Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moshe.... They said, "Is it only with Moshe that Hashem has spoken? Didn't He speak with us as well?" -- and Hashem heard it. And the man Moshe was very modest, more than any other man in the world.

(Bemidbar 12:1-3)

After Miriam's criticism of her brother, the Torah tells us that Moshe was the most modest person in the world. What is the relevance of Moshe's modesty to what Miriam had said? We would have expected the Torah to say that Moshe was exceedingly righteous and thus was in no way blameworthy for having divorced his wife, but his *modesty* does not seem be a pertinent factor in this context.

Rebbi Natan in the Sifri, explains that Miriam slandered Moshe in Moshe's own presence. Although insulted to his face, Moshe displayed extraordinary modesty and did not react at all. Hashem Himself had to intervene to defend Moshe's honor. Moshe's trait of modesty was indeed relevant to the incident described, since. It was this trait that enabled him to overlook the personal indignity that was directed towards him.

Moshe's lack of reaction was truly remarkable. The Gemara (Gittin 36b) pays tribute to people who show such exceptional restraint: "People who are insulted but do not insult others, who hear disparaging remarks yet do not return them, who act with the love of Hashem and are happy with any hardships that may come their way -- they are the ones referred to in the verse "Those who love [Hashem] shine like the sun in its full intensity" (Shoftim 4:31). Perhaps for this reason, we find that "the face of Moshe was like that of the sun" (Bava Batra 75a).

A person should always be modest, like Hillel... Once there were two men who made a wager, saying that whoever could anger Hillel would receive four hundred Zuzim (= silver coins).

That day was Friday, and Hillel was washing his hair for Shabbat. One of the men went to the door of Hillel's house and said, "Is Hillel here? Is Hillel here?" Hillel put on his robe and went to greet the man. He sat him down and asked him, "What do you want, my son?" The man replied, "I have a question I must ask!" Hillel replied, "Ask, my son, ask." The man posed his question: "Why do Babylonians have elongated heads?" Hillel replied, "You have asked a good question, my son! It is because their midwives are not well-skilled [and the head becomes misshapen at birth]."...

[No sooner had Hillel returned to his shower, than the man again rudely called him out, this time with the question,] "Why are the eyes of Tarmudians so narrow?" Hillel replied, "You have asked a good question, my son! It is because they live in a sandy environment (See I Kings 9:18 -MK) [and because of the sand that constantly blows into their eyes they are always squinting]."...

[Shortly afterwards the man again returned, this time to ask,] "Why do Africans have wide feet?" Hillel replied, "You have asked a good question, my son! The answer is that they live in marshy areas [and they must therefore go about barefoot, which causes their feet to become flat and wide]."

The man then said, "I have many more questions to ask -- but I am afraid that you will become angry at me." Hillel wrapped himself in a garment and sat down before the man, saying, "Ask all the questions you wish to ask!" The man said to him, "Are you the Hillel whom they call 'Nassi'?" Hillel said, "Yes, I am." The man retorted, "If you are he, then may there not be many others like you in Israel! It is because of you that I have lost four hundred Zuzim!" Hillel scolded him, saying, "Mind that you don't act so impulsively! Better that many times four hundred Zuzim be lost through Hillel, than that Hillel should become angry!"

(Shabbat 30b-31a)

Hillel's humility is even more impressive if we remember that Hillel himself was from Babylonia (Pesachim 66a, Sukkah 18a). The question, "Why do Babylonians have elongated heads?" was thus a direct insult to Hillel's physical appearance! Yet, like Moshe, he was able to retain his composure even when subject to such extreme humiliation.

If we further contemplate the questions that were posed, they may be seen to have a deeper significance. Perhaps the man was not talking about the physical condition of the Babylonians' heads, but about what is *inside* their heads. What he meant to say was, "Why is it that while we Israelis have a conventional, straightforward manner of thinking, you Babylonians have an "elongated," or lopsided, manner of thinking? How do you dare to take your crooked, Babylonian methods of thought and rule over sages whose background is so much more intellectually sound than yours, when you are not even a proper rabbinical scholar!" This was meant to be a particularly harsh insult to the man who was the spiritual leader of the nation. (The insult is seen to be particularly vicious when we bear in mind that Hillel was only granted his lofty post through proving himself more worthy than the Israeli scholars in an intellectual challenge -- Pesachim 66a.)

To this disparaging remark Hillel replied modestly, "You are right. Perhaps our minds are not as keen as those of the people of Israel. But even if that is so, we are not to be blamed. It happened due to a lack of professional `midwives.' The people who brought us into the world of Torah and nurtured our development were not as learned as the great rabbis of Israel. (See Rashi to Gittin 6a, who says that until a period many years after Hillel there was never more than one Yeshiva in Babylonia, as opposed to the many in Israel proper.) If you believe that my intellectual capabilities are inferior to those of my colleagues, it is due to a flaw in my early education."

Both the question and the answer should be understood metaphorically. The man was leveling a very low insult at Hillel, and Hillel responded to the slight in an extremely humble manner.

It is possible that these two questions were also designed to incite Hillel's anger. If there is one thing that can upset a Jew even more than a direct personal insult, it is a disparaging remark about his Rabbi or mentor!

The mentors of Hillel -- from whom he was very proud to have learned (Pesachim ibid.) -- were the two great sages of Babylonia of the previous generation, Shemayah and Avtalyon (Avot 1:10).

The Gemara (Gittin 57b, Eduyot 5:6) tells us that these two leading rabbis were actually converts to Judaism -- descendants of none other than the evil Sancheriv (who destroyed the Northern Kingdom of Israel, driving the ten "lost" tribes into exile)! The Gemara does not specify to which nationality they belonged, but the Rambam (Perush HaMishnayot, Eduyot, 1:3) says that they had difficulty pronouncing various Hebrew sounds -- in their homeland they had been totally unfamiliar with the consonants of the Hebrew language. This intimates that they did not come from lands of major Jewish settlement such as Babylonia, where Jews and the Hebrew consonants were familiar, but from some far-flung, remote land where there were few, if any, Jews. Perhaps we can speculate that the land of origin of one of Hillel's teachers was none other than Tarmud. (See Yevamot 16a, "Chaggai the prophet said ... that it is permitted to accept Tarmudian converts," and Rashi ad loc.) The other sage may have hailed from Africa. If so, it is easy to see how the second and third questions were also aimed at angering Hillel -- they were insults to his mentors! Let us take another look, now, at the latter two questions.

"Eyes" is a term that is often used to represent "leaders" (see Parasha-Page, Parashat Naso 5755). By asking why Tarmudians squint, the man was implying that people from Tarmud are unsuitable as proper leaders -- they can't "see" (= lead) properly. But Hillel did not lose his temper despite the provocation. He answered the taunt humbly by explaining that the Tarmudians lived in a "desert land" -- that is, a land devoid of spirituality and morality. The sand of this "desert" affects the eyes of its inhabitants -- a metaphor for the deleterious effects that such unwholesome surroundings can have on all who live there. If the leaders hailing from Tarmud are any less qualified, then this is why. Even after one has uprooted himself from a wicked environment, and subsequently attained great spiritual heights, the "sand" may have affected his ability to be a proper spiritual leader (= "his eyes").

"Feet", too, can easily be understood as representing the leaders of the people, who walk before them and guide their steps. When the man asked Hillel why Africans have wide feet, he implied that African "feet," or leaders, are "deformed" -- i.e. inferior, unworthy of leading. But Hillel once again did not let the intended insult to his teacher "get under his collar." He answered humbly that the Africans live in swampy areas. Swamps and quagmires are also often used as metaphors to depict evil, idolatrous influences (see Tehillim 69:3). Once again, Hillel explained, it is not the fault of the African if he shows poor leadership skills, for he is unalterably affected by the habitat where he was raised. The "swamplands" (-- that is, the idolatrous, immoral conduct that is rampant in that area) take their toll on the "feet" (-- leadership capabilities) of all who are born and raised there.

According to this analysis we can see that Hillel's patience was tested in a way very similar to that of Moshe's. Yet, like Moshe, he passed the test without batting an eyelash! In the words of one gentile who converted to Judaism under the guidance of Hillel -- "Hillel, the humble! May many blessings come upon your head, for your conduct has enabled me to recognize the Divine Presence and become one of His people (Shabbat 31a)!