Parshios Chukas & Balak

The Power of Prayer

By Rabbi Yochanan Zweig

“And Moshe sent emissaries from Kadesh to the king of Edom…” (20:14)

Moshe sends a delegation to the king of Edom requesting permission to pass through his country. He instructs his emissaries to relate the Jews’ experience in Egypt to the king. The Torah records that one of the statements which was made to the king was “vanitz’ak el Hashem vayishma koleinu” - “and we cried out to Hashem and He heard our voice”.1 From the fact that the verse states that Hashem heard our voice, rather than our cries, Rashi interprets that Moshe is sending a warning to Edom that we have the legacy of our Patriarchal blessing received from Yitzchak, “hakol kol Yaakov”, the power of the voice of Torah; Bnei Yisroel are infused with the blessing that when we pray, we are answered.2

The king of Edom responds by saying that he will come out with sword in hand if Bnei Yisroel attempt to traverse his land. Rashi again comments that through his words the king of Edom is invoking the Patriarchal legacy which was conferred upon Eisav, the father of Edom, “by the sword you shall live”.3

Moshe must have been aware that just as Bnei Yisroel have the power of prayer to facilitate their success, the Edomites have the power of war. Why does Moshe assume that Bnei Yisroel’s Patriarchal legacy is superior?

The key to solving this dilemma lies in Rashi’s comment on the preceding verse. The emissaries relate “and with us the Egyptians dealt malevolently and with our fathers.”4 The construct of the verse appears convoluted. Why does the verse not simply state that “the Egyptians dealt malevolently with us and our fathers”? Rashi explains that the verse is stressing the notion that the affliction suffered by our fathers is a byproduct of our affliction. The “fathers” referred to in the verse are not our biological fathers who endured the servitude in Egypt with us, rather our Patriarchal Fathers who, although they were not present with us in Egypt, suffered our pain.5

Why is it necessary for Moshe to allude to this concept in his message to the king of Edom? The power of prayer which Bnei Yisroel have rests not only in our capacity to extricate ourselves from our own predicament, but also in our ability to relieve our Patriarchs of the distress caused to them by our situation. It is this ability which motivates Hashem to answer our prayers, not only in our merit, but in the merit of our Forefathers as well. The ability with which Edom is imbued benefits only them, and not their forefathers. Their forefathers do not feel the distress of the later generations, for they do not enjoy a closeness to them as do the Forefathers of Bnei Yisroel to the Jewish nation

1.20:16
2.Rashi ibid.
3.Ibid.
4.20:15
5.Ibid.

COMMUNITY MINDED

“And Moshe raised his arm and struck the rock…” (20:11)

The Talmud relates that after Miriam died, the well, which was a water source for Bnei Yisroel in the desert, disappeared.1 Hashem commanded Moshe to bring forth water from a rock. The Torah records that Moshe and Aharon sinned.2 However, the exact nature of the sin is not specified in the verses. Rashi understands that Moshe’s sin was a result of striking the rock to bring forth water rather than communicating with it.3 The Ramban questions Rashi’s approach, for Hashem instructed Moshe to take the staff from the Holy of Holies and bring it with him. If Hashem had not intended for Moshe to strike the rock, why had He commanded Moshe to bring the staff along with him?4

The Maharsha points out an apparent contradiction between two Talmudic statements: The Talmud in Tractate Ta’anis relates that the well, the source of water for the entire Bnei Yisroel, was in the merit of the prophetess Miriam.5 However, the Talmud in Tractate Bava Metzia relates that since Avraham Avinu supplied the angels with water, his descendants had water in the desert. Was the well in the merit of Avraham or Miriam?6

The Talmud states that the merits of an individual help for the needs of that individual. However, an environmental change that will benefit the needs of many can only be achieved through the merits of the entire community.7 An individual is generally concerned with his own short-term needs and of those close to him, while the responsibility and concern for long-term needs is borne by the community. A community, by nature, is an ongoing perpetual entity and therefore, it has the responsibility to ensure that not only its short-term needs are met, but, to whatever extent possible, that all of its future members’ needs will be met as well. Consequently, all matters that might have long-term societal implications such as ecological and environmental issues must be addressed on a communal level, and then filtered down to the individuals. For a miracle to occur which would create a long-term environmental change, Bnei Yisroel had to ask as a community.

Once the well of Miriam was no longer available in the desert, the individual was concerned with his immediate need for water. Hashem instructed Moshe to give over the message to Bnei Yisroel that they should not request water to satiate only their individual needs, rather that their concern should be on a communal level, for this would ensure the availability of a long–term reservoir that would serve as a perpetual source of water. The staff symbolizes leadership, as we find in the blessing to Yehuda “the staff will not depart from Yehuda”.8 Moshe was not instructed to bring along the staff in order to strike the rock, rather as a representation of his leadership, for as leader he would herald the energies of the entire community, bringing them together to request a perpetual water source.

In Avraham’s merit the needs of the individual were met. What Miriam’s merit accomplished was that Bnei Yisroel would have a perpetual source of water for the ongoing community. The Talmud refers to this quality of Miriam an “parnes”, a person who ensures that all of the needs of the entire community are met.9

1.Ta’anis 9a
2.20:12
3.20:11
4.20:1
5.9a
6.86b, See Maharsha
7.Ta’anis 9a.
8.Ibid., See Rashi
9.Ta’anis ibid

Balak

A DIFFERENT KIND OF FRIEND

“He perceived no iniquity in Yaakov, and saw no perversity in Yisroel. Hashem, his G-d is with him, and the friendship of the King is in him.” (23:21)

The commentators translate “teruas melech” as “the friendship of the King”, “teruas” stemming from the word “rayus” - “friendship”. Rashi explains the verse as Balaam expressing the futility of any attempt to curse Bnei Yisroel, for Hashem does not scrutinize their iniquity nor criticize them for their shortcomings, even when they provoke Him by maliciously violating His word.1 Why would not criticizing a person for his wrongdoing be an expression of friendship? On the contrary, a true friend is not afraid to criticize, for that is the manner in which he expresses his concern for his friend’s well-being.

In Parshas Kedoshim we find the commandment “ve’ahavta lerayacha kamocha” - “you should love your friend as you love yourself”.2 Translating “rayacha” as “neighbor” is incorrect. Rayacha is derived from the word “rayus” - “friendship”. From this verse we can derive that in the hierarchy of relationships, love is greater than friendship, for we are commanded to love a person who already is our friend: “ve’ahavta lerayacha”. In the last of the Sheva Berachos, the seven blessings established by the Rabbis as part of the wedding ceremony, we thank Hashem for the various levels of relationships which can be attained by the bride and groom. Presumably, we give thanks in ascending order. Here we say “ahava ve’achva shalom verayus” - “love, brotherhood, harmony, and friendship”. The implication is that the relationship of friendship transcends that of love. How do we reconcile this apparent contradiction?

During his lifetime, a person may have many friends. There are two categories of friendship. The most common type are friends with whom a person shares experiences. Although he may enjoy their company, a person still maintains a facade, unwilling to present his vulnerabilities to them, for fear that they may use this information against him. Very rarely, do we find a friend in whom we place our complete trust and for whom we are willing to let down our guard and share our insecurities. This only occurs if we sense that this friend is completely dedicated to our growth and his actions are motivated by his concern for our best interests. There is no contradiction between the verse in Parshas Kedoshim and the terminology used at the Sheva Berachos. The verse is teaching us that we should learn to love our friends who fall into the first category. The Rabbis bless the married couple that their relationship should transcend from love to the friendship of the second category.

It is difficult to accept criticism graciously, especially when the criticism emanates from an injured party. The reason for this is that we convince ourselves that the criticism is not being levied because the person cares for us, rather because he is an injured party. This is only true of a friend from the first category. However, if the criticism is given by a person who we know to have our best interests at heart, we can accept that the rebuke is meant to prevent us from harmful behavior. Rashi’s interpretation of the verse is thus: It is because of our “rayus” - friendship with Hashem that He does not criticize us for what we have done to Him. Hashem is willing to overlook the hurt that we cause Him. It is only for the damage which we cause ourselves that Hashem rebukes and punishes us, for Hashem’s only agenda is our best interests.

1.23:21
2.19:18

OUT OF THE DUST

“Who has counted the dust of Yaakov...” (23:10)

In his second explanation of this verse, Rashi offers the Midrashic interpretation: Who can count the agricultural mitzvos that Bnei Yisroel perform, for they are so numerous.1 The Maharal asks why it is particularly the agricultural mitzvos that are drawn to Balaam’s attention?2

On the third day of creation Hashem instructs that there should be “aytz pri oseh pri” - “fruit trees yielding fruit”3. However, when the trees are actually created, we find that the verse states “v’aytz oseh pri” - “trees yielding fruit”4. Rashi comments that Hashem commanded the earth to produce trees which were edible themselves and had the same taste as the fruit that they yielded. However, the earth produced trees which were inedible themselves, but yielded edible fruit. Therefore, when man was cursed for the sin of eating from the Tree of Knowledge, Hashem cursed the earth as well: “Accursed is the ground.” 5,6 What is the notion of the earth disobeying Hashem’s will? Furthermore, why is the punishment of the earth delayed until Adam’s punishment?

Clearly, the earth cannot rebel against Hashem’s wishes, rather Hashem must have programmed that instead of the earth producing trees in their perfect state, i.e. having the same taste as their fruit, the earth brought forth an imperfect product. The question that must then be addressed is why would Hashem create the illusion that one of His creations rebelled against Him?

Since man is created from the earth, as is verified by his name “Adam” - “from the adama (the ground)7”, it is the very perception that the ground chose not to follow the will of Hashem that gives man his ability of free choice, the ability to either conform to or rebel against the will of Hashem. Since man’s ability to sin stemmed from being created out of the earth, it is only once he does sin that the earth is punished as well. Punishing the earth is a furthering of the illusion that the earth has its independence and the ability to choose not to conform to the will of Hashem.

The ultimate purpose of mitzvos which involve the use of the earth is to take the element in creation that appears to be the most separate from Hashem and has the greatest expression of Hashem distancing Himself from the world, and reconnect it back to Hashem. It is specifically those elements which appear most alienated from Hashem that when connected back to Him reveal His glory in the greatest manner. It is this ability that Bnei Yisroel have to take that which is cursed and turn it into beracha - blessing, i.e. being reconnected back to Hashem, which impacts upon Balaam. Balaam recognizes that Bnei Yisroel view that which is cursed as an opportunity to reveal Hashem’s glory, and not as an obstacle. Therefore, ultimately Bnei Yisroel will be impervious to his curses.

1.23:10
2.Gur Arye ibid
3.1:11
4.1:12
5.1:11
6.3:17
7.1:7