Archeological Findings and Sarah's Treatment of Hagar

After years of suffering without a child, Sarah told Avraham to marry their Egyptian maidservant Hagar. Sarah felt that the blessings that Hashem had promised to give to Avraham's offspring could not possibly be fulfilled through her because of her old age and she told Avraham to fulfill his destiny through Hagar. Shortly after marrying Avraham, Hagar conceived a child (Breishit 16:4)

ויבא אל הגר ותהר ותרא כי הרתה ותקל גברתה בעיניה
He consorted with Hagar and she conceived; and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was lowered in her esteem.

Sarah had hoped that Hagar and Avraham would have a child together, but she did not anticipate that this would lead Hagar to belittle her. Rashi comments,

אמרה שרי זו אין סתרה כגלויה, מראה עצמה כאלו היא צדקת ואינה צדקת, שלא זכתה להריון כל השנים הללו, ואני נתעברתי מביאה ראשונה
She said, 'This Sarai her conduct in secret is not like her conduct in public. She shows herself as if she is a righteous woman, but she is not a righteous woman, for she did not merit to conceive all these years, whereas I have conceived from the first union.'

Sarah complained to Avraham about Hagar's negative attitude and he told her that she was free to do with her whatever she saw fit. The Torah tells us (16:6)

ותעניה שרי ותברח מפניה
And Sarai dealt harshly with her, so she fled from her.

What exactly did Sarah do to Hagar that caused her to runaway? Rashi writes that she enslaved her harshly. Radak, however, goes into greater detail. He writes,

ומה שעשתה שרי לא היה טוב בעיני הא-ל, כמו שאמר המלאך אל הגר: “כי שמע ה’ אל עניך” והשיב לה ברכה תחת ענויה.
And what Sarai did was not proper in the eyes of God, as the angel said to Hagar: 'for Hashem has heard your suffering' and he gave her a blessing because she had suffered.

Radak claims that Sarah sinned by treating Hagar harshly. He goes on to describe exactly what Sarah did to Hagar,

עשתה עמה יותר מדאי, ועבדה בה בפרך. ואפשר שהייתה מכה אותה ומקללת אותה, ולא הייתה יכולה לסבול וברחה מפניה... אף על פי שאברהם מחל לה על כבודו...היה ראוי לה למשוך את ידה לכבודו ולא לענותה... אין ראוי לאדם לעשות כל יכולתו במה שתחת ידו
She did too much to her and she enslaved her with hard labor. And it is possible that she beat her and cursed her, and she could not withstand it so she fled...even though Avraham gave up his honor...it would have been appropriate for her to hold back for his honor and not afflict her...It is not appropriate for a person to do all that is within their power to a subordinate.

Radak is not alone in his criticism of Sarah. The Ramban criticizes both Avraham and Sarah when he writes,

חטאה אמנו בעינוי הזה, וגם אברהם בהניחו לעשות כן
Our mother committed a great sin with her harsh treatment and Avraham also sinned by allowing her to do this

Rabbi Elchanan Samet (Iyunim L'Parashot HaShavua Vol 1 pp. 33) writes that there is evidence, found in archeological digs that might defend Sarah from her critics. He quotes a Hebrew translation of Hammurabi's Code, the system of laws developed by King Hammurabi who lived during the same time period as Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov. Hammurabi's code records the following law,

כי ייקח אישה כוהנת, והיא תיתן לאישה אמה, אם תלד בנים ואחרי כן תשווה עצמה לגברתה, גברתה לא תיתן אותה בכסף, מפני שילדה בנים. היא תשים עליה אות ותמנה אותה בין האמהות. אם לא תלד בנים, תיתן אותה בכסף
When a man marries a woman who is barren and she gives her husband a maidservant, if the maidservant has children and then puts herself on the same level as her mistress, her mistress may not sell her, for she has had children. She shall place a symbol on her and enumerate her amongst the maidservants. If she does not have children she may be sold.

In the time and place of Avraham it was common practice for a barren woman to give over her maidservant to her husband in order for them to have children. However, the maidservant remained a maidservant; she was not on equal footing with her mistress. Hagar viewed herself as being superior to Sarah because she conceived the first time she was with Avraham and she began to act like she was the head of the household. Sarah complained to Avraham and he told her that she was free to do what she wished, because Hagar had acted inappropriately - what she did was against the law. Hammurabi's code called for the mistress to "place a symbol on her", to do something to let the maidservant know her place in the household hierarchy. Accordingly, Sarah and Avraham did not sin when they afflicted her, it was Hagar who sinned by viewing herself as an equal.
Given this archeological evidence, one could argue that Radak and Ramban would take back what they said about Sarah's behavior. On the other hand, perhaps they would stand their ground; such behavior may have been permissible according to the letter of the law, according to Hammurabi's code, but perhaps Avraham and Sarah were expected to not simply abide by the letter of the law, but rather to go beyond it.

Escaping the Famine: Did Avraham Sin?

Not long after he arrived in Canaan, Avraham was forced to make a critical decision. He had uprooted his entire family from Charan and moved to Canaan because Hashem had commanded him to do so, but a famine had struck his new homeland (Breishit 12:10). Without the food and water he and his family needed to survive, what was Avraham to do? The Ramban (12:10) writes,

יציאתו מן הארץ, שנצטווה עליה בתחילה, מפני הרעב, עון אשר חטא, כי האלהים ברעב יפדנו ממות. ועל המעשה הזה נגזר על זרעו הגלות בארץ מצרים ביד פרעה
His leaving the Land, about which he was commanded to settle because of the famine, was a sin, for God, in times of famine, saves people from death. And because of this, the exile in Egypt was decreed on his offspring

According to Ramban, Avraham should have had faith in Hashem that He would provide for him during the tough times of the famine; just like Avraham had faith in Hashem that things would work out if he moved from Charan to Canaan, so too he should have had faith and remained in Canaan. His sin was so egregious that Hashem decreed that Avraham's children would suffer as a result and be exiled to the very Egypt that Avraham had runaway to.
Rabbi Don Isaac Abrabanel, vehemently disagrees with the Ramban's theory. He writes,

וכבר ראית דברי הרמב"ן...וכבר תפשו על הדעת הזה הר"ן כי הנה יציאתו מארץ כנען לארץ מצרים מפני הרעב חז"ל מנוהו מכלל הנסיונות ובידוע שה' צדיק יבחן ומי שיעמוד בנסיונו אין ראוי שיקרא חוטא וחליל שינסה השם את אברהם להכשילו...ודי שנאמר עתה ששתי הסבות הניעו לאברהם לרדת למצרים. האחת היא שחשב שהמצוה האלהית היתה לשבת בארץ כנען ושלא נאסר עליו מפני זה ללכת מצרים אם לסחורה או לצורך אחר כי לא היה עובר בזה על המצוה כיון שלא היה דעתו בהליכתו להתישב שמה דירת קבע אלא דירת עראי וימים אחדים עד עבור הרעב ומיד ישוב לארץ כנען וכמו שהיו עושים בני ישראל בהיותם בארץ שהיו הולכים למצרים לעשות סחורה ושבים ובזה האופן היו מעשיו של אברהם לשם שמים... וכבר זכרה התורה הסבה הזאת באמרה וירד אברם מצרים לגור שם כי היה הרעב בארץ רוצה לומר בדרך גרות לא להתישב שם. והסבה הב' היא שהמצוות האלהיות הם על תנאי אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם ולא שימות בהם
And I have already seen the words of the Ramban...Rabbeinu Nissim has already challenged this position because Avraham left the Land of Canaan for Egypt because of the famine. Furthermore our sages enumerated this as one of the tests given to Avraham and it is known that Hashem only tests the righteous and those who can stand up to his tests. It is suitable to explain that Avraham had two motives for going down to Egypt. Firstly he believed that the divine commandment was to settle in the Land of Canaan; travel to foreign countries such as Egypt for business or some other need was not forbidden. He did not violate the commandment because he did not travel there to settle, but rather he went there temporarily until the famine ended - and when it did, he immediately returned. This is what Bnei Yisrael did when they eventually settled the Land - they went to Egypt to conduct business and then returned home. In a similar vein, Avraham's actions were for the sake of Heaven. And the Torah already alludes to this fact when it says, 'Avraham went down to Egypt to dwell their because there was a famine in the land.' This means to say, he went as a stranger, not to settle. And the second reason he went to Egypt is because God's commandments are conditional - one does not need to give up their life in order to fulfill them.

Rabbi Abrabanel argues with the Ramban and claims that Avraham's actions could not have been a sin because if his acts were sinful, he would have failed one of the tests given to him by God. Furthermore, there was no sin in going to Egypt temporarily. Finally, he went to Egypt because had he stayed in Canaan he would have had to do so at the risk of his life and the lives of his family members. Hashem had commanded him to settle and live in Canaan, not to die there of starvation.

Rambam's History of Religion

The Rambam, in the first chapter of his Hilchot Avodat Kochavim, gives a brief history of religious practice beginning with the creation of the world through the birth of the Jewish people. The Rambam writes that at first man exclusively worshiped God. However during the days of Enosh (Breisht 5:6,9-11) the generation's belief system was corrupted by a mistaken theory. The people reasoned that God had placed the sun, the moon, stars and planets in the heavens because He held them in high regard. The people then reasoned further, that it would be appropriate to worship and praise the stars as a way of honoring Hashem; everyone knew that Hashem was the only God, however they felt that a king is honored when his most loyal servants are honored.
As the years went by false prophets emerged claiming that they were told by God to build temples and offer sacrifices to the sun, moon and stars. They also claimed to have been told to build images and idols of the constellations. As time went on, people began to claim that the idols and the sun and the moon and the stars were actual gods; no longer were they "servants of God", they themselves were gods. As time went on even further, the people forgot the One and true God entirely.
Rambam points out that along the way there were individuals who were able to recognize the existence of God, such as Noach, Shem, Eiver and Metushelach. However, no one was able to reach the heights that Avraham reached. Avraham, writes the Rambam, spent day and night contemplating the existence of a single God. He looked at the sun, moon and stars and believed that there must be a deity controlling them; they could not be without a leader. Finally, at the age of 40, Avraham came to the realization that there was only one God in the world. Shortly thereafter he began to spread the word of God to people of his town. He would engage in religious debates with them and would always emerge victorious. Avraham's attempts to convert people to monotheism caused him to be ridiculed by his fellow townspeople, eventually leading the king to throw him into a fiery furnace, prompting his family's move from Ur Kasdim to Charan.
Avraham successfully spread monotheism wherever he went and eventually passed on his position as God's chief advocate to his son Yitzchak who then passed it on to Yaakov. And the rest is history.

Comparing Avraham and Noach

Given their close proximity to one another in the Torah and their loyalty to Hashem, it is understandable that Chazal, through Midrashim, compare Noach and Avraham to one another. The most well known comparison is mentioned by Rashi in the beginning of Parshat Noach (Breishit 6:9). The Torah writes that Noach was a tzaddik, a righteous man, in his generation. Picking up on the words "in his generation," Rashi cites a debate that is found in the Midrash:

יש מרבותינו דורשים אותו לשבח, כל שכן שאלו היה בדור צדיקים היה צדיק יותר, ויש שדורשים אותו לגנאי, לפי דורו היה צדיק, ואלו היה בדורו של אברהם לא היה נחשב לכלום
Some of the sages interpret it (the phrase 'in his generation'), favorably: How much more so if he had lived in a generation of righteous people, he would have been even more righteous. Others interpret it derogatorily: In comparison with his generation he was righteous, but if he had been in Abraham’s generation, he would not have been considered of any importance.

Those who viewed Noach as a tzaddik who would have transcended generations believed that had he lived during a time period other than that of the evil generation of the Flood, he would have flourished even more. On the other hand, those who claim that Noach "would not have been considered of any importance" in Avraham's generation believe that Noach's righteousness was relative; he was righteous, but look at the people around him - had he lived at a time when the rest of humanity possessed the least bit of morality and integrity he would not have stood out like he did in his generation.
While the debate over the transcendence of Noach's righteousness is left unresolved, the Zohar cites another difference between Noach and Avraham, which seems to indicate that Noach's righteousness was relative. The Zohar writes,

“

ויגש אברהם ויאמר: האף תפסה צדיק עם רשע” (בראשית יח,כג) - אמר ר’ יהודה: מאן חמא אבא דרחמנותא כאברהם? תא חזי: בנח כתיב (ו,יג-יד): “ויאמר אלוקים לנח: קץ כל בשר בא לפני... והנני משחיתם את הארץ. עשה לך תבת עצי גפר...” ואשתיק ולא אמר לו מידי ולא בעי רחמי. אבל אברהם, בשעתא דאמר ליה קב”ה: “זעקת סדום ועמורה כי רבה וחטאתם כי כבדה מאד. ארדה נא ואראה...” - מיד כתיב: ויגש אברהם ויאמר: האף תפסה צדיק עם רשע
'And Abraham drew near and said, will You also destroy the righteous with the wicked? (Breishit 18:23) - said Rabbi Yehuda: Who has seen a father as compassionate as Avraham? Come and see: Regarding Noach it is stated (6:13) 'and God said to Noach, the end of all flesh is come before me;...and behold I will destroy them from the earth. Make an ark of gopher wood...' And Noach held his peace and said nothing, neither did he intercede. Whereas Avraham, as soon as the Holy One blessed be He said to him: 'Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous. I will go down and see...' Immediately, as it is stated, 'And Abraham drew near and said: Will you destroy the righteous with the wicked?'

When Hashem told Noach that He was going to destroy the world and that he should build an ark to save himself and his family, Noach obediently listened. He was a tzaddik and was worthy of being saved. However, according to the Zohar, Avraham was greater because when informed that Sodom was going to be destroyed he challenged Hashem in the hopes that he would be able to save the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah.
In the words of Nechama Leibowitz (Iyunim L'Sefer Breishit pp. 46),

נח אינו ערב לאנושות, נח אין בו אחריות לעולם כולו, נח הוא מאלה הניצולים אשר את נפשם הצילו. והעולם - יחרב. והוא נחרב. “צדיק תמים?” כן, בדורותיו.
Noach a guarantor of mankind, Noach does not have a responsibility to the world as a whole. Noach belonged to those who were satisfied to save their own souls, while the world is destroyed. [He was] 'a perfect tzaddik?' Yes, but only in his generation.

The Difference Between the Sacrifices of Kayin and Hevel

After Adam and Chavah were evicted from the Garden of Eden we encounter two of their sons, Kayin and Hevel. Eight pesukim later, Hevel is a murder victim, killed by his own brother. Prior to Kayin's murderous act we are privy to another incident involving the brothers when they both offered korbanot to Hashem. The Torah tells us (Breishit 4:3-5),

ויהי מקץ ימים ויבא קין מפרי האדמה מנחה לה'. והבל הביא גם הוא מבכורות צאנו מחלבהן וישע ה' אל הבל ואל מנחתו. ואל קין ואל מנחתו לא שעה ויחר לקין מאד ויפלו פניו
After a period of time, Cain brought an offering to Hashem of the fruit of the ground. And as for Abel, he also brought of the firslings of his flock and from their choicest. Hashem turned to Abel and to his offering, but to Cain and to his offering He did not turn. This angered Cain exceedingly, and his countenance fell.

Why did Hashem accept Hevel's sacrifice but reject Kayin's? In fact, it would seem more logical for Hashem to have accepted Kayin's - Kayin was the first one to bring a korban; only once Kayin offered his sacrifice did Hevel offer his. Kayin took the initiative, while Hevel simply mimicked his brother!
Rashi famously comments about Hevel's sacrifice:

מפרי האדמה - מן הגרוע, ויש אגדה שאומרת זרע פשתן היה
From the inferior and there is an aggadah (legend) that says it was a flax seed

Rashi says that Kayin's sacrifice was from inferior fruits. According to Rashi this is peshat, the simple understanding of the pasuk. He then quotes a Midrash, which he says is not peshat, which claims that he offered a mere flax seed as his korban. How can Rashi claim that the simple explanation of the pasuk is that Kayin offered inferior fruits? What sort of indication is there from the text that this was the case?
Nechama Leibowitz offers a beautiful insight into Rashi's explanation of peshat. She writes (Iyunim B'Sefer Breishit pp. 29),

לימדנו רש”י לשים לב להקבלה ולאי-הקבלה בפסוקים. בהבל נאמר “מבכורות צאנו”, מן המובחר, ממיטב. אצל קין לא מצינו מקביל לו, אלא “מפרי האדמה” שלא מן המובחר. והשני אצל הבל נאמר “מבכורות צאנו” - משלו, יש כאן נתינת עצמו, הזדהות. אצל קין “מפרי האדמה”, אין כאן שום עניין אישי, אין הנתינה ממלאת מקום עצמו.
Rashi teaches us to pay careful attention to parallels and the lack thereof in verses. Regrading Abel it says "of the firstborn of his flock" - implying from the choicest. Regarding Cain we do not find a parallel, rather "of the fruit of the ground" - that they were not of the choicest. Secondly regarding Abel it is stated: From the first of his flock" - his very own, while Cain brought "of the fruit of the ground." Cain made no individual sacrifice and did not go out of his way to select the best of his personal possessions.

Rashi noticed the subtleties within the pesukim, which show us the inferior nature of Kayin's sacrifice. The Ramban writes that the purpose of animal sacrifice is for the animal to take the place of the person. In reality the person bringing the sacrifice wishes that he could offer himself, but knows that God has outlawed such practice, so he offers an animal in his stead. Hevel understood this, so he offered the best, the choicest of his flock, while Kayin offered the worst; Hevel made a sacrifice with his sacrifice, giving up his valuable possessions, while Hevel simply offered fruit of the earth, possibly as little as a flax seed.

The Creation of Man and the Royal We

The story of creation is very cryptic and difficult to grasp causing many commentators to offer allegorical explanations for many of the events that took place. On the sixth day, the final day of creation, Hashem created man in His image. While the way in which God actually created man may be difficult for us to comprehend, the way in which he commissioned his creation poses a potential theological quandary. The Torah states (Breishit 1:26),

ויאמר אלוקים נעשה אדם בצלמנו כדמותנו
And God said, 'Let us make Man in Our image...

The question arises: To whom was God referring to when he said "us" and "our?" The implication seems to be that there was more than one deity. The Targum Yonatan answers the question by saying that Hashem was speaking to the angels when he said "we", but not that there was, God forbid, more than one god.
The explanation offered by the Targum Yonatan does not explain why Hashem needed to consult with the angels when deciding to create man. In fact, the fear that one could come to the wrong conclusion, that there are multiple deities, is expressed in a fascinating story in Masechet Megillah (9a):

.

מעשה בתלמי המלך שכינס שבעים ושנים זקנים, והכניסן בשבעים ושנים בתים, ולא גילה להם על מה כינסן. ונכנס אצל כל אחד ואחד ואמר להם: כתבו לי תורת משה רבכם. נתן הקדוש ברוך הוא בלב כל אחד ואחד עצה, והסכימו כולן לדעת אחת. וכתבו לו... אעשה אדם בצלם ובדמות
There was an incident involving King Ptolemy who gathered 72 elders and placed them into 72 different rooms and did not inform them as to why he had gathered them. He went to each and every one of them and said to them: 'Write me the Torah of Moshe your teacher.' Hashem divinely inspired each of them and they all came to the same opinion. And they wrote, 'I will make a man in an image and likeness.'

When King Ptolemy had the rabbis translate the Torah into Greek the rabbis realized that it would be best for all concerned if they made some changes to the Torah. Even though they were unable to consult with one another a miracle happened and they all made the same changes. One of the changes that was made was the changing of the phrase, "Let us make man in Our image after Our likeness" to "I will make make in an image and likeness." Ptolemy would have come to the wrong conclusion that there was actually more than one god, so the rabbis changed it to avoid the issue.
Rabbi Baruch HaLevi Epstein (1860-1941) explains why Hashem used the plural form instead of the singular. In his Torah Temimah he writes,

ומה שבאמת כתיב בלשון רבים הוא משום דמדרך הכבוד והגדולה כך הוא, וכמו במלך בו"ד שמדבר בלשון רבים, אלא שתלמי לא היה מקבל זה מפני שאולי היה רוצה למצוא עילה בתורת משה. ונראה דאע"פ שהיו יכולים להביא לו ראיה דרשות אחת בבריאה מדכתיב בפסוק הסמוך ויברא אלהים את האדם
And in truth it is written in the plural because this is the way of honor and greatness, just as a king of flesh and blood speaks in the plural. Ptolemy, though, would not have accepted this because it is possible that he wanted to find a pretext [for disputing the validity of] Moshe's Torah. And it appears that even though they (the rabbis who translated the Torah) could have brought proof that there is only one deity from creation that it states in the next verse, 'And God created man...'

Rabbi Epstein explains that the Torah used the plural not because there is more than one god nor because he was consulting with the angels about the creation of man, but rather because that is the way kings - even the King of the Universe - speak. Indeed, according to the Torah Temimah, Hashem was the first king to speak in the royal we.

Halacha of the Week: Lighting Candles on Simchat Torah

By Rabbi Leonard Matanky

This year, Simchat Torah, will occur on Motzaei Shabbat, and therefore, one cannot light candles before Maariv/Hakafot. Therefore, when should the candles be lit?

While Shabbat and Yom Tov candles should ideally be lit at the beginning of Shabbat or Yom Tov AND at home (there are some exceptions to this latter issue) Rabbi Yehoshua Neuwirth suggests that on Yom Tov, if one is not at home for the meal, candles could even be lit when one returns home [Shmirat Shabbat K'hilchata vol. 2 chapter 43 note 24].

Therefore, when Simchat Torah is on Saturday night and candles could not be lit earlier in the evening (since it was still Shabbat) it would be permitted to wait until AFTER hakafot (even after the shul dinner) to return home and light Yom Tov candles.

The Death of Moshe: The Punishment for a Reluctance to Lead

The holiday of Simchat Torah has become one of the more joyous holidays on the Jewish calendar. Dancing around the bima, and in some places in the streets, with the Torah marks the conclusion of the annual Torah reading cycle and the beginning of the next year's cycle. However, along with the joy and happiness of completing the Torah comes the death of Moshe Rabbeinu.
The emotional ending of the Torah is made even more dramatic by the words of Rabbi Shimon in the Gemara (Bava Batra 15a), speaking of the last eight pesukim of the Torah, which take place after we are informed of the death of Moshe:

עד כאן הקב"ה אומר ומשה אומר וכותב, מכאן ואילך הקב"ה אומר ומשה כותב בדמע
Until here God spoke and Moshe repeated and wrote (the Torah), from here and on God spoke and Moshe wrote with tears.

The Maharsha (Chidushei Aggadot Bava Batra 15a) writes that Moshe actually used his tears to write the last pesukim of the Torah instead of the ink he used for the rest of the Torah.
Why did the Torah need to end on such a sad note, with the death of the greatest teacher and prophet ever to live, before he could enter the land he so desired to dwell in?
The simple explanation is that Moshe was punished for his part in the sin of the rock (Bamidbar 20). However various Midrashim, most likely troubled by the severity of Moshe's punishment, sought alternative reasons for God denying him entry into the Land.
One such approach, which appears throughout many Midrashim, claims that Moshe was denied entry into the Land because of a sin that took place well before Bnei Yisrael entered the desert. The Mechilta of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai (Parshat Va'era 6:2) relates in the name of Rabbi Tarfon:

אמר הקב"ה גלוי וידוע לפני שישראל ראויים לצאת ממצרים ולהנתן ביד עמון ומואב ועמלק אלא בשבועה נשבעתי ללחום מלחמתם ואושיע אתכם... והריני מבקש להוציאם ממצרים, ואתה אומר לי: שלח נא ביד תשלח

God said: It is known to Me that Bnei Yisrael is worthy to leave Egypt and then be given over in the hands of Amon, Moab and Amalek, but I have taken an oath to fight their wars and save them. And behold I am asking you to take them out of Egypt and you tell me: "Send whomever you shall send!?"

According to Rabbi Tarfon God became angry with Moshe because he had the audacity to tell Him to send someone else in his stead to lead the people out of Egypt. God had preordained a plan to redeem the people and had backed up His promise by taking an oath that He would fulfill His word and now Moshe decided that he did not want to be part of His plan; in the opinion of Rabbi Tarfon, Moshe's modesty, in this case, was misplaced.
The same Midrash quotes the opinion of Rabbi Nechemiah, who harshly criticizes Moshe's reluctance to lead.

גלוי וידוע לפני צער ישראל במצרים... צער קשה... הם שרויים בצרה ואתה שרוי בריוח ואני כבר פקדתי אותם ברחמים להוציאם ממצרים, ואתה אומר שלח נא ביד תשלח
It is known to me the pain of Israel in Egypt...the intense pain... they are in a state of pain and you are in a state of comfort and I have already remembered them with mercy to redeem them from Egypt and you say "Send whomever you shall send!?"

According to Rabbi Nechemia, God was outraged with Moshe for not identifying with the pain and suffering of his own people. Here he was sitting comfortably in Midian with his brethren suffering in the bitter slavery of Egypt. He was given the opportunity to save the people and he shrugged it off, claiming that someone else should do it.
According to both Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Nechemia God was angry with Moshe for not wanting to lead. With all of that said, they do not make a connection between God's anger and God's denying Moshe entry into the Land. Another tanna, Rabbi Elazar ben Arach, however, does make the connection.

ר' אלעזר בן ערך אומר: וכי מפני מה נגלה הקב"ה משמי מרום והיה מדבר עם משה בסנה, והלא היה לך מארזי הלבנון ומראשי ההרים ומראשי גבעות, אלא השפיל הקב"ה את שכינתו ועשה דברו כדרך ארץ, שלא יהיו אומות העולם אומרים מפני שהוא אלוה ובעל עולמו עשה דברו שלא כדין. לפיכך כבש הקב"ה את משה ששה ימים ובשביעי אמר לו שלח נא ביד תשלח
Rabbi Elazar ben Arach says: Why did God descend from the Heavens and speaking to Moshe from a bush? He should have spoken to him from the cedars of Lebanon, from the mountaintops or hilltops! Rather, God lowered His Presence and made His speech natural so that the other nations would not say that because he is God and Master of the world, he followed his word. Therefore God courted Moshe for six days and on the seventh day Moshe told him, "Send whomever you shall send."

According to Rabbi Elazar ben Arach, God brought Himself down to Moshe's level and even courted him for six days, but Moshe rejected God's recruitment pitch. Rabbi Elazar continues to illustrate his point through an analogy:

משלו משל למה הדבר דומה, למלך שהיה לו עבד והיה אוהבו אהבה גמורה. בקש המלך לעשותו אפטרופוס שלו להיות מפרנס בני פלטין של מלך. מה עשה המלך, תפס את העבד בידו והכניסו לבית גנזיו, והראהו כלי כסף וכלי זהב אבנים טובות ומרגליות וכל מה שיש לו בבית גנזיו. ומאחר כן הוציאו והראהו אילנות גנים ופרדסים... לאחר כן כבש העבד את ידו ואמר איני יכול לעשות אפטרופוס להיות מפרנס בני פלטין של מלך. אמר לו המלך: הואיל ולא היית יכול לעשות אפטרופוס, למה הטרחתני כל הטורח הזה, וכעס עליו המלך וגזר עליו שלא יכנס לפלטין שלו. כך כבש הקב"ה למשה ששה ימים ובשביעי אמר לו שלח נא ביד תשלח. נשבע לו הקב"ה שלא יכנס לארץ ישראל, שנאמר: לכן לא תביאו
To what can this be compared to? To a king who had a servant whom he truly loved. The king wished to appoint the servant as his caretaker to support the king's subjects. What did the king do? He took the servant by the hand and brought him into his treasure house and showed him his silver and gold utensils, his precious stones and pearls and all of the other contents of his treasure house. Afterward he took him out and showed him his trees, gardens and orchards. שׁAfterward the servant withdrew his hand and said, "I cannot be the caretaker of your subjects." The king said to him, "Since you had no intention of being a caretaker, why did you burden me to show you all of this?" The king became angry at him and decreed that he could not enter his palace. So too, God courted Moshe for six days and on the seventh day, Moshe said to him, "Send whomever you shall send." God swore to him that he would not enter the Land of Israel, as it says, "Therefore you will not bring them..."

Rabbi Elazar ben Arach explicitly writes that even before Moshe went to Egypt to take the Jewish people out of slavery it had been determined that he would not be able to enter the Land of Israel. His sin was unforgivable; he did not want to lead the people and in doing so he spurned God.
According to the tanaim in the Midrash, Moshe was punished because he was initially reluctant when asked to lead Bnei Yisrael out of the treacherous and inhumane conditions in Egypt. Moshe was fit to lead and initially refused to do so; even though he eventually relented, his inability to recognize his duty to the Jewish people was so severe that he was punished so harshly.

The Sefer HaChinuch and the Symbolism of the 4 Minim

The holiday of Sukkot is filled with symbolism. There are countless explanations amongst the commentators, which speak of the true symbolism behind leaving our permanent homes for the temporary dwelling place of the sukkah. There are also many theories which detail the symbolic nature of the lulav, etrog, hadasim and aravot (the arbah minim).
One such explanation is offered by the Sefer HaChinuch. Throughout the Sefer Hachinuch the author develops the theory that,

אחרי הפעולות נמשכים הלבבות
The heart follows after actions

In essence the Chinuch feels that a person's being and psyche are influenced by their actions. If a person performs mitzvot, even if they are not initially motivated to do so, the performance of the mitzvah will leave an impression on them, eventually causing them to want to do mitzvot out of their own volition. This theory is very similar to the encouraging words of Rabbi Yehuda who said in the name of Rav (Horayot 10b),

לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה ובמצות אפילו שלא לשמה, שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה
A person should always be involved in Torah [study] and [the performance of] mitzvot even if it is not for their (the mitzvot's) own sake, because out of doing them not for their own sake, you will come to do them for their own sake.

The Chinuch (No. 285) writes that Sukkot is a time of great happiness for the Jewish people; having completed the harvesting of their crops at the beginning of autumn, the people would rejoice over the fruits of their labor. As a result God gave us a holiday, Sukkot, at this time, so that all celebrations should be done in His name, with the celebrants receiving reward for their performance of a mitzvah.
He goes on to explain, beautifully, the symbolism behind the arba minim,

ועוד יש בארבעה מינים אלו עניין אחר, שהם דומים לאברים היקרים שבאדם, שהאתרוג דומה ללב, שהוא משכן השכל, לרמז שיעבוד בוראו בשכלו, והלולב דומה לשדרה, שהיא העיקר שבאדם, לרמז שיישר כל גופו לעבודתו, ברוך הוא; וההדס דומה לעינים, לרמז שלא יתור אחרי עיניו ביום שמחת לבו; והערבה דומה לשפתים, שבהן יגמור האדם כל מעשהו בדיבור, לרמוז שישים רסן בפיו ויכוון דבריו ויירא מהשם אף בעת השמחה
These four species are similar to the vital limbs and organs of a person. The etrog is similar (in appearance) to the heart, the sanctuary of intellect, to indicate that a person should serve his Creator with his intellect. The lulav is similar (in appearance) to the spine, which is essential to man, to indicate that a person should straighten his entire body in His service, blessed is He. The hadas (myrtle) is similar (in appearance) to the eyes, to indicate that a person should not stray after their eyes on the day of his rejoicing. The aravah (willow) is similar (in appearance) to the lips, for with them a person completes all of his actions with speech, to indicate that a person should place a rein on his mouth and fear God even at a time of rejoicing.

The Chinuch, in keeping with his theory that we are influenced by our own actions, teaches that the purpose of the arbah minim is to make sure that we remain focused on God and maintain an even keel even during times of tremendous simcha.

The Season of Sukkot

The Gemara (Sukkah 11b) records a dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva concerning the historical origin of the holiday of Sukkot. The Torah (Vayikra 23:43) writes that we should celebrate Sukkot,

"So that your generations will know that I caused the Children of Israel to dwell in booths (sukkot) when I took them from the land of Egypt; I am Hashem, your God."

Regarding the booths that Bnei Yisrael dwelt in while in the desert, the Gemara states,

כי בסכות הושבתי את בני ישראל - ענני כבוד היו, דברי רבי אליעזר. רבי עקיבא אומר סוכות ממש עשו להם.

'I caused the Children of Israel to dwell in booths...' Rabbi Eliezer says this refers to the clouds of glory (ananei ha'kavod). Rabbi Akiva says that He made actual booths for them.

Rashbam writes that view of Rabbi Akiva is the simplest way of understanding the pasuk; presumably because the pasuk states that Hashem caused Bnei Yisrael to dwell in booths and makes no mention of the ananei ha'kavod.
Whichever approach we take, Sukkot serves as a remembrance of the time Bnei Yisrael spent in the desert and the kindness God showed them by protecting them from the elements. Accordingly, Hashem could have chosen any time of year for us to celebrate the holiday - why did He choose the 15th of Tishrei?
In answering this question Rashbam points out that the Torah goes out of its way to describe the season in which Sukkot occurs (Vayikra 23:39),

אך בחמשה עשר יום לחדש השביעי באספכם את תבואת הארץ תחוגו את חג ה' שבעת ימים
But on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when you gather in the crop of the Land, you shall celebrate Hashem's festival for a seven-day period

Sukkot is referred to as the חג האסיף, the Holiday of the Harvest, because it takes place immediately following the autumn harvest. Rashbam explains,

למען תזכרו כי בסוכות הושבתי את בני ישראל במדבר ארבעים שנה בלא יישוב ובלא נחלה, ומתוך כך תתנו הודאה למי שנתן לכם נחלה ובתיכם מלאים כל טוב. ואל תאמרו בלבבכם: "כוחי ועוצם ידי עשה לי את החיל הזה" (דברים ח')... ולכך יוצאים מבתים מלאים כל טוב בזמן אסיפה ויושבין בסוכות לזכרון שלא היה להם נחלה במדבר ולא בתים לשבת. ומפני הטעם הזה קבע הקדוש ברוך הוא את חג הסוכות בזמן אסיפת גורן ויקב. לבלתי רום לבבם על בתיהם מלאים כל טוב פן יאמרו ידינו עשו לנו את החיל הזה
So that you shall remember that I caused Bnei Yisrael to dwell in booths for forty years in the desert away from civilization and without land and as a result you shall give thanks to the One who gave you land and homes filled with every good thing. And do not say to yourselves, 'My strength and the might of my hand made me all this wealth.'... Therefore we depart our homes, which are filled with everything good at the time of the harvest and sit in sukkot as a remembrance that we did not have land nor homes to dwell in while in the desert. And because of this reason Hashem established the holiday of Sukkot during the time of the harvest to prevent them from becoming haughty over their homes filled with everything good, lest they say that our hands created this strength.

According to Rashbam, Sukkot takes place during the fall season because it is a time when people rejoice over their material possessions. Leaving our homes, which are filled with our material possessions, for the sukkah serves as an acknowledgment that we would not have our material possessions if not for Hashem's kindness.
However, a different reason for celebrating Sukkot in Tishrei is given by Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan, quoting the Tur (Rabbi Yaakov ben Asher 1269-1343) in his Mishna Berurah (625:1)

ואע"פ שיצאנו ממצרים בחודש ניסן לא ציונו לעשות סוכות באותו זמן לפי שהוא ימות הקיץ ודרך כל אדם לעשות סוכות לצל ולא היתה ניכרת עשייתינו שהם במצות הש"י ולכן ציוה אותנו שנעשה בחודש השביעי שהוא זמן הגשמים ודרך כל אדם לצאת מסוכתו לביתו ואנחנו יוצאין מן הבית לישב בסוכה בזה מראה שהוא עושה לשם מצות הש"י

And even though we left Egypt in the Month of Nissan, He did not command us to make sukkot during that time because it is during the days of summer and it is customary for people to make booths during those times for shade and it would not be recognizable that they were being made because of a commandment of God. Therefore He commanded us to make the holiday during the seventh month, which is the rainy season, when most people leave their booths for their houses, but we leave our houses to dwell in the sukkah; through this we show that we are doing so because it is a mitzvah from God.

According to Rabbi Kagan, Sukkot should take place during Nissan because it is directly linked to the Exodus from Egypt; it was moved to Tishrei to show just how grateful we are for the kindness that God showed us in the desert - we are so appreciative that we eat in our Sukkot even though it might not be the most pleasant time of year to do so.
According to both Rashbam and the Mishna Berura, Sukkot is a time of thanksgiving in which we take a step back, or in this case out(side), in order to appreciate all that Hashem has done for us from the time He led us through the desert and sheltered us from the elements to the modern day when He is the sole source and provider of our material possessions.