Degalim and Pikudim

In his introduction to Sefer Bamidbar, the Ramban explains that this Sefer called “Bamidbar” because it mainly discusses things that we pertinent to the time that the Bnei Yisroel were in the Midbar. He adds that although there are not too many Mitzvos in Sefer Bamidbar that apply to us in our times, or even in the times of the Bais HaMikdash, each story or incident that is recorded is meant to teach us a lesson.

This then is the lens that we should look at the entire Sefer with: these are not merely “stories,” they are messages that the Torah is trying to send us, to teach us how to lead our lives.

Our Parsha begins with the Mitzvah that Hashem gave Moshe to count the Jews. While it is sometimes easy to see the lesson for our lives in the various episodes mentioned in the Torah, it would seem that when it comes to this first Mitzvah it may be a little more challenging to apply the words of the Ramban, and take a lesson for our own lives.

What can we learn from this initial Mitzvah of “Siu es Rosh Kol Adas Bnei Yisroel?”

As similar question can be asked with regard to a more general theme that is seen in Sefer Bamidbar.

Many of the Parshios include stories in which the behavior of the Dor Hamidbar seems less than perfect. The Misoninim in Parshas Bahaloscha, the Meraglim, Adas Korach, the instigators of the Mei Meriva and those who sinned with the Midianim—these are all told in Sefer Bamidbar. It seems as though one cannot make it through a Parsha in this Sefer without encountering some way in which the Dor Hamidbar angers Hashem.

The Sefer that is about the Tekufa of the Midbar at times gives a less than favorable impression of those that lived in through that era. Keeping the words of the Ramban in mind, what lesson can we take from this thread that seems to be running through the Parshios?

I think that if we look at another Mitzvah that Moshe was given in this Parsha, perhaps we can gain an understanding that will help answer these questions.

After the counting of Klal Yisroel is complete, Moshe is told to divide the Nation into four Degalim, or sections. Each Degel was comprised of three Shevatim and that group would encamp together as instructed by Hashem.

There is a very interesting Medrash that accompanies this Mitzvah, which is cited by many of the Miforshim.

The Medrash tells us that at the time of Matan Torah Hashem’s presence was accompanied by 22,000 Malachim, and these Malachim were arranged into Degalim. When Bnei Yisroel saw this, they began to desire Degalim as well; they wanted to be arranged in their camp as the Malachim were in theirs.

As explained by this Medrash, the Degalim were the result of Bnei Yisroel having an honest desire to be as close to Malachei HaShares as possible.

When Hashem gave Moshe the Tzivuy of the Degalim, the Passuk says: “Ish Al Diglo B’Osos L’Bais Avosav.” The Medrash points out that the words “L’bais Avosam” are extra, but are there for an important reason. Moshe was given the order to create the Degalim: The Bnei Yisroel would be divided into four groups, and each group would be given a position surrounding the Mishkan. That being the case, Moshe worried that there would be a Machlokes, as each Degel would want to choose their own spot. What if the Degel of Reuven and the Degel of Dan both wanted to camp in the East? Or what if one of the Degalim specifically did not want to stay in the sector that they were assigned?

Hashem told Moshe not to worry about this, because their positions had been assigned long ago. When Yaakov was on his deathbed, he instructed his sons where each should stand as the carry his Mittah to Kevurah in Eretz Yisroel. In fact, Yaakov promised his sons that if they keep to his instructions, their descendants would be Zoche to Degalim in the Midbar. Those same assignments would be mirrored in the Degalim now. Therefore Moshe had nothing to worry about: the Shevatim would implicitly know where they should camp, and no fighting would ensue.

R’ Elya Lopian, in Lev Eliyahu, asks the glaring question that results from this Medrash. These were the Dor Hamidbar, the Mikablei HaTorah, is it fathomable to think that they would be so petty as to fight about which position they should get while surrounding the Mishkan?

It is easy to imagine being concerned about such fighting when it comes to children or even our own ego-driven selves, but let us consider why the Degalim came into existence in the first place: because the Bnei Yisroel saw 22,000 Malachim at Har Sinai and wanted to be as much like them as possible! In fact the word used to describe their desire to reflect the Malachim is “Nisavu” which comes from the word Taiva, a term usually reserved for physical cravings.

How could Moshe imagine that these same people, whose cravings were so spiritual, would then devolve into bickering masses when it came to their placement in the Machane?

R’ Elya does add that he assumes that the Shevatim would have presented all manner of claims as to why they should be in the spot that they prefer, and that these claims would have been rooted in Ruchniasdik reasons. But the fact remains that Moshe assumed that they would behave in a manner that would potentially be problematic, and not be willing to be Mevater to their fellow Degalim.

The answer that R’ Elya gives is no one hand so simple, but on the other so instructive: the Dor Hamidbar had a Yertzer Harah too.

Yes, they stood at Har Sinai and saw 22,000 Malachim. Yes, they had Hisgalus HaShechina and heard the Kol Hashem directly. Yes, they saw at Krias Yam Suf what Yechezkel the Navi was not Zoche to see.

But they were human nonetheless. They had a Yetzer Harah and were subject to its tactics and machinations. As R’ Elya said, their claims would have been disguised as further Bakashas Hashem; after all, the Degalim were a result of their Taiva to be like Malachim. But it would have been rooted elsewhere and would have been the tools of the Yetzer Harah.

Moshe Rabeinu understood this. He knew that no one is perfect, and that there was therefore a chance that the Degalim could cause strife amongst the Shevatim. And so Hashem allayed his fears: “L’Bais Avosam” they will be arranged as their forefathers were when carrying the Mittah of Yaakov, and there will be no further claims.

I think that the lesson we can learn from the counting of Klal Yisroel at the beginning of the Parsha can be related to this point.

R’ Gedaliah Schor, in Or Gedalyahu, points out that another name for Sefer Bamidbar is Sefer Hapikudim. The word Pikudim, as used when Hashem instructs Moshe to count Bnei Yisroel “L’fikudeihem” means numbers. Variances on this root word are used throughout out the Parsha in reference to counting.

But the word Pikud can also refer to a position of authority or an officer, as in “Vayafked Hamelech Pikidim: and the king appointed officers.” In Modern Hebrew a Mifaked is a supervisor or commander—the Shoresh Pikud connotes stature.

Says R’ Schor: in counting each and every member of Klal Yisroel “L’shmosam” Hashem was showing the importance of each and every member of the Klal. As Rashi says, the counting shows a Chiba for Klal Yisroel. But the way in which it was performed, each individual shows a Chiba for each and every person. That is why the words Pekudim, with its implication of importance is used in relation to the counting.

Perhaps we can merge these two messages, that of the Deglaim and the Pikudim.

In the Parsha of the Degalim, as in much of Sefer Bamidbar, we are confronted with the human side of the Dor Hamidbar. This is sometimes difficult for us to reconcile, for we place them on a pedestal: they stood at Har Sinai and were the ones who said Na’aseh V’nishma—surely they should be held to a higher standard! And, as we see through Chumash, Hashem did hold them to quite a high standard. But, as R’ Elya said, they were human nonetheless and were therefore subject to the Yetzer Harah.

But Hashem counted them L’fikudeihem. He loved each and every member of Klal Yisroel and chose to show this as often as possible, by counting them on various occasions. A person’s name represents his essence, and everyone has their own Maalos and Chesronos. But, Hashem chose to count us L’shemosam, not in spite of our weaknesses but perhaps because of them. Because we have weaknesses we also have the opportunity to overcome them in service of Hashem.

Perhaps this is why Sefer Bamidbar is referred to as Sefer Hapikudim. As we read about the various times in the Midbar that Bnei Yisroel acted against Hashem, we should remember that they were Pikudim—loved and valued by Hashem.

We too are among the Mikablei HaTorah: each of our Neshamos was present at Har Sinai and accepted the Torah. We must therefore hold ourselves accountable as members of the Mamleches Kohanim.

But we must also remember the lesson of the Degalim: we each have a Yetzer Harah and can sometimes fall victim to him. We must not despair, though, because Hashem’s Chibba for each and every member of Klal Yisroel is manifest and is not diminished at all due to our own shortcomings.