Am/Kahal v Edah – The Groups that Led to Moshe and Aharon’s Departure

Parshas Chukas

by Rabbi Avi Billet

For ease, the following words are presented over and over in Hebrew as the emphasis below is how they are used in the Torah’s text: קהל = Kahal; עדה = Eidah; עם = Am; בני ישראל = Bnei Yisrael; קהל ה' = K’hal Hashem. Each word or phrase refers to a group of people, and the ensuing discussion surrounds whether they are the same group or different groups

 The fallout from Mei Merivah seems clear in the story, but what is unclear is WHAT WENT WRONG. Elsewhere in the Torah Moshe and Aharon are told of different general flaws in that tale as to why they won’t be entering the land – לא האמנתם בי להקדשני, מריתם פי, מעלתם בי, לא קדשתם אותי – and a legitimate question to ask is, in using those terms: Is God talking to Moshe and Aharon, or is He talking to the people or about the people themselves? Who didn’t have faith? Who rebelled against God? [See Bamidbar 20:24;27:14; Devarim 32:51]

 Many commentaries try to figure out what Moshe and Aharon did wrong (prompting Shad”al to say “Moshe and Aharon sinned once, and the rabbis heaped 13 sins on them”), but here we will propose a different way of looking at this story, not as much through the lens of what they did or didn’t do, but through the lens of which crowd or crowds they were looking to address, and how THAT IS THE REASON for the fallout. It is essential to see the Hebrew in the following texts, because using an English translation will cause every insight to be lost in translation. 

 We are familiar with there being different factions in Bnei Yisrael. Mechilta notes that at the sea there were 4 groups. Here, the verse tells us that Bnei Yisrael - all of the עדה came to Midbar Tzin (20:1), the עם settled in Kadesh (20:1). The עדה didn’t have water and they gathered (Haktav V’Hakabbalah notes the עדה didn’t say anything) (20:2). The עם fought with Moshe saying we’re all going to die (20:3-4). And they, the עם, challenge why the קהל ה' was taken out of Egypt (20:4). Moshe and Aharon come before the קהל (20:6).

 God then tells them: to gather the עדה, all the instructions of staff, speaking, bring water out FOR THEM – והוצאת להם מים, and then give to drink to the עדה and their animals. (All in 20:8)

 In 20:10, however, they gather the קהל (NOT THE עדה!), speak to them, then (in 20:11) Moshe strikes the סלע twice and much water came out – ויצאו מים רבים – which implies the people he is addressing now have water; then ותשת העדה ובעירם, the Eidah and their animals drink.

 Moshe and Aharon are then told they will not bring the קהל to the land (20:12). And the narrative summarizes that these are the waters of strife where Bnei Yisrael FOUGHT with God (20:13). Our precise reading will indicate that it was the עם that fought with משה, not the עדה. And yet the emphasis in the fallout is on the fight of Bnei Yisrael with God, מֵ֣י מְרִיבָ֔ה אֲשֶׁר־רָב֥וּ בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל אֶת־יְקֹוָ֑ק – NOT on what Moshe and Aharon did, or did wrong. 

 בני ישראל, עם, קהל, עדה, קהל ה'. Why so many names for the same people in so few Pesukim?

 Because they’re not the same people. They are different groups! Which means that while the עדה gathered and said nothing, and Moshe was instructed to deal with them, Moshe took the bait from the עם who chose to fight and complain, gathered a קהל, chose to give Mussar, and brought out water, a result of which completed the instruction of והִשְׁקִיתָ֥ אֶת־הָעֵדָ֖ה וְאֶת־בְּעִירָֽם (20:8) with וַתֵּ֥שְׁתְּ הָעֵדָ֖ה וּבְעִירָֽם (20:11). It’s the fallout with the עם and קהל, on the one hand, and not dealing directly with the עדה as instructed, on the other hand, which is the problem. 

 So who are these groups?

 Rashi (on 11:1) notes that when the word עם or העם is utilized, the verse implies the group in question are רשעים (wicked), and Sifsei Chakhamim caveats “unless context suggests otherwise, such as ויענו כל העם יחדיו ויאמרו כל אשר דבר ה' נעשה.” (The עם answered as one that we will do all God said)

A number of commentaries point straight out that עם refers to the Erev Rav (a group of troublemakers within the Israelite camp) (Tzror HaMor, Shelah, Haksav…); Toldos Yaakov Yosef (HaKohen), a student of the Baal Shem Tov, said that the עם are people who rested on their laurels, thus lowered their personal status, allowing the evil inclination to get a foothold.

 R’ David Zvi Hoffman suggests the עדה refers to leadership, while Malbim has a very extensive series of comments on this subject, noting that עדה refers to the Sanhedrin. Malbim in Vayikra 4, paragraph רמא (241) and in Bamidbar 17 notes that עדה refers to a group who gathers following a specific order - they are invited to a gathering. While his definitions of קהל and עם seem to interchange/equate the two, his comments about a קהל are people who gather without any invitation or order in their gathering, aka the המון עם, who might be a disorganized mob.

 One example is Korach’s עדה, who were largely organized. Another appears in the plague stopped by Aharon with the Ketores (incense). There Aharon was instructed to take Ketores, and go immediately to the עדה, to bring atonement for them (17:11). In the next Pasuk Aharon did as Moshe said, except that וַיָּ֙רָץ֙ אֶל־תּ֣וֹךְ הַקָּהָ֔ל וְהִנֵּ֛ה הֵחֵ֥ל הַנֶּ֖גֶף בָּעָ֑ם (he ran amongst the קהל, as the plague had begun to affect the עם). Since the משחית (destroying force of the plague) began with the קהל – the unorganized crowd – he had to help them first, so he ran to the קהל for the plague had started with their true synonym, the עם. And sure enough וַיִּתֵּן֙ אֶֽת־ הַקְּטֹ֔רֶת וַיְכַפֵּ֖ר עַל־הָעָֽם (he atoned for the עם – even though he had been instructed to stop the plague with the עדה): The Torah tells us ותעצר המגפה (the plague stopped, 17:13). Then Aharon goes back to the Tent of Meeting, and we are told והמגפה נעצרה (the plague stopped, 17:15) – is this a repetition? No! A plague first stops among the עם/קהל where it was most dangerous. Then he went back to the עדה, a group that had been organized, possibly the Sanhedrin, where it was far less severe. He is contending with two groups in that arena.

 Getting back to Mei Merivah, the Shela’h (R Yeshaya Horowitz) rejects the notion that even Moshe and Aharon calling the people מרים (rebels) was a problem, because he feels that Moshe was talking to the קהל/ the עם, who were troublemakers, and he was not referring to the scion of Avraham, who are represented as an עדה. Remember – Moshe and Aharon are told they won’t bring the קהל to the land. It doesn’t say they won’t bring the עדה, or they won’t bring בני ישראל. The קהל are the people fighting with Moshe and Aharon 20:3-6, and the people they address in 20:10 and in the first half of 20:11. עם and קהל.

 Similar to Malbim, the Shela’h looks at the Pesukim in Devarim where Moshe blames his non-entry on the people and suggests Moshe is saying his non-entry is because the people are undeserving of having him lead them, and that is why he is going to die. See Devarim 3:26-28 “God got angry at me on your account… Yehoshua will be leading the עם.” And Devarim 4:20-21 “God took you to be his עם… and He was angry at me for your words, swearing I would not cross the Jordan.” 

 The Pesukim in Haazinu (Devarim 32:50-51) would put the icing on the cake that the reference to Bnei Yisrael is the עם over which Moshe and Aharon lost their cool, and fell into the mud with – thereby proving it was no longer a good match of leadership, as there it references those who mis-used God (מעלתם) and those who did not sanctify God (לא קדשתם) at Mei Merivah (recall it was “the Bnei Yisrael who fought with God at Mei Merivah” – Bamidbar 20:13).

 The only problem is the verse in Pinchas – Bamidbar 27:14, which references מריבת העדה – the fight of the עדה. We just established that it was Bnei Yisrael, not the עדה, who fought with God?!

 Malbim explains that the fight was that the עדה wanted a miracle and thus a great Kiddush Hashem. And Moshe did not provide that because he struck the rock instead of going the route the עדה required, of a big miracle. So the fight with the עדה was really over what degree of Kiddush Hashem Moshe would demonstrate.

 Call it leadership, call it a mistake. The point is that it is hard to truly point to a sin here in Moshe’s actions. There was certainly a fallout, but was it between Moshe and God, or Moshe and the people, or Moshe and himself? Both Malbim and the Shela’h are of the view that Moshe and Aharon were taken away from leadership because the people were undeserving of having them as their leaders.

 This is the struggle of any עבד ה' who is trying to do a job, but is thrown curveballs from people who are in need. Who are the people? What is their sincerity level? How much are they on board with working to solve a problem? Or are they just complainers? Do we take the bait that brings us to a low point? Or do we have the patience to do exactly as God instructs? 

 Moshe and Aharon talked to the wrong people, and in a way were brought down to their level as a result. This brings about a very regrettable leadership moment, which in that case ultimately translated to a leadership overhaul, though this view puts the blame on the עם for not seeing what they had in leadership and treating them properly, rather than on Moshe and Aharon for having sinned in a manner that can’t definitively be identified.