This week’s Torah portion begins with Moses presenting the commandments regarding the laws of promises and oaths to the “heads of the tribes” (Numbers 30:2). Indeed, the very division of the land of Israel is established along tribal lines. The Biblical book of Judges is filled with tribal rivalries and murderous tribal conflicts, and even after King David unites the nation under one monarch with a single capital city of Jerusalem, the enmity of Judah and Ephraim persists until the destruction of the Holy Temple. To this very day, kohen-priest descendants of Aaron from the tribe of Levi rise to bless the congregation, and all the descendants of the tribe of Levi are called to the Torah immediately following the first-to-be called kohen.
Why retain a tribal system which seems to have only contributed to the internecine strife which prevented the united period of Kings David and Solomon from becoming the norm of Israel’s government?!
I believe that a careful reading of this week’s Torah portion – paying particular attention to two different Hebrew words for “tribe” – provides the answer.
The Hebrew word generally used for “tribe” is “shevet”; when Jacob concludes his blessings-descriptions of his twelve sons, highlighting the differences and even the tensions between them, the Biblical text states “all of these are the tribes (shivtei) of Israel, twelve (in number)….” (Genesis 49:28). Similarly, this week’s Torah reading speaks of half the tribe (shevet) of Menasheh” (Numbers 32:33).
However, there is another Hebrew word used for tribe, matteh, and it is the noun in the very opening verse of our Torah portion: “And Moses spoke to the heads of tribes… (mattot, translated by Targum as shivtaya)” (Numbers 30:2). The very Book of Numbers, which opens with a census count of each of the tribes, provides for a representative of each tribe, “one man per tribe” – lamatteh, (Numbers 1:4). What is the reason for these two different Hebrew nouns for the very same concept of tribe?
According to most of our commentaries, shevet is to be defined as a ruling rod whereas matteh is a supporting staff. When Jacob blesses Judah, he declares, “The rod (shevet) shall not depart from Judah…” The Talmudic Sages interpret, “the rod refers to the exilarchs of Babylon, who strong-handedly (tyrannically) rule the nation with a rod; they derive their authority from the gentile governments” (Genesis 49:10, Rashi ad loc). The Hebrew word matteh, on the other hand, is a supporting staff, as in the modern Hebrew position of Ramatkal, or Chief of Staff, with staff referring to a support group of knowledgeable and experienced individuals.
In our Book of Numbers, when Korah challenged Aaron’s leadership as High Priest from the tribe of Levi, each tribe was asked by G-d to take a staff and write upon the staff the name of the prince of each tribe; on the staff of the tribe of Levi was to be written the name of Aaron. “…And behold, the staff of Aaron of the tribe of Levi flowered, a flower arose, a bud blossomed and almond fruit matured” (Numbers 17:24). The staff (matteh) of the tribe (matteh) of Levi supported Aaron’s appointment as High Priest, Kohen Gadol. The best Hebrew synonym of matteh is mishenet, a word used for the support staff of an elderly person with difficulty walking, and is also a Talmudic idiom for the son of a widow who serves as her aide and benefactor.
In effect, the Torah is teaching us that a nation comprised of different and distinctive tribes has both negative and positive possibilities. On the one hand, a particular tribe can be desirous of unilateral control (shevet), initiating a rivalry and even war. But too centralized a governmental power can turn unity into uniformity and produce all of the tyranny of a totalitarian Tower of Babel. Different tribes – each with its own cultural flavor, temperament and specific point of view – can provide a unity with diversity. Obviously, the tribes must subscribe to a united goal and agree upon basic values, ideals and rules of conduct. But differences which are respected and which respect others can provide the breadth, depth and growth possibility that is the best defense against stagnation and tyranny.
Hence the world must have different nations, nations must have different cities (tribes, edot), cities must have different communities, communities must have different committees, and committees must have different families. It must be, in my grandmother’s words, a “velt mit veltelakh, a world with little worlds, – as long as each little world, as well as the greater world, remains committed to the integrity and inviolability of every individual and does not countenance fanatic bigotry in any form.
As the prophet Micah teaches, as long as “humanity does not learn war anymore,” “every individual can call upon his god and we will call upon the Lord our G-d forever.” (Micah 4).

Rabbi Shlomo Riskin is chancellor of Ohr Torah Stone and chief rabbi of Efrat, Israel.