Shoftim, Chapter 2: Pinchas’s Rebuke and the Difference Between Hashem’s Command and His Will

Transcript

This Torah class is brought to you by TorahAnytime.com. The end of Perek Aleph, Malach elaborates on the parts of Eretz Yisrael which were not conquered, which Shvatim couldn't complete the job. It begins with pasuk chof-zayin all the way to pasuk lamed-vav, to the end of the perek. We have who did not conquer in Shoftim, Perek Aleph. We're holding now at the end of the first perek, and it's more or less repetition, pasuk after pasuk, of all the different parts and all the different Shvatim that couldn't complete, complete the yerushas ha'aretz. And in some cases, the Canaani remained, and yet they took them for taxation; they kept them there, vayihyu l'mas. And this is the actual introduction to Perek Beis. That's where Perek Beis takes over from, and that Klal Yisrael is being sent a navi to give them tochachah for not completing yerushas ha'aretz, for leaving over in Canaan different parts of the Canaani. Pasuk Aleph of Perek Beis: Vayaal malach Hashem min haGilgal el haBochim. Gilgal is a place, Bochim is a place, and the malach Hashem who here is going is a navi. And we soon will see from Rashi and Chazal who this novi was. He comes to Klal Yisroel with a mussar shmues, and that you're going to read at the end of pasuk aleph, beis, gimmel, that there's a mussar to Klal Yisroel: Hayitachein, hayitachein, hayitachein. You left over from the Knaanim. Ay, you were told, v'atem, pasuk beis, Lo sichrisu bris ליושבי הארץ. You were not supposed to make a treaty with them. You were supposed to annihilate them. Lo shamatem b'koli, ma zos asisem? How could you do this? Klal Yisroel hears the words of the malach, the novi, the mussar, and immediately, Vayisu ha'am es kolam vayivku, the end of pasuk daled. Vayeikra shem hamakom hahu Bochim, and so the name Bochim. So the place was called originally Bochim, but of course we know in Tanach that the names have to do with the future incidents that are going to take place in that place. So Bochim now is the reason we now understand why it was called Bochim, Vayizbachu sham laHashem, they shechted korban over there. Now, l'choira, what happened? What was taka the story that Klal Yisroel did not conquer? Why not? So poshut you learn that they couldn't. It had to do with lack of strength, lack of capability. They just weren't able to do it. So then what's the ta'ina? If we're discussing— If the problem is one of ones, it's one that they just couldn't do it, so how does it become a ta'ina? And the answer obviously is that it must have been a ta'ina that they could have done it, l'choira. So why didn't they do it? It's taka pshat. So the emes, we're going to have to really discuss what exactly did they do wrong. The pasuk seems to say, V'atem lo sichrus uvris l'yoshvei ha'aretz. You were not supposed to make a treaty. V'lo sh'ma'atem b'koli. You didn't listen to what I told you. So l'choira, the pashut pshat in the pasuk is you did make treaties with them. You were kores bris. Michlal lav, atah shomea hen. What you didn't do, because you were told to do this and you didn't do it, is mashma that what you were told you didn't do, and you were told to be not kores bris. The pasuk never told us in any of the pesukim of the end of perek aleph that they were kores bris. All it says is they didn't conquer, they didn't finish the yerusha. Vayehi l'mas, they even taxed them.

It doesn't say anywhere that they were kores bris with the Knaanim. So how and why does the pasuk seem to imply that that was the ta'ina? Really, okay. So the emes is, let me just tell you who asks the kasha, the Alshich asks the kasha, many after him and many before him. But the Alshich is mearech on this kasha. We don't find the kerisas bris. Someone will say that the fact that you let them live, vayi'u l'mas, and you take from them taxes, that's a type of kerisas bris. Maybe. It's a big discussion in halacha, and I don't want to go into the detail of it. I'll just take, b'mezak for prize value, the Alshich for a good kasha. But l'choira, the pasuk seems to say that they were kores bris, and that's the ta'ina, while the pesukim don't clearly state, the pesukim don't clearly write and tell us that they were kores bris. Hakeret, it seems that they weren't able to conquer, and they left them there b'di'eved, b'delezbreira. So first of all, loi bazoi was their ta'ina, and the answer is obviously you could have done more, you should have done more, but the kerisas bris is not in the pasuk unless you say, whole gufa, whole gufa the fact that you let them stay on in Eretz Yisroel and you take from them taxes, is nichlal in the issur of lo yischros lahem bris. Many want to say like this, many acharonim discuss. I would like to medayek in the pasuk, rabboisai, say something interesting. It never said that you weren't kores bris. All it says is, Va'atem lo yischrosu bris l'yoshvei ha'aretz hazos. V'loy shamatem b'koli. It didn't say you were koireres bris. It doesn't say that the issur was what you did, but I told you, loy sichru subris liyoshev ba'aretz, and you didn't listen. You weren't shomea b'koli, ma zois asisa? What did you do? Now we're going to discuss this a little bit more in great detail, that sometimes there's a tzivui, and sometimes there's things that are not clear in the tzivui, yeah, but that's what the Ribono Shel Olam wanted. In the pasuk, v'atem loy sichru subris, and if you notice it says, ma zois asisa. What did you do? What do you mean, what did you do? You didn't do — you were supposed to do. What's the lashon? They didn't make a bris. They did not. They did not. Well, so... What? They didn't make a bris. They did not. So my question is, what's the ta'ina? And the answer is, I told you not to make a bris. V'loy shamatem b'koli. Now let's discuss this a little bit. If you notice, the pesukim are very interesting. First of all, vayaal malach Hashem. Who is this malach Hashem? And why is he called the malach Hashem? Just tell me who the person was. Says the Eglei Rashi, b'shem Chazal, shaninu b'seder olam, zeh haya Pinchas. This malach is Pinchas. So Pinchas resurfaces. We know he resurfaces many times through his long life. Pinchas hu Eliyahu, through many, many geshichtes. In Tanach, as well as doros later, Pinchas resurfaces for different shlichusim, and this is one of them. So the pasuk, Vayaal malach Hashem, is Pinchas. Why is he called malach Hashem? And why dafka Pinchas was taken for this task? What's up with Pinchas? Why does Pinchas have to come? What's wrong with other neviim, and what's wrong with other manhigim? Yeshua is still alive. Vas eps is dafka been Pinchas, al tzadikim minavdem. So the Chazal tell us that every malach actually is called—I'm sorry, every navi is called malach Hashem. The Medrash says, it's a Medrash, Vayikra Rabbah, that it was Pinchas. V'lama kara oso malach? Because all neviim are nikra'im malachim. What? Okay. I know. So why do we need that the malach here—it's not always, it's not every place that there was a malach, a navi that comes, it's called a malach. Eppes, it's mudgash, it's stressed.

That it's a malach, a world's a malach, shebishaas shehoysa ruach hakodesh shorah on the navi, it's pono boires k'lapidim, ve'al hamalach, v'chein motzinu b'Chaggai. So why sometimes yeah and sometimes not? And why over here is there a hadgasha that the malach, the malach is the navi? And what's pshat? Why do we need Pinchas to resurface in this story for him to be the one to be chosen to say the nevuah? Now, rabosai, if pshatot of the pesukim, l'choira there's another shaila. What exactly is Gilgal? So the Radak says Gilgal happens to be the place where the nevuah came. Coincidence. So the malach is Pinchas, and the coincidence is that it's min haGilgal. Zogt the Radak, sham nimtza lei hanevuah. That's where the nevuah. So the story tells us, min haGilgal. Is there any significance? Is it important? L'choira not, right? L'choira, it just happens to be that he was in Gilgal. So what's pshat? Vayal, malach Hashem in Gilgal, he wasn't with them. Yeah, this is Pinchas. We're going to learn this, that Pinchas resurfaces. Throughout the history of Klal Yisrael, we're going to find that Pinchas resurfaces, and he keeps on coming back for different occasions. And the question is, is there a significance here that Pinchas is the one to come back? Even though you see this, you should stop, Hashem means this. That's what Pinchas did by... We're going to get that. Wait, wait. Okay, so let's see. Al kol panim, rabosai. What's the shmuyes that's being given here? So we have over here that it's Pinchas, it's Min haGilgal, Vayomer, a'aleh eschem miMitzrayim. What does the word a'aleh mean? I have, I will? Is it avar or osid, rabosai? It's osid. A'aleh. It should say, helesi, I brought you up. So the Radak and the Rabbag and the meforshim say it's interchangeable. Sometimes the avar and the osid in expression in lashon is interchangeable. So here it's supposed to be read a'aleh as if it says, I have. Interesting. Now, we know the pasuk sometimes tells us that the Ribbono Shel Olam was motzi. Sometimes it says in the pasuk, hama'aleh eschem, that the Ribbono Shel Olam has taken us out, elevated us from Mitzrayim. For example, by Shratzim it says that, hama'aleh eschem. So Chazal tell us it's there for a reason, the word ma'aleh. Why? Because shratzim is tumas Mitzrayim. Hama'aleh. So I've elevated you, and if it's only for this that I have taken you out, it was kedai. It's a lashon of ma'alah. Certain things, we left Mitzrayim, it's about a ma'alah. We're elevated out of the tumas Mitzrayim, as eison Chazal. Now here too, Vayomer a'aleh eschem. The shmuyes begins with the a'aleh. Is there a significance using the word a'aleh instead of just saying, I took you out? A'aleh means I've elevated you from. Mitzrayim is the chabroteh. Mitzrayim is the makom tumah, makom yerud. Ha'alah, I've elevated you. And Chazal, when the Torah uses that lashon, discuss that there's a reason why it says the word ma'alah, because certain things are a shailah of tumah and taharah. It's a certain degradation, these aveiros, so therefore it uses the word ma'alah. But how does it fit in over here, the word ha'alah? Maybe that's what he told them then when they went down to Mitzrayim. That what? Saying over, then before he went down to Mitzrayim, I said, I will bring you out of Mitzrayim, and... Okay, okay, okay. Saying over what was then. Okay. But you do admit that the Radak... Rabbi, I'll listen to every one, it's going to be one at a time. Yes, I hear. Icha banan the pshat is, maybe I like it better. What should I do? Every person has negius to what he thinks. Ich tracht pshat, maybe I do it best, maybe yours is better, but... so what's the ha'alah? Okay, yes. What do you want to bring out? Mitzrayim is a lower level, and the havayeis Mitzrayim as compared to Eretz Yisrael. You're right, but if that would be the case...

The Chazal wouldn't be bothered when the Torah writes Amalek. It's part of the mussar. For some reason, that's what I think. I think it's part of the mussar. You see, brilliant minds think alike. I agree with you. I think it's part of the mussar. They wanted to get rid of the Canaanim, and you should be on a higher level. So you should say the shiur next week, im yirtzeh Hashem. I'm going to tap you in that you should say. You're saying very good. Okay. Yes, what do you want to bring up? Good. And what does that have to do with this issue? I mean, they have a chiyuv to go be... to go and annihilate the Canaanim, so why does this become the issue? Just say, I took you out and I made a deal with you, and that's all, finished. I went to look a little bit. I see my cousin, Reb Yitzchok... my... the same shaylah. Choireh, the interesting... I... and Mitzrayim. It's a little out of context, knowing that the Torah bedavka sometimes writes, ... Mitzrayim. Anyways, v'havi'eschem el ha'aretz, I bring you to the land asher nishbati la'avoseichem, va'omar, and I told you, lo eifer brisi itchem l'olam. I won't, I won't be meifer the bris forever. Now how did this come into the conversation? I mean, if there's a chiyuv, I bring you into the land and I tell you that I want that you should do this mitzvah, and that is to annihilate and destroy and kill, and don't let lo yischayeh kol neshamah. So how did this become a chelek of the mussar? Va'omar, and I've said, lo eifer brisi itchem. I won't knock, I won't shlog up the treaty forever. V'zos hashaychus? The mitzvah, when the mitzvah was muzman tan, and dos nisht getan, the mitzvah, kumt oich mussar, and that's all. In the Midbar Gilgal, they first went into Eretz Yisrael. They traveled for sixty, so a number of mil, I know, sixty mils, and they went to Gilgal, and they made a bris over there. Okay, so let's discuss all this. So we're starting to find that there's a picture that's starting to formulate here: the malach, the bris, Gilgal, and what did they do wrong? V'lo shama'tem b'koli, ma zos asisem? What exactly was all the taina? Now, if you notice, something interesting also. When he gives them the mussar, Vayehi kedaber malach Hashem es hadvarim ha'eileh... You know, even pasuk gimmel, I think, is also a lot of... V'gam amarti, lo agaresh osam mipneichem, v'hayu lachem l'tzidim, v'loheihem l'mokeish. I told you that you will only have bad; it's only going to be a destructive force for you, all their avodah zaras. I told you a mitzvah and you didn't do it. What does this become the issue? V'hayu lachem l'tzidim, v'loheihem l'mokeish. They'll mitzvahs, they'll mitzvah; nishketan, they'll mitzvah; hafasas nishketan, they'll mitzvah. Why do we have to know all that rum and that rum? Why the Ribono Shel Olam was mitzaveh? How was that nogea so much? Anyways, Vayehi kedaber malach Hashem es hadvarim ha'eileh el kol Bnei Yisrael, Vayisu ha'am es kolo, vayifku. So it starts off that he spoke to the Bnei Yisrael. Vayisu ha'am es kolo. Why does it switch from the Bnei Yisrael to the am? Now, if you think this is not such a shtar, the Chazal always make this diyuk. Chazal tell us that sometimes Klal Yisroel is referred to as am, and sometimes Klal Yisroel is referred to as Bnei Yisroel. The Medrash Rabbah says that when it says Bnei Yisroel, it's shevach; it's Klal Yisroel when they're on a higher madreigah. And when Klal Yisroel is referred to as am, it's on a lower madreigah. So here in the parshas, we have, Vayehi kedaber Malach Hashem es hadvarim eileh el kol Bnei Yisroel, and then it switches to, Vayisa am es kolam vayifku. Why is the switch? And again, the meforshim are me'orer the she'eilah: why are they called am over here? So, haboisai, we're going to give back to all these she'eilos, but first I'd like to say a yesod. You know, Reb Elchonon Wasserman has a beautiful yesod. The Torah sometimes writes halachos, tzivuyim, mitzvos, and a person could theoretically keep Hashem's Torah. Could do it. But that's not exactly what the Ribono Shel Olam wanted. You could sometimes find heterim around the mitzvah that you weren't oiver the—

Yet, is that what the Rabbeinu Shleilam really wanted? He brings an interesting pasuk. The pasuk in Yirmiyah, perek yud tes: Uvanu es bamos haBaal lisrof es b'neihem ba'esh, olos laBaal, asher lo tzivisi, v'lo dibarti, v'lo alsa al libi. So there's three things the pasuk says, that I told you not to make: asher lo tzivisi, v'lo dibarti, v'lo alsa al libi. I told you not to do it. What's the three things? Says the Melchanan — it's in Kuntrus Divrei Sofrim, a very famous Reb Elchanan — Ki yesh shlosha chelkei Torah: there's sivui, there's dibur, but then there's she'eino lo tzivui v'lo dibur, ela l'ratzon Hashem, v'heim kol hamitzvos d'Rabbanan. You know what the d'Rabbanans are? The Rabbanan understood what the Rabbeinu Shleilam wanted. You know, for example, just to bring out one of the most simple and classic examples: muktzah. It's exactly how the Rambam explains to us muktzah, that in the Torah it says, L'maan yanuach. A person could theoretically not do lamed-tes melachos, but he didn't rest. Says the Rambam, perek chaf-hei, hata Rabbanan yekumin gemacht, az a mensch zol nisht אנדערן muktzah, noi bazois iz er mekayem l'maan yanuach. So the ratzon — the ratzon, if you want to put it in English, I would call it the spirit of the law — vas vil der Rabbeinu Shleilam. And he brings Reb Elchanan that that's what happened with Bilam. Bilam says, Leucha lavres pi Hashem. So was he over pi Hashem? No. He did exactly what the Eibishter... So what's the rishus of Bilam? Yeah, good, but you're right, I told you yet. You know what I want. You know that I didn't want you to go. So you went against the ratzon Hashem. Ayid, ayid, a visin, a tzvei zachen. Tzidad, al tzivui Hashem, and then there's the ratzon Hashem. Vos vil der Ribono Shel Olam? If you notice, V'atem lo sichru bris liyoshvei eretz hazois. What's the reason? There's a reason behind the issur of krisas bris im yoshvei haaretz. If you look at the Rishonim, the Rishonim tell us Eretz Yisrael is heilig. Eretz Yisrael is a makom kadosh. It's a makom raui la'avodah. Men ken shtaign in avodas Hashem ברוחניות. So if you have the Knaanim there, they're full of avodah zarah, which of course we all know avodah zarah leads to גילוי עריות, u'meimeila you must get rid of them. So even if you're not over the issur, even if maybe the issur wasn't there, but this is not what the Ribono Shel Olam wanted. Onte dozik the pasuk: V'atem lo sichru bris liyoshvei haaretz, mizbechoseihem titotzun, v'loy shematem. You didn't listen well b'koli, v'oscha b'gvul. When I made the tzivui, maybe you're right, you got away with the actual halacha. You're not. The kashya is, I weren't kores bris. Yavadi weren't kores bris, but did you do vasichav givalt? Is that what I had in mind when I made this issur avad and ish? And that's where the shmuyes comes from. The shmuyes comes from, Ma'ale eschem miMitzrayim, daltachlis fun Eretz Yisroel is geven a aleh, that you should be nis'aleh. Therefore I told you not to keep the akum over there. Avodas has to do, like you said so beautiful, the reason, the reason behind it. What is the reason behind the issur? The reason behind the issur is because Klal Yisroel, daf lebn in a platz vos is me'ulah, that it's elevated. And that's what it means, Asher nishbati la'avoseichem, v'omar lo'efer brisi itchem l'olam, etz Yisroel is about the bris between Klal Yisroel. He's going back. Forget the actual issur. We're not discussing the issur. We're going back to the bris. I made a bris in Eretz Yisroel. What was the bris? Bris is Klal Yisroel in kusher to...

B'rebeinu Shleimam. So even if, let's say, in the halacha you weren't oiver the issur, this is not what I had in mind. That's pshat. V'hoyu lachem l'tzidim v'lo heyim lachem l'mokesh. And that's why, Vayehi kedaber malach Hashem es hadvarim eileh el kol bnei Yisrael. He was talking to them, bnei Yisrael. This is what he's telling them, Klal Yisrael. You're going into Eretz Yisrael as Bnei Yisrael. Vayehi so am. That's where the am comes in. They understood that the chet, the mistake was that an am, they didn't realize they're coming to Eretz Yisrael with a purpose. It's with a higher meaning. It's not stam they're coming to conquer the land that was given to them b'yerushah. It's linked in them bris with the Ribono Shel Olam. Now I understand where Pinchas comes into the picture. It is Pinchas. Pinchas is malach habris. I don't know if you know, the Chasam Sofer always talks about it. When Pinchas comes to the bris, does he come as a person? Does he come as a malach? How does he come? He's called malach habris. What's pshat malach habris? Throughout the doros, Pinchas is the kanoi that's there to make sure Klal Yisrael isn't affiliated and assimilated with the goyim and the aveiros. That's what happened originally. Pinchas. Pinchas is the ta'ich that he fought when the Bnos Moav zonu. They broke into Klal Yisrael, into the ruchniyus of Klal Yisrael. So Pinchas' job becomes— L'doiros, Pinchas ben Elazar, he lives on, and that's why he's here called malach. His job over here is this malach habris, and that's why he talks about the bris. V'avi eschem el ha'aretz asher nishbati l'Avraham, l'Yitzchak, u'lYaakov, v'atem lo sichrusu bris l'yoshvei ha'aretz hazos. Pinchas, who is there to be shomer on the bris, is now the malach that's chosen to teach Klal Yisrael that they have a bris to be mekayem in Eretz Yisrael. Now I understand where Gilgal comes from. You know, Gilgal, the Radak brings down that originally Gilgal was the place where the aron and the Ohel Moed was. If you notice, Shaul becomes king. Shmuel tells him to make him king in Gilgal. Vayelchu ... Shmuel Aleph, perek yud aleph, pasuk tezvav, Vayelchu kol ha'am ha'Gilgal, vayamlichu sham es Shaul. Why Gilgal? So it says that over there was the aron and the Ohel Moed, the first place when they came to Eretz Yisrael. Lefikach, says the Radak, hayu mechabdin oisah hamakom. First place where the Ohel Moed and the—af al pi she'ata lo hayah sham ki im minoif. Later on it wasn't there. Originally this was the makom where the hashra'as haShechinah was when they came into Eretz Yisrael. So mimeila the idea was that Eretz Yisrael had to be conquered off an oifen that it's there for the Beis HaMikdash. So he sends him min hagilgul. The nevuah was given to Pinchas to go to Klal Yisrael to give them mussar from where? Min hagilgul, because they kept them. They kept them, the oysei haaretz. So you're right, in halacha maybe the issur of lo sischris bris, that that didn't apply. But the ... of having them, the ratzon Hashem. What was the ratzon Hashem? That they shouldn't be there because it'll be l'tzidim. Mimeila Eliyahu, Pinchas, little Eliyahu, malach habris, is there to me'orer Klal Yisrael on the inyan of the bris. You've just experienced another Torah class brought to you by TorahAnytime.com.