Walled In

The Haftorah for Parshas Balak is taken from Sefer Micha and can be seen as having two distinct parts. The first half is a Nevuah regarding the Yemos Hamoshiach, about which the Navi makes glorious predictions such as: “Tarom Yadecha Al Tzarecha V’chol Oivecha Yikareisu”, promising that we will triumph over our enemies and hardships. The second part of the Haftorah is a bit less upbeat as the Navi turns to Divrei Tochacha, focused mainly on our lack of gratitude, as a nation, for all that Hashem does for us. Although the connection to the Parsha is most notable in this second section, where the Passuk mentions Balak and Bilaam, the first half of the Haftorah is connected to the period of time that we are about to begin: the days of Bein HaMetzarim. As our thoughts turn to Galus and Geulah, we can use the words of the Navi to frame our thoughts.

The Pessukim at the beginning of the Haftorah are quite vivid in their description of Acharis HaYamim. The Navi tells us that we will rise among the Goyim: “K’Aryeh BaBehamos Ya’ar”, as a lion among the animals of the forest. Our strength will be independent of aid from the outside, no longer relying on Mitzrayim for strong horses, for example.

There is one Passuk among this set that, on its face, is a little difficult to understand: “ViHichrati Arei Artzecha ViHaSarti Kol Mivtzarecha”. HKBH promises us that following the Geulah, He will destroy our cities and demolish our fortifications. This Passuk seems like it belongs in Sefer Yermiyahu, foretelling the calamities of Galus, not in a Nevuah discussing the glory of Geulah. This of course requires explanation.

Rashi explains that the Psssuk is indeed heralding a positive development: following the Geulah, our security will be guaranteed, obviating the need for walled cities to protect us.

The intent of the Passuk is now clear, and its place among the rest of this Nevuah is understood, but a closer look at the way this promise is made raises some questions.

First, the Navi speaks on behalf of Hashem, and the Passuk is written in the first person, meaning that HKBH will be the one to destroy the walled cities once they are not needed. Why would this need to happen through the Yad Hashem? If the walls were no longer necessary, would not the people themselves destroy them? Why is this something that Hashem must do Himself?

Second, there are two phrases in the Passuk: “ViHichrati Arei Artzecha” and “ViHaSarti Kol Mivtzarecha”. Metzudos explains that the second half of the Passuk is “Kefel HaInyan B’Milos Shonos”, a repetition of the first half, in different words. Why is this necessary? Why does the Passuk here repeat the same thing twice?

Finally, but perhaps most pressing, we must understand this Passuk in a more general sense. Why must the cities be destroyed? Why do the walls have to come down just because they are no longer useful?

Perhaps if we can answer this question, we will better understand the way the Passuk is written.

Ibn Ezra explains that were it not for the fear of enemy incursion it is best not to live in a walled city, “SheHaAvir Rachav”, for there is less congestion. For this reason, the walls would be destroyed once our security is no longer a concern.

Radak explains the Passuk similarly and notes that this idea can be seen from a Gemara in Kesubos.

The Mishna, there, speaks about when a husband may or may not compel his wife to move from her homeland. For example, he may not force her to move from Yehudah to the Galil or vice versa. He may, however, force his new wife to move from one town to another within the same land of Eretz Yisroel. One of the other condition mentioned in the Mishna is that he may not move from a Ir to a Krach, meaning from a big city to a town, or from a Krach to an Ir.

The Gemara asks: it is understandable that one might not be allowed to compel his wife to move from a city, in which things are generally available, to a town in which they are not. Why, though, would he not be allowed to require her to move from a town to a city?

The Gemara answers that this is a proof that “Yeshivas Kerachim Kasha”, it is difficult to live in a walled city. Rashi explains that this is due to the congestion and traffic that pervades larger cities.

Based on the Meforshim, and the Gemarah, we can understand that once the walls are not needed, because our security will be guaranteed, they will be removed to relieve the inhabitants of congestion.

It is interesting to note that the Ibn Ezra refers specifically to the less favorable Avir of the walled cities, when there seem to be other downsides to these locales.

The Passuk in Shir HaShirim says “Lech Dodi Netzei Hasadeh”, and the Gemara in Eruvin brings a Drasha on these words: “Amrah Kneses Yisroel Lifnei HKBH...Al Tidanani K’Yoshvei Krachim SheYesh Bahem Gezel V’Arayos”. The walled cities, explains Rashi, had markets, and larger populations, and were therefore more crime ridden. Klal Yisroel asks HKBh not to focus on those behaviors, but on other, more positive, accomplishments.

If the cities are rife with Aveiros, wouldn’t that be a better reason to destroy their walls, allowing their borders to expand? Why does Ibn Ezra mention only that the Avir in an unwalled city is more desirable, and not the serious Ruchniasdik detractions of urban living?

A similar question can really be asked on Rashi in Kesubos: why does he mention the congestion and Avir and not the crime and Aveiros? The Gemara doesn’t explain why it is difficult to live in a walled city, and Rashi only speaks about the Avir, but not the issues mentioned in the Gemara in Eruvin. Why?

The truth is that, outside of these Mamarei Chazal, we are most familiar with the differences between walled and unwalled city as they relate to the Halachos of Mikrah Megillah. As we know, unwalled cities celebrate Purim on the fourteenth of Adar, while those with walls celebrate on the fifteenth. Perhaps there is a message within these Halachos that can help us better understand the concept of Yeshivas Kerachim Kasha.

Rav Tzadok HaKohen, in Risisei Layla, explains that the distinction made between walled and unwalled cities, with regard to the Yom Tov of Purim is no coincidence. Rather, they are related to a difference in the way inhabitants of these cities are subject to the influnces of Amalek—the enemy whose defeat we celebrate on Purim.

Rav Tzadok explains that Yaakov and Eisav made an agreement: each would keep to their respective Olamos. Yaakov would reign over the Olam HaRuchani, and Esav over the Olam HaGashmi. It is when we expand beyond our borders, and give into the Taivos of Gashmiyus that we are most subject to the attacks of Amalek, the scion of Esav.

This concept is clearly seen in the story of Purim itself: Chazal teach us that Haman arose because we were Neheneh M’Seudas Achashverosh. While there may or may not have been actual Issur involved in our participation, it was certainly an exercise in Taivos Gashmi and therefore opened the door for Amalek to attack. we had expended beyond our boundaries and therefore were subject to the machinations of Amalek.

This, explains Rav Tzadok, is the meaning of the term “Yeshivas Kerachim Kasha”. When one lives in a walled city, where there is little room for expansion, he trains himself to live within his bounds. This is not only a physical reality, but a spiritual one as well: a person who lives in a walled city will be able to control himself and defeat his Yetzer Harah more effectively because he lives in a world of Tzimtzum or limitations.

This control, though, is limited to the Yetzer Haraah of Kaas, anger, as opposed to that of Taivos. Thos living in a walled city are less likely to give in to their Yetzer Harah of Kaas, but more likely to be subject to other Taivos. This, explains Rav Tzadok, is why the Gemara in Eirvuin tells us that the Yoshvei Krachim are more likely to be steeped in Gezel V’Arayos: they are more in control of their Kaas, and therefore the Yetzer Harah for other Taivos is stronger.

It emerges that those who live in walled cities are somewhat more protected from Amalek—because they can control their Kaas—but live a dangerous existence in that their Yetzer Harah for physical Taivos are stronger. When, as in the case of Shushan, the Yetzer Harah of Taiva prevails, Amalek can arise, placing the inhabitants in grave danger. Yeshivas Krechim is certainly Kasha, then, as it is an existence fraught with danger: the Yetzer Harah of Taiva is stronger, and the pitfalls quite deep.

Rav Tzadok explains that this is why the Passuk in Zechariah tells us “Prazos Teshev Yerushalayim”. L’Asid Lavo, when the Yetzer Harah is defeated, the need for Tztitzum will be eliminated, and with it the advantages of living in walled cities. Yerushalyim will therefore become an open city, free to expand beyond its walls.

Based on this we can understand the Passuk in our Haftorah, and its attendant Meforshim.

The Passuk tells us that in the future, there will be no need for walled cities, and repeats this statement in different words. Perhaps this is to communicate the dual reasons that the walls will be unnecessary. Our physical enemies will be defeated, removing fear of invasion and allowing cities to be open, as Rashi explains.

At the same time, we will no longer require the Tzimtzum and protection from the Yetzer Harah of Kaas afforded by the walled cities, allowing us to be more expansive. This would explain the focus of the Ibn Ezra on the aspect of “Avir” as this is the reality that dictates the Tzimtzum of the walled cities. When this Tzitzum is no longer necessary, the “Avir Rachav” of an open city is most welcome.

Perhaps most importantly, we can use this idea to explain why the Passuk implies that the destruction of the walled city is to be done by Hashem directly.

The destruction of the Yetzer Harah, following the Geulah HaAsida, will be accompanied by the development of a deep and close connection to HKBH. Each of us will live in a new reality, in which our preference for Ruchnias will finally prevail over our propensity to Gashmi. The need for Tzitzum, formerly provided by the walled cities, will be eliminated, replaced by our connection to HKBH. Even if the physical act of removing the walls is carried out by humans, then, it is this renewed relationship with Hashem Himself that makes it possible and even preferable.

As we enter the days of the Bein HaMetzarim, we think about Galus, and Churban, and know that there is much work to be done. Perhaps if we focus on the reality that awaits us, as depicted in these Pessukim, we will be motivated to do what is hard, in the hopes that it brings the day we await.