Most of us have heard many of the stories surrounding Rebbe Levi Yitzchak of
Berdichev. He was known for his defense of 'Am Yisroel that he presented before
Ribbono Shel 'Olam. He was the great defender; the "m'lamed z'chus" of his people and the legends are many. Always he would take the precept of "vehevi dan es kol ho'odom l'chaf z'chus"(Masseches Ovos Perek 1/Mishna 7). Judge every man for the better. Reb' Levi Yitzchak would also ask Hashem to do the same. His actions are legendary.
With this in mind it is somewhat surprising that Moshe Rabbenu comes to the defense of 'Am Yisroel and is berated for it. "…v'ha'tzel lo hi'tzal'to es 'amecho"(Perek
5/Posuk 23). You, Hashem, have not saved your people. This cry for salvation should be rewarded. This cry for help should be answered. Was not Moshe Rabbenu chosen for his task because of his inherent kindness and concern as represented by his care of the sheep that were his responsibility (Midrash Tanchuma)? It was the task that was presented to him and he seemingly came to fulfill it. Yet, the Torah tells us of the harsh response to Moshe Rabbenu. "Va'y'daber E-lo-kim…"(Perek 6/Posuk 2) are the opening words of our Parsha. Not "Vayomer Hashem" but "Vay'daber E-lokim". Rashi tells us, "Dibber I'to mishpot". Hashem spoke to him strictly.
We can pose another question as well. The interaction that the Torah describes as taking place between Moshe and Hashem seems to belie the righteousness for which he was chosen to be the future leader of 'Am Yisroel and to be the one who will take them out of Egypt. He casts aspersions upon the very people he is called upon to lead and refuses the offers that HaKodosh Boruch makes him time and time again.
Hashem tells Moshe, "mazeh b'yodecho"(Perek 4/Posuk ). What is in your hand? The word "mazeh" should be written as two words, "mah", "zeh", not as one as appears in the Torah. The answer, Rashi points out, is that the letters that form "mazeh", mem, zayin, heh, could also be read as "mi'zeh"--from this. The Posuk would then mean
"from this in your hand", implying that the episode of the staff changing to a snake is attributed from "mi'zeh", from something done by Moshe. The staff is used as a frightening symbol since he deserves to be struck by it since he cast aspersions upon
B'nei Yisroel.
Again, the Torah tells us that Moshe saw "v'hi'neh yodo m'tzora'as k'sholeg"(Posuk
6). His hand was leporously white as snow. Again he was punished for speaking
L'shon Hara' against B'nei Yisrael saying they would not accept him as Hashem's messenger.
When Rashi reveals to us that the event at the bush took place over seven days, we are hard-put to understand his obstinacy and the patience that Hashem shows. Finally, at the end it is time for His wrath to make itself known. How could Moshe be the leader when at the outset his relationship with Hashem is beset with difficulties?
We can begin to forge an approach to the problem by noting another issue. Moshe, at the end of Parshas Sh'mos, approaches Hashem with the complaint that will be the antecedent to Parshas Vo'eiro. "Va'yo'shov Moshe el Hashem vayomar, 'Hashem lomoh har'eiso lo'om ha'zeh lomoh zeh sh'lachtoni' "(Perek 5/Posuk 22). Moshe

returned to Hashem and said, "Hashem why have You done badly to this people, why did You send me?" The Posuk has two parts, a narrative and a conversation. In both the narrative and the conversation the word "Hashem" is mentioned. However, there is a difference in the way that it is written in the Posuk. In the narrative, that is the objective description of the event, the word describing Him, Yisborach, is Yud, Keh,
Vov , Heh, the Shem HaM'forash, the standard way the Torah writes His name.
However, strikingly, when Moshe addresses Hashem he uses the word Aleph, Dalet,
Nun, with a Yud at the end--from the word Adon.
Now, we are startled by this usage. The name Yud, Keh… implies Hashem's kindness and chessed. The name of Aleph, Dalet implies Master without any hint of kindness and chessed. The correct look at this Posuk says that Moshe was talking to
Hashem, the G-d of kindness, and talked to Him incorrectly; he used the wrong name when he said the name of Aleph, Dalet! He used the wrong name and thus exhibited a terrible lack of understanding of He Who had sent him.
When we advance a few months in time and come to that fateful Shiva' 'Asar
B'Tammuz when Moshe Rabbenu has to offer his T'filos for the very existence of our ancestors, following Cheit Ha'Egel, Hashem teaches him to daven. The thirteen attributes of HaKodosh Boruch Hu are recited by Moshe Rabbenu, beginning with the very words in which he erred, "Hashem Hashem Keil Rachum v'Chanun…(Perek 34/
P'sukim 6-7). Here there is no mistake. Moshe does know the vast difference between the two.
Furthermore, Moshe who has now spoken against the qualities of B'nei Yisroel will forgo the greatest of honors in order not to endanger his people. Hashem says,
"V'atah hanicho Li v'yichar a'pi vo'hem va'a'chalem v'e'eseh o's'cho l'goi godol"(Perek 32/Posuk 10). Leave Me and I will destroy them and make you to a great nation. In one moment Moshe would not only be the giver of the Torah, he would also embody the merits of Avraham Ovinu 'Alav HaShalom as the founder of the nation. Moshe understands Hashem's word: Leave me. But he does not leave nor let up until the Torah tells us "Va'yi'nochem Hashem…"(Posuk 14), Hashem relented.
The Torah presents us with an important lesson. Moshe Rabbenu was holy from birth--"…va'teiro o'so ki tov hu"(Perek 2/Posuk 2). Yocheved saw that Moshe he was good, since at his birth the house became full with light. Masseches Sotah(12 a) tells us that this is learned from a G'zeira Shava from Sefer B'reishis. There is says,
"va'yar E--lokim es ho'or ki tov"(Perek 1/Posuk 4). The word "tov" is used in both instances to tell us that the "tov" regarding Moshe refers to light, and that light was from Creation, the light that is in-waiting for Moshiach. Similarly, we are told that
Bas Par'o opened the basket "va'tir'ei'hu es ha'yeled"(Posuk 6). The literal translation of these words is "she saw him the boy". Masseches Sotah (12b) notes this superfluous usage and remarks that she saw Him, referring to the Sh'china, in addition to Moshe.
Wonderful beginnings, however, do not guarantee a wonderful future. A person has to make the most of his gifts, overcome his deficits and reach his potential. Moshe's potential, to be Moshe Rabbenu, was not reached immediately nor without travail.
The Torah carefully recounts the events here to show the deficits so that when we hear him teach us to pray, Hashem Hashem, we understand that he had to accomplish

much to reach such a level. He had to build himself. When he refuses to accept
Hashem's judgment of "va'acha'lem"-and I will destroy them, he has forgotten or is ignoring all of the reasons for justifying the punishment.
Moshe has to learn how to approach Hashem in prayer and in supplication. Of course he was worried about B'nei Yisroel but he did not as yet know how to separate his own feelings from those regarding B'nei Yisroel. He does not only say, "lomoh har'ei'so lo'om hazeh" focusing on their trouble. He adds, "lomoh zeh sh'achto'ni", emphasizing his own discomfort. Until he learns to make such a distinction he cannot serve as Hashem's messenger.
This is seen when the Torah tells us of the difficulty B'nei Yisroel had in accepting
Moshe's promise of salvation in the beginning of our Parsha. "Va'y'daber Moshe kein el B'nei Yisroel v'lo shom'u el Moshe mi'kotzer ru'ach u'mei'avoda kosho"(Perek
6/Posuk 9). Moshe spoke thus to B'nei Yisroel and they did not listen to him because of impatience and the hard labor. As most m'forshim explain, B'nei Yisroel were impatient and did not have the fortitude to put their troubles aside and appreciate the redemption that was at its beginning. Targum Onklos translates the phrase "mi'kozer ru'ach" as "mei'a'yeik rucho"-a troubled spirit, an explanation which is in consonance with those m'forshim. Targum Y'honoson Ben 'Uziel translates the phrase differently.
His rendition states "mi'k'pi'dus rucho", meaning because of a critical spirit. This phrase definitely refers to Moshe Rabbenu, not to B'nei Yisroel. It was not only the outside travail which interfered with our ancestors' ability to appreciate the promises offered them. It was also the way in which those promises were conveyed. The style in which they were conveyed also interfered with our ancestors' ability to appreciate the promises offered them. "Lomoh zeh sh'lachtoni resonated in Moshe's words to
B'nei Yisroel even though they most certainly did not hear them being said.
It was not Moshe's defense of B'nei Yisroel that was being berated; it was the way his personal involvement was expressed that was criticized. It was not the care that was being reproved; it was all that accompanied it. We follow Moshe Rabbenu until he receives the ultimate evaluation from the Torah itself: "V'ho'ish Moshe 'onov m'od mi'kol ho'odom asher 'al p'nei ho'a'domo"(Bamidbor Perek 12/Posuk 3). Moshe was the most humble of all people on the face of the earth. There is no longer any personal involvement. His life is ultimate subjugation to HaKodosh Boruch Hu and complete self-effacement before his people.
Shem Mi'Shmuel (5672,1) brings us the Midrash on the Posuk in T'hillim (Perek
68/Posuk ), "ashrei sivchar u's'korev". Happy is the one you choose and bring near.
The Midrash says one is happy who is chosen and not drawn near. Avraham,
Ya'akov and Dovid HaMelech were all described in various P'sukim as being chosen by Hashem, but He did not bring them near. They brought themselves close to
Hashem. One who is capable of bringing himself close to Hashem, on his own without external help, is greater than one who can come near only when he is brought near.
This idea is similar to Rashi's teaching the distinction between…"es Ho--E lokim hishalech No'ach"(B'reishis Perek 6/Posuk 9), describing Noach and "hishalech l'fonai ve'h'yei somim"(Perek 17/Posuk 1), said to Avraham Ovinu. No'ach could only be

"es Ho'--E lokim, with Hashem, not independently. Avraham could walk before
Hashem, unaided and alone.
Thus, there are two levels of Tzaddikim. The first are those who need the strength of all those arround them. Then there is the second group who can more be independent and self-sufficient.
We know that we are treading on delicate ground when we attempt to evaluate Moshe
Rabbenu 'Olov HaShalom by our standards and by our lack of understanding. We know at the same time that we must make use of what the Torah tells us, not to pretend we understand Moshe Rabbenu or can judge him, chas v'shalom. We do make use of the Torah to tell us how we can assess ourselves and plan our future; how we can avoid pitfalls and how we can set our goals in truly hope to approach their fulfillment. We do not affect to approach that which Moshe Rabbenu attained. But we know that we can and must improve ourselves and can be inspired by the models that the Torah presents to us so dramatically.
Shabbat Shalom
Rabbi Pollock