Moshe‘s Farewell Song/Poem:
o Appeal to universe for attention
o God's Faithfulness
o Israel’s folly
o The lesson of History
o Israel’s ingratitude
o Israel deserves punishment
o God delays His vengeance
o Israel’s enemies will be punished
o Nations of world called upon to rejoice in Israel’s deliverance
Observance of Torah law is Israel’s life
Moshe told to ascend Mt. Nevo to view Land from afar and then prepare to be gathered up to his people (die)
Torah as poetry
Poetry (from the ancient Greek word “to create”) is an art of rhythmical composition that through meaning, sound, and rhythmic language evokes pleasure by beautiful, imaginative, or elevated thoughts. Poetry uses forms and conventions to suggest differing interpretations, or to evoke emotive responses: assonance, alliteration, onomatopoeia and rhythm to achieve musical effects; ambiguity, symbolism, irony to create multiple interpretations; metaphor and simile to create a layering of meanings, forming connections previously not perceived.
Rabbi Naftali Zvi Yehudah Berlin ("the Netziv," 1816-1893), dean of the eminent Volozhin yeshiva and author of Ha'amek Davar (A Matter Profound) thinks that the Torah possesses "both the nature and singularity of poetry[shira], which is to speak in lyrical language". Because the essential quality of poetry is its compressed nature and its allusiveness--a kind of symbolic language -- the so-called hidden meaning of the Biblical text is its real meaning! Nechama Leibowitz elaborates that “poetry is essential symbolic and requires constant reading over to taste its full significance. It has many levels of meaning.”
"Therefore, write down this 'shira' and teach it to the people... in order that this 'shira' may be My witness against the Nation, when I bring them into the Land.... For I know the very nature of this people (the way they will act) even before I bring them into the Land..." This verse, found towards the end of last week’s Parsha, is thought by some to introduce “Moshe’s Farewell Shira/Poem” in this week’s Parsha and by others to refer to the entire Torah.
Moshe’s Farewell Shira: Form and Content
The Song provides the reader with a bird’s eye view of our past as well as warnings of what will happen to us in the future. Ramban summarizes as follows: The Torah predicts that despite all the goodness bestowed on us, we will turn to idolatry, thereby invoking God’s anger and prompting Him to expel us from our land. Eventually, He will inflict His vengeance on our enemies for persecuting us. Their deep hatred of us is based on our loyalty to God , our obeying Him and His Torah, not intermarrying, disdaining and banishing their religious ritual and cults. They maltreat us because they hate God and the ethics He represents. Our ultimate redemption at the end of history will come when God forgives us for our sins and repays our enemies “for His name’s sake”-- because we have repented. But even if we have not repented and still remain undeserving, He still promises us redemption. “Divine judgment on Israel is therefore annulled for fear of desecrating the name of God” (Nechama Leibowitz).
Rabbi Ludwig Rosenthal, (German rabbi, 1886-1929, cited by both Rav Jacobson and Nechama Leibowitz) provides a tripartite division of the body of the Song, preceded by a three-verse prologue and followed by a four-verse epilogue in which the latter harks back to the former. The prologue “Give ear, heavens”; the epilogue: “ I raise My hand to heaven”. An invitation for the listener to participate in the prologue is worded “Give glory to our God” and in the epilogue, “O nations acclaim His people”.
The body of the Song consists of 36 verses divided into three equal and distinct stanzas of 12 verses each…
The first section details God’s loving-kindness to us, and how He transported us on the wings of eagles from a howling, waste wilderness to a fertile land of oil wheat and wine. But eventually Israel sinned “…Jeshurun waxed-fat and kicked”.
The second section describes our ingratitude and predicts the ensuing terrible punishment we will endure.
The third section of the Song focuses on how God mercifully deviated from the path of strict justice. His reasons for saving us were our enemies’ arrogance and “for His name’s sake”.
This Song guarantees the continuity of the Jewish people. Furthermore, continues Rabbi Menachem Leibtag, its importance is as “an eternal cry not only for Teshuva, but also for the recognition of our purpose” to be a living example to the world by leading an ethical, moral Torah life. “The time will ultimately come, should we perform proper teshuva, when a new song will be sung ["v'nomar l'fanav SHIRA CHADASHA..."], a song of praise and recognition of God as the source of our victory.”
Rabbi David Fohrman sees this Song as God’s defense against the attacks from the Nation of Israel (expressed in last week’s parsha) that the reason for their sufferings is because “God is not within us” instead of acknowledging that it was their own behavior in abandoning God and returning to idolatry that was the source. Through a review of Israel’s history expressed in poetic wording and imagery some of which link to the Creation, Rabbi Fohrman shows that it is God who is responsible for our language, our culture, our history…our very existence. The poem re-enforces God’s role as our Creator, our Father and Our Mother (“suckling honey”) who would certainly never pull back from us unless we had pulled away from Him first.
Rabbi Leibtag on the five songs in Tanach
The following table summarizes these five songs and the important time period that each one concludes.
• Shmot 15:1 19 Shirat ha'Yam after Yetziat Mitzraim (the Exodus)
• Devarim 32:1 43 Shirat Ha'azinu after 40 years in the desert
• Yehoshua 12:1 24 Shirat Yehoshua" after defeat of the 31 kings
• Shoftim 5:1 31 Shirat Devorah after complete conquest of north
• Shm.II 22:1 51 Shirat David after establishing the Monarchy
Shirat Ha'azinu and Yehoshua exhibit the pattern of two columns with an empty space down the middle :
Shirat ha'Yam, Devorah, and David exhibit a brickwork-like pattern:
Rabbi Leibtag’s hypothesis is that songs following the first pattern (Shirat Ha'azinu and Yehoshua) mark the end of historical periods that fell short of their original expectations but the songs following the second brickwork-like pattern were used when expectations were fully realized :
• The people of the Exodus were destined to reach the Holy Land. But they and their offspring continuously angered God. What should have been an ideal situation --conquering the Promised Land with Moshe as their leader--became a more realistic one with a pessimistic forecast that the Israelites would sin after entering the land. It seemed inevitable that the nation will fail in its Divine mission of establishing God’s model nation in the Land of Israel. Such a tragic conclusion necessitated the use of the first pattern for Ha’azinu.
• Yehoshua’s conquest was far from complete because only the Tribes of Yehudah and Yosef successfully conquered their lands. But the remaining ten tribes had not captured their respective areas. His song, therefore, is written utilizing the first pattern.
• The Song of the Sea marks not only the completion of the Exodus, but also our total independence from Egypt.
• During the time of Devorah, Emek Yizrael (the Jezreel Valley), which sat on the major trade route from Egypt to Mesopotamia, was finally conquered through the joint effort of the surrounding tribes. Barak and Devorah defeated Israel's enemies in the north, thereby geographically uniting the twelve tribes. Therefore, Devorah’s Song utilizes the second pattern.
• Emek Yizrael, having been lost during the time of Judges, came back under control during David’s time. David expanded his sphere of occupation to the north, east, and south, thus creating a stable monarchy and secure borders. He thanks God for His assistance in achieving the most complete conquest of Eretz Canaan in a song utilizing the second pattern.
Rambam notes that in some places it is customary to chant this Farewell Song at the daily synagogue services in place of the Song of the Sea (Az Yashir Moshe) and but in other locations both are read.
Moshe’s failure to sanctify God’s name
God informs Moshe that he will die and not enter the land of Canaan “because you broke faith with me in the midst of the Israelites at the Waters of Dispute at Kadesh in the Tzin desert, and because you did not sanctify me among the Israelites”.
The Israelites had complained about a lack of water. Moshe and Aaron fled to the Ohel Moed and “fell on their faces” (to pray? to appease the demonstrators? in frustration and disgust?)
God tells Moshe to “take THE rod (to assemble the nation?)… and speak to the rock before their eyes… and you shall bring out water from the rock”. Moshe takes the rod (the same? another one?) and speaks harshly to the assembling nation: “listen here you rebels, can we bring out water from the rock?” An enraged Moshe raises his hand (holding the rod), hits the rock twice and abundant waters come out to quench the thirst of the congregation and their cattle.
God’s response: “Because you did not believe in Me (alternate translation: were not supportive enough of me) to sanctify me in the eyes of the Children of Israel therefore you shall not bring this congregation into the land I have given them .These are the waters of Meriva…where He was sanctified in them.”
Clearly Moshe did something seriously wrong to deserve such a harsh punishment. But the Torah does not tell us what it was! Nechama Leibowitz surveys commentators’ views…
• Rashi, later followed by Shadal, says Moshe hit the rock instead of talking to it. Had he spoken to the rock as instructed, the people would have reasoned that if even an inanimate rock performs the will of God, how much more so we humans are obligated to follow His commandments!
• Ramban focuses on the “shall we…?” in which Moshe seems to give part of the credit to himself and to Aharon instead of attributing the water-extraction to God alone.
• Ibn Ezra faults the two leaders for their undignified, unstatesman-like reaction to the nation’s demand for water (fleeing and falling on their faces)—and also for the unnecessary hitting of the rock twice. The leaders display a lack of respect for the people and their need for water.
• Saadia Gaon understands the phrase “talk to the rock” to mean “talk to them (the Jewish people)...near the rock …” about God’s ability to miraculously extract water from a stone. Instead, Moshe berates them and strikes the rock twice.
• Ha’Ketav V’HaKaballah focuses on God’s command to speak to the rock L’EYNEHEM, “before their eyes”. Since sounds and speech are absorbed by ears, not eyes, it must mean that God was not referring to the physical eye but rather to the mind’s eye. Not physical sight but Insight. Moshe‘s failure was in wasting the opportunity to help the nation “see” (understand) the enormous capability of God.
• Rambam draws our attention to the tone of Moshe’s pejorative description of the people: “listen here YOU REBELS” (or fools or “teachers” who presume to teach leaders).The people looked up to their leader and emulated his behavior. But instead of being patient, Moshe became angry and exasperated. For a man in his position such public behavior amounted to a desecration of God’s name.
• Joseph Albo notes that God subjects Nature to the control of believers. In the Korach incident, Moshe took the initiative to announce that the “earth would open its mouth”—and God complied. In response to the demand for water, Moshe and Aharon should have taken the initiative to announce that a rock would split and water would flow. They should have confronted and assured the people that God will provide. Instead, they acted cowardly, became panic-stricken, fled from the people and fell on their faces praying for God to provide a solution.
• Others, finding no serious wrongdoing in this incident, conclude that the punishment was for earlier sins, possibly of the Golden Calf (Aharon) and The Spies (Moshe) which the Torah chose to keep hidden (perhaps to avoid publicly embarrassing them).
• Daas Mikrah maintains that the main takeaways from this incident is that even the giant figures of any generation sin and are punished accordingly. The particulars are secondary.
Rabbi Menachem Leibtag, noting that the stated punishment is “… you shall NOT LEAD this nation into the land…” concludes that they were punished for their failure as leaders (not as individuals)—and, therefore, could not LEAD the people there. “Lo he-eman-ted be” can mean “you did not believe in me” but here is to be understood as meaning that they failed to support God (i.e., failed to defend God and to assure and encourage the nation). As a leader Moshe should have been empathic to their needs, and not get angry at them. This breakdown in leadership had started some time earlier. They failed to sanctify God’s name a number of times during the forty year desert trek but this was the final straw.
Rabbi H. L. Berenholz
Last edit: 4 years 6 months ago by Heshy Berenholz.