And there was no water for the congregation. As a form of punishment, they lacked water because they did not eulogize her [Miriam] properly. For regarding Moses and Aaron it says, and the children of Israel wept for them, but here it does not say “and they wept for her.” And it says, she died there and was buried there — in the place where she died, there was her burial immediately, and she was forgotten like a dead person from the heart, and they did not feel her absence at all. Therefore, the water was withheld from them so that they would retroactively know that the well was in Miriam’s merit. And our Sages (Moed Katan 28a) said that her death was placed adjacent to the section of the Red Heifer to tell you that just as sacrifices atone, so too the death of the righteous atones. And why was it specifically placed adjacent to the Red Heifer? Because in truth it is not a sacrifice unless we find the scripture calls it a sin-offering Numbers 19:9. But the main reason is that just as the heifer comes to clean its child’s filth, so too the righteous woman, the mother of all living, through her death cleanses the filth of her descendants.

The commentaries bring this juxtaposition in four places. First, the juxtaposition of the death of Aaron’s sons to Yom Kippur which atones (Leviticus 16:1). Second, the juxtaposition of Miriam to the red heifer. Third, the juxtaposition of Aaron’s death to the priestly garments which atone (Numbers 20:28), as our Sages explained (Moed Katan 28a). Fourth, the juxtaposition of Aaron’s death to the breaking of the tablets (Deuteronomy 10:2–6), teaching that the death of the righteous is as severe as the breaking of the tablets. This is because from every righteous person, four types of benefits come to the people of his generation. The first is that the entire world is sustained by his merit, as our Sages said (Berakhot 17b), “The entire world is sustained for the sake of my son Chanina, etc.” as we explained in the portion of Vayechi regarding Goren ha-Atad and in the portion of Emor on the verse “except for his relative.” They are like a mother nursing her child, as it is written (Tanchuma Shemot 12:28), “Your two breasts are like Moses and Aaron,” and as Rashi explained (Song of Songs 4:5). Similarly, we find that in Miriam’s merit they had the well which provided for all of Israel’s needs. This is the connection of her death to the red heifer, the mother of the calf that comes to rectify the damage of her offspring. The second benefit is that the righteous person teaches them effectively about the way of God and commandments; therefore, his passing is comparable to the breaking of the tablets. The third benefit is that his merit protects like a shadow and like a garment made to protect from cold and heat. With his death, his protective shadow is removed, and they are left naked without any covering, as it is said (Numbers 20:29), And all the congregation saw that Aaron had died, and our Sages interpreted (Rosh Hashanah 3a) “va-yir’u” [they saw] with the letter yud vocalized with a tzere, meaning “they became visible,” referring to the removal of the cloud which was likened to a garment. This is [the reason for] the juxtaposition to the priestly garments. The fourth benefit is that he atones for the people through his death. This is [the reason for] the juxtaposition to Yom Kippur, and it is easily understood.

And the people quarreled with Moses. In all the complaints, we do not find the language of quarreling except regarding water matters, twice: here and at Massah and Meribah (Exodus 17:7). This is because from water, division was created, as our Sages said (Bereishit Rabbah 4:6): “Why was ‘it was good’ not said on the second day? Because on it division was created, as it says (Genesis 1:6), And let it be a separation between waters and waters.” And it is explained in the tradition (Proverbs 17:14), The beginning of strife is like releasing water. When the waters were released and separated from each other, this was the beginning of strife and the start of all quarreling. Similarly, the quarrel of Isaac’s shepherds was about water, for all this follows naturally from the primordial waters. And they quarreled with Moses, who was drawn from the water, and whose hand ruled over the waters at the Red Sea and at the rock. [They argued,] “Why can’t he bring forth water for us from the flint rock now as well?”

And concerning what they said, “If only we had perished when our brothers perished,” they were not speaking about dying of thirst, for if so, why would they conclude their words with “and there is no water to drink”? Rather, the beginning of their words contains a different and greater complaint, because it had been decreed upon them that in this wilderness they shall be consumed and there they shall die (Numbers 14:35). Our Sages explained (Sanhedrin 110b) that there they shall die means in the World to Come, as the generation that died in the wilderness have no portion in the World to Come. And some say that this is what they meant here by saying to die there, we and our cattle — we are equal to our cattle, just as the spirit of the animal goes downward, so does our spirit. And I add a good lesson, that this is why they prefaced by saying If only we had perished when our brothers perished before the Lord similar to our brothers of the house of Israel who died before the decree that there they shall die in the World to Come, for then we would have been equal to our brothers in the portion of the World to Come. Why have you brought us, etc., to die there? — that we are equal to our cattle, for this is the opposite of when our brothers perished, but rather like the death of our cattle. This explains why they first used the term perishing [gevi’ah] and afterward the term death, [mitah], because the term perishing is used for the righteous (Bava Batra 16b), while death applies even to the less worthy. This is an indication that they were speaking about the perishing of the righteous who have a portion in the World to Come, and when they said to die there, we and our cattle, they meant, “Shall we die like a fool dies?” like other animals. And this is a precious interpretation.

“And why did you bring the congregation of the Lord.” Initially it says, They gathered against Moses and Aaron, and afterward it says, The people quarreled with Moses alone, and then it reverts to saying, And why did you bring to both of them, and afterward, Why did you bring us up to Moses alone (see Baal HaTurim). Furthermore, they should have prioritized the complaints of Why did you bring us up from Egypt before Why did you bring the congregation of the Lord to this wilderness in the order of their occurrence. Additionally, they changed their names several times from assembly, to congregation, to the people, and congregation of the Lord.

And the explanation for all this is, that Israel knew that the well was in the merit of Miriam, the manna in the merit of Moses, and the clouds of glory in the merit of Aaron. And if they had gone by way of inhabited land, they would not have needed any of this. And it is known that for the ascent from Egypt, Moses alone was the main factor, as it is written For this Moses, the man who brought us up, etc. (Exodus 32:1). But their willingness to enter the wilderness was because of both of them, for they could not exist there without manna and without the clouds of glory. Therefore it says, They gathered against Moses and Aaron, but it does not yet explain why they gathered against both of them. And afterward it says, The people quarreled with Moses alone, and does not yet explain why they quarreled with him. And afterward it explains the first point first: For they gathered against both of them in order to say to them, Why have you brought the congregation of the Lord to this wilderness? because both of them were the reason for their coming to the wilderness. And regarding the latter point later: What is meant by the people quarreled with Moses is that they said, Why did you bring us up from Egypt, etc., because Moses alone was the one who brought them up. And the reason they prioritized the complaint Why have you brought us, etc. is because this was the greatest grievance of all, for there would have been no harm in being brought up from Egypt if they had not been brought to the wilderness. Therefore, they first complained about being brought to the wilderness, which was bad in itself, even if they had not left an important place like Egypt. And afterward they made a lesser complaint, which was that he forced them from one extreme to the other, for he brought them up from Egypt, a place that was like the garden of God for trees and seeds, to this bad place, not a place of seed or fig trees, etc.

And according to what we have explained above, that they complained because they lost their portion in the World to Come, this also explains why they prefaced their complaint with Why have you brought, etc. as this is indeed a significant complaint. And this is what it means The entire assembly came — referring to the complete assembly, as Rashi explains; And the people settled in Kadesh — wherever it says “the people,” it refers to the wicked ones, as Rashi explains in the verse And the people were complaining (Numbers 11:1). It means that the wicked among them sought to establish a permanent settlement in Kadesh and had no desire or wish to go to the Land because they hated the Land. Immediately Miriam died there so that due to the lack of water, they would not seek a permanent settlement [there], and her death was the cause of the well’s disappearance, and “the innocent suffer with the guilty” (Bava Kamma 92a), so that there was no water for the assembly, even for the righteous among them who were called by the name assembly. And the people quarreled — these were the lesser ones, but the good ones remained silent, awaiting God’s salvation. And when they said Why have you brought the congregation of the Lord, these were their own words, because they were righteous in their own eyes.

And Moses and Aaron came to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting from before the congregation. That is, because they [the people] gathered and stood [threateningly] against them, they [Moses and Aaron] fled from them to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.

Take the staff and gather the congregation, etc. If God commanded him to speak to the rock, then why did he need this staff? Since it doesn’t say “take your staff” but rather the staff, it implies that it’s referring to a specific, known staff. And what is meant by from before the Lord — was Moses’ staff standing before the Lord? And why did He call them rebels specifically in this complaint? Regarding the nature of this sin, there are 11 opinions mentioned by Abarbanel in his book, and there you will find many opinions that are far from the simple meaning. Now, look to the right and see, and set your heart to my opinion.

You should know and understand that I found in Chizkuni that this staff was Aaron’s staff which was placed before God. But his words are not well-seasoned, for he doesn’t explain what the purpose of Aaron’s staff was here. And I say that indeed the language indicates that this staff was Aaron’s staff, as it is written the staff, which implies the known one that was kept before God. It was a dry piece of wood without any moisture of water at all, and nevertheless it produced a flower and a blossom. And there is no flower and blossom without water, except that the Holy One, blessed be He, decreed that it should produce water, and God made the dry wood produce flowers through the water that came out by the decree of God, blessed be He. The Holy One, blessed be He, wanted Moses to take Aaron’s staff and show it to all of Israel, to say: Just as God brought forth water from this dry wood, so will He bring forth water from this flinty rock that is dry. And what it says, and speak to the rock and it will yield its water, means that you should speak to the rock that it should also do as this staff did. And since the exact wording that Moses should speak to the rock is not specified in the text, certainly the wording is the two words and it will yield/yielded its water [venatan meimav]. For and it yielded refers to the past, and he should speak to the rock about the staff that produced a blossom and yielded its water, because normally a flower and blossom contain moisture of water. And when the rock hears that the staff has already yielded its water, then it will also do likewise. And through this, you shall bring forth water for them from the rock. A hint to this is that the numerical value of rock [sela] equals wood [etz], suggesting that it should learn from the dry wood to do as it did. But God did not command to strike it at all. And when Moses struck it, it is written with his staff, implying that he struck with his own staff and not with Aaron’s staff. And Moses took the staff from before God, as He commanded him. Because he understood this from the fact that it says the staff, the known one, and not “your staff. ”And the text informs us that only this taking was as God commanded him, but what he did from here on was not as God commanded him.

The issue of the sin of striking is, that we find in the words of our Sages (Shemot Rabbah 21:9) regarding the splitting of the Red Sea, it is written And you, lift up your staff and stretch out your hand (Exodus 14:16), and this lifting is an expression of removal and giving, meaning “lift up your staff and set it aside, and stretch out your hand” — not with your staff — because they [the Israelites] were murmuring about the staff and said that all the miracles that Moses performed with his staff were all done through some form of sorcery that he had in this staff, because “we see that his power is only through this staff.” Therefore, it was said lift up your staff in order to remove this notion from their hearts. And therefore it is said And Israel saw the great hand (Exodus 14:31), meaning that they saw that this miracle was performed by hand and not with the staff. Therefore they believed in God and in Moses His servant, implying that until now they were children in whom there is no faith, because they did not believe in God and in the prophecy of Moses His servant, as they had reason to attribute the miracles to the staff.

Now at this time, many days had passed for Israel since the splitting of the sea, and this generation did not know whether Moses performed that miracle with his hand or with his staff. They assumed that just as all the miracles in Egypt were performed with the staff, so too was the splitting of the sea. And because he struck the rock with his staff, he brought Israel back to a lack of faith, as they again said that it was not God who did all this, but rather there was some aspect of sorcery in his staff. And there [at the splitting of the sea] it was said, And you, lift up your staff and stretch out your hand. The language of “lifting” and removal was used regarding the staff, and the language of “stretching” regarding the hand, and through this they believed in God. But here [with the rock] it states exactly the opposite: And Moses lifted his hand and struck with his staff. The language of “lifting” and removal is used regarding the hand, because since he did not perform this act with a mere stretching out of his hand, it is as if he removed his hand and struck with his staff. Through this, he brought back the lack of faith to its original place, just as there was murmuring about the staff before the splitting of the sea. Therefore it says, Because you did not believe in Me. It does not [actually] say “lo emanntem” [you did not believe] but rather “lo he’emanntem” [you did not cause to believe], which is a transitive verb [affecting others], meaning that they caused others not to believe in Me but to say that he did this by the power of the staff, and it was not God who did all this. In this, they committed two evils: they did not speak to the rock at all, and Aaron was also guilty in this matter, as it says, and you [plural] shall speak to the rock. If they had spoken to the rock about the matter of Aaron’s staff and what it did, and the rock had listened and acted accordingly, there would be no greater sanctification of God’s name than this, as everyone would learn a fortiori [all the more so] from the rock. But not only did they not speak at all to strengthen faith, but he struck it with his staff and weakened faith. And this is what is meant by because you did not believe in Me — you did not cause others to believe in Me.

And if you object that the statement “Shall sheep and cattle be slaughtered for them?” (Numbers 11:22) is more difficult than this, to this He responded, to sanctify Me in the eyes of the Children of Israel, because that [previous incident] was in private and this one in public, before the eyes of all Israel. For this is the measure regarding desecration of God’s Name, that whoever desecrates the Name of Heaven in private will be punished in public (Avot 4:5). This means that the Holy One, blessed be He, arranges circumstances for him to commit [such a sin] in public so that people will know why He, blessed be He, is punishing him. And as for why He began with the Children of Israel and afterward said therefore you shall not bring this congregation, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses as follows: “If all those entering the Land were Children of Israel, descendants of Abraham about whom it is said (Genesis 15:6) And he believed in God, I would have remained silent. For since they are believers, the children of believers, even if you did not perform miracles before their eyes to strengthen their faith, nevertheless they would remain strong in faith and not deviate from it. However, among those entering the Land there are a congregation of converts, the mixed multitude, who are not from the Children of Israel, for they are evil, and they could easily return to their old ways since they are ‘children in whom there is no faithfulness.’ Therefore, those entering the Land need a leader who can walk against the spirit of each and every person and continually perform miracles before them to strengthen their faith. And it is not your way to be exacting about this, therefore you shall not bring this congregation — that congregation of converts — into the Land.”

Therefore it was said regarding Joshua (Deuteronomy 31:7), Before the eyes of all Israel, be strong and courageous, for you will bring this people to the land. Here too He begins with Israel and concludes with the people. For He said: Train yourself before the eyes of all Israel to be strong and courageous in the word of God, so that they will not come through you to a lack of faith. And if you say that Israel is not suspected by you of this, [God] said, For you will bring this people, as it includes among them also the mixed multitude who are called by the name “the people,” and they need strengthening even more. This matter will be further explained below in Parashat Vayelech, God willing. And this interpretation is more precious than all that the commentators have said about it, which your eyes will see in the book of Abarbanel.

And I will further say about what is written, “and he struck the rock with his staff twice.” This led to a diminishment of faith, as Israel would not listen to the voice of God and His prophets except after many strikes, for a rebuke enters more into a wise man than a hundred stripes into a fool (Proverbs 17:10), as concluded in Yalkut Shimoni sign 763, which states: Speak to the rock — it does not say “strike it” but rather “speak to it.” When a child is young, his teacher instructs him and strikes him; once he has grown, he disciplines him through speech. Similarly, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: “When the rock was small, you struck it, as it says, and you shall strike the rock, but now that it has grown, speak to the rock.” Every intelligent person would be astonished at this sight — does this rock have eyes of flesh? Is it not the same whether small or large? How can it be compared to a youth? Certainly, the intent is only toward what is represented — that Israel should learn from this that there is a difference between verbal instruction and discipline through the rod of oppression, for [with the latter,] when the compulsion is removed, one returns to their waywardness, as will be explained, God willing, later in Parashat Vayelech. The Holy One, blessed be He, showed us that although this concept does not apply to a rock, nevertheless, these matters were presented to demonstrate that it is only appropriate to strike a youth or an ignorant person with a rod. But when one matures, a rebuke is sufficient for the understanding person. If one does not listen to the voice of instruction and needs to be struck with suffering, undoubtedly as soon as relief comes, they will return to their waywardness — just as it was necessary to strike the rock twice, and it did not respond to the first strike. Similarly, whatever is done through striking and compulsion, the outcome of the action is not quickly achieved. This is the desecration of God’s name — that the children of Israel would not learn to listen to the voice of instruction except after a hundred stripes into a fool. This is a very appropriate allusion according to this midrash.

Thus said your brother Israel, etc. You know all the hardship, etc. For this hardship was meant to be shared by you, to pay the debt of your descendants will be strangers [in a land not theirs], but we endured all the hardship, even your portion. He hinted at this in the word “hatela’ah” [hardship], tav equaling 400, corresponding to the 400 [years] of exile, plus [the numerical equivalent of the remaining letters being] 40 for their wandering in the desert, and the [letter] alef is not counted. And just as you have no share in paying the debt, you also have no share in the land, because it is as if we purchased your portion from you. So it is fitting that you too give the purchase into our hands and help us come to the land quickly.

“We will not drink water from the well,” is stated as an emphasis, because regarding cistern water it’s obvious that we wouldn’t drink, as there would be effort to refill them. But even well water, where the spring replenishes itself naturally — a situation where one benefits while the other does not lose — nevertheless, we will not drink from what is yours. And afterward, they added, I will pay for their food to benefit the host. Similarly, at first they said, We will go on the king’s road, which is the path that the king typically travels on. And he [Edom] responded, Lest I come out against you with the sword, meaning: Since the road is trodden for the king, if Esau encounters you, who should yield to whom? And [Israel] responded, We will go up by the highway.