[Par-navi] Yehoshua chapter 22

[Menachem Leibtag]

The TSC series on Sefer Yehoshua is dedicated in memory of Max and Eli
Podolski z"l.

*************************************************************
     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.