We get different perspectives of this when reading parshat Moav with Rashi and reading parshat Devarim with Rashi.
In parshat Balak, we read {Bemidbar 22:2-3}:
Devarim 2:9}:
Rashi says to explain Moav's dread, in parshat Balak, is:
Balak… saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites He said, “These two kings whom we relied on could not resist them; we certainly cannot.” Consequently, “Moab became terrified.” - [Mid. Tanchuma Balak 2, Num. Rabbah 20:2]and
[Moab] became terrified [Heb. וַיָּגָר is] a term denoting dread, as in,“Fear (גּוּרוּ) for yourselves” (Job 19:29). - [Machbereth Menachem p. 59, third def.]So this is fear after seeing what they did to others.
Moab became disgusted They became disgusted with their own lives, as in“I am disgusted (קַצְתִּי) with my life” (Gen. 27:46). This is an abbreviated verse.
On the other hand, we get a different picture when seeing Rashi's comment on parshat Devarim. On the aforementioned pasuk, {Devarim 2:9}:
Rashi states:
and do not provoke them to war God forbade Israel only to wage war against Moab. However, Israel did frighten them, appearing before them, armed for battle. Therefore, it is written,“And Moab was very frightened of the people” (Num. 22:3) because Israel plundered and looted them. Regarding the children of Ammon, however, it says (verse 19),“Do not provoke them”-with any kind of provocation, as a reward for the modesty shown by their ancestress [Lot’s younger daughter], who did not publicize her father’s conduct, as did his elder daughter, who named her son Moab [מוֹאָב like מֵאָב, from the father] (Baba Kamma 38b).What is happening is a very close reading comparing the instruction regarding Moav and the instruction regarding Ammon. For Moav, the instruction is אַל-תָּצַר אֶת-מוֹאָב, וְאַל-תִּתְגָּר בָּם, מִלְחָמָה, with that extra word milchama. Meanwhile, a bit later in the same perek, we see almost the same instruction regarding Ammon, but without the extra word milchama.
titgar} the children of Ammon" at all, but regarding the Moabites, "you cannot contend {titgar} with them to the extent of waging war with them." Thus, conducting raids to loot and requisition is permitted.
That part of it, at least, is directly drawn from the gemara in Bava Kamma 38b:
R. Hiyya B. Abba said that R. Johanan had stated:2 The Holy One, blessed be He, does not deprive any creature of any reward due to it, even if only for a becoming expression: for in the case of the [descendants of the] elder [daughter] who named her son 'Moab', the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Moses, Distress not the Moabites, neither contend with them in battle, [implying that] while actual hostilities against them were forbidden, requisitioning from them was allowed, whereas in the case of the younger [daughter] who called her son 'Ben Ammi', the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Moses: And when thou comest nigh over against the children of Ammon, distress them not, nor meddle with them at all, thus implying that they were not to be subjected even to requisitioning.However, Rashi takes this an additional step further. He connect titgar here with vayagar in parshat Balak, something he did not do when local to parshat Balak. Thus, when in Balak it stated:
titgar here, namely that the Israelites were conducting raids to requisition supplies.
And perhaps had they not done that, Balak would not have seen the need to call Bilaam. In which case, though, we would not have the blessings of Israel or the talking donkey. But then, we also would not have had Cosbi bat Tzur and Zimri, the plague, Pinchas, the fight with Midian, etc.
So to an extent, Balak can point to the Israelites and complain "But they started it!"
No comments:
Post a Comment