As related in this week's parasha, Mattos, the tribes of Reuven and Gad wanted good grazing ground for their cattle and requested Moshe to give them the land on the other side of the Yarden. This reason for their request is explicitly related in the Torah. When Moshe grants their wishes, half the tribe of Menashe was unexpectedly added to those inheriting land outside the main land of Eretz Yisroel. Inexplicably, Rashi does not explain why this happened. Other mefarshim however seek to explain why Menashe would have wanted to join Reuven and Gad. provide underlying motivations. They are divided as to whether the tribe of Menashe never asked to be located there and was coerced to go, or whether they were asked after the tribes of Reuven and Gad made their request or independently at another time. It is often said that the parasha of Eliezer making the shidduch of Yitzhak and Rivkah is repeated in the Torah due to the great lessons to be learned contrasting that to entire masechtas of gemaras replete with halachos hang on a thread, i.e. one sentence or less in the Torah, but why would the Torah simply add this factoid about the half of the tribe of Menashe without interjecting any impetus for our education. It is not clear from the passuk whether its assignment to the East Bank of Yarden is a punishment or reward.
Some commentaries explain that the tribe of Menashe was deprived of the inheritance within the Land of Israel because of its role in the sale of Yosef. In the story of Yosef and his brothers, Menashe was the one who placed the goblet in Binyamin's sack. Since this subsequently caused the brothers to tear their clothes, the tribe of Menashe was torn apart in retribution. Another perush says that since Menashe was descended from Shechem through Asnas bas Dinah, his imperfect bloodline prevented his a inheritance in the holy land in entirety; Reuvan and Gad in this view also were assigned outside the main land due to imperfections of their mother's zivug with Yaakov. Menashe is punished and not Ephraim who is also descended from Yosef because of the meaning of the name Menashe(forget), and since Yeravam descends form Menashe, which is bad, and because Joshua descends form Ephraim, which is good. Indeed the first tribe to be exiled was Menashe. [See details in Arizal Likutei Torah, Megale Amukos Igra D'Kala, Pardes Yosef, Shach al HaTorah, Eliyahu Kitov Sefer HaParshiyot, Hamodia 27 Tammuz 5764 Magazine]. These are explanations that seek the division of Menashe as something negative.
Positive reasons are expounded upon by the same and other sources. Menashe is part of Yosef which mystically represents the sefirah of Yesod which is the force of connection and thus joins the two groups of tribes, those beyond Yarden and those within the Land of Israel together: it is the strength of this tribe that holds the nation together. Yosef and his sons possess this strength because they gained experience in sustaining themselves religiously during galus in Egypt and thus can do the same outside the land now and in the future. Sons of Menashe were placed in Trans-Jordan to guide the naive shepherd tribes of Reuven and Gad. These tribes are seen as the mezuzahs of the land of Israel to replace the negative “door”-posts of Sichon and Og. Menashe is the tribe that requested to be in this land that was promised to Abraham, that of the three nations (besides the seven who were inside the Land). Reuven, Gad and Menashe, just as they did at the beginning of the conquest of Eretz Israel will be on the forefront of preparing the world for Moshcuach.
Tzror HaMor, Smuchim L'ad (Eliyahu of Izmir), Ahavat Yonaton (Eibeshitz)Megale Amukos 131, Kisvay Haim Eliezer Bichovsky, Hamodia 27 Tammuz 5764 Magazine, Likutei Sichos (Chabad) volume 28 as paraphrased in http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/92830/jewish/Matos.htm, http://www.moshiach.com/parshah/devarim/the-future-expansion-of-israel.php , see also http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/310891/jewish/Mezuzah-at-the-Gates-of-Israel.htm, }, Sefer Mamarim Chabad 5729/5629 Mattos, See also http://www.aish.com/tp/i/moha/48922172.html http://www.ohrtorahstone.org.il/parsha/5765/matot65.htm http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/chassidic-dimension-2/19.htmhttp://www.sichosinenglish.org/weekly/w10.htm]
We may ask: What was the underlying historical reality? Did Menashe ask or was it something imposed on it? As alluded to above, the Torah is not a history book. The Torah does not tell us about many remarkable events in Jewish history. There is no mention of Avraham Avinu being tested by Nimrod throwing him into the fire as this was not a necessary step in his life to be recorded in the Torah. It is not clear when the Mishkan was commanded to be built’ many reasons are given and one can learn a different lesson from each reason [see http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/chassidic-dimension-2/19.htm]
The Fifth Discipline by Peter Senge, subtitled the art and practice of the learning organization, proposes that there can be convergent problems which have a clear solution (like "Who stayed behind?" ) and divergent problems such as the motivation of Moshe and Menashe herein which do not have a simple answer, along the lines of a mathematical problem. But even complex differential equations, etc have a best fit among many, to the curve. Indeed as in out own day, a complex psyche that has multiple inputs that determine why a person acts the way they do in a particular situational confrontation. Some responses are active; some non-responses can even be classified as passive aggressive. This may very well be the motivation behind the ambiguity of the Torah with this event and why Rashi chose not to comment because as long as we are in galus, there are always multiple motives that remain hidden.
Comments