English translation — מטות

Matot<pg>117</pg>

A.

"And Yair son of Menasheh went and captured their villages and called them villages of Yair"<sup>1</sup>.

And Rashi: "their villages — their hamlets"

(and it is the language of the Targum

(Onkelos and Yonatan)

here),

that is, "village" means hamlets.

And behold, in Ibn Ezra here he explained "like cities",

that is, towns

(as it is written in the portion of Devarim<sup>2</sup>

(regarding the conquest of the land of Og<sup>3</sup>)

"There was no city<sup>4</sup>

which we did not take from them, sixty cities, etc.'").

And in Radak on this verse<sup>5</sup>

"And the Philistines gathered to Lechi" he explained that "Lechi"

[that the word "Chot" is from the root "Chai",

"with the yod replaced by vav"<sup>6</sup>]

is "an unwalled city that has no wall"<sup>7</sup>.

And it is puzzling what compelled Rashi to explain

(as the Targum)

that "their villages" means villages,

and he did not explain that they are towns,

which seemingly fits better with the plain sense of the matter of "and he captured their villages",

for according to the explanation of the Targum, one must say that the conquest of Yair was only in the villages of the land of Og!

And in addition to the difficulty in the interpretation itself,

behold later in Parshat Devarim⁸

regarding the conquest of the land of Og it is explicit "sixty cities, all the region of Argob, etc..

fortified cities with a wall..

apart from the cities of the open country, etc.",

and in the continuation of the matter⁹

that "Jair the son of Manasseh took all the region of Argob up to the border, etc. and called them after his name, the Bashan Havvoth Jair, etc.",

and from the plain sense of the verse it implies that these sixty cities were

(at least part of them¹⁰)

in the region of Argob

(and so the plain sense of the verses in the book of Joshua indicates¹¹,

"all the kingdoms of Og, etc. and all the Havvoth Jair which are in Bashan, sixty cities").

behold it is explicit that there were cities in the portion of Jair,

and why should we interpret that "and he captured their villages" refers to the capture of the villages¹²?

Furthermore: earlier

(in Parshat Chukat¹³)

on the verse "<pg>118</pg>

In the account and in all her daughters — Rashi "her daughters — the villages that are near her",

that "villages" are called "daughters" of the city

(and as explained in the commentaries&lt;sup&gt;14&lt;/sup&gt;

that the city is like a "mother" and the villages dependent on the city are called "her daughters"),

and if so why did the verse change here to call the villages by the name "their father-in-law",

and not "their daughters",

and like the language of the verse here itself,

in the verse after this&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;,

"And Nobach went and captured Kenath and its daughters"

(and not — "its father-in-law")&lt;sup&gt;16&lt;/sup&gt;.

2.

And this will be understood by prefacing the explanation of Rashi on the verse after this: "And he called them Havoth Yair — because he had no sons, he called them by his name for a remembrance."

And already the commentaries asked&lt;sup&gt;17&lt;/sup&gt;,

"What need is there for this reason, is it not that all builders and conquerors of towns, their way is to call them by their name&lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt;

like Nobach in the adjacent [verse]"

("And Nobach went etc. and he called it Nobach by his name").

And one should add: it is explicit in the verse¹⁹

"And it was that

(Cain)

built a city and called the name of the city after the name of his son Enoch" and in Rashi there that it was "in memory of his son Enoch".

Behold, it is common to call the name of a city in memory of a man even though he has descendants etc.²⁰

(for "and Enoch begot Irad"²¹),

and what is the necessity to explain that Yair had no children and this is the reason that he called them after his name

(and not like Novach, about whom it is stated simply "and he called it Novach after his name",

and Rashi did not explain there that this is because he had no children²²).

And now, simply one can say,

that it is impossible to explain that he called the city after his name simply, as is the way of all conquerors of a city,

because if so, why does the verse relate this matter?

That is to say: when the Torah relates about calling a new name for a specific place,

it is understood that this matter comes to teach us something²³,

for otherwise, what is the practical difference that they called this place a new name²⁴.

And according to Rashi's explanation of what was written previously²⁵

regarding the change of names of the cities of Sichon by the children of Reuben — "they changed [them] etc. and they called by names the names<pg>119</pg>

of the cities which they built",

that "the Amorites used to call their cities after the name of their idolatry and the children of Reuben changed their name to other names",

meaning that it comes to teach us the virtue of the children of Reuben,

that they abolished the names of the cities which were names of idolatry²⁶].

And therefore it must be said in our subject,

that "and he called them Havvoth Jair" was because of a special situation²⁷,

and this is what Rashi explains: "because he had no sons, he called them by his name for a remembrance",

that is,

that this itself the verse comes to teach us in this story,

that Jair had no sons.

But still, at first glance, there is room to question,

for even though it is forced that there is here a special matter,

from where [do we know] in the plain sense of Scripture that this was "because he had no sons etc."²⁸,

and not another matter,

and especially that also in the midrashim of our Sages

(that are before us)

no source is found²⁹

for this, that Jair had no sons.

[And on the other hand,

later in parshas Devarim⁹

we find a special matter regarding the calling of this name,

"And he called them by his name etc. Chavos Yair until this day"

(unlike the calling of the name "Novach",

"this name was not established for him"³⁰)].

3.

And it can be said,

that these two explanations of Rashi come in sequence with each other,

that this that Rashi [says] that the naming of the city after him was "because he had no sons" comes in sequence to Rashi's [explanation] of "Chavoseihem" meaning "their villages".

That is: since it must be said that there was here a special matter in the calling of this name,

it is logical to say,

that the special innovation is hinted at in the language of the verse itself.

And therefore Rashi chose the explanation of the Targum,

that "their seals" means "their signatures",

because according to this explanation it turns out,

that in the verse itself the matter of "he had no sons" is hinted at.

Explanation of the matter:

Since in the inheritance of Yair there were several cities

(as above, section 1),

it is difficult³¹,

why he called only the villages by his name,

and not the cities themselves, which are more important than villages and are the main thing?

Rather, in this Yair wanted to hint at the matter of the remembrance of his name in place of his not having sons: "villages" are called "daughters" of a city,

and as above, that the city is considered as the "mother" and its villages — "its daughters",

and thus,

that in this he called specifically the villages by his name,

it is emphasized that he wanted them to be in place of sons

(regarding the remembrance),

since "villages" are analogous to offspring

("daughters")

of the cities³².

<pg>120</pg>

And it may be said,

that the reason Yair called them specifically by the term "Havvoth"

(and not "daughters" and the like),

is because this emphasizes the matter of remembrance,

as Rashi's language: "he called them by his name for a remembrance"

[for the choosing of the villages to call them by his name emphasizes that the reason for the naming is "because he had no sons",

and that he used the term "Havvoth

(Yair)

" emphasizes the purpose of the name — "for a remembrance"]

:

"Chavot" in singular is "Chavah," which is from the root "Chai"

(for the yud is interchanged with vav&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;),

and as is explicit in the verse&lt;sup&gt;34&lt;/sup&gt;

"And he called etc. Chavah, for she was the mother of all life"

[And one may say by way of hint,

that also for this reason the villages are called by the name "Chavot,"

for the villagers supply the cities with food&lt;sup&gt;35&lt;/sup&gt;,

and thus they are the source of life of the cities].

And this is the hint in the explanation of the name "Chavot Yair,"

that the memory of Yair was fixed in the names of these villages,

thus,

that these are the continuation and memory of his life,

"Chavot Yair."

D.

And one must explain the connection between the matter of memory specifically to "villages" in the inwardness of the matters,

with the preface of what is explained in Bachya&lt;sup&gt;36&lt;/sup&gt;

regarding the reason that the children of Reuven changed the names of the cities to other names,

for Sichon and Og "were idol worshipers..

And therefore the children of Gad and the children of Reuven, when they knew this, changed the names of the cities to other names and wanted to settle in them and serve there the Holy One, blessed be He, and to unify Him..

And therefore

[they requested]

let be given&lt;sup&gt;37&lt;/sup&gt;

this land to Your servants as a possession,

it would be a cause to abolish idol worship and to unify the Almighty".

And based on this, we can also explain the content of the matter that "Yair ben Menashe went and captured their villages and called them Havot Yair,"

which in spirituality means that he "captured" them spiritually,

through nullifying the matter of idolatry within them.

And it can be said,

that specifically regarding Yair the verse explains the new name³⁸,

"And he called them Havot Yair",

is because in this name is hinted the general content of the transformation that they effected in Transjordan,

that in place of idolatry,

which "is a place of death"³⁹

— "And he called them Havot Yair",

a matter of life and light

(for holiness is life and light),

to such a life that is the source of life

(Chavah)

and light that will shine in the future

("Until⁹

this day").

And based on this, one may add further,

that this that he captured "their villages" — villages — specifically,

it is because the general content of the transformation of the husk is emphasized in the matter of the "village".

5.

And this will be understood based on the words of our Sages, of blessed memory⁴⁰

that a village dweller who saw the king is not comparable to a city dweller who saw the king,

for a city dweller is in proximity to the king and therefore seeing the king is not a novelty for him,

but not so a village dweller who is far from the place of the king,

seeing the face of the king causes in him a great excitement because of the novelty of the matter.

<pg>121</pg>

And so it is in spirituality⁴¹,

regarding the matter of seeing the King of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He,

for a city dweller alludes to one whose service is in the world of holiness,

and the matter of the revelation of G‑dliness is not a novelty for him; but a villager is one whose service is in the concealment and hiding of the world

(far from the "city of our G‑d"⁴²),

and when he succeeds in refining and clarifying the concealment of the world and elevating it to holiness, then the revelation of holiness for him is "with a great noise" because of the novelty in the matter

(in the manner that specifically "the ofanim"⁴³

— the angels of the world of Asiyah — say "Blessed"⁴⁴

is the glory of the Lord from His place 'with a great noise'").

And thus,

the concept of "village" alludes to the entire service of refining and clarifying the concealment and hiding of the world⁴⁵.

And according to this, one can also explain the connection of "villages" to the matter of remembrance:

Although in the matter of "revelation",

the service of a "villager"

(which is in a place of concealment and hiding)

is lower than the service of a "city dweller"

(who is in proximity to the king),

nevertheless, from the aspect of the self-nullification in this service,

they reach His very Essence and Being⁴⁶,

the "essence" which is above revelation.

And this is that specifically the calling of the name Yisrael to the "villages" effects a matter of remembrance,

for from the aspect of the "essence" which is above the category of revelation is drawn the matter of eternality,

which is not in the category of change

(and forgetfulness)

at all,

and therefore specifically the name "Chotz Yair" was established⁴⁷

"until⁹

this day".

(From the sicha of Shabbos Parshas Mattos-Masei 5743)