Destination Please

In the middle of this week’s Sedra, following the Pessukim that discuss the Degalim, but before the Parsha of the Misoninim, the Torah records a conversation between Moshe Rabbeinu and his father-in-law Yisro that seems to be slightly out of place, or at the very least extraneous. As we know, however, this cannot be the case—rather we are to examine the Pessukim as they are written, seeking the message that is certainly there to be found.

The discussion begins with Moshe Rebbeinu telling his father in law that Bnei Yisroel was traveling toward Eretz Yisroel, “Hamakom Asher Amar Hashem Oso Etein Lachem.” Moshe trys to convince Yisro to accompany them on the journey. When Yisro rebuffs the request, stating that he desires to return home, “El Artzi V’El Moladiti”, Moshe presses, asking Yisro to guide Bnei Yisroel on their travels, promising that he will be rewarded for his efforts: “Vehitavnu Lach.” The Torah then turns to the travels of Bnei Yisroel, without letting us know what Yisro decided.

There are of course several questions to be asked about this exchange.

First, we must understand the timing of this discussion. As we mentioned, the Torah records the conversation after describing Klal Yisroel’s travels away from Midbar Sinai and before the Parsha of the Misoninim. Rashi explains that this conversation took place at exactly that time, when Bnei Yisroel was but three days from entering Eretz Yisroel, with Moshe as their leader. It was only after the Misoninim that their entry to Eretz Yisroel was initially delayed, followed by the Meraglim and the longer stay in the Midbar.

If so, why did Moshe wait until this point to speak to Yisro? It does not seem as though the conversation was precipitated by Yisro himself deciding to leave, but that Moshe approached his father in law. Why now? At least according to those who hold that Yisro came to be with Klal Yisroel before Matan Torah, he had at this point had been with them for well over a year, had Moshe never discussed Yisro’s intentions before? By the time they spoke, Bnei Yisroel were only three days from their destination—why would he leave now and what drove Moshe to speak to him about it?

It is also notable that Moshe’s father-in-law, who we generally refer to as Yisro (and will continue to do herein, for the sake of clarity), is in this case called “Chovev Ben Reuel.” As we know, Yisro had seven names, among them Chovev and Reuel, but if the Torah calls him by one name in a specific place, there must be a reason for it. In fact, here, the Torah seems to be using two of his other names, Chovev and Reuel, surely there is a reason for this. In a more general sense, we must understand why the Torah found it necessary to tell us this story to being with. It almost seems like a private discussion between Moshe and Yisro, a man and his father-in-law. If the Torah chose to tell us about the conversation, however, there must have been a wider ramification—Moshe must have, for some reason, thought that Yisro’s presence would have been beneficial to Klal Yisroel on the whole. How do Yisro’s intentions, vis-à-vis his entry to Eretz Yisroel, affect Klal Yisroel at large?

Also curious is the outcome of this discussion. As we mentioned, Moshe Rabbeinu offered to repay Yisro for staying with Bnei Yisroel, promising “Vehitavnu Lach”. Although the Torah does not tell us whether Yisro accepted the offer, Chazal do: The Sifra says that when Bnei Yisroel entered Eretz Yisroel, there was an area of land in the vicinity of Yericho that measured 500 Amos by 500 Amos which was not included in the Chaluka between the Shevatim. That land was promised to the Shevet that would eventually donate the land to be used for the Bais Hamikdash, but until then was occupied by Bnei Yisro. This was the reward that Yisro received, the fulfilment of the promise of “Vehitavnu Lach.”

This Medrash, which Rashi here cites, is itself difficult to understand. If there was a need for land upon which the Bais Hamikdash could be built, why not set that area aside to begin with? Why was it first given to a Shevet who would then have to cede the land? In addition, why was the replacement parcel first given to the Bnei Yisro? Certainly there must be a connection between Yisro’s offspring and the area of land that was then transferred to the Shevet that gave land to the Bais Hamikdash, but what? Why was this the specific scenario used to fulfil the promise of “Vehitavnu Lach”?

There is a thread that runs throughout the Pessukim here, especially through the eyes of Rashi, that may help us understand the context of the discussion, and answer some of our questions.

As noted, Yisro initially demurred when Moshe asked him to stay with Klal Yisroel and enter Eretz Yisroel, wishing instead to return to his family. At that point, Moshe makes a second, more emotional, request: “Al Nah Ta’azov Osanu.” Rashi notes that the words “Al Nah” indicate Bakasha or pleading. It seems that Moshe had a concern: people may think that he Yisro originally joined Klal Yisroel in order to get a portion of Eretz Yisroel, and once it became clear that as a Ger he would not, he left.

Why though did Moshe resort to Bakasha based on this concern? Perhaps he wished to spare Yisro the shame of people spreading false rumors about his dedication to Klal Yisroel, but it seems that there is something else at play, a more pressing concern, which Moshe’s words at the end of the Passuk may allow us to understand.

Moshe uses two terms to explain the role he sees Yisro fulfilling: “Ki Al Ken Yadata Chonoseinu Bamidbar, for you know how we should camp in the desert” and “Vahayisa Lanu L’Enayim, and you will be our eyes”. Both phrases point to the fact that as someone familiar with the area, Yisro could serve as a guide for Bnei Yisroel in the Midbar. If that was the case, however, why did MOse need to use both terms? Rashi seems sensitive to this point, offering a number of explanations for the words “Vahayisa Lanu L’Enayim.” The final interpretation, based on the Sifri, is that Moshe spoke of the love that Klal Yisroel would have for Yisro: “Shethei Chaviv Aleu K’Galgal Enayim”, that you will be as beloved to us as our own eyeballs. The Medrash adds a Pasuk about this sense of love: “V’Ahavtem Es HaGer.”

It seems, based on this Medrash, that throughout their discussion Moshe was addressing Yisro’s standing in Klal Yisroel as a Ger. He did not wish Yisro to leave because others might construe that as being related not only to his treatment as a Ger but to his motives for Gierus as well, and Moshe then insisted that he stay so that the Mitzvah of “V’Ahavtem Es HaGer” may be fulfilled.

That their discussion was related to Yisro being a Ger seems to be indicated by the name used for him as well. The Ramban, in Parshas Yisro and here as well, explains that the name Chovev was the one given to Yisro when he completed his Geirus. The fact that this is the name the Torah chose to use here is further evidence that the treatment of Yisro and other Geirim was at issue. Moshe did not want Yisro to leave because it may seem like a Ger was mistreated and in fasct encouraged him to stay so Klal Yisroel may show their love for him.

This may also help us understand why Moshe spoke to Yisro at this time as well. When Bnei Yisroel left Midbar Sinai it was the first time that they moved in the formation of the Degalim, each Shevet trasvelling under its relevant flag. A Ger, who came from no specific Shevet, may well have felt like he had no place among the rest of Klal Yisroel, causing Moshe to approach Yisro about this matter.

If Moshe’s conversation with Yisro was about his position as a Ger, however, how are we to understand the outcome of their discussion—the temporary assignment of the 500 Amah area near Yericho to the children of Yisro? Moshe primised that if Yisro stayed, allowing Klal Yisroel to fulfil the Mitzvah of V’Ahavtem Es HaGer, he would be repaid—why was this land the payment?

In order to answer this question, we must have a better understanding of how to look at the Ger.

R’ Tzadok HaKohen, in Mchsheves Chutz, speaks at length about Gerim, their strengths and weaknesses. He explains that Gerim are so beloved because of the source of their desire for Torah. We, Klal Yisroel, have a long history, and in some ways we owe our allegiance to Hakadosh Baruch Hu—after all, He took us out of Mitzrayim, gave us the Torah and has saved us on many occasions since then. It is therefore understandable that we follow the Derech HaTorah and seek to fulfil the Ratzon HaBorei. The Ger, however, has no real reason to connect to Hashem, and in fact he leaves the comforts of Olam Hazeh in order to join Klal Yisroel. Thus, he is beloved, for his desire to forge a relationship with Hakadosh Baruch Hu comes from the purist of intentions.

These origins can in fact lead the Ger to a very lofty position. The Gemarah in Kedushin tells us that Gerim are dangerous for Klal Yisroel, Kashim K’Sapachas. Tosfos there explains that this is due to their Dikduk Hamitzvos: Gerim are generally much more careful in their performance of Mitzvos, and this can cause a Kitrug on natural-born members of Klal Yisroel. We see then that the fact that they join Klal Yisroel only out a desire to be closer to Hashem, leads them to be able to perform the Mitzvos in an exceptional manner.

In instructing us to love Gerim, then, the Torah teaches us an vital lesson: it is not important where a person comes from, but where he reaches. The Ger reaches perfection by virtue of his background and not despite it, and he is therefore beloved to Hashem, and to Klal Yisroel.

When Klal Yisroel entered Artzenu Hakedosh each family and Shevet was assigned a parcel of land. It was up to one of these Shevatim to see the potential in their Chelek—to realize that a piece of land that looked like every other could in fact be elevated by hosting the Bais Hamikdash. If a portion of land had been set aside for the Mikdash, we may have thought that only that which is predetermined to be Kadosh can attain that level. By first giving the land to a Shevet, in this case Binyamin, and allowing them to elevate it, the Torah shows us that anything can be elevated with the proper intentions.

The connection between Yisro’s offspring and the Makom Hamikdash is thus understood: the Shevet that was to dontate the land for the Bais Hamikdash had realized the message of the Ger: where soemthign begins is not as important as where it is going. By statying with Klal Yisroel in the Midbar, Yisro would teach them a vital lesson, as the zeal of the Ger showed them the that intentions outweigh mere origins. He was then rewarded with the land that would then be given to the Shevet that realized this as well, by elevating simple land to the Makom Hamikdash itself.

When we examine our own potential for growth, we can keep this lesson in mind: it matters not whre we come from, but where we are headed.