Difference between revisions of "Petition of the Two and a Half Tribes/2"
m |
|||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
<p>Moshe correctly inferred that Reuven and Gad did not intend to join the campaign against Canaan and viewed this as sinful, justifying his outburst.</p> | <p>Moshe correctly inferred that Reuven and Gad did not intend to join the campaign against Canaan and viewed this as sinful, justifying his outburst.</p> | ||
<mekorot> | <mekorot> | ||
− | <multilink><a href="RalbagBemidbar32-1-24" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar32-1-24" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 32:1-24</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32" data-aht="source">Akeidat Yitzchak</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32" data-aht="source">85</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-2" data-aht="source">85: (2)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-3" data-aht="source">85: (3)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-4" data-aht="source">85: (4)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-5" data-aht="source">85: (5)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-6" data-aht="source">85: (6)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-7" data-aht="source">85: (7)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-8" data-aht="source">85: (8)</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Arama (Akeidat Yitzchak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Arama</a></multilink>,<fn>See also R" Samet, <a href="http://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%9E%D7%98%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%93%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99-%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%94-%D7%9C%D7%91%D7%A0%D7%99-%D7%92%D7%93-%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%91%D7%A0%D7%99-%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%95%D7%91%D7%9F">דברי משה לבני גד ולבני ראובן</a> who does an extensive analysis of the opposing positions of R. Yitzchak Arama and Abarbanel, concluding that R. Arama's approach is the more convincing.</fn> <multilink><a href=" | + | <multilink><a href="RalbagBemidbar32-1-24" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar32-1-24" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 32:1-24</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32" data-aht="source">Akeidat Yitzchak</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32" data-aht="source">85</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-2" data-aht="source">85: (2)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-3" data-aht="source">85: (3)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-4" data-aht="source">85: (4)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-5" data-aht="source">85: (5)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-6" data-aht="source">85: (6)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-7" data-aht="source">85: (7)</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbar32-8" data-aht="source">85: (8)</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Arama (Akeidat Yitzchak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Arama</a></multilink>,<fn>See also R" Samet, <a href="http://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%9E%D7%98%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%93%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99-%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%94-%D7%9C%D7%91%D7%A0%D7%99-%D7%92%D7%93-%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%91%D7%A0%D7%99-%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%95%D7%91%D7%9F">דברי משה לבני גד ולבני ראובן</a> who does an extensive analysis of the opposing positions of R. Yitzchak Arama and Abarbanel, concluding that R. Arama's approach is the more convincing.</fn> <multilink><a href="TzerorHaMorBemidbar32" data-aht="source">R. Avraham Saba</a><a href="TzerorHaMorBemidbar32" data-aht="source">Tzeror HaMor Bemidbar 32</a><a href="R. Avraham Saba (Tzeror HaMor)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Saba (Tzeror HaMor)</a></multilink>,  <multilink><a href="NetzivBemidbar32-6" data-aht="source">Netziv</a><a href="NetzivBemidbar32-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 32:1</a><a href="NetzivBemidbar32-6" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 32:6</a><a href="NetzivBemidbar32-13" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 32:13</a><a href="NetzivBemidbar32-16-23" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 32:16-23</a><a href="NetzivDevarim3-12" data-aht="source">Devarim 3:12</a><a href="NetzivDevarim3-16" data-aht="source">Devarim 3:16</a><a href="R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin (Netziv)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin</a></multilink> |
</mekorot> | </mekorot> | ||
<point><b>"אַל תַּעֲבִרֵנוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן"</b> – According to this approach, these words betray the tribes' desire not to join in the Conquest.<fn>Malbim explains that the two halves of the verse represent distinct requests. First Reuven and Gad ask to settle on the eastern side of the Jordan (יֻתַּן אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת לַעֲבָדֶיךָ לַאֲחֻזָּה) and then they add a second request, that they not participate in the Conquest (אַל תַּעֲבִרֵנוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן).</fn></point> | <point><b>"אַל תַּעֲבִרֵנוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן"</b> – According to this approach, these words betray the tribes' desire not to join in the Conquest.<fn>Malbim explains that the two halves of the verse represent distinct requests. First Reuven and Gad ask to settle on the eastern side of the Jordan (יֻתַּן אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת לַעֲבָדֶיךָ לַאֲחֻזָּה) and then they add a second request, that they not participate in the Conquest (אַל תַּעֲבִרֵנוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן).</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>What is wrong with the request?</b> These sources maintain that the request was problematic both on the interpersonal level, and in relation to Hashem.<br/> | <point><b>What is wrong with the request?</b> These sources maintain that the request was problematic both on the interpersonal level, and in relation to Hashem.<br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li><b>Unfair burden</b> – | + | <li><b>Unfair burden</b> – Netziv present Moshe as emphasizing the injustice of Reuven and Gad's request vis-a-vis the other tribes.<fn>This is what emerges from Moshe's opening question, "הַאַחֵיכֶם יָבֹאוּ לַמִּלְחָמָה וְאַתֶּם תֵּשְׁבוּ פֹה"?</fn>  Given that the lands of Sichon and Og had been conquered by the united effort of all the tribes, for two of the tribes to now claim for themselves the fruits of that combined effort and to leave to the others, alone, the burden of conquering Canaan was presumptuous and immoral.<fn>When the other tribes would see their brothers already settled safe and sound while they yet faced long and dangerous struggles, they would be filled with jealousy, leading to divisiveness amongst the nation.</fn></li> |
<li><b>Demoralizing the tribes</b> – The tribes' decision not to join the campaign would further have a damaging psychological effect on the rest of the nation who would naturally conclude that their non-participation stemmed from fear and lack of trust in Hashem. This would, in turn, weaken the nation's own morale.  Moshe justifiably sees in their words a potential repetition of the episode of the spies whose fear had been contagious.<fn>R"E Samet points out that Moshe intentionally uses the same language ("וְלָמָּה [תְנִיאוּן] (תנואון) אֶת לֵב בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל") when speaking of Reuven and Gad's actions as when describing the sin of the spies, ("וַיָּנִיאוּ אֶת לֵב בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל").  In so doing, he emphasizes how the two sins are identical.</fn></li> | <li><b>Demoralizing the tribes</b> – The tribes' decision not to join the campaign would further have a damaging psychological effect on the rest of the nation who would naturally conclude that their non-participation stemmed from fear and lack of trust in Hashem. This would, in turn, weaken the nation's own morale.  Moshe justifiably sees in their words a potential repetition of the episode of the spies whose fear had been contagious.<fn>R"E Samet points out that Moshe intentionally uses the same language ("וְלָמָּה [תְנִיאוּן] (תנואון) אֶת לֵב בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל") when speaking of Reuven and Gad's actions as when describing the sin of the spies, ("וַיָּנִיאוּ אֶת לֵב בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל").  In so doing, he emphasizes how the two sins are identical.</fn></li> | ||
− | <li><b>Rejection of the Land/God</b> – Akeidat Yitzchak further | + | <li><b>Rejection of the Land/God</b> – R. Avraham Saba and Akeidat Yitzchak further suggest that the tribes' request betrayed a rejection of and disdain for the Promised Land.<fn>This could explain why Moshe repeatedly emphasizes that the land that they reject is "הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נָתַן לָהֶם י"י."</fn>  Like the spies before them, these tribes sinned in that  "וַיִּמְאֲסוּ בְּאֶרֶץ חֶמְדָּה".‎<fn>See <a href="Tehillim106-24-26" data-aht="source">Tehillim 106:24</a>.</fn>  Netziv adds that the petition also suggests that they had no desire for God's providence which was strongest in Israel proper.</li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Status of the Eastern bank of the Jordan</b></point> | <point><b>Status of the Eastern bank of the Jordan</b></point> | ||
− | <point><b>The root of the problem: materialism</b> – | + | <point><b>The root of the problem: materialism</b> – Akeidat Yitzchak and R. Saba, following <a href="BemidbarRabbah22-6" data-aht="source">Bemidbar Rabbah</a>,<fn>See also <multilink><a href="RashiBemidbar32-16" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBemidbar32-7" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 32:7</a><a href="RashiBemidbar32-16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 32:16</a><a href="RashiDevarim1-4" data-aht="source">Devarim 1:4</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>.</fn> interpret the emphasis by the text on the abundance of cattle owned by Reuven and Gad<fn>The word "מִקְנֶה" appears four times in the first four verses of the chapter alone.  In addition, the formulation of the opening phrase of the chapter is unique in that it begins with the subject rather than a verb ("וּמִקְנֶה רַב הָיָה לִבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן וְלִבְנֵי גָד" rather than "ויהי מקנה רב..."), further directing the reader’s attention to the two tribes’ accumulated wealth.  R"E Samet (ibid) also points out that the text's choice of the root קנה further focuses the reader on the quality of possession. Moshe, in contrast, prefers to use different language, and speaks instead of the tribes' "צאן".</fn> as evidence of their materialism.  They wrongly placed greater value on their wealth than on the spiritual importance of living in the sanctity of Eretz Yisrael.<fn><multilink><a href="BemidbarRabbah22-6" data-aht="source">Bemidbar Rabbah</a><a href="BemidbarRabbah22-6" data-aht="source">22:6</a><a href="Bemidbar Rabbah" data-aht="parshan">About Bemidbar Rabbah</a></multilink> even suggests that these misplaced priorities were the reason they were first to be exiled.</fn></point> |
− | <point><b>An indirect request</b> – There are several hints in the text that tribes might have | + | <point><b>An indirect request</b> – There are several hints in the text that tribes might have on their own sensed that their petition was problematic,leading to a certain hesitation on their presentation:<br/> |
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li>"עֲטָרוֹת וְדִיבֹן וְיַעְזֵר" –The unconventional manner through which Reuven and Gad present their request, listing the names of the cities without first providing the general context of their request, suggests that the tribes were "beating around the bush", and only indirectly hinting to their petition.<fn>See Y. Rosenson, עיונים בפרשניים בספר במדבר‎, (Jerusalem, 2004): 397 who makes this point.</fn></li> | + | <li><b>"עֲטָרוֹת וְדִיבֹן וְיַעְזֵר"</b> –The unconventional manner through which Reuven and Gad present their request, listing the names of the cities without first providing the general context of their request, suggests that the tribes were "beating around the bush", and only indirectly hinting to their petition.<fn>See Y. Rosenson, עיונים בפרשניים בספר במדבר‎, (Jerusalem, 2004): 397 who makes this point.</fn></li> |
− | <li>"וַיֹּאמְרוּ... וַיֹּאמְרוּ" – The phenomenon of the "double ויאמר" of verse 5,<fn>Though the text introduces the tribes' speech in verse two with the word "וַיֹּאמְרוּ", verse 5 seemingly needlessly once again opens "וַיֹּאמְרוּ" despite the fact that no one else speaks in the interim. This textual phenomenon might indicate a break in the continuity of the conversation, in this case a pause in which the tribes are expecting a response by Moshe.   Another example of the phenomenon can be found in Bereshit 16 where three verses in a row open, "'ה‎ וַיֹּאמֶר לָהּ מַלְאַךְ".  There, too, one might posit that the angel had been hoping for a response from Hagar; getting none, he was forced to continue talking.</fn> might further suggest that the tribes had paused, hoping for Moshe to respond without the need for them to make their request explicit. When no reaction is forthcoming they are left with no choice but to state their request outright.</li> | + | <li><b>"וַיֹּאמְרוּ... וַיֹּאמְרוּ" </b>– The phenomenon of the "double ויאמר" of verse 5,<fn>Though the text introduces the tribes' speech in verse two with the word "וַיֹּאמְרוּ", verse 5 seemingly needlessly once again opens "וַיֹּאמְרוּ" despite the fact that no one else speaks in the interim. This textual phenomenon might indicate a break in the continuity of the conversation, in this case a pause in which the tribes are expecting a response by Moshe.   Another example of the phenomenon can be found in Bereshit 16 where three verses in a row open, "'ה‎ וַיֹּאמֶר לָהּ מַלְאַךְ".  There, too, one might posit that the angel had been hoping for a response from Hagar; getting none, he was forced to continue talking.</fn> might further suggest that the tribes had paused, hoping for Moshe to respond without the need for them to make their request explicit. When no reaction is forthcoming they are left with no choice but to state their request outright.</li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>"הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הִכָּה י"י"</b> – Akeidat Yitzchak points out that throughout the negotiations, the two tribes never mention Hashem except once, when they refer to the land that they desire as "הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הִכָּה י"י לִפְנֵי עֲדַת יִשְׂרָאֵל".  He reads this as their attempt to neutralize any accusations that it is unfair of them to take land that all the tribes risked their lives to attain. Reuven and Gad point out that since it was really  Hashem who conquered the land, there is no ethical problem in their request.</point> | <point><b>"הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הִכָּה י"י"</b> – Akeidat Yitzchak points out that throughout the negotiations, the two tribes never mention Hashem except once, when they refer to the land that they desire as "הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הִכָּה י"י לִפְנֵי עֲדַת יִשְׂרָאֵל".  He reads this as their attempt to neutralize any accusations that it is unfair of them to take land that all the tribes risked their lives to attain. Reuven and Gad point out that since it was really  Hashem who conquered the land, there is no ethical problem in their request.</point> | ||
Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
<li><b>לֹא נָשׁוּב אֶל בָּתֵּינוּ עַד הִתְנַחֵל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל</b> – The Netziv  explains that the tribes even offer to wait until after the distribution of the lands, so that no one can accuse of them of being able to work their property before others have inherited.</li> | <li><b>לֹא נָשׁוּב אֶל בָּתֵּינוּ עַד הִתְנַחֵל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל</b> – The Netziv  explains that the tribes even offer to wait until after the distribution of the lands, so that no one can accuse of them of being able to work their property before others have inherited.</li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Why does Moshe agree</b></point> | + | <point><b>Why does Moshe agree</b><ul> |
− | <point><b>Moshe's rephrasing of the request</b> – According | + | <li>According to Ralbag and the Netziv, as the tribes revised proposal addressed all of Moshe's concerns, he acquiesced to the request.</li> |
+ | <li>However, according to R. Saba and Akeidat Yitzchak, who maintain that the request was a rejection of the land, the tribes' agreement to fight with their brothers should not have sufficed.</li> | ||
+ | </ul></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>Moshe's rephrasing of the request</b> – According to the Akeidat Yitzchak and the Netziv, Moshe rephrases the request because despite the tribes' revised proposal, there were still several lessons that they needed to be taught <br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li>לִפְנֵי י"י – | + | <li>לִפְנֵי י"י – Akeidat Yitchak asserts that Moshe's repeated mephaisi on Hashem is a reaction to the fact that</li> |
− | <li> | + | <li> עָרִים לְטַפְּכֶם""</li> |
− | <li> | + | <li>  לְטַפְּכֶם... לְצֹנַאֲכֶם</li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
+ | <point><b>Integrating the revisions</b></point> | ||
<point><b>Menashe</b></point> | <point><b>Menashe</b></point> | ||
<point><b>Moshe as leader</b></point> | <point><b>Moshe as leader</b></point> |
Version as of 14:31, 7 January 2017
Petition of the Two and a Half Tribes
Exegetical Approaches
Moshe Judges Correctly
Moshe correctly inferred that Reuven and Gad did not intend to join the campaign against Canaan and viewed this as sinful, justifying his outburst.
- Unfair burden – Netziv present Moshe as emphasizing the injustice of Reuven and Gad's request vis-a-vis the other tribes.3 Given that the lands of Sichon and Og had been conquered by the united effort of all the tribes, for two of the tribes to now claim for themselves the fruits of that combined effort and to leave to the others, alone, the burden of conquering Canaan was presumptuous and immoral.4
- Demoralizing the tribes – The tribes' decision not to join the campaign would further have a damaging psychological effect on the rest of the nation who would naturally conclude that their non-participation stemmed from fear and lack of trust in Hashem. This would, in turn, weaken the nation's own morale. Moshe justifiably sees in their words a potential repetition of the episode of the spies whose fear had been contagious.5
- Rejection of the Land/God – R. Avraham Saba and Akeidat Yitzchak further suggest that the tribes' request betrayed a rejection of and disdain for the Promised Land.6 Like the spies before them, these tribes sinned in that "וַיִּמְאֲסוּ בְּאֶרֶץ חֶמְדָּה".7 Netziv adds that the petition also suggests that they had no desire for God's providence which was strongest in Israel proper.
- "עֲטָרוֹת וְדִיבֹן וְיַעְזֵר" –The unconventional manner through which Reuven and Gad present their request, listing the names of the cities without first providing the general context of their request, suggests that the tribes were "beating around the bush", and only indirectly hinting to their petition.11
- "וַיֹּאמְרוּ... וַיֹּאמְרוּ" – The phenomenon of the "double ויאמר" of verse 5,12 might further suggest that the tribes had paused, hoping for Moshe to respond without the need for them to make their request explicit. When no reaction is forthcoming they are left with no choice but to state their request outright.
- וַאֲנַחְנוּ נֵחָלֵץ חֻשִׁים – According to these sources, these words constitute a revised plan, meant to address and allay Moshe's concerns. The tribes concede the need to fight with the nation, and even commit to going first, thus alleviating any idea that they were motivated by fear.
- גִּדְרֹת צֹאן נִבְנֶה לְמִקְנֵנוּ פֹּה וְעָרִים לְטַפֵּנוּ – Netziv adds that this point, too, is meant to assuage Moshe's worry that they do not trust in Hashem or His providence. The tribes point out that they are willing to leave their children behind because they have faith that Hashem will protect them.
- לֹא נָשׁוּב אֶל בָּתֵּינוּ עַד הִתְנַחֵל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל – The Netziv explains that the tribes even offer to wait until after the distribution of the lands, so that no one can accuse of them of being able to work their property before others have inherited.
- According to Ralbag and the Netziv, as the tribes revised proposal addressed all of Moshe's concerns, he acquiesced to the request.
- However, according to R. Saba and Akeidat Yitzchak, who maintain that the request was a rejection of the land, the tribes' agreement to fight with their brothers should not have sufficed.
- לִפְנֵי י"י – Akeidat Yitchak asserts that Moshe's repeated mephaisi on Hashem is a reaction to the fact that
- עָרִים לְטַפְּכֶם""
- לְטַפְּכֶם... לְצֹנַאֲכֶם
Moshe Misjudges
Moshe misunderstood the request of Reuven and Gad and assumed that they did not want to participate in the conquest, when in reality the tribes had always intended to battle with the rest of the nation.
- "וּמִקְנֶה רב"– According to this approach, the introductory verse of the chapter with its focus on the word "מקנה",16 might simply be Tanakh's confirmation of the truth of tribes' claim and not meant as a negative value judgement of their materialism.17 Similarly the tribes' own repeated mention of their cattle might simply reflect the reality of their situation which prompted their request.18
- Enumeration of cities – The strange opening of the tribes' request19 need not be read as evidence that the tribes were purposely indirect, knowing that they were to make a problematic request. Rather, they might have been attempting to highlight the potential danger of having many uninhabited cities on the border of Canaan. If they were to remain unoccupied, they would have soon been inhabited by enemy populations on Canaan’s doorstep.20 Thus, the tribes might be implying that by settling these lands and cities, they would serve as a ring of defense for the Israelites.
- Ramban posits that Menashe had not been part of the original negotiations. However, after agreeing to Reuven and Gad's request, Moshe realized that the land was too vast for just two tribes and offered a portion to anyone who wished to join.31 Machir and Gilad agreed and conquered their own territory.
- A commentary on Chronicles attributed to a student of Saadia Gaon, in contrast, claims that the sons of Menashe had actually conquered the territories mentioned in verses 39-42 much earlier, while their grandfather, Yosef, was still a vizier in Egypt. If so, it is possible that now that Moshe was apportioning the land, he honors their claims and right to settle there as well.32
Moshe Had it Right!
The two Tribes’ original request had two components: one explicit, to receive their portion on the eastern side of the Jordan and one implied, that they would not be participating in the conquest. According to several sources, Moshe correctly inferred that R&G did not intend to join the campaign and saw this as an immediate threat to the success of the Conquest. By comparing their request to the Spies, Moshe is expressing his indignation that they would prefer to settle outside the borders that G-d had chosen for them. Therefore, his harsh response was justified.
- Moshe's indignant exclamation "ה,33"הַאַחֵיכֶם יָבֹאוּ לַמִּלְחָמָה וְאַתֶּם תֵּשְׁבוּ פֹ and his comparison to the Spies, implies and warns of the damaging psychological effect upon the other tribes, seeing their brothers already settled safe and sound while they yet faced long and dangerous struggles. This is elaborated by Philo. Following Bemidbar Rabbah, that likens R&G to the rebellious Korach34, commentaries, such as, Rashi, and the Malbim, note that this situation, would weaken their morale and create jealousy and divisiveness35.
- The Netziv points out that given how the lands of Sichon and Og had been conquered by the united effort of all the tribes, for two of the tribes to now claim for themselves the fruits of that combined effort and to leave to the others, alone, the burden of conquering Canaan was presumptuous and immoral.
- By their preference for land outside the boundaries of Canaan,Tzeror HaMor and Akeidat Yitzchak accuse R&G of being guilty of,וימאסו בארץ חמדה36 , that will further demoralize the rest of the Tribes.The promise of the Land is a central element of every revelation by G-d to all the Avot and is a component of the Birkat Avraham that accompanies and guides the Bnei Yisrael through their bondage and exodus from Egypt, and their wandering through the Wilderness. All the references to the Land, beginning with the promises to the Avot, speak of “the land of Canaan” which in the days of Moshe had a particular geographic referent. While its north-south borders were never considered definitive "מִנְּהַר מִצְרַיִם עַד הַנָּהָר הַגָּדֹל נְהַר פְּרָת",37 the natural borders of the Mediteranean Sea and Jordan River, determined its east-west limits. It did not include the lands east of the Jordan. For those situated on the east side of the Jordan, it was always, “when you will cross the Jordan”. And so, G-d said to Moshe while he was on the east side of the Jordan, "וְהָיָה בַּיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר תַּעַבְרוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר י"י אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לָךְ"38 that is, the Land that G-d gives you as an inheritance is on the west side.39
- Moshe fears that settlement of R&G outside of Canaan would be considered by G-d as a grievous sin, resulting in some sort of collective punishment just as it was in the case of the Spies,or perhaps as the Netziv suggests, an extension of the Spies' punishment of wandering the desert.
- Bemidbar Rabbah followed by Rashi, Tzeror HaMor , and the Akeidat Yitzchak, interpret the emphasis by the text of the abundance of cattle owned by R&G as a demonstration of their wrongly placed greater value on their material wealth than the spiritual importance of living in the sanctity and under the special providence of Eretz Yisrael. Bemidbar Rabbah condemns their misplaced priorities and see that as the reason they were first to be exiled.
- The Tribes' wealth40 and military victories over Sichon, Og and Midian may have had generated a sense of over confidence. The fact that this generation were not newly liberated slaves, but rather, had attained a certain degree of independence and self-sufficiency during their stay in the wilderness, may have further strengthened their self confidence. According to Akeidat Yitzchak, this situation might have lead to a sense of כֹּחִי וְעֹצֶם יָדִי and a lack of trust in G-d. This might explain their willingness to live alone in territories that were exposed to incursions and that lacked the natural defenses of Canaan41.
- In response to Moshe’s outrage, R&G now propose to send a military force, "נֵחָלֵץ חֻשִׁים" to serve as a vanguard to help the tribes conquer Canaan, and not to return to their families until each of the tribes have received their portion in Canaan, עַד אֲשֶׁר אִם הֲבִיאֹנֻם אֶל מְקוֹמָם...עַד הִתְנַחֵל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אִישׁ נַחֲלָתוֹ" 42". Seforno and Spero43 suggest, that while strict authoritarianism would require that Moshe stick to the Divine plan and insist that the R&G settle in Canaan, Moshe had to weigh the possibility of popular rebellion, as was the case of Korach44 and the Ma’apilim45, if he refuses their request. As a sort of “lame duck” leader at this time, it would have been much more difficult to assert his authority. The immediate, positive gain of R&G’s willingness to send their men as a vanguard force, outweighed the possible negative.
- In regard to the question of: Did Moshe consult with G-d before he accepted their proposal? From the wordsאֵת אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר י"י "" 46, it would appear that Moshe did receive Divine sanction for the agreement, affirmed by Moshe in Arvot Moav, י"י אֱלֹהֵיכֶם נָתַן לָכֶם אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת לְרִשְׁתָּהּ, and later by Yehoshua, יָּשֻׁבוּ וַיֵּלְכוּ בְּנֵי רְאוּבֵן וּבְנֵי גָד וַחֲצִי שֵׁבֶט הַמְנַשֶּׁה מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִשִּׁלֹה אֲשֶׁר בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן לָלֶכֶת אֶל אֶרֶץ הַגִּלְעָד אֶל אֶרֶץ אֲחֻזָּתָם אֲשֶׁר נֹאחֲזוּ בָהּ עַל פִּי י"י בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה.47
- Moshe’s critical, yet calculated response is an example of crisis management and damage control aimed to educate and ensure for smooth implementation of the agreement under Yehoshua, as described by Philo, Akeidat Yitzchak, Malbim and Samet48. These commentaries explain how only after Moshe's passionate and critical reaction, do the two Tribes take council with each other, modify their request with a generous counter proposal and the tension is diffused. Here, Moshe demonstrated seasoned leadership and good judgment.
- In order to further strengthen the legality of the agreement, Moshe spells out the terms of the condition: If you will do this thing…..and if you will not do so….. This is referred to in the Talmudic literature as תנאי בני גד ובני ראובן, which is the prototype for a condition to have legal standing 49. According to Chanina ben Gamliel50, the double condition is necessary to clarify that the Tribes' will not loose their right to a portion in Canaan, in the situation that they do not keep their side of the bargain.
- It would appear that the agreement was solemnized by the Tribes taking an oath, as it says, וִהְיִיתֶם נְקִיִּם מֵי"י וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל 51. Moshe then, brings the agreement before Elazar HaCohen, Yehoshua and the heads of the Matot, the same judicial bodies that will supervise the Conquest and portioning of the land in Canaan. The successful completion of the Tribe's mission and the fulfillment of the agreement will take place 14 years later, as described in Yehoshua 22.
- According to this approach that the very request of R&G was offensive and which triggered Moshe’s harsh response, how do we understand what seems to be Moshe’s unsolicited offer to settle clans from Menashe in Eiver Hayarden? Based on the chronology of the tribe of Menashe52, the sons of Menashe , were probably not alive when the Bnei Yisrael were about to enter Canaan! A commentary on Chronicles, attributed to a student of Saadia Gaon, claims that the sons of Menashe had temporarily conquered some territories in Eiver Hayarden much earlier, while their grandfather, Yosef,was still a vizier in Egypt. It is these earlier conquests that are referred to in verses 39,41,42. Now that these lands had been “liberated”, Moshe honored their claims to the land and their right to settle there.53
- וּמִקְנֶה רַב הָיָה לִבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן וְלִבְנֵי גָד עָצוּם מְאֹד וַיִּרְאוּ אֶת אֶרֶץ יַעְזֵר וְאֶת אֶרֶץ גִּלְעָד וְהִנֵּה הַמָּקוֹם מְקוֹם מִקְנֶה -The introductory words of the chapter that begin with the subject (and not a verb),already set the tone and direct the reader’s attention to the Tribes’ accumulated wealth. Samet 54points out that the root קנ"ה that is mentioned twice in the introduction and twice in the Tribes’ first conversation55 -focuses on the quality of possession/aquisition. Moshe avoids that subject-except when he uses a substitute word צנאכם56.
- עֲטָרוֹת וְדִיבֹן וְיַעְזֵר וְנִמְרָה וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן וְאֶלְעָלֵה וּשְׂבָם וּנְבוֹ וּבְעֹן.-Rosenson57 suggests that the unconventional manner that R&G present their request by listing the names of the cities without providing their general context, and the hesitant, hinting manner of verses 4,5-as if “beating around the bush", suggests that they themselves sense that their request is problematic.
- הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הִכָּה י"י –Akeidat Yitzchak contends that the only mention of G-d by R&G in their initial request was perhaps an attempt to neutralize any accusation that they were acting immorally by taking for themselves, land conquered by a joint effort of all Bnei Yisrael. Their implicit argument is that these lands were primarily conquered through the help of G-d..and so, too, will Canaan be conquered with Divine intervention.
- The repetition of the word ויאמרו while in the middle of an uninterrupted conversation, that began in verse 2, is a textual phenomenon that might indicate a break in the continuity of the conversation that will have an impact on the 2nd half of the conversation. Samet58 suggests how Moshe’s lack of a response- his “deafening silence” (symbolized by the פרשה סתומה) is the break that will cause the Tribes to present their request in a straightforward way, יֻתַּן אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת לַעֲבָדֶיךָ לַאֲחֻזָּה אַל תַּעֲבִרֵנוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן".59."
- להניע-להניא-להניח60 - Samet61 shows how Moshe’s play on verbs further connects the two Tribes’ and the Spies’ respective sins and punishments with each other.
- וַיִּרְאוּ אֶת אֶרֶץ - refers to R&G’s laying eyes on Eiver Hayarden, reminds us of Moshe’s instructions to the Spies, וראיתם את הארץ62". People see the same scene through different lens. R&G saw Eiver Hayarden through the lens of self-interest, while the Spies were told by Moshe to see it in all its promising possibilities.
- אל הארץ אשר נתן להם ה and...את האדמה אשר נשבעתי לאברהם ליצחק וליעקב-By referring to Canaan as the Promised land, three times in his first response, Moshe is insinuating that the Tribes’ preference for Eiver Hayarden is misplaced.
- לבני ראובן ולבני גד...בני גד ובני ראובן.. According to Chizkuni, Ibn Ezra and Ramban, because of their greater wealth and military prowess, the tribe of Gad, were the initiators of the plan and therefore, are listed first throughout the chapter, except for the introductory verse-out of respect for Reuven, the biological Bechor. The Netziv supports this claim from the text that describes Reuven's holdings as רב, whereas, Gad's were עצום מאד.
- כִּי בָאָה נַחֲלָתֵנוּ אֵלֵינוּ -According to Rashi (as understood by the Ramban), this sounds somewhat arrogant, as if to say that it was a “done deal”, before the negotiation was over.
- וַיִּגְּשׁוּ אֵלָיו- Akeidat Yitzchak and the Malbim understand that Moshe’s harsh response, surprised R&G. They now drew closer to Moshe, and primarily to him, offered their modified proposal-perhaps out of a sense of embarrassment ( symbolized by the פרשה סתומה).
- עבדיך...אדני...עבדיך...אדני- The multiple expressions of humility reflect their attempt to ease the tension.
- גִּדְרֹת צֹאן נִבְנֶה לְמִקְנֵנוּ פֹּה וְעָרִים לְטַפֵּנוּ. -In their revised version, R&G suggest that they will settle the Eastern Jordan, where they will build fences for their livestock and then, cities for their children, to which Bemidbar Rabbah comments, שעשו את העיקר טפל ואת הטפל עיקר. Following the midrash, Rashi points out that Moshe’s 2nd response will correct their faulty order of priorities,"בְּנוּ לָכֶם עָרִים לְטַפְּכֶם וּגְדֵרֹת לְצֹנַאֲכֶם". By their third response, R&G will integrate this lesson," טַפֵּנוּ נָשֵׁינוּ מִקְנֵנוּ וְכׇל בְּהֶמְתֵּנוּ".
- לפני הי- In contrast to R&Gs’ counter proposal which did not mention G-d, Moshe invokes G-d’s name 7 times in his response to their counter proposal (20-23). The Akeidat Yitzchak point outs that Moshe is using this opportunity to educate the Tribes, that their actions be לשם שמים, that is, that they are fighting not only in the name of G-d, but by doing so they may be assured of the help of G-d.
- הְיִיתֶם נְקִיִּם מֵי"י וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל... וְאִם לֹא תַעֲשׂוּן כֵּן הִנֵּה חֲטָאתֶם לַי"י- From these words we can infer that the Tribes took a solemn oath before G-d to keep their promise 63.
- וַיִּתֵּן לָהֶם מֹשֶׁה לִבְנֵי גָד וְלִבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן וְלַחֲצִי שֵׁבֶט מְנַשֶּׁה בֶן יוֹסֵף -Menashe’s lineage is mentioned here to legitimize their claim to lands in Eiver Hayarden, which according to the Book of Chronicles, took place during the life-time of Yosef 64.
Moshe Misjudges
According to this approach, R&G had every intention of participating with all Bnei Yisrael in the Conquest. The only meaning of "אַל תַּעֲבִרֵנוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן", bring us not over the Jordan”65, was in regard to settlement and inheritance. However, fueled by memories of the traumatic episode of the Spies, and all the damaging effects that it had on the morale of the Bnei Yisrael, Moshe concluded that they are refusing to participate in the Conquest, as he exclaims,"הַאַחֵיכֶם יָבֹאוּ לַמִּלְחָמָה וְאַתֶּם תֵּשְׁבוּ פֹה 66 "! Only after they are given the opportunity to clarify their original proposal, does Moshe reconsider and acquiesce. According to this view, the central problem of this chapter is with Moshe’s hasty, over reaction which leads to his misunderstanding the Tribes' request which may indicate a flaw in his leadership.
These wider concerns of R&G can be seen in the way they order the aspects of their clarified proposal. They first specify their intentions 1) to build fences for their livestock and cities for their children,2) to go first into battle as an expeditionary force and 3) to remain in Canaan until the land is apportioned among all the Tribes. As Josephus , Yosef Bekhor Shor and Chizkuni point out, this can be seen as an argument that their ability to fight effectively and remain in Canaan for an indefinite period, will be enhanced by their knowledge that their families and livestock are safely settled.
It may also be that Moshe was concerned about the possible dangers of the growing alienation between the tribes of the east and west of the Jordan. By positioning certain clans of the tribe of Menashe on Eiver Hayarden, this would enlist family and tribal ties that would connect the two communities separated by the Jordan78. The fact that their portion in Canaan was contiguous with their portion on the other side of the Jordan, would make them a good candidate for this task. The Moshav Zekeinim suggests that Moshe saw that the land in Eiver Hayarden was too vast for only Reuven and Gad to settle, and so for security reasons, offered a few clans from Menashe to join them. The Netziv points out that the tribe of Menashe was knowledgeable in the Torah tradition and would make them a valuable asset to the isolated communities in Eiver Hayarden. According to this approach, conquests by the descendants of Machir the son of Menashe in Gilead, took place as described in Bamidbar 32:39, after being invited by Moshe to join R&G in Eiver Hayarden. However, the text in Devarim 3:12-14 seems to imply that the conquests by the Menashe clans of portions of Gilead took place during the campaign of Sichon and Og. The Ramban suggests that the Menashe clans had hesitated to make any requests for settlement, however, once the tribes of Reuven and Gad took that bold step, the clans of Machir followed suit.
- וּמִקְנֶה רַב הָיָה לִבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן וְלִבְנֵי גָד עָצוּם מְאֹד וַיִּרְאוּ אֶת אֶרֶץ יַעְזֵר וְאֶת אֶרֶץ גִּלְעָד וְהִנֵּה הַמָּקוֹם מְקוֹם מִקְנֶה... וַיָּבֹאוּ בְנֵי גָד וּבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן- The Or HaChayyim understands that this introductory verse with its focus on the word "מקנה", presents the facts and the context, in a very matter of fact way, and not meant as a value judgement. The Tribes’ accumulated wealth, was a function of the military prowess of Reuven and especially Gad, whose reputation –accounts for his name listed first, in most of the chapter.
- עֲטָרוֹת וְדִיבֹן וְיַעְזֵר וְנִמְרָה וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן וְאֶלְעָלֵה וּשְׂבָם וּנְבוֹ וּבְעֹן. - Convention would have dictated first to give the general context before listing the names of cities. Samet79 points out that the verse’s strange sequence and the listing of all the cities, brings to focus the potential danger of many uninhabited cities on the border of Canaan80.
- הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הִכָּה י"י-The Abarbanel and Or HaChayyim claim that by referring to G-d’s help in the conquest of the lands of Sichon and Og, R&G are claiming that these lands of Eiver Hayarden have a special status- that they are looked upon favorably by G-d and are extension of the Promised Land.
- ויאמרו אל משה...ויאמרו אם מצאנו חן-The repetition of the word " ויאמרו" while in the middle of an uninterrupted conversation that began in verse 2, is a textual phenomenon that might indicate a break in the continuity of the conversation that will have an impact on the 2nd half of the conversation. Abarbanel suggests that Moshe’s lack of a response- his “deafening silence”-(symbolized by the פרשה סתומה) is the break that will cause the Tribes to present their request in a straightforward way, יֻתַּן אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת לַעֲבָדֶיךָ לַאֲחֻזָּה אַל תַּעֲבִרֵנוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן.81.
- וַיִּגְּשׁוּ אֵלָיו- The Abarbanel describes how they came closer to Moshe, as if to whisper in his ear, "במחילות כבודו”, as if to say, “pardon me, sir, but we have a misunderstanding, let’s clarify “ – as does Yehuda before Yosef 82.
- כִּי בָאָה נַחֲלָתֵנוּ אֵלֵינוּ - The Ramban implies that this is manner of speaking and not meant to be haughty.
- גדרות צאן נבנה למקננו פה וערים לטפנו....טפנו נשינו מקננוו וכל בהמתנו יהיו שם-The difference in the order of activities need not be a reflection of the Tribes’ misplaced priorities, but rather they represent different settlement strategies- according to the Kli Yakar83, to first build fences for the animals on the frontier, as a buffer,while according to the Chizkuni, to first secure the families.
- לִבְנֵי גָד וְלִבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן וְלַחֲצִי שֵׁבֶט מְנַשֶּׁה בֶן יוֹסֵף -Not being the sons of Yaakov, their tribal affiliation goes back to Yosef.