קַח אֶת הַמַּטֶּה וְהַקְהֵל אֶת הָעֵדָה אַתָּה וְאַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ וְדִבַּרְתֶּם אֶל הַסֶּלַע לְעֵינֵיהֶם וְנָתַן מֵימָיו וְהוֹצֵאתָ לָהֶם מַיִם מִן הַסֶּלַע וְהִשְׁקִיתָ אֶת הָעֵדָה וְאֶת בְּעִירָם: (במדבר כ:ח)

“ … You shall bring forth water for them from the rock and give (ess) the congregation and (vess) their livestock to drink” (Bamidbar 20:8).

Rashi on this pasuk explains that the fact that Hashem also gave the livestock to drink teaches us that HaKodesh Baruch Hu has compassion on Bnei Yisroel’s possessions.

Zera Shimshon asks: How did Rashi learn from this pasuk that the reason that Hashem gave the animals to drink was because of His compassion on animals? Maybe, Hashem was simply responding to their complaint of (Bamidbar 20:4), “Why have you brought the congregation of Hashem to this desert so that we and our livestock should die there?” and not because Hashem has mercy on the livestock. Secondly, why does the pasuk have to teach us that Hashem has mercy on Yisroel’s livestock? Hashem has mercy on all creatures!

Zera Shimshon answers in light of a fascinating midrash: The midrash tells of a man who sold a tree to another person. When the buyer uprooted the tree, he discovered a hidden treasure beneath its roots. The buyer returned to the seller and argued that since he had purchased the field and the tree without knowledge of the hidden treasure, the treasure should belong to the seller. In response, the seller claimed that, like the buyer, he had no intention to steal and therefore, the treasure rightfully belonged to the buyer. Both parties approached the king to seek a judgment. The king listened to their arguments and inquired if either of them had a son and a daughter. They both answered that they did and the king ruled that these children should marry each other—enabling both individuals to enjoy the discovered treasure.

Alexander the Great—present during the case—expressed his admiration for the king’s judgment and the king then asked Alexander how he would have judged the case. Alexander stated that in his kingdom, any found treasure should be given to the king, and, therefore, both individuals would have been punished by beheading and he would have taken the treasure! The king responded by questioning Alexander about the natural elements present in his kingdom—whether the sun shines, the rain falls and if there are animals. Alexander confirmed these aspects. The king responded that he should know that it is the presence of animals that allows for rain and sunshine, and not because of Alexander!

From the king’s response to Alexander, we understand that sometimes—despite individuals not deserving favorable judgment—Hashem may show mercy by considering the merits of their animals.

In light of this, Zera Shimshon explains that Bnei Yisroel recognized their low spiritual state during that period—evident from their constant complaints and dissatisfaction. Consequently, they felt unworthy to directly request water for themselves. Instead, they sought water based on the merits of their animals! By combining their requests for both themselves and their animals, they emphasized the reliance on their animals’ merits.

However, Hashem did not accept this. This can be seen by the way Hashem commanded Moshe to provide water for them. If Bnei Yisroel were granted water solely due to their animals’ merits, the wording should have omitted the “ess” particle—just like their initial request. Moreover, it could have been simply written that Hashem provided water to Bnei Yisroel, and since the water for Bnei Yisroel was in the merit of the animals, it would be obvious that the water is also for the animals—even without it being said.

The fact that the text specifically mentions providing water to the animals and includes the “ess” particle led Rashi to explain that—contrary to assumptions—the water was granted based on Bnei Yisroel’s own merit. This decision stemmed from Hashem’s immense love for Bnei Yisroel which causes Hashem to care for us even when we are totally not deserving.

This is also Rashi’s intention in explaining that the phrase “ess beiram” is to show Hashem’s compassion towards the belongings of Bnei Yisroel. The statement itself is obvious since Hashem extends mercy to all His creations, so there is no apparent reason for Rashi to write it! Rather, Rashi wrote it to emphasize the fact that Hashem provided water to the animals not because it was in their merit that Bnei Yisroel also was provided with water, but on the contrary, they were provided with water only because of the merit of Bnei Yisroel.

To summarize: After Miriam’s passing, Hashem took away the well of water that had sustained Bnei Yisroel throughout their time in the desert. Faced with the prospect of thirst and potential death for themselves and their animals, Bnei Yisroel voiced their complaint to Moshe. In response to their plea, Hashem provided them and their animals with water. Rashi explains that the inclusion of water for the animals was an expression of Hashem’s mercy towards the possessions of the Jewish people.

Zera Shimshon questioned the reasoning behind Rashi’s interpretation. A simpler explanation could be that Hashem granted water to the animals simply because this is what Bnei Yisroel asked for. A second question: Why does the pasuk have to teach us that Hashem has mercy on Yisroel’s livestock? Hashem has mercy on all creatures!

Zera Shimshon, therefore, explains that Bnei Yisroel—recognizing their own unworthiness—requested water solely in the merit of their animals. This understanding is supported by the wording of their complaint, “Why should we and our animals die?” where the word “ess” is omitted. This omission implies that the sole justification for their plea lies in the merits of their animals.

However, Hashem’s slight modification in instructing Moshe to provide water to both the congregation and their livestock—using the words “ess” and “vess”—indicates that the reason for granting water is not as Bnei Yisroel had assumed. Instead, it stems from Hashem’s immense love for the Jewish people, while the provision of water to the animals reflects His mercy towards the belongings of Bnei Yisroel.

In order to stress that the reason Hashem provided water to the animals was not because it was in their own merit, as Bnei Yisroel also was provided with water. But, on the contrary, Rashi explains the fact they were provided with water only because of the merit of Bnei Yisroel.

HaRav Shimshon Nachmani—author of Zera Shimshon lived in Italy—about 300 years ago, in the time of the Or HaChaim HaKodesh. The Chida writes that he was a great mekubal and wrote many sefarim—including sefarim about “practical Kabbalah”—and asked that all of his sefarim be buried after he passes away, except for Zera Shimshon and Niflaos Shimshon on Avos. HaRav Shimshon Nachmani had one child who died in his lifetime (hence the name “Zera Shimshon”) and in the preface, he promises for people who learn his sefarim after he dies, “ … And your eyes will see children and grandchildren like the offshoots of an olive tree around your tables, wise and understanding with houses filled with all manner of good things … and wealth and honor …