War With Midian?

 

article screenshot

The war with Midian – Why now?

The direct adjacency of Milchemet Midian and the story of B’nei Gad and Reuven tell us that we need to peer deeper.

.

Toward the beginning of Parshat Pinchas (Numbers/Bamidbar 25:16-18), Hashem commands Moshe to wage war against Midian in order to avenge the Midianites’ ensnaring of B’nei Yisrael (the Children of Israel) at Ba’ar Pe’or into severe public transgressions, which led to the deaths of 24,000 Jews – an incredibly painful and tragic episode that had just occurred. However, Hashem did not command that the battle with Midian actually occur until later, as presented in Parshat Matot (ibid. 31:1-54).

 

The Chizkuni explains that although the actionable command to wage Milchemet Midian, the war with Midian, was not given to Moshe until Parshat Matot, Hashem initially charged Moshe and B’nei Yisrael to wage Milchemet Midian in Parshat Pinchas in order to assuage the bereaved and shaken nation (with the apparent message that Midian would be defeated and B’nei Yisrael would move on and upward toward a better future). The Chizkuni’s remarks prompt a question in the reverse: Why did Milchemet Midian not occur at that juncture, directly after the calamitous incidents at Ba’al Pe’or? Why was Milchemet Midian postponed, as it were, until Parshat Matot?

Milchemet Midian immediately precedes the account of B’nei Gad and B’nei Reuven requesting settlement in Ever Ha-Yarden, the East Bank of the Jordan River. It seems that the juxtaposition of these two events – Milchemet Midian and settlement in Ever Ha-Yarden – bears a deep underlying message. In fact, the Torah’s language in these two narratives is striking. 

In Milchemet Midian, we read: “And Moshe told the nation: ‘Arm (“Heichaltzu”) men from among you…’” (ibid. 31:3), and in the account of B’nei Gad and B’nei Reuven do we read, “We will rapidly arm (‘nachalotz’) ourselves” (ibid. 32:17). The shoresh/Hebrew root word “chalatz” that is found in both texts rarely appears in the Torah and indicates a connection between these two events. (In fact, this same rare shoresh appears seven times in the story of B’nei Gad and B’nei Reuven; e.g., “We will pass armed (‘chalutzim’) before Hashem to the Land of Cana’an…” (ibid. 32:32), and it appears twice in the story of Milchemet Midian). 

It is also noteworthy that the Torah elaborates extensively regarding the details of the booty captured by B’nei Yisrael in Milchemet Midian – something that we do not find concerning the numerous possessions gained from the Egyptians at Yetzi’at Mitzrayim (the Exodus from Egypt) or at K’riat Yam Suf (the Splitting of the Sea); nor does the Torah devote particular attention to booty gleaned from any other battles fought by B'nei Yisrael. Similarly does the Torah elaborate extensively regarding the specific cities and tracts of land received and settled by B’nei Gad and B’nei Reuven (and half of Shevet Menashe) in Ever Ha-Yarden – something that we do not find in the Torah as pertains to any other Jewish settlement.

The direct adjacency of Milchemet Midian and the story of B’nei Gad and B’nei Reuven, and their resemblances, tell us that we need to peer deeper and derive important lessons.

Despite the similarities and juxtaposition of these two events, there is also stark contrast. Chazal indicate that B’nei Gad and B’nei Reuven placed an emphasis on material possessions; the fact that these shevatim (tribes) approached Moshe and began to enumerate the names of the lush pasture lands in Ever Ha-Yarden before even presenting to him their proposal to remain in Ever Ha-Yarden might further hint at this. However, even though Milchemet Midian involved a massive amount of material possessions, we read that a significant portion of these possessions were donated for holy purposes; we read as well how the Jewish warriors in Milchemet Midian were instructed to kasher and sanctify the metal vessels of booty which they brought back from the battle, and they needed to purify themselves and their clothing upon return from the battle. 

Pinchas the Kohen was sent to the battlefield as well, with the Aron Ha-Kodesh (Holy Ark), the Urim V’Tumim and the Tzitz - the sacred headband of the Kohen Gadol. (Rashi on ibid. 31:6, from Midrash) Milchemet Midian was a holy war in every sense of the word. (Chazal even elaborate about the punctilious mitzvah observance on the part of the Jewish soldiers who participated in Milchemet Midian.)

In contrast, B’nei Gad and B’nei Reuven were involved in a solely materialistic venture. These two shevatim viewed it as a practical necessity – they were not base, selfish people – yet a palpable aura of kedushah was not present in this endeavor. In fact, Chazal were critical of B'nei Reuven and B'nei Gad for their emphasis on material possessions, which caused these shevatim to settle outside of Eretz Yisrael, away from the rest of B’nei Yisrael, and which resulted in B'nei Reuven and B'nei Gad to be exiled first. (Bamidbar Rabba 22:7; Rashi from Tanchuma on Bamidbar 32:16)

By connecting the narrative of Milchemet Midian to the story of B’nei Gad and B’nei Reuven, the Torah is telling us that what might appear to be quite similar pursuits can be vastly different and almost polar opposites, all depending upon our motivations and values. The Torah presents what are essentially two tales of mass conquest back-to-back, in which material assets played a major role. We are bidden to consider the contrast in priorities in these events and to realize which approach is correct and reflects the highest ideals of the Torah. This is why the episode of Milchemet Midian and the story of B’nei Gad and B’nei Reuven are together, and why Milchemet Midian was delayed until this point. Furthermore, it is quite likely that Milchemet Midian was mandated to occur when it did, immediately before B’nei Gad and B’nei Reuven approached Moshe, so that these two shevatim would observe and derive from Milchmes Midian the proper perspective regarding the role of gashmiyut, material possessions. 

It is fascinating that even though it was not initially requested by them, Moshe allotted a large portion of land (the territories of Sichon and Og) in Ever Ha-Yarden to half of Shevet Menashe as well. Why is this? Although is true that Menashe was a massive tribe that needed a lot of land, why was Menashe so readily accorded territories in Ever Ha-Yarden, whereas Reuven and Gad had to debate Moshe and be subjected to rebuke before being accorded land there?

The decision to assign land in Ever Ha-Yarden to half of Shevet Menashe is discussed by some of the Meforshim (Commentators – v. Ramban and Chizkuni on ibid. 32:31), but perhaps a new interpretation can be suggested:

We read in Parshat Pinchas (Bamidbar 27:6-11) how B’not (the daughters of) Tzelofchad sought to inherit the land in Eretz Yisrael that their deceased father would have received. Chazal laud B’not Tzelofchad for their love of Eretz Yisrael (Chibat Ha-Aretz) and relate that these women derived this trait from their ancestor, Yosef, who likewise displayed a great love for Eretz Yisrael, as exhibited by his strong desire to be returned there for burial. (V. Rashi on ibid. 27:1.) Chazal connect B’not Tzelofchad with Yosef through their lineage, for B’not Tzelofchad were part of Shevet Menashe, who came from Yosef.

This story does not end here, for we read at the very end of Sefer Bamidbar (36:1-12) how Tzelofchad’s brethren, who were the heads of the family units of the house of Machir, son of Menashe, approached Moshe to request that the land to be inherited by their nieces, B’not Tzelofchad, remain in Shevet Menashe and not transfer to another shevet, should B’not Tzelofchad marry into other shevatim, whereupon the inheritance of their land upon their passing would normally be subject to transfer to heirs who were members of the shevatim of their husbands. 

Tzelofchad’s brethren who approached Moshe with this concern, similar to their nieces, were not interested in this land for its real estate value; rather, they too exhibited a profound Chibat Ha-Aretz, as direct progeny of Yosef, and sought for Shevet Menashe’s ancestral land in Eretz Yisrael to remain with their own shevet. Chibat Ha-Aretz was a strong family value, and it was robust and particularly conspicuous in Shevet Menashe. 

This explains why Moshe assigned land in Ever Ha-Yarden to half of Shevet Menashe - for Moshe wanted the neighbors and co-settlers of B’nei Gad and B’nei Reuven to be people who were teaming with Chibat Ha-Aretz, in order to try to infuse that entire Jewish territorial settlement with a greater sense of ruchniyus (spirituality) and connection with the Holy Land.

The message for us is that we must always seek spiritual elevation and use every opportunity in life to serve Hashem and find kedushah (holiness). We can approach our choice of home/real estate from a business perspective, or we can choose our place of residence based on spiritual considerations. This same calculus applies to every facet of our lives. 

Let us commit to cling to Hashem and His Torah as the animating factors in all that we do, and emulate the holy examples of Yosef and his progeny.

by Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer at https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/374088