VOLUME 121 NUMBER 9
Tamuz 25, 5786
July 10, 2026
Parshas Mattos-Masei
Candlelighting Time 8:12
The end of sefer Bamidbar concludes that these are the mitzvos that were conveyed to the people ‘in the hand of Moshe’ whereas the conclusion of the previous sefer Vayikra ends that these are the mitzvos that were transmitted to Moshe. Why is there a variation of the language between the end of Bamidbar and Vayikra?
Rabbeinu Bachya explains that Hashem chose wording initially that would not indicate such an intimate relationship between Hashem and the nation because unbeknownst to the people, the Golden Calf debacle would create somewhat of a division between us and Hashem. Therefore, Moshe was commanded by Hashem the 613 mitzvos which he communicated to us. They lost their earlier stance with Hashem as they received the second set of 10 commandments. However, all was not lost because a second covenant was established on the plains of Moav as the nation prepared to enter into the Land of Israel. The original level of holiness and sanctity that had been present when the Torah was given on Mt. Sinai was rejuvenated. We were once again enjoying favored nation status, hence the Torah states that the Torah was given into the hand of Moshe secure and protected. Of course, the question remains that the sin of the Golden Calf was never fully atoned and as the Torah states we will suffer for all generations due to that iniquity. So how was it possible to regain that lost connection? What recreated that intense and intimate relationship that once existed but was destroyed?
Perhaps we may suggest that the verse in Devorim after the tens of curses were hurled at the people says that these are the words of the covenant that was sealed with the nation besides the original covenant that was made at the time of Mt. Sinai. In other words, the initial covenant that was repudiated due to the Golden Calf was reinstituted now at Mt. Sinai. To fashion a new covenant or, in other words, initiate the bond between Hashem and the nation is quite a task. However, even though the original agreement was disrupted by the Golden Calf, nonetheless it was not fully repudiated merely somewhat marred. Of course, we remained the people of Hashem but our relationship was weakened and needed to be restored. But we still need to examine what was indeed the process by which it was reinstated.
The Talmud states that just as salt preserves meat, so too, punishments levied against an individual or in this case a nation can also uphold and maintain. The people had survived numerous episodes of rebellious events against Hashem and they had paid for those iniquities severely. As they entered into the Land of Israel a whole register of potential accountabilities were levied against them. And yet as Rabbeinu Bachya states the covenant made anew was developed out of Hashem’s love for His people. We are not discussing what is referred to as tough love but rather it would appear that the intent is that often when someone veers off the straight path in order to reconnoiter clarity must be established and that requires that a strong fixation on that which is true must be examined. And that was accomplished with the newly reinforced covenant that after a long forty years in the desert and numerous complications, finally a new generation had surfaced armed with the experiences of their sojourn in the arid and dry land but saturated with Torah and mitzvos. Such a renewal can occur and fortify the nation for its next task, entering into the Land of Israel and establishing it as a place of serving Hashem in the best possible way.
A BYTE FOR SHABBOS
In the parsha the protocol for kashering utensils is discussed. First you must remove all the rust from them and then you can make them usable. In a similar fashion, in order to repent one must remove all the rust, the spoilage in his spiritual system and then he can promote a new life full of Torah and mitzvos and serving Hashem appropriately. CHOFETZ CHAIM
GOOD SHABBOS
