************************************************************* THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org] In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem Leibtag ************************************************************* Yehoshua - chapter 22 The mizbeiach of the tribes of Reuven & Gad The delicate question of 'Who’s a Jew?' not only reached the Supreme Court of Israel this week, it has been the source of a vicious debate in Israel for decades. Interestingly enough, this very same issue was already a 'hot topic' over three thousand years ago which almost led to a civil war - only a few years after Yehoshua first captured the land. In this week’s shiur, as we study the story of the "Mizbeach" that Bnei Gad and Bnei Reuven built, we’ll take a closer look at this problem (and we may find a message for today as well). INTRODUCTION Yehoshua chapter 22 describes how the fighting men of the tribes of Reuven, Gad, and Menashe ('the 2-1/2 tribes') returned to their original "nachala" [inheritance] on the eastern bank of the Jordan River. In this manner, the discussion of these 2-1/2 tribes forms both the opening and closing sections of the "nachala" section of Sefer Yehoshua (i.e. chapters 13 thru 22). Recall from Sefer Bamidbar chapter 32 how these 2 1/2 tribes (in the aftermath of the war against Sichon) preferred to take their inheritance on the East bank of the Jordan River, on the condition that they would lead the army in the nation's conquest of the West bank. [See also Yehoshua 1:12-18.] Now that the major military effort of the conquest was complete, Yehoshua allowed them to return to their land and to 'settle down'. In our shiur, we will first quickly review what happened; afterward we will attempt to explain why. A TRAGIC MISUNDERSTANDING Upon returning to their nachala, Bnei Gad and Bnei Reuven decided to erect a monumental "mizbeiach" [altar] near the banks of the Jordan River (see 22:9-11). However, when the other tribes saw this mizbeiach, they became enraged - for they understood this monument as nothing less than idol worship. [Recall that the Torah forbids sacrifices outside the confines of the Mishkan - see Devarim 12:5-12, and Masechet Zevachim Chapter 14.] In fear that this terrible sin of these 2-1/2 tribes would evoke God’s rage against the entire nation, the ten tribes gathered in Shiloh to declare war on their brethren (see 29:12). Luckily, before actually going to war, the ten tribes first sent a commission of inquiry, led by Pinchas (the son of the High Priest). After a short dialogue (see 22:13- 31), it immediately became clear that the entire incident was a misunderstanding; the 2-1/2 tribes never intended to offer sacrifices on this mizbeiach. Rather, their intention was solely to build a SYMBOL to show that even though they were living outside of Biblical borders of Eretz Canaan, that they still belonged to the same nation. Satisfied by the findings of the commission, Bnei Yisrael immediately called off their battle plans, and a civil war was averted (see 22:32-34). A PERPLEXING STORY In our study of chapter 22, several questions arise that require explanation: 1. What are the borders of Eretz Yisrael [the land of Israel]? Is Transjordan (the East bank) included or not? [In other words, is the "nachala" of the 2-1/2 tribes part of the Holy Land, or not?] 2. Why were the 2-1/2 tribes so fearful that the future generations would not consider them part of the nation? 3. Why did they choose specifically a mizbeiach for their symbol? (Why not a "menorah", or a "magen david"?) 4. Why were the ten tribes originally so quick to jump to military action as a solution? 5. Why was specifically Pinchas chosen to lead the inquiry mission, rather than his father? To answer all of these questions, we must return to our study of Chumash. For example, to answer question #1, we must return to the basic points of our shiur on Parshat Masei, which dealt with the Biblical borders of the land of Israel. EXPANDING BORDERS Two clichés, both based on psukim in Tanach, are commonly used to describe the expanse of the borders of the Land of Israel: (A) "from Dan to Beer Sheva" (see I Melachim 5:4-5) (B) "from the Nile to the Euphrates" (see Br. 15:18) The discrepancy between these two borders is immense! According to (B), Eretz Yisrael encompasses almost the entire Middle East, while according to (A); it is a tiny country not much bigger than the state of Rhode Island (and smaller than today’s State of Israel!). To understand why, it is necessary to differentiate between: (A) "ERETZ CANAAN", as promised to Avraham Avinu at BRIT MILAH (Bereishit 17:3-14), whose borders are defined in a rather precise manner in Parshat Masei (Bamidbar 34:1-13), and (B) "HA’ARETZ", as promised to Avraham Avinu at BRIT BEIN HA’BTARIM (Bereishit Chapter 15), whose borders are defined by a very general phrase "from the River of Egypt [the Nile] to the Great River – the River of Prat [the Euphrates]". (15:18) The basic borders of Eretz Yisrael are those of "eretz Canaan" (A), i.e. 'from Dan to Beer Sheva', as promised to Avraham Avinu in Brit Milah. These borders constitute a natural geographic area; for Eretz Canaan is bordered by the Mediterranean Sea on the West, the Negev desert on the South, the Syrio-African Rift (Jordan River) to the East, and the Lebanon Mountain Range to the North (see also Bereishit 10:19). Should Bnei Yisrael first conquer this 'kernel' area, then potentially the borders can be (but do not have to be) extended up to, but no farther than the two great rivers mentioned in the borders of Brit Bein HaBtarim - i.e. from the Nile to the Euphrates. In the shiur, we suggested that these two Rivers can be understood as geographic LIMITS rather than specific borders, as they set the potential limits of this expansion. As each river formed the lifeline of Egypt and Mesopotamia - the two great centers of ancient civilization, the Torah leaves an option for Am Yisrael to expand its borders by continuous settlement outward (from Eretz Canaan), up until (but not including) Egypt and Mesopotamia. EXPANDING KEDUSHA This interpretation explains why Transjordan did not acquire "kedushat ha’aretz" until "eretz Canaan" was first conquered. When Transjordan was first conquered by Moshe Rabeinu in Sefer Bamidbar (21:21-35), Eretz Canaan had not yet been captured, and therefore this area had no "kedusha". However, once Yehoshua had captured all of Eretz Canaan, the "kedusha" of Eretz Yisrael could now extend to Transjordan as well. By Bnei Gad and Bnei Reuven following the terms of their agreement with Moshe, not only did they help Bnei Yisrael conquer Eretz Canaan, they also facilitated their homelands in Transjordan into becoming an integral part of Eretz Yisrael. [For the "halachic" definition of these points, see Rambam Sefer Zeraiim, Hilchot Terumot, Chapter One, Halachot 2-3.] SOMETHING TO WORRY ABOUT This background can help us explain why the 2-1/2 tribes were so worried. As is apparent from the above discussion, the status of Transjordan is quite complicated, and hence a serious fear existed that the rest of the nation would consider only "eretz Canaan" to be "Eretz Yisrael". If so, then anyone living on the eastern bank of the Jordan would not be considered part of Am Yisrael. (After all, Moshe Rabeinu himself had been in Transjordan, even though he was not allowed in Eretz Yisrael!) This danger was reinforced by the fact that there were several other nations also living in Transjordan who were also once part of the family of Avraham, but afterward rejected - such as Amon, Moav and Edom. Recall from Sefer Breishit, that once they were 'rejected' from the God's covenant with the family of Avraham, the progenitors of these nations took up residence on the eastern side of the Jordan! Therefore, a serious fear existed that within a few generations the 9-1/2 tribes would consider the 2-1/2 tribes no different than Amon, Moav, and Edom. It was for this reason, we posit, that they decided to erect a monument that would serve as an everlasting reminder that the 2-1/2 tribes living in Transjordan were an integral part of Am Yisrael. WHY A MIZBEACH? Now we must explain why they chose specifically a MIZBEIACH to symbolize their connection to Am Yisrael. One could suggest a reason based on their opening statement (i.e. after they were first questioned by the other tribes concerning their actions). Note the strange manner in which they began their response: "KEL ELOKIM HASHEM [shem havaya], KEL ELOKIM HASHEM, He knows an Yisrael should [also] know if this mizbayach was built as a rebellion against God..." (see 22:21-23) This repetition of God’s 'full' Name twice, emphasizing that "Elokim" and "Havaya" are one, may relate to the expanding nature of Eretz Yisrael’s borders. Recall from our shiur on Parshat Lech L’cha that God’s promise of Eretz Canaan to Avraham at Brit Milah was given exclusively "b’shem ELOKIM", while His promise of the land to Avraham at Brit Bein ha’Btarim was given exclusively "b’shem HAVAYA". Hence, this opening statement may allude to their claim that Transjordan, as part of the land promised to Avraham at Brit Bein ha’Btarim, b’shem Havayah, should now be considered part of Eretz Yisrael. THE MIZBEACH OF THE AVOT What symbol should one choose to represent this aspect of our relationship with God from the perspective of "shem Havaya"? Again, we must return to Sefer Bereishit and Parshat Lech L’cha. Recall that when God first instructed Avraham to travel to Eretz Yisrael (see Bereishit 12:1-3), that commandment was given b’shem Havayah. Then when Avraham first arrived, to thank Hashem for His promise of the land, he built a mizbeiach in Shchem (see 12:7). Then he traveled on to Bet-el where he not only built a mizbeiach, but also called out b’shem Havaya! (See 12:8 and Ramban). Later we find several other instances where Avraham and Yitzchak each built a mizbeiach and called out b’shem Havaya (e.g. see Bereishit 13:4 and 26:25). These sources indicate a very strong connection between a mizbeiach and shem Havaya, and the underlying concept that the very purpose of Am Yisrael to become a nation that will 'call out b’shem Havaya'. (There is also a connection between Brit Bein ha’Btarim and korbanot - see Rashi on 15:9-13). Hence, a model of the mizbeiach may have been an appropriate monument and symbol to show that the tribes living on both sides of the Jordan River shared a common goal and common religion. THE RESOLUTION This theory may explain the actions of Bnei Gad and Bnei Reuven, but how about the seemingly rash reaction of Bnei Yisrael? Why were they so quick to react? One could suggest that the primary reason was their fear of God’s punishment, which could affect the entire nation for the sin of a minority, as was the case with the sin of shevet Shimon at Baal Peor (see 22:16-18 and Bamidbar Chapter 25). This indeed explains the nation’s fear and anger, but why were they so quick to take up arms (see 22:12)? [See also Devarim 4:1-4!] One could suggest that this may also have been the effect of spending the last seven years fighting battles to conquer the land. Unfortunately, after so many years of battle, going to war almost became a way of life. Even when battles were fought for 'just' reasons, they can often leave lasting effects on attitude and approach to solving problems. This may also explain why Pinchas was chosen to lead the inquiry commission. Recall that it was Pinchas himself who had been zealous for God and immediately killed Zimri, and later led Bnei Yisrael to war against the Midyanim (see Bamidbar 31:1-7). But Pinchas was also the grandson of Aharon, who was known for his ability to be a "rodef shalom" - to search for peaceful solutions. Luckily for Am Yisrael, Pinchas chose the path of his grandfather Aharon, and first searched for a peaceful solution before resorting to a military one. No matter how serious an offense appears to be, it is always best to attempt dialogue before resorting to force.