[Par-reg] Parshat Chukat - shiur #2 - Chronology of events

Wed Jun 20 15:43:40 EDT 2007

************************************************************
THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org]
  In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag
************************************************************

 PARSHAT CHUKAT - 
 WHEN DID THE MEI MERIVA INCIDENT TAKE PLACE?

 To test a new theory, I'd like to share with you a shiur concerning 
WHEN the events at Mei Meriva took place, and I would appreciate your 
feedback. The theory may sound a bit 'radical' at first and I'm not at

all convinced that its correct, but I'd like to share it with you
since 
it's very interesting and maybe someone can help me prove or disprove 
it. 
 [To follow the shiur you'll definitely need a Tanach in hand; in 
fact using two would help out when we compare psukim. A "mikraot 
gdolot" will come in handy as well.]

INTRODUCTION
 Just about everyone takes for granted that the Mei Meriva incident 
takes place in the 40th year. The reason for this is quite simple -
Mei 
Meriva takes place immediately after the death of Miriam (see Bamidbar

20:1), and Miriam died in the first month of the FORTIETH year -
didn't 
she?
 Let's double check this assumption by taking a closer look at that 
pasuk:
"And Bnei Yisrael [the entire congregation] arrived at MIDBAR TZIN 
on the first month, and the people settled down in Kadesh, there 
Miriam died and was buried."  (20:1)

 Note, that we are only told that this took place on the first 
month, but there is no mention of the year at all! So why does
everyone 
assume that it is year FORTY?
 Most of the classical commentators deal with this question. Let's 
start with Rashbam's explanation (on 20:1):
 "And Miriam died there: On the first month at the end of the FORTY 
years - for Aharon died on the fifth month of the fortieth year, as it

states [explicitly] in Parshat Masei."

 Rashbam's logic is quite straightforward. Since later in this same 
chapter we learn about Aharon's death (see 20:22-29), AND since
Parshat 
Masei states explicitly that Aharon died on the fifth month of the 
FORTIETH year - then [most likely] Miriam died (four months earlier) 
during that SAME year. 
 Note however that Rashbam's assumption is based on "parshanut" 
(exegesis) and not on a "masoret" (tradition).
[In other words, Rashbam doesn't say that we have a tradition that 
tells that Miriam died in the 40th year, rather, one can deduce 
this date from the psukim. Therefore, if by using the same tools of 
"parshanut" [i.e. by carefully studying all of the psukim involved] 
one arrives at a different conclusion, it is permitted to suggest 
(and discuss and debate) other possibilities as well - better known 
as "la'asok b'divrei Torah"./ "v'akmal"]

IBN EZRA in his pirush (on 20:1) gets right to the point:
"In the first month: In the FORTIETH YEAR. And (thus) behold that 
there is neither a story nor a prophecy in the Torah other than in 
the FIRST year and in the FORTIETH year."

 Ibn Ezra makes a very bold statement. He claims that from the 
moment that God decreed the punishment of forty years (after chet 
ha'meraglim) Chumash goes into a 'coma' for 38 years, no stories, no 
mitzvot - we learn about nothing until the fortieth year, and those 
events begin here in chapter 20!
[One could ask concerning the story of Korach which would seem to 
have take place in the interim, but recall that Ibn Ezra himself 
claims that narrative to be 'out of order' and places it BEFORE 
Bnei Yisrael left Har Sinai! See his pirush to Bamidbar 16:1 and 
Ramban's refutation as well.]

 However, Ibn Ezra does not explain here how he arrives at that 
conclusion. [We'll return to a possible source later in the shiur, but

most probably he would explain as Rashbam does.]

 RAMBAN too agrees that Bnei Yisrael first arrive at Midbar Tzin in 
the fortieth year. [Later we'll see how and why he argues here with
Ibn 
Ezra.] But most important is how he concludes his pirush to 20:
"But this KADESH is located in MIDBAR TZIN, and [Bnei Yisrael] 
arrived there in the FORTIETH year, and there Miriam died, and the 
psukim are EXPLICIT!"
[Note that the "girsa" in Torat Chaim's Ramban is "u'mikraot 
mfurashim HEYM" while Chavel's edition has: "u'mikraot mfurashim 
SHAM"!]

 Now Ramban tells us that the psukim are explicit, but he doesn't 
say which psukim he is referring to!
[Note again how neither Chavel's Ramban nor Torat Chaim's provide a 
footnote to explain what psukim Ramban is referring to (even though 
you would expect them to).]

 Most likely, Ramban is referring to psukim in Moshe's first speech 
in Sefer Devarim. In fact, in CHIZKUNI's parallel explanation (on
20:1/ 
he concurs that they arrive at Midbar Tzin in the fortieth year), he 
attempts to reconciliate these psukim with parallel psukim both in 
Parshat Masei and in Sefer Devarim.
[I suggest that you see that Chizkuni inside, but AFTER you are 
familiar with those sources.]

 To figure out what Ramban is referring to we must first take a step 
back and try to follow the flow of events, and then take inventory of 
all of the related sources in Chumash that describe this leg of Bnei 
Yisrael's journey. 

WHERE HAVE THEY BEEN TILL NOW?
 Where were Bnei Yisrael before they arrive at KADESH Midbar Tzin 
(in 20:1)? Let's work backwards to figure it out. 
 The last story in Chumash was the incident with Korach. But no 
where in that narrative are we told WHERE that story took place. [That

is what allows Ramban & Ibn Ezra to argue about it.] Therefore we must

work our way backwards again to the story of the "meraglim" in Parshat

Shlach which took place in KADESH BARNEA. 
 In other words, the last PLACE (in Chumash) that Bnei Yisrael were 
'spotted' was in KADESH BARNEA. But they couldn't have stayed there 
very long. Recall that immediately after the chet ha'meraglim God 
commands them to leave Kadesh Barnea and head SOUTH:
"... the Amalekites and Canaanites are sitting in the valley, 
TOMORROW turn around and travel into the desert towards the Red 
Sea." (14:25)

 Bnei Yisrael don't listen, and the "ma'aplilm" decide to attack 
anyhow (and are defeated/ see 14:39-45), but that defeat would not be
a 
reason for them to stay in Kadesh Barnea. God wants them to travel
into 
the desert - to the south- AWAY from Eretz Canaan, for if they stay 
near Kadesh Barnea most likely they will be attacked by Canaanites who

most likely are already on guard because of the 'rumors' about Bnei 
Yisrael's plan to conquer 'their' land.
 Now Parshat Shlach stops right here without telling us if, when, or 
how they actually left Kadesh Barnea; but according to "pshat", based 
on 14:25 (quoted above), it would be safe to assume that they left 
immediately, just as God commanded them to!

 As Sefer Bamdibar continues, the next time an encampment is 
recorded is in Parshat Chukat, as Bnei Yisrael arrive at Kadesh Midbar

Tzin (see 20:1). What happened in the meantime? How many years
elapsed? 
Did they travel to (or toward) the Red Sea as God commanded them?
 At least partial answers to these questions are found in Parshat 
Masei and in Sefer Devarim.

THE 18 STOP JOURNEY IN PARSHAT MASEI
 Parshat Masei is our most comprehensive source for it lists all 48 
locations in which Bnei Yisrael encamped (see 33:1-49).
 [The problem with Parshat Masei is that it mentions locations that 
are not mentioned anywhere else in Chumash, but skips many locations 
that are mentioned elsewhere (such as Kadesh Barnea itself)! But that 
should not affect our shiur too much. Chazal claim that Ritma is
Kadesh 
Barnea - see Rashi on 33:18.]

 Let's pick up Parshat Masei as it records Bnei Yisrael's journey 
from Har Sinai (see 33:16). From Sinai they travel to Kivrot ha'taava,

and then to Chatzerot, and then to Ritma. Now Kivrot ha'taava and 
Chatzerot have already been mentioned in Parshat Bha'alotcha (see 
11:34-35), but Ritma is not. However, Parshat Bha'alotcha tells us
that 
they camped next in Midbar Paraan (see 12:16), and from there Moshe 
sent the meraglim (see 13:3) from an area known as KADESH BARNEA in 
Midbar Paraan.
[Parshat Shlach never mentions Kadesh Barnea itself, but everywhere 
else in Chumash when chet ha'mergalim is mentioned, it states 
explicitly KADESH BARNEA - see Bamidbar 32:8 and Devarim 1:3,19; 
2:14; and 9:23! Most likely "Kadesha" mentioned in 13:26 refers to 
(and is a short form of) Kadesh Barnea.]

 Therefore, Chazal identify Ritma with Kadesh Barnea, and its 'new 
name' reflects the events which took place there (see Rashi 33:18). 
Then Parshat Masei mentions an additional 18 stops from Ritma until 
Bnei Yisrael arrive in Midbar Tzin (see 33:18-36), which were not 
mentioned anywhere else earlier in Sefer Bamidbar.
[Now you can read the first part of the Chizkuni on 20:1 and better 
understand what he's talking about.]

 Now among the 18 locations we find Yotvata and Etzion Gaver, sites 
which almost for sure are somewhere in the SOUTHERN Negev, not far
from 
the Red Sea (i.e. near Eilat). Most likely, this journey SOUTHWARD was

a fulfillment of God's command to leave Kadesh Barnea towards the Red 
Sea (see again 14:25).

 Then, Parshat Masei tells us that Bnei Yisrael travel from Etzion 
Gaver and arrive at Kadesh Midbar Tzin (see 33:36-38/ compare with 
20:1), but does not tell us on what year they arrived. 
[However, it is quite clear that they LEAVE Kadesh Midbar Tzin in 
the fortieth year, for from Kadesh they travel to Hor Ha'Har to 
bury Aharon - and that event for sure took place in year 40 as the 
pasuk itself testifies (33:38).]

 So was Kadesh Midbar Tzin the LAST stop after a long forty year 
journey, OR was Kadesh Midbar Tzin the LONG stopover where Bnei
Yisrael 
may have spent MOST of the years while waiting for the first
generation 
to die?
 Enter Sefer Devarim!

 Recall that in Moshe Rabeinu's first speech in Sefer Devarim 
(chapters 1->4), he explains why forty years had elapsed since Bnei 
Yisrael SHOULD have entered. Therefore, the first part of that speech 
includes the story of chet ha'meraglim, for that was the primary
reason 
for the forty year delay.

WILL THE REAL 'KADESH' PLEASE STAND UP
 That story states specifically that the meraglim were sent from 
KADESH BARNEA (see 1:19), and also includes God's commandment that
Bnei 
Yisrael must immediately leave and travel back into the desert toward 
the Red Sea (see 1:40). But after the story of the "ma'apilim" (see 
1:41-45) there is one small, but very important pasuk: 
 "va'teshvu ba'KADESH yamim rabim, kayamim asher ya'shavtem."
[And you settled (or sat) in KADESH many days - as the days that 
you settled (or sat) there."  (1:46)
[Note the difficulty in translating this pasuk! See for example 
JPS and its footnote.]

 So what KADESH is this pasuk referring to? There are two 
candidates:
 1) KADESH BARNEA - where the meraglim were sent from
 2) KADESH MIDBAR TZIN - where the Mei Meriva story took place

 But based on our analysis above, it CANNOT be Kadesh Barnea! After 
all, God commanded them to LEAVE Kadesh Barnea - "machar" -the NEXT 
DAY. Why then would they stay there for a long time?
 [It cannot be because the ma'apilim lost their battle, since that 
defeat is only more reason to retreat to a safer location farther
away. 
Most likely the Canaanites have heard rumors of Bnei Yisrael's 
impending attack and now that they are camped so close [Kadesh Barnea 
borders on eretz canaan (see Bamidbar 34:4)] - God commands that they 
move to the south for their own safety. Otherwise they will be
attacked 
and God is no longer 'with them' to protect them in battle.]

 So why do almost all of the commentators explain that KADESH here 
means KADESH BARNEA? [see Ibn Ezra & Chizkuni]
 After all, in this very same chapter Kadesh Barnea has already been 
mentioned twice (see 1:3 & 1:19 and 2:14) and each by its full name 
KADESH BARNEA! Why then would Moshe refer to it now simply as KADESH -

especially when there is another location called KADESH (i.e. Kadesh 
Midbar Tzin) which is always referred to simply as KADESH?!

FOLLOWING THE FLOW FROM MERAGLIM TO ARVOT MOAV
 Most probably, the reason why everyone explains KADESH here as 
KADESH BARNEA is because of the immediate context of this pasuk.
 [Before continuing, you must review 1:40->2:14 on your own, and 
attempt to follow the flow. Compare them with the parallel account in 
Bamidbar 20:14->21:4, and especially 20:16 & 21:4! Pay careful 
attention to Dvarim 2:14 as well.]

 Let's follow the flow:
   * the story of chet ha'meraglim (1:19-40)
   * God's command to LEAVE Kadesh Barnea -> Yam Suf (1:40)
   * The "ma'apilim" are defeated, Bnei Yisrael cry (1:41-45)
  ** -- AND YOU SETTLED IN KADESH FOR MANY DAYS (1:46)
   * "Then we turned and travelled into the DESERT towards YAM 
SUF, as GOD HAD COMMANDED US, and we circled Har Seir for many days". 
(2:1 / this pasuk is KEY)

 The last pasuk which we quoted is the KEY to understanding what 
happened, [and its most likely what Ramban was referring to when he 
said "ha'mikraot m'furashim"]. 
 As Chizkuni (on 2:1) explains - the travel described in this pasuk 
is precisely the same 18 stops described in Parshat Masei from Ritma
to 
Kadesh Midbar Tzin. Most likely, he reaches this conclusion for the 
following reason:
 Since God commanded Bnei Yisrael to travel towards Yam Suf in 1:40, 
it only makes sense that this pasuk describes HOW Bnei Yisrael 
fulfilled this command. In fact the pasuk states explicitly "as God
had 
commanded us" (2:1) - i.e. his command in 1:40. Furthermore, that 
journey took "many days" - therefore it coincides perfectly with the
18 
stop journey from Ritma to Kadesh as described in Parshat Masei. If
so, 
then KADESH which is mentioned in the previous pasuk (1:46) CANNOT be 
Kadesh Midbar Tzin, since Bnei Yisrael had not arrived there yet,
since 
they only arrive there after the journey described in 2:1. Therefore, 
KADESH in 1:46 must be KADESH BARNEA, and it would seem that Bnei 
Yisrael remained for a long time in Kadesh Barnea, most probably 
feeling quite devastated by the events of the meraglim and ma'apilim.
 But what about God's command of "machar, pnu u'su lachem" (1:40)? 
Should they not have left right away?
 On the other hand, 2:1 must be talking about the 18 stop journey, 
for that is the only journey when Bnei Yisrael travel for 'many days' 
in the direction of Yam Suf. [Isn't it?]
 Therefore all of the commentators prefer this explanation of 2:1, 
and prefer to overlook the problem with "machar" (in 1:40) -and hence 
KADESH in 1:46 must be KADESH BARNEA and therefore, they only arrive
in 
Kadesh Midbar Tzin in the fortieth year.
[I'm almost sure that this is how all of the rishonim understood 
these psukim, if anyone has heard a different explanation - please 
write me.]

NOT SO FAST!
 However, there is one small hole in this interpretation. The 
assumption that 2:1 refers to the 18 stop journey was based on two
very 
strong points:
 1) they travelled south to Yam Suf, and that was only once.
 2) just as God had commanded / in 1:40

 But one can argue with both of these points. [It's a bit 
complicated, so follow carefully with your Tanach in hand.]
 Note how the next set of psukim in Sefer Devarim (see 2:2-8), 
relates BACK to the journey described in 2:1. Let's explain how:
"Then God said to me saying: You have been circling this mountain 
for too long - turn to the NORTH. And command the people saying: 
You are passing now along the border of your brother Esav... then 
we passed thru the land of 'bnei Esav' along the way of the ARAVA 
from Eilot & Etzion Gaver and then we passed Moav... until we 
reached Nachal Zared."
       (see 2:2-14)

 Now this journey CANNOT be the 18 stop journey from Ritma to 
Kadesh, since this journey ends in Transjordan, in the land of Moav.
In 
fact, this is the final journey of the end of the fortieth year when 
Bnei Yisrael pass thru Seir, Moav, and Amon and fight with Sichon & Og

and camp in Arvot Moav. In other words, this is not the journey of 
33:16-36 in Parshat Masei, rather it is the last leg of the journey 
described in Parshat Masei, i.e. 33:40-49, AFTER they leave Kadesh 
Midbar Tzin.
 And if the journey described in 2:2-13 is from Kadesh Midbar Tzin 
to Arvot Moav, then (based in its context) so must be the journey 
described in 2:1!
 And if 2:1 describes this last leg of the journey, the KADESH 
mentioned in 1:46 must be Kadesh Midbar Tzin - just as its name 
implies!
 But how about our two anchors? How can this last leg of the journey 
be considered a travel TOWARDS YAM SUF, and how could it be referred
to 
"as God had commanded us" (see 2:1)?
 The answer is simple. Go back to Parshat Chukat and the parallel 
account of Bnei Yisrael's departure from KADESH Midbar Tzin:
"And Moshe sent messengers from KADESH to the King of Edom 
saying:... we are now in Kadesh - a city on your border - let us 
pass thru your land..."  (see Bamidbar 20:14-21)

 But Edom [=bnei Esav] did not allow Bnei Yisrael to pass. But God 
COMMANDED them not to attack Edom, but instead to CIRCLE the land Edom

by travelling south TOWARDS YAM SUF, and then crossing the ARAVA 
towards the east, and then turning north towards Moav!
 And this is exactly what Parshat Chukat tells us in the next 
chapter:
 "And we left Hor ha'Har (next to Kadesh), and travelled TOWARDS YAM 
SUF, to CIRCLE the land of EDOM..." (21:4)
  [From there they travelled north (see 21:10-20) thru Moav etc. 
ending up in Arvot Moav. Compare this journey with the second leg in 
Parshat Masei (33:38-48/ you'll see that its the same journey! 

 So lo and behold we find a SECOND journey, commanded by God, where 
Bnei Yisrael travel TOWARDS YAM SUF and CIRCLE HAR SEIR. It is this 
journey, described in Parshat Chukat and detailed in Parshat Masei 
(33:38-48) that Devarim 2:1 could very easily be referring to! And 
hence, this SECOND journey as well fulfills both criteria mentioned 
above ("derech Yam Suf" and "as God commanded")- and KADESH in 1:46
can 
still be KADESH Midbar Tzin -and all of the psukim work out perfectly!

 The final proof that Bnei Yisrael must have left Kadesh Barnea 
immediately and not waited there for too long is from Devarim 2:14:
 "And the days that we travelled from KADESH BARNEA until we reached 
NACHAL ZARED (border with Moav) were 38 YEARS..."

 This pasuk states explicitly that Bnei Yisrael LEFT Kadesh Barnea 
in YEAR 2, and therefore, they could not have stayed there for "yamim 
rabim" [which implies many years / see Breishit 24:55].

IN CONCLUSION / & SOME REMARKS
 So "l'mai nafka minah" - what difference does it make when Bnei 
Yisrael first arrived in KADESH.

 If we understand that they arrive in Kadesh Midbar Tzin only in 
year 40, then Moshe's  sin at Mei Meriva takes place in the fortieth 
year, and Miriam dies at an age of approx. 130!
 However, based on our shiur we can entertain the possibility that 
Bnei Yisrael arrived in Kadesh Midbar Tzin only several years after 
chet ha'meraglim, i.e. after the 18 stop journey from Kadesh Barnea 
(southward) towards Yam Suf back, and then back north to Kadesh Midbar

Tzin. Now this journey most likely took several years as it served as
a 
precaution against any further Canaanite attacks, but there is no 
reason why it should have taken thirty eight years! If indeed this 
journey was only several years, then Moshe's sin at Mei Meriva could 
have taken place only a short time after chet ha'meraglim and the
story 
of Korach.   Consequently, this would fit in thematically very 
nicely with our shiurim on Bhaalotcha, Shlach, and Korach, which all 
indicate a slow but definite gap between Moshe and the people and
hence 
the collapse of his leadership. Then, the story at Mei Meriva would 
form the conclusion of these events, rather than an isolated incident 
that took place some 38 years later. [It would also have Miriam's 
death at an age under 120.] 

 There are several other implications, but the main purpose of this 
shiur was simply to study Chumash, trying to figure out all of the 
possibilities. Once again, if you have any comments to help prove or 
disprove this theory, please write.       
   shabbat shalom,        
    menachem
==========================
FOR FURTHER IYUN
A. Note also from Bamidbar 34:4 that Kadesh Barnea is located on the 
SOUTHERN border of Eretz Canaan, and that's exactly why the meraglim 
are sent from there. (Today, this area is identified just over the 
Egyptian border with Israel in the Negev, about 20 kilometers east of 
Sdeh Boker and south of Nitzana.]

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: chukat2.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 39959 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-reg/attachments/20070620/c0be3aca/attachment-0001.pdf 