Hashkifah mima'on kodshecha min hashamayim uvarech es amcha es yisroel v'es ha'adamah asher nasatah lanu ka'asher nishbata la'avoseinu eretz zavas chalav udivash.At the end of the process of vidui ma'aser we have an interesting tefilah that culminates in a trade-off: Rashi interprets this passuk as literally challenging Hashem - we've done what you asked of us, now it's your turn to fulfill your promise. This seems to smack of the famous "aser bishvil shetitasher" - tithing as a means of testing Hashem for wealth. The passuk itself, though, is very elaborate and strange - why the term "hashkifah," which normally has a negative connotation? What is the distinction between "ma'on kodshecha" and shamayim? Similarly, the passuk divides the bracha into three components - amcha, yisroel, and ha'adamah. This last point is borne out clearly by Rashi , who states that the promise to the avos was more than simply the inheritance of the land, and that the status of the land itself as "zavat chalav udivash" is contingent on our fulfillment first.
In this matter, one might have an even greater obstacle to understanding the passuk. Multiple times in the Torah, Hashem reminds klal Yisroel that they are being brought to the land to wipe it out of the evil inhabitants. If such is the case, then how is it possible that the miraglim came back with such a magnificent bounty? Could the land possibly be yielding such bounty to those engaged in abominations - adultery, child immolation, necromancy, and other grotesqueness? And if it was uniquely for the spies, how would the existence of a single large cluster of grapes lead them to characterize the entire land as zavat chalav udivash?
If anyone has an answer, please let me know and I'll update this post to reflect it.
No comments:
Post a Comment