וַיָּבֹאוּ עַד-נַחַל אֶשְׁכֹּל, וַיִּכְרְתוּ מִשָּׁם זְמוֹרָה וְאֶשְׁכּוֹל עֲנָבִים אֶחָד, וַיִּשָּׂאֻהוּ בַמּוֹט, בִּשְׁנָיִם; וּמִן-הָרִמֹּנִים, וּמִן-הַתְּאֵנִים.
"And they came unto the valley of Eshcol, and cut down from thence a branch with one cluster of grapes, and they bore it upon a pole between two; they took also of the pomegranates, and of the figs."
The midrash rabba on parashat shlach states:
וַיָּבֹאוּ עַד-נַחַל אֶשְׁכֹּל - לא רצו לטל מפרות ארץ ישראל. אלולי כלב ששלף את הזין וירץ לפניהם ואמר להם אם אין אתם נוטלים או אתם הורגים אותי או אני הורג אתכם, לא היו נוטלים. אִם-לֹא הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר דָּרְכָה רַגְלְךָ בָּהּ, לְךָ תִהְיֶה
"And they came unto the valley of Eshcol" - they did not wish to take from the fruits of the land of Israel. Had not Caleb unsheathed his sword and ran in front of them and said to them, 'If you do not take (the fruits to show to the Israelites), either you will kill me or I will kill you,' they would not have taken. (Then it cites the verse from Yehoshua, '...Surely the land whereon thy foot hath trodden shall be ___ to thee..." (the word inheritance from the full verse is not in the citation, so I left it out of the translation.)
The full verse in sefer yehoshua is:
Yehoshua 14:9
וַיִּשָּׁבַע מֹשֶׁה, בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא לֵאמֹר, אִם-לֹא הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר דָּרְכָה רַגְלְךָ בָּהּ, לְךָ תִהְיֶה לְנַחֲלָה וּלְבָנֶיךָ עַד-עוֹלָם: כִּי מִלֵּאתָ, אַחֲרֵי יְהוָה אֱלֹהָי.
"And Moses swore on that day, saying: Surely the land whereon thy foot hath trodden shall be an inheritance to thee and to thy children for ever, because thou hast wholly followed the LORD my God."
Why am I citing this midrash? Three reasons. First, I think it is exciting. Second, it fits in with a post I made earlier this week, about putting one's own life at risk to save another person's life.
There, I translated the following yerushalmi:
Rabbi Ami was captured by bandits. Rabbi Yonatan said, the dead one will be wrapped in his sheets. {that is, there is no way to save him.}
Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said, 'I will kill or be killed' (lit: Until I kill (or) I will be killed. i.e. I will try to save him, by killing all his captors, or will die in the process. We know from elsewhere that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish was a bandit, skilled in weapons, before he repented and became a scholar.) I will go and save him by force.
He went and persuaded them (convinced them to turn R Ami over, perhaps with threats) and they gave him over to him.
He (Resh Lakish) said to them (the bandits) go to the Old One (Rabbi Yochanan) and he will pray for you. They went to Rabbi Yochanan (note, this is *not* Rabbi Yonatan of before, unless it is a typo.)
He (R Yochanan) said to them, 'that which was in your hearts to do to him should come to pass on you.' They did not reach Apipsiros before they all went (died).
This is the same language as that used by Calev. Either you will kill me or I will kill you. It shows that you will stand up forcefully for something. Perhaps this midrash can be used to show how the phrase is used in the gemara, which can perhaps help determine what the halacha is on this matter.
Thirdly, I'm interested in how the prooftext from Yehoshua supports the midrash.
The commentaries address this (having to do with where the spies wanted to go, and Calev being rewarded with the land as an inheritance for going where they did not, which really does not fit in well with the midrash and specifically the taking of the fruit, Calev's action of unsheathing his sword, and the language of his threat). My own suggestion: the only cited text was אִם-לֹא הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר דָּרְכָה רַגְלְךָ בָּהּ, לְךָ תִהְיֶה, so we should not focus on the Nachala = inheritance aspects of it.
Rather, the midrash deconstructs the citation as follows: אִם-לֹא, "If not" - if you do not take from the fruit of the land. הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר דָּרְכָה רַגְלְךָ בָּהּ - "The earth upon which you," - the spies" - "are currently walking over", לְךָ תִהְיֶה, "will be to you," that is, you will be buried there, (sort of like a mes mitzvah is koneh his 4 amos for his burial) this earth will be yours. Perhaps we can add text from the end of the pasuk to the quote: עַד-עוֹלָם - "for ever" - with threatening finality.
Update: We should also look locally for the drasha. The local pasuk is:
וַיָּבֹאוּ עַד-נַחַל אֶשְׁכֹּל, וַיִּכְרְתוּ מִשָּׁם זְמוֹרָה וְאֶשְׁכּוֹל עֲנָבִים אֶחָד, וַיִּשָּׂאֻהוּ בַמּוֹט, בִּשְׁנָיִם; וּמִן-הָרִמֹּנִים, וּמִן-הַתְּאֵנִים.
Now, only the first part of the verse is cited: וַיָּבֹאוּ עַד-נַחַל אֶשְׁכֹּל. However, often the drasha comes from the part of the verse not cited.
Here, I think the drasha might actually come from the next verse:
לַמָּקוֹם הַהוּא, קָרָא נַחַל אֶשְׁכּוֹל, עַל אֹדוֹת הָאֶשְׁכּוֹל, אֲשֶׁר-כָּרְתוּ מִשָּׁם בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל.
"That place was called the valley of Eshcol, because of the cluster which the children of Israel cut down from thence."
We can say it is a mikra misuras, a verse which is out of order and must be shuffled (midrashicly, at least).
אֲשֶׁר-כָּרְתוּ מִשָּׁם בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל
עַל אֹדוֹת הָאֶשְׁכּוֹל
that the Jews (=spies) were (almost/threatened to be) cut off from there
on behalf of the cluster of grapes.
If so, the verse in Yehoshua might still be drashened as I suggested, in the context of this drash on the local pasuk, or we can revert to considering it Calev's reward (after all, the midrash does use the word לפיכך in introducing the pasuk from Yehoshua).
No comments:
Post a Comment