A Curious Conclusion

Parashat Matot-Masei not only marks the end of Bamidbar but also that of the mainstream, standard Torah. Next week, we will begin Devarim, the fifth book of the Pentateuch and one different in character and nature. Devarim differs from the previous parts, both in terms of the perspective (Moshe’s first person, vs Hashem’s third person), content (Mishne Torah vs the OG), and perhaps authorship (Moshe Rabbeinu with God’s command [see Abarbanel] vs God Himself).

As such, it would be a worthwhile endeavor to examine the end of our parasha, which tells the story of the Bnei Menashe – not the Indian Jews but the children of Gilad, grandson of Menashe.

The leaders of this group approach Moshe and the Nesi’im about a familial problem. They acknowledge that Hashem commanded Moshe to give the daughters of Tzelofchad, from the family of Gilad, their father’s portion. However, if the daughters marry out of the shevet, the portion they inherited will move to the tribe they marry into, thus detracting from Menashe’s portion.

Moshe tells the Israelites, 'על פי ה, that the claim is valid, and that Hashem had commanded the daughters of Tzelofchad to marry within the tribe, as should any heiress. (This law ends up being repealed in a later generation on Tu B’Av, one of the reasons to celebrate, especially marriage, on that day.) The Torah tells us that the Bnot Tzelofchad agree and marry within the shevet, and then concludes with a general “These are the mitzvot…”

The story is relatively straightforward, but it seems like a strange conclusion to Bamidbar and everything pre-Mishne Torah. Bereishit ends with Yosef promising his descendants that they will eventually leave Egypt and his passing. Shemot ends with Hashem’s presence resting in the Devarim ends with Moshe’s passing and a tribute to him. (Vayikra has a seemingly random ending, for a different dvar torah.) But we end with… the B’nei Menashe ensuring their inheritance stays within the tribe. What’s going on here? What are we supposed to learn from it?

On a simple level, we might say that this story exemplifies keeping the peace in B’nei Yisrael. Bamidbar is a book full of rebellion and discord among the Jewish people and between them and their leaders. It ends, however, with an example of a real political issue being brought before Moshe Rabbeinu, who, through Hashem, is able to create a solution that works for all parties. Instead of animosity we find unity – in the tribe and in marriage. Perhaps we want to conclude this section of Torah with a message of peace, showing how we can learn from our mistakes and join together instead of staying apart.

We might learn an additional lesson by looking at two parallel stories, both in theme and diction, that appear in the Torah, both in Sefer Bamidbar. The story obviously evokes the story of B’not Tzelofchad that we read last week, but it’s more than just the characters. Both stories involve a group approaching Moshe, concerned about losing out (יגרע), and receiving a positive response (כן בני/בנות...דוברים/דוברות). The language is strikingly similar. Additionally, the same theme and concept of יגרע appears in Beha’alotecha, by פסח שני. However, the lesson lies not in the comparison but in the contrast.

The story of the B’nei Menashe stands apart in one main way: the lack of presence of the Omnipresent. Surely, Hashem responds in the positive to all three appellants. In the earlier two stories, the Torah highlights that Moshe had to bring the case before God, followed by a וידבר/ויאמר ה' אל משה לאמר. Hashem is explicitly and actively involved by B’not Tzelofchad and Pesach Sheini. However, by the B’nei Menashe, Hashem remains in the background. Moshe answers them, 'על פי ה. Additionally, the B’nei Menashe story results in a temporary solution; the others result in eternal Torah law.

Perhaps we can explain this difference by another difference. The first two cases are initiated for the sake of fulfilling God’s command or for the sake of the others. “Why should we lose out on offering this קרבן among the rest of B’nei Yisrael.” “Why should our father’s name lose out among his family?” The B’nei Menashe, on the other hand, are afraid of the נחלה being lost from their family and from becoming part of another tribe’s נחלה (see Netziv). It is less about fulfilling God’s command or upholding the dignity of one’s deceased parent having a portion in the Land, but about having more and being upset with others taking.

Hashem acceded to their request because it was logical for the generation entering and conquering the land. But it is not an eternally true law, and He is מייחד his name less this time, perhaps due to the way these descendants of Gilad plead their case, as opposed to their cousins, the daughters of Tzelofchad. Maybe we end with this story to highlight not only the value of peace and cohesion, but also to show that for Hashem to fully reside among us, we must approach our relationship with Him out of a place of true desire to serve Him and His creations.

May we be zoche to fully appreciate, especially during The Three Weeks, the values of שלום, קדושת הארץ, and properly serving Hashem and His בריות. Shabbat Shalom.