Moshe Rabbeinu Praised the Bravery of Shimon in Shechem

posted in: English Divrei Torah | 0

How Did Moshe Rabbeinu Praise Shimon and Levi’s Bravery in Shechem?

Bamidbar (Numbers) 2:2 The Israelites shall camp each with his standard, under the banners of their ancestral house; they shall camp around the Tent of Meeting at a distance.

Rashi : באתת [EVERY MAN OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL SHALL ENCAMP BY HIS OWN STANDARD] WITH THE SIGNS [OF THEIR FATHERS’ HOUSES] — Each banner shall have a different sign — a piece of coloured cloth hanging on it, the colour of the one not being the same as the colour of another, but the colour of each tribe shall be like that of his stone that is fixed in the breastplate (of. Exodus 28:21), and by this means everybody will be able to recognise his banner .

Midrash Bamidbar Rabba on the chapter (2:7) informs us that Shimon’s banner or flag was colored green and contained an image of the city of Shechem.

Maharzu’s commentary states concerning Shechem – regarding the bravery and self sacrifice in Shechem, And even though Levi was with him, Shimon was the older one and the main one and this was his praise that he was zealous against harlotry.

Had Moshe Rabbeinu not approved of Shimon’s behavior, he would not have allowed them to display the city of Shechem on their flag.

How Do We Know Moshe Rabbeinu Had the Obligation to Protest If He Really Disapproved of Shimon and Levi’s Bravery in Shechem?

Tractate Shabbat 54b – 55a:

The mishna relates that the cow of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya would go out on Shabbat with a strap between its horns, contrary to the will of the Sages. The Gemara asks: Did Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya have only one cow? Didn’t Rav say, and some say that Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya would tithe from his herds 12,000 calves each and every year? There were 120, 000 calves born in his herds annually. There is no way, then, to speak of the cow of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya.

The Gemara Answers It Was Really the Neighbor’s Cow But the Blame Was Attributed to Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya Because He Had the Ability to Protest But Did Not

The Gemara answers: It was taught in the Tosefta: The cow was not his; rather, it was his neighbor’s. And because he did not protest her conduct and tell her that doing so is prohibited the cow was called by his name to his discredit, as if it were his.
It was related that Rav, and Rabbi Ḥanina, and Rabbi Yoḥanan, and Rav Ḥaviva taught the statement cited below. The Gemara comments: Throughout the order of Moed, wherever this pair of Sages is mentioned, exchange Rabbi Yoḥanan and insert Rabbi Yonatan in his place. In any event, they said: Anyone who had the capability to effectively protest the sinful conduct of the members of his household and did not protest, he himself is apprehended for the sins of the members of his household and punished. If he is in a position to protest the sinful conduct of the people of his town, and he fails to do so, he is apprehended for the sins of the people of his town. If he is in a position to protest the sinful conduct of the whole world, and he fails to do so, he is apprehended for the sins of the whole world.
Rav Pappa said: And the members of the household of the Exilarch were apprehended and punished for the sins of the whole world. Because their authority extends across the entire Jewish world, it is in their hands to ensure that nobody commit a transgression. As indicated by that which Rabbi Ḥanina said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “The Lord will enter into judgment with the Elders of His people and its princes, saying: It is you who have eaten up the vineyard; the robbery of the poor is in your houses” (Isaiah 3:14)? The question arises: If the princes sinned by committing robbery,

what did the Elders, i.e., the Sages of that generation, do that was considered a sin? Rather, say: God will enter into judgment with the Elders because they did not protest the sinful conduct of the princes.

Someone Might Ask Maybe the City of Shechem Was Displayed on Shimon’s Banner/Flag in order to Shame The Tribe for Bad Behavior of their Ancestor?

There are several reasons to reject the idea that the city of Shechem was placed on Shimon’s banner to shame them.

  • When Moshe Rabbeinu did want to shame the tribe of Shimon after the incident involving their deeds in the place called Shittim, he did so by not giving the tribe an overt blessing (see Rashi and Sifri to Dvarim / Deut. 33:7) while giving a blessing to all the other tribes.
  • Regarding the banners all the descendants of Yaakov got a banner with a picture on each banner denoting some merit or praise of the tribe. Even the tribe of Levi (Shimon’s partner in the Shechem story) and the tribe of Reuven got a picture praising some deed or trait of the tribe on their banner as spelled out in Bamidbar Rabba 2:7. The fact that the other tribes had a banner displaying some merit or praise of the tribe indicates that the Shechem picture on Shimon’s banner was also meant as praise.
  • Furthermore, prominent rabbis such as, Rambam and Maharal came up with Halachic justifications on behalf of Shimon and Levi..
  • Ramban has a separate approach, where he tries to give the reasoning of Yaakov Avinu’s opposition to Shimon and Levi, while also offering an explanation for the viewpoint of Shimon and Levi.

On the Pragmatic Limitations on the use of force, see the post: Building New Israeli Settlements – The Opinion of the Gaon – according to Kol Hator

It should be obvious that further information and study than what was presented in this post is needed to properly apply the precedent of Shimon and Levi to future situations.
Without voicing my own opinion on the subject, I will point out that Rabbi Dov Lior recently stated that he agrees with Maharal’s line of reasoning to explain Shimon & Levi at Shechem.