Parashat Hukkat – 5785

A D’var Torah for Parashat Hukkat

By Rabbi Marge Wise (AJR ‘21)

As someone who has struggled with understanding the concept of s’khar v’onesh, reward and punishment in Judaism, I find in parashat Hukkat perhaps a partial answer. Volumes have been written about what Moshe may have done wrong in this parashah, why God reacted as He did, whether it was Divine punishment and if it was, what can we learn from it.

Although I’m tempted to discuss some other themes in this parashah – the parah ha-adumah, the red heifer, the effect on Moses of Miriam and Aaron’s death, the plague which killed 15,000 individuals and the copper serpent cure, I’m determined to remain faithful to the theme of Moses’ striking the rock – twice – and what follows, in the hope of gaining additional insights into the subject of reward and punishment.

I searched through many commentaries because I was unhappy with the focus on punishment for Moses’ act of hitting the rock. In using the word punishment, most of the commentaries seem to portray God as vindictive, which I don’t believe describes God. God wants us to revere Him but He also wants us to love Him. God is not going to excuse our being disrespectful and not following His teachings, but He is still a forgiving God, who is “slow to anger and abounding in loving kindness.”

What I’m getting at is that I was desperate to find another explanation for God’s decision not to allow Moses and Aaron to lead the people into the promised land – after the rock episode – that didn’t use the “p” word. I believe that there are consequences to our actions, for sure, but that is very different from what the word punishment implies. For the record, I really don’t like the word punishment in the first place. I prefer consequences but onesh is typically translated as punishment so I use it, sparingly.

I learned many years ago one basic answer to my question about how reward and punishment manifest themselves in Judaism – namely, that both come in olam haba, in the world-to-come, not in olam hazeh, not in this world. This may be in sync with what we all observe from time to time – that some individuals who seem to be good, caring, kind, generous people suffer in significant ways while others who appear to be selfish or dishonest or unkind, seem to “have it all.” This observation, however, doesn’t bring us closer to understanding the ramifications of Moses’ “sin.” While we’re on the subject of words, I also don’t like the word “sin”, hence my quotation marks. I find it to have a very Christian connotation, i.e. as in “original sin.”

To summarize my findings, this is what the commentaries say about Moses and Aaron not being allowed to lead the people into the promised land.

For Rashi, our frequently-quoted 11th century commentator: the decree of not being allowed to lead the Israelites into the promised land was because Moses hit the rock – God specifically wanted the people to witness that if an inanimate rock could heed the word of God, how much more should the people do so. Moses thwarted this opportunity for the people to glorify God. (Numbers 20:1,11,12)

Nahmanides’ – also an 11^th century rabbi – take is that using the stick was not the issue because God told Moses to take his stick, rather, it was that by Moses saying that they would bring forth water, he and Aaron negated that the miracle would come from God. Nahmanides cites the words “Because you did not believe in Me” – to indicate a lack of faith on Moses’ part as the problem, not his anger (Numbers 20:8) as Rashi posits.

Other opinions abound: the Bekhor Shor, 12^th century France, writes that the rock-hitting episodes in Exodus and Numbers are one and the same – the former foretelling the latter – and so Moses and Aaron were not punished for striking the rock because they were told to do so. Rather, they were guilty of not acknowledging God as the true source of the water (Deut. 32:51)

Another commentator, Rabbi Joseph Albo writes in his Sefer Ha-Ikarim (Maamar 4, ch. 22) that tzaddikim can perform miracles and so Moses could have brought water without relying on God. His not doing that, according to Albo, caused the people to have diminished faith in tzaddikim and in turn in God who endows tzaddikim with these powers.

Fifteenth century commentator Abarbanel said that the real reason that God decreed that Moses and Aaron would not enter the land was that Moses sent the spies in Parashat Shelah Lekha and that Aaron was involved in the Golden Calf.

Finally, I found two commentaries that don’t attribute Gd’s decision to punishment. One is from Rabbi Shalom Dovber of Lubavitch the conversation differently, asking why Gd made Moses disobey Him.

I’m a Conservative rabbi and although my personal theology doesn’t align with hasidut, I like that this explanation offers a different take on Moses’ “sin.” While I find Dovber’s interpetation to be a bit too esoteric for my taste, I’d like to share it, for its non-attribution of punishment:

Rabbi Dovber cites the Tikunei Zohar (Tikkun 21 page 53b):

The rock represents Torah. Had Moses spoken to, and not hit, the rock, the Jews would not have to toil in the study of Torah. Moses’ hitting the rock caused the Torah to descend from its place of purity and exaltedness. Striking the rock caused the Torah’s light to become concealed, making it difficult to connect with God. Had Moses spoken to the rock, the waters of Torah would come out freely and flowing. One would not need to toil and struggle to understand the Torah, for its light would shine openly and simply. Had Moses spoken to the rock, the Jews would see Godliness openly, and (they would) connect with God easily.

He goes on,

On one hand, as the Jews’ loving Father, God wanted Moses to speak to the rock, so He and His Torah would be easily accessible. Nevertheless, He arranged that Moses struck the rock, as Moses’ entire existence was about connecting Jews with God, and we must toil to connect.

Based on this explanation, perhaps we can understand why Moses and Aaron had to die before they could enter the Land of Israel. This was not as a punishment (bolding is mine), heaven forbid, but rather the first step in the fulfillment of Moses’ goal. Moses and Aaron’s very existence revealed Godliness and inspired people to serve Him. Living in their presence made it easy to connect with God. Therefore, Moses and Aaron could not enter the Land, so that this very plan to create a strong bond between God and the Jewish people could come to fruition.

Bearing this in mind, it is understood that Moses’ sin was not as a rebellion against God; it wasn’t even a mistake. It was for God’s sake, and in the long run the unity between Jews and God would be more complete (because of it).

For me personally, this explanation removes the stigma of making a wrong move and having your entire life fall apart as a result. Moses was on a higher level of sanctity than an “ordinary human being” but he was still human. Judaism teaches us that our heroes are imperfect people, partly so that we can relate to them and learn from them. They made wrong moves at times but their lives weren’t over as a result of their missteps. Examples include our patriarch Jacob, Joseph, and King David, to name a few.

This Hasidic explanation doesn’t diminish Moses’ pain since we learn in parashat Va’ethanan that Moses prayed 515 times to God to allow him to enter the promised land (Devarim Rabbah 11:10) – but at least it doesn’t blame him for the decree.

I would add that this interpretation of how Moses had to separate from b’nai yisrael for a greater goal – namely their relationship with God and with God’s Torah – also reminds me of the separation which children have to eventually make from their parents to live independent and productive lives. The separation can be fraught with anxiety and uncertainty but when the separation doesn’t happen, it can be costly in many more far-reaching and troublesome ways.

A second non-punishment-based explanation for Gd’s decree is put forth by Rabbi Shai Held (Hadar Torah Commentary: Hukkat). It’s less spiritual but I find it to be logical and in tune with our sensibilities of how humans function. He asserts that by the time this latest round of complaints and demands by the people surfaces, Moses has reached a level of anger and impatience that doesn’t enable him to really hear them, let alone be sympathetic to them. They’re thirsty which was a reality – Miriam had died and, with her, the water source had dried up. Gd wasn’t angry that the people were thirsty but Moses assumed that this complaint would result in the same cycle of despair and recriminations leading to God’s punishing the people. Rabbi Held suggests that Moses was incorrect in his assessment though. As a result of Moses’ inaccurate assumption that this was the same old-same old complaint, he was even upset and angry that God wasn’t angry and that He didn’t support Moses in his frustration. In Rabbi Held’s words,”

And so, tragic as the situation is, God realizes that God must find someone else—because when all is said and done, you cannot lead people you disdain, and you cannot guide people you can no longer even really see. According to Numbers, what God still has, but Moses has lost, is the ability to respond empathically even to this stiff-necked people. When anger crowds out the possibility of empathy, it is time for a new leader.

In closing, we all face consequences in our lives – good consequences and not-so-good consequences. Some of the negative consequences we face may be the result of bad decisions and/or bad courses of action on our parts. My prayer is that we can learn from any negative consequences and work hard to repair them so that our lives don’t fall apart, but rather that they bring in their wake a better future, a future filled with better relationships with other human beings, and especially with better relationships with our God.

Shabbat Shalom

_______________

Rabbi Marge Wise (AJR ’21), is also known as the Journey Rabbi (journeyrabbi.com). Her passion is outreach, including teaching prospective Jews by choice and accompanying them on their journey to formal conversion. She teaches in person and on Zoom – currently her students span 5 continents and as many time zones!