The sons of Reuven and the sons of Gad had an extremely large amount of livestock, and they saw that the land of Yazer and the land of Gilead was a place for grazing.... They said (to Moshe)... "Let this land be given to your servants for their portion; do not bring us across the Jordan."

(Bemidbar 32:1,5)

Perhaps it is for this reason that the Midrash Rabba on this week's Parasha goes into a lengthy discussion of what the proper attitude towards one's livelihood and source of support should be.

"It is not from the east or from the west, nor from the desert mountains ('Harim')" (Tehillim 75:7).

"It is not from the east or from the west" -- It is not from traveling from east to west that a man becomes wealthy. Even if he travels in ships and to the most remot deserts and mountains, it will not make him rich.

"Nor from the desert mountains" -- Rebbi Abba of Romania said: All 'Harim's in the Tanach should be translated as "mountains," except for this one, which should be understood as "to raise up." The meaning of the verse is thus "nor does traveling in the desert raise oneself up [=make one rich and honored]"

(Bemidbar Rabba 31:7)

Rebbi Meir says: [Rather than teaching one's child the most lucrative business in the market,] a person should try to train his son in a vocation that is honest and simple -- all the time praying to the One to Whom all wealth and property belongs. There is no trade that does not have both wealthy and poor practitioners. It is not the career that gives a person wealth or poverty, rather a man's wealth is granted to him according to his merits.

(Kiddushin 82a)

We can find this lesson hinted at in the story of the Manna that rained from heaven for the Bnai Yisroel [=the Jews] during their stay in the desert. The Torah tells us that no matter how much of the Manna he tried to accumulate, every person would end up with an equal amount (Shmot 16:18). Perhaps this was intended to accent to the Bnai Yisroel the important theme mentioned above. A person's sustenance and livelihood are not functions of the amount of effort he invests in earning money. Rather, they are blessings bestowed upon him by the One above. (See also Parasha-Page Shavuot 5755, IV:1)

Every day, for three hours, Hashem sits and involves Himself in ensuring that every creature on earth gets the food it needs to survive -- from the smallest bug to the largest beast.

(Avodah Zarah 3b)

Hashem sits at the top of the universe, dispensing food to every living creature.

(Pesachim 118a)

Of course, *all* that befalls us is a divine edict (see Gemara Chulin, bottom of 7b, etc.). Why, then, do our Sages stress the divine involvement in the provision of food more than the hand of Hashem in any other dispensation? Also, what do the Rabbis mean by attributing so much of Hashem's time towards feeding His creations?

Perhaps the Gemara means to impress upon us how wondrous the fact is that every creature of the earth finds a means of sustenance. An honest reflection on this phenomenon can lead to only one conclusion: Someone from Above must be sitting and tending to the needs of all of His creatures. Miracles are happening day by day, not only to humankind, but in the animal kingdom as well! The Talmud is conveying to us that we can *feel* Hashem's presence in the ecological balance of the world. The success of the food chain relies on such perfect coordination between the various organisms, that it is absolutely miraculous!

The Midrash Rabba in our Parasha tells us:

Wealth is a bountiful gift from Hashem, which enables a person to have everything he wants in this world. But when is this so? When it is granted to a person from Heaven, in the merit of studying and observing the Torah. But the wealth of a human being is nothing at all.

(Bemidbar Rabba 22:7)

What the Midrash means is that there are some people who acknowledge the fact that everything that they earn is a gift from Hashem. Their riches "come from Heaven," and are a wonderful gift, helping them serve Hashem. However, others feel that they have "worked hard for what they have," and do not acknowledge Hashem's part in granting them their riches. Their wealth is referred to as money that "comes from a human being." Such wealth is not a benefit to its owner. It will just cause him to become arrogant and rebel against his Creator, as we are told in the Torah (Devarim 8:12-18).

In Bava Batra we are taught that not only the amount to be *earned* in a given year is predetermined, but also the amount of *losses* a person will sustain during that year is decided. The Gemara illustrates this idea with a story:

Rebbi Yochanan ben Zakkai saw in a dream that his sister's children were going to lose seven hundred Dinarim during the coming year. He prevailed upon them to give a great deal of money to charity, and he managed to have them donate 683 Dinars that year. When the day before Yom Kippur arrived, a representative of the Caesar came and collected 17 Dinars for a tax!

(Bava Batra, 10a)

Rebbi Chanina ben Dosa's wife once said to him, "How much longer will we go on suffering from poverty? Why don't you pray that we should have some money?" He prayed, and a hand appeared from Heaven which handed him a golden table leg! That night, his wife saw in a dream a vision of the righteous eating in the World to Come at golden tables of three legs, while she and her husband were eating at a golden table of only two legs. When she told her husband of her dream, he asked her, "Are you willing to accept that everyone else will eat at three-legged tables in the World to Come, and we will eat at a two-legged table?" She answered, "Pray again, that the golden leg be taken away from us!" He did so, and the leg was taken away.

(Ta'anit 25a -- See also Shmot Rabba 52:3, for some similar stories)

How is it possible to "use up" ethereal reward in this physical, mundane world? Perhaps one way of understanding this idea is the following: The lot that Hashem grants a person is in accordance with what the person needs in order to accomplish his particular mission in this world. By refusing to accept his financial lot, the person is also refusing to achieve his unique goal in this world. This, in turn, will necessarily lessen his portion in the World to Come.

This thought, too, is borne out in many places in the words of Chazal:

Not everyone who is rich today is rich tomorrow, nor is everyone who is poor today poor tomorrow, for Hashem raises some people up and lowers other people, as it says, "Hashem is the Judge; He lowers this one and raises that one."

(Shmot Rabba 31:3)

A certain Roman matron once asked Rebbi Shimon ben Chalafta, "How many days did it take God to create the world?" "Six days," was the answer. She then asked him, "If so, what has He been doing all the time since then?" He replied, "He creates ladders, by which He raises up some people and lowers others, as it says, `Hashem is the Judge; He lowers this one and raises that one.' "

(Bemidbar Rabba 22:8)

Do you know why "property" is called "Nechasim" in Hebrew? Because it becomes "covered up" ("Nichsim") from one person and discovered by another! And why is currency called "Zuzim" in Aramaic? Because it moves ("Zazim") from one person to the next. Why is money called "Mamon?" It stands for "Ma Moneh" - "Why bother counting it?" It's not worth the effort! ... And you can similarly explain [the other names for money in this manner].

(Ibid.)

Man's sustenance is as miraculous a feat for Hashem as the splitting of the Red Sea. (And a person must take this to heart when he prays for sustenance - Rashi.)

(Pesachim 118a)

Perhaps this interpretation can be used to explain yet another passage in the Gemara:

Matchmaking between men and women is as miraculous a feat as the splitting of the Red Sea.

(Sotah 2a)

Support for this interpretation of the Talmudic analogies to the splitting of the sea can be drawn from the Midrash. In Bereishit Rabba (68:4) the story of the Roman matron appears in a slightly different form. According to the Bereishit Rabba, Rebbi *Yossi* ben Chalafta was asked, "What has Hashem been doing since He finished the creation of the world?" The Midrash then presents *two* versions of Rav Yossi's answer. Some say that he answered, "He occupies Himself with finding mates for men and women... which is as hard as splitting the Red Sea." Others told over that Rav Yossi's answer was, "He arranges the rise and fall of men's fortunes" (as in Bemidbar Rabba, quoted above). The implication is that this, too, is as hard as splitting the Red Sea, and that is why it takes up so much Divine time. If so, it is clear that the interpretation we have suggested above is correct. The specific point that makes man's sustenance as hard as splitting the Red Sea is the necessity to "raise one man while causing another to fall!"

The above selection from Bereishit Rabba also provides proof for our explanation of the difficulty of matchmaking. After quoting Rav Yossi's answer, that matchmaking is as hard as splitting the Red Sea, the Midrash proves its point from a verse in Tehillim: "God brings people to their home; and He brings out prisoners in a fitting manner ('Bakosharot')" (Tehillim 68:7). The Midrash suggests that the beginning of the verse means that Hashem *Himself* is the one who brings man and wife together to a common home. The Midrash adds that the word "Bakosharot" at the end of the verse can be read as "Bechi Ve'Shirot" - with crying and rejoicing. The intention of the verse, according to the Midrash, is that "the one who is satisfied with the match rejoices while the one who is not, cries" (Midrash ibid.; see also Sanhedrin 22a).

What does the Midrash mean by this? Who is unhappy about the match? And who is the "prisoner" that had been "taken out" of prison, according to this reading of the verse? Perhaps the Midrash, like the Talmud, is referring to second marriages. The spouse of the first marriage [=the prisoner] has been freed of their commitment [=taken out of bondage], in order to become a match for another person at the expense of their first spouse! If so, it is the spouse from the first marriage that is sad, while the spouse from the second marriage rejoices!

The Midrash is presenting its reading of the verse in Tehillim as a proof that matchmaking is as hard as splitting the Red Sea. It thus lends support to our contention that the splitting of the sea is equated with matchmaking because they both involve one person's gain at the expense of another's!

(Some of our explanation of the analogy to the splitting of the sea can be found in the work "Yefeh To'ar" on the Midrash Bereishit Rabba. I later found more proof for this interpretation in the Midrash HaZohar to Bereishit 73b. The Zohar discusses how "hard" it is for Hashem to remove one person from the world in order to give his mate to another person, citing the story of King David and Batsheva as an example -- Shmuel II, Ch. 11.)