1. religion and spirituality
2. judaism

‫פרשות ניצבים וילך‬
If you wish to find an easy way to remember when the Parshos of Nitzovim
and Vayelech are separated or combined (as they are this year), look at the
opening words of Baal HaTurim.
Rabbenu Yaakov1 ben Rabbenu Osher (the Rosh) refers2 to a verse in the
Book of Daniyel (Perek 1/Posuk 5) and interprets it to fit our two Parshos.
His commentary is on the first verse in Parshas Vayelech (Perek 31/Posuk
1).
His commentary is based on the verse:
‫שלֹוש‬
ָ ‫שנִים‬
ָ ‫ש ָתיו ּו ְל ַג ְדלָם‬
ְ ‫ּומיֵין ִמ‬
ִ ‫ְבר יֹום ְביֹומֹו ִמפַת ַבג ַה ֶם ֶל ְך‬
ַ ‫ָהם ַה ֶם ֶל ְך ד‬
ֶ ‫ְמן ל‬
ַ ‫וַי‬
:‫ִפנֵי ַה ֶם ֶל ְך‬
ְ ‫ַמדּו ל‬
ְ ‫ָתם יַע‬
ָ ‫ּומ ְקצ‬
ִ
And the King ordered for them3 from his daily food4 and from the wine that
he drank, to allow them to grow for two or three years [in order] that some
of them [be fit] so that they can appear before the King.
He is the Tur, who invented the division of the four parts of the Shulchan
Aruch: Orach Chaim, Yoreh Deah, Even HoEzer and Choshen Mishpot. He is
the author of Tur Shulchan Aruch as well as Piskei HoRosh, a summary of
the Halachic decisions of his father. We have two commentaries from him on
Chumash-Perush HaTur al HaTorah and the Baal HaTurim.
1
As we shall see, the interpretation of the Baal HaTurim is not faithful to the
text of the Posuk.
2
The reference here is to Jewish children from the royal family who were
sequestered by Nevuchadnetzar Melech Bovel for potential and eventual
royal service. Two verses hence we read that among them were Doniyel,
Mishoel, Chananya and Azarya. ‫ַעַז ְריָה‬
ֲ ‫יש ֵאל ו‬
ָ ‫ָהם ִמ ְבנֵי יְהּודָה ָדִניֵאל ֲחַנְניָה ִמ‬
ֶ ‫ְהי ב‬
ִ ‫וַי‬:
3
4
This translation is from Rashi. He writes:
‫ הוא שם מאכל המלך בל' כשדים ויש פותרים פת בג לחם ואין נראה כן שהרי כתיב‬- ‫מפת בג‬
:‫ויהי המלצר נושא את פת בגם ונותן להם זרעונים ואין זרעונים חליפי לחם אלא חליפי תבשיל‬
This is what Baal HaTurim writes5:
‫ פירוש ב"ג המלך כשחל ראש השנה יום ב' או ג' אז נצבים‬8‫ וילך‬7‫ המלך פ"ת‬6‫ב"ג‬
:‫וילך נפרדים‬
MiPas bag-This is the name of a royal dish in Chaldean. There are those who
explain [the word combination of] pas bag as meaning bread.
That explanation cannot be because it is written (Daniyel Perek 1/Posuk 16):
The waiter carried the ‫ פת בגם‬and gave them seed-food “to eat”. Seed-food is
not an equivalent of bread.
Rashi means that since Daniyel would not eat the non-Kosher food (Posuk 8)
served by the servants of Nevuchadnetzar, this seed-food was given in its
place.
‫שר לֹא‬
ֶ ‫ִיסים ֲא‬
ִ ‫שר ַה ָןר‬
ַ ‫ַקש ִמ‬
ֵ ‫ש ָתיו וַיְב‬
ְ ‫ּוביֵין ִמ‬
ְ ‫ִתגַָאל ְב ַפ ְתבַג ַה ֶם ֶל ְך‬
ְ ‫שר לֹא י‬
ֶ ‫ָשם ָדִניֵאל עַל לִבֹו ֲא‬
ֶ ‫וַי‬
:‫ִתגָָאל‬
ְ‫י‬
Doniyel committed himself not to be contaminated with the ‫ פתבג‬of the Kind
and the wine that he [the king] drank. And he [Doniyel] requested from the
servants‟ master that [he should allow him] not to become contaminated.
Rashi understands that:
1. The terms ‫ פתבג‬and ‫ פת גם‬are interchangeable, and:
2. Since the seed-food was served as the main course in place of the
‫פת גם‬/‫ פתבג‬that that dish had to be a main course as well, not bread.
Rather than translate generally, we will give a specific, word by word or
phrase by phrase explanation.
5
The “quotation marks” between the letters beis and gimmel indicate that
this word will be interpreted as an abbreviation.
6
7
Of course, this is not the order of the words in the verse.
This, word, the name of our Parsha, does not appear in the verse or in any
other verse in Sefer Daniyel.
8
‫ב"ג המלך פת‬-When the King9 is two and Three, i.e., the first day of Rosh
Hashanah is either Monday (the second day of the week) or Tuesday (the
third day of the week), then
10
‫ פת‬- break [off Parshas] Vayelech [from Parshas Nitzovim].
‫פירוש ב"ג המלך כשחל ראש השנה יום ב' או ג' אז נצבים וילך נפרדים‬-The
explanation is that when Rosh Hashanah falls on Monday or Tuesday
Nitzovim and Vayelech are separated.
:‫פירוש ב"ג המלך כשחל ראש השנה יום ב' או ג' אז נצבים וילך נפרדים‬
The Tur presents this idea and the logic behind in his writings in Orach
Chaim Siman 428.11
‫אתם נצבים קודם ר"ה ולכן כשר"ה ביום ב' ג' שיש ב' שבתות בין ר"ה לסוכות‬
‫צריכין לחלק נצבים וילך כדי שיקראו וילך בין ר"ה לצום כפור והאזינו בין צום כיפור‬
‫לסוכות וסי' ב"ג המלך פת וילך אבל כשר"ה ביום ה"ז אז אין בין ר"ה לסוכות אלא‬
.‫שבת א' שקורין בה האזינו אז וילך עם נצבים קודם ר"ה‬
Parshas Nitzovim [always] comes before Rosh Hashanah. Thus, when [the
first day of] Rosh Hashanah occurs on Monday or Tuesday, there will be
two Shabbosos between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur and it is necessary
to divide Nitzovim and Vayelech in order to read Vayelech between Rosh
Hashanah and Yom Kippur and Haazinu between the Fast of Atonement
This is in reference to Rosh Hashanah when we coronate HaKodosh Boruch
Hu.
9
In his supra-commentary to Baal HaTurim, Rav K. Reinitz Shlita cites the
Mogen Avraham (to Shulchan Aruch 428) who explains that Baal HaTurim
sees the word ‫ פת‬here as being related to the word for breaking or splitting.
Thus we read in Sefer Vayikro in regard to some of the Mincha offerings:
)‫ו‬/‫פתות אותו פתים (ויקרא ב‬-break it into pieces.
10
The word ‫ פת‬here means to break or split to the two Parshos.
11
That Siman contains much information regarding calendar events.
and Sukkos. An intimation of this is ‫ב"ג המלך פת וילך‬. But when Rosh
Hashanah falls on Thursday or Shabbos, then there will be only one
Shabbos12 between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur and we read Haazinu
then and thus Nitzovim and Vayelech are read [combined] before Rosh
Hashanah.
Tosfos offers a number explanation.
In Masseches Megilla there are a number of discussions about Krias
HaTorah throughout the year.
One passage (31 b) states:
‫ עזרא תיקן להן לישראל שיהו קורין‬:‫ רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר‬,‫תניא‬
‫ מאי טעמא? אמר אביי ואיתימא ריש‬.‫שבמשנה תורה קודם ראש השנה‬...‫קללות‬
.‫ כדי שתכלה השנה וקללותיה‬:‫לקיש‬
We learned in a Braiso that Rabi Shimon ben Elazar says: Ezra [Hasofer]
established that Israel should read the curses in D’vorim prior to Rosh
Hashanah. What is the reason? Abaye says, and some say it was Reish
Lokish who said, “In order *to intimate+ that the *concluding+ year should be
finished with its curses.
Tosfos (d.h. klolos) cites the Beis Midrash of Rabbenu Nissim that attributed
this Gemara as the reason why Parshas Nitzovim is always read prior to
Rosh Hashanah.13 Since there are many passages of curses in Parshas
This is not exact. When Rosh Hashanah falls on Thursday, as it does this
coming year, 5772, there will be two Shabbosos between Rosh Hashanah and
Sukkos-3 Tishrei and 10 Tishrei. However, since the second Shabbos, 10
Tishrei is Yom Kippur, a regular Parsha is not read that day-the reading of
Yom Kippur is “the Parsha”. That is what the Tur meant-there will not be
two Shabbosos available for a regular ‫פרשת השבוע‬.
12
Rabbenu Nissim was well aware of the need to have the Parshos finish for
Shimini Atzeres/Simchas Torah. However, he had a better suggestion. Why
not divide the two very large Parshos Mattos-Mas‟ei and keep NitzovimVayelech combined? However, we find the opposite. There are years in
13
Nitzovim, those are the ones to which the Gemara in Masseches Megillah
refers.
Tosfos rejects the opinion that the contents of Parshas Nitzovim are the
k’lo’los to which the Gemara refers. Rather, Nitzovim is a Parsha that does
not contain curses and thus it should be read prior to Rosh Hashanah in
order to serve as a buffer between the real curses, those in the tochecha or
Ki Sovo, and Rosh Hashanah.14 15
Perhaps there is an additional way to look these two Parshos, separate or
combined.
Beginning from the middle of Parshas Ki Sovo, at least, we find ourselves on
the final day of Sefer D’vorim, the final day in the life of Moshe Rabbenu
Olov Hashalom. It was the seventh day of Adar and it was a Shabbos.
This day was not only the day on which the Torah was concluded and the
unique, never to be equaled Massores as transmitted by Moshe Rabbenu
ended. It was not only the day on which Moshe died.
which Parshos Mattos-Mas‟ei are combined and Parshos Nitzovim-Vayelech
are separate. Such will be the case next year, 5772.
Since logistically it would make more sense to divide Mattos-Mas‟ei it stands
to reason that there is a reason why Nitzovim and Vayelech should be
together. That reason is to allow Nitzovim to be read immediately prior to
Rosh Hashanah (either on its own or combined with Vayelech).
Thus, by keeping Mattos-Mas‟ei combined, Nitzovim is moved up one week
ahead and can be read on the Shabbos before Rosh Hashanah. Were MattosMas‟ei separated, then Ki Sovo would be read on the Shabbos prior to Rosh
Hashanah. Tosfos says that such a reading is very inauspicious.
14
Tosofos gives as a precedent for this explanation that reading of Parshas
B‟midbar prior to Rosh Hashanah. It serves as a buffer between the tochecha
of Parshas B‟chukosai and the Yom Tov of Shavuos.
15
The same thought is expressed in Tosfos to Masseches Bava Basra 88b.
It was the day on which B’nei Yisroel had to make an extraordinary
transformation.
They had been preparing for that transformation for 37 days, as Moshe
began his soliloquy of mussar and Mitzvos from the beginning of Sefer
D’vorim.
What was that transformation? Until the seventh of Adar, for the last four
decades, Moshe Rabbenu was the face of Torah for our ancestors. For
those who came out of Egypt, he was the one who delivered them from
slavery to freedom, physical and spiritual.
For those who were too young to remember Exodus or were born
subsequent to it, he was the only leader that they knew. And on this day
all would change.
The stability of continuity of leadership was now threatened.
Now it is easy to reply that there was no threat. Hashem was with them.
He was, He is and He will be. Such a statement is too facile, too simplistic.
We cannot forget the trauma of the Eigel HaZahav that happened a few
short weeks after the Revelation and the people’s words (Sh’mos Perek
32/Posuk 1):‫שר ֶה ֱעע ָלנּו ֵמ ֶארֶץ ִמ ְצ ַריִם לֹא יָ ַדעְנּו ֶמה ָהיָה לו‬
ֶ ‫מֹשה ָה ִאיש ֲא‬
ֶ ‫כי זֶה‬...
…this man Moshe who took us up from the Land of Egypt-we do not know
what happened to him.
If that was the reaction then, how much more so would the potential for
national trauma be when Moshe Rabbenu was to leave this world?
However, there was not a national trauma. Let us attempt to examine why.
The expectation for such a trauma can be seen in particular at the end of
Parshas Vayelech. We read there (Perek 31/P’sukim 28 - 29):
‫ְברִים ָה ֵאלֶה‬
ָ ‫ֵיהם ֵאת ַהד‬
ֶ ‫ַברָה ְבָאְזנ‬
ְ ‫ַאד‬
ֲ ‫ְשֹטרֵיכֶם ו‬
ְ ‫ש ְב ֵטיכֶם ו‬
ִ ‫ִקנֵי‬
ְ ‫ְהילּו ֵאלַי ֶאת כָל ז‬
ִ ‫ַהק‬
‫ש ִחתּון‬
ְ ‫ש ֵחת ַת‬
ְ ‫מֹותי כִי ַה‬
ִ ‫ַאחרֵי‬
ֲ ‫ְתי‬
ִ ‫ כִי יָ ַדע‬:‫ְאת ָהָארֶץ‬
ֶ ‫ש ַמיִם ו‬
ָ ‫וְָאעִידָה ָבם ֶאת ַה‬
‫ָמים כִי ַתעֲשּו‬
ִ ‫ַאחרִית ַהי‬
ֲ ‫ְקרָאת ֶא ְת ֶכם ָה ָרעָה ְב‬
ָ ‫ִיתי ֶא ְתכֶם ו‬
ִ ‫שר ִצּו‬
ֶ ‫ְתם ִמן ַה ֶד ֶר ְך ֲא‬
ֶ ‫ְסר‬
ַ‫ו‬
:‫ֲשה יְדֵיכֶם‬
ֵ ‫ְמע‬
ַ ‫ְה ְכעִיסֹו ב‬
ַ ‫ֶאת ָהרַע ְבעֵינֵי ה' ל‬
Gather to me [Moshe] all of the elders of our tribes and the officers and I
will speak in their ears these matters and I will call upon the Heavens and
the Earth to bear witness. Because I know that after my death you surely
will become corrupt and you will veer from the path that I commanded you
and this evil will befall you at the end of days when you do evil in the eyes
of Hashem to anger Him with your actions.
This calling to bear witness is, of course, the introduction to Parshas
Haazinu.16
Moshe expects that the dire warnings that he issues will take place almost
immediately. The justification for that expectation can be learned from
the reason why it was not realized.
Rashi writes:
‫ שנאמר (יהושע‬,‫ והרי כל ימי יהושע לא השחיתו‬- ‫אחרי מותי כי השחת תשחתון‬
‫ מכאן שתלמידו של אדם חביב עליו‬,‫ לא) ויעבדו בני ישראל את ה' כל ימי יהושע‬,‫כד‬
:‫ שכל זמן שיהושע חי נראה למשה כאלו הוא חי‬,‫כגופו‬
(Moshe said that they will become corrupted “after my death”)-But, all the
days of Yehoshua they were not corrupt, as the Posuk says [at the end of
the life of Yehoshua+ ‘B’nei Yisroel served Hashem all of the days of
Yehoshua’. From this *we learn+ that a person’s student is beloved to him
as his own self. While Yehoshua was alive, it appeared to Moshe as if he
was yet alive.17
The opening words of Parshas Haazinu (Perek 32/Posuk 1) following these
verses perfectly: ‫ש ַמע ָהָארֶץ ִא ְמרֵי ִפי‬
ְ ‫ְת‬
ִ ‫ַברָה ו‬
ֵ ‫ַאד‬
ֲ ‫ש ַמיִם ו‬
ָ ‫ ַה ֲאזִינּו ַה‬. Hear the heavens
and I will speak and let the land hear the words of my mouth.
16
See the supra-commentaries to Rashi to gain an approach to this cryptic
line.
17
From this comment we can derive that the reason why the expected
corruption did not take place was because the people did not feel that
Moshe Rabbenu did not leave them. The transition following the death of
Moshe Rabbenu was so smooth because they did not know that there was
a transition.
Since, evidently, Moshe Rabbenu was not hopeful of such resounding
success, let us see why it succeeded.
On that year of Moshe Rabbenu’s death, the seventh of Adar fell on a
Shabbos. Chazal tell us that in a very special Parsha which begins with an
attempt to understand the words of Moshe in Parshas Vayelech.
There we read (Perek 31/P’sukim 1-2):
‫ֶשרִים‬
ְ ‫ֵהם ֶבן ֵמָאה וְע‬
ֶ ‫ַיֹאמר ֲאל‬
ֶ ‫ ו‬:‫ָאל‬
ֵ ‫ִשר‬
ְ ‫ְברִים ָה ֵאלֶה ֶאל כָל י‬
ָ ‫ַבר ֶאת ַהד‬
ֵ ‫מֹשה וַיְד‬
ֶ ‫וַיֵ ֶל ְך‬
‫ָאמר ֵאלַי לֹא ַתעֲבֹר ֶאת ַהיַ ְרדֵן‬
ַ '‫שנָה ָאנֹכִי ַהיֹום לֹא אּוכַל עֹוד ָלצֵאת וְלָבֹוא וַה‬
ָ
: ‫ַהזֶה‬
Moshe went and spoke to these words to all of Israel. He said to them, ‘I
am one hundred twenty years old today; I am no longer able to go out and
come in and Hashem said to me, ‘You will not cross this Jordan River’.
What did Moshe Rabbenu mean by saying that he was ‘no longer able to go
out and come in’?
In Masseches Sotah (13 b) we read:
‫ז) ומשה בן מאה‬/‫ (דברים לד‬:‫ והכתיב‬,‫מאי לצאת ולבא? אילימא לצאת ולבא ממש‬
‫א) ויעל משה מערבות מואב‬/‫ (דברים לד‬:‫ וכתיב‬,‫ לא נס ליחה‬...‫ועשרים שנה במותו‬
‫ ופסען משה בפסיעה אחת! א"ר‬,‫ שתים עשרה מעלות היו שם‬:‫ ותניא‬,‫אל הר נבו‬
‫ שנסתתמו ממנו‬,‫ מלמד‬,‫ לצאת ולבוא בדברי תורה‬:‫שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יונתן‬
.‫שערי חכמה‬
‫ אותה שבת של דיו‬:‫ תנא‬- ‫יד) וילך משה ויהושע ויתיצבו באהל מועד‬/‫(דברים לא‬
.‫ ניטלה רשות מזה וניתנה לזה‬,‫ היתה‬18‫זוגי‬
What does the phrase *‘I am not longer able+ to go out and come in’ mean?
If you say [that it means] going out and coming in literally [implying that
Moshe was weak and infirm, that cannot be] because it says Moshe was
one hundred twenty years at his death …his vigor did not leave him. And it
also says [to demonstrate that Moshe was not weak or infirm at his death],
Moshe went up from the plains of Moav to Mt. Nevo and the Braiso
teaches that there were twelve steps there [on the mountain] and Moshe
took them all in one step. Rabi Sh’muel bar Nachmeini says in the name of
Rabi Yonoson, Moshe could no longer go out and come in Torah. This
[verse] teaches us that the gates of wisdom were closed to him [on that
day].
The Gemara continues:
‘Moshe and Yehoshua went and they stood erect in the Ohel Moed.’ The
Braiso taught, ‘That Shabbos was the Shabbos of the double pair19. The
authority was taken from one and given to the other.
18
These words sometimes appear as a contraction: ‫שבת דיוזגי‬.
This phrase –double pair- is puzzling. There were just the two of themMoshe and Yehoshua which was one pair, not two.
19
Rashi writes: ‫ שני זוגות שני חבירים היו בהתחלת היום למשה וסופו ליהושע‬- ‫דיו זוגי‬.
Two pairs-two colleagues. At the first part of the day with Moshe and at its
end - with Yehoshua.
Maharsha explains:
‫דעד היום לא בא למחנה שכינה דהיינו אוהל מועד רק משה בלבד אבל באותו יום שמת משה‬
...‫היה גם יהושע נצב במחנה שכינה דהיינו שבת דיוזגי בתחלת היום למשה וסופו ליהושע‬
Until that day, only Moshe entered the Ohel Moed, which was the Machane
Shechina. On the day that Moshe died, Yehoshua also stood in the Machane
Shechina and that is the meaning of ‫שבת דיוזגי‬-the Shabbos of pairs. At the
Yet, do we yet have an understanding of how that limited20 equality
between Moshe and Yehoshua came about-a limited equality that made it,
from the perspective of Israel, as if Moshe was still among them after his
death?
Let us look at that Posuk once more.‫ וילך משה ויהושע ויתיצבו באהל מועד‬.
There appear to be two anomalies in this verse. First, and perhaps most
apparent, is the word ‫וילך‬-which means he went. Since the subject of the
verse is Moshe and Yehoshua we would have expected it to say ‫וילכו‬-and
they went.
The second difficulty with the verse is the term use for “standing”. The
Torah could certainly have written ‫ויעמדו‬-and they stood. By choosing the
word ‫ ויתיצבו‬a very different connotation is implied. This word always is
used with a sense of standing upright and independent.21
beginning of the day it was [a pair consisting of Hashem] and Moshe. At the
end of the day [after Moshe‟s death, it was a pair consisting of Hashem] and
Yehoshua.
No person was truly equivalent to Moshe Rabbenu in his Torah authority.
Only Moshe could give the Torah. He was qualitatively different than anyone
before him or anyone who will ever be. Rambam in Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah
(Perek 8/Halacha 1) makes that abundantly clear.
20
Though this idea of standing upright and independently is the consistent
usage of this word in its many forms, the actual perspective on the word can
be positive or negative, depending on the context.
21
In Parshas Sh‟mos we find the term to be used as conveying a sense of anger
or defiance. Moshe and Aharon left their meeting with Par‟o with the result
of his increasing the harsh labor imposed upon our ancestors. What did the
people say to them (Sh‟mos Perek 5/Posuk 20)?
:‫ֵאתם ֵמ ֵאת ַפרְעֹה‬
ָ ‫ָאתם ְבצ‬
ָ ‫ִקר‬
ְ ‫ַאהרֹן ִנצָבִים ל‬
ֲ ‫ְאת‬
ֶ ‫מֹשה ו‬
ֶ ‫ִפגְעּו ֶאת‬
ְ ‫וַי‬
They accosted Moshe and Aharon, standing uprightly to meet them when
they [Moshe and Aharon] left Par‟o.
For the above reason, the first of this week’s Parshos, Nitzvoim (Perek
29/Posuk 9), describes B’nei Yisroel having that particular posture.
‫ְשֹטרֵיכֶם כֹל‬
ְ ‫ִקנֵיכֶם ו‬
ְ ‫ש ְב ֵטיכֶם ז‬
ִ ‫ָאשיכֶם‬
ֵ ‫לקיכֶם ר‬...‫ִפנֵי ה' א‬
ְ ‫ָבים ַהיֹום ֺכ ְלכֶם ל‬
ִ ‫ַאתם ִנצ‬
ֶ
:‫ָאל‬
ֵ ‫ִשר‬
ְ ‫ִאיש י‬
You [Israel] are standing upright, all of you, before Hashem your G-d, your
heads of tribes, your elders, your officers, all of Israel.
What was the particular circumstance that brought all of Israel together?
We read (Posuk 11):
:‫ִם ָך ַהיֹום‬
ְ ‫ל ֶהי ָך כֹרֵת ע‬...‫שר ה' ֱעא‬
ֶ ‫ּובָאלָתֹו ֲא‬
ְ ‫לקי ָך‬...‫ִברִית ה' ֱעא‬
ְ ‫ָב ְר ָך ב‬
ְ ‫ְלע‬
The subsequent comments leave no doubt regarding their attitude.
Perhaps the most striking example of the usage of the term ‫ נצבים‬as a posture
of defiance can be seen by Korach and his followers.
After delivering the sternest of warnings to them, we read (B‟midbar Perek
16/Posuk 27) regarding Moshe and Aharon:
‫יהם‬
ֶ ‫ְש‬
ֵ ‫ֵיהם ּונ‬
ֶ ‫ָאהל‬
ֳ ‫ַאבִירָם יָצְאּו ִנ ָצבִים ֶפ ַתח‬
ֲ ‫ָתן ו‬
ָ ‫ַאבִירָם ִמ ָןבִיב וְד‬
ֲ ‫ָתן ו‬
ָ ‫שכַן קֹרַח ד‬
ְ ‫וַיֵעָלּו ֵמעַל ִמ‬
:‫ְט ָפם‬
ַ ‫ֵיהם ו‬
ֶ ‫ּובנ‬
ְ
And they [Moshe and Aharon] were brought up from the dwelling of Korach,
Doson and Aviram, surrounding, and Doson and Aviram went out and stood
uprightly at the opening of their tents, and their wives, their children and
their babies.
We know that Doson and Aviram were not merely standing. They held
themselves in a carriage that implied disdain for Moshe and Aharon and total
and complete impudence.
On the other hand, this word is used in a most positive sense. In order to
convey that Miriam, sister of Moshe, guarded him when he was cast in to the
river, we read (Sh‟mos Perek 2/Posuk 4): ‫ָשה לֹו‬
ֶ ‫ַת ַתצַב ֲאחֹתֹו ֵמרָחֹק ְלדֵעָה ַמה יֵע‬
ֵ ‫ו‬.
His sister stood upright, from afar, to know what would be done to him.
Certainly, in this instance we sense the use of the word ‫ ותתצב‬in this
connotation to demonstrate unwavering dedication and responsibility.
You are making a covenant with Hashem and with His oath that He makes
with you today.
The fact that we are told that they were ‫ נצבים‬implies their independence
in entering this restated covenant with HaKodosh Boruch Hu. They were
doing so on their own accord, exercising their free will.
What meaning does ‫ נצבים‬convey in the context of that unique day and
unique place in describing Moshe and Yehoshua?
The answer to the first question is quite simple. We have numerous
examples of multiple individuals doing a particular act and the verb is in the
singular.22 When we have such a form the party associated with the verb is
the one who is most significant in the action.
Thus, the implication of this Posuk is that Moshe brought Yehoshua into the
Ohel Moed. That is not hard to understand. At G-d’s command, Moshe
initiated Yehoshua’s entry into the Ohel Moed.
The first example in Tanach is when Shem and Yefes covered their father‟s
nakedness. We read (B‟reishis Perek 9/Posuk 23):
22
‫יהם‬
ֶ ‫ּופֵנ‬
ְ ‫ִיהם‬
ֶ ‫ֵיהם וַיֵלְכּו ֲאחֹ ַרמִית וַיְכַןּו ֵאת ֶע ְרוַת ֲאב‬
ֶ ‫שנ‬
ְ ‫שכֶם‬
ְ ‫ָשימּו עַל‬
ִ ‫ש ְמלָה וַי‬
ִ ‫ֶפת ֶאת ַה‬
ֶ ‫שם וָי‬
ֵ ‫ִקח‬
ַ ‫וַי‬
:‫ִיהם לֹא רָאּו‬
ֶ ‫ְע ְרוַת ֲאב‬
ֶ ‫ֲאחֹ ַרמִית ו‬
Shem [he] took and Yefes the clothing and placed it on their backs and they
walked backwards and they covered the nakedness of their father and their
faces were turned back and they did not see the nakedness of their father.
By writing “took” in the singular and the other verbs in the verse in the
plural, it is clear that the initiative to do this necessary action was that of
Shem. Yefes then joined in as a full partner.
As Rashi writes, ‫ לימד על שם שנתאמץ במצוה יותר מיפת‬,‫אין כתיב כאן ויקחו אלא ויקח‬.
The verse does not say “they took”, but “he took”. This teaches that Shem
made greater efforts for this Mitzvah than did Yefes.
This was a most unique time for Yehoshua. The appointment that had
already been announced23 was now becoming realized.
Thus, the
leadership implied by the singular ‫ וילך‬is understandable.
How are we to understand their posture of ‫?נצבים‬
In Parshas Ki Siso, when Hashem reveals to Moshe His Thirteen Divine
Attributes, Moshe receives preparatory guidance from the Ribbono Shel
Olom (Sh’mos Perek 34/Posuk 2).
:‫שם עַל רֹאש ָה ָהר‬
ָ ‫ְת לִי‬
ָ ‫ַבֹקר ֶאל ַהר ִסינַי וְִנצַב‬
ֶ ‫ִית ב‬
ָ ‫ַבֹקר וְ ָעל‬
ֶ ‫ֶהיֵה נָכֹון ל‬
ְ‫ו‬
Be ready in the morning and you will go up in the morning to Mt. Sinai and
you will stand upright there at the top of the mountain.
If ‫ נצב‬means to stand upright, independently, how do we understand this
seminal verse of the Torah? Moshe Rabbenu was experiencing a personal
revelation of Hashem. To be worthy of it, he had to stand with a modicum
of autonomy to make him worthy. This is similar to the modicum of
equality that is demonstrated with the words of Parshas Nitzovim:
...'‫אתם נצבים היום לפני ה‬
If we now transfer these thoughts to the Ohel Moed then when we view
the events there, we see the modicum of autonomy being not the province
of Moshe Rabbenu alone, but, now, also of Yehoshua. In fact the contrast
between the word ‫וילך‬, in the singular, and ‫נצבים‬, in the plural, emphasizes
this concept even more.
From where did Yehoshua receive the courage to joining Moshe Rabbenu in
standing uprightly with all that such a posture implies?
23
In Parshas Pinchas (B‟midbar Perek 27/Posuk 18) we read:
:‫ְת ֶאת יָ ְד ָך ָעלָיו‬
ָ ‫ְס ַמכ‬
ָ ‫רּוח בֹו ו‬
ַ ‫שר‬
ֶ ‫ְהֹוש ַע בִן נּון אִיש ֲא‬
ֺ ‫מֹש ה ַקח ְל ָך ֶאת י‬
ֶ ‫ַיֹאמר ה' ֶאל‬
ֶ ‫ו‬
Hashem said to Moshe, ‘Take for yourself Yehoshua bin Nun, a man who has the
spirit within him and place your hand over him [to give him authority].
Yehoshua obviously received that from Moshe Rabbenu. Yehoshua
followed Moshe Rabbenu into the Ohel Moed. He was not independent.
Can we conceive of the idea that Yehoshua stood in such a way without the
encouragement and support of Moshe Rabbenu? Of course, not.
If Yehoshua stood as if he was equal to Moshe Rabbenu Olov HaShalom it
was only because Moshe Rabbenu brought him to such a level. By standing
at a level equal to Moshe, Yehoshua was now in the place to succeed
Moshe Rabbenu. Moshe Rabbenu made in his “equal”.
Because Moshe Rabbenu made him his equal, he was perceived as such by
Am Yisroel and the dire predictions read at the end of our second Parsha
did not come true until after the death of Yehoshua.
One might think that Moshe Rabbenu erred when he spoke those dire
predictions on the day of his death. He did not. The prophesied straying of
the People was a function of their perception. In their perception Moshe
was yet alive, in some fashion, and that which he said ‫ אחרי מותי‬did not yet
happen.24
What we see here is a continuation of the generosity of Moshe Rabbenu
when his appointment as the successor to Moshe Rabbenu was announced
in Parshas Pinchos. We read there (B’midbar Perek 27/Posuk 18) G-d’s
command to Moshe Rabbenu:
:‫ויאמר ה' אל משה קח לך את יהושע בן נון איש אשר רוח בו וסמכת את ידך עליו‬
24
We noted earlier the difficult passage in Rashi:
‫שכל זמן שיהושע חי נראה למשה כאלו הוא חי‬
As long as Yehoshua was live, it seemed to Moshe as if he was still living.
Thus, perhaps, the vision that Moshe had and told at the end of Parshas
Vayelech was really what he saw after the death of Yehoshua. But, Moshe
did not perceive that it was after the death of Yehoshua because ‫שכל זמן‬
‫שיהושע חי נראה למשה כאלו הוא חי‬.
Hashem said to Moshe, ‘Take for yourself Yehoshua bin Nun, a man who
has the spirit within him and place your hand upon him [conferring upon
him authority].
When the Torah describes how Moshe fulfilled G-d’s command, it writes
(Posuk 23): ‫ויסמך את ידיו עליו ויצוהו כאשר דבר ה' ביד משה‬. Moshe placed his
hands upon him [Yehoshua] like G-d spoke to him through Moshe.
Rashi writes:
‫ והוא עשה‬,‫ שהקב"ה אמר לו וסמכת את ידך‬.‫בעין יפה יותר ויותר ממה שנצטווה‬
:‫ ועשאו ככלי מלא וגדוש ומלאו חכמתו בעין יפה‬,‫בשתי ידיו‬
[Moshe placed both of his hands on Yehoshua] with generosity, much more
than he was commanded. Hashem said to him *Moshe+, ‘Place your hand
upon him. And he [Moshe] did so with two hands and made him
[Yehoshua] a vessel that was full and overflowing. Moshe generously filled
Yehoshua with his wisdom.
One could ask-doesn’t Rashi contradict the words of the Posuk? The verse
said that Moshe did what Hashem commanded. Rashi says Moshe did
more than he was commanded?
Perhaps the answer is in the wording of the verse. Moshe was told:
.”‫“קח לך את יהושע‬
What does it mean when it says ‫לך‬-for your benefit25?
See for example Hashem‟s words to Avraham Ovinu at the beginning of
Parshas Lech Lecha: ‫ויאמר ה ' אל אברם לך לך‬-Hashem told Avram, „Go for
yourself‟.
25
Rashi writes:
:‫ ועוד שאודיע טבעך בעולם‬.‫ וכאן אי אתה זוכה לבנים‬,‫ ושם אעשך לגוי גדול‬,‫להנאתך ולטובתך‬
Now we can understand the impact of the verse. The appointment of
Yeshoshua could be for Moshe’s benefit. Yehoshua had the ability extend
the perceived lifespan of Moshe Rabbenu. However, he could only do so
he was raised to a certain level of equivalency. That is what Moshe did and
it was in keeping with G-d’s command of lecha.
Why is this the reading prior to Rosh Hashanah?
Rosh Hashanah is Yom HaDin and the New Year. Yom HaDin is frightening.
The New Year promises the ability to change and to start over.
In Parshos Nitzovim and Vayelech we see the ability to transform. We see
Yehoshua who was the faithful servant of Moshe transformed to this
equivalency with Moshe.
In the very first Posuk in Yehoshua we read:
:‫ויהי אחרי מות משה עבד ה' ויאמר ה' אל יהושע בן נון משרת משה לאמר‬
After the death of Moshe, the servant of Hashem, Hashem spoke to
Yehoshua bin Nun, the assistant26 of Moshe saying.
This is for your benefit and for your good. There I will make you into a great
nation. Here you do not merit sons. Additionally, [there] I will let the entire
world know your true nature.
Thus, via the word lecha, Hashem informed Moshe that the trek upon which
he was to embark was for his own good.
26
There is a stark difference between ‫ עבד‬and ‫משרת‬.
‫עבד‬, the term used to described Moshe, means a slave. A slave has no will of
his own. His entire will is subjugated to that of his master.
‫ משרת‬means to serve, but without the connotation of domination of the
master. A sign that this description of Yehoshua is far less prestigious than
that of ‫ עבד‬can be seen from the first time that Yehoshua merits this
description.
At the end of his life, Yehoshua is described (Yehoshua Perek 24/Posuk 29)
qualitatively differently.
:‫ויהי אחרי הדברים האלה וימת יהושע בן נון עבד ה' בן מאה ועשר שנים‬
It was after these things that Yehoshua bin Nun, the '‫עבד ה‬, died at the age
of 110.
This was the culmination of a lifetime of accomplishment in which the title
of ' ‫עבד ה‬, which was exclusively that of Moshe, was bestowed upon
Yehoshua.
Parshos Nitzovim-Vayelech appear at the end of the year (and Vayelech at
its beginning sometimes). The message is most clear. There is always an
opportunity to start over. Recognition of deficits or defects does not mean
that hope is lost.
Finding ourselves on a particular level does not mean that change is
impossible or unlikely.
On Rosh Hashanah we will stand, uprightly, and hear the sound of the
Shofar as it inspires us.
Rambam (Hilchos Teshuva Perek 5/Halachah 4) tells us:
We read in Parshas B‟haalosecha (B‟midbar Perek 11/Posuk 28), in the
section dealing with Eldad and Medad:
...‫ויען יהושע בן נון משרת משה מבחריו‬
Yehoshua bin Nun, the m‟shares from among the lads of Moshe, replied…
Certainly, this description of Yehoshua as ‫ משרת‬is complimentary, but not
exclusive.
Were it to be exclusive, the phrase ‫ מבחוריו‬would have been
inappropriate. He would not have been one among many. He would have
been distinctive.
‫אף על פי שתקיעת שופר בראש השנה גזירת הכתוב רמז יש בו כלומר עורו ישינים‬
‫משנתכם ונרדמים הקיצו מתרדמתכם וחפשו במעשיכם וחזרו בתשובה וזכרו‬
‫הביטו לנפשותיכם והטיבו דרכיכם ומעלליכם ויעזוב כל אחד מכם דרכו‬...‫בוראכם‬
...‫הרעה ומחשבתו אשר לא טובה‬
Even though that Tekias Shofar on Rosh Hashanah is an inexplicable Divine
decree, it intimates a message. It says, ‘Awaken sleepers from you sleep
and slumberers from your slumber and examine your deeds and repent and
remember your Creator…Look at your souls and improve your ways and
your actions. Everyone should forsake their evil path and their thoughts
which are not good…
Listen to the Shofar.
Shabbat Shalom
Ksvia Vachasima Tova
Rabbi Pollock