Grasshoppers and Ants

... and we were in our own eyes as grasshoppers

and so we were in their eyes.      Numbers 13:33

          Midrash Aggada wonders how the ten spies knew how the Canaanites perceived them. There is psychological truth in the ten spies’ report: since their self-image was as grasshoppers, they were so perceived by the inhabitants of the Land.

            Rashi comments that the spies said:

‘We heard the Canaanites say ‘there are ants walking through the vineyards.’”

            There are those who edit Rashi’s comment, replacing the words “ants” with “grasshoppers,” the word used in the verse. However, my father suggested that Rashi takes the psychological point one step further: due to their low self image, the spies were perceived as being even less than they perceived themselves. They were not even grasshoppers, but mere ants in the eyes of the Canaanites.

            Beyond their awful sin of speaking ill of the Land, the ten spies were guilty of a gross distortion of the proper self concept of an Israelite in relation to the Promised Land. In Parashat Beḥukotai, God says to His nation Israel:

I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, so that you would not be their slaves. I broke the bars of your yoke, so that you can walk upright (komemiut).                    Leviticus 26:13

                                     

The Midrash [Breishit Rabba 20:5; Bemidbar Rabba 13:12] explains the simple meaning (p’shat) of the word “komemiut:” “With erect stature and fearing no creature.”

            Based upon this, we can understand that it is not sufficient for the Nation of Israel simply to enter its Land, but we must enter with upright stature and fearing no one. In this, the ten spies failed miserably.

            Rabbi Menaḥem Kasher, in the notes to his work Torah Shleima, adds an explanation of the Midrashic comment:

The Israelites must appreciate their status as the sons of the Living God and may not be meek … nor may they fear any creature.

            Based upon Rabbi Kasher’s comment, “komemiut” takes on an aspect of faith as well: we must enter the Land fully aware that we are the nation chosen by God, to whom He gave the Land. In essence, Israel’s failure to express “komemiut” represents a failure in our belief in God.

            It is therefore likely that the sin of speaking ill of the Land is intimately related to the ten spies’ low self image. Had the spies entered the Land in a state of “komemiut,” they would have understood what Joshua and Caleb understood, “for God is with us.” [Numbers 14:9]

            Indeed, Joshua and Caleb made it clear that the basis of the difference between their minority report and the majority report of the ten spies is the dimension of faith, as they said “Do not rebel against the Lord.” [ibid.]

            The fact that the ten spies entered the Land as grasshoppers is the source of “weeping for generations.” [The language of the Talmud, Ta’anit 29a]

Jerusalem Double

In Hebrew, the suffix “ayim” denotes double (as in eynayim = eyes; raglayim = legs, etc.) The form of the name Yerushalayim, therefore implies two Yerushalayims. Indeed, the 13^th century Biblical commentator, Rabbenu Behayye, explains the name to refer to the heavenly and earthly Jerusalems. The Holy City’s name itself perhaps teaches that it is incumbent upon us to strive to unite the two Jerusalems, to endow the earthly city with a spiritual aspect as well.

While it is our job to unite the two Jerusalems, Jerusalem itself is involved in uniting the Jewish People. Our Sages consistently make it clear that this is Jerusalem’s role in history, its goal and destiny, are to unite the People of Israel, telling us:

It is Jerusalem which connects [literally “makes friends”] Israel one to another.                   Jerusalem Talmud Bava Kama 7:7

Further, it is Jerusalem which unites all of Jewish history. Rabbi Akiva commented:

Eternity [v’hanetzach, I Chronicles 29:11], this is Jerusalem.                                 Babylonian Talmud, Berachot 58a

Rabbi Joseph Dov Soloveichik explained that the definition of eternity is the convergence of all time, when past, present and future exist simultaneously. This, Rabbi Akiva taught us, refers to Jerusalem. It is in Jerusalem, and in my humble opinion, only in her, that the Jewish past, present and future will meet.

 

Ascent: Means and End

I am God, and I brought you up from the land of Egypt to be your God. Therefore, since I am holy, you must (also) remain holy.  Leviticus 11:45   I, God, have brought you up from Egypt on condition that you accept the yoke of mitzvot.                                                                  Torat Kohanim

 

            Sefat Emet explains that the phrase “brought you up from the land of Egypt” conveys a higher level than “took you out of Egypt,” which we find in other verses [Leviticus 22:33; Deuteronomy 13:6]. In essence, the exodus was a means, not an end, and its purpose was to elevate the nation of Israel from the degradation of enslavement in Egypt to the level of freedom, which as our Sages taught, requires acceptance of Torah and mitzvot.

            Maharal of Prague [Gevurot haShem, chap. 45] phrases Sefat Emet’s point somewhat differently: God says: “I have taken you out of Egypt for the purpose of elevating you.”

            Israel’s ascent from Egypt was completed only upon the nation’s entrance into its Land, as we read “We are the ones He brought out of there, to bring us to the Land He promised our fathers, and give it to us.” [Deuteronomy 6:23] There is a progressive process, from exodus to acceptance of Torah at Mount Sinai to entering the Land, which is the ideal place for fulfillment of mitzvot.

            Seen from this perspective, it is not at all surprising that the Holy Tongue refers to coming into the Land as “aliya” (ascent, the root word used in our verse).

 

Heroes of Holiness

In the Dvar Torah I sent two years ago in commemoration of Memorial Day for our fallen soldiers, I demonstrated that the approach of the Israel Defense Force (I.D.F.) is an application of the traditional approach of the heroes of the Bible. This year, I present some of Rabbi Kook’s enlightening insights in this matter, based upon his “Orot - Milḥama” [Chapter 2) and the English translation and commentary of Rabbi David Samson and Tzvi Fishman [War and Peace].

The underlying principle of Rabbi Kook’s approach is that Israel’s wars are God’s wars and its army is the army of God on earth. “Their war of survival, the survival of the nation, was a battle of God.”

Rabbi Kook focuses our attention on the fact that the Biblical heroes, who fought the wars of God and His nation, are not merely military heroes, but also, and primarily, “heroes of holiness.” “The men of these times are the same great figures whom we cherish for their holy stature.” Our Father Abraham, who had the courage to stand against the rest of the world in his belief in a single omnipotent God, did not hesitate to pursue the army which had just won the “First World War” in order to rescue his nephew, who had been taken captive. Moses, the greatest spiritual figure in history, who brought Torah down to us from Mount Sinai and taught it to us, fought Israel’s wars against the kings of eastern Eretz Yisrael, himself killing Sichon, King of the Amorites and Og, king of the Bashan. [Based upon Bemidbar Rabba 101] Joshua, who “Did not depart from the tent” of Moses and of Torah [Exodus 33:11] led the Israelites’ battle against Amalek as well as their battles to capture the Promised Land. King David, the “sweet singer of Israel” [II Samuel 23:1], was one of the greatest generals in Israel’s history, and through his wars established the largest empire ever ruled by a Jewish monarch.

When we yearn for the heroes of our past, learn from them and attempt to emulate them, their holy valor becomes a part of our lives, and our identification with them, gives us the power to realize our own inner potential:

When we reflect on them, we are, in all of the spiritual revelation which we are so eagerly yearning for, longing to emulate their bravery, their fully formed and sculptured life force, so solid and strong inside them; from this great yearning our spiritual power is charged, and our valor is refined.

And beyond this, “those same powerful souls return to our midst as in the days of old.” That is, by adopting the ways of our ancient heroes, the I.D.F.’s soldiers have the power to resurrect them within our midst!

The necessity to deal with war presents a difficult challenge. By its nature, war requires killing and includes acts of cruelty. Therefore a Jewish soldier must have strength and courage and in two realms: strength for the physical battle, and strength to battle the ugly emotions and passions which are incited by war. Our Biblical heroes succeeded in this challenge, “They were bold in spirit, and they knew in the depths of darkness to choose good and deviate from evil.” (Emphasis mine) “Their holiness, even in battle, is what makes them legendary heroes to all of the world.” These twin strengths must be the aspiration of our soldiers. There is no doubt that the I.D.F. is the most moral army in the world.

            Maimonides sets a very high standard for the Jewish soldier:

Once a soldier enters battle, he should rely on the Hope of Israel and their Savior. He should know that he is fighting for the sake of the unity of God’s name, and he should place his soul in his hand and not show fear or fright. He should not worry about his wife or children, but erase their memory from his heart, removing all thoughts from his mind except for the war. Laws of Kings 7:15

The ability to focus on the war with no thoughts of family intruding arises from faith in “the Hope of Israel and their Savior,” the belief that God fights on behalf of His nation. Faith in God has an additional effect during times of war, in protecting soldiers from the negative effects of war.

Indeed, such faith is one of the lessons we must learn from our ancient heroes.

An example of this faith is the courage of David, the shepherd, who apparently was a teenager, to battle the Philistine giant, Goliath, as David himself said:

David said to the Philistine: “You come against me with your sword, javelin and spear; but I come against you in the name of the Lord of Host, the God of Israel’s army, Whom you have taunted.” I Samuel 17:45

            May it be God’s will to “make the enemies who rise against us be struck down before the soldiers of the I.D.F., and our enemies subdued under them and crown them with deliverance and victory.” [Based upon the Prayer for the I.D.F.]

 

Double Up on Pesaḥ

 

The Sages taught: Once, King Agrippa wished to know the multitudes of Israel (i.e. to know the population) He said to the High Priest: “Set your eyes on the Paschal lambs (count the number brought in order to approximate the population). (The High Priest) took a kidney from each, and six hundred thousand pairs of kidneys were found there, double (the number) of those who left Egypt. (This did not reflect the sum total of the Jewish population, since it) excluded those who were ritually impure or at a great distance (from the Temple, and hence did not offer the Paschal sacrifice). (Furthermore) there was not a single lamb that did not have more than ten people registered for it.                                            Babylonian Talmud, Pesaḥim 64b

            Based on the Talmud’s story, during the time of King Agripas (who reigned between 41 – 44 C.E.) 1,200,000 paschal lambs were slaughtered and offered on the altar, and since each lamb was brought by a group of no fewer than ten, more than 12,000,000 Jews ascended to the Temple.

            Anaf Yosef (commentary on the Talmudic aggadot) suggests that the Talmudic story is an exaggeration, a suggestion which seems necessary, based on at least two considerations:

            P It is physically impossible to deal with such a huge number of sacrifices within the limited time available for offering the Paschal lamb (approximately four and a half hours, see Maimonides’ Laws of the Paschal Sacrifice 1:4]

            P Historians estimate that at the time of Agrippa, the Jewish population of the world numbered approximately 7,000,000

            Immediately before quoting the episode of counting the kidneys of the Paschal lambs, the Talmud presents a difference of opinion between Abayye and Rava concerning the correct reading of the Mishna’s description of offering the Paschal sacrifice. Abayye posits that the proper reading is “the doors (of the Temple courtyard) were closed (implying automatically, and miraculously),” while Rava maintains that the reading is “they (humans) closed the doors.”

The Talmud explains that the source of the disagreement is the question of whether or not we are to rely on miracles.

            While the debate between the two Talmudic giants apparently is not on a halachic issue, nonetheless, it would seem that Rava’s position is to be preferred, since in all halachic debates between the two the halacha is decided in accordance with Rava’s approach (save six times).

            Indeed, Maimonides, in describing the service of the Paschal lamb, quotes Rava’s position:

The first group (to offer the Paschal lamb) entered (the Temple courtyard) until it was filled, and then they closed the doors of the courtyard and began to sacrifice the Paschal lambs.

                                                    Laws of the Paschal Offering 1:11

            This preamble to the episode of Agrippa’s’ “census,” accepting that we do not rely on miracles, is perhaps intended to inform us that the following story is not to be believed literally.

            Moreover, the source of the Agrippa episode is the Tosefta; however, the Talmud deletes the phrase from the original source “and the (courtyard) could not contain them all.” [Tosefta, Pesaḥim 4:15] According to the Tosefta, there was not enough room in the Temple courtyard for all of the pilgrims who ascended to Jerusalem. The missing phrase too indicates that our Sages exaggerated and the story is not to be believed literally. If the story reflects a miracle that the natural limitation of space was overcome, it matters not to God, who performs the miracle whether there were 12,000,000 or 12,000,000,000 in the courtyard.

            The number which our Sages use, “six hundred thousand” (in a more exact translation: “sixty myriads”) is what scholars refer to as a “typological number,” that is, a number which conveys a symbolic, rather than exact meaning.

            We may suggest that in stating that the number of Paschal lambs brought to the altar was “double (the number) of those who left Egypt,” our Sages express the thought that the experience of offering the Paschal sacrifice is greater than the experience of leaving Egypt. The reason for this is that the exodus was not a goal, but a means. The goal of the exodus was to bring the nation of Israel into its Land, and to fulfill God’s mitzvot within her. When Jews offered the Paschal sacrifice during the Second Temple period (and, equally, during the First Temple period) they realized the purpose of the exodus, and thus their experience was greater than that of leaving Egypt.

 

The Cosmic Navel

As the navel is located in the middle of one’s body, so the Land of Israel is the navel of the world, as the verse states: “Who live at the center (tabur, literally “the navel”) of the world” [Ezekiel 38:12]. The Land of Israel is at the center of the world, Jerusalem is at the center of the Land of Israel, and the Temple is at the center of Jerusalem, the Sanctuary is at the center of the Temple, and the Ark is at the center of the Sanctuary, and the Foundation Stone, from which the world was founded, is before the Sanctuary.

                                   Midrash Tanḥuma, Parashat Kedoshim, 10

            Maharal [Be’er haGola 6:13] writes that the intention of the Midrash is not to provide “physical, tangible measurements,” rather, it is a statement of the essence of the Land and of its capital, and does not deal with the material level. (Based upon the enlightening comments of Rabbi Yehoshua David Hartman.) After all, the navel is not actually located in the middle of the human body based upon measurement of height, rather:

The navel is the center in the sense that it is between the upper and lower parts of the body; it divides the upper and lower parts of the body and is, as it were, the point of connection between the two parts. So too is the Land of Israel: she is the intermediate point between the lower world and the spiritual worlds, and in this sense she is the “center” of the world. And the “center” of the Land of Israel, the holiest place in the Land is the Holy of Holies (the Sanctuary).

            The “upper part of the body” is the intellectual – spiritual part, while the “lower part of the body” is its more material – tangible part. The navel is located between the two parts of the human body, and, symbolically, it connects them, and in a similar manner, the Land of Israel connects the material and spiritual worlds.

            In his commentary on the Song of Songs, Rabbi Sa'adya Gaon explains the metaphor of the navel: as a fetus in its mother’s womb receives its nurture through the navel, so too the bounty which descends to the entire earth comes through and because of God’s direct supervision of the Land of Israel, as our Sages taught/ [Babylonian Talmud, Ta’anit 10a]. 

As One Flesh

… except for his immediate relation (she’aro), who is near unto him - for his mother, and for his father, and for his son, and for his daughter, and for his brother. Leviticus 21:2

“She’ar” denotes his wife. Rashi (based upon Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot 22b)

There are differing opinions as to the proper understanding of the word “she’ar.”

Midrash Lekaḥ Tov states: “the true meaning of ‘she’ar’ is flesh.” (Indeed, the blessing recited following brit mila includes the words: “[You] have marked the decree of circumcision in his flesh [she’aro].”)

Lekaḥ Tov continues and connects its definition of “she’ar” to a verse in Genesis:

The reason (the Sages) said she’aro refers to one’s wife is that she is as one flesh with him, as the verse states: “And they shall become one flesh.” [Genesis 2:24]

HaKetav v’haKabbala (1785-1865) understands “she’ar” to be related to “she’erit” (remnant), and writes:

In my opinion, a wife is called she’ar because she is responsible for the continuity of (man’s) existence by giving birth to children, which constitutes the existence and the survival of man, as the verse [Genesis 45:7] states “To provide a remnant (she’erit) in the land.”

This comment seems close to that of Rashi on the verse in the second chapter of Genesis:

“As one flesh” – the child is formed by both parents, who thereby become as one flesh.

However, Naḥmanides rejects Rashi’s comment, noting that the offspring of lower animals as well are formed by both parents, while the verse implies that becoming as one flesh is a trait unique to humans.           

Naḥmanides asserts that the phrase “they shall become as one flesh” must be understood in the context of the complete verse, which is:

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and cling to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

Naḥmanides suggests that the difference between animals and human beings in the matter of sexual relations is that the male does not form an attachment to the female, but merely copulates with whichever female he encounters and then goes on his way. With humans, on the other hand, at least on the ideal and desired level, the attachment between the couple precedes sexual relations:

Scripture tells us that the (first) human female (Eve) was the flesh of man’s (Adam’s) flesh and the bone of his bones [Genesis 2:23] and man clung to her, and she was in his bosom as his own flesh, and he desired to always be with her. This trait was included in the nature of Adam’s descendants, namely that the males cling to their wives, leaving their parents and seeing their wives as if they are one flesh with them. Similarly, the verse states: “For he is our brother, our (own) flesh” [Genesis 37:27] and “his immediate relation, who is near unto him; that is: close relatives are called ‘she’ar of flesh.’” Thus a man leaves the closeness (she’ar) of his relation to his parents and sees his wife as being more closely related.

Indeed, Da’at Zekanim of the Tosafists comments: “They shall become one flesh” – there is no greater relation or closeness.

Rabbi Moshe Alshikh (1507-1593) comments:

“One’s wife is as himself (literally, ‘as his own body’)” [Babylonian Talmud, Berachot 24a] by virtue of the closeness of their souls, for the souls of a man and of his mate are considered as a single soul, they are as two bodies with a single soul.

Based upon Alshikh’s comment we would have expected the Sages to say: “a man’s wife is as his own soul.” However, Alshikh adds a comment which averts the question:

When the couple is of one soul, they become one flesh as well by giving birth to children, through whom they become as one flesh, as our Sages taught [Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 30b] “there are three partners in every human: the Holy One, blessed be He, the father and the mother.”

According to Alshikh’s exposition, the connection as one flesh comes as the result of the connection of souls. It seems that this comment of Alshikh is exactly that of Naḥmanides quoted above, that the spiritual closeness is what brings a couple to becoming as one flesh.

This matter, man’s uniqueness in being able to and needing to form a spiritual and physical connection with his mate, is a component of creation, as Malbim elucidates [Malachi 2:15]:

When God created humans, He did not create male and female separate from each other, as He did other animals, for initially Adam was created alone and Eve was one of his ribs and was originally part of the same body as him (as our Sages [Babylonian Talmud, Berachot 61a] taught: “God created Adam with two countenances” [and Eve was made of one]). This is what is meant in the verse: “And hasn’t He made (them) one (flesh) in order to have spiritual blood-relatives (she’ar)?” God created Adam as a single body with his wife; they were (physically) connected together at the time of creation. “Spiritual blood-relatives” – Adam and his mate, who was part of him, were of one spirit. Thus, Adam and Eve were created as a single body and a single spirit, unlike all other animals, which were created as two, separate in body and in spirit. And why did He do this, rather than creating man and his mate separately? It is to teach that man’s mate must be like him and able to unite with him both in flesh and in spirit.

Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch offers a different definition of “she’ar,” and writes:

The basic meaning of she’ar is “completion.” Here, “she’ar” denotes his wife, because it is she who “is the spiritual and moral complement of a man’s human existence.” [Commentary on Leviticus 21:2]

As long as man was alone, he was not yet “good,” and because once the division had been made, it was no longer at all possible for man to fulfill his calling by himself, because his wife was to be “a companion suitable for helping him.” [Genesis 2:18] Without her, he was only half a man, and only together with her did he feel himself a whole man. Therefore, a man leaves his father and mother and attaches himself to a wife, and they become one single body. Man and woman become one single body. But that can take place only if at the same time they become one mind, one heart, one soul. And this is possible only if they subordinate all their strength and efforts, all their thoughts and desires to the service of a Higher Will. [Commentary on Genesis 2:24]

Ḥizkuni preceded Rabbi Hirsch by six centuries, when he commented:

This creation (humans) is unlike the rest of creation, which was brought forth from soil and water. And why are humans unique? Because the Holy One, blessed be He intended that man leave his parents and cling to his wife, that they become as one flesh, that is, a complete body. Therefore, man pursues woman, since she comes from him. (Until a man finds his mate) it is as if he is missing a limb.

            Similarly, Rabbi Ovadya Sforno (1480-1550) writes: “They shall be as one flesh” – the intention is to achieve the completeness which was intended by the Creator.

Shela (Rabbi Yeshaya haLevi Horowitz [1558-1630]) adds his own dimension:

Humans are the epitome of creation and are made in the Divine image, and as God created them with two countenances, to demonstrate the absolute equality of the genders, so too their bodies and souls join together in sanctity. After the initial creation, woman was separated from man to become a companion suitable for helping him, and then they can truly be united as one flesh, and then Man achieves completion in the Divine image.

Based upon this definition of “she’ar” as well, there is a close connection between the spiritual and physical connection of spouses.

The verse in the second chapter of Genesis presents practical halachic lessons, as Tur writes in his introduction to Even haEzer:

“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and cling to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” – This means that it is fitting that she be special and particular to him and he to her. Therefore, it is appropriate that a man love his wife as he loves himself, and honor her more than he honors himself [Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot 62b], to have compassion for her and protect her, as he would protect one of his limbs. The wife too is obligated to help her husband and love him as she loves herself, “because she was taken out of man.” [Genesis 2:23]

Therefore the Torah commanded: “He must not reduce the food, clothing, or marital rights of his wife.” [Exodus 21:10] Many other mitzvot are mandated in the matter of the connection between husband and wife for as long as they are together.

            In summary, we can quote Malbim’s commentary on Genesis 2:24:

Every man in his youth clings to his parents, and when he matures and becomes an adult, he leaves his mother and father and takes a wife, with whom he will build his own faithful home and cling to her, for she is his companion and a companion suitable for helping him, and they become as one flesh in order to have progeny and maintain the species.

In memory of my wife, Gloria, and with deep appreciation to the Creator for the privilege of being connected to her spiritually and physically for more than a generation.