Chukat-Balak parsha: The significance of hitting the rock
After Moses hits the rock, God tells him he will not lead the Jews into Israel. What precisely did Moses do wrong to elicit such a harsh response?
Rashi insists that while God told Moses to speak to the rock, Moses instead hit it (Numbers 20: 8–12).
Others disagree, asserting that God never told Moses to speak to the rock but rather told Moses to speak about the rock. Ibn Ezra suggests that Moses had the right to hit the rock once but not twice, as the text records (Ibn Ezra, Numbers 20:8).
Maimonides and Nachmanides, however, see Moses’s mistake not in his actions, but in the words he utters just prior to striking the rock. For Maimonides, Moses’s misstatement was his reference to the people as hamorim (rebels; Numbers 20:10). Such displays of anger, rather than eliciting the best from others, often bring out the worst (Shemoneh Perakim, chapter 4).
For Nachmanides, Moses’s error was his declaration, “notzi” (we will bring forth; Numbers 20:10), that he and Aaron would bring forth the water. This statement left the impression that the miracle of water coming from the rock came from Moses and Aaron alone – not from God. This was a serious mistake, especially bearing in mind that the Jews often confused Moses with God. In some faith communities, leaders become god; not so in Judaism. As great as Moses was, he was human. Unintentionally, Moses’s declaration sent a mixed message to his people (Nachmanides, Numbers 2:7).
Another thought comes to mind. When Moses hits the rock, the Torah tells us, “va’yach et haselah” (and he hit the rock; Numbers 20:11). The only other time in the Torah that a similar phrase appears is when Moses kills the Egyptian for smiting the Jew. There the Torah states, “va’yach et haMitzri” (and he smote the Egyptian; Exodus 2:12).
Some suggest that Moses overreacted by killing the Egyptian; surely he could have stopped the assailant with less force (Haktav v’Hakabbalah, Exodus 2:11). For taking life unnecessarily, he should have been ruled out immediately as a prospective leader of the Jewish People. God, however, gives Moses a reprieve, with the understanding there will be zero tolerance for future unnecessary uses of force.
Only when Moses hits the rock and again uses too much force is he denied entry into the land of Israel. In itself, hitting the rock was a negligible miscue. It is viewed, however, as a cumulative wrong, linked to Moses’s killing of the Egyptian.
Thus we learn that leaders must be very careful with the power invested in them. As the English historian John Dalberg-Acton once said, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Precisely because Moses was the prophet of prophets, he was scrupulously judged for even the slightest abuse of power.
Yet another approach to the connection between these incidents is to recognize they are separated by almost forty years. Smiting the Egyptian, breaking the tablets, and asking that Korach be swallowed up by the earth may have been the combative leadership Israel needed when becoming a people. Now, the second generation, on the cusp of entry into Israel, needs a softer leadership.
Thus, as Rabbi Nathaniel Helfgot has suggested, hitting instead of speaking to the rock was not the reason Moses did not enter the land but the sign that he lacked the capacity to change his leadership approach.
Moses, although the greatest of the great, was human. He, too, had limitations. And so it was necessary for him to step back, making space for Joshua, a younger leader who could adopt a new tone to better relate to and inspire the Israelites as they entered and settled the Land of Israel.
Candle lighting:
Chukat-Balak parsha
June 30 at 7:59 p.m.