Parshiot Chukat-Balak: From victim to aggressor

By Rabbi Avi Billet

Issue of July 3, 2009 / 11 Tammuz 5769

Imagine a group of strangers knock on your front door. They seem imposing. But they are nonetheless polite and assure you they mean no harm. For the sake of the parable, please accept their claim as truth.

“We need to get to the other side of your property,” says their spokesman. “We don’t intend to harm you, to break anything, or to destroy your property. But the easiest way to get to the other side is through your yard, house and backyard. Going around the neighborhood, with all the dead ends and blocked off streets, will be a detour we simply do not want to take.”

Would you let them through?

Perhaps, as the phrase goes, “A man’s word is his bond.” (See here for a debate over the source of this phrase.) If they say they’ll be civil and treat all nicely, they’ll hold true to it. On the other hand, no group has the right to trespass their way through my private property. I am entitled to tell them, “No one goes through here.”

From a different perspective, when Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran in 1967, it was internationally viewed as an act of war against Israel as it effectively closed off access to the port of Eilat. Of course, in that case the waterways were not “owned” by either country, and peaceful maritime passage and trade is an international right for all nations.

It is hard to objectively say who is the aggressor when a nation requests permission to pass through the land. In Biblical times, the nation requesting passage usually had no gripe with those from whom they sought it.

But the nation living in peace usually did not see things that way. In Divrei Hayamim (Chronicles) II, 35:21, the King of Egypt requested passage from King Yoshiyahu, in order to fight against the people of Kar’k’mish along the Euphrates River. A study of the map indicates the grueling trip — through the Sinai desert, or on ship around the Sinai peninsula and through what is now Saudi Arabia and Jordan — they might avoid were they to travel along the Mediterranean coast of Israel.

We lament on Tisha B’Av over how Yoshiyahu would not hear of it, and he met Nekho, King of Egypt, in Megiddo to wage battle, where Yoshiyahu was killed.

In our Torah portion, 21:21, the Israelites make a similar request of the Emorites. It is important to understand that Israel had no intention to fight with any nations dwelling east of the Jordan River. They were traveling north to set the stage for crossing the Jordan to enter the land from the east, and the land of King Sichon was in their path.

“Sichon, however, did not let Israel pass through his territories. Instead, Sichon mustered up all his people, and went out to confront Israel in the desert. When he came to Yahatz, he attacked Israel” (21:23).

Rashi says he attacked the Israelites because all the Canaanite nations were paying him taxes to hold the line against Israel. When they requested passage, his reaction was, “The only reason I am still here is because I am being paid to stay here. And now you expect me to just withdraw and renege on my commitments?”

Rashi does not bring proof to his assertion, so I like to think that Sichon was also aggressive because he wanted to be aggressive. There is a difference between saying, “No,” and saying, “No. And I want to attack you for making such a ridiculous request.”

If he were to call up his army and station them along the border saying, “No one crosses this line into our country,” that would be a legitimate act of self-defense. A nation has the right to defend its borders. But once he takes his army to attack the Israelites for making a request, as justified as he may be in viewing their request as unreasonable, he is no longer holding the party line of defending borders. He becomes an aggressor.

The parallel to Israel’s efforts to seek peace with the Palestinian leaders and terrorists over the last 15 (or 60) years is painfully obvious, so we’ll conclude with a semi-homiletical message instead.

To bring such a parallel closer to home, family, friends, or neighbors may sometimes ask favors of us. When we can, it is nice to help, even when it is inconvenient. It is also OK to sometimes say, “I am unable to help you today.”

However, saying “I can’t help you. And it drives me crazy that you always ask me to do you a favor, but you never do one in return,” and telling others about this uneven exchange, not only reflects badly on the speaker. It turns the speaker into an aggressor, a negative trait which is unbecoming among good human beings.