities they live in: are they in open cities or in
fortresses? What is the soil like: is it rich or poor? Are there any trees in it
or not?" (Ibid. 13:18-20) The latter phrase literally reads: "Is there a
tree in it or not?""
Meaning: If the Tree of Life, which is tiferet, known
as the "sun", is there, I shall enter it; if not, I will not.
The Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge are respectively
associated with Zeir Anpin and Nukva.
It follows from the above that the Arizal, based on the Zohar,
holds that it was not because Moses formally married the widow of the Cushite
king that he was denied entrance into the Land of Israel, but because he was
essentially above its level. He puts Rabbi Kalonymus' interpretation into the
mouths of Miriam and Aaron as their supposition that G-d then refuted.
* * * * * *
Rabbi Shmuel Vital (Rabbi Chaim Vital's son) notes that after
Timna became Eliphaz's concubine, she bore him Amalek, the ancestor of the
nation that became Israel's archenemy, and that the Sages state that this was
because Jacob, in fact, should have married her. He could have elevated
the good in her (evinced by her desire to convert) and thereby nullified the bad
in her (that became manifest later as Amalek). Thus, from our sages words, it
appears that Jacob erred by not accepting Timna, while in Rabbi Kalonymus'
exposition, it appears that he was rewarded for repelling her. | | " This inner Amalek derives from our reluctance to answer the challenge of absorbing and elevating the good elements of materiality and foreign culture...." | | |
He resolves this dichotomy by proposing that it would have
indeed been preferable for Jacob to marry Timna, even if by doing so he would
have forfeited his ability to be buried in the Land of Israel. By preventing the
emergence of Amalek, he would have saved his descendants from much suffering and
removed an obstacle in the way of the Redemption. (One of the conditions that
must be met before the Redemption can occur is that Amalek's descendants must be
wiped out.) Not being buried in the Land of Israel would be a small price to pay
for this, especially since Moses himself was also not buried in the Land of
Israel, and our sages say that this was in order that he be able to bring the
generation that died in the desert to the Final Redemption with him.
If this is true, its psychological implications are
far-reaching. We are taught that Amalek signifies the coldness in our
relationship with G-d that comes from doubts that the "inner skeptic" plants in
our mind, and the above exposition implies that this inner Amalek derives from
our reluctance to answer the challenge of absorbing and elevating the good
elements of materiality and foreign culture out of fear of the contamination it
will entail. These unredeemed elements of non-Jewish culture later come back to
haunt us in the form of doubts and the cultured sophistication that cools off
our enthusiasm for holiness.
So, what is better - to insist on ascetic purity of mind, soul,
and body, as Jacob did, or to sacrifice purity in order to elevate the
non-Jewish world and thereby avoid the doubts and indifference of Amalek? We
could propose that Chasidut would answer that Jacob could not have
allowed himself the risk of elevating alien culture because the Torah, with its
solid anchoring in holy lifestyle and consciousness, had not yet been given.
Moses, on the other hand, who represented the Giving of the Torah, could allow
himself this risk. The lesson for us would then be that only to the extent that
we are solidly grounded and immersed in the holiness of the Torah and its ways
can we allow ourselves the broadmindedness to absorb, include, and elevate the
elements of worldly culture that can be, and indeed beg to be, assimilated. If
we do not trust the power of the fire of the Torah to burn off the dross of this
unrefined raw material, these elements will eventually plague us as seeds of
doubt and as a coldhearted attitude in all things holy.
[Shaar HaPesukim and Likutei Torah]
|
