Parashas Chukas: Moshe Rabbeinu's Sin

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post.

Parashas Chukas: Moshe Rabbeinu's Sin

In this week's parashah we read one of the most tragic episodes in Sefer Bamidbar:

Bnei Yisrael, the whole assembly, arrived at the Midbar Tzin in the first month and the people settled in Kadeish. Miriam died there and she was buried there. There was no water for the assembly, and they gathered against Moshe and Aharon. The people quarreled with Moshe and spoke up, saying, "If only we had perished as our brethren perished before Hashem! Why have you brought the congregation of Hashem to this wilderness to die there, we and our animals? And why did you bring us up from Egypt to bring us to this evil place? - not a place of seed, or fig, or grape, or pomegranate; and there is no water to drink!" Moshe and Aharon went from the presence of the congregation to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting and fell on their faces. The glory of Hashem appeared to them. 

Hashem spoke to Moshe, saying, "Take the staff and gather together the assembly, you and Aharon your brother, and speak to the rock before their eyes that it shall give its waters. You shall bring forth for them water from the rock and give drink to the assembly and to their animals." Moshe took the staff from before Hashem, as He had commanded him. Moshe and Aharon gathered the congregation before the rock and he said to them, "Listen now, O rebels, shall we bring forth water for you from this rock?" Then Moshe raised his arm and struck the rock with his staff twice; abundant water came forth and the assembly and their animals drank.

 Hashem said to Moshe and to Aharon, "Because you did not believe in Me to sanctify Me in the eyes of Bnei Yisrael, therefore you will not bring this congregation to the Land that I have given them." They are the waters of strife, where Bnei Yisrael contended with Hashem, and He was sanctified through them.

There are certain things which seem to be unanimous: (1) Moshe Rabbeinu sinned, (2) his sin is identified in this week's parashah, (3) the punishment for his sin was being barred entry into the Land of Israel. Beyond that, there is much machlokes (disagreement). Ask your average parashah-conscious Jew to identify Moshe's sin, and you might receive one or two responses - or three, if you're lucky.

Thankfully, the Abravanel [1] - in typical Abravanel fashion - conveniently summarizes ten opionions of his predecessors' and highlights the difficulties with each of them before sharing his own view on the matter. In this post I will paraphrase (not translate) the Abravanel's summaries and the difficulties he raises with all of the other views besides his own. I will not add any of my own insights to the Abravanel's treatment of the subject. Nevertheless, this post will serve as a valuable step for anyone who desires to understand the cheit (sin) of Moshe Rabbeinu. In other words, this is a "set table" style post rather than a "light bulb" style post, and is intended to pave the way for a more in-depth analysis.

Now we are ready for the Abravanel's summaries:

Eleven Opinions and their Difficulties

(1) Chazal [2] / Rashi [3]: Moshe hit the rock instead of speaking to it. This opinion cited by Rashi is probably the most well-known. Hashem had commanded Moshe: "speak to the rock." Had he simply done that, Ha'Kadosh Baruch Hu would have been sanctified in the eyes of the congregation. People would have said: "If this rock - which doesn't speak and doesn't hear - fulfills the word of Ha'Kadosh Baruch Hu, kal va'chomer ourselves!"

Difficulties: The Ramban [4] objects to this view, saying that when Hashem instructed Moshe to "take the staff," it was implied that he should hit the rock; if Hashem had wanted him merely to speak to the rock, then of what relevance was the staff? Furthermore, speaking to the rock would have resulted in a greater miracle than hitting it. Lastly, how does Rashi interpret Hashem's criticism of Moshe: "you have trespassed against Me" (Devarim 32:51)?

(2) Chazal [5]: Moshe disrespected Bnei Yisrael by saying: "Listen, now, you rebels." Chazal learn from here that degrading the congregation is tantamount to chilul ha'Shem (desecration of God's Name).

Difficulties: The Ibn Ezra [6] objects to this view on the basis of Moshe Rabbeinu's statement in Sefer Devarim, "You have been rebels against Hashem from the day that I knew you!" (Devarim 9:24) - which is even more degrading to Bnei Yisrael than his statement here. If disrespecting Bnei Yisrael was his sin, why would he repeat his error?

(3) Rambam [7]: Moshe needlessly got angry with Bnei Yisrael. In addition to anger being a bad midah (character trait) in and of itself, Moshe's anger also caused Bnei Yisrael to think that Hashem was angry with them, when He really was not.

Difficulties: The Ramban [4] objected to this on the basis of the statements: "]because] you rebelled against My word" (Bamidbar 27:14) and "[because] you did not believe in Me," which indicate that Moshe was punished for lack of emunah - not for anger. Moreover, Moshe should have received an even greater punishment when he got needlessly angry at the soldiers: "Moshe was angry with the commanders of the army" (Bamidbar 31:14). Rather, his statement here: "listen now, O rebels" should be understood as a rebuke - not a statement made in anger.

(4) Rabbeinu Chananel [4]: Moshe said "we shall bring forth water" instead of "Hashem shall bring forth water," making it seem as though he was taking credit for the miracle.

Difficulties: The Abravanel refutes this reading based on grammatical considerations. He learns that the pasuk: "ha'min ha'selah ha'zeh notzi lachem mayim" should be read with the hey ha'teimah - not as "Shall we bring forth water for you from this rock?" but rather "Are we the ones who will bring forth water for you from this rock?!" In other words, this is the opposite of Rabbeinu Chananel's claim: Moshe was emphatically stating that this miracle was not accomplished through his own power, but by Hashem. 

(5) "People" [6]: Moshe hit the rock twice instead of once; if he had struck the rock only one time, as Hashem instructed him, he wouldn't have gotten punished.

Difficulties: Ibn Ezra [8] highlights a problem with this theory, which also applies to several of the other views: if this was Moshe's sin, then why was Aharon punished? Aharon didn't hit the rock at all!

(6) "Some People" [8]: Moshe and Aharon didn't sing shirah (a song of praise) over the water from the rock, whereas Bnei Yisrael did. Later on in the chapter we read "Then Israel sang this song: Come up, O well! Call out to it! Well that the princes dug, that the nobles of the people excavated, through a lawgiver, with their staffs, a gift from the wilderness" (Bamidbar 21:17-18).

Difficulties: Abravanel points out that Bnei Yisrael's song didn't take place until much later on - and if so, how could Hashem punish Moshe and Aharon now for not singing shirah over the water?

(7) "Other People" [8]: Moshe brought forth water from a different rock than the one that Bnei Yisrael selected. This is what he meant by, "Shall we bring forth water from this rock?" Moshe was afraid to deviate from the word of Hashem - but since he didn't use the rock that Bnei Yisrael expected the water to come from, he was punished. This is the meaning of: "because you did not believe in Me to sanctify Me."

Difficulties: The pasuk said, "you rebelled against My word" so how could obedience to Hashem be characterized as "rebellion"?

(8) Ibn Ezra [8] / Ran [9]: Moshe, in his anger, broke his connection with Hashem, which allowed him to perform miracles.

Difficulties: The Abravanel characterizes this opinion as "a conglomeration of the other views." Moshe Rabbeinu got angry (Opinion #3) and hit the rock (Opinion #1). and when the water didn't come out, he hit it a second time (Opinion #5).

(9) Sefer ha'Ikkarim [10]: Moshe should have taken initiative and commanded the rock to give water without turning to Hashem for advice, since which would have led to a greater kidush ha'Shem (sanctification of Hashem's Name) and would have increased Bnei Yisrael's emunah; because Moshe and Aharon failed to seize this opportunity, Hashem ascribes these sins to them.

Difficulty: The first time the people complained about water, Moshe awaited Hashem's command, and did what He said. If that wasn't a sin, then why should this be a sin?

(10) "A Contemporary Thinker" [1]: Moshe and Aharon didn't sin; rather, they were not permitted to enter the Land because their generation wasn't worthy to have them as leaders. This is why the pasuk says: "you will not bring this congregation to the Land" rather than "you shall not enter the land." Just as we find pesukim which indicate that Moshe sinned, so too, we find pesukim which indicate that he didn't sin: "But Hashem became angry with me because of you, and He did not listen to me" (Devarim 3:26), "They provoked at the waters of strife, and Moshe suffered because of them" (Tehilim 106:32), It would be irrational to think that someone as perfected as Moshe would sin. All of the pesukim about Moshe's sin should be understood in the same sense as "Achan ... took of the consecrated property, and the wrath of Hashem flared against Bnei Yisrael" (Yehoshua 7:1) and "Israel has sinned; they have also violated My Covenant that I commanded them; they have also taken from the consecrated property, etc." (ibid. 7:11). It is clear that Achan was the only one who sinned - and yet, all of Klal Yisrael are described as having sinned. Similarly, when Bnei Yisrael sinned and rebelled, Moshe and Aharon were included among them, even though they didn't actually participate in this sin.

Difficulties: The Abravanel rejects this view because it contradict the pesukim that overtly make reference to Moshe's sins - especially "because you trespassed against Me among the Children of Israel at the waters of strife at Kadeish, in the Midbar Tzin; because you did not sanctify Me among Bnei Yisrael" (Devarim 32:51).

(11) Abravanel: Moshe and Aharon weren't punished for any sin that occurred now; rather, they were punished now for sins that occurred earlier - Aharon for the Cheit ha'Egel (Sin of the Golden Calf) and Moshe for the Cheit ha'Meraglim (Sin of the Spies).

Even though Aharon didn't worship the eigel, and even though all of his intentions were good, nevertheless, he was still a contributing cause to Klal Yisrael's involvement in avodah zarah. Since his sin wasn't as severe as those who actually worshiped the eigel, and in order to protect Aharon's kavod (honor), his punishment was delayed and concealed.

Moshe's cheit was that when Bnei Yisrael asked him to send spies, they only asked: "Let us take men ahead of us and let them spy out the Land, and bring word back to us: the road on which we should ascend and the cities to which we should come" (Devarim 1:22). When Hashem sanctioned the sending of the spies, He only instructed the to "Send forth men, if you please, and let them spy out the Land of Canaan that I give to Bnei Yisrael" (ibid. 13:2). But Moshe added mission objectives of his own: "See the Land - how is it? and the people that dwells in it - is it strong or weak? is it few or numerous? And how is the Land in which it dwells - is it good or is it bad? And how are the cities in which it dwells - are they open or are they fortified? And how is the land - is it fertile or is it lean? are there trees in it or not?" (ibid. 13:18-19). And even though his intention in adding these objectives was good - so that Bnei Yisrael would have a greater appreciation of Hashem's might and beneficence when He helps them conquer the Land - nevertheless, it was these mission objectives which created an opening for the meraglim to sow doubt in the minds of Bnei Yisrael. Because Moshe contributed to this cheit, and because for someone on Moshe's level "an unintentional error counts as intentional" (Avos 4:16), he was punished by being barred entry into Eretz Yisrael.

When Bnei Yisrael were in Kadeish and Midbar Tzin, and they complained about the lack of water, they pointed out that Moshe and Aharon were causes of many deaths of Bnei Yisrael in the Midbar. In response, Hashem commanded Moshe and Aharon to summon the nation, and instructed Moshe to speak to the rock to bring forth water. But when Moshe transgressed by hitting the rock instead of speaking to it, Hashem punished him and Aharon - not for the sin of hitting the rock (which wouldn't have warranted such a severe punishment), but for their earlier sins, whose punishments He had concealed and delayed out of respect for Moshe and Aharon. This may be likened to a son who commits a major offense, and whose father suspends his punishment to protect his son's dignity. But later, when the son commits a subsequent minor offense, the father punishes him - not for the minor offense, but for the original major offense.

Difficulties: Not surprisingly, the Abravanel maintains that there are no difficulties with this view. 

The Abravanel's answer is creative, and seems to address many - if not all - of the difficulties faced by the other views. Do you find his answer compelling?

[1] Don Yitzchak Abravanel, Commentary to Sefer Bamidbar 20:11
[2] Midrash Aggadah (specific citation unknown)
[3] Rabbeinu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary to Sefer Bamidbar 20:12
[4] Rabbeinu Moshe ben Nachman (Ramban / Nachmanides), Commentary to Sefer Bamidbar 20:7
[5] Pesikta d'Rav Kahana, Piska 24
[6] Rabbeinu Avraham ibn Ezra, Commentary on Sefer Bamidbar 20:8
[7] Rabbeinu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides), Shemoneh Perakim: Perek 4
[8] Rabbeinu Avraham ibn Ezra, Commentary on Sefer Bamidbar 20:8
[9] Rabbeinu Nissim ben Reuven, Derashos ha'Ran: #8
[10] Rabbeinu Yosef Albo, Sefer ha'Ikkarim 4:22