Parshat Chukat

Death
Rabbi Ari Kahn
Parshat Chukat begins by teaching about the Para Aduma, the Red Heifer, the rite
that purifies those who come in contact with the dead. The Para Aduma is one of
the most obscure commandments, and serves as the prototypical example of
"Chok" - the type of commandment that transcends human understanding1: Not
only is the response - the Para Adumah- difficult for man to comprehend, but the
cause - death - is also ultimately beyond human understanding.2

In this Parsha, death is introduced not in the context of ritual, but in a sense death
is the major theme of the Parsha. Miriam and Aharon perish in this week’s Parsha
and Moshe himself receives a death sentence. Reading between the lines of the
text, the deaths of many more people can be inferred, but before we explore what
is between the lines let us consult the text itself:

"The children of Israel, the entire community, arrived in the Tzin desert in
the first month. The nation stayed in Kadesh. There Miriam died, and there
she was buried. There was no water for the community, and they gathered
around Moshe and Aharon." (20:1,2)
1
See Midrash Rabbah - Numbers XIX:1 When the dead body is in the house, the house is clean, but when it comes out it is
unclean. Who did this? Who commanded this? Who decreed this? Was it not the world's Only One? We have learned
elsewhere: The persons engaged in any part of the preparation of the Red Heifer from beginning to end defile garments,
while the Heifer itself makes garments ritually clean. The Holy One, blessed be He, says: ‘I have laid down a statute; I have
issued a decree! You cannot transgress My decree. And Midrash Rabbah - Numbers XIX:3: Solomon meant: All these I
have fully comprehended, but as regards the section dealing with the Red Heifer, I have investigated and inquired and
examined: ’I said: I will get wisdom; but it was far from me.’ (Eccl. VII, 23).
2
The idea of death is most likely included within the topic of theodicy, Rav Meir opines that this was not revealed to
Moshe, despite his request: Berachot 7a - R. Johanan further said in the name of R. Jose: Three things did Moses ask of the
Holy One, blessed be He, and they were granted to him. He asked that the Divine Presence should rest upon Israel, and it
was granted to him. For it is said: ‘Is it not in that Thou goest with us [so that we are distinguished, I and Thy people, from
all the people that are upon the face of the earth].’ He asked that the Divine Presence should not rest upon the idolaters,
and it was granted to him. For it is said: ‘So that we are distinguished, I and Thy people’. He asked that He should show
him the ways of the Holy One, blessed be He, and it was granted to him. For it is said: ‘Show me now Thy ways.’ Moses
said before Him: ‘Lord of the Universe, why is it that some righteous men prosper and others are in adversity, some wicked
men prosper and others are in adversity…’ Now this [saying of R. Yochanan] is in opposition to the saying of R. Meir. For
R. Meir said: only two [requests] were granted to him, and one was not granted to him.
‫פסיקתא רבתי )איש שלום( פרשה יד ד"ה [אליך] א"ר יוסי‬
‫ מביאין‬,‫גוי אחד שאל את רבן יוחנן בן זכאי אמר אילין מילין דאתון עבדין נראין כמין כשפים‬
‫ אחד מכם מטמא למת ומזין עליו שתים‬,‫פרה ושורפין אותה )וכובשין( [וכותשין] אותה ונוטלין אפרה‬
‫ ולא‬,‫ אמר לו לאו‬,‫ אמר לו לא נכנסה רוח תזזית באותו האיש מימיך‬,‫ושלש טיפין ואומר טהרת‬
‫ אמר לו ולא‬,‫ מביאין עיקרין ומעשנים תחתיו ומרביצין עליו מים והיא בורחת‬,‫ראית מה עושים לו‬
‫ כך רוח הזו רוח טומאה היא דכתיב וגם את הנביאים ואת רוח‬,‫ישמעו אזנך מה שפיך מדבר‬
‫ אמרו לו תלמידיו ר' לזה דחית בקנה ולנו מה‬,‫ וכיון שיצא‬,('‫הטומאה אעביר מן הארץ )זכריה י"ג ב‬
‫ אמר הקב"ה‬,‫ אמר להם לא המת מטמא ולא המים מטהרים אלא גזירתו של מקום היא‬,‫אתה משיב‬
.‫חוקה חקקתי וגזירה גזרתי אין אתה רשאי לעבור על גזירתי‬
The Talmud infers from this passage that the water the Children of Israel drank in
the desert was in the merit of Miriam, and with her demise the merit for water
dissipated as well.

R. Jose the son of R. Judah says: ‘Three good leaders had arisen for
Israel, namely Moses, Aaron and Miriam, and for their sake three good
things were conferred ]upon Israel[, namely, the Well, the Pillar of
Cloud and the Manna. The Well, for the merit of Miriam; the Pillar of
Cloud for the merit of Aaron; the Manna for the merit of Moses. When
Miriam died the well disappeared, as it is said, ‘And Miriam died
there,’ and immediately follows ]the verse[, ‘And there was no water
for the congregation’; and it returned for the merit of the ]latter[ two.
]Talmud Ta'anith 9a[

The people were clearly concerned. This is not the first time that the nation
approaches Moshe with a complaint about a shortage of supplies. It is not even
the first time that a complaint was registered about a shortage of water. Here,
however there is a subtle difference. Let us return to the text:

And the people quarreled with Moshe, and spoke, saying, ‘Would G-d that
we had died when our brothers died before the Lord! And why have you
brought up the congregation of the Lord into this wilderness, that we and
our cattle should die there? And why have you made us come out of Egypt,
to bring us in to this evil place? This is no place of seed, or of figs, or of
vines, or of pomegranates; nor is there any water to drink. (20:3-5)

This litany of complaints has been heard before; different words or images were
employed but the same message was conveyed: Egypt was superior to this. The
people longed for their place of birth. The hardships were forgotten, and only
nostalgia for the home of their youth remained.

Yet this description is somewhat imprecise, for this is a new generation. Most of
these people never saw Egypt! Very quietly, with no fanfare, the forty years of
wandering in the desert, promised in Parshat Sh’lach, have elapsed. This new
generation, born in the desert, should have had nothing to be nostalgic about.
These people should not be suffering from a "slave mentality", for they were born
free. Miriam’s death transpires as the forty-year decree expires. Rashi alludes to
this in his commentary:

‘The entire community’: the whole (intact) community, for those who were
to die in the desert had perished, and these (the remainder) were separated
for life" (Rashi 20:1)

Miriam has died; Aharon and Moshe will soon follow. Moreover, the entire
generation of Egyptian-born former slaves, anyone over the age of twenty, had
died 3. The Torah did not mention the years that have elapsed, but the last date
3
See 14:27-35 How long shall I bear with this evil congregation, which murmur against me? I have heard the
mentioned in the text was almost 40 years prior to the events described in this
passage. Perhaps this is why the Parsha begins with the antidote to death: this is
not a theoretical discussion, or a law that is occasionally applied. This is a
situation that has arisen in virtually every home. An entire generation is now
missing - dead.

And nonetheless, the children speak just as their parents did. Perhaps this should
not surprise us; children often mimic their parents, even if their personal context
has been altered. They question Moshe regarding the wisdom of the exodus: "Why
did you bring us from Egypt to this evil place." While these people, on the whole,
never saw Egypt, nor were they taken out, but they had internalized their families’
grievances.

The observation that a new generation had emerged will help us understand the
central episode of the Parsha: The indiscretion of Moshe with the rock, the act that
led to the death sentence of Moshe and Aharon.

Moshe and Aharon turn to G-d for guidance; G-d responds with the following
instruction:

And G-d spoke to Moshe saying; ‘Take the staff, and gather the
congregation, you, and Aharon your brother, and speak to the stone in the
sight of the people, and it will give of its waters. Take from the stone’s
water, and give the congregation and their cattle to drink.’ Moshe took the
staff from before G-d, as commanded. Moshe and Aharon gathered the
people in front of the stone. He said to them ‘Hear now you rebels, shall we
extract water for you from this stone?’ Moshe lifted his hand and struck the
stone with his staff twice; an abundance of water came out and they gave
the people and cattle to drink. (20:6-11)

A cursory reading does not produce anything exceptional; this is the type of event
which had become commonplace in the desert; the people complain, Moshe turns
to G-d, who in turn solves the problem but points out the peoples’ shortcomings.
Here, however the conclusion contains a twist; instead of pointing out the failure
of the community, G-d responds:

G-d said to Moshe and Aharon, ‘Because you did not believe in Me to
sanctify Me in the eyes of the Children of Israel, therefore you will not lead
this people to the land which I have given them. These are the waters of

murmurings of the people of Israel, which they murmur against me. Say to them, ‘As truly as I live, said the Lord, as you
have spoken in my ears, so will I do to you. Your carcasses shall fall in this wilderness; and all who were counted of
you, according to your whole number, from twenty years old and upward, who have murmured against me, shall by no
means come into the land…, save Calev the son of Yephunneh, and Yehoshua the son of Nun. But your little ones, whom
you said would be prey, them will I bring in, and they shall know the land which you have despised. But as for you, your
carcasses shall fall in this wilderness. And your children shall wander in the wilderness forty years, and bear your
backslidings, until your carcasses are wasted in the wilderness. According to the number of the days in which you spied
the land, forty days, each day for a year, shall you bear your iniquities, forty years, and you shall know my displeasure. I
the Lord have said, I will surely do it to all this evil congregation, who are gathered together against me; in this
wilderness they shall be consumed, and there they shall die.
 contention (Mei Meriva), for which the Children of Israel quarreled with G-
d…’ (20:12,13)

The response is stunning. Moshe and Aharon have failed their mission;
consequently entering, conquering, and most importantly settling the Land will
take place without them. They will not cross the Jordan; Israel will remain a goal
beyond their reach. But what was the sin? The Torah does not clearly state what
they did; rather, the Torah seems to address the cause: "Because you did not
believe in Me to sanctify Me in the eyes of the children of Israel".

Similarly, the commentaries are not unified in their understanding of the actual
offense committed by Moshe and Aharon. According to Rashi, the problem was
striking the stone instead of speaking to it, but this “answer” raises a number of
questions: First, if the problem was striking the stone with the staff, why was this
procedure acceptable in a previous episode?4

Therefore the people complained to Moshe and said, ‘Give us water that we
may drink.’ And Moshe said to them, ‘Why do you strive with me? Why do
you tempt G-d?’ And the people thirsted there for water; and the people
murmured against Moshe, and said, ‘Why have you brought us up out of
Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst?’ And Moshe
cried to G-d, saying, ‘What shall I do to this people? They are almost ready
to stone me.’ And the G-d said to Moshe, ‘Go before the people, and take
with you of the Elders of Israel; and your rod, with which you struck the
river, take in your hand, and go. Behold, I will stand before you there upon
the rock in Horev; and you shall strike the rock, and water shall come out of
it, that the people may drink. And Moshe did so in the sight of the Elders of
Israel. (Sh'mot 17:2-6)

Immediately following the Exodus, the People demanded water; there, G-d called
upon Moshe to bring his staff and strike the rock. In our present episode, G-d only
told Moshe to bring the staff, but G-d did not say to strike the stone. One could
attempt to defend Moshe by saying that G-d’s instructions were somewhat
deceptive, commanding Moshe to bring the staff if it is not to be used, especially
if the staff was, in fact, used on another, similar occasion. Yet this defense cannot
stand in the face of G-d’s instructions, which must be carried out exactly, with no
deviation. Nonetheless, the resulting punishment seems excessive.

4
The Alshich explains the distinction as follows: Often younger children need some type of corporal discipline, but as the
child grows the parents should shift their methods, and speak to the child. Similarly, the grown nation now needed to be
spoken to, rather than to be shown force.
There is a second problem with this approach: Why was Aharon punished?5 He did
not strike the stone; only Moshe did so. "Moshe lifted his hand and struck the
stone with his staff twice." Aharon ostensibly had no part in the actual sin; why
should he share equally in the punishment?6 Perhaps Moshe and Aharon
discussed the issue and jointly concluded to strike the stone twice.7

The Rambam opines that the sin was Moshe’s anger in his response to the
people8. A great man should not allow his anger to get the best of him in any
circumstance. Again, Aharon's role seems questionable. According to the
Rambam, the phrase "Hear now you rebels, shall we extract water for you from
this stone?” was a display of anger. From the text itself, it is unclear whether
Moshe or Aharon uttered these words. Perhaps here Moshe acts, and Aharon
speaks, as per the arrangement worked out at the Burning Bush. The only
problem with this resolution, is that the Rambam explicitly states that it was
Moshe who spoke. So, again, Aharon’s role, and thus his responsibility, comes into
question.

Likewise Rashi in his commentary to the Talmud states:

"For the sin of saying 'Hear now you rebels' he (Moshe) was punished and
not permitted to enter the Land of Israel (Rashi Sanhedrin 101b, see Rashi
Bamidbar 31:21,)

According to this approach Aharon's role in the sin, and therefore his punishment,
seem elusive.

The more mystical commentaries, from the Ramban and on, point at striking the
stone twice as the sin: the stone should only have been struck once. The rationale
was, that the rock needed to be struck one time to bring water. The second time
was to guarantee that the flow of water continued, an issue that arose only with
the demise of Miriam. Moshe and Aharon were concerned that the water would
run out; the second strike would assure that the water would be sustained.9

I would like to suggest a different resolution, based on several teachings of Rabbi

Meir Simcha of Dvinsk in his commentary "Meshech Chochma":

5
This question is posed in the Midrash; the answer, though, presupposes that the indiscretion was Moshe’s anger. Midrash
Rabbah - Numbers XIX:9: Why was Aharon made responsible, as it says, ‘And G-d said to Moshe and Aharon, ‘Because
you did not believe in me?’ (XX, 12)? This may be illustrated by a parable. A creditor came to take away a debtor's granary
and took both that and the one belonging to his neighbor. Said the debtor to him: ‘If I am guilty, what crime has my
neighbor committed?' So also did Moses our teacher say: 'I lost my temper, but what crime did Aharon commit?' For this
reason Scripture praises Aharon, saying, ‘And of Levi he said: Thy Thummim and Thy Urim be with Thy holy one, whom
Thou didst prove at Massah, with whom Thou didst strive at the waters of Meribah (Deut. XXXIII, 8).
6
See Rashi D'varim 33:8
7
See Rabenu Bachayay on the verse. The Ha’amek Davar notes that Aharon’s role was speaker
for Moshe, therefore by not speaking Aharon was culpable.
8
See Rambam Shemonah Perakim chapter 4
9
see L’vush, commentary to Rekanati
The Meshech Chochma notes an apparent non sequitur in D'varim. Moshe delivers
a soliloquy warning of the perils of idolatry, and he adds,

...And G-d was angry with me for your sakes and swore that I will not be
allowed to cross the Jordan (River) and not be allowed to enter the land....
(D'varim 4:21)

After this Moshe returns to the topic at hand and continues to speak about
idolatry.

But I must die in this land, I must not go over the Jordan; but you shall go
over, and possess that good land. Take heed to yourselves, lest you forget
the covenant of the Lord your G-d, which he made with you, and make you
an engraved image, or the likeness of any thing, which the Lord your G-d
has forbidden you… (4:22-25)

The Meshech Chochma suggests that Moshe’s reference to the incident at Mei
Meriva, and the resultant punishment, are in fact germane to the topic of idolatry.

"The higher wisdom was concerned lest when the People enter the Land
they would treat him (Moshe) as a deity (Meshech Chochma D'varim 4:15)

The reason that Moshe was not permitted to enter the Land was that this
generation, raised in the desert and witness to miracles galore, ran the risk of
seeing Moshe as something more than human. Perhaps they would think that
miracles came from Moshe and not G-d. If we apply this approach to our passage,
we find that after Moshe hits the rock, G-d pronounces:

"...Because you did not believe in Me to sanctify Me in the eyes of the

Children of Israel, therefore you will not lead this people to the land which I
have given them."

The problem, as stated, is that Moshe and Aharon did not sanctify G-d sufficiently;
rather, Moshe and Aharon gave the impression that the miracle came from them.
Surely this was not their intention, but it was the result of their actions. The
purpose of Moshe bringing water from the rock was to show one and all that G-d is
the source of all miracles. The damage was done; now, they would be unable to
lead "this people", this particular generation, into the Promised Land.

If this is the case, Aharon was no different from Moshe. Their status in the eyes of
the nation was similar. As a result of this display, neither Aharon nor Moshe could
enter the Land.

Moshe, for his part, should have understood the inherent problem of perceived
holiness in something other than G-d.10 We recall that when Moshe came down
10
In the description of the Midrash, it sounds as if Moshe had perceived an attack on his ability to perform miracles,
therefore he acquiesced to their request: Midrash Rabbah - Numbers XIX:9 In the present instance also all Israel stood
there and saw the numerous miracles in connection with the rock. They began saying: 'Moshe knows the natural properties
from the mountain with the Tablets of Stone, the Word of G-d etched on stone by
the "hand" of G-d, upon seeing the celebration around the Golden Calf, Moshe
destroyed the Luchot, and according to the Talmud, G-d approved:

And how do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, gave His approval?
Because it is said, ‘Which you have broken’ (asher shibarta): Resh Lakish
said, (Yasher kochecha sheshibarta) ‘All strength to you ]i.e.,
congratulations[ for breaking them" (Talmud Shabbat 87a)

The Meshech Chochma explains that just as the people had erred, thinking that
through the Golden Calf they could forge a relationship with G-d, Moshe feared
that they would transform the Luchot into something that contains divinity in and
of itself, independent of G-d. In other words, if they had already worshipped a Calf
made of gold they would certainly end up worshipping the Luchot which were
made by G-d himself. This observation explains why Moshe is instructed to make
the second Luchot himself, with his own hands, and not by the hand of G-d,
because G-d agreed with his analysis (see Meshech Chochma Sh'mot 32:19).

And the Lord said to Moses, ‘Cut for you two tablets of stone like the first;
and write upon these tablets the words that were in the first tablets, which
you broke. (Exodus 34:1)

This explanation is buttressed by a separate comment of the Meshech Chochma,

in our passage in Bamidbar. The Meshech Chochma notes the interesting turn of
phrase:

And G-d spoke to Moshe saying; ‘Take the staff, and gather the
congregation, you, and Aharon your brother, and speak to the stone in the
sight of the people,"

What does it mean to "speak to the stone in the sight of the people"? The
implication is to speak so that the people can see, and not, as would be expected,
in order for the people to hear. There was, of course, another instance when G-d
spoke in order for the people to see: the Revelation at Sinai.

And all the people saw the sounds and the lightning, and the sound of the
shofar, and the mountain smoking; and when the people saw it, they were
shaken, and stood far away. And they said to Moshe, ‘Speak with us, and we
will hear; but let not G-d speak with us, lest we die. (Shmot 20:15,16)

This was a new generation, who had either not been present, or had been too
young to appreciate the Great Revelation. This new generation would soon enter
the land. G-d wanted to provide them with a new revelation, 11 but instead of a
clear, visible revelation of G-d, Moshe and Aharon caused the people to simply see

of this particular rock! If he wishes [to prove his miraculous powers], let him bring out water for us from this other one!’
11
This would explain why all the people needed to witness the event: Midrash Rabbah - Numbers XIX:9 ‘And Moshe and
Aharon gathered the Assembly together before the rock (XX, 1).’ This teaches that each individual Israelite felt himself
standing before the rock.
one more miracle. Moshe and Aharon thus made themselves look more
impressive, as we explained above, but deprived the generation that would enter
the Land of Israel of their own revelation. In so doing, Moshe and Aharon had
created a situation whereby they themselves could not enter the Land; their
“punishment” was not excessive, it was merely the result of their own actions.

What was Moshe’s motivation in choosing this course of action? Rashi and
Rambam pointed at anger as the cause. On the other hand, we may posit that
when Moshe heard this generation complaining in much the same way as the
previous generation, he began to consider the education these children received
from their parents: If they had inherited the cynicism, the complaints and the
rebellious attitude, then they must have inherited some positive traits as well.
Perhaps Moshe felt that the collective experience of Sinai had also been
effectively communicated, and this generation did not need a new collective
experience.

According to the Meshech Chochma, Moshe is barred from the Land of Israel, but
not because his sin has made him unworthy; quite the opposite. Moshe was too
great for this new generation. They were incapable of understanding the purity of
spirit, the modesty, the greatness of Moshe. They were unaware that man could
reach such a level. G-d desired that this generation be uplifted, in order to merit
leaders like Moshe and Aharon. Unfortunately, unwittingly, Moshe and Aharon
thwarted that plan. They, too, would die in the desert, and this new generation
would have to enter Israel without them. Indeed, Moshe and Aharon never do
enter the Land. The nation enters alone, under Yehoshua instead of Moshe. Yes,
Yehoshua is a great man, but he is not Moshe, and we are left with a haunting
question: What would have been accomplished had Moshe joined them, had
Moshe led them?

While such hypothetical questions may be tantalizing, we can say one thing with
certainty: The theme of death, which permeates the Parsha, would have been
considerably limited had Moshe and Aharon acted differently, and had the people
been worthy of them as leaders.