English translation — בלק ג

A.

In connection with the story in the conclusion of our parshah¹

- "And behold, a man of the children of Israel came and brought near to his brothers the Midianite woman before the eyes of Moses etc." - Chazal relate²,

that Zimri ben Salu brought the "Midianite woman"

(Cozbi bat Tzur)

before Moses our teacher and argued: "Is this one forbidden or permitted,

and if you say forbidden,

the daughter of Yitro who permitted her to you.

It was concealed from him

(from Moses)

the halachah",

until Pinchas "saw the deed and remembered the halachah etc. One who cohabits with a non-Jewish woman³

zealots may strike him."

Why indeed was "the daughter of Yitro" permitted to Moses our teacher?

- Rashi⁴

explains: "Moses married before the giving of the Torah, and when the Torah was given, all were children of Noah and entered into the category of commandments, and she was with them etc."

D.

E.

Moses married Tzipporah because then

(before the giving of the Torah)

all

(also the children of Israel)

were in the category of children of Noah; and afterwards

(at the giving of the Torah)

Tzipporah also converted⁵

was together with all Jews,

and therefore she was also afterwards permitted to Moses.

It is not understood: Zimri was indeed "the prince of a father's house of the Simeonites"<sup>6</sup>,

that is, what was initially his claim "And if you say she is forbidden,

the daughter of Yitro who permitted her to you" - did he then not know the most simple distinction between marriages before the giving of the Torah and after the giving of the Torah?

And on the other hand: If even one should find some reasoning

(at least as a possibility)

why the above distinction is not a sufficient reason to permit "the daughter of Yitro" to Moshe - it is still difficult,

why do we not find in the Gemara that Moshe

(or someone else)

should answer <b>the claim </b>of Zimri towards Moshe Rabbeinu<sup>7</sup>

(Pinchas only said the halacha "One who cohabits with a non-Jewish woman etc.",

which pertains to <b>the act </b>of Zimri)?

There are commentators<sup>8</sup>

who say,

that this very thing

(the aforementioned distinction between before and after the Giving of the Torah)

was "concealed" from Moses.

But in addition to this,

what

(a)

Rashi<sup>9</sup>

says explicitly: "And the law was concealed from him,

that was said to him at Sinai <b>one who cohabits with a Cuthite </b>etc.",

that only <b>the </b>law

(what punishment is due)

was "concealed from him";

it is a great difficulty to say that such a simple distinction as mentioned above<sup>10</sup> should be concealed from Moses

- is also not understood: how did Zimri <b>ask </b>such a question?

Could he then rely that from Moses the distinction between before and after the Giving of the Torah would be concealed?

(b)

B.

Also one must understand:

The¹¹

law is,

that a female convert is forbidden to a kohen; and this is a prohibition <b>from the Torah</b>.

Although the Gemara¹²

derives it from a verse in Ezekiel¹³

— this is only that "Ezekiel came and anchored it to a verse"¹⁴,

but this is a prohibition from the Torah itself, as it says "A woman¹⁵

<b>a harlot </b>etc. they shall not take"¹⁶

— "because she comes from the nations who are steeped in lewdness"¹⁴.

In the Gemara¹⁷

there is a dispute regarding Moses our teacher: according to one opinion, "Moses our teacher was a high priest"¹⁸

(because "the priesthood never ceased except <b>from his seed </b>of Moses"¹⁷),

a second opinion holds,

that "Moses served as priest only during the seven days of inauguration"¹⁹

— it is difficult: how was "the daughter of Jethro"²⁰

permitted to him — she was after all a female convert²¹?

According to the one who says that "Moses served as priest only during the seven days of inauguration,"

one could still answer²²

(at least with difficulty),

that Moses was also then not a complete priest; and that which he was allowed to offer the sacrifices then,

it is because - as Tosafos²³

explains - during the seven days of inauguration the Tabernacle had the status of a bamah

- not with the priestly garments - because "there are no priestly garments at a bamah"]

- and therefore also "the daughter of Yisro"

(a convert)

was not forbidden to him.

But - besides this,

what from the language of the Gemara "Moses did not <b>serve as priest</b> etc." implies,

that during the seven days of inauguration he was a complete priest²⁵

- it remains difficult according to the one who says that Moses "all²⁶

his days was a priest"²⁷.

3.

Superficially, one could say,

that the two questions mentioned above

(section a and b)

are answered one by the other:

With the claim "the daughter of Yitro who permitted [her] to you" Zimri indeed meant

(not the prohibition of marriage with an "Aramite,"

but)

the prohibition of a convert for a priest*²⁷

; and the connection between this prohibition with that which a "Midianite" is forbidden

("If you say

(this)

is forbidden the daughter of Yitro etc.'")

is in this,

that the reason for the prohibition of a convert for a priest is

(as above)

"because she comes from the nations

(Arameans)

who are steeped in lewdness."

4.

5.

If the "Midianite" is forbidden because she is an "Aramite" - why then is "the daughter of Yitro,"

"who comes from the nations

(Arameans)

etc.'" permitted to Moses

(a priest)?

But according to this it remains difficult

(as above section a')

On the other hand:

(a)

What is actually the answer to the claim?

And

(b)

Why was the answer not said to Zimri²⁸?

Seemingly one could answer²⁹

with that which our sages of blessed memory³⁰

say: "Three things Moses did from his own mind and the Holy One, blessed be He, agreed with him,"

one of which is that which "he separated from the woman."

And consequently there is no longer any claim "Daughter of Jethro, who permitted her to you"

(because of the prohibition of a convert for a kohen),

since Moses had <b>separated</b> himself from his wife.

And although separation alone is seemingly not enough to remove the prohibition of a convert to a kohen — nevertheless Rashi says in his commentary on the Torah on the verse

(in the end of parshas Beha'aloscha&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;)

"And Miriam spoke etc. about the woman etc. for the Cushite woman he had taken" — "about the woman,

about her &lt;b&gt;divorce&lt;/b&gt;; for the Cushite woman he had taken,

and now &lt;b&gt;he divorced her&lt;/b&gt;",

4.

That

is

Rashi teaches that it is not only that "he &lt;b&gt;separated &lt;/b&gt;from the woman"

(as Rashi brings it there&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;

below),

mere separation&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;,

but it was — &lt;b&gt;divorce&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;34&lt;/sup&gt;.

Nevertheless, they did not answer Zimri when he asked "the daughter of Yisro, who permitted her to you?" — because,

as explained in the words of Chazal&lt;sup&gt;35&lt;/sup&gt;,

no one knew about this,

until even Miriam learned of it only when "Eldad and Medad were prophesying in the camp"&lt;sup&gt;36&lt;/sup&gt;

and Tziporah said "Woe to the wives of these ones etc."&lt;sup&gt;37&lt;/sup&gt;

Because since Moses did it "from his own mind",

he,

being a "very humble man"³⁸,

did not want that they should know about it - and for this reason he³⁹

also did not want to answer Zimri that "separate from the woman".

But the explanation is not sustained²⁹,

because

that Rashi⁴⁰

learns

(according to the Sifri⁴⁰)

that Moses separated from his wife

(not "of his own accord",

but)

because "I said to him to separate from the wife ..

and you, stand here with Me"⁴¹,

and it is certainly not contrary to humility to tell that he fulfilled a <b>command of G-d</b>⁴²

The reason for Moses' separation from his wife they say is because he was a prophet - as Rashi³¹

brings down

(from the Sifri³¹)

that Zipporah said "Woe to the <b>wives</b> of these if they are required <b>for prophecy</b> that they should separate from their wives"⁴³

- whereas according to the above he had to divorce her because of the prohibition of a convert to a kohen⁴⁴.

5.

The explanation in this:

It stands in the Mishnah⁴⁵

: "He betrothed

(a common kohen)

a widow and was appointed to be High Priest, he shall marry her."

And the Gemara learns it from a verse⁴⁶

"He shall take a wife",

that since the "He shall take a wife"

(the betrothal)

was in a permitted manner,

he may ab initio complete the taking and marry the widow.

It is a kal vachomer and a fortiori in our case,

where not only the betrothal,

but also the marriage was permissible&lt;sup&gt;47&lt;/sup&gt;,

that even after Moses became a priest, "the daughter of Jethro" was permitted to him

(although she was a convert).

At first glance one can ask on this: That Moses married Tzipporah permissibly was &lt;b&gt;before &lt;/b&gt;the giving of the Torah; and since Jews then had the status of Bnei Noach and at that time there was &lt;b&gt;not &lt;/b&gt;at all the definition of "taking" from after the giving of the Torah&lt;sup&gt;48&lt;/sup&gt;,

one must therefore say,

that after the giving of the Torah, Jews needed to renew kiddushin and taking of their wives according to the Torah&lt;sup&gt;49&lt;/sup&gt;

- then the question returns to its place: How could Moses betroth Tzipporah after the giving of the Torah&lt;sup&gt;50&lt;/sup&gt;?

- It is not a question,

because

(during the days of the consecration,

after the erection of the Tabernacle)

- then even if one accepts,

that according to the opinion that Moses "all his days was a priest" his priesthood began immediately at the Giving of the Torah⁵¹,

it is also not a question,

because]

On the verse⁵²

"And a man of the house of Levi went and took a daughter of Levi" the Gemara expounds⁵³

: "that he performed for her an act of taking",

and the plain meaning of this is,

that Amram betrothed her with a taking from after the Giving of the Torah.

explain what the Rambam&lt;sup&gt;55&lt;/sup&gt;

says "And in Egypt Amram was commanded regarding additional commandments" - which superficially is not understood&lt;sup&gt;56&lt;/sup&gt;

: Where does one find that "Amram was commanded regarding additional commandments"?

- Rather this is the commandment of betrothal,

which was already in Egypt&lt;sup&gt;57&lt;/sup&gt;].

And since that also before the Giving of the Torah the betrothals of a woman were among Jews in a manner of taking from after the Giving of the Torah,

they did not need to have new betrothals after the Giving of the Torah - the previous betrothals remained in their force also after the Giving of the Torah&lt;sup&gt;58&lt;/sup&gt;.

And according to this it is understood,

that the "took a wife" of Moshe Rabbeinu was permitted,

since it was before the giving of the Torah,

and he did <b>not</b> need to betroth Tziporah again after the giving of the Torah.

6.

With this one can explain:

(a)

What was the claim of Zimri "daughter of Yitro who permitted her to you",

and

(b)

why Moshe did not answer him at all to his claim:

Zimri did not hold from the yalfusa

(from the Oral Torah)

of "yikach ishah" mentioned above,

and according to his view, Moses had to divorce "the daughter of Yitro".

Moses could not answer with the teaching of "yikach ishah"⁵⁹

- because⁶⁰

the law⁶¹

is,

that a Torah scholar who is "mora halachah" and is a "nogei'a badavar",

he is not believed at the time of the deed to say "kakh kibalti" - and Moses was indeed a nogei'a badavar - "the daughter of Yitro, who permitted her to you?"⁶²

that together with his quarreling about the priesthood of Aharon he also came⁶³

with false claims and questions about mezuzah — "a house that is full of books, what is it regarding being obligated in mezuzah" and techeiles — "a tallit that is entirely techeiles, what is it regarding being obligated in tzitzis" — and one does not find that Moshe should answer these questions with a teaching from <b>Torah Shebe'al Peh</b>⁶⁴

— he only said: "And if a creation the Lord creates etc."⁶⁵

And the explanation is as above: Moshe was a party to the matter⁶⁶,

and therefore he would in any case not have been believed about this].

7.

The lesson of the aforementioned matter:

Not always does one seek to answer the other person his questions; sometimes the other person is entirely intent with his question to permit a governmental matter! When his intention is for the sake of heaven, it must be "Answer

(even a)

fool according to his folly"⁶⁷.

When he asks, however, in matters of Torah with the intention to permit that which the Torah prohibits — then the conduct must be of "Do not answer a fool according to his folly"⁶⁸

: the way to overcome such an opponent of Torah is not through debate,

but with a force that is above reason and knowledge.

- the evil inclination - comes to confuse him,

one must not enter into a dispute with him,

rather one must immediately <b>do</b> with force - "drag him to the study hall etc."⁷⁰].

And this was also the conduct of Pinchas - "<b>when he zealously avenged</b> My vengeance"⁷¹

: he did not enter into a dispute; because on the contrary: the law⁷²

is,

that "one who comes to ask <b>they do not</b> instruct him" - rather he was zealous with the zeal of <b>the L-rd</b>

and sacrificed himself to kill Zimri⁷³.

8.

The holiday of redemption of 12-13 Tammuz falls

(in most years)

in the week of Parshas Balak — so the above matter has a connection to the holiday of redemption:

The conduct of the Rebbe,

the master of the redemption and joy,

was in a manner of "in his zeal for My zeal": not looking at the claims of certain people,

that there is no obligation to sacrifice oneself for every step and step etc.,

by the master of the redemption and joy there was the "in his zeal for My zeal": since it is a matter of the Most High

("My zea<b>l</b>")

("My zeal"),

he sacrificed himself one after another in practice for spreading Torah and Judaism.

The mesiras nefesh can be in several ways.

And among them:

A.

In our parshah — not through the nasi of the generation — the nasi of the generation was Moshe⁷⁴

In a manner of gevurah⁷⁵

(For which one finds that Pinchas — he is Eliyahu⁷⁶

— said "I have been zealous with zeal for the L-rd, G-d of Hosts, etc."⁷⁷

And did not find a merit for the Jews⁷⁸).

B.

As by the master of the redemption and joy: "In his zeal for My zeal" the nasi of the generation himself,

that also by Pinchas,

the <b>empowerment</b> for the "they were zealous with My zeal" came from Moshe⁷⁹

(the prince of the generation)

: through his saying "the carrier of the letter, he shall be the executor"⁸⁰

he gave Pinchas the power to be zealous with the zeal of the Lord]

In a manner of <b>kindnesses</b> - as has been told many times⁸¹,

that the master of redemption and joy asked his father,

the Rebbe n"e,

that his leadership should be with kindness and mercy,

the point,

that also a matter of "they were zealous with My zeal" is carried out in a manner of "a good eye he will be blessed"⁸²

- with kindness and mercy⁸³.

and Shabbos Parshas Mas’ei,

5729)