Numbers 30:2-32:42 - Jeremiah 1:1-2:3 - John 18:1-27

This week's edition of The Set Table contains:

Questions and Commentary on Shabbat Mattot
Chayyei Yeshua - A Devotional Commentary on the Besora Reading
In Summary
Looking Ahead

Questions & Commentary on Parashat Mattot

1. In Numbers 30:2-17, Moses relays to the people instructions regarding the taking of vows. Under which circumstances does the Torah allow for vows to be annulled? Under which conditions do our sages permit the taking and annulment of vows? In light of Yeshua's statements in Matthew 5:33-37, how should Moses' instructions in this chapter be understood?

Rabbi Jonathan Kaplan

Moses offers two sets of instructions regarding the taking of vows. One set for men and the other for women. Men are given no opportunity to annul vows made to God or other obligation that they take upon themselves. Rather, "all that has crossed his lips he must do" (30:2). This language is interesting because it reminds us that vows entail a firm commitment whether to God, another, or oneself to fulfill an obligation.

According to the Torah, Women also face the same strictures concerning vows that men do. However, a woman's father (if she is unmarried) or husband may annul the woman's vows or allow them to stand without objection (30:4-16). The father or husband is responsible for the woman's fulfillment of the vow if he allows it to stand. If the woman fails to keep her commitment, her father or husband bears her guilt. This approach to women and the taking of vows highlights the social role of women in Ancient Israel as subordinate members of a household headed by a man. Do these strictures still apply when the structure of modern family life is different?

 Our sages detail three circumstances in which it is commendable to make a vow: 

1. If someone has developed sinful habits and wishes to repent of their actions, they may take a vow to strengthen their resolution.
2. One may swear to fulfill a mitzva so as not to miss the opportunity to fulfill the commandment.
3. In times of distress, one may follow the example of our father Jacob in making a vow (Genesis 28:20).

Just as one may only make vows under certain conditions, one may only seek the annulment of vows under certain conditions. The Mishna (Nedarim 3:1) details these vows as:

1. Vows of incitement
2. Vows of exaggeration
3. Vows made in error
4. Vows [broken] under constraint

Our sages pursue the path of mercy here and recognize that vows are not always easy to keep. However, they still advise that there are strict consequences for the violation of vows. They cite a story in the Talmud (b. Nedarim 65a) which recounts how King Tzedqiyahu's broken vow to King Nebuchadnezzar to keep secret Nebuchadnezzar's practice of consuming live rabbits led to the destruction of Judah and the Temple. We commemorate this horrible event on the upcoming Tisha B'Av (this year August 10, 2008).

In Matthew 5:33-37, Yeshua also emphasizes the importance of vows by emphasizing the teaching of Moses in this week's parasha and in other places in the Torah concerning vows (Exodus 20:15; Deuteronomy 5:20; and Leviticus 19:12). Yeshua establishes a fence around the Torah by stating that one should avoid making vows altogether lest one transgress commitments made to God (and others). The importance of avoiding making vows which one fails to keep is also emphasized by Yeshua's brother Ya‘aqov who says, "Above all, my beloved, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your "Yes" be yes  your "No" be no, so that you may not fall under condemnation" (Ya‘aqov 5:12).

2. At the end of Parashat Mattot, the Gadites and Reuvenites request to settle in the land across the Jordan River from the Land of Israel. Though Moses is initially incensed by their request, he eventually grants it.   What assurances do the members of these two tribes give to Moses? What actions do they take in this parasha to indicate their dedication to the rest of the People of Israel? What spiritual lesson can we learn from their actions?

Rabbi Jonathan Kaplan

The Gadites and the Reuvenites ask for permission to settle on the Eastern side of the Jordan before the conquest of Canaan is complete so that they might take advantage of the spacious pasturelands available in these lands conquered from Sichon and Og. They ask of Moses and Eleazar, "the land that the LORD has conquered for the community of Israel is cattle country, and your servants have cattle.  It would be a favor to us if this land were given to your servants as a holding; do not move us across the Jordan" (Numbers 32:3-5). Moses is initially incensed by their request because it suggests they are no longer committed to the People of Israel. Disloyalty such as this was the reason for the 40-year delay in entering the Land of Promise.  To what would the apparent disloyalty of these two tribes lead (32:6-14)? 

The Gadites and the Reuvenites step-up and provide Moses with a number of assurances that they will remain committed to the People of Israel (32:17-19). First, they will serve as shock-troops (chushim), or the first line of attack, in the conquest of Canaan. In other words, they will take the greatest risk in battle. Second, they will not return home until all the children of Israel are firmly established in their territories. Third, they will not take any share of the territory in the Land of Canaan, treating the land they are given on the eastern side of the Jordan as their share.

Though these promises express a profound commitment on the part of the Gadites and Reuvenites to the whole of the Jewish people, their haste in seeking their inheritance ultimately had dire consequences. As we are told in 1 Chronicles 5:26, the tribes on the eastern side of the Jordan were the first to be exiled in the 8th century B.C.E. As it says in Proverbs 20:21, "An inheritance acquired hastily at the outset will not be blessed in the end." Seeking money and profit can distract one from commitment to the greater good, especially of K'lal Yisrael and, in this case, from fulfilling the commandment to settle the land of Israel (see Mishna Ketubot 13:11).

However Moses understands that even the assurances made by the Gadites and Reuvenites would not be enough to sustain their long-term commitment to the people of Israel. As such the half-tribe of Manasseh are also given a portion of the land east of the Jordan. In Gateways to Torah, Rabbi Russ Resnik explains the odd appearance of the half-tribe of Manasseh during the negotiations in Numbers 32:33. He writes,

Their sudden appearance in the story is a bit puzzling and various explanations have been proposed.  Perhaps the most likely explanation is that Manasseh's involvement serves to bind Reuben and Gad to the rest of Israel. Torah places a great emphasis on the wholeness and integrity of each tribe. If one tribe settles partly west of the Jordan and partly to the east, it binds together the two sides of the river into one community.  It provides a conduit for the greater holiness of Eretz Yisrael to influence the land to the east.

Scott Nassau

John 18:1-27 - Confronting Our Own Weakness

For the last two thousand years Judas' name has been synonymous with a "greedy traitor." He is the epitome of the villain. In fact, the image of Judas has often become a caricature used to misrepresent the Jewish people. While it is important not to absolve Judas of his guilt, it might be necessary to rethink our misconceptions.

When the throng of people asked for Yeshua, he simply replied "I AM." At the sound of these words the whole cohort fell on their backs. The crowd understood the implication of Yeshua's words. In his narrative Yochanan repeatedly uses the words "I AM," to show Yeshua's self-revelation of his divine nature, the Messiah of Israel (4:26; 6:20, 35; 8:12, 18, 24, 28 58; 9:9; 10:7, 11, 14; 11:25; 13:19; 14:6; 15:1). In the Tanakh this particular phrase, "I AM," is a clear allusion to God's self-disclosure as the God of Israel. When Moses asked God to reveal the Divine Name, God replied from the burning bush, "I AM who I AM" (Exodus 3:14). God demonstrates God's own eternality and expresses God's own exclusive relationship with the nation of Israel (Deuteronomy 32:9; Isaiah 45:18; 46:4). So Yeshua's response to the question is not only an affirmation that he is Yeshua of Nazareth, but also that he is the God of Israel. Despite the cohort of Roman soldiers Yeshua demonstrated that it was he, not the soldiers, who was in control of the situation. After Kefa's misguided attempt to save Yeshua, Yeshua expresses his willingness to surrender (John 18:11). Ultimately it was not Judas' betrayal that delivered Yeshua into the hands' of the Romans, but Yeshua's own participation in the divine plan of the Father.

NEXT WEEK'S READINGS - PARASHAT MASSEI