This chapter continues the theme of the first, presenting further questions regarding G‑d’s commandment to Moshe to wage war against Midian.
In this chapter, the Rebbe Rashab also introduces one of the basic chassidic themes of the maamar, that Midian serves as the counterpart in the realm of evil to G‑d’s name Havayah.
וְגַם צָרִיךְ לְהָבִין בְּעֶצֶם עִנְיַן הַמִּלְחָמָה בְּמִדְיָן,
It is also necessary to understand the fundamental nature of the war against Midian.
דְּעִקַּר הַכַּוָּנָה בָּזֶה הָיָה לִנְקוֹם נִקְמַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵהַמִּדְיָנִים,
The principal reason1 behind it was for the Children of Israel to exact retribution from the Midianites
לֹא בִּכְדֵי לָרֶשֶׁת אֶת אַרְצָם,
rather than to acquire their lands,
כִּי לְפִי הַנִּרְאֶה מֵהַכְּתוּבִים לֹא יָרְשׁוּ אֶת אֶרֶץ מִדְיָן.
for the Torah implies that the land of Midian did not become part of Israel’s inheritance.
דְּמַה שֶּׁיָּרְשׁוּ בְּנֵי גָד וּרְאוּבֵן וַחֲצִי שֵׁבֶט מְנַשֶּׁה הָיָה מֵאֶרֶץ סִיחוֹן וְעוֹג,
The lands inherited by the tribes of Gad, Reuven and half of Menashe had belonged to Sichon and Og,
These lands were also not part of the land originally destined for the Jewish people.2 They were conquered by the Jews through wars led by Moshe. However, in contrast to the land of Midian, these lands became part of the inheritance of the Jewish people.
וּכְמוֹ שֶׁפֵּרֵשׁ רַשִׁ"י עַל פָּסוּק עֲטָרוֹת וְדִיבוֹן
as Rashi explains on the phrase,3 “Ataros and Divon.”
(וּלְדִבְרֵי הָרַמְבַּ"ן בְּפָרָשַׁת בָּלָק עַל פָּסוּק זִקְנֵי מִדְיָן,
(Ramban’s understanding of the narrative conflicts with the above. Commenting on the words,4 “the elders of Midian” in Parshas Balak, he states that
הָיָה מִדְיָן בִּכְלַל אֶרֶץ סִיחוֹן,
the territory of Midian was actually part of the land of Sichon.
וְנִמְצָא בִּכְלַל יְרֻשַּׁת אֶרֶץ סִיחוֹן נִכְלַל גַּם אֶרֶץ מִדְיָן.
Thus, Midian was included within the land inherited from Sichon.
וּלְפִי זֶה צְרִיכִים לוֹמַר שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁלְמָה שְׁלֵמוּת מִלְחֶמֶת סִיחוֹן עַד שֶׁנִּלְחֲמוּ בְּמַלְכֵי מִדְיָן.
According to this understanding, it must be said that the war with Sichon was not completed until after the war against the kings of Midian. Thus, Ramban’s view differs from the previous statement that the Jews did not inherit the land of Midian and that the intention of the war might actually have been about conquering the land, according to which the question raised by the maamar no longer stands.
וְלֹא מַשְׁמָע כֵּן מֵהַפְּסוּקִים,)
However, the literal meaning of the Scriptural verses does not support Ramban’s view and, therefore, the statement that the land of Midian was not inherited by the Jews can be accepted.)
כִּי אִם עִקַּר הַכַּוָּנָה הָיָה לִנְקוֹם כוּ'.
Thus, the principal reason for this war was retribution.
וְצָרִיךְ לְהָבִין בָּזֶה,
It is necessary to understand a seeming contradiction within the narrative itself:5
דִּבְמַאֲמַר ה' לְמֹשֶׁה כְּתִיב נְקוֹם נִקְמַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כוּ'',
When quoting G‑d’s words to Moshe, Scripture states, “Exact the retribution of the Children of Israel,”
וּמֹשֶׁה אָמַר לְיִשְׂרָאֵל לָתֵת אֶת נִקְמַת הוי' בְּמִדְיָן.
yet Moshe tells Israel “to exact the retribution of G‑d from Midian.”
וְצָרִיךְ לְהָבִין מַהוּ עִנְיַן נִקְמַת הוי',
We must understand what is meant by “the retribution of G‑d.”
הֲלֹא לֹא עָשׂוּ מִדְיָן רָעָה רַק לְיִשְׂרָאֵל,
Midian harmed only Israel,
וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב כִּי צוֹרְרִים הֵם לָכֶם כוּ',
as it is written,6 “For they harass you.”
וְעַל זֶה אָמַר נְקוֹם נִקְמַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כוּ',
As a response to this, it is said, “Exact the retribution of the Children of Israel.”
אֲבָל מַה שַּׁיָּךְ זֶה לְשֵׁם הוי'.
But what does this have to do with the retribution of G‑d, and more particularly, with G‑d’s name Havayah?
Havayah refers to the Four-Letter Name of G‑d, י-ה-ו-ה, as commonly pronounced in the study of Chassidus. This name is associated with the G‑dly light that entirely transcends the structures of the world, being past, present, and future as one.
וְאִם
True,
The Rebbe offers a possible resolution why the verse speaks of both the retribution of Havayah and the retribution of the Jewish people.
מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחֵלֶק הוי' עַמּוֹ,
it is written,7 “part of G‑d is His people,”
וּכְתִיב יִצְּרֶנְהוּ כְּאִישׁוֹן עֵינוֹ,
and “He kept them as the apple of His eye.”
כָּל הַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּהֶם כְּאִלּוּ נוֹגֵעַ בְּבָבַת עֵינוֹ כוּ'',
And our Sages say,8 “Whoever touches them, it is as if he touches the apple of His eye.”
וּמִמֵּילָא נִקְמַת יִשְׂרָאֵל הוּא נִקְמַת הוי' כוּ',
From these texts, it follows that the “retribution of Israel” is simultaneously the “retribution of G‑d.”
הִנֵּה בֶּאֱמֶת כֵּן הוּא,
All this is, indeed, true.
אָמְנָם מִמַּה שֶּׁפָּרַט כַּאן
However,9 from the specific wording of the text,
לָתֵת נִקְמַת הוי' בְּמִדְיָן,
“Exact the retribution of Havayah against Midian,”
מַשְׁמָע שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְזֶה שַׁיָּכוּת בִּפְרָט לְשֵׁם הוי',
the implication is that the war against Midian is intrinsically connected to G‑d’s name Havayah. Therefore, the resolution offered above is not completely satisfactory and further explanation is necessary.
דְּהַיְנוּ דִּקְלִפַּת מִדְיָן הוּא הֵפֶךְ וּמְנַגֵּד לְגַמְרֵי לְשֵׁם הוי'.
The intent is that Midian, as well as being an actual nation, is representative of a spiritual force, a power in the realm of evil. From the above verse, it appears that the kelipah10 of Midian is the evil counterpart and force opposing G‑d’s name Havayah.
וּבְמַה שֶּׁפָּעֲלוּ מִדְיָן וְהֶחֱטִיאוּ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל,
When Midian caused Israel to sin,
שֶׁזֶּהוּ פְּעֻלַּת וְהִתְפַּשְּׁטוּת קְלִפָּתָם כוּ',
through the activity and expression of its kelipah, i.e., the evil that is its spiritual source,
פָּגְמוּ בְּזֶה בְּשֵׁם הוי'.
a blemish was brought upon the name of G‑d, i.e., there was an obstruction to the revelation of G‑dliness.
וְעַל זֶה אָמַר לָתֵת נִקְמַת הוי' בְּמִדְיָן,
Concerning this, it is written, “to exact the retribution of Havayah from Midian,”
לִנְקוֹם מֵהֶם וּלְאַבְּדָם,
i.e., by taking revenge against them and destroying them,
שֶׁעַל יְדֵי זֶה יְתֻקַּן הַפְּגַם כוּ'.
the Jews would rectify that blemish.
וְלִכְאוֹרָה אֵין זֶה מוּבָן,
On the surface, this is difficult to understand:
מַהוּ עִנְיַן הַמְנַגֵּד דְּמִדְיָן לְשֵׁם הוי',
How is it that Midian is the evil counterpart of G‑d’s name Havayah,
עַד שֶׁאוֹמֵר עַל זֶה לָתֵת נִקְמַת הוי' כוּ',
to the point that destroying them is called “the retribution of Havayah”?
וְלִכְאוֹרָה, מַה שֶּׁיָּכוֹל לִהְיוֹת פְּגַם בְּשֵׁם הוי' הוּא יוֹתֵר מֵהַז' אֻמּוֹת,
One might think that the seven Canaanite nations would cause a greater blemish in G‑d’s name Havayah,
שֶׁהֵן הַז' מִדּוֹת רָעוֹת, שֶׁהֵן לְעֻמַּת זֶה דִקְדֻשָּׁה, כַּיָּדוּעַ,
for, as is well-known,11 they represent the seven evil attributes, the antithesis of holiness.
Every entity in this world is a representation of spiritual reality above. Just as there are seven emotive qualities in the realm of holiness corresponding to the seven midos,12there are seven emotive qualities in the realm of evil. The seven Canaanite nations are an embodiment of these seven undesirable qualities. Therefore, there was a need to conquer the lands of these seven nations and transform them into Eretz Yisrael, thereby including them in the realm of holiness.
אֲבָל מִדְיָן אֵינוֹ בִּכְלַל הַז' אֻמּוֹת כְּלָל כוּ'.
Midian, however, is not one of these seven nations.
וְעוֹד צָרִיךְ לְהָבִין, מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב הֵחָלְצוּ מֵאִתְּכֶם
Another matter requiring explanation is the Torah’s use of the word Heichaltzu (“arm yourselves”).
הָיָה צָרִיךְ לִהְיוֹת יֵחָלְצוּ,
Yeichaltzu, in the third person, would have been more appropriate.
דְּהֵחָלְצוּ מַשְׁמָע כֻּלְּכֶם,
To explain: Heichaltzu implies “all of you.”
וּלְפִי מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב מֵאִתְּכֶם,
But since the verse states, “Arm from you,”
שֶׁלֹּא הָלְכוּ כֻּלָּם לַמִּלְחָמָה, רַק אֶלֶף לַמַּטֶּה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב אַחַר כָּךְ,
meaning that the people did not all go to war, only one thousand per tribe, as the Torah subsequently indicates,
וְזֶהוּ שֶׁכָּתוּב מֵאִתְּכֶם וְלֹא כֻּלְּכֶם,
which is why the text states “from you” (i.e., “part of you”) rather than “all of you,”
אִם כֵּן הֲוָה לֵיהּ לְמֵימַר יֵחָלְצוּ וְלֹא הֵחָלְצוּ,
it follows that yeichaltzu, rather than heichaltzu, would have been the preferred term,
וּמַשְׁמָע שֶׁקָּאֵי עַל כְּלָלוּת יִשְׂרָאֵל,
for the latter refers to the Jewish people as a whole,
שֶׁיֵּחָלְצוּ וְיִזְדָּרְזוּ לְמִלְחָמָה זוֹ כוּ'.
implying that they all should arm themselves and ardently prepare for this war.
The Rebbe Rashab is explaining that it seemingly would have been more appropriate for the verse to use the term yeichaltzu because it implies that soldiers would be selected from among the tribes, while heichaltzu implies that the entire people would go to war.
וְגַם מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב אַחַר כָּךְ אֶלֶף לַמַּטֶּה כוּ' לְכֹל מַטּוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל,
Another question regarding the passage: Instead of stating, “One thousand per tribe... for all the tribes of Israel,”
הֲוָה לֵיהּ לְמֵימַר מִכֹּל מַטּוֹת כוּ'.
seemingly, the verse should have said “from every tribe.”
The Rebbe Rashab is quoting a question posed by the Alter Rebbe (Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 85d), which focuses on the grammatical construction employed. The Rebbe Rashab does not answer this question explicitly in the maamar here. See Likkutei Torah, loc. cit., p. 88b, where the Alter Rebbe explains that the words lichol mattos indicate that the war was fought as a combined effort of the entire Jewish people.
קִצּוּר.
Summary:
עִנְיַן מִלְחֶמֶת מִדְיָן.
The intent of the war against Midian — that it was fought for revenge and not conquest;
מְנַגֵּד לְשֵׁם הוי'.
the opposition to G‑d’s name Havayah;
קֻשְׁיוֹת בִּלְשׁוֹן הַכָּתוּב.
questions on the language used in the Torah, which implies that the war against Midian was to be fought by the entire Jewish people.
