Shemos. The Common Denominator of Moshe Rabbeinu's Missteps

Hashem expressed anger against Moshe Rabbeinu twice: at the Sneh (ויחר אף, Shemos 4:14,) because he excessively resisted Hashem's mission, and at Mei Meriva (התאנף, Devarim 1:37,) because he struck the rock instead of talking to it. In both cases, Hashem's anger had serious consequences. At the Sneh, Moshe Rabbeinu lost the Kehuna (Rashi 4:14) and possibly his right to enter Eretz Yisrael (Rashi 4:13,) and at Mei Meriva, the gzeira that he would not enter Eretz Yisrael was finalized (Rashi Devarim 20:12.)

It is possible that the common denominator is, ironically, Moshe Rabbeinu's middah tova of דרך ארץ קדמה לתורה. In both cases, Moshe's acute sensitivity to the honor of his brother and sister contributed to his behavior.  

At the Sneh, Moshe was worried about Aharon. He was concerned that if he were to lead the Jews out of Mitzrayim (הוצא את עמי בני ישראל ממצרים...) and bring the Torah to Klal Yisrael (תעבדון את האלהים על ההר הזה,) it would dishonor Aharon, who was older, and was the Navi and beloved spiritual leader of the Jews in Mitzrayim for so many years. 

As Rashi says, (Shemos 4:10)

גם מתמול וגו'. לָמַדְנוּ שֶׁכָּל ז' יָמִים הָיָה הַקָּבָּ"ה מְפַתֶּה אֶת מֹשֶׁה בַּסְּנֶה לֵילֵךְ בִּשְׁלִיחוּתוֹ, "מִתְּמוֹל", "שִׁלְשֹׁם", "מֵאָז דַּבֶּרְךָ" הֲרֵי ג' וּשְׁלוֹשָׁה גַמִּין רִבּוּיִין הֵם, הֲרֵי שִׁשָּׁה, וְהוּא הָיָה עוֹמֵד בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי כְּשֶׁאָמַר לוֹ זֹאת עוֹד שְׁלַח נָא בְּיַד תִּשְׁלָח, עַד שֶׁחָרָה בּוֹ וְקִבֵּל עָלָיו (שמות רבה); וְכָל זֶה שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה רוֹצֶה לִטֹּל גְּדֻלָּה עַל אַהֲרֹן אָחִיו שֶׁהָיָה גָּדוֹל הֵימֶנּוּ וְנָבִיא הָיָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "הֲנִגְלֹה נִגְלֵיתִי אֶל בֵּית אָבִיךָ בִּהְיוֹתָם בְּמִצְרַיִם" (שמואל א ב') – הוּא אַהֲרֹן, וְכֵן "וָאִוָּדַע לָהֶם בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם … וָאֹמַר אֲלֵיהֶם אִישׁ שִׁקּוּצֵי עֵינָיו הַשְׁלִיכוּ" (יחזקאל כ'), וְאוֹתָהּ נְבוּאָה לְאַהֲרֹן נֶאֶמְרָה (תנחומא): 

At Mei Meriva, it was his respect for and hakaras hatov to Miriam. The Be'er that had accompanied the Jews for all the years was in Miriam's zechus, and it disappeared with her death. Moshe was told to bring the Be'er back, but this time it would be in his own zechus. When Hashem now told him to take the staff and speak to the stone, Moshe realized that when the Be'er appeared in the zechus of Miriam, he had to hit the stone, but now, in his zechus, it seemed that it would be enough to speak to it - a far greater miracle. But Miriam was the reason Moshe Rabbeinu was born! She watched over him as he floated in the Nile! She was the Nevi'ah whose encouragement and bravery had kept Klal Yisrael alive in Mitzrayim! That he would in some way detract from Miriam's honor caused Moshe Rabbeinu great distress, and this subconsciously influenced him (it gave him a negiyus, and negiyus influences us without our realizing it) to interpret Hashem's words to mean that he should hit the stone this time as well. (We discussed this elsewhere, in the context of Tefillas Geshem.)

This is not my psychoanalysis of Moshe Rabbeinu chalila. Here is what the Tzitz Eliezer (17:41) (among other achronim) says. 

לכן עולה בדעתי להוסיף וליישב בעל פי מה שראיתי בספר לב אריה המפורסם על חולין ד' ז' ע"ב שכותב כי מצא טוב טעם והתנצלות לאדון הנביאים זה האיש משה רבינו ע"ה בענין מי מריבה שהסתבכו בו המפרשים לדעת מה היה לו לעבור את פי ה' שצוהו לדבר אל הסלע והוא הכה אותו פעמיים, ובהקדם מה דקשה דמדוע לא צוה השי"ת כן בתחילת נתינת הבאר שהוא הסלע הזה לדבר אליו, רק אמר בפ' בשלח והכית בצור ויצאו ממנו מים. אלא הענין הוא דכבר ארז"ל שהבאר ניתן לישראל בזכות מרים וכאשר מתה מרים נסתלק הבאר וחזר אחר כך בזכות משה והנה מרים לא היה זכותה גדול כ"כ כזכות משה ולזה לא עצר כח זכותה שיופעל הנס בדיבור בעלמא אל הסלע לכך הוצרך לפעולות גשמיות להכות בצור לקרב הדבר קצת אל הטבע וכמ"ש הרד"ק בהא דאלישע שהשים פיו אל פיו אבל אח"כ כשחזר הבאר בזכות משה וזכותו גדלה מאד למעלה ראש היה יכול לפעול הנס בלי עמל ויגיעה ופעולות טבעיות רק גדיבור בעלמא וכיון שפעולת הנס היה יכול לבוא ע"י דיבור לזה הקפיד הוא ית' שיהי' דוקא בדיבור למען יתקדש שמו יותר ואולם זה האיש משה שהי' עניו מאד מכל האדם אשר על פני האדמה ומחמת ענוותנותו לא רצה לדבר אל הסלע למען לא יתראה לעיני העם שזכותו גדול מאד מזכות מרים לזה הכה בסלע כאשר בתחילה אמנם הדבר הי' רע בעיני ה' כי במקום שהי' יכול לבוא לידי קידוש שמו מהראוי הי לו להניח מדת ענוותנותו בעת ההוא כנלע"ד להליץ בעד אחננו משה ע"ה והש נכון ונחמד בס"ד עכ"ד ודפח"ח 

As always, the mussar haskeil is not simple. Two diametrically opposed interpretations would be that Moshe was incorrect, and he should have no more worried about what his actions would mean to his siblings than Avraham Avinu worried about what the Akeida would mean to Yitzchak; or that Moshe was correct, and his punishment was a necessary consequence of doing the right thing. There are many intermediate steps between these two approaches.  There's no way to know exactly what lesson should be derived. But this definitely illustrates how seriously we should take Chazal's dictum, "דרך ארץ קדמה לתורה." 

Note

R Menachem Shafran said that sof kol sof, Moshe made the wrong choice. I disagree. For example. Reb Moshe talks about the Gemara in Rosh Hashanna הביאו כפרה עלי שמיעטתי את הירח.  Reb Moshe explains that in deciding between litigants, even when both sides are right, the dayan has to make a decision that favors one on some dakkus, or external cheshbon, or because one side is more right than the other, not that he is wrong. This is a mussar haskeil that even when you are right, there can be costs to the decision. Here, too. I wouldn't say it was the wrong choice. I would say it was a choice that had heavy costs. That's what I meant by "his punishment was a necessary consequence of doing the right thing."

Just this morning, I saw something that might be helpful to explain my approach.  A sheet called "א חסידישע גליון", a chasidish parsha sheet, is distributed in my shul. Someone said it was worth reading, so I took it home. The first thing I saw was attributed to the Baal Shem Tov, and I quote:

ד. יא.  אלם או חרש או פקח.  מדוע מונה הכתוב את הפיקח בין שאר בעלי המומים? אלא שמכאן ראיה שגם פיקח יותר מדי נחשב לבעל מום, וכפי שפירשו צדיקים על דברי רש״י בפר׳ קורח: קורח שפיקח היה מה ראה לשטות זו׳ דהיינו שאסור להיות פיקח יותר מדאי.

I think this is a classic example of Chassidishe drush that harkens back to the first days of Chasidus, the days when they wanted to let people know that ahavas Hashem or emuna peshuta is worth more than gadlus batorah. It has nothing at all to do with the pshat in the passuk. Obviously, pikei'ach in that passuk means having normal vision, as opposed to blindness (מי שם פה לאדם או מי ישום אלם או חרש או פקח או עור).  Second, pikchus is not "IQ." PIkchus means seichel hayashar, recognizing what's going on and doing something about it. Third, Pikchus is not a handicap. It can be used badly, just like you can take a Faberge egg and smash someone in the head with it. But genius is not like missing a leg. The point that this vort means to convey is that if a person is too smart, if he jumps to conclusions, if he doesn't work or think carefully, if he is excessively proud of his gifts, this can be harmful to him and to others, but it's not a challenge like being deaf or mute. As I said, the message of the vort is that there are things that are more worthy than genius, whatever you want to put in - Simcha, or Emuna Pshuta, or Yiras Shamayim. 

This helped crystallize my approach. Moshe Rabbeinu was punished not for doing something wrong. He was concerned about dishonoring his brother and his sister. With all that Moshe Rabbeinu was a malach, his gadlus was based on his being a perfect human being. He could not have been the malach that he was without being the superlative human being that he also was. Part of what made Moshe Rabbeinu who he was is this extreme sensitivity and love and empathy for Aharon and Miriam.  If he were to lose this sensitivity, his ruchniyus would have fallen as well.  This must be one of the reasons that a human being cannot reach the fiftieth Shaar Binah. As long as we're alive, there is and there has to be an irreducible tension between being a perfect human being and being a malach. So Moshe was wrong, from the perspective of middas hadin. But from the standpoint of his need to be a human being that lives in this world and aspires to spiritual perfection, he had no choice but to do what he did.