Source Browser

{
  "title": "Ibn Ezra on Numbers",
  "index": {
    "title": "Ibn Ezra on Numbers",
    "categories": [
      "Tanakh",
      "Rishonim on Tanakh",
      "Ibn Ezra",
      "Torah"
    ],
    "schema": {
      "nodeType": "JaggedArrayNode",
      "depth": 3,
      "addressTypes": [
        "Perek",
        "Pasuk",
        "Integer"
      ],
      "sectionNames": [
        "Chapter",
        "Verse",
        "Comment"
      ],
      "match_templates": [
        {
          "term_slugs": [
            "ibn-ezra",
            "numbers"
          ]
        }
      ],
      "lengths": [
        36,
        659,
        1107
      ],
      "isSegmentLevelDiburHamatchil": true,
      "diburHamatchilRegexes": [
        "^<b>(.+?)</b>",
        "^(.+?)[\\-–]"
      ],
      "titles": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "text": "Ibn Ezra on Num."
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "text": "Ibn Ezra on Num"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "text": "Ibn Ezra on Bamidbar"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "text": "Ibn Ezra on Bemidbar"
        },
        {
          "text": "אבן עזרא על במדבר",
          "lang": "he",
          "primary": true
        },
        {
          "text": "Ibn Ezra on Numbers",
          "lang": "en",
          "primary": true
        }
      ],
      "title": "Ibn Ezra on Numbers",
      "heTitle": "אבן עזרא על במדבר",
      "heSectionNames": [
        "פרק",
        "פסוק",
        "פירוש"
      ],
      "key": "Ibn Ezra on Numbers"
    },
    "order": [
      25
    ],
    "authors": [
      {
        "en": "Abraham ibn Ezra",
        "he": "אבן עזרא",
        "slug": "ibn-ezra"
      }
    ],
    "enDesc": "Ibn Ezra’s commentary on the Tanakh reflects his knowledge as a Hebrew grammarian and philologist. His commentary is terse and aims to discover the pshat, the contextual meaning, of the text. Ibn Ezra was known for his independent ideas which aroused much controversy. Many view Ibn Ezra as the forefather of Biblical criticism. As an example, in the last chapter of Sefer Devarim (34:10), Ibn Ezra comments that Joshua, and not Moshe, wrote from this point until the end of the Torah.",
    "pubDate": [
      1524
    ],
    "hasErrorMargin": true,
    "compDate": [
      1155,
      1165
    ],
    "compPlace": "Middle-Age France/Italy/England",
    "pubPlace": "Venice",
    "era": "RI",
    "dependence": "Commentary",
    "base_text_titles": [
      {
        "en": "Numbers",
        "he": "במדבר"
      }
    ],
    "base_text_mapping": "many_to_one",
    "collective_title": {
      "en": "Ibn Ezra",
      "he": "אבן עזרא"
    },
    "is_cited": true,
    "heTitle": "אבן עזרא על במדבר",
    "titleVariants": [
      "Ibn Ezra on Num.",
      "Ibn Ezra on Num",
      "Ibn Ezra on Bamidbar",
      "Ibn Ezra on Bemidbar",
      "Ibn Ezra on Numbers"
    ],
    "heTitleVariants": [
      "אבן עזרא על במדבר"
    ],
    "sectionNames": [
      "Chapter",
      "Verse",
      "Comment"
    ],
    "depth": 3,
    "heCategories": [
      "תנ\"ך",
      "ראשונים על התנ״ך",
      "אבן עזרא",
      "תורה"
    ],
    "compDateString": {
      "en": " (c.1155  – c.1165 CE)",
      "he": " (1155 – 1165 לספירה בקירוב)"
    },
    "pubDateString": {
      "en": " (1524 CE)",
      "he": " (1524 לספירה)"
    },
    "compPlaceString": {
      "en": "Middle-Age France/Italy/England",
      "he": "צרפת / איטליה / אנגליה של ימי הביניים"
    },
    "pubPlaceString": {
      "en": "Venice",
      "he": "ונציה"
    }
  },
  "text": {
    "he": "<b>בשם</b> אשר פקודי רום ותחת חבר. החל לפרש על הפשט ספר וידבר <b>במדבר סיני.</b> להודיע כי לא עלה משה אל הר סיני אחר היות הכבוד באהל מועד: <b>באחד לחדש השני.</b> לתקן את הדגלים ואיך יסעו ואיך יחנו בעבור המקדש כי בעשרים לחדש השני נסעו: <b>שאו את ראש.</b> כמו כי תשא ושם מפורש: <b>לבית אבותם.</b> כי משפחת האם אינה קרואה משפחה: <b>לגלגלותם.</b> פירשתיו: <b>בישראל.</b> להוציא ערב רב: <b>איש ראש.</b> דרך קצרה והראוי להיות איש איש: <b>לראובן.</b> החל מהבכור כטעם ולא להתיחס לבכורה: <b>לבני יוסף.</b> אחר בני לאה בעבור כבוד רחל על השפחות והחל מאפרים על דרך יעקב אבינו והקדים אפרים ומנשה על בנימין כי הם מקום יוסף ואחר כן החל מדן שהוא בכור השפחות ואחריו אשר כי השם ידע שהוא יהיה ראש החונים על דגל דן ואחר כן גד כי הוא בכור שפחת לאה: <b>קרואי העדה.</b> הטעם שהעדה לא יעשו דבר עד שיקראום: <b>מטות אבותם.</b> הטעם על השבטים והנה כל אחד נשיא שבט: <b>ראשי אלפי ישראל.</b> כל אחד ראש על כל אלפי השבט כי יש שר לאלף: <b>ויקח משה ואהרן.</b> עמם: <b>האנשים אשר נקבו.</b> שהם מפורשים כמו אשר פי ה' יקבנו: <b>ויתילדו.</b> בקשו מתי נולדו בעבור חשבון כ' שנה אז נכתבו תולדתם: <b>ויפקדם.</b> משה שהוא העיקר והחל מראובן כי הוא הבכור ואחריו שמעון הנולד אחריו ואחריו גד בכור שפחת לאה והנה דגל ראובן ואחר כך דגל יהודה ואחר כך דגל אפרים ואחר כך דגל דן והחונים על כל דגל ודגל כאשר הם בחנוכת המזבח ודע כי אחר שהיו כל השבטים שנים עשר שיצא לוי והיו ליוסף בנים שנים ורוחות העולם ארבע הנה לכל רוח שלשה והנה יש ללאה חמשה בנים יחסר האחד ויהיו לה שני דגלים השלימו הדגל עם בכור שפחתה ושמוהו עם דגל ראובן שהוא גם בכור והדגל השני ליהודה והחונים עליו אחיו הקטנים ממנו ולרחל דגל בפני עצמה ואפרים מקום יוסף הוא קודם מנשה כדברי יעקב והדגל הרביעי לשפחת רחל שהוא הבכור שלה ואחריו אשר ואם הוא קטן בשנים מנפתלי בעבור היות הדגל לבן שפחת רחל שם זאת המעלה לבן שפחת לאה ואם תסתכל היטב אז תדע כי הראש הוא הדרום והזנב הוא הצפון ולא אוכל לפרש על כן ראובן בדרום כי הוא הראש ודן בצפון ודע כי לא היו גבורים בשבטים כשבט יהודה הנמשל לגור אריה וכשבט דן הנמשל כן בדברי משה על כן היו הם בראשונה ובאחרונה. והזכיר לגלגלותם בראובן גם בשמעון להורות על האחרים כי הכתוב אחז דרך קצרה: ופירוש <b>ויהיו כל פקודי בני ישראל.</b> שלא נפקדו רק מי שהוא מבן עשרים שנה ואחר כך ויהיו כל הפקודים בכללם: <b>התפקדו.</b> משני בנינים. כי הוא בנין התפעל ועם בנין שלא נקרא שם פועלו: <b>אך את מטה לוי.</b> פירוש לא התפקדו כי השם צוה כן: <b>ואת ראשם לא תשא.</b> כללם כאשר פירשתי: <b>ואתה הפקד את הלוים.</b> באר למה לא התפקדו כי פקודת המשכן עליהם על כן לא יצאו בצבא: <b>משכן העדת.</b> הוא אהל מועד והמשכן לארון ששם העדות: <b>ועל כל כליו.</b> כמנורה והשלחן והמזבחות: <b>ועל כל אשר לו.</b> הם כלי הכלים: <b>המה ישאו.</b> הם הם הנושאים בנסוע המחנה והם המשרתים בחנותם וסביב המשכן יחנו: <b>ובנסוע המשכן יורידו אותו.</b> להסיר הבריחים והעמודים ובחנותו הם יקימוהו: <b>והזר.</b> מבני לוי ואם הוא ישראל <b>יומת</b> ובית דין ימיתוהו: וטעם <b>וחנו בני ישראל.</b> כשיחנו בני ישראל: <b>איש על מחנהו.</b> הטעם כל שבט: וטעם <b>איש על דגלו.</b> שלא יתערב שבט דגל עם שבט דגל: <b>והלוים יחנו סביב.</b> פי' הכתוב למעלה למה יחנו סביב שלא יקרב אל המשכן אחד מעדת בני ישראל וימות וזה טעם ולא יהיה קצף כעוזא שנגע בארון ושם כתוב ויחר אף ה' בעוזא: וטעם <b>על עדת בני ישראל.</b> אחד מעדתם וכן ויקבר בערי גלעד עיר בן אתונות ורבים כמוהם: <b>ושמרו הלוים.</b> מצוה עליהם לשמור המשכן: <b>ויעשו בני ישראל.</b> שלא נגעו במשכן לעולם: וטעם <b>אל משה ואל אהרן.</b> בעבור כי אהרן ובניו ישימו משא הקהתים בכתף: <b>באתת.</b> סימנים היו בכל דגל ודגל וקדמונינו אמרו שהיה בדגל ראובן צורת אדם מכח דרש דודאים ובדגל יהודה צורת אריה כי בו המשילו יעקב ובדגל אפרים צורת שור מטעם בכור שור ובדגל דן צורת נשר עד שידמו לכרובים שראה יחזקאל הנביא: <b>מנגד.</b> רחוק: <b>קדמה מזרחה.</b> תחלת מזרח: <b>ופקודיהם.</b> או ופקודיו. אין הפרש ביניהם: <b>והחונים עליו.</b> כמו עמו והם אחריו וקודם השלישי: <b>ראשונה יסעו.</b> הם יסעו בתחלה: <b>תימנה.</b> מגזרת ימין: <b>ושנים.</b> תאר השם: <b>ונסע אהל מועד בתוך המחנות.</b> הנזכרות כי הגרשונים והמררים נוסעים בין דגל יהודה ובין דגל ראובן והקהתים נוסעים ועמהם אהרן ובניו בין דגל יהודה ובין דגל אפרים: <b>כאשר יחנו כן יסעו.</b> שב אל המחנות שהם ישראל לא אל מחנה הלוים כי יחנה דגל יהודה למזרח כי הגרשוני שהוא למערב המקדש ומררי בצפון יחדו יסעו: <b>על ידו.</b> פאה ומקום וכן יד הירדן ויד תהיה לך: <b>אלה פקודי בני ישראל.</b> <b>וכן נסעו.</b> כאשר היו ביום שהתפקדו והנה בעשרים יום לא מת אחד מהם וזה דבר פלא: <b>והלוים לא התפקדו.</b> לבאר שלא נחשוב אחד מהם עם הפקודים בנסעם: <b>ויעשו בני ישראל.</b> כל ימי המדבר: <b>ואלה תולדות אהרן ומשה.</b> הטעם שלא הולידו בניהם ולא הוסיפו בקרוב מעשרה חדשים כאשר דבר ה' עם משה בהר סיני בעלותו להתכפר על מעשה העגל אז נבחר שבט לוי ואמר השם למשה הקרב את מטה לוי גם פרשת ואני הנה לקחתי וכאשר הוקם המשכן אמר השם פקוד את בני לוי והשכינה במשכן על כן כתב במדבר סיני והנה היו תולדות אהרן ומשה במדבר סיני כאשר היו בהר סיני רק חסרו שני בני אהרן על כן אמרתי כי הלוים לא נתנו כפר נפשם כי כן כתוב לכל העובר על הפקודים ויש אומרים כי לא פקדם משה טרם עשות המשכן רק ידע פקודיהם בדרך נבואה והכתוב יכחישם והוא כי תשא: <b>המשחים.</b> בשמן המשחה. שהיו כהנים גדולים: ולא הניחו בנים גדולים או קטנים על כן חסר ממספר הלוים כי הגדולים יתכן שיולידו: <b>על פני.</b> פירשתיו: <b>לפני אהרן הכהן.</b> שהוא נגיד השבט. ופירוש והעמדת הוא ושרתו וכן חי ה' אשר עמדתי לפניו: <b>ואת משמרת כל העדה.</b> בקרבנות: <b>ואת משמרת בני ישראל</b> שישמרו שלא יגע ישראלי אל המשכן: <b>נתונים.</b> לעולם או הם ובניהם העובדים תחתם: <b>לאהרן ולבניו.</b> הנמצאים ועומדים תחתיהם: <b>מאת בני ישראל.</b> להיותם מובדלים: <b>ואת אהרן ואת בניו.</b> ובכלל בניו בני בניו תפקדם לתת פקודה לכל אחד והם ישמרו את כהנתם שלא יבואו לידי פסולות: <b>והזר הקרב.</b> לכהן להיות עם כהנתם ישראלי או לוי <b>יומת</b> ופרשת ואני הנה לקחתי גם היא דבקה כי יש בתורה פרשיות דבקות בטעם ואם הם מפורשות כמו ויהי כאשר תמו כל אנשי המלחמה כן ויהי ביום דבר ה' אל משה: <b>לקחתי.</b> מעלה גדולה ללוים: <b>בכור.</b> דבק אל פטר: <b>והיו לי הלוים.</b> מקודשים לי: <b>כי לי כל בכור.</b> והטעם כי גם הבכורים לי הם: <b>ביום הכותי</b> טעמו זמן וכן רבים: <b>לי יהיו.</b> טעמו לי הם ולי יהיו כי כל בכור מאדם יפדה וכן כל בכור הבהמה הטמאה: <b>מבן חדש ומעלה.</b> עד שוב המחבר' או על קרוב מהמקום הראשון זה אל זה והמשכיל יבין: <b>גרשון.</b> כי הוא הבכור ובדברי הימים נמצא עם מ\"ם תחת נו\"ן: <b>לגרשון משפחת הלבני.</b> פירושו אלה שתי המשפחות מספרם כך: <b>אחרי המשכן.</b> כמו אחורי וכן אחור וקדם: <b>ימה.</b> בעבור שהוא הים הגדול הספרדי בארץ ישראל לפאת מערב: <b>המשכן.</b> הם עשר יריעות: <b>והאהל.</b> עשתי עשרה יריעות: <b>מכסהו.</b> ומכסה מכסהו בכלל: <b>אשר על המשכן.</b> שהוא בפנים החצר: <b>ועל המזבח.</b> שהוא חוץ למשכן: וטעם <b>סביב.</b> שאין שם מקום חסר כפרץ שאין שם מסך: <b>לכל עבודתו.</b> עוד אפרשנו: <b>משמרת הקדש.</b> הוא הארון ונקרא קדש כנגד המשכן כאשר פירשתי: <b>תימנה.</b> ובעבור שבני קהת נכבדים מכל בני לוי הושם קהת בימין כי הוא נכבד מהשמאל ומהאחור ואין אחר מזרח נכבד ממנו ובעבור שהיה גרשון בכור לוי יש לו מעלה גדולה על מררי כי הוא נושא את הקדש כנגד משא מררי על כן חנה גרשון במערב כמו דגל אפרים ומררי בצפון כדגל דן שהוא בכור השפחה והנה הקהתים מצד דגל ראובן על כן התחבר קרח עם דתן ואבירם ועוד אפרשנו: <b>והמזבחות.</b> שניהם: <b>וכלי הקדש אשר ישרתו בהם.</b> הם כלי המנורה והשלחן והמזבחות ורבים השתבשו בפירוש והמסך וכל עבודתו והאמת ברורה שהוא מסך פתח אהל מועד: <b>וכל עבודתו</b> מיתריו: <b>ונשיא נשיאי הלוי.</b> שהם שלשה גם מלת נשיאי הלוי מושכת עצמה ואחרת עמה כמו לא רבים יחכמו וכן הוא נשיאי פקודת שומרי משמרת הקודש והטעם כי אלו שלשה פקידים על השומרים שהם הלוים: ויתכן היות <b>צפונה.</b> מגזרת צפנת ליראיך וצפון לצדיק כי אין בנגב שום דבר: <b>קדמה מזרחה.</b> הוא מזרחה שמש במקום התחברות העגלות והנה במזרח אהל משה ואהל אהרן ואהל בניו ובני בניו וכל ביתם: <b>והזר הקרב.</b> אל מקום הקדש והנה כל הלוים סביבות המשכן לשמור אותו: <b>שנים ועשרים אלף.</b> מכלל וכשאתה מחבר הפרטים תמצא שיותירו שלש מאות ויש אומרים כי הכתוב אחז דרך קצרה להזכיר האלפים ועזב המאות וזה לא יתכן בעבור מספר העודפים שהם פחותים משלש מאות והאמת דברי הקבלה אין בכור מפקיע בכור ויהיה פירוש הפסוק כל פקודי הלוים חוץ מהבכורים. ויהודה הפרסי דקדק להביא ראיה מהמספר כי בכורי הלוים הם חלק משלשה ושבעים מלוים וכשאתה לוקח במספר הזה מפקודי ישראל ואחר כן תקח כמספר פקודי הלוים הבאים לצבא כנגד פקודי הלוים מבן חדש יהיו קרובים ולא אמר כלום כי ישראל נפקדו מבן עשרים שנה ואין קצב אחרת והלוים נפקדו מבן שלשים ועד בן חמישים ויש ביניהם הפרש גדול רק נסמוך על דברי הקבלה: <b>פקוד כל בכור זכר.</b> הנה זכר שם התאר: <b>ואת בהמת הלוים.</b> שלא יפסידו הלוים ובכור כל בהמה גם הוא לשם: <b>קח את הלוים.</b> פעם אחרת כאילו אמר כאשר תקח את הלוים יהיו העודפים פדיום ונסמכה מלת פדויי אל המספר וכמוהו רבים יש מכחישים אמרו מזה נלמוד כי פדיון כל בכור חמשה שקלים ואינו ראיה כי זאת מצוה בפני עצמה והאמת דברי קבלה: <b>הפדיום.</b> במ\"ם תחת נו\"ן כמו גרשון: <b>נשא את ראש בני קהת.</b> בתחלה בעבור משה ואהרן: <b>מבן שלשים שנה.</b> קרוב מארבע' שבועות: <b>בן חמשים</b> שבעה שבועות כי אז יחסר כח הגוף: <b>מלאכה באהל מועד.</b> מלאכת המשא: <b>קדש הקדשים.</b> הוא הארון: <b>פרכת המסך.</b> שתסוך על הארון: <b>ונתנו עליו.</b> על המסך ויש אומרים כי ישוב עליו אל מלת את שהוא את פרכת וכמוהו ותצפנו: <b>ופרשו בגד כליל תכלת.</b> כלו תכלת: <b>מלמעלה.</b> י\"א על כסוי עור תחש והנכון בעיני שפירושו וכבר פרשו בגד כליל תכלת מלמעלה לפרכת המסך ואם לדרך כבוד יתכן גם הראשון ועור תחש מפני הגשם והאבק: <b>ושמו בדיו.</b> הנה יסירום עד שיכסו הארון ויש אומרים שמו בדיו על כתפות הנושאים: <b>ועל שולחן הפנים.</b> להורות כי יש שם שולחנות אחרות לצורך הבשר ולחם הפנים שיש בו לא יוסר: <b>בגד תולעת שני.</b> והנה על השולחן שני בגדים והמכסה וכן על הארון מסך ובגד תכלת ומכסה ועל המנורה בגד ומכסה: <b>ונתנו על המוט.</b> כי אין לה בדים והוא כמו וישאוהו במ וט: <b>ועל מזבח הזהב.</b> בגד (צ\"ל אחד) אחר ומכסה לכסות את הקודש שהוא הארון והשולחן והמנורה והמזבחות וכל כלי השרת כמו סכינים וכפות וקערות: <b>ודשנו.</b> הסרת הדשן מעל המזבח: <b>משא בני קהת באהל מועד.</b> כי האהל והמשכן הם לא ישאוהו: <b>ופקדת.</b> מגזרת פקיד: <b>שמן המאור.</b> יש אומרים כי הוא היה נושא שמן המאור לילה אחד וכן את מנחת התמיד והנכון בעיני שהוא פקיד עליה לתת שמן המאור וטעם הכלי וכן כלי שמן המשחה וכלי הקטורת לבני הקהתים: וטעם <b>פקדת כל המשכן.</b> כי יש לו גם פקידות במשכן ובכל כליו עם אחיו איתמר רק לגודל מעלת אלעזר היה הוא פקיד על השמן הקטרת והמנחה לבדו: וטעם <b>אל משה ואל אהרן.</b> כי מצוה על אהרן ובניו להשמר שלא יבאו הקהתים לידי כרת: ומלת <b>אל תכריתו.</b> למשה אהרן ובניו: <b>וחיו.</b> יוסיפו חיים: <b>ולא ימותו.</b> בכרת והטעם כי אם ישמרו יקבלו שכר ואם לא יענשו כי יתכן שלא יענשו על כן ולא ימותו: <b>ושמו אותם.</b> הארון והשולחן והמנורה והמזבחות: <b>על עבודתו.</b> בכלי הקדש: <b>ואל משאו.</b> לשאת בכתף: <b>ולא יבואו.</b> הקהתים אל אהל מועד לראות כבלע את הקדש והטעם כאשר יוסר בנינו יוסר מסך הפרכת ונגלה הארון ויש אומרים כי כבלע כמו ככסות והטעם כאשר יכסו הארון לשאת אותו וזה טעם קרוב מהראשון והנה שתים אזהרות שלא יגעו בקדש כי אם בבדים ישאוהו ולא יראו הקדש: <b>נשא.</b> שם הפעל כמו זכור את יום השבת וטעם <b>נשא.</b> שא: <b>גם הם.</b> בעבור שנשא את ראש הקהתים: <b>לעבוד.</b> להקים המשכן ולעשות הלחם ולשחוט ולשמור: <b>ולמשא.</b> שם הפועל וכמוהו ולמסע את המחנות כי משקלי שמות הפעלים משתנים: <b>ומכסה התחש אשר עליו.</b> אחז הכתוב דרך קצרה שלא הזכיר מכסה עורות אילים ויש אומרים ששני המכסים היו דבקים: <b>ואת כל כלי עבודתם.</b> כשולחנות ויתדות ומיתרות: <b>ואת כל אשר יעשה.</b> <b>להם.</b> לכלי העבודה או למשכן ולמזבח: <b>בני מררי.</b> לא הזכיר לשאת שמותם כי הפרשה דבקה: <b>עבדת עבדה.</b> כאשר פרשתי והנה טעם כל הפקודים שהיו מבן ל' שנה: <b>איש איש.</b> על גרשון קהת ומררי: <b>על עבדתו ועל משאו.</b> על כן ופקדיו. ונסמכו פרשת וישלחו מן המחנה בעבור היות השכינה בתוך המחנות בנסעם ובחנותם: <b>כל צרוע וכל זב וכל טמא לנפש.</b> אלה הם מטומאת שבעה והם מטמאים אחרים על כן לא יצא בעל קרי מחוץ למחנה ואין יד במחנה לצאת חוץ רק כל אחד חופר באהלו כמנהג כל המחנות כלן כי תינוקים יש ביניהם. ופרשת כי תצא מחנה על מחנה קטן ידבר שאין שם אשה והארון ביניהם ואין (ס\"א והם) סובבים כי במחנה ישראל השכינה באמצע ועוד אפרשנו במקומו: <b>נקבה.</b> זבה או נדה או מצורעת או טמאת מת: <b>ויעשו כן.</b> מיד קודם שנסעו והטמאים בנסעם יסעו בין דגל אפרים לדגל דן על דרך סברא כי לא פורש. ונסמכה פרשת איש או אשה כי הצרעת והזוב יבואו בעבור מעל. וטעם להזכיר זאת הפרשה פעם אחרת להזכיר ואם אין לאיש גואל: <b>והתודו.</b> איזה מהם שיהיה איש או אשה: <b>בראשו.</b> כאשר הוא. לא פחות ממנו: <b>וחמישתו יוסף עליו.</b> אם הוא מתודה מעצמו ואם יש עדים עליו יוסף שני חמישיות ומעתיקי הדת אמרו חומש החומש ודעתם רחבה מדעתנו: <b>המושב לה'.</b> בעבור יראת השם השיבו: <b>ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו.</b> טעמו ברשות המקדיש הם שיתנם לאיזה כהן שירצה והזכיר זה בעבור מתנות כהונה: וטעם <b>תשטה.</b> בעבור ומעלה בו מעל: <b>תשטה.</b> תסור מהדרך הישרה וכן שטה מעליו ועבור: <b>שכבת זרע.</b> השכיבה הידועה כי עקרה לזרע: <b>ונסתרה</b> שלא גלתה היא הדבר ואפילו עד אחד אין בה שתהיה חשודה בעבורו: <b>והיא לא נתפשה.</b> בעדים אנשים או על ידי נשים עד שתהיה חשודה: <b>ועבר עליו.</b> לשון זכר וכן רוח גדולה וחזק מאד: וטעם <b>עבר.</b> שעל' במחשבתו: <b>והביא.</b> בעל כרחה: <b>עליה.</b> עמה או בעבורה: <b>קמח שעורים.</b> אמרו רבותינו היא עשתה מעשה בהמה תביא מאכל בהמה ומנחת הנדבה היא סולת חטים לזכרון לטוב. וזאת המנחה מזכרת עון אם היה שם על כן היא גרוע להיותה שעורים בלא שמן ובלא לבונה: <b>והקריב אתה.</b> המנחה: <b>והעמידה לפני ה'.</b> לפני המזבח: <b>מים קדשים.</b> מהכיור כי כבר נקדשו: <b>בקרקע.</b> ידוע תחת הקרקע: <b>ופרע את ראש האשה.</b> יגלה ולפי דעתי יוציא פרע ראשה שהיה מכוסה: <b>מי המרים.</b> לפי דעתי שמלת מי סמוך ומלת המרים תאר השם אם כן סודו ידוע גם יתכן שנקראו על שם סופם כמו ובגדי ערומים תפשיט והעד ובאו בה המים המאררים למרים להורות כי האלות הנקראות המאררים ישימו המים מרים אחר היותם מתוקים: ומלת <b>המאררים.</b> מהבנין הכבד כמו אשר אררה ה': וטעם <b>והשביע.</b> שתענה האשה אמן אמן: <b>אם לא שכב איש אתך.</b> הטעם איש אחר בחזקה: <b>ואם לא שטית.</b> ברצונך ודקדוק שטית טומאה כמו לא תבנה אתהן גזית: <b>הנקי.</b> תהיה נקייה כמו ומות בהר ויתכן להיות והשביע הראשון בשם והשני באלה כאשר הוא מפורש: <b>ירך ובטן.</b> שכנים: <b>צבה.</b> כמו נפוחה ואין ריע לו חוץ מהפרשה הזאת: <b>ולנפיל.</b> נפתח הלמ\"ד להורות על חסרון ה\"א הבנין וכן לשמיד: <b>אמן.</b> פעמים חזוק: וטעם <b>בספר.</b> שהיה להם ספר ידוע באלות: <b>אזכרתה.</b> מה שיהיה לה לזכרון לטוב או לרע כפי מעשיה: <b>ותמעל מעל.</b> כאשר פירשתי דבר מכוסה: <b>ונזרעה זרע.</b> שיתן לה השם זרע בשכר הקלון שאירע לה: <b>תשא את עונה.</b> אם נטמאה: וטעם <b>ונקה האיש מעון.</b> כי אם עבר עליו רוח קנאה הנה היא אסורה לו שישכב עמה והשוכב יש לו עון. יש אומרים שטעם הסמך פרשת נזיר לפרשת סוטה שיהיה לה בן נזיר אם לא נטמאה ולפי דעתי כי נסמכה בעבור נזירת האשה שהיא הפך המועלת כי רובי העבירות סבתם היין ואשה שלא תתקן שער ראשה איננה מבקשת להבעל: <b>יפלא.</b> יפריש או יעשה דבר פלא כי רוב העולם הולכים אחר תאותם: <b>נדר נזיר.</b> פירוש נדר להיות נזיר כי נזיר הוא תאר השם: <b>נזיר</b> מגזירת וינזרו שירחיק מהתאות ועשה זה לעבודת השם כי היין משחית הדעת ועבודת השם ובפרשת כי תצא מחנה ארמוז לך סוד: וטעם <b>מיין ושכר.</b> אם נדר להיותו נזיר וקדוש מיין ושכר יזיר על דעת המעתיקים ששכר גדול מהתירוש ואחרים אמרו שכר ממש כל דבר שישתכר האדם ממנו: וטעם <b>חומץ יין</b> והמשרה והענבים. לשום גדר שירחק מן היין כלל ובאשת מנוח פי' כל טומאה כל אשר יצא מגפן היין: <b>משרת.</b> אין לו חבר והתי\"ו לסמיכת לשון נקבה וטעמו כל דבר שימס עם ענבים ויש אומרים משקה מבושל: <b>מחרצנים.</b> אין לו ריע וכן זג והמפרשים אמרו חרצנים חצונים וזג פנימי' ואחרים הפכו הפירוש ויהיה פירוש מחרצנים דבק עם מכל אשר יעשה כל מה שיעשה מאלה שניהם: <b>גדל פרע.</b> שם הפעל מהכבד. והטעם <b>גדל.</b> יגדל: <b>הזירו.</b> שם הפעל מהכבד: <b>על נפש מת.</b> תאר לנפש או יחסר גוף: <b>לאביו ולאמו.</b> ואף כי לאשתו ולבתו ולאחרים ויש אומרים כי מלת נזיר מגזרת נזר והעד כי נזר אלהיו על ראשו ואיננו רחוק ודע כי כל בני אדם עבדי תאות העולם והמלך באמת שיש לו נזר ועטרת מלכות בראשו כל מי שהוא חפשי מן התאות: <b>בפתע פתאום.</b> שניהם קרובים בטעם וכן אדמת עפר: <b>וטמא.</b> המת יטמאנו: <b>ביום טהרתו.</b> במי נדה כי הוא טמא מת: <b>אחד לחטאת ואחד לעולה.</b> והסוד שהוא שאמרו חז\"ל ושכר עבירה עבירה: <b>על הנפש.</b> הוא על נפש מת כמו ושרט לנפש ואילו היה שחטא על נפשו לא היה השם מצוה אותו שיחזור לחטאתו: <b>והזיר לה' את ימי נזרו.</b> כל הימים שנדר להיות נזיר ועתה יחל לספור אותם: <b>כי טמא נזרו.</b> כי הוא לא נדר רק שיהיו שלמים זה אחר זה ולא יכרית שום דבר ויפסיק ביניהם: <b>מלאת.</b> שם הפועל מבעלי האל\"ף על מנהג בעלי הה\"א באחרונה וכמוהו לבלתי קראת לנו: <b>יביא אותו.</b> יביא נפשו כמו וירעו הרועים אותם או יביא הכהן אותו בצווי בעל כרחו להקריב את קרבנו: <b>כבש.</b> זכר כמשפט כל עולה: <b>וכבשה.</b> נקבה כמשפט כל חטאת: <b>ואיל לשלמים.</b> שמחה שהשלים מה שנדר: <b>את חטאתו.</b> בעבור שהזכיר באחרונה כי כן מנהג הל': <b>שער.</b> על שני משקלים: <b>בשלה.</b> פירוש והיא בשלה: <b>התגלחו את נזרו.</b> הנה אות כי קדש הוא שב אל הזרוע כי הוא עיקר או ישוב הוא על המונף כלו: וטעם <b>מלבד אשר תשיג ידו.</b> חיוב שיתן כפי ממונו גם כפי ימי הנדר אם רבים אם מעטים ונסמכה פרשת ברכת כהנים לפרשת נזיר כאשר השלים תורת הנזיר שהוא קדוש הזכיר תורת כהנים שהם קדושים והמכחישים אמרו כי זאת הברכה היה הכהן מברך לכל מביא מנחה ונסמכה בעבור על פי אשר תשיג יד הנודר והאמת כמו שהעתיקו חז\"ל והעד וישא אהרן את ידיו אל העם ויברכם ביום השמיני ונכתבה זאת הפרשה שהשם צוה בהקמת המשכן שיברך אהרן את העם ושם כתיב נשיאות כפים כי הכפים כידים רק ידים כללים: <b>יברכך.</b> תוספות חיים ועושר: וטעם <b>וישמרך.</b> שישמור התוספת שלא יגזול אחר מה שהוסיף: <b>יאר ה' פניו אליך.</b> כטעם באור פני מלך חיים והטעם וכל אשר תבקש ממנו ובשעת שתדרשו יאר פניו והטעם יקבל אותך וירצה למלא' שאלתך מיד: ואם בקשת אותו בעת צרה הוא <b>יחנך</b> גם יתכן היות ויחנך ויתן לך בקשתך כטעם חנוני אתם אשר חנן אלהים מגזרת חנן: <b>ישא ה' פניו אליך.</b> הפך אעלים עיני מכם והטעם כאשר פירשתי כי בכל מקום שתפנה יהיה פניו נשואות אליך: <b>וישם לך שלום.</b> כטעם לא יגע בך רע לא מאבן ולא מחיה רעה ולא מאויב: <b>ושמו את שמי.</b> כטעם לשום שמו שם שיהיו מקודשים בשם או טעמו כאשר יזכירו שמי עליהם כי בכל אחד מהשלשה פסוקים השם הנכבד והנורא: <b>ואני אברכם.</b> ויתכן היות מ\"ם אברכם סימן הכהנים המברכים או יהיה סימן לישראל והטעם אם הם יברכום אני אברכם והטעם שאקיים ברכתם לפי דעתי שמ\"ם אברכם סימן לכלם כהנים וישראלים: וטעם <b>ויהי ביום כלות משה.</b> אחר ברכת כהנים כי כן היה כי ביום שנשא אהרן את ידיו אל העם ויברכם החלה חנוכת המזבח ופסוק ויהי ביום כלות משה להקים את המשכן לעד על דברי המעתיקים כי היה סותרו ומקימו וחוזר לסותרו ולהקימו כל ז' ימי המלואים להרגיל' כי טעם ויקדש אותם בהזאת הדם בשבעת ימי המלואים: <b>ואת המזבח ואת כל כליו.</b> דבק עם ביום כלות משה להקים את המשכן והטעם שהקים המזבח במקומו: <b>ואת כל כליו וימשחם.</b> בשמן המשחה: <b>ויקדש אותם.</b> בדם והזכיר המזבח בעבור החנוכה: <b>ויקריבו נשיאי ישראל.</b> שם כלל והטעם שעשו קרבן לה' אל פתח אהל מועד: <b>צב.</b> כמו ובצבים ובפרדים מין ממיני השוורים המושכים את העגלות ויש אומרים שהוא כטעם מלאות יותר מדאי מגזרת ואת בטנך צבה בדרך רחוקה: כבר בארתי בספר מאזנים שמ\"ם שנים עשר דבק ומוכרת והטעם שנים ועשר ונסמך אל עשר לקצר כמו שלש עשרה וכן שלש אלה ובאה מלת שני עשר בחסרון מ\"ם דרך קצרה: <b>על שני הנשאים.</b> כמו לשני.  אמר הכתוב וקרבנו כי כבר הזכיר המקריב והוי\"ו יש לו טעם כאומר וזה קרבנו ואמר בשני הקריב את קרבנו כי כן דרך המקרא כמו ויאמר יצחק אל אברהם אביו ויאמר אבי בעבור שארכו לו הדברים וכן ויאמר המלך אחשורוש ויאמר לאסתר המלכה ולא הזכיר ביתר הנשיאים הקריב כי אחז דרך קצרה וכן לגלגלותם במספר ראובן ושמעון לבדם וכן רבים: <b>ביום השביעי.</b> יש אומרים כי בשבת הקריבו והיא הוראת שעה ויש אומרים כי היום הוא שביעי לחנוכת המזבח והמכחישים אמרו כי לא היה תחלת החנוכה יום ראשון לשבוע וזה לא יועיל כי לא יתכן שלא יהיה שבת בין שנים עשר יום. והנכון בעיני כי הוא כפירוש השני זבח השלמים וכן ביום השביעי בהקפת יריחו וכן ז' הימים בחנוכת הבית בעבור יום ענוי נפש: <b>פר אחד בן בקר.</b> קטן כמו בן יונה: <b>בקר שנים.</b> גם הם פרים זכרים וטעמו מין הבקר והעד וכל בקר זבח השלמים עשרים וארבעה פרים: <b>ביום עשתי עשר יום.</b> כבר בארתי בספר מאזנים למה השתנה זה המספר וטעם <b>עשתי.</b> כמו עשתנותיו מה שיולידו מחשבותיו כאילו העשר הוליד והוא סוד גדול. ויאמר רבי יונה הספרדי כי פירושו על שתי עשר והטעם החשבון שהוא קודם ממנו והנה טעה שתי טעיות גדולות. האחד כי חשבון שנים עשר הוא על אחד עשר הפך דבורו והעד הנאמן מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה. והטעות השנית כי אילו היה על שתי היה ראוי שיאמר עשני עשר ולא עשתי עשר כי עשתי לשון נקבה רק עשתי מלה אחת: וטעם <b>ובבא משה.</b> יתכן שתחלת הדבור שהוא ויקרא אל משה היה כאשר נשלמה החנוכה וכל המדקדקים אמרו כי מדבר אליו מבנין התפעל והתי\"ו מובלע ולפי דעתי שהוא שם הפועל כמו הנה לא ידעתי דבר והמ\"ם תחת מן למשפט הלשון: וטעם <b>וישמע.</b> שהוא לבדו היה שומע הקול ולא ישמענו מי שהוא באהל מועד מחוץ לפרוכת גם זה נכון כי השם הוסיף בהרגשת אזניו כאשר הוסיף באור עיני נער אלישע וכן ויגל ה' את עיני בלעם: <b>וידבר אליו.</b> כן הי' משפט הדבור תמיד: <b>דבר אל אהרן.</b> כי הוא חייב במצות הדלקת הנר: <b>אל מול פני המנורה.</b> פירוש והאיר אל עבר פניה והנה מלת האיר יוצאה כמו תאיר נרי ואין כן יאירו והארץ האירה ונסמכה זאת הפרשה להורות כי הדבור יהיה גם בלילה כי שם יהיה הנר דלוק ולא יכבה: <b>וזה מעשה המנורה.</b> הזכיר שלא נראה כמוהו: <b>מקשה.</b> פירשתיו: <b>ירכה.</b> הוא על הקנה שתעמוד עליו כי כן כתוב ירכה וקנה: <b>פרחה.</b> ידוע ולא היה כח בחרש חכם לעשותה כן לולי שהשם הראה אותה למשה במראה הנבואה: <b>כן עשה.</b> שב אל משה והטעם בצווי וכן ועשית מנורת זהב: וטעם הסמך פרשת הלוים להורות כי אהרן יתעסק בהדלקת הנר ובשאר העבודות יעזרוהו הלוים ויעמדו לפניו לעשות מה שיצוה: <b>קח את הלוים מתוך בנ'</b>'י. כי מעורבים היו וכן כל השבטים קודם שיסעו אל הדרך מהר סיני: <b>מי חטאת.</b> כמו תחטאני או טעמו כחטאת הקרבן: <b>הזה עליהם.</b> אמר רבי משה שפ\"א הפעל נו\"ן כמו הכה תכה ונכון הוא: <b>והעבירו תער על כל בשרם.</b> וכבר העבירו תער אמרו המעתיקים אפילו הזקן ולא הפאה: <b>וכבסו בגדיהם.</b> ואחר כן יהיו טהורים בטהרם במי חטאת: <b>והטהרו.</b> מבנין התפעל והתי\"ו מובלע וכן המתקדשים והמטהרים: <b>פר בן בקר.</b> קטן: <b>סלת.</b> שלשה עשרונים כמשפט: <b>תקח לחטאת.</b> בציווי כי הם יקחו והטעם יתנו כמו ויקחו לי תרומה או יקחו עמם כמו ויקחו להם איש שה לבית אבות: <b>לפני ה'.</b> והטעם כאשר תקריבם לפני האהל יסמכו בני הלוים את ידם על ראש כל אחד מהפרים ורבים כן: <b>ועשה.</b> בצווי כי אהרן היה המקריב והעד הנאמן שאמר כי החטאת גם העולה הם לכפר על הלוים וכתוב ויכפר עליהם אהרן: וטעם <b>והעמדת את הלוים.</b> אחר שיכפר אהרן עליהם תעמידם לפניו ויניפם: <b>והנפת.</b> בצווי כמו יעשה להם: <b>והיו לי הלוים.</b> זו מעלה גדולה: <b>ואחרי כן יבאו הלוים.</b> אחרי שתטהר אותם: <b>והנפת.</b> כצווי: <b>כי נתונים נתונים.</b> הם ובניהם ישראל נתנום לי ואני לקחתי אותם לי והטעם קבלתים ולא נתנום בעבור פדיון פטרת כל רחם. ופטרת ופטר שתי לשונות כמו צדקה וצדק או על משקל אחר: <b>ביום הכותי.</b> זמן כמו אתה עובר היום: וטעם <b>ואקח את הלוים.</b> וכבר אמר לקחתי אותם לי כי כן דרך המקרא והוא דבק עם הפסוק הבא אחריו וכאשר לקחתי לי הלוים נתתים אני לאהרן ולבניו: <b>ולכפר.</b> להיותם כפר נפשם כאשר פירשתי: <b>ויעש משה ואהרן.</b> משה בצווי ואהרן שהניפם וישראל שסמכו עליהם: וטעם <b>ויתחטאו.</b> כי גם הם עשו: <b>ויכפר עליהם.</b> וכבר כפר עליהם ויש אומרים כי בתחלה התחטאו ואחר כן סמכו ידיהם על הפרים ואיננו רחוק ואם כן יהיה פירוש והעמדת את הלוים וכבר העמדתם בתחלה: <b>כן עשו להם.</b> תמיד בני אהרן לבניהם: <b>זאת אשר ללוים.</b> והטעם זאת הקצבה ואין מבן שלשים שנה מכחיש זה הפסוק כי מבן שלשים שנה הוא לעבודת משא ומבן חמש ועשרים לעבודת האהל: וטעם <b>לצבא.</b> להמנות עם צבא העובדים: <b>במשמרותם.</b> על הזקנים ונדבקה פרשת הפסח כי החנוכה היתה בחדש הראשון ואז נבדלו הלוים ובאה זאת הפרשה בעבור שהוא כתוב בפסח והיה כי תבאו אל הארץ והיה כי יביאך ה' צוה שהם חייבים גם במדבר: <b>ויהי אנשים.</b> לא יתכן שיהיה מחנה ישראל גדול ושלא ימותו שם מתים בכל יום: <b>למה נגרע.</b> מבנין נפעל: <b>עמדו.</b> פתח אהל מועד: <b>או בדרך רחוקה.</b> אין לחפש כי כבר העתיקי חז\"ל כמה היא הרחוקה: <b>לכם.</b> לטמא נפש: <b>או לדורותיכם.</b> בטמא נפש ודרך רחוקה: <b>ובדרך לא היה.</b> או בדרך וכן ומכה אביו ואמו: <b>חטאו ישא.</b> הוא בעצמו: <b>וכי יגור אתכם גר.</b> גם הוא יעשה פסח שני כמשפט ויש אומרים כי הטעם על פסח ראשון: <b>וביום הקים את המשכן.</b> החל לספור מסעי ישראל הוצרך להזכיר הענן שחנה על המשכן כי בחנותו יחנו ובנסעם יסעו: <b>לאהל העדות.</b> על אהל ורבים כן: <b>על פי ה' יסעו.</b> הטעם ידוע כי הענן השם יניחנו ויסענו: <b>ובהאריך.</b> ואם היה מאריך והנה דרך כלל ואחר כן אמר ימים מספר יסעו או יחנו על פי ה': <b>או יומם ולילה.</b> הנה פעמים יסעו בלילה ויש אומרים כי פירושו יומם ולילה כמשמעו והוא הנכון בעיני והעד או יומם: <b>או ימים.</b> שנה תמימה: <b>על פי ה' יחנו.</b> באחרונה כל ימי שבתם במדבר: <b>חצוצרת.</b> שם הפועל בחסרון הצד\"י בקריאה ואם הוא כתוב: <b>למקרא.</b> שם הפועל וכן ולמסע או הוא שם והטעם לעת מקרא ולעת מסע והראשון נכון בעיני: <b>ותקעו בהן.</b> התוקעים כמו ויאמר ליוסף אשר ילדה אותה ללוי והנה הטעם אם יתקעו בשתיהן יתחברו הנשיאים והעדה: <b>ואם באחת יתקעו.</b> פירוש בחצוצרה אחת יבואו הנשיאים לבדם ואם היתה תרועה יסע דגל מחנה יהודה אף על פי שהענן על המשכן ולפי דעת רבים שענן אחר הוא הנוסע לפניהם: <b>ונסעו המחנות.</b> כי הם שלש: <b>תרועה שנית.</b> שיסע דגל ראובן ולא יתקעו עוד כי הקהתים ועמם הכהנים התוקעים נוסעים קודם דגל אפרים: <b>תרועה יתקעו.</b> הכהנים למסעיהם כי אחר דגל ראובן נוסעים: <b>והיו לכם לחקת עולם.</b> כי המחנות נוסעים להלחם הלא תראה דברי משה בנסוע הארון והנה פירוש זאת החוקה שתעשו כן שיריעו הכהנים בחצוצרות בלכתם למלחמה להלחם אל ארץ אויביהם וכן כי יבא אויב בארצכם ותבואו למלחמה עמו: <b>ונזכרתם.</b> כי עשיתם מה שצוה לכם השם הנכבד גם התרועה זכר לנפשו' לצעוק לשם: <b>וביום שמחתכם ובמועדיכם.</b> ששבתם מארץ אויב או נצחתם האויב הבא עליכם. וקבעתם יום שמחה כימי פורים ושבעת ימי חזקי\"ה (ס\"א חנוכה) שמחה. רק המעתיקים פירשו וביום שמחתכם שבת והתקיעה שישמעו ישראל וידעו כי העולות יקריבו ויכונו לבם לשם: <b>בעשרים בחדש.</b> זה היום היה תחלת נסוע הדגלים והנה עמדו בסיני קרוב משנה: <b>למסעיהם.</b> כראוי שיסעו: <b>וישכון הענן במדבר פארן.</b> עוד אפרשנו וכן ויסעו בראשונה: <b>והורד.</b> הלוים יורידוהו: <b>נושאי המקדש.</b> הוא הארון: <b>והקימו.</b> הגרשונים והמררים את המשכן עד בא הקהתים ויכניסו הכהנים מיד הארון אל מקומו: <b>מאסף.</b> לפי הדגלים כי נפתלי הוא באחרונה: <b>אלה מסעי בני ישראל.</b> הטעם כך נסעו תמיד כל ימי המדבר: מצאנו שצפורה היא בת רעואל כי כן כתוב ויתן את צפרה בתו ועוד להשקות צאן אביהן אל רעואל אביהן והנה חובב הוא בן רעואל והנה הוא אחי צפורה ולפי שקול הדעת הוא יתרו בעבור חנותנו במדבר ואמר על דבר יתרו כאשר בא אל המדבר אשר הוא חנה שם ואם יטעון טוען כי הכתוב אמר על יתרו חותן משה יש להשיב כי דרך המקרא לקרוא אבי הנערה ואחיה חותן והעד לחובב בן רעואל המדיני חותן משה וכבר נתברר שחובב אחי צפורה וקראו חותן משה ואם אמר אין חותן משה דבק עם חובב רק עם רעואל התשובה מבני חובב חותן משה ורבים אמרו שחובב הוא יתרו והוא אבי צפורה ורעואל היה זקנה ואמר הכתוב אל רעואל אביהן כאשר אמר יעקב אלהי אבי אברהם ואמר הכתוב בתו כאשר אמר על בלשצר שהוא בן נבוכדנצר והוא בן בנו וחכמינו אמרו שבעה שמות היו לו ליתרו ושבעים פנים לתורה: <b>אל ארצי.</b> שאדור שם היום ושם נולדתי: <b>אל נא.</b> כמו עתה וכן כל נא שבמקרא והוא הפוך בלשון ישמעאל: <b>כי על כן ידעת.</b> כמו כי על כן לא נתתיה לשלה והטעם הואיל וידעת חנותינו שידעת המקום שחנינו שם: <b>לכה אתנו והיית לנו לעינים.</b> להראות הדרך ורבים אומרים כי והיית לשון עבר רמז על העצה שנתן למשה שהראה לו מה שלא ידע וזה טעם לעינים: וטעם <b>ויאמר אל נא.</b> וכבר אמר לו כך ולא הועיל: לפי דעתי שהמסע הראשון לבדו לא היה כשאר המסעות והפסוק שאמר ונסעו הקהתים אחר נסוע שני הדגלים בכל המסעים חוץ מזה כי הארון היה נוסע לפניהם וזה היה שלשת ימים בלבד וזה טעם דרך שלשת ימים וכמוהו וילכו שלשת ימים במדבר איתם אין פירושו שהלכו ביום אחד מהלך שלשה ימים ויש אומרים שהלכו מהלך שלשה ימים ביום אחד ויש אומרים שהלכו מהלך שלשה ימים כנגד המסעים שנסעו בצאתם ממצרים והארון היה רחוק מהם דרך שלשה ימים וזה טעם וישכן הענן במדבר פארן ויפרשו ויסעו בראשונה כי על פי משה נסעו כי הענן נסע מיד וזה לא יתכן כי משה לא יסור מהארון והעד ויהי בנסוע הארון ויאמר משה ובנחה יאמר והנכון בעיני אשר אמרתי. וטעם וישכן הענן במדבר פארן שם כלל לתבערה שהוא קברות התאוה ולחצרות ורתמה ומסעים רבים והעד שלא הזכיר הכתוב בפרשת אלה מסעי במדבר פארן ועוד אפרשנו: וטעם <b>על פי ה'.</b> בהריע בחצוצרות: <b>קומה ה'.</b> כדרך בני אדם לעמוד להלחם: וטעם <b>ויפוצו.</b> כאשר יראו שקמת לעשות מלחמה מיד יפוצו אויביך: מלת <b>משנאיך.</b> מהבנין הכבד הנוסף והנו\"ן קל להקל על הלשון: <b>ויפוצו וינוסו.</b> כדרך כל הנבואות לכפול במלות משונות כאשר אפרש בפרשת בלעם: <b>ובנחה.</b> בנוח הארון ונכתב בה\"א כמו ה\"א אהלה כי אותיות אהו\"י מתחלפים: <b>שובה ה'.</b> אמר רבי יהודה המדקדק הראשון כי כל שב שטעמו מגזרת תשובה הוא פועל עומד ולא יוצא בבנין הקל רק אם היה טעמו בשלוה והשקט כמו בשובה ונחת תושעון כן שובה ה' רבבות אלפי ישראל שיניח' ולא ירגזו' מאויב. ודע כי רבבה מגזרת רב והטעם כמו רבבה כצמח השדה נתתיך ויתכן שנקרא עשרת אלפים כן בעבור היותו מספר רב על כן נסמכה מלת רבבות לאלפי ומשה התפלל שיניח וישקיט השם כל ישראל ואם הם רבים: <b>ויהי העם.</b> נסמכה זו הפרשה כי אחר שנסע הארון מהר סיני חנו בקברות התאוה והנה ספר מה שאירע שם: <b>כמתאוננים.</b> מגזרת און וכן מחשבות אונך: וטעם <b>וישמע ה'.</b> שדברו דברי און: <b>ותאכל.</b> מלעיל כמו ויאמר ובמוכרח מלרע הפך הלשון רק כן מצאנו: <b>ויצעק העם אל משה.</b> בפיוס: <b>ותשקע האש.</b> כטעם ותכבה ואין לו אחר: <b>תבערה.</b> עוד אפרשנו: <b>והאספסף.</b> שנאספו אל ישראל ואינם מהם והם ערב רב והמלה כפולה כמו סחרחר חמרמרו: <b>וישובו ויבכו.</b> אחר התאוה: <b>גם בני ישראל.</b> עמם: <b>הדגה.</b> שם המין: <b>חנם.</b> בזול כאילו היא חנם: <b>הקשואים.</b> באל\"ף תחת ה\"ת מקשה כמו ועמי תלואים ורבים כן: <b>אבטיחים.</b> ידוע מלשון קדר ואין לו ריע במקרא: <b>חציר.</b> הירקות שהם עשב השדה וכן המצמיח הרים חציר והנה הוא שם כלל והמתרגם ארמי אמר שהוא שם פרט גם הוא נכון: <b>הבצלים והשומים.</b> ידועים והם קרובים בלשון קדר: <b>נפשנו יבשה.</b> היא הנפש המתאוה הנטועה בכבד: <b>אין כל.</b> חסרנו כל דבר: <b>עינינו.</b> כי מן השמים ירד: <b>והמן.</b> ספר הכתוב חסרון דעת המתאוין כי המן היה כזרע גד והוא קל ללקוט והיה נראה כי הוא לבן ועוד כי יוכלו לאכלו כאשר היה גם לטחנו ברחים ולעשות עוגות או לדכותו ולבשלו בפרור ויש לו טעם נכבד כמו לשד השמן ועוד היה יורד על מקום נקי אחר שירחץ הטל את המקום: <b>כזרע גד.</b> סמוך כמו נטע שעשועים: <b>גד</b> י\"א כסברתא וי\"א חרדל מגזרת גדין ואנכי לא ידעתי: <b>שטו העם.</b> מגזרת משוט בארץ וזה יורה כי לא היה נופל זה עם זה רק מפוזר ומפורד: <b>ברחים.</b> של היד ולא יתכן להפריד זה השם כי משנים יהיו הרחים: <b>במדוכה.</b> עץ או אבן שידוכו בה גם יתכן שיעשו עוגות מאשר ידוכו: <b>עוגות.</b> כמו ועשי עוגות: <b>לשד.</b> י\"א כי הלמ\"ד נוסף כלמ\"ד שלאנן ושלו והיה ראוי להיות השמן מלרע בעבור שהוא תאר השם והנכון בעיני שהלמ\"ד לשד שורש כמו נהפך לשדי והוא הפך בחרבוני קיץ והיא הלחה הנכבדת העולה למעלה מכל שמן ויהיה השמן מלעיל כמשמעו: <b>בוכה למשפחותיו.</b> שהתחברו המשפחות לבכות כאשר יעשו בבכותם על מת: <b>איש לפתח אהלו.</b> בפרהסיא: <b>ובעיני משה רע.</b> פעל עבר או תחסר מלת היה: <b>למה הרעות לעבדך.</b> הכתוב דבר על הבא במהרה: <b>ולמה לא מצאתי חן בעיניך.</b> כאשר אמרתי שלח נא ביד תשלח: ומלת <b>מצתי</b> חסרת אל\"ף ורבים כמוה כי אין תימה לחסרון המלך יהו\"א: <b>הריתי.</b> האני אמם: . <b>ילדתיהו.</b> או אני אביהם כמו ילד את שלח: <b>שאהו.</b> עד בואו אל האדמה: <b>מאין.</b> במ\"ם שם מקום ובלא מ\"ם כמו לא ונמצא מלת הן אתם מאין: <b>כי כבד.</b> פעל עבר כמו כי זקן יצחק או יחסר הוא: <b>את.</b> לשון זכר ונקבה כמו לך גם בך ועמך ואתך ואתה לשון זכר לבדו: <b>הרגני.</b> כמו המיתני זה עשה לי בצדקתך ובעבור פיוסי וזה טעם ואם מצאתי חן בעיניך: <b>ואל אראה.</b> עוד ברעה שאני בה ואין צורך לתקון הסופרים: <b>אספה לי.</b> מלה זרה ויתכן שהיתה כן בעבור אות הגרון וכן ערכה לפני התיצבה: <b>ושוטריו.</b> כי יש זקנים שבאו בימים ואינם ראוים להיות שוטרים גם יש שוטרים ואינם זקנים: <b>וירדתי.</b> הכבוד ירד באש בתוך הענן: <b>ודברתי אתך שם.</b> וכאשר תשמע את הקול ישמעו גם הם: <b>ואצלתי.</b> כטעם אקח מאשר אצלך ודע כי הרוח כמו החכמה ואם תנתן מחכמת ראובן לשמעון לא תחסר חכמת ראובן רק נשארה כאשר היא והמשל בנר: <b>התקדשו.</b> נמצא לשבח ולגנאי לשון התקדש וכן היקדש שהוא לשון טומאה: <b>ולא יומים.</b> כפל: <b>חמשה ימים.</b> כנגד אצבעות היד האוכלים: <b>עשרה.</b> כפל בשתי ידיו גם עשרים כמשל האומרים יאכל כל מה שיאכל באצבעות ידיו ורגליו: <b>חדש ימים.</b> פירשתיו שישוב ערך הלבנה באורה כאשר היתה וכן שנתים ימים: וטעם <b>מאפכם.</b> כי הריח באף ויצא הריח ממנ' ולא ימצא: <b>לזרא.</b> באל\"ף תחת ה\"א כמו קראן לי מרא כי אותיות אהו\"י מתחלפין וטעם <b>לזרא.</b> הוא דבר זר נתעב לתולדת שלא הרגיל אדם בו: <b>שש מאות אלף רגלי.</b> ואין צורך להזכיר הפחותים. ורבים פירשו זאת הפרשה לטעמים רבים יש אומרים כי משה אמר מה שיאמרו לו ישראל בעת שישאלו מה הוא הבשר והתשובה שיאמר להם אין לכם צורך לשאול <b>היד ה' תקצר.</b> ולא אדע למה הצרה הזאת רק הדבר כמשמעו כי משה לא ידע כי השם יחדש אות או מופת כי אם להצדיק נביאו כאשר אפרש: <b>ומצא להם.</b> כדברי המתרגם ארמית ומה נכבד דרש קדמונינו במלת ישחט על הבהמה ויאסף על הדג: <b>היקרך.</b> כמו ויקר מקרה: <b>ויצא משה.</b> מאהל מועד: <b>ויאצל.</b> על דעתי מהבנין הכבד הנוסף: וי\"ו <b>ויתנבאו</b> כפ\"א רפה בלשון ישמעאל: <b>ולא יספו.</b> פעם שנית וכן קול גדול ולא יסף ולא יסף עוד לדעתה ואין מדקדוק הלשון להיותו מגזרת פן תספו בכל חטאתם אמרו חכמים ז\"ל שלקח משה מכל שבט ששה והנה שנים ושבעים ובעבור שאמר לו השם שבעים איש הניח השנים וזה נכון: <b>והמה בכתובים.</b> בתחלה: <b>ולא יצאו.</b> ממחנה ישראל אל אהל מועד: <b>וירץ הנער.</b> בה\"א הוא הנודע לשרת משה חוץ מיהושע כי שרות יהושע איננו כשרות כל נער: <b>מבחוריו.</b> יש אומרים שפירושו מבחרותו והטעם שלא אמר כדברי זקן ויש מדביקים מבחוריו עם משרת משה והטעם ששרת אותו מיום שהיה בחור וזה איננו נכון כי זה המעשה היה בשנה השנית והנכון בעיני שהוא מבחוריו הוא מהמובחרים לשרת משה כי אחרים יש עמו ודע כי מלת בחור בלשון רבים פעם תשתנה ופעם לא תשתנה וכן מלת סריס אולי הם שני משקלים: <b>כלאם.</b> נפתח הלמ\"ד בעבור אות הגרון הבא אחריו: ונפתחה ה\"א <b>המקנא.</b> והיה ראוי להיותו בשו\"א ובפת\"ח ובעבור היותו תחת המ\"ם שוא נע ושני שואים נעים לא יתחברו לעולם: ומלת <b>מי יתן.</b> כשואל חפץ בדבר כאומר מי יתן לי זאת השאלה והחפץ: <b>ויאסף משה.</b> הלך בלווי עם הזקנים לחלוק להם כבוד: <b>ורוח נסע.</b> יום שני: <b>ויגז.</b> כרת כמו גזי נזרך ומגזרת וגז צאנך: וטעם <b>ויגז.</b> שהיו בשפת הים רבים כחול והנה גזז מהם ומלת ויגז מפעלי הכפל כמו ויחם בשר הילד: <b>ויטש.</b> כמו ויפרוש והטעם כדבר נטוש אין כח בו לסור וכן והנם נטושים על פני כל הארץ: <b>סביבות המחנה.</b> בלבד גם הטעם שהיה כאמתים בכל מקום גבוה או שפל: <b>וישטחו.</b> כמו ויפרשו וכן שטחתי אליך כפי ואם הם שני בנינים: <b>מכה רבה.</b> דבר היה: <b>ויקרא.</b> הקורא או משה: <b>קברו.</b> הקוברים כמו ויאמר ליוסף: <b>נסעו העם חצרות.</b> אל חצרות דרך קצרה: וטעם <b>ויהיו בחצרות.</b> דבק עם ותדבר מרים כי בעבורה ישבו שם כי כן כתוב: <b>ותדבר מרים.</b> היא דברה גם אהרן הסכים או החריש על כן נענש: וטעם <b>ותדבר.</b> עם בי\"ת דרך גנאי כמו וידבר העם באלהים גם ימצא לשבח גם בדרך נבואה. יש אומרים כי משה מלך על כוש ולקח כושית והמתרגם אמר שפירתא וטעמו לשון כבוד כאשר יקראו הישמעאלים לזפת הלבן גם אנחנו נקרא העור סגי נהור. והנה לא יתכן שנקרא שם שהוא לשבח להפכו לגנאי ויש אומרים כי כוש בן ימיני הוא שאול וכן הלא כבני כושיים וכבר פירשתיו והישר בעיני שזו הכושית היא צפורה כי היא מדינית ומדינים הם ישמעאלים והם דרים באהלים וכן כתוב ירגזון יריעות ארץ מדין ובעבור חום השמש אין להם לבן כלל וצפורה היתה שחורה ודומה לכושית: וטעם <b>כי אשה כשית לקח.</b> זה הדבור שדברה מרים ומה נכבד דברי קדמונינו שאמרו על הזקנים אשריהם ואוי לנשיהם והנה חשדו משה כי לא נמנע לשכב עם צפורה רק בעבור שאיננה יפה: <b>ויאמרו הרק אך במשה.</b> הביאה ראיה כי לא עשה זה לקדושת השם כי הם היו נביאים ואין המשכב אסור להם: <b>הרק אך.</b> והאחד יספיק רק הוא דרך צחות כמו המבלי אין קברים: <b>וישמע ה'.</b> ואם דברו בסתר: <b>ענו מאד.</b> במשקל שלו והטעם שלא בקש גדולה על אחיו: <b>פתאום.</b> המ\"ם נוסף כמ\"ם שלשום והוא מגזרת פתי דבר שלא עלה על לב: <b>צאו שלשתכם ויצאו שלשתם.</b> כל אחד מאהלו והנה דרך כלל ואחר כן פרט וירד ה' בעמוד ענן ויקרא אהרן ומרים ומשה שומע: <b>שמעו נא.</b> כמו עתה: <b>נביאכם.</b> מי שיהיה מכם נביא ה': <b>במראה.</b> פירושו אם היה נביאכם שהוא נביא ה' כמו והנבואה עודד הנביא האהלה שרה אמו כסאך אלהים עולם: <b>במראה.</b> במראות הלילה: <b>בחלום אדבר בו.</b> כפול כדרך הנבואות: <b>בכל ביתי נאמן הוא.</b> טעמו כבן בית שיכנס בלא רשות ואם יצטרך ידבר צרכיו ואתם כאשר אתודע לכם בחלום תדעו ואם לא אין לכם רשות לשאול: <b>פה אל פה אדבר בו.</b> הטעם בלא אמצעי: <b>במראה ולא בחידות.</b> הטעם שאראה לו הדבור כאשר הוא כצורת המשכן: <b>ולא בחידת.</b> כמו הנשר הגדול: <b>ותמונת ה' יביט.</b> כטעם הראני נא את כבודך או שהוא בהקיץ: <b>וילך.</b> הכבוד והעד והענן סר: <b>מעל האהל.</b> מעל פתח האהל: <b>והנה מצורעת.</b> תחסר מלת היא כמו כאשר קאה: <b>בי אדני.</b> פירשתיו: <b>אל נא.</b> אל עתה: <b>נואלנו.</b> מבנין נפעל ואין לו ריע כי אם נואלו שרי צאן ויש אומרים שהוא הפוך מאולת קשורה וטעמו ידוע: <b>אל נא תהי כמת.</b> אל עתה תהיה אחותינו כנפל המת כאשר יצא מבטן אמו נאכל חצי בשרו וכן בשר המצורע ואין צורך לתיקון סופרים: <b>ויצעק משה.</b> זה יורה שהיה בצער על אחותו: <b>אל.</b> אתה שיש הגבורה בידך עתה רפא עתה לה על כן השיב השם ואביה ואילו אביה כעם עליה וירק בפניה הלא תכלם לראות פניו שבעת ימים: <b>תסגר.</b> כמו המצורעים שלא יזיקו אחרים: <b>ואחר תאסף.</b> תחשב מהיישוב וכן ואספתו מצרעתו ואחר שבאה אל המחנה נסעו העם מחצרות: <b>ויחנו במדבר פארן.</b> על דעת רבים שהענן היה שם בעבור שמצאו וישכן הענן במדבר פארן ויפרשו הענן סר מעל האהל כמשמעו ולפי דעתי אין זה הפירוש נכון: <b>שלח לך.</b> כתוב שהשם אמר לישראל עלה רש והם אמרו נשלחה אנשים אז אמר השם שלח לך אנשים: וטעם <b>אנשים.</b> שהם ידועים גבורים וכן כלם אנשים וחזקת והיית לאיש כי איש היה: <b>ויתורו.</b> ויחפשו וכן ולא תתורו: <b>כל נשיא בהם.</b> כל אחד הוא נשיא בהם או תהיה מלת אחד מושכת עצמה ואחרת עמה וכן ושנים אנשים שרי גדודים היו בן שאול ורבים כן: וטעם <b>אלה שמות האנשים.</b> אחר שאמר ואלה שמותם להודיע כי כן היה שמותם לעולם ולא השתנו כמו הושע: <b>עלו זה בנגב.</b> עלו זה הדרך בנגב וידוע כי מצרים הוא נגב ארץ ישראל כאשר פירשתי בספר דניאל והראיה כי רוחב מצרים פחות משלשים מעלות ורוחב ירושלים שלשים ושלש ומדבר פארן בנגב ארץ מצרים והנה פירוש בנגב אינו נגב המחנה רק פירושו בנגב של ארץ כנען והעד בחברון שהוא ליהודה והכתוב אמר יהודה יעמוד על גבולו מנגב: <b>וראיתם את הארץ מה היא.</b> ומה העם: <b>החזק.</b> למלחמה ואחר כן פירש מה הארץ הטובה היא שהאויר שלה והמים שלה טובים: <b>הבמחנים.</b> כמו הקדריים שחונים באהלים: <b>השמנה היא.</b> לתת חטה: אמרו חז\"ל כי טעם <b>ויבא.</b> על כלב בן יפנה כי כל אחד הלך לצד אחר: <b>צען מצרים.</b> שם מדינה סמוכה אל מצרים וכן מבית לחם יהודה ויש אומרים שפירושו מגזרת אהל בל יצען בדרך רחוקה: וטעם להזכיר חברון להודיע שהיא קדמונית: <b>עד נחל אשכול.</b> דברי משה ויתכן להיות כמו וירדוף עד דן להיות שם אחר: <b>קרא.</b> הקורא כמו אשר ילדה אותה ללוי: יש מקץ שהוא תחילה ויש מקץ שהוא מסוף ויתכן להיות ראש הארבעים: <b>וילכו.</b> להודיע שלא באו לאהליהם אל המחנה רק מיד הלכו: <b>וישיבו אתם דבר.</b> אל משה ואהרן: <b>ויספרו לו.</b> למשה שהוא העיקר: <b>ויהס כלב.</b> אמר רבי יונה המדקדק שטעמו שאמר הסו: <b>ויוציאו דבת הארץ.</b> דבר שלא היה ואין כן ויבא יוסף כי ויבא הפך ויוציאו: <b>דבה</b> מפעלי הכפל מגזרת דובב שפתי ישנים ובמקומו פירשתיו: <b>אכלת יושביה.</b> שהאויר שלה רע: <b>אנשי מדות.</b> כל איש הוא איש מדה רק טעמו מדות גדולות יותר מהכל וכן אנשי לבב ורבים כמו הם: <b>הנפילים.</b> פירשתיו: <b>מן הנפילים.</b> טעמו וגם אחרי כן אשר יבואו ושם מפורש: <b>את קולם.</b> פעול למלת ותשא גם ויתנו: <b>וילונו.</b> מבנין נפעל מהפעלים השניים הנראים לנפעל שלם: <b>שוב מצרימה.</b> שם הפועל כמו לא אוכל קום ומלך אלקום עמו: <b>ויפל משה.</b> ברצונו: <b>ויהושע בן נון.</b> הזכירו משה בתחלה לגודל מעלתו: <b>כי לחמנו הם.</b> נאכלם כלחם וכן אוכלי עמי אכלו לחם: <b>סר צלם.</b> כי הגבור אם אין לו מגן שיגן עליו ויהיה צל לו לבו ירא: <b>לרגום אתם.</b> יהושע וכלב: <b>ינאצוני.</b> כמו יכעסוני ורבים חביריו: וטעם <b>בקרבו.</b> לשון שהיו בתחלה לב אחד לטוב: <b>ושמעו מצרים כי העלית.</b> טעמו ואשר העלית ואחר שאמר ושמעו ואמרו אל יושב הארץ הזאת היא ארץ כנען פירש מה שמעו על כן פעם אחרת שמעו כי אתה ה' כבודך בקרב העם הזה: <b>אשר עין בעין.</b> על הכבוד שראו הזקנים או על מראה כבוד ה' לעיני בני ישראל והוא הנכון: <b>נראה.</b> פעל עבר וטעמו נראת אתה ה' וכן ונאשאר אני וכן כי אומלל אני בעבור היות הלמ\"ד בפת\"ח גדול: <b>עמד עליהם.</b> בשבתם: <b>ואמרו הגוים אשר שמעו את שמעך.</b> מצרים גם כנענים גם אחרים: <b>יכלת.</b> שם כמו עד יבושת המים ואיננו לשון מדה כדרך הדרש: <b>וישחטם במדבר.</b> הטעם ויהרגם ואמר וישחטם בעבור המדבר כי שם ירעו הצאן: <b>יגדל נא.</b> קרוב מאריכות אפים כי כל מי שהוא ארך אפים יש לו כח גדול לשבור כעסו והעד כאשר דברת שאתה ארך אפים ואלה המדות פירשתים בפרשת כי תשא: <b>סלח נא.</b> אחר שמצאנו שאמר אם יראו את הארץ אחר סלחתי כדברך ידענו כי מלת סלח נא אריכות אף וכן ונסלח לו עד שיעשה תשובה שלימה: <b>כגודל חסדך.</b> בעבור חסדך הגדול: <b>וכאשר נשאתה.</b> כטעם נושא עון: <b>ועד הנה.</b> עד המקום הזה או מיום שיצאו ממצרים ועד זה היום כי יש הנה שם המקום כמו באו הנה הלילה גם סימן זמן כמו ולא ראיתיו עד הנה וכבר פירשתיו: <b>חי אני.</b> טעמו כאשר אני חי כן יהיה דברי קיים: <b>וימלא.</b> וכאשר מלא כבודי את כל הארץ והקרוב שהוא לעתיד וטעמו זה אעשה כדי שיודע כבודי בעולם: <b>זה עשר פעמים.</b> הטעם רבים והזכיר עשר בעבור היותו סך חשבון כי הוא סוף האחדים וראש העשרות שהם במחברת השנית: <b>וכל מנאצי.</b> מבניהם: <b>ועבדי כלב.</b> הזכירו לבדו בעבור ויהס כלב והלוים והכהנים אינם בכלל השבועה כי לא הלך מהם נשיא מרגל ועוד לכל פקודיכם לכל מספרכם אף על פי שלא היו הכהנים גם הלוים הם רבים: <b>רוח אחרת.</b> כנגד התרים: <b>וימלא אחרי.</b> רדף אחרי דברי ומלא אותו שהארץ טובה מאד ואין דבה: <b>והעמלקי והכנעני.</b> הוא האמורי כי כל אמורי הוא כנעני ולא חשש הכתוב להפרישו בעבור העמלקי שהוא מבני שם וכנען שהוא אבי האמורי מבני חם וכן וירד העמלקי והכנעני והעד ויצא האמורי ולא הזכיר העמלקי כי האמורי הוא העיקר: <b>יושב בעמק.</b> לארוב לכם ויש אומר אף על פי שהעמלקי והכנעני יושבים בעמק פנו דרך ים סוף ולא תפחדו והנה ישראל לא עשו תשובה על כן דבר השם: <b>פגריכם.</b> הגופות: <b>הלינותם.</b> מגזרת וילונו על משה: <b>נשאתי את ידי.</b> כלשון בני אדם כי השמים למעלה: <b>כי אם כלב.</b> הקדים כלב כי הוא הקדים ויהס: <b>ופגריכם.</b> שהם אתם: <b>יהיו רועים.</b> כי מנהג הרועה שלא יעמוד וינוח במקום והעד כאהל רעי: <b>זנותיכם.</b> שזנו מאחרי ואמרו נתנה ראש: <b>אשר תרתם.</b> בציווי: <b>את תנואתי.</b> אניא דברי או מי יניאני והטעם שישבור את שבועתי כמו ואם הניא: <b>הנועדים עלי.</b> שאמרו לרגום באבנים עבדי השם בעבור שאמרו כבוד השם: <b>במדבר הזה.</b> יתום קץ כל אחד ששם קץ כל אחד: <b>ושם ימתו.</b> כלם קרוב מהקץ: <b>וילינו עליו</b> פועל יוצא לשנים פעולים: <b>וימתו.</b> כמו מתו: <b>במגפה</b> כלם יחד: <b>ויהושע בן נון.</b> דברי משה קודם כלב: <b>והיא לא תצלח.</b> העליה אל ראש ההר לא תצלח או העברת פי השם אין בה הצלחה: <b>כי על כן שבתם.</b> הואיל ושבתם כמו כי על כן לא נתתיה: <b>ויעפילו.</b> מגזרת עפל ובחן והטעם שעלו אל העפל: <b>ויכתום.</b> אמר רבי משה הכהן הספרדי ז\"ל כי היה ראוי להיותו ויכיתום וכן וידביקו גם המה והנכון בעיני שהוא מפעלי הכפל והיא מלה זרה: <b>עד החרמה.</b> שם מקום ויש אומרים עד שהחרימום: <b>כי תבואו אל ארץ מושבתיכם.</b> נסמכה זאת הפרשה בעבור שנחלשו ויתאבלו לנחם הבנים להודיעם כי יבאו אל הארץ והנכון בעבור שנשאו קול כל העדה (וחטאו) ונסלח להם בעבור תפלת משה אמר וכי תשגו והעד ונסלח להם והוצרך להזכיר משפט מנחות כל עולה וזבח ובסוף והנפש אשר תעשה ביד רמה רמז למעשיהם והזכיר דבר המקושש כי עשה ביד רמה ומרוב חמלת השם על ישראל שם הציצית לזכר שלא יעשה האדם ביד רמה או שלא ישכח: <b>לפלא.</b> לפרש וכן והפלה ה' ואם הוא בה\"א כי אותיות אהו\"י מתחלפות: <b>מנחה סלת.</b> עשרון לאחד מן הצאן: <b>שה כבשים.</b> או עזים וכן פירש בסוף לכבש האחד או אם הקריב איל תהא מנחתו כפלים כי הכבש הוא קטן. ולא הזכיר עם בן הבקר נדבה והזכיר שלמים בעבור שלא הזכירו בתחלה ומשפט הכל אחד: וטעם <b>כמספרם.</b> על המנחה והשמן והיין: <b>או אשר בתוככם.</b> היום: <b>הקהל.</b> יש אומרים כי זה הה\"א הוא לקריאה ולפי דעתי שאין סימן קריאה בלשון הקדש והעד הארבעה והאחד מהם משה משה רק זה הה\"א הוא ה\"א הדעת וסימן הקריאה איננו: <b>ככם כגר.</b> כבר ביארתי משפט הכפי\"ן בהתחברם: וטעם <b>תורה אחת.</b> לבד מהעולות כי העולות הם בחיוב חקה ועוד אמר השם כאשר תביאו מנחה על העולה מהסלת כן תתנו גם מעריסותיכם ואין צורך להזכיר מה שקבלו קדמונינו ז\"ל כי הם שתים חלה ותרומה ושיעורן לפי שכל דבריהם אמת וזולתם הבל הנה שעור נוסף בין שעשו בשגגה מה שצוו שלא לעשות ובין שלא עשו בשגגה מה שצוו לעשות: הנה שעיר נוסף בין שעשו בשגגה מה שצֻוו שלא לעשות ובין שלא עשו בשגגה מה שצוו לעשות: <b>וחטאתם.</b> היא השעיר ובעבור שהוא סמוך אל עזים הוא קטן והעתיד הפך: <b>עז בת שנתה.</b> פירוש שעירת וזה החטא הוא שלא עשו מה שצוה לעשות והוא שוגג והנה הוא כמשפט העושה בשגגה מה שצוה שלא לעשות: <b>תורה אחת.</b> כזאת תורת החטאת: <b>ביד רמה</b> להראות הכל שאיננו ירא מהשם: <b>מגדף.</b> כדרך לשון בני אדם: <b>כי דבר ה' בזה.</b> זה הוא ביד רמה: <b>ואת מצותו הפר.</b> שצוהו שלא לעשות ביד רמה ויש אומרים או אם יפר מצותו בסתר: <b>הנפש ההיא.</b> איננה המשכלת כדברי תועה רוח רק הוא חבור נפש עם הגוף: <b>עונה בה.</b> כמו דמו בראשו: <b>במדבר.</b> לפי דעתי שהוא מדבר סיני וכבר הזכרתי למה נסמכה הפרשה גם יתכן שעשה המקושש ביד רמה והזהירוהו ולא הועיל. יש אומרים ויקריבו אותו ליל ראשון: <b>במשמר.</b> בפתחות הבי\"ת מקום היה ידוע: <b>מה יעשה לו.</b> אי זו מיתה ימות: <b>כאשר צוה ה'.</b> מיתת הרגימה: <b>ועשו להם ציצית.</b> יתכן על שני פירושים האחד שיעשו ציצית כמו בציצית ראשי והם החוטים היוצאים שאינם ארוגים: <b>על כנפי בגדיהם.</b> על כל בגד חלוק או מכנסים כי אם תחלקוה הנה הוא כדמות כנף: <b>פתיל תכלת.</b> על הציצית. וטעם <b>תכלת.</b> בעבור שהוא כעין השמים: <b>והיה לכם לציצת.</b> והנה ישוב הפתיל להיותו בקצה כמו הציצית. והפירוש השני כאשר העתיקו חז\"ל ובעבור שיש עדים נאמנים על הפירוש השני בטל הראשון והם העתיקו כי זאת המצוה עם בגד שיש לו ארבע כנפים והציצית הם הגדילים ועוד אפרשנו. והנה מצוה על כל מי שיש לו בגד בארבע כנפים שיתכסה בו ביום תמיד ולא יסירנו מעליו למען יזכרו והמתפללים בטלית בשעת התפלה יעשו זה בעבור שיקראו בקריאת שמע והיה לכם לציצית ועשו להם ציצית רק לפי דעתי יותר הוא חייב להתעטף בציצית בשאר השעות משעת התפלה למען יזכור ולא ישגה ולא יעשה עבירה בכל שעה כי בשעת התפלה לא יעשה עבירה: <b>וראיתם אותו.</b> מצוה להיות נראה: <b>אחרי לבבכם.</b> המתאוה והעין רואה והלב חומד והנה יהיה הציצית לאות ולסימן שלא ירדוף אדם אחר הרהור לבו וכל אשר שאלו עיניו: <b>אשר אתם זונים.</b> כי מי שילך אחרי תאותו הוא זונה מתחת עבודת אלהיו: וטעם <b>למען תזכרו.</b> וכבר אמר וזכרתם את כל מצות ה'. שאם תזכרו תהיו קדושים ולא תתגאלו בתאות הלב המטנפת הרוח המשכלת: <b>אני ה' אלהיכם.</b> אני הוא שהוצאתי אתכם להיות לכם לאלהים על כן אמרתי לכם אני ה' אלהיכם: <b>ויקח קרח.</b> זה הדבר היה במדבר סיני כאשר נתחלפו הבכורים ונבדלו הלוים כי חשבו ישראל שמשה אדונינו עשה מדעתו לתת גדולה לאחיו גם לבני קהת שהם קרובים אליו ולכל בני לוי שהם ממשפחתו והלוים קשרו עליו בעבור היותם נתונים לאהרן ולבניו וקשר דתן ואבירם בעבור שהסיר הבכורה מראובן אביהם ונתנה ליוסף אולי חשדוהו בעבור יהושע משרתו גם קרח בכור היה כי כן כתוב. ודגל ראובן חונה בנגב וקרח בנגב המשכן כי הוא מבני קהת ואלה נשיאי העדה היו בכורים והם היו מקריבים את העולות על כן לקחו מחתות והראיה על זה הפירוש מופת המטה שראו כל ישראל כי השם בחר שבט לוי תחת הבכורים על כן כתוב ותכל תלונתם כי התלונה על זה היתה. גם אמר משה כי לא מלבי בעבור שחשדוהו כי מלבו עשה ועוד לא ה' שלחני בשליחות הזה כי כבר האמינו בו כל ישראל ועוד ראיה גמורה כי כל העדה כלם קדושים וזה רמז לבכורים שהם קדושים כי כן כתוב קדש לי כל בכור והם היו הכהנים הנגשים אל ה' והם עיקר כל העדה: <b>ויקח קרח.</b> אנשים דרך קצרה כמו חמור לחם ורבים ככה ויאמר ר' יונה כי פירוש ויקח לקח לקום על משהו: <b>לפני משה.</b> שלא קמו בסתר ויש הפרש בין לפני ובין מפני: <b>קראי מועד.</b> שהיו נקראים אל אהל מועד: <b>אנשי שם.</b> קודם צאתם ממצרים ומדקדק אמר כי נשיאי עדה הם הנשיאים העומדים על הפקודים והם פעולים למלת לקח כאילו כתיב ויקח קרח ודתן ואבירם ואון נשיאי העדה לדבר אליהם וזה מעט רחוק: <b>רב לכם.</b> כמו די לכם והטעם שתפשתם החלק הרב: <b>כי כל העדה כלם קדושים.</b> כי כל העדה מיום מעמד הר סיני היו קדושים: <b>ובתוכם ה'.</b> כי הלוים נבחרו אחרי היות הכבוד בתוך בני ישראל ואם ידע משה כאשר היה בהר סיני כי נבחר שבט לוי לא ידעו ישראל: <b>תתנשאו.</b> להיות אהרן הכהן הגדול ומשה למעלה ממנו כי הוא למדו: <b>ויפול על פניו.</b> ברצונו ויש אומרים כדרך הנבואות: <b>את אשר לו.</b> השבט הנבחר וזאת תשובה לדתן ולאבירם ולנשיאי העדה שהיו הבכורים: <b>ואת הקדוש.</b> בשבטו להיותו כהן גדול: <b>זאת.</b> הבחינה: <b>רב לכם בני לוי.</b> וזה פירושו שאמר להם המעט ואמר הכתוב ויאמר משה אל קרח כי הדבור הראשון עם קרח ועם כל עדתו וזה עם הלוים: <b>המעט.</b> הדבר מעט הוא אצלכם: <b>לפני העדה לשרתם.</b> בהביאם את עולותיהם ואת זבחיהם: <b>ויקרב אותך.</b> וכאשר הקריב אותך ואחיך בקשתם גם כהונה: <b>לכן.</b> על כן קשרתם אתה וכל עדתך שאתם נועדים על השם והטעם כמו ורוזנים נוסדו יחד על ה' ועל משיחו שעשו וועד להריב עם השם וכן בהצותם על ה' וי\"א כי ה\"א הנועדים נוסף: <b>מה הוא.</b> מה פשעו מה הוא עושה: <b>לא נעלה.</b> יתכן שהיה אהל מועד בתוך המחנה במקום גבוה על כן מלת העלו מסביב או מי שילך לעבודת השם או אל המקום הנבחר יקרא עולה: <b>המעט.</b> הדבר קל כי העליתנו מארץ זבת חלב ודבש כי מצרים בנגב ארץ ישראל והבא ממצרים לארץ כנען באמת הוא עולה: <b>כי תשתרר עלינו.</b> העליתנו ממצרים כדי שתשתרר עלינו: <b>גם השתרר.</b> גם שררות רבות אתה ואחיך: <b>אף לא אל ארץ זבת חלב ודבש.</b> והטעם שהוצאתנו ממקום טוב ואילו הביאותנו למקום טוב כמוהו ונתת לנו שדה וכרם כאשר היה לנו במצרים ותבקש שררה היינו סובלים רק הסירותנו ממקום טוב משדותינו וכרמנו ולא הביאותנו אל מקום כמוהו ולמה תבקש שררה: <b>העיני האנשים ההם.</b> טעמו תרצה לנקר עיני האנשים ההם רמז ליוצאים ממצרים כאילו אמר תרצה לנקר העינים שלא תראינה כי זה שעשית לנו נראה הוא לעינים ודרך משל לומר סגורות הן עיני פלוני על כן לא יראה על כן לא נעלה ויש אומרים התרצה להחשיך העינים שלא תראינה כלומר אחיזת עינים אתה עושה לנו לא נעלה ויש אומרים אילו היית מנקר עינינו לא נעלה ואמר האנשים ההם על דרך בני אדם חסרי דעת שלא ירצו לדבר על נפשם בגנאי והנכון בעיני שמלת האנשים ההם רמז לזקנים שהיו עם משה כי כן כתוב וילכו אחריו זקני ישראל: <b>ויחר.</b> זה הדבור כבר פירשתיו כי העולה והמנחה מארכת האף על הרשעים ודתן ואבירם היו אנשים גדולים והקריבו מנחה קודם זה המעשה וזה טעם אל תפן אל מנחתם ופנה אלי כי לא נשאתי חמור אחד מהם: ופירוש נשאתי ששמתי משא עליו: <b>ולא הרעתי.</b> בשום דבר: <b>ויאמר משה אל קרח.</b> וכבר אמר כן רק הטעם כאשר אמר משה לקרח היו לפני ה' לקחו איש מחתתו: <b>מחר.</b> והוא היום שקרא משה לדתן ואבירם ויתכן שקראם קודם והוא הנכון בעבור מלת בקר: <b>ומשה ואהרן.</b> עמם: <b>הבדלו.</b> כי היו עמם פתח אהל מועד: <b>ויפלו על פניהם.</b> להתפלל: וטעם <b>אל.</b> מורה שיש לו כח לכלותם כרגע והוא אלהי הרוחות והטעם פי' אל כי יוכל לכלותם כי הרוחות בידו הם: <b>האיש אחד יחטא.</b> הוא קרח שהקהיל על משה ועל אהרן כל העדה וי\"א כי טעם אלהי הרוחות כי בידו כח לחפש הרוחות כי הוא אלהיהם והוא ידע כי האחד שהוא קרח חטא לבדו וגם אם החטיא אחרים. והנכון בעיני כי טעם הבדלו מתוך העדה הזאת הם קרח וכל עדתו ואש יצאה ואכלתם וכלתם כרגע: <b>למשכן קרח.</b> הנכון בעיני שהיה לקרח אהל לאדם שלו ולרכושו רחוק ממחנה הלוים והיה עם אהלו אהלי דתן ואבירם כי לא יחנו סביב המשכן כי אם הלוים לבדם ומזה הכתוב נלמוד כי בעל הדגל היה חונה קרוב ממחנה הלוים: <b>זקני ישראל.</b> הנכון בעיני שהם השבעים הזקנים הנבחרים: <b>ואל תגעו בכל אשר להם.</b> שאם באו להציל ממונם ירדו חיים שאול כמו הם: <b>בכל חטאתם.</b> בעבור רב חטאתם: <b>ובניהם.</b> הגדולים: <b>וטפם.</b> קטנים וקטנות: <b>לעשות את כל המעשים.</b> להחליף הבכורים בלוים ודע כי דבר גדול היה ומכעיס לאשר איננו מאמין להסיר הבכורים מכהונתם ולהשיב המעלה למשפחת משה לבדו וכל זה הי' בעבור מעשה העגל כי ויעלו עולות ויגשו שלמים הבכורים העלום כי הם היו לבדם הכהנים ובני לוי הרגו עובדי העגל ויש בכאן שאלה ותשובתם בפרשת וילך משה: <b>בריאה.</b> י\"א שהיא תורה על המצא מה שלא היה וכבר פירשתי שאין המלה רק מגזרת וברא אתהן וכבר נבקעו מדינות רבות וירדו הדרים בהן שאולה והנה פירושה כטעם גזרה: <b>ופצתה האדמה את פיה.</b> כמו ופתחה וכן יפצה פיהו וכבר רמזתי בעבור היות נשמת האדם העליונה תיכונה תדבר על הגבוהים ממנה כדרך ארמונה שהוא הגוף וכן על השפלים ממנה והטעם להבין השומעים: <b>ואת בתיהם.</b> שם כלל לנשיהם ובניהם וטפם: <b>ואת כל הרכוש.</b> שהיה לכלם: <b>וירדו הם.</b> הטעם כאשר ירדו נסתמה הארץ ולא נראו: <b>ותכס עליהם.</b> הארץ בעצמה: <b>ויאבדו.</b> בעבור מות בניהם העומדים תחתם: <b>לקולם.</b> בעבור קולם: ה\"א <b>החמשים</b> מושכת עצמה ואחרת עמה. י\"א כי קרח מהנבלעים היה והראיה ותבלע אותם ואת קרח וי\"א כי נשרף היה והעד ואת קרח במות העדה באכול האש וחז\"ל אמרו כי נשרף ונבלע ולפי דעתי שלא נבקע רק מקום דתן ואבירם כי לא נזכר וקרח היה עומד עם מחתתו עם אהרן ועם נשיאי העדה מקריבי הקטרה ופירוש הפסוק ואת קרח איננה דבק עם ותבלע אותם רק עם במות העדה ואם יטעון טוען ויאמר למה לא הזכיר קרח עם השרופים התשובה כי אחר שהזכיר הכתוב שנשרפה עדתו שבאה לעזרה אין צורך להזכיר קרח כי מקל וחומר יודע הדבר וכמוהו מרכבות פרעה וחילו ולא הזכיר בשירה פרעה שטבע ובאמת טבע כי כן כתוב ונער פרעה וחילו והעד הנאמן כי קרח היה מהשרופים ולא יהיה כקרח וכעדתו: <b>זרה הלאה.</b> מהמזבח: <b>כי קדשו.</b> כי אחר שהקריבום לשם הנם קדושים: <b>את מחתות החטאים.</b> פי' המחתות: <b>ועשו אותם.</b> האומנים: <b>רקועי פחים.</b> כמו וירקעו את פחי הזהב: ופי' <b>כי קדשו</b> כי הקריבום לפני ה': <b>ויהיו לאות.</b> לזכר ולסימן: <b>וירקעום.</b> המרקעים: <b>כאשר דבר ה' ביד משה לו.</b> לאהרן וי\"א כי לו שב אל קרח והוא רחוק בעיני: <b>ממחרת.</b> זה היום כי לעולם הוא סמוך: <b>אתם המתם.</b> הטעם מה ראיה היתה זאת ששבט לוי הוא הנבחר ונבחר אהרן לכהן גדול ויתכן שבתפלתכם או החכמה שידעתם שרפתם המקריבים: <b>בהקהל העדה.</b> כל קהלה ואחריה על היא למריבה: <b>ויבא משה ואהרן.</b> בעבור שראו שנראה הכבוד: <b>הרמו.</b> שישבו במקום המרומם במחנה הלויה והוא האהל כאשר פירשתי במלת העלו: <b>ויפלו על פניהם.</b> להתפלל: <b>את המחתה.</b> הידועה: <b>ושים קטרת.</b> ולא אמר הקטרת והמשכיל יבין: <b>והולך.</b> לשון צווי כמו הושב את אביך ושרשו כמו הוליכי וטעמו הובילי כמו ילך עמך: וטעם <b>וישב אהרן.</b> דבק עם הפרשה הבאה ואם נפסקה וכבר הראיתיך רבות כהנה וכהנה וכאשר שב אהרן ונעצרה המגפה דבר השם: <b>מטה.</b> י\"א כי מטה לוי איננו מטה האלהים כי כבר היה ניכר ומה צורך לכתוב עליו שם אהרן וי\"א כי המטה היה כשאר המטות אין הפרש ביניהם וזה הישר בעיני: וטעם <b>לבית אב.</b> שבטי ישראל כמו ראובן ושמעון: וטעם <b>כי מטה אחד.</b> בעבור שנחלק השבט לכהנים וללוים: <b>אשר אועד לכם.</b> תמיד: <b>והשכותי.</b> מפעלי הכפל כמו והתמותי (טמאתך) מגזרת וחמת המלך שככה וטעם <b>והשכותי.</b> כדרך בני אדם למצוא מנוחה ומטה לוי בתוך השנים עשר והנה יוסף במטה אחד: <b>לבית לוי.</b> מטה משרת עצמו ואחר עמו מטה אהרן מטה לבית לוי: <b>ויגמול.</b> מגזרת ויגדל הילד ויגמל ורבים אמרו בעבור שקדים כי המטה היה ממין האילן ואינה ראיה ודרך דרש כי שקדים כמו כי שוקד אני: <b>ויראו.</b> מכתב יד כל אחד: <b>ויאמרו בני ישראל.</b> די לנו שגוענו ואבדנו והנה עוד כל הקרב אל המשכן ה' ימות כמות השרופים ומי יתן ותמנו לגוע אז אמר השם לאהרן שהוא הנגיד על שבט לוי להזהירו שלא יכשילו הלוים את ישראל. וטעם לאהרן על יד משה או כאשר הוא כי גם אהרן נביא היה גם זאת הפרשה לאות כי במדבר סיני היתה כאשר הוקם המשכן ונבחרו הלוים ונפסלו הבכורים: <b>את עון המקדש.</b> שהוא מבית לפרכת והטעם אם לא תשמרוהו העון עליכם: וטעם <b>ובית אביך.</b> כי הם נושאי המקדש: <b>את עון כהונתכם.</b> אם לא תשמרו הכהונה העון עליכם: <b>שבט אביך.</b> הוא לוי וחז\"ל פירשוהו כמשמעו ולפי דעתי מה שפירשתיו כאילו אמר מטה לוי שהוא שבט אביך: <b>וילוו.</b> כמו ונספחו וכן ילוה אישי והנה הלוים נלוים בשמם: <b>ואתה ובניך אתך.</b> תשבו לפני אהל מועד לבדכם ולא הלוים: <b>גם הם גם אתם.</b> דרך המקרא כן כמו משל בנו גם אתה גם בנך והטעם כי זה כמו זה: וטעם <b>ונלוו עליך.</b> שלא תצטרכו לזר שהוא ישראל: <b>עבודת מתנה.</b> והזר מהכהנים אפי' לוי ועולת שמואל שהוא לוי איננה טענה כי היא היתה הוראת שעה כמעשה גדעון: <b>למשחה.</b> פירשתיו: <b>מקדש הקדשים.</b> כי יש קדשים קלים: <b>מן האש.</b> כל מה שיקדישו ממנו כי אשה כמו אש והה\"א נוסף: <b>לכל מנחתם.</b> אחר אשר יקדיש האזכרה ממנה ואמורי החטאת והאשם: <b>אשר ישיבו לי.</b> פי' כי תמעול מעל והנה המנחה והחטאת ואשם קדש קדשים כנגד השלמים: <b>בקדש הקדשים תאכלנו.</b> אפי' בקדש הקדשים שהוא אהל מועד ונקרא קדש הקדשים כנגד חצר המשכן: <b>מתנם.</b> בחסרון תי\"ו כמו הולך (נ\"א עובר) בשוק אצל פנה שהוא פנתה או הם שני משקלים: <b>חלב יצהר.</b> הנכבד והמוטב שהוא הקצף כי יצהר מענין צהור ושרשו צהר והוא חלב שמן זית: <b>בכורי כל אשר בארצם.</b> בכורי כל פרי האדמה: וטעם <b>כל טהור בביתך יאכלנו.</b> להזהיר על אלה החלבים כי כל טהור בביתך יאכל אותו על חזה התנופה ועל שוק התרומה ומה שיחרים הישראלי שלא יאכלנו כי הוא לשם ואתה תאכלנו: <b>אך פדה תפדה.</b> פירוש תקח פדיונו וכן בכור הבהמה הטמאה תפדה: <b>ופדויו.</b> שב אל בכור האדם לבדו: <b>לא תפדה כי קדש הם.</b> לא תקח פדיונם ורבים פירשו שפדה לישראל והפך זה כל הבכור שאמר תאכלנו והסימן לכהן מי שהוא חייב לאכלו: <b>ברית מלח.</b> ברית כרותה מגזירת ארץ פרי למלחה ומקום המלח כמו נכרת שלא יעלה בו צמח כלל וכן גפרית ומלח: <b>חלף.</b> כמו תמורה: <b>ולא יקרבו עוד.</b> בעבור עדת קרח: <b>ועבד הלוי הוא.</b> בעצמו ויש אומרים כי הוא פעול ואיננו נכון כי את עבודת אהל מועד הוא הפעול: <b>והם ישאו את עונם.</b> אם לא ישמרו והנה המעשר נחלתם ע\"כ אמרתי: <b>וידבר ה' אל משה.</b> ולא אל אהרן בעבור תתם מעשר מן המעשר לאהרן: <b>וכמלאה.</b> פירשתיו: <b>מכל חלבו.</b> מהטוב שבו וכן ואכלו את חלב הארץ: <b>את מקדשו.</b> כי המעשר הוא הקדש: וטעם <b>בהרימכם את חלבו.</b> וכבר הזכיר הכתוב זה לדבק אחריו ואכלתם אותו והטעם שהוא אסור לכם לאכול ממנו עד שתרימו חלבו ממנו ואחר שיחשב לכם אז תאכלוהו בכל מקום טהור: <b>ולא תשאו עליו חטא.</b> טעמו כאשר תרימו לא תשאו עליו חטא ובתתכם מקדשו ממנו יהיו קדשי בני ישראל שמורים ואם לא תעשו כן תשאו חטא שעברתם על המצוה וחללתם קדשי בני ישראל בעבור שאכלתם אתם מקדשו: <b>זאת חקת.</b> גם זאת הפרשה במדבר סיני נאמרה כאשר צוה השם וישלחו מן המחנה ובפסח היו טמאי מתים. ונסמכה זאת הפרשה בעבור שהיא לכהן: <b>פרה אדמה תמימה.</b> שלא תהיה קטנה. אמר הגאון כי מי נדה כמו הדבש שיזיק לבעל המרה האדומה ויועיל לבעל הלחה ואין צורך: <b>והוציא אותה.</b> המוציא או בצווי וכן ושחט כי הוא לא ישחטנה והעד לפניו: <b>ושרף את הפרה.</b> השורף והעד לעיניו: <b>עץ ארז.</b> כמו למצורע ושם רמזתי סוד: <b>וכבס בגדיו.</b> הכהן השורף: <b>וטמא הכהן.</b> וכבר ישב טמא ויש אומרי' שיהיה טמא עד הערב שלא יאכל מן הקדשים: <b>איש טהור.</b> איננו הכהן השורף: <b>למי נדה.</b> פירושו רחוק כמו מנדיכם: <b>וטמא עד הערב.</b> ואחר שאמר שיכבס את בגדיו אין צורך להזכיר שירחץ במים: <b>ולגר הגר בתוכם.</b> בעבור היות ארץ ישראל קדושה כי הכבוד שם: <b>לכל נפש אדם.</b> יהודי או עובד כוכבים: <b>אדם.</b> ולא בהמה: <b>וטמא.</b> יהיה טמא והוא פועל עתיד כי הוי\"ו השיבו ועל דעתי שהוא פועל עבר: <b>יתחטא בו.</b> יסור חטאו בו או כמו תחטאני באזוב ואטהר וידוע כי בסוד החשבון השלישי כמו השביעי: <b>כי מי נדה.</b> יש מפרשים כמו אך במי נדה יתחטא: <b>לא זורק עליו.</b> על המים: <b>עוד.</b> תמיד כמו עוד כל ימי הארץ: <b>באהל.</b> והבית כאהל רק הזכיר הכתוב האהל בעבור היות ישראל באהלים וכן אשר ישחט שור או כשב ועז במחנה: <b>וכל אשר באהל.</b> מבגד: <b>צמיד פתיל.</b> שנים פתילים: <b>או בקבר.</b> של אדם: ו. <b>לקחו לטמא.</b> הנה פירוש איך יתחטא: <b>איש טהור.</b> והקרוב להיותו כהן: <b>ואיש אשר יטמא.</b> וכבר הזכיר כל הנוגע במת בנפש ונכרתה ועתה הזהיר על העצם ועל הקבר: <b>יטמא עד הערב.</b> ולא יטהר עד אשר ירחץ: <b>וכל אשר יגע בו הטמא יטמא.</b> שהוא טמא מת או עצם או קבר: <b>תטמא עד הערב.</b> ותרחץ: <b>בחדש הראשון.</b> בשנת הארבעים והנה אין בתורה כלל שום מעשה או נבואה רק בשנה הראשונה ובשנת הארבעים: וטעם <b>ויבאו בני ישראל כל העדה.</b> בעבור שמתו דור המדבר ועתה באו הבאים אל ארץ כנען: <b>וישב העם בקדש.</b> בעבור שישבו שם ימים רבים כי כן כתיב: <b>ולא היה מים לעדה.</b> ספר הכתוב שנים מאורעים האחד מות מרים והשני מות אהרן ומשה ולא יכנסו לארץ והחל לספר הסבה: <b>וירב.</b> מבנין הפעיל: <b>בגוע אחינו.</b> שם הפעל כמו כשכב אדני המלך: <b>אחינו.</b> הם דור המדבר שמתו והם עבדי השם: <b>ולמה הבאתם.</b> ידבר למשה ולאהרן כי כן כתוב ויקהלו על משה ועל אהרן: וטעם <b>וירב העם עם משה.</b> שהמריבה היתה עם משה חזקה: <b>העליתנו.</b> מלה זרה: <b>ויבא משה ואהרן מפני הקהל.</b> כדמות בורחים: <b>ויפלו על פניהם.</b> להתפלל וי\"א לדרוש את השם בנבואה: <b>קח את המטה.</b> יש בכאן פירושים רבים יש בדברי יחיד בעבור שאמר לישראל שמעו נא המורים והם בני אברהם יצחק ויעקב ואילו היה כן למה אמר להם עוד ממרים הייתם ואחרים אמרו כי מלת ודברתם כמו והכיתם וכמוהו ותדבר את כל זרע המלוכה ואין זה נכון כי המלה מגזרת דבר או מן ידבר עמים תחתנו והנה פי' ותדבר כמו ותאבד וכן בספר השני והנה פירוש ודברתם אל הסלע ואבדתם ועוד אם כן הפירוש למה נענש משה גם הם השיבו בעבור שהכה פעמים אם כן למה נענש אהרן ויאמר רבי משה הדרשן ז\"ל הספרדי יש אותות נעשות בדבור ויש בפועל ודבור כמו מלת אלישע והשם צוה שיקח המטה להכות בסלע כמשפט הצור והוסיף מלת ודברתם להוציא המים במכה ובדבור ובעבור שהכעיסו ישראל אמר להם המן הסלע הזה נוציא לכם מים והיתה דעתו כי אין יכולת בנו להוציא מים מהסלע כי אם בכח השם והנה לא פירש דבורו היטב וחשבו אנשים בלבם כי דבורו שלא יוכל השם להוציא מים מן הסלע וזה טעם אשר לא קדשתם אותי והביא ראיה מדברי המשורר שאמר כי המרו את רוחו ויבטא בשפתיו והנה החטא היה בבטואו לא במכה גם זה איננו נכון כי משה אמר זה ולמה נענש אהרן ועוד כי אין במעשה זכר דבור והראיה שהביא איננה ראי' כי אין פי' כי המרו את רוחו כי אם אל השם וכן כתוב והמה מרו ועצבו את רוח קדשו וזה פירוש ויקציפו על מי מריבה והטעם שהקציפו השם וכן כתוב המה מי מריבה אשר רבו בני ישראל על ה' וירע למשה בעבורם כי המרו את רוח השם ויגזור על משה שלא יכנס לארץ. ואחרים אמרו כי הדבור אל הסלע שאיננו שומע איננה כי אם במכה ואם כן למה נענש משה. ואחרים אמרו בעבור שלא אמרו שירה כמו עלי באר ענו לה וזה טעם אשר לא קדשתם והאחרים אמרו כי השם צוה שידברו והם לא דברו רק הכה משה על כן נענשו שניהם ונאמר להם מעלתם מריתם לא האמנתם לא קדשתם. ואנשי שקול הדעת אמרו שלא יתכן שיהיה שליח השם ימיר דבור השם ואם הוא המיר איך נאמין בתורתו גם אלה לא דברו נכונה כי אילו היה מחליף במצוה מיד היה נענש כי הנה נענש על דבר שאינו מצוה לעולם ולא תורה לישראל ולא נעשה בזדון רק בשגגה בעבור שהכעיסוהו ישראל וכן אמר גם בי התאנף ה' בגללכם ואחרים אמרו כי ישראל אמרו שיוציא מסלע אחר וראיתם המן הסלע הזה ומשה פחד להחליף דבור השם ובעבור שלא האמין להוציא מים מן הסלע שאמרו על כן נענש וזה טעם לא האמנתם בי גם זה הפירוש איננו נכון כי הכתוב אמר מריתם את פי והנה לא מרו. והפירוש הנכון בעיני אגלנו ברמיזות דע כי כאשר ידע החלק את הכל ידבק בכל ויחדש בכל אותות ומופתים ואמת כי השם אמר למשה ולאהרן ודברתם ולא דברו בעבור מריבת העם עם משה והנה החלק חלק והכה הסלע ולא יצאו מים עד שהכהו פעם שנית והנה לא קדשו השם ומרו ומעלו בשגגה גם יוכל המפרש לפרש ויבטא בשפתיו על משה כי על כן נענש כי לא היה ראוי שידבר דבר עד שימלא שליחות השם גם יהיה דרש קדמונינו ז\"ל כי החטא היה בעבור שאמר שמעו נא המורים ורמזו זה הסוד: <b>אל הסלע.</b> שהודעתיך או הנמצא סמוך למחנה: <b>ונתן מימיו.</b> בעבור מימיו טעו רבים ואמרו כי זה הסלע הוא הצור ואלה עורי לב כי הצור הוא בחורב וזה הסלע היה בקצה ארץ אדום כי בקדש היה גם יתכן לפרש מימיו המים שאתן בו: <b>את המטה מלפני ה'.</b> הוא מטה האלהים והוא המונח לפני העדות: <b>המן הסלע הזה.</b> יש לנו כח להוציא לכם מים ממנו: <b>יען לא האמנתם בי.</b> היא הסוד שרמזתי שלא נקדש השם על ידם: <b>ויקדש בם.</b> במשה ואהרן כטעם בקרובי אקדש: <b>מקדש.</b> שם מקום עיר ואיננו קדש ברנע כי אותו הוא מדבר וכן הכתוב אומר יחיל ה' מדבר קדש: <b>התלאה.</b> פירשתיו: <b>לנו מצרים ולאבותינו.</b> שמתו והטעם שארך זמן רע תם: <b>וישלח מלאך.</b> כמשמעו וכן הכתוב אומר ומלאך פניו הושיעם ורבים פירשוהו על משה כי מצאו ויאמר חגי מלאך ה' ואין זאת דעתי: <b>בשדה ובכרם.</b> שלא ישחיתו ואפי' מי הבארות שלכם לא נשתה: <b>דרך המלך נלך.</b> אם הדרך שהמלך הולך בה או פירושו הדרך שיצוה המלך שהוא מלך אדום נלך: <b>במסלה נעלה.</b> מה יזיקכם שנעלה במסלה ואם הוצרכו למים תמכרום לנו וזה טעם מכרם כמו דמיהם: וטעם <b>בני ישראל כל העד'.</b> בעבור שיצא אדום להלחם בם הגיד הכתוב שלא נפקד איש מבני ישראל בבואם מעיר אדום אל הר ההר: <b>יאסף אהרן.</b> כמו ומות כהר שיתקן עצמו למות ויעלה אל ההר: <b>מריתם.</b> פירשתיו: <b>למי מריבה.</b> כמו במי מריבה שם המקום או בעבור מי מריבה: <b>והפשט.</b> <b>והלבשתם.</b> יוצאים לשנים פעולים: וטעם <b>ואהרן יאסף.</b> כי בעת שתפשוט בגדיו מיד ימות: <b>ויאסף אהרן אל עמיו.</b> פירשתיו: <b>ויראו כל העדה.</b> כאשר ראו זה המאורע שאירע בכו שלשים יום: ומלת <b>גויעה.</b> פירשתיו: <b>וישמע הכנעני מלך ערד.</b> אמרו הקדמונים שהוא סיחון ונקרא הכנעני כי כל אמורי כנעני ורבים אמרו כי זאת הפרשה יהושע כתבה והראיה מלך ערד אחד ומצאו שבני יהודה קראו שם המקום חרמה ולא אמרו כלום כי אותו המקום יקרא בתחלה צפת וזה מלך ערד והאמת שני מקומות ורבים במקרא כמו הם ומלך ערד על פשוטו הוא מעבר לירדן מזרחה ונסמכה זאת הפרשה למות אהרן כי הכתוב ספר מה שאירע בהר ההר קודם נסעם משם והעד וישמע הכנעני מלך ערד ואחריו ויסעו מהר ההר ואם תבקש מה שמע הנה מפורש: <b>כי בא ישראל דרך האתרים.</b> האתרים י\"א כי האל\"ף נוסף והטעם התרים את הארץ וכן אל\"ף אזרועך: <b>לסבוב את ארץ אדום.</b> צלמונה ופונון כי כן כתוב: <b>הקלקל.</b> כמו קל הקל והמלה כפולה ורבים כמו הם: <b>וישלח וגו' השרפים.</b> שם תאר הנחשים ודרך דרש אם ישך הנחש בלא לחש ואין יתרון לבעל הלשון והם שלחו לשונם לנשוך כן שולח בהם: <b>עשה לך.</b> כדמות נחש שרף מנחשת כי כן כתוב: <b>על נס</b> שיהיה גבוה ויראו אותו הכל ורבים השתבשו ואמרו כי זאת הצורה לקבל כח עליונים וחליל' חלילה כי הדבר נעשה בצווי השם ואין לנו לחפש למה צורת נחש ואם לא כן יראנו היש עץ שימתיק המים המרים אפי' הדבש לא ימתיקם ומה טעם לשום דבלת תאנים על השחין ואין בתולדת הדבלה להסיר השחין והאמת כי נשגבה ממנו דעת עליון: <b>ויסעו בני ישראל.</b> מארץ אדום כי כן כתוב לסבוב ואחרית גבולה פונון ומפונון נסעו אל אובות כי כן כתוב: <b>ויחנו בנחל זרד</b> במקום אחר יקרא דיבון גד: <b>כי ארנון גבול מואב</b> היה בתחלה: <b>בספר מלחמת ה'.</b> ספר היה בפני עצמו ושם כתוב מלחמות ה' בעבור יריאיו ויתכן שהיה מימות אברהם כי ספרים רבים אבדו ואינם נמצאים אצלנו כדברי נתן ועדו ודברי הימים למלכי ישראל ושירות שלמה ומשליו: <b>את והב בסופה.</b> מלחמות היו בימים הקדמונים במקומות הנזכרים ושם והב איננו לשון הקדש וכן ופסי ושתי ויזתא גם ושני או פירוש ושני הוי\"ו לחבור וכל זה למה שלא נמצא וי\"ו שרש בראש המלה רק מלת ווי העמודים רק תמצא תחת יו\"ד כמו ולד ופירוש המתרגם ארמי ידוע: <b>ואשד הנחלים.</b> י\"א שהוא בלשון ארמית וסוף דבר כל אלה שמות מקומות: <b>אשר נטה.</b> הטעם על ישראל כי על ער עברו: <b>ונשען לגבול מואב.</b> זהו והוא יושב ממלי ומשם נסעו ישראל אל המקום הנקרא באר כי ה\"א בארה תחת אל כה\"א מצרימה וזאת הבאר גם היא היתה פלא ואיננה הבאר הנקרא באר מרים לפי דעתי רק היה המקום שצוה משה וחפרוהו שרי ישראל במשענותם ומיד נבקעו מים: <b>עלי באר.</b> תחלת השירה ולא נכתבה כלה: <b>ענו לה.</b> לשון צווי והנה פי' איך עלתה: <b>כרוה נדיבי העם.</b> כפול כמשפט: <b>במחוקק.</b> ע\"י מחוקקים כמו לבי לחוקקי ישראל וזו הבאר היתה במדבר רחוק מהיישוב ומזה המדבר נסעו אל מתנה ומשם אל נחליאל ודע כי אשד הנחלים והמדבר הנקרא באר ומתנה ונחליאל כולם מקומות ויש להם שם כלל והוא עלמון דבלתימה כי כן כתוב בפרשת אלה מסעי או אלה שמות מקומות עברו עליהם במסע אחר והרי העברים לפני נבו הוא הבמות והגיא אשר בשדה מואב והעד שאמר הכתוב כי מהגיא נסעו אל ערבות מואב בעבר לירדן ירחו וכתיב כי מהר העברים נסעו אל ערבות מואב על ירדן ירחו ועוד ונשב בגיא מול בית פעור עת שהתחננתי ובמקום אחר עלה אל הר העברים הר נבו גם ויקבוד אותו בגיא ושם כתוב ויעל משה מערבות מואב אל הר נבו והנה הגיא הוא ראש הפסגה ושם מת משה ואין צורך להוליכו אחר מותו: <b>ונשקפה.</b> לשון נקבה על הגיא: <b>הישימון.</b> מקום שממה והעד ובתהו יליל ישימון וכן תעו במדבר בישימון דרך: <b>יהצה.</b> אל יהץ: <b>מארנון.</b> שלקח ממואב: <b>עד בני עמון.</b> כי כתוב כי חצי ארץ בני עמון היתה לישראל כי לקחוהו מיד האמורי שלקחו בתחלה מיד בני עמון והכתוב אמר על מואב ועמון שלא יתן השם מארצם לישראל עד מדרך כף רגל והטעם הארץ שהיתה בידם בעת ההיא על כן הוצרך הכתוב לאמר דברי המושלים בעבור חשבון שישבו שם ישראל כי כן כתוב וישב ישראל בכל ערי האמורי בחשבון: <b>ובכל בנתיה.</b> חשבון כאם והכפרים כבנות: <b>כי חשבון עיר סיחן.</b> שבה כי הוא נלחם במלך מואב הראשון והוא דבר ידוע: <b>המושלים.</b> הבודאים משלים מלבם: וטעם <b>באו חשבון.</b> לאמורים יאמרו: <b>ותבנה.</b> יותר ממה שהיא: <b>ותכונן</b> להיותה עיר סיחון: <b>כי אש יצאה מחשבון.</b> רמז לאנשים שקשרו בחשבון על מלכם: <b>להבה.</b> הטעם כפול כמשפט: <b>מקרית סיחון.</b> מקרית שהוא היום לסיחון: <b>ער מואב.</b> שם מקום סמוך כמו מבית לחם יהודה: <b>במות.</b> מקומו' גבוהים: <b>כמוש.</b> שם צלם אלהי מואב: <b>פליטם.</b> פליטי חרב בורחים: <b>ונירם.</b> דברי משה והמ\"ם סימן מלך אמורי וגדודיו ולו שני פירושים. האחד מגזירת ניר ותהיה מלת ונירם מושכת עצמה ואחרת עמה כמו והנבואה עודד הנביא וכן הוא ונירם אבד ניר חשבון ותהיה מלת ונירם כמו בתוך האהלי הערכך וכן הוא והניר שלהם אבד שהוא ניר חשבון. והפירוש השני שתהיה מלת ונירם מגזרת ירה ויור אשר יריתי והטעם כאשר ירינו אותם אבד חשבון: <b>ונשים.</b> מפעלי הכפל והחיר\"ק תחת קמ\"ץ קטן כמו ויסב אלהים את העם ויאמר רבי משה הכהן כי הדגשות לחסרון האל\"ף כאל\"ף מלפנו מבהמות ארץ מגזרת תאשם שומרון וי\"א כי חשבון היתה עיר סיחון לעולם וטעם בואו חשבון דברי המושלים למואבים הבאים בשבי אל חשבון כי אש יצאה מחשבון משל למחנות סיחון וכאשר ירינום דברי המושלים על לשון המואבים חשבנו כי תאבד חשבון ונעשה שממה כל הארץ עד נופח או הם דברי משה הדרשן: <b>ויפנו.</b> פירשתיו: <b>אדרעי.</b> אל אדרעי דרך קצרה: <b>השאיר לו.</b> אחד מישראל: <b>לאמורי.</b> בקמצות הלמ\"ד והטעם לידוע שהוא סיחון ועוג ולא הי' במלכי כנען גדולים כאלה והעד אשר כגובה ארזים גבהו: <b>ויגר מואב.</b> כמו ויירא וכן גורו לכם: <b>ויקץ.</b> כמו הפוך וכמוהו נעלה ביהודה ונקיצנה: <b>אל זקני מדין.</b> יתכן שהיו החמשה מלכים זקנים: <b>ילחכו כלחוך.</b> שנים בנינים: <b>פתורה.</b> כמו מצרימה אל פתור: <b>ארץ בני עמו.</b> והם ארמים וכן מפתור ארם נהרים ובדרש שבלעם הוא בלע כי זה ארמי ואם בעבור בעור אביו הנה בן אחשורוש קודם אחשורוש רק הם שנים: <b>אשר על הנהר.</b> פירוש ארם נהרים: <b>עין הארץ.</b> פירשתיו: <b>ארה לי.</b> לשון צווי מפעלי הכפל בחסרון אות הכפל וכן קבה לי והנה קוב על משקל שמור וקבה לי בחסרון הה\"א על דרך משקל שכב רכב צלח: <b>נכה בו.</b> שם הפועל ואין טענה בעבור היותו בה\"א כי הנה כמוהו לכלה הפשע: <b>יואר.</b> הוי\"ו הנח הנעלם תחת הדגש שהוא תחת אות הכפל כמו על כמון יושב ולא היה כמוהו מאותו בנין בעבור אות הגרון כמשפט: <b>זקני מואב.</b> חכמים: <b>וקסמים בידם.</b> אמר רבי שמואל הנגיד הספרדי ז\"ל שטעמו ודמי הקסמים וראיתי מבידם ולא אמר כלום רק הוא כמשמעו וספר הכתוב ששלח אל קוסם קוסמים כמוהו ועוד שלא יוכל להתעכב לאמר לא אמצא יום נבחר ושעה נבחרת ללכת ולקוב כי הם אנשי אומנותו והעד שפירושו כאשר הוא שאמר הכתוב בימינו היה הקסם: <b>והשבותי אתכם דבר.</b> אחר שתלינו: <b>ויבא אלהים.</b> לכבוד ישראל כי השם ידע דבר בעל פעור ואילו היה בלעם מקלל אותם היו כל העולם אומרים כי בעבור קללת בלעם באה המגפה: <b>מי האנשים האלה.</b> פתחון ותחלת דבור כמו אי הבל אחיך והנה הוא כחש והשם אמר לו קול דמי אחיך: <b>כי ברוך הוא.</b> הטעם כי לא תוכל לקלל אותו כי אני ברכתיו: <b>שרי בלק.</b> ולא הזכיר זקני מדין כי בלק הוא העיקר והוא השולח אליו אמר ר' משה הכהן הספרדי ז\"ל כי אף על פי שסימן הפועל ביו\"ד לא יתכן להיותו כי אם בנו\"ן כמו הלהרגני לא יאמר הלהרגי והנה שכח לתתי להלך עמכם לא אבה יבמי ור' יונה המדקדק אמר כי היו\"ד נוסף ואיננו נכון: וטעם <b>הלוך עמנו.</b> ממקומו: <b>רבים.</b> כמשמעו או גדולים כמו על כל רב ביתו קרית מלך רב והוא דוד כי כן תקרא קרית חנה דוד: <b>כי כבד אכבדך.</b> בממון: <b>וכל אשר תאמר.</b> שיש צורך כדי שתקללם והעד כי כבד אכבדך כן שאמר בלעם אם יתן לי בלק מלא ביתו כסף וזהב: <b>מלא ביתו.</b> ביתו מלא וכן מלא כל הארץ כבודו כי רבים טעו שחשבו כי כבוד השם הוא מלא העולם כטעם לה' הארץ ומלואה: <b>קטנה או גדולה.</b> תאר השם ויחסר מקום השם וכן ועשיר יענה עזות ומאכלו בריאה: <b>בזה.</b> במקום הזה אמר הגאון ז\"ל אם יטעון טוען ויאמר אחר שאמר השם לא תלך עמהם איך אמר קום לך אתם יש להשיב כי השם לא רצה שילך עם האנשים הראשונים עד שיבואו שרים נכבדים מהם ולפי דעתי אין צורך רק טעמו כטעם שלח לך אנשים כי השם אמר לישראל עלה רש והם לא האמינו רק אמרו נשלחה אנשים לפנינו אז שאל משה את השם ואמר לו שלח לך אנשים ואחר שאמר השם לבלעם לא תאור את העם מה צורך היה לו לומר ואדעה מה יוסף ה' דבר רק חשב בלבו מחשבה רעה והשם אמר לו לך עם האנשים רק השמר לך שלא תדבר רק מה שאומר לך והעד על פירושי ויחר אף אלהים כי הולך הוא: <b>ויחבוש.</b> בציווי: <b>לשטן לו.</b> כבר פירשתיו בספר איוב כי השטן היה המלאך ודברי הגאון שהוא בן אדם לא מעלין ולא מורידין: <b>מן הדרך.</b> הדרוך והלכה בשדה שאין שם דרך: <b>להטותה הדרך.</b> דרך קצרה והטעם אל הדרך: <b>במשעול הכרמים.</b> פירושו כפי מקומו כדברי המתרגם ארמית כי אין ריע לו: <b>ותלחץ אל הקיר.</b> היא לחצה עצמה: <b>אל הקיר.</b> הוא הגדר: <b>ויוסף להכתה.</b> כי כבר הכה אותה בנטותה אל השדה: <b>ויפתח ה'.</b> אחז\"ל שי' דברים נבראו בערב שבת בין השמשות ולפי דעתי שהטעם שגזר השם לחדש באותות האלה שהם חוץ לתולדות ויאמר הגאון כי לא דברה האתון ורב שמואל בן חפני תפסו ורב שמואל הספרדי בעל השירים חשב להציל הנתפס ודע כי אנשי שקול הדעת הוצרכו להוציא הדברים ממשמעם כי אמדו שהשם לא יחדש אות בעולם לשנות המנהג שברא רק להצדיק נביאו ולא אמרו אמת כי הנה חנניה מישאל ועזריה נעשה להם אות ולא היו נביאים ויש מהם אומרים כי בלעם נביא היה והאמת כי נבואתו היתה בעבור כבוד ישראל כי קוסם היה וכן קראו הכתוב ויש אומרים כי היה יודע דעת עליונים לקבל כחם למטה בצורות וזה טעם ואשר תאור יואר והנכון בעיני כי היה יודע מזלות ובעת ראותו במזל של שום אדם שהגיע עת רעתו היה מקלל אותו ובבא הרעה אל המקולל יחשבו הרואים והשומעים הנמצאים כי בעבור קללתו באה הרעה והעד שדבר במרמה עם שרי בלק וזה טעם לא אוכל לעבור את פי ה' אלהי כי אין יכולת בנוצר לשנות מעשה היוצר או גזרתו והסוד כי החלק לא ישנה החלק רק גזירות הכל תשנה גזירת החלק ולא אוכל לגלות זה הסוד כי עמוק הוא והישר כי האתון דברה ואם תבין סוד מלאכי אברהם גם יעקב אז תבין האמת: וטעם <b>במקל.</b> כי בתחלה ובשנית הכה אותה בעץ או בעור: <b>רגלים.</b> פירשתיו: <b>התעללת.</b> פירשתיו: <b>מעודך.</b> הטעם מיום שרכבת: <b>ההסכן הסכנתי.</b> ההרגל הרגלתי והטעם הכך היה חקי הסכן נא עמו ושלם: <b>ויגל ה'.</b> כנער אלישע שהוסיף במאור עיניו או הכהו תחלה בסנורים: <b>וישתחו לאפיו.</b> פירשתיו: <b>כי ירט.</b> הטעם עוות וכן על ידי רשעים ירטני שהוא מן רטה שאילו היה מן ירט היה ראוי להיות כמו יעטני ואם הם שני שרשים וכמוהו מעיל צדקה יעטני שהוא על משקל אשר יעצני כמו עוטה אור: <b>ותראני האתון.</b> בקמץ גדול תחת קטן שהיה ראוי להיות ותראני ורבים כן אולי יתחלק לטעמים רבים ופה הוא כמו לולי ומלת גם לעד שמתה האתון אחר שדברה: <b>ואותה החייתי.</b> דרך קצרה וכן הטעם כאשר הרגתיה הרגתיך או הרגתיך לבדך ואותה החייתי: וטעם <b>ואותה החייתי.</b> כי בן אדם בראותו המלאך ימות והעד ותנצל נפשי ודבר מנוח לעד אף כי הבהמה שאין לה שום שותפות עם רוח המלאך כבן אדם: <b>עם האנשים.</b> האלה: <b>ואפס.</b> כמו רק וכן אפס כי לא יהיה בך אביון אפס כי עז העם: <b>למה לא הלכת.</b> כמו באת בעבור מלת אלי וכן מלת ויסר כאשר פירשתיו: <b>קרית חצות.</b> שם מדינה: <b>במת בעל.</b> הוא בעלי במות ארנון: <b>וירא משם קצה העם.</b> כי הם חונים לארבע רוחות השמים: <b>שבעה מזבחות.</b> יש סודות עמוקים לא יבינום כי אם מתי מספר ושביעי בימים ובחדשים ובשנים ושבעה כבשי העולה ושבעה הזאות גם אמר השם לאיוב קחו לכם שבעה פרים ושבעה אילים ובתת שלם לשלם אז תתחדש רוח בינה והמשכיל יבין: פר <b>ואיל במזבח.</b> בכל מזבח והיא דרך קצרה כאילו אמר במזבח האחד מכל המזבחות: <b>יקרה.</b> מגזרת לקראתי: <b>ודבר.</b> סמוך אל מה: <b>וילך שפי.</b> דברי המתרגם ארמית ידועים שהוא לבדו והנה שפי לבדו גם הוא בלי אח ואחרים אמרו כי הוא כמו נכאה לכב מגזרת ושפו עצמותיו והנכון בעיני שהוא מגזרת קול על שפיים וימצא ביו\"ד גם באל\"ף כמלת פתאים והטעם שהלך אל שפי ותחסר מלת אל כמו ויבא ירושלים וכן נסעו העם חצרות ורבים כן והנה הוא מנחש בלכתו כי כן כתוב ולא הלך כפעם בפעם לקראת נחשים והנה גם פה רמזתי לך סוד חתום: <b>ואעל פר ואיל במזבח.</b> בצווי: <b>וישא משלו ויאמר.</b> המשל הוא כי מראש צורים אראנו: <b>מהררי קדם.</b> מזרח: <b>לכה ארה לי יעקב.</b> תחסר מלת ואמר ובשיר השירים כמוהו רבים והיא דרך קצרה: <b>זועמה ישראל.</b> הטעם כפול כמשפט שהוא דרך לדבר טעם אחד במלות משונו' וישנוהו לחזוק והיתה ראויה מלת זועמה להיותה על משקל זכרה לי אלהי רק כאשר נפתח העי\"ן בעבור היותו מן הגרון היה היה בינו ובין הזי\"ן חול\"ם תחת קמץ חטף: <b>מה אקוב לא קבה אל.</b> כטעם קללה והה\"א תחת וי\"ו כה\"א אהלה וכן ה\"א כי פרעה אהרן והמלה מפעלי הכפל והשלמה קבבו כמו סבבו ואם היא מלה זרה: <b>ומה אזעם לא זעם ה'.</b> מגזרת זעם והטעם כפול: <b>כי מראש צורים אראנו.</b> כי על השפי היה והוא גבוה והעד על השפי שהוא כפירושי ולא הלך כפעם בפעם לקראת נחשים וישת אל המדבר פניו ולא אל שפי גם יתכן להיות מראש צורים משל לגזירות היורדות מהעליונים כי ראה בחכמתו שתעמוד זאת האומה לבד' ולא תתערב עם אחרות מתגברת עליה לעזוב תורתה כאשר עשו כל האומות: <b>ובגוים לא יתחשב.</b> אפרשנו בפסוק יצב גבולות עמים: <b>מי מנה.</b> והתימה שלא יתחשב עם הגוים והם עם רב כחול שיתכן שלא יתחשב המעט: <b>עפר יעקב.</b> הטעם שהוא רב כעפר הארץ: <b>ומספר את רבע ישראל.</b> דגל ישראל. דגל אחד כטעם אפס קצהו תראה וכלו לא תראה: ויפה פירש המתרגם ארמית מלת ישרים וטעם לפי דעתי שהתאוה למות ותהיה אחריתו כאחרית ישראל שהם חלק השם ולא חלק כוכבים כי הוא היה קוסם ויש אומרים שמלת ותהי אחריתי כפולה בטעם והוא היה מתאוה שימות מות ישרים כמו הישרים של ישראל בעבור דעתו כי בחרב ימות והגאון אמר כי מי מנה הוא השם והטעם אתה שתוכל למנות עפר יעקב המת נפשי מות ישרים אם כן מה טעם ומספר את רובע ישראל ולפי דעת רבים שפירושו כמו ארחי ורבעי זרית שהוא כענין רבצי ויפרשו עפר יעקב על עת נסעו: משפט הלשון להקדים שם הפועל בלשון עבר ועתיד ובצווי הדבר הפוך ויש מלות זרות כמו ברכת ברך ובא בא (ושטף ועבר): <b>אפס קצהו.</b> רק קצהו: <b>וקבנו.</b> מלה זרה ולפי הדקדוק כי הצווי כעתיד ואין ביניהם רק הסימן ירדפהו ירדפנו ירדפוהו אויב ירדפו ובאה זו המלה מורכבת עם נו\"ן ובחול\"ם ולפי דעת רבי יהודה המדקדק הראשון שהוא מן שורש קבן א\"כ לא יתכן להיותה צווי כי ימצא כן מהבנין הקל אולי תהיה שם הפועל על משקל ומשמרו את השבועה: <b>וישא משלו.</b> הוא כתועפת ראם כלביא יקום: <b>האזינה עדי.</b> מגזרת עד וכן לא שבתם עדי והטעם כפול. וי\"ו בנו בעור נוסף כמו למעינו מים: וטעם <b>לא איש אל.</b> בעבור שאמר וקבנו לי משם וכבר אמר לא קבה אל: <b>אמר ולא יעשה.</b> אמרו: <b>ודבר.</b> דברה: <b>הנה ברך לקחתי.</b> שם הפועל כמו שם: <b>וברך.</b> פועל עבר והטעם והשם ברך ברכה ולא אשיבנה: <b>לא הביט און.</b> לפי דעתי כי מזאת המלה למד בלק לשלוח נשי מואב במחנה ישראל והטעם כי אין השם כבן אדם שיתנחם כי לא ראה און בישראל והנה אם יהיה בהם און לא יקום דבר השם כי כל דבריו הם על תנאי רק במקום שבועה וכן הנביא אומר רגע אדבר וזה טעם בדבר בלעם: <b>ולא ראה עמל.</b> הטעם כפול והוא אחי האון והטעם מה יביא האדם לעמל בסוף און. והנה כל עת שלא הביט און ביעקב השם עמו: <b>ותרועת מלך בו.</b> במחנה ישראל וזה ותקעתם תרועה: <b>אל מוציאם ממצרים.</b> וזה השם שהיה עמו הוא תקיף והראה אותות במצרים: <b>כתועפת.</b> כמו קרני ראם ופירוש תועפות תוקף וכן ותועפות הרים לו גם יתכן היות פירושו וקרני הרים וכסף תועפות לך פירושו וכסף תועפות הרים ואמר לו כמו ותרועת מלך בו והטעם שזה האל שם תוקף לישראל וכל זה בעבור שהוא דבוק בשם ולא יבקש כי אם מאתו כי אין להם צורך למנחש וקוסם: <b>כעת יאמר ליעקב.</b> כעת הזאת והטעם בכל עת יאמר להם בלי דעת נחוש: <b>מה פעל אל.</b> מה יפעל אל ומלת עבר בעבור היות כל דבר נגזר ואם הוא לעתיד כבר נגזר בתחלה וזה יאמר לישראל בדרך נבואה שהוא האמת: <b>ליעקב ולישראל.</b> דבר כפול בנבואה וכן מראש שניר וחרמון: <b>הן עם כלביא יקום.</b> רמז כי ינצח מלכי כנען והקרוב אל הדעת הדבר הקרוב כמו מלחמת מדין שלא נשמע מלחמה כמוה שלא נפקד מזרע ישראל אחד ומתו חמשה מלכים ונפש אדם אשר לא ידעו משכב זכר היו שלשים ושתים אלף: <b>ודם חללים.</b> המלקוח ואת כל חילם ועל דרך הדרש לא ישכב משה עד יאכל טרף כן כתוב אחר תאסף אל עמך: <b>וקבתו לי.</b> מפעלי הכפל כמו וסבותי אני: <b>ראש הפעור.</b> ולא הלך לקראת נחשים על כן היתה עליו רוח אלהים וזה עשה בעבור שראה כי לא נחש ביעקב: <b>וישת אל המדבר פניו.</b> ששם ישראל בערבות מואב: <b>שכן לשבטיו.</b> ראה כל הדגולים י\"א כי בלעם היה רע עין הנקרא מרע וברעת עינו היה עושה רעות וכבר הודעתיך דעתי: <b>וישא משלו.</b> הטעם שנשא קול במשלו והמשל כנחלים נטיו: <b>נאם.</b> דבר כמו וינאמו נאם י\"א כי טעם שומע גם יחזה דבר הנחוש והקרוב אל הדעת שהוא דרך הנבואה בחלום כדברי אליפז תמונה לנגד עיני דממה וקול אשמע: <b>שתם העין.</b> אין לו אח רק פירושו כפי מקומו הפך סתום וי\"א כי עין אחד היתה לבלעם וזה דרך דרש: <b>נפל.</b> כמו תרדמה נפלה על אברם: <b>וגלוי עינים.</b> אף על פי שהוא ישן הוא רואה בעיניו כטעם ולבי ער: <b>מה טבו.</b> פעל עבר כמו כי אורו עיני: <b>נטיו.</b> דגשות הטי\"ת להתבלע נו\"ן נטה כי יש נחלים שינטו כה וכה ועליהם אילנים: <b>כאהלים.</b> כמו מר ואהלות והנה דמה האהלים כנחלים נטיו: <b>כארזים.</b> כפול בטעם והזכיר הארזים כארז בלבנון ישגה: <b>יזל מים.</b> הנה מים לשון יחיד כמו מי נדה לא זורק עליו: <b>מדליו.</b> כמו מדליותיו: <b>וזרעו במים רבים.</b> כזרע שרוה במים והטעם שכל יום יצמח ויגדל: <b>וירום מאגג מלכו.</b> נבואה על שאול שהוא המלך הראשון כי קודם שאול היו שופטים ולא מלכים: <b>אל מוציאו.</b> והטעם כי האל המוציאו ממצרים שם כח לו כתועפות ראם ואל יטעון טוען בעבור מ\"ם אל מוציאם ויחשוב כי מלת לו סימן לשם כי כן משפט הלשון כמו תכו לרגליך ישא מדברותיך עד אנה ינאצוני העם הזה ורבים כן: <b>יאכל גוים צריו.</b> מלכי כנען: <b>ועצמותיהם יגרם.</b> ישבר הגרם שהוא העצם וכן מלת עצמו וככה מסעף פארה לא תפאר: <b>וחציו ימחץ.</b> כל חץ מחציו ימחץ וכן וצדיקים ככפיר יבטח בנות צעדה וכן מברכיך ברוך כל אחד ממברכיך יהיה ברוך וכן אורריך: <b>כרע שכב.</b> הטעם שיירש ישראל ארץ כנען ואחר כך תשקוט הארץ: <b>יקימנו.</b> פירשתיו: <b>ויספק את כפיו.</b> כמו ספקו עליך כפים: <b>לכה איעצך.</b> י\"א הטעם על בנות מואב וזה דבר רחוק בעבור שאמר באחרית הימים והנכון בעיני שהוא כמשמעו אתן לך עצה שתדע מה תעשה כי זה העם כן יעשה לעמך: <b>וידע דעת עליון.</b> בדרך נבואה לא בקסם: <b>אראנו ולא עתה.</b> הקרוב אלי כי זאת הנבוא' על דוד אמר ולא עתה כי אחרי ארבע מאות שנה היתה: <b>אשורנו ולא קרוב.</b> הטעם כפול והמשל הוא כוכב ושבט: <b>דרך כוכב.</b> יש דמות כוכבים דורכים ברקיע שלא היו בתולדת ולא נודעו: <b>וקם שבט.</b> מלכות והנכון בעיני כי מלת דרך שיראה בדרכו כטעם הכוכבים ממסילותם ורבים פירשוהו על המשיח והקדמונים אמרו סנחריב בלבל הגוים והנה מואב ועמלק ואשור ועוד למה השלים וענו עבר רק היה ראוי להיות דרך כוכב בסוף משלו וחסירי דעת יחשבו כי המפרש דרך כוכב על דוד הוא מכחש ביאת המשיח חלילה חלילה כי המשיח מבואר היטב בנבואת דניאל כאשר פירשתי שהזכיר עמידת מלכי יון וקום החשמונים ועמידת בית שני ושני המצור והגליות והישועה זה אחר זה ואין צורך לנביא בעולם עם דברי משה שהוא העיקר אם יהיה נדחך בקצה השמים ושב ה' אלהיך את שבותך: <b>ומחץ פאתי מואב.</b> כן עשה דוד: <b>וקרקר.</b> כמו מקרקר קיר והטעם הורס הקיר כמו מסעף: <b>בני שת.</b> כמו בני אדם כי הוא העיקר כי נח מבני בניו היה ויאמר היצחקי כי פירשו על בני עמון גם מואב והטעם כפול גם אמר שהוא מגזרת וחשפי שת רמז לבנות לוט והוא רחוק בעיני כי השת הוא האחור שהוא כמו היסוד כמו כי השתות יהרסון ורבים פירשו כל בני שת מגזרת כי השתות והטעם כי יהרום המדינות ואיננו רחוק: <b>והיה אדום ירשה.</b> מגזרת ואם לא תורישו והוא שם במשקל קח לך לבנה והוא תחת תאר השם כמו והיתה הארץ שממה ויודע כי גברה יד דוד על אדום והר שעיר: <b>וירד מיעקב.</b> יקום רודה מיעקב: <b>והאביד שריד מעיר.</b> מכל עיר והטעם מאדום וזה היה יואב כי כן כתוב עד הכרת כל זכר באדום: <b>וירא את עמלק.</b> בדרך נבואה והמשל ראשית גוים ופירושו כי הוא הגוי הנלחם עם ישראל בראשונה ואחריתו עד שיהיה אובד וכן היה בימי שאול שהמית מאיש ועד אשה מעולל ועד יונק וזקן ורבים פירשו ראשית גוים כי הם יחשבו בראש הגוים ולא היה כן: <b>וירא את הקיני.</b> משפחת יתרו וכתוב המה הקינים וחבר הקיני והמשל ושים בסלע קנך. והטעם כפול כי אילו היה מושבך גבוה כקן העוף לא יצילך: <b>לבער קין.</b> כמו ושבה והיתה לבער וכן כאשר יבער הגלל ובערת הרע וקין הוא הקיני: וטעם <b>עד מה אשור תשבך.</b> כאומר עד מתי תשבך אשור לא יעזבך כי אם היתה לבער ואשור לשון נקבה והטעם מחנה וכן ותפול שבא ותקחם ותערוך ישראל: <b>וישא משלו ויאמר.</b> הוא וצים מיד כאשר הזכיר שאשור ישבה הקיני אמר גם יבא עת שיעונה אשור ועבר עמו והטעם העברים שישבה אשור כי הקינים היו דרים עם ישראל ופירוש המתרגם ארמית ידוע רק אין מנהג הכתוב להזכיר עבר בלא נהר. יש מפרשים וצים לשון רבים מגזרת וצי אדיר וי\"א שפירושו כמו ופגשו ציים את איים כי דמם לציים שישום אדם מראותם: וטעם <b>אוי מי יחיה משמו אל.</b> הטעם על מלך אשור ששם נפשו כמו אל וכן כתיב בספר ישעיה או טעמו מי יחיה מהגזרות ששם אל בעולם על ידי אשור כי מלך אשור נצח את כל הגוים כי כן כתוב: <b>וכתים.</b> מבני יון כי כן כתוב ויתכן להיות רמז למלכות יון וכבר ביארתי בספר דניאל כי מלכות יון וכתים אחת היא והיא החיה השלישית בראיות: <b>מיד כתים.</b> ממקום כמו על יד הירדן ויד תהיה לך: <b>וגם הוא.</b> כתים שהוא שם יחיד ואם הוא על משפט לשון רבים והעד ובני יון אלישה ותרשיש כתים: <b>ויקם בלעם.</b> כי שוכב היה ותרדמה נפלה עליו וכן אמר נופל וגלוי עינים: <b>בשטים.</b> כי כן כתוב ויחנו על הירדן מבית הישימות עד השטים והכל בערבות מואב כי לא זזו משם גם יהושע משם שלח מרגלים: ולפי דעתי כי <b>ויחל</b> מהבנין הכבד הנוסף: <b>וישתחוו.</b> ישראל ובנות מואב: <b>ויצמד ישראל.</b> מגזרת צמד בקר והטעם הנשים והנה נצמדו עמם לדת פעור: <b>והוקע אותם.</b> הטעם על הנצמדי' והעד שהוא כתוב ויאמר משה אל שופטי ישראל: <b>והוקע אותם.</b> כמו ויוקיעם בהר כדברי המתרגם ארמית והעד נגד השמש והטעם בפרהסיא כמו לעיני השמש הזאת: <b>הרגו איש את אנשיו.</b> הטעם מאיזה שבט יהיו וידוע כי הרגו ואם לא הזכיר הכתוב: <b>ויקרב אל אחיו.</b> נתנה למשפחתו: <b>והמה בוכים.</b> מתפללים לשם: <b>וירא פינחס.</b> כאשר ראה פינחס כן קם מתוך העדה שהיתה בחצר אהל מועד ויש בכאן שאלה ויתכן להשיב שכבר נצמד זמרי בעדים: <b>אל הקבה.</b> כמו אל האהל וכן קרוב בלשון קדר ואם יש מעט הפרש בין צורת האהל והקבה: <b>וידקור.</b> כמו ודקרני בה: <b>אל קבתה.</b> בקובה שהיתה שם עם אחי זמרי. וי\"א כי קבתה מגזרת הזרוע והלחיים והקבה וגם יש דרך דרש שנעשו י' נסים לפינחס רק הכתוב לא הזכירם: <b>בקנאו.</b> קל הנו\"ן להקל על הלשון והטעם כי הוא קנא כקונו וכתוב על השם כי הוא אל קנא בע\"א: ולולי הוא שקנא הייתי מכלה כל ישראל בדבר <b>בקנאתי</b>: <b>את בריתי שלום.</b> טעמו את בריתי ברית שלום כמו כסאך אלהים ורבים כן והטעם שלא יגור מאחי זמרי כי הוא נשיא בית אב ושכרו שתהיה לו ולזרעו אחריו ברית כהונת עולם ונצח כי הכהנים הגדולים היו מבני פינחס ויתכן שהיו בנים אחרים לאלעזר: ומלת <b>אחריו.</b> לאות שמת ואינו אליהו כלל וכבר פירשתיו כי נגיד היה עליהם וגם שהיה בימי פילגש בגבעה: <b>אשר קנא לאלהיו.</b> מאהבתו את השם גם עשה טובה לישראל ודרך דרש האב כפר ובניו יכפרו: <b>אשר הכה את המדינית.</b> עם ורבים כן: <b>נשיא בית אב.</b> אחד מחמשת אבות בני שמעון. וראש לבית אבותיו גדול: <b>צור.</b> אחד ממלכי מדין והנה גם מלכי מדין חמשה אבות: <b>צרור.</b> שם הפועל כמו זכור את יום השבת: <b>כי צוררים הם לכם.</b> כי הצרו לכם: <b>בנכליהם.</b> במחשבתם הרעה מגזרת ויתנכלו אותו: <b>ועל דבר כזבי.</b> ועוד כי יחשבו לעשות לכם רע בעבור כזבי אחותם: <b>ויהי אחרי המגפה.</b> אמר השם אל משה ואל אלעזר על יד משה וכן ויצו משה וזקני ישראל אז ישיר משה ובני ישראל: וטעם <b>אחרי המגפה.</b> בעבור שאמר השם לאלה תחלק הארץ: <b>וידבר משה ואלעזר הכהן.</b> במקום אביו ויתכן שהוא היה פה למשה כמו אהרן: <b>אתם.</b> כמו דברו לשלום: <b>מבן עשרים שנה.</b> והטעם שנשאו את חשבונם כאשר צוה ה' את משה: וטעם <b>ובני ישראל היוצאים מארץ מצרים.</b> כי היו בספורים רבים מיוצאי מצרים והקרוב להיותם חצים והחל מראובן בספורים הראשונים במדבר סיני: <b>אשר הצו.</b> כטעם כי ינצו אנשים: <b>ואת קרח.</b> פירשתיו: <b>ויהיו לנס.</b> כמו ויהיו לאות לבני ישראל: <b>ובני קרח לא מתו.</b> והעד שמואל ובניו ובני בניו שהם המשוררים והם הנקראים הקרחים לבני קרח מזמור גם בתורה כתיב משפחת הקרחי והזכיר הכתוב ובני קרח עם בני ראובן בעבור כי בני דתן ואבירם גדולים וקטנים מתו והנה רעת דתן ואבירם קשה מרעת קרח: <b>הימיני.</b> אל תבקש דקדוק בשמות וכן מן פוני ומן לשפופם השופמי לימנה משפחת הימנה ואיננו הימיני כמו מן בריעה בריעי וחגי ושוני חסר יו\"ד היחס או זה יו\"ד היחס ושל השם חסר והוא הנכון ואחר ראובן שמעון וגד החונים עליו רק מנשה קודם אפרים ובמדבר סיני הפוך והנכון שזה בעבור מספרם כי בני אפרים יוסיפו על בני מנשה במדבר סיני שמונת אלפים ושלשת מאות ובערבות מואב יוסיפו בני מנשה על בני אפרים עשרים אלף ומאתים וכן זכר למשפחות חמשה בנים לבנימין והם בכר וגרא ונעמן וראש וארד: <b>לאחירם.</b> הוא אחי שפופם הוא מופים חופם הוא חופים ואלה ארד ונעמן הם בני בלע וי\"א כי נעמן וארד מיורדי מצרים הם והם בני בלע בן בנימין: <b>לשוחם.</b> הוא חושים: <b>אלה משפחות דן למשפחותם.</b> כי חושים נחלק למשפחות רבות: <b>יחלק את הארץ.</b> הטעם כי בגורל יחלק הארץ למטות: <b>על פי הגורל תחלק נחלתו בין רב למעט.</b> לפקודים: <b>לגרשון.</b> החל מהבכור והזכיר בנו שהוא לבני ולא הזכיר שמעי ויתכן שלא היו לו בנים או היו לו ומתו בלא בנים. ואחר כן הזכיר החברוני שהוא בן קהת ולא הזכיר עוזיאל ואחר כן בני מררי ושב להזכיר בני יצהר ואחר כן בני עמרם ואיחר אותם בעבור שיבאר מה שאירע לבני בן עמרם: <b>הקרחי.</b> הם בני קרח. והזכיר שם יוכבד בעבור כבוד בניה ולא הזכי' שם יולדת' דרך קצר' וכן אשריאל אשר ילדה: <b>ויהיו פקודיהם.</b> פקודי הלוים במספר הזה נוספו שבע מאות והתימה כי לא נוסף בהם רק שבע מאות והנה ישראל שמתו מי שהיה מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה היה מספרם בפעם האחרונה קרוב מהמספר הראשון כי הלוים לא נכנסו עם פקודי ישראל והעד אלעזר הכהן: <b>ובאלה לא היה איש.</b> זה הפסוק שב אל פקודי ישראל: <b>כי אם כלב בן יפנה.</b> קודם יהושע כאשר אמר השם: <b>והוא לא היה.</b> חשבו הבנות כי לא יירשו בני הנועדים על ה': <b>כי בחטאו מת.</b> אמר ר' יהודה הלוי הספרדי כי פי' כי בחטאו מת דבק עם ובנים לא היו לו כאשר יאמר היום בעונותיו אירע לפלוני כך וכך ואיננו רחוק: <b>כי אין לו בן.</b> בעבור שאין לו בן: <b>כן.</b> אמת או הדבר כן: <b>והעברת.</b> מה שהיה ראוי שיקח הוא תקחנה הן: <b>ובן אין לו.</b> הנה אות כי הבן יירש את אביו: <b>לאחיו.</b> מאב או מאם: <b>לשארו הקרוב אליו.</b> מכל המשפחה: <b>וירש אותה.</b> הנחלה וכבר פירשתי דרך חז\"ל בפסוק לעם נכרי. ולדעת הנחלו' אם יירש האב או האם את הבן ומה שתירש אשתו צריכים אנחנו לקבלה: אמרו חז\"ל כי נסמכה פרשת עלה אל הר העברים לדעת הנחלות כי בקש משה לדעת מי ינחל מעלתו: <b>להקדישני.</b> דבק עם מריתם והטעם כי מריתם להקדישני וזה הוא על אשר לא קדשתם כאשר פירש: ה' <b>אלהי הרוחות.</b> שהוא יודע הרוחות איזה רוח ראוי: וטעם <b>יפקד.</b> מגזרת פקיד: <b>אשר יצא לפניהם.</b> במלחמה: <b>ואשר יוציאם.</b> ע\"י אחר: <b>אשר רוח בו.</b> וכל איש חי יש בו רוח רק הטעם כמו וחזקת והיית לאיש: <b>וסמכת את ידך.</b> להראות את ישראל שהוא במקומו ועליו סמך: <b>ונתתה מהודך.</b> לחלוק לו כבוד לפני ישראל: <b>למען ישמעו</b> כי הם כבר האמינו בך וכאשר יראו שאתה כבדתו כן יכבדוהו כי ילכו אחרי מעשיך: <b>על פיו יצאו.</b> על פי אלעזר במשפט האורים וי\"א על פי משפט האורים והראשון ישר בעיני: <b>הוא וכל בני ישראל.</b> בדבר שהיה כלל לכל: <b>וכל העדה.</b> בדבר שהיה פדט לעדה הם הנועדים באהל מועד: וטעם הדבק פרשת הקרבנות שהשם צוה אז למשה שיצוה את בני ישראל הקרבנות שהם חייבים לעשות כי הוא לא יכנס לארץ עמהם והחל להזכיר עולת תמיד ואם הזכירה בתחלה יתכן שהנזכרת היא על הר סיני או שתהיה מערכת הקרבנות סדורה: <b>לחמי.</b> פירשתיו: <b>לאשי.</b> פירשתיו. והטעם לחם לאשי לריח ניחוחי: <b>במועדו.</b> שלא יקדמו קודם הבקר ושלא יאחר אחר הערב: <b>את הכבש אחד.</b> אמר רבי משה הכהן הספרדי כי הוא דרך קצרה והטעם את הכבש כבש א' ועל דעתי שאות ה\"א מושך עצמו ואחר עמו וכבש הראיתיך רבים כן: <b>העשויה בהר סיני.</b> הטעם כאשר עשיתם בהר סיני גם זה אות שלא העלו עולות במדבר אחר נסעם מסיני כאשר פירשתי בראיות גמורות: <b>הסך נסך שכר.</b> נו\"ן השורש מובלע בסמ\"ך ומן הפירוש נסמוך על דברי הקדמונים ז\"ל: <b>בשבתו.</b> שב אל יום השבת אע\"פ שנמצא כל שומר שבת מחללו והטעם כל שבת ושבת כמו יום ביומו: <b>על עולת התמיד.</b> הטעם אחרי התמיד שישים עליה עולת שבת: <b>ובראשי חדשיכם.</b> אמר רבי משה הכהן הספרדי נ\"ע שפירושו חדש ניסן כי כן כתוב ראשון הוא לכם ואחר כן אמר זאת עולת חדש בחדשו שיעשו כן בכל חדש על כן הוסיף לחדשי השנה ופירושו נכון הוא ואע\"פ שיש לטעון על יו\"ד ובראשי חדשיכם רק בעבור שמצאנו הנה חדש מחר ישר דבורו: <b>בחדשו.</b> כמו שבת בשבתו ולא יתכן בו על דרך הפשט פי' אחר כי אין בפסוק זכר לירח ועוד כי לא מצאנו זאת המלה כי אם מהבנין הכבד הדגוש והנה הדל\"ת רפה: <b>ושעיר עזים אחד לחטאת לה'.</b> כמו אשר עלה עליו הגורל לה' ועשהו חטאת. ודע כי חטאת עם למ\"ד בלשון הקדש אין החטאת דבק כי אם בחוטא הלא תראה וחטאתי לאבי והנה זה הפך הדרש רק יש לו סוד: <b>בארבעה עשר יום לחדש.</b> ולא הזכיר בין הערבים גם זה חזוק למעתיקים אע\"פ שאין להם צורך: <b>ושעיר חטאת.</b> כמו שעיר עזים והוא דרך קצרה והנה לא הזכיר עולות בשבעת ימי הפסח כאשר לא הזכיר עולת התנופה ואנו צריכין לקבלה כי פסוק שבת בשבתו אמר על עולת התמיד: <b>בהקריבכם מנחה חדשה.</b> לחם התנופה הוא העיקר ועמו שבעה כבשים ופר בן בקר ואילים שני' ושני כבשי שלמים והעולה הנזכרת בפרשה הזאת היא חובת היום והעד על דבריהם כי לא באר בשבת ובמועד דבר כלל רק הזכיר בחג המצות וסכות ויום העשור והקרבתם אשה לה' ולא אמר כמה המספר וכן ביום תרועה ולא הזכיר עולת חדש ועולת התמיד ומנחתה היא העולה הראשונה: <b>יום תרועה.</b> מצוה להריע כי אילו היה זה הדיבור על עולת היום למה לא הזכיר בשאר המועדים ועוד כי כל העולות צוה לתקוע ולא להריע: <b>פר בן בקר אחד.</b> של צבור וכן איל אחד ואינם פר כהן גדול והאיל שלו ולפי דעתי כי האיל הנזכר בפרשת אחרי מות שלקח מן העם איננו זה כי על אילו ואיל העם נאמר ועשה את עולתו ואת עולת העם והעד שיש תוספת שבעת כבשים גם זה שעיר עזים אחד לחטאת איננו משעיר הגורלות על כן כתוב מלבד חטאת הכפורים הנכתבת בפרשת אחרי מות: <b>עצרת.</b> פרשתיו: <b>ולמנחותיכם ולנסכיכם.</b> לכל עולה ועולה כמשפטה: <b>ראשי המטות.</b> לפי דעתי שזאת הפרשה היתה אחר מלחמת מדין ע\"כ היא אחריה כמו ותדבר מרים ואהרן במשה אחר ויהיו בחצרות כאשר פירשתי והכ' אמר שבאו בני גד אל משה ואל אלעזר ואל נשיאי העדה ודכרו דבריהם ואחרי כן כתוב ויצו להם משה את אלעזר הכהן ואת יהושע בן נון ואת ראשי אבות המטות הם נשיאי העדה הנזכרים ובעבור שאמר משה לבני גד ולבני ראובן והיוצא מפיכם תעשו ע\"כ כתוב וידבר משה אל ראשי המטות ושם כתוב ככל היוצא מפיו יעשה: <b>לבני ישראל.</b> שיאמרו כן לבני ישראל: <b>לה'.</b> שהזכיר השם והנדר אם יהיה כן אתן לשם כך וכך או אתענה: <b>השבע.</b> שם הפועל ובא עם שם וכמוהו רבים: <b>לא יחל דברו.</b> כמו לא יחלל ואיננו לשון מחילה והנה אנחנו צריכין לקבלה כי הכ' אמר איש ואשה ולא פירש מתי יהיה איש או מתי תהיה אשה: <b>ואסרה אסר.</b> או אסרה איסר. ואסרה ממשקל אחר ואיננו כמו אסר: <b>הניא.</b> כמו שבר והפר כמו את תנואתי: <b>ביום שמעו.</b> לא ביום אחר: <b>ונדריה עליה.</b> בבית אביה ולא הניא אותה אביה בעלה יניא אותה: <b>ביום שמוע.</b> הדבר מפיה: <b>מבטא שפתיה.</b> השבועה: <b>ואם בית אישה נדרה.</b> האלמנה בימים הקדמונים והניא אותה לא תקיים נדרה בימי אלמנותה וזה על דבר העתיד שנדרה ומת הבעל קודם הגעת הזמן. מלת סליחה מפורשת: <b>לענות נפש.</b> אפי' לענות נפש שהוא הצום כאשר פירשתי: <b>והקים.</b> כבר הקים ואחר כן פירש איך הקים אותם בעבור שהחריש ביום שמעו: <b>ונשא את עונה.</b> כי היא ברשותו: <b>בין איש לאשתו.</b> והיא בוגרת: <b>בין אב לבתו.</b> אם איננה בוגרת על כן נאמר בנעוריה: <b>החלצו.</b> חגרו חלוציכם: <b>נקמת ה'.</b> היא נקמת בני ישראל בעבור עבודת כוכבים: <b>וימסרו.</b> כמו וינתנו וקרוב ממנו למסור מעל בה': <b>וכלי הקדש.</b> הארון: <b>ויהרגו כל זכר.</b> גדול בשנים: <b>ואת צור.</b> אבי כזבי: <b>בלעם בן בעור.</b> י\"א אחר ששב אל מקומו בא אל מדין כאשר שמע המגפה שהיתה בישראל בעצתו שב לקחת ממון מזקני מדין: <b>חילם.</b> שם כלל והוא זהב וכסף ונחשת וברזל ובגדים: <b>ואת כל עריהם במושבותם.</b> כלל ופרט: <b>טירותם.</b> ארמוני המלכים: <b>ויקחו את כל השלל ואת כל המלקוח.</b> שם כלל לאדם ולבהמה: <b>השבי.</b> פרט לאדם: <b>השלל.</b> הם הבגדים: <b>על פקודי החיל.</b> מגזרת יפקוד ה' כמו פקידי החיל וכן מלת קרואי כמו קריאי: <b>שרי האלפים ושרי המאות.</b> הם מאה ושלשים ושנים: <b>החייתם כל נקבה.</b> הטעם אפי' אחת וכן אין כל ויתכן להיות כמשמעו כי כל נקבה החיו ורבים כן: <b>טף.</b> שם כלל לקטן זכר או נקבה: <b>אתם ושביכם.</b> בעבור הכבוד השוכן בתוכם: <b>וכל מעשה עזים.</b> כאשר פירשתי. והנה הבגד בעבור שנגע בחלל הוא טמא הטעם ועמכם כל בגד עד שתתחטאו או תהיה מלת תתחטאו יוצאה וכן והתאויתם לכם כי הגבול הוא הפעול: <b>ויאמר אלעזר הכהן.</b> כי חקת תורת הפרה לאלעזר נתנה ומשה אמר להם תתחטאו דרך כלל ואלעזר פירש להם: <b>הבדיל.</b> ידוע: <b>אך במי נדה יתחטא.</b> היה נראה לנו כי הוא מי אפר הפרה כמו מי נדה לא זורק עליו וחז\"ל אמרו כי טעמו בשיעור המים שתרחץ בהם האשה הנדה ודעתם רחבה מדעתינו: <b>שא את ראש.</b> פירשתיו: <b>מלקוח.</b> הבהמה: <b>השבי.</b> האדם ותחסר מלת ו' כמו שמש ירח: <b>וראשי אבות העדה.</b> הם הנשיאים: <b>וחצית את המלקוח.</b> שם כלל: <b>אחד נפש.</b> כמו נפש אחד: <b>אחד אחוז.</b> כמו והאחוז אחוז ושניהם דבקים כאשר פירשתי: <b>מכל הבהמה.</b> כמו גמלים והנה לא לקח אלעזר מהם חלק אולי היו מעטים ועל כן לא נזכר המספר שהביאו ולא המספר שלקחו הלוים: <b>יתר הבז.</b> חוץ מאשר אכלו על כן אמר יתר והזכיר מספרם כי היה מספר רב ולא שמענו שלל כמוהו גם כן הזכיר המכס כי גם הוא רב ומלת מכם מפועלי הכפל על משקל וממר ליולדתו והוא מגזרת תכסו על השה והטעם חלק: ואמר <b>מן האדם ומן הבהמה.</b> שם כלל: <b>הפקדים.</b> פירשתיו: <b>אשר בידינו.</b> בעבור היותם ברשותם וכן ולקחת בידך עשרה אנשים: <b>ונקרב.</b> במחשבה או בפה: <b>אצעדה.</b> היא על הזרוע כי כן כתוב: <b>וצמיד.</b> ליד: <b>טבעת.</b> באצבע: <b>עגיל.</b> באזנים כי כן כתוב אולי נקרא כן בעבור היותו עגול: <b>וכומז.</b> כחביריו: <b>כל כלי מעשה.</b> הגיד הכ' שלא היה בהם כלי שבור: <b>אנשי הצבא בזזו איש לו.</b> הזכיר הכתוב זה להודיע כי זהב רב וכלי מעשה בזזו כל אחד: <b>לבני ראובן.</b> כי הוא בן הגבירה: <b>מקום מקנה.</b> כי שם מרעה טוב: <b>ויבאו בני גד.</b> הם היו בעלי העצה בתחלה על כן הקדימם הכתוב: <b>ויאמרו יותן.</b> אמר ויאמרו פעם אחרת בעבור שארכו הדברים י\"א כי את הוא פעול יותן ולא אדע למה זה כי הנה כתוב נעתם ארץ. יחלק הארץ ולא נשא אותם הארץ אשר הוא בא שמה בקרבו: <b>תניאון.</b> כמו תשברון: <b>ויעלו עד נחל אשכול.</b> כי העולים מצפון הלכו לנגב: <b>לא מלאו.</b> קל הלמ\"ד והוא מהבנין הכבד מלא קרנך שמן לא השלימו מה שהתחילו: <b>כלב בן יפנה.</b> בתחלה כאשר דבר השם ומלת מלאו כמו בקשו נפשי שלחו באש מקדשך: <b>וינעם.</b> מגזרת נע ונד בעבור שלא נחו: <b>תרבות.</b> מגזרת אשר טפחתי ורביתי והוא קרוב מגזרת על כל רב ביתו והטעם גדול השנים: <b>לספות.</b> כמו להוסיף רק הוא משרש אחר וכמוהו ספו על זבחיכם כי לא מצאנו בבעלי היו\"ד מזה השרש בבנין הקל חסר יו\"ד: <b>וערים.</b> בתחלה לטפנו: <b>חשים.</b> על משקל מולים היו כמו מהירים מגזרת מהרה חושה אל תעמוד: <b>והלאה.</b> נמצא על מקום ועל זמן והטעם ולמעלה: <b>עד הורישו.</b> השם: <b>לפני ה'.</b> כי שם הארון. לפני ה' כאשר פירשתי כי לעולם הוא לשבח: אל\"ף <b>לצאנכם.</b> נוסף כמו והאזניחו נהרות: <b>כל חלוץ צבא.</b> כמו הארון הברית והטעם כל חלוץ חלוץ צבא: <b>ונתתם.</b> תתנו להם והוי\"ו כפ\"א רפה בל' ישמעאל כי כן משפט הלשון: <b>ונאחזו בתככם.</b> חלק להם כבוד כי הטעם אם לא יעברו חלוצים תוליכום עמהם בעל כרחם ונאחזו או אם יתנחמו ונאחזו בתוככם ובאת זו המלה כמשפט בעלי היו\"ד כי אותיות אהו\"י מתחלפים: <b>ויענו בני גד.</b> שנית חזוק: <b>נחנו.</b> הוא העיקר ואל\"ף אנחנו נוסף ולא הזכיר עד עתה חצי שבט מנשה בעבור היותו חצי השבט: <b>ואת נבו.</b> יתכן שהוא הר נבו ששם נקבר משה כאשר אפרש: <b>מוסבות.</b> אלה הערים הוסבו שמותם וכן שבמה: <b>ויורש.</b> יש אומרים כי מכיר חי היה ולפי דעתי שמלת ויורש שבה אל הגבור שהיה במשפחה: וטעם <b>למכיר בן מנשה.</b> לבני מכיר כמו ויאמר יהודה לשמעון אחיו: <b>ויאיר בן מנשה.</b> הוא ממשפחת יהודה כי כן כתוב כי חצרון לקח בת מכיר בן מנשה והוליד ממנה שגוב ושגוב הוליד את יאיר שהיו לו הערים בערי הגלעד ונקרא על שם משפחת אמו גם יש כהנים שנקראו על שם בני ברזילי הגלעדי כי כן כתוב ואין פה מקום לשאול איך לקח יאיר נחלה עם שבט אחר כי ארץ כנען היא הנחלקת ולא ארץ האמורי שהיא מעבר לירדן מזרחה כי יש אמורי בארץ כנען והוא היה התקיף מכל שבעה גוים: <b>חותיהם.</b> פירושו לפי מקומו כמו קריות: <b>אלה מסעי.</b> כאשר חנו בני ישראל בערבות מואב וישבו שם חדשים עד שבנו הערים הנזכרים ולא זזו משם כי אם אחרי מות אהרן כתב משה כל המסעים: <b>את מוצאיהם.</b> איך יצאו ממקום למקום על כן אחריו למסעיהם: <b>על פי ה'.</b> דבק עם למסעיהם: <b>ממחרת הפסח.</b> פירשתיו וכן ביד רמה: <b>ובאלהיהם עשה ה' שפטים.</b> כמו ראש דגון כי כן אמר השם למשה: <b>וישב.</b> רמז לענן או לישראל: <b>מפני החירות.</b> ופי החירות מקום אחד הוא והפה בפנים: <b>דרך שלשת ימים.</b> פירשתיו: <b>קברות התאוה.</b> הוא בקדש ברנע כאשר פירשתי: <b>ויסעו מקדש.</b> שם עיר: וטעם <b>וישמע הכנעני.</b> כי נלחם עם ישראל בהיותם בהר ההר: <b>צלמונה ופונון.</b> פירשתים: <b>בעלמון דבלתימה.</b> שם כלל למסעים רבים כאשר פירשתי בפרשת זאת חקת התורה: <b>מבית הישימת.</b> הוא הגיא הנשקף על פני הישימון אז צוה השם להזהיר ישראל כי הם קרובים לעבור: <b>משכיתם.</b> כמו אבן משכית: <b>במותם.</b> מקומות גבוהים כמו במותי ארץ: <b>והתנחלתם.</b> כמו והתאויתם והפעול הארץ: וטעם להזכיר <b>לרב תרבו.</b> לדבק אחריו ואם לא תורישו: <b>לשכים.</b> קוצים חדים מגזרת הסר מסוכתו. הנני סך את דרכך בסירים: <b>ולצנינם.</b> פירושו לפי מקומו כמו ולשוטט בצדיכם שהם מכות בשוט או קוצים חדים כמו צנים פחים והנה עוד פי' להם גבול נחלתם שהם חייבים להוריש משם יושב הארץ: <b>אל הארץ כנען.</b> כמו והנבואה עודד הנביא הנבואה נבואת עודד הנביא והטעם <b>אל הארץ.</b> ארץ כנען: <b>על ידי אדום.</b> מקום כמו על יד הירדן: <b>נחלה מצרים.</b> אל נחל מצרים ואיננו היאור: <b>הים הגדול.</b> הספרדי והטעם גבול מערב נחלתכם והיה הים הגדול והוא הגבול בעצמו: ואל\"ף <b>והתאויתם.</b> תחת וי\"ו והתוית תיו ואם הם ב' בנינים: <b>והתאויתם.</b> כמו עד תאות גבעות עולם: <b>ומחה.</b> כאשר אמרו קדמונינו תבירתא מגזרת ימחאו כף: <b>שני המטות.</b> פעם שנית לבאר מקום נחלתם: <b>ינחלו.</b> פעל יוצא לשנים פעולים וכן ונחלתנו על דעת המדקדקים: <b>אלעזר.</b> ראשונה כי על פיו יצא יהושע גם הוא בן אהרן. ולא הזכיר נשיא לבני ראובן וגד כי כבר לקחו חלקם והמפרשים אמרו כי החל מיהודה כאשר יצא הגורל בתחלה רק יש טענה גדולה עליהם אף על פי שהפירוש נכון יהיה נראה לפי דעתינו: <b>פדהאל.</b> אם נעלם הה\"א הם שתי מלות שוות בטעם כי הה\"א איננה מהאותיות המשך: <b>ומגרש.</b> ידוע: <b>ארצה כנען.</b> ידוע גם זאת הפרשה דבקה: <b>והקריתם.</b> מגזרת קריה: <b>לבני ישראל.</b> איננו דבק עם הפסוק הראשון כי בפסוק הראשון אמר כי אלה הערים תהיינה ערי מקלט ולא אמר מקלט למי אחר כן באר כי לבני ישראל ולגר הגר בתוכם תהיינה שש הערים האלה מקלט: <b>בפגעו בו.</b> בשבר הפ\"ה כמו בשברי לכם כי שמות הפועלים ישתנו: <b>יהדפנו.</b> ממקום גבוה: <b>או השליך עליו.</b> כמו קיר נטוי או כלי שימות בו: <b>בצדיה.</b> פירשתיו: <b>בפתע.</b> כמו פתאום: <b>בלא ראות.</b> שם הפועל: <b>ולא אויב לו.</b> ולא מתכוין לבקש רעתו: <b>עד מות.</b> יש אומר עד מות עד חפוש וכמוהו תמות חכמה ולא אמרו כלום כי עמכם תמות חכמה הוא כמשמעו וגם כן עד מות הכהן הגדול כי הוא יכפר בעד ישראל וזה המאורע אירע בימיו: <b>את גבול.</b> מן גבול כמו כצאתי את העיר: <b>דם.</b> פירשתיו: <b>יחניף.</b> עשות רע בסתר: <b>שופכו.</b> פועל כמו ובא גואלו: <b>ולא תטמא.</b> החנופה את הארץ או הוא ציווי בעבור כי אני שוכן בתוכם ולא לכבוד הארץ רק לכבוד בני ישראל על כן אמר שוכן בתוך בני ישראל: <b>ויקרבו.</b> גם זאת הפרשה דבקה עם כאשר צוה משה לתת מנחלת ישראל ערים ללוים: <b>ראשי אבות.</b> הם הנשיאים: <b>ואם יהיה היובל.</b> ואפילו שיהיה היובל לא נקוה לשוב הנחלה אלינו רק תהיה תמיד נוספת על נחלת המטה: <b>כן מטה בני יוסף.</b> כי ראשי האבות דברו בעבור כל המטה: וטעם <b>תסב.</b> שפעם תסוב מפה ומפה (ס\"א תסוב מכה וכה) בין הם בין אחרים: וטעם <b>לא תסוב נחלה.</b> מהיום קודם נחלת הארץ: <b>וכל בת יורשת נחלה.</b> אחר ניחול הארץ על כן אמר הכתוב ולא תסוב נחלה פעם שנית: <b>מחלה תרצה.</b> הזכירם הכתוב בתחלה כאשר נולדו ועתה הזכיר' כאשר נשאו לאנשים בתחלה: <b>ממשפחות.</b> לאות כי בני דודיהן לא היו כולם אחים: <b>אלה המצות.</b> של הנחלה והנדר וכל בת יורשת נחלה ומשפטי הדם: <b>על ירדן ירחו</b> מזרחה:",
    "text": "In the name of God who counted those numbered above<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The stars. See Ps. 147:4, <i>He counteth the number of the stars</i>.</i> and below;<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Israel.</i>I begin to explain according to the plain meaningthe Torah portion which begins with <i>va-yedabber</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Book of Numbers begins with the word <i>va-yedabber</i> (spoke).</i> IN THE WILDERNESS. This verse<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which states that <i>the Lord spoke unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the tent of meeting</i>.</i> informs us that Moses did not go up to Mount Sinai<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For revelation.</i> since God’s glory was now present in the tent of meeting.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Otherwise, what follows would have been told to Moses on Mount Sinai.</i> ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE SECOND MONTH. To tell him to arrange the standards and to instruct him how the Israelites were to journey and how they were to camp with reference to the tabernacle,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Filwarg suggests emending <i>ba’avur ha-mishkan</i> (with reference to the tabernacle) to <i>be’evre ha-mishkan</i> (on the sides of the tabernacle).</i> for they journeyed on the twentieth day of the second month.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence it was necessary to inform Moses of these things prior to their journey.</i> TAKE YE THE SUM. <i>Se’u et rosh bene yisra’el</i> (take ye the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel) is similar to <i>ki tissa et rosh bene yisra’el</i> (when thou takest the sum of the children of Israel) (Ex. 30:12). I have explained its meaning there.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Exodus, (Vol. 2, p. 631). I.E. explains that <i>ki tissa et rosh</i> literally means: when you lift up the head. One who takes a census writes the particulars after the sum, which he writes at the top of the page. Thus when Scripture speaks of raising up the head, it means take up the sum.</i> BY THEIR FAMILIES BY THEIR FATHER’S HOUSES. For pedigree is not determined by the mother.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence Scripture qualified <i>by their families</i> with <i>by their fathers’ houses</i>.</i> BY THEIR POLLS. I have already explained the meaning of <i>gulgelotam</i> (their polls).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>gulgelotam</i> (their polls) literally means their skulls. In his short commentary (S.C.) on Exodus, I.E. explains that the word <i>gulgolet</i> means a head. The head is so called because it is round. Compare, <i>galgal</i> (wheel, i.e., a round object). See I.E. on Ex. 16:16 (S.C.).</i> IN ISRAEL. This excludes the mixed multitude.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Foreigners who joined Israel during the Exodus. See Ex. 12:38.</i> EVERY ONE HEAD OF HIS FATHERS’ HOUSE. <i>Ish rosh le-vet avotav</i> (every one head of his fathers’ house) is an abridged phrase. The text should have read, <i>ish ish rosh le-vet avotav</i> (every one head of his fathers’ house).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The first part of the verse reads, <i>ish ish la-matteh</i> (a man of every tribe). Hence, in keeping with the rules of parallelism, the second part of the verse should read, <i>ish ish rosh le-vet avotav hu</i>) (every one head of his father’s house).</i> OF REUBEN. Scripture begins with Jacob’s first-born,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though Jacob took away Reuben’s birthright. See Gen. 49:3,4.</i> as it is stated, <i>yet not so that he was to be reckoned in the genealogy as first-born</i> (I Chron. 5:1).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I Chronicles explains that even though Reuben lost his birthright to Joseph, he was always to be reckoned as the first-born as far as genealogy was concerned.</i> OF THE CHILDREN OF JOSEPH. The children of Joseph are mentioned after the children of Leah because Rachel’s status was greater than that of the handmaids.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence Rachel’s descendants are mentioned before those of the handmaids even though the children of the handmaids precede them in birth.</i> Scripture begins with Ephraim, in keeping with the actions of our father Jacob.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Manassah was older than Ephraim. However, Jacob placed Ephraim before Manasseh. See Gen. 48:21.</i> Scripture places Ephraim and Manasseh<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Joseph’s sons.</i> before Benjamin because they are in place of Joseph.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Joseph was born before Benjamin.</i> Scripture then begins with Dan,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The son of Bilhah, Rachel’s handmaid.</i> who was the first-born of the handmaids.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of the children born to the handmaids’. See Gen. 30:6.</i> Asher follows Dan<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Gad and Asher were the sons of Zilpah, Leah’s handmaid. According to Gen. 30:10-13, Gad was Zilpah’s first-born. Thus Scripture should have mentioned Gad before Asher. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> because God knew that Asher would be the head of those who camp under the standard of Dan.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Asher pitched next to Dan and was therefore next in importance under that standard. Gad was third under the standard of Reuben. See Num. 2:14,27.</i> Scripture then mentions Gad because he was the first-born of Leah’s handmaid.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Gen. 30:10,11.</i> THESE WERE THE ELECT OF THE CONGREGATION. The meaning of <i>keru’e ha-edah</i> (the elect of the congregation)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, the called of the congregation. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> is that the congregation does nothing unless they are called. THE TRIBES OF THEIR FATHERS. The meaning of <i>mattot avotam</i> is the tribes of their fathers. Thus each one<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Each one of those listed in verses 5-16.</i> was prince of a tribe. THEY WERE THE HEADS OF THE THOUSANDS OF ISRAEL. Each one was a leader over all the thousands that comprised a tribe, for there was also a chief over one thousand.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The tribes were divided into units of thousands. Each of these units was headed by a <i>sar</i> (chief). See Ex. 18:21, <i>sarei alafim</i> (rulers over thousands). Also see I Sam. 17:8, <i>sar ha-elef</i> (the captain of their thousand). Each one listed in verses 5-15 was the head of all the captains of the thousands of their respective tribes.</i> AND MOSES AND AARON TOOK. With them. THAT ARE POINTED OUT BY NAME. <i>Nikkevu</i> means that are pointed out. Compare, <i>yikkvennu</i> (mark out) in <i>Which the mouth of the Lord shall mark out</i> (Is. 62:2). AND THEY DECLARED THEIR PEDIGREES. They were asked for their birth dates,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Biblical text reads, <i>va-yityalledu</i> (and they declared their pedigrees). I.E. translates this as: they gave their birth dates.</i> for only those from twenty and above were to be counted. Their progeny were then recorded.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See verse 2. <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38 reads, “Or, their progeny were recorded.” According to this interpretation, <i>va-yityalledu</i> means: and they declared their children.</i> SO DID HE NUMBER THEM. The reference is to Moses,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Va-yifkedem</i> (so did he count them) is in the singular. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> who was the most important.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Actually Aaron and the heads of the tribes also participated in counting the people (see verse 44). However, Scripture here mentions only Moses, because he was the most important.</i> Scripture begins<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The count.</i> with Reuben,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 20.</i> as he was the first-born. Simeon is next<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 22.</i> because he was born after Reuben. Gad the first-born of Leah’s handmaid,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See note 24.</i> follows. We thus have Reuben’s standard.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verses 20-25. The tribes listed in verses 20-25 (Reuben, Simeon, and Gad) made up the standard of Reuben. See Num. 2:10-16.</i> Next<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 26-30.</i> comes the standard of Judah,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 2:3-9.</i> followed by the standard of Ephraim<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 32-37. Also see Num. 2:18-24.</i> and the standard of Dan.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 38-43. Also see Num. 2:25-31.</i> Those who camped around each standard did so in the same manner in which they offered the sacrifices dedicating the altar. Note, there were twelve tribes,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verses 20-43; and in Num. 2:10-31.</i> for Levi was not counted and Joseph’s two sons were. Now the world has four sides.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">North, south, east, and west.</i> Behold, three tribes camped on each one of the four sides.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For purposes of symmetry.</i> Now Leah had five sons,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, five of Leah’s six sons were counted among the twelve tribes of Israel. They were Reuben, Simeon, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun.</i> for one of her six sons<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Levi.</i> was not counted. She had two standards.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The standards of Judah and Reuben. See Num. 2:3-16.</i> They [Moses and Aaron] completed one of her standards<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The standard of Reuben. See Num. 2:10-16.</i> with [Gad] the first-born of her handmaid.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See note 20.</i> They placed Gad with the standard of Reuben, who was also a first-born. Judah made up the second standard [of Leah]. His younger brothers camped with him.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Issachar and Zebulun.</i> Rachel had a standard of her own.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The standard of Ephraim. See Num. 2:18-24.</i> Ephraim was in place of Joseph. He preceded Manasseh, in keeping with the words of Jacob.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Gen. 48-14-20.</i> The fourth standard was that of Rachel’s handmaid. It was led by [Dan] her first-born.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 2:25-31.</i> Asher followed<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, Asher pitched next to Dan. See Num. 2:27.</i> even though he was younger than Naphtali.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The standard of Dan consisted of Dan, Asher, and Naphtali. Asher, who was younger than Naphtali, pitched next to Dan.</i> The son of Leah’s handmaid<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Asher.</i> was so honored because the standard belonged to Rachel’s handmaid.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, Asher, son of the handmaid Zilpah, was pacified for being under the standard of Dan, the son of the handmaid Bilhah, by being placed before Naphtali, another son of Bilhah.</i> If you look carefully into things, you will know that the south is the head and the north the tail.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The sun in its annual journey moves from north to south. The face of the sun is thus to the south while its back, the tail, is to the north (see Weiser).</i> I cannot explain the aforementioned.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When I.E. uses this expression it means that he is unable or does not want to explain further.</i> Reuben was therefore placed in the south<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The standard of Reuben was on the south side of the tabernacle. See Num. 2:10.</i> because he was the head.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He was the first-born.</i> Dan was placed in the north.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, at the tail of the camp. See Num. 2:25.</i> Observe, there was no one among the tribes comparable in might to Judah, who was compared to a lion’s whelp (Gen. 49:9),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Jacob’s blessing.</i> and to the tribe of Dan, who is likewise compared to a lion by Moses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Deut. 33:22.</i> These tribes were thus first and last.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When the tribes marched, the standard of Judah marched first and that of Dan last. See Num. 10:14-25.</i> Scripture mentions <i>by their polls</i> (le-gulgelotam) with regard to Reuben<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 20.</i> and also with regard to Simeon<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 22.</i> to show that it was the same case with the other tribes,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though the term is not mentioned with regard to the other tribes.</i> for Scripture was being brief. [AND ALL THOSE THAT WERE NUMBERED OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL BY THEIR FATHERS’ HOUSES, FROM TWENTY YEARS OLD AND UPWARD.] It means that only those who were aged twenty and above were counted. Scripture then goes on to say,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 46.</i> <i>even all those that were numbered</i>. The latter refers to their<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Those 20 and older.</i> total number.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, our verse speaks of the age of those numbered, while verse 46 speaks of the total number of those who were counted.</i> WERE NOT NUMBERED AMONG THEM. The word <i>hotpakdu</i> (were not numbered) is of two forms. It is both a <i>hitpa’el</i> and a <i>hofal</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>heh</i> and <i>tav</i> placed in front of the root is the sign of the <i>hitpa’el</i>. The <i>kamatz katan</i> placed beneath the <i>heh</i> is the sign of the <i>hofal</i>.</i> HOWBEIT THE TRIBE OF LEVI THOU SHALT NOT NUMBER. This explains <i>were not numbered</i> (v. 47),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Otherwise, why inform us once again that the Levites were not counted.</i> that the Levites were not numbered because this is what God commanded. NEITHER SHALT THOU TAKE THE SUM OF THEM. Their total number, as I have explained.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scriptures reads, <i>ve-et rosham lo tissa</i> (neither shalt thou take the sum of them). This literally means <i>neither shalt thou lift up their heads</i>. I.E. earlier noted that <i>to lift up the head</i> means to write the total sum at the top of a page. See I.E.’s comment on verse 2.</i> BUT APPOINT THOU THE LEVITES OVER THE TABERNACLE. Scripture explains here why the Levites were not counted. They were not counted because the charge of the tabernacle was upon them. Therefore they did not serve in the army.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. believes that those who were counted were counted for military purposes. This is also the view of Rashbam. See Rashbam on verse 2.</i> THE TABERNACLE OF THE TESTIMONY. The reference is to the tent of meeting and the tabernacle of the ark, which contains the testimony.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The tent of meeting was called the tabernacle of testimony because it served as a tabernacle for the ark, which contained the tables of testimony (<i>luchot ha-edut</i>) (Weiser). <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38 reads: The tabernacle of testimony refers to the ark wherein the testimonies are (that is, the tablets on which the ten commandments were written).</i> AND OVER ALL THE FURNITURE<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew reads <i>kelim</i>, which means articles, utensils, or vessels. This is the way I.E. interprets the term.</i> THEREOF. Such as the menorah, the table, and the altars. AND OVER ALL THAT BELONGETH TO IT. The reference is the utensils which serve the furniture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Such as the utensils which served the menorah and the table of showbread.</i> AND THEY SHALL BEAR THE TABERNACLE. They are the very ones who carry the tabernacle when the camp journeys, and they are the ones who shall minister unto the tabernacle when they camp. They shall camp around the tabernacle. AND WHEN THE TABERNACLE SETTETH FORWARD, THE LEVITES SHALL TAKE IT DOWN. They shall remove its bars and posts. When the tabernacle rests, they shall set it up. AND THE COMMON MAN.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The literal meaning of <i>zar</i> is a stranger. Hence I.E.’s interpretation.</i> A person who is not a Levite, even if he is an Israelite. SHALL BE PUT TO DEATH. A law court shall put him to death. [AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL SHALL PITCH.] Its meaning is, “when” the children of Israel shall pitch.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">79</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The verse reads, <i>And the children of Israel shall pitch…every man with his own standard</i>. However, the command to set up standards had not yet been given. Hence I.E.’s interpretation</i> EVERY MAN WITH HIS OWN CAMP. The meaning of every man is each tribe.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">80</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. the meaning of <i>ish</i> in our verse is each and every man.</i> [AND EVERY MAN WITH HIS OWN STANDARD.] Its meaning is that the tribe of one standard shall not be mixed with the tribe of another standard. BUT THE LEVITES SHALL PITCH ROUND ABOUT THE TABERNACLE OF TESTIMONY. Our verse explains why the earlier verse<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">81</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 50.</i> stated that the Levites were to encamp round about the tabernacle:<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">82</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Krinsky’s edition of I.E. reads, “The explanation of <i>and shall encamp round about</i> (v. 50). Our verse explains why the earlier verse stated that the Levites were to encamp round about the tabernacle.”</i> so that no one from the congregation of Israel should draw close to the tabernacle and die. This is the meaning of <i>that there be no wrath upon…the children of Israel</i>, as there was in the case of Uzzah, who touched the ark. Scripture there states, <i>And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah</i> (II Sam. 6:7). The meaning of <i>upon the congregation of the children of Israel</i> is, upon anyone from the children of Israel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">83</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For God would not punish all of Israel for the acts of one person.</i> It is similar to <i>and was buried in the cities of Gilead</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">84</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Jud. 12:7)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">85</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of which is, <i>And was buried in one of the cities of Gilead</i>, for Jephthah was not buried in all the cities of Gilead.</i> and <i>Even upon a colt the foal of asses</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">86</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Zech. 9:9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">87</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is, <i>Even upon a colt the foal of an ass</i>.</i> There are many such cases. AND THE LEVITES SHALL KEEP THE CHARGE. The Levites are obligated to guard the tabernacle. THUS DID THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. They never touched the tabernacle. [AND THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES AND UNTO AARON.] Scripture reads, <i>unto Moses and unto Aaron</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In most cases, only Moses is mentioned when God addresses commands. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> because Aaron and his sons were to command the Kohathites as to which burdens they were to carry upon their shoulders.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the burden of the Kohathites, see Num. 4:4-19.</i> ACCORDING TO THE ENSIGNS. There were signs upon each and every standard. The ancients<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Talmudic sages.</i> said that the banner of Reuben had the form of a person on it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>Ba-Midbar Rabbah</i> 2:6.</i> Their statement is based on a midrashic interpretation concerning the mandrakes found by Reuben.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The mandrakes have the appearance of a person. See I.E. on Gen. 30:14.</i> The ancients also tell us that there was an image of a lion on the standard of Judah, for Jacob had compared Judah to a lion.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Gen. 49:9.</i> They also tell us that the banner of Ephraim<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The son of Joseph.</i> had the image of an ox upon it, in keeping with the verse, <i>His firstling bullock</i> (Deut. 33:17). The flag of Dan had the image of an eagle. Thus the banners were similar to the cherubim which the prophet Ezekiel saw.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Each one of the cherubim seen by Ezekiel had four faces, the face of a man, an ox, an eagle, and a lion. See Ezek. 1:10. The camp of Israel similarly carried each one of these four images. In Ezekiel’s vision these cherubim supported the divine throne. Similarly, according to the sages, God’s spirit rested upon the camp of Israel.</i> A GOOD WAY OFF. The word <i>mi-neged</i> means a good way off.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>neged</i> literally means opposite. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> ON THE EAST SIDE TOWARD THE SUNRISING. The beginning of the east.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>kedemah mizrachah</i>. This literally means toward the east. According to I.E., <i>kedemah mizrachah</i> is a technical term for the beginning of the east, i.e., northeast. See I.E. on Ex. 27:9 and the notes thereto (Vol. 2, pp. 581-2).</i> AND HIS HOST (<i>U-FEKUDEHEM</i>). Scripture could have read <i>u-fekudav</i> (and his host).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As it does in verse 8.</i> There is no difference between the two terms.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>U-fekudehem</i> literally means and their host. <i>U-fekudav</i> means and his host. I.E. indicates that Scripture employs the singular for the plural, as the Bible uses collective nouns.</i> AND THOSE THAT PITCH NEXT UNTO HIM. <i>Ve-hachonim alav</i> means those that pitch with him.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Alav</i> literally means on him. Thus the literal meaning of <i>ve-hachonim alav</i> (and those that pitch next unto him) is, and those that pitch upon him. Hence I.E.’s comment that <i>alav</i> means with him.</i> Issachar was behind Judah and in front of Zebulun who was third. THEY SHALL SET FORTH FIRST. The meaning of <i>rishonah yissa’u</i> is, they shall set forth first.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>rishonah yissa’u</i> should be read as if written <i>ba-rishonah yissa’u</i>. (Krinsky).</i> ON THE SOUTH SIDE. The word <i>temanah</i> (on the south side) comes from the same root as the word <i>yemin</i> (right).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When a person faces east, the south is at his right.</i> SECOND. <i>Sheniyyim</i> (second) is an adjective. THEN THE TENT OF MEETING, WITH THE CAMP OF THE LEVITES, SHALL SET FORWARD IN THE MIDST OF THE CAMPS. In the midst of the above-mentioned camps,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The camps of Judah and Reuben.</i> for the Gershonites and Merarites journeyed between the banner of Judah and the banner of Reuben.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 10:14-20.</i> And the Kohathites, and with them Aaron and his sons, journeyed between the banner of Reuben and the banner of Ephraim.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 10: 21-24.</i> AS THEY ENCAMP, SO SHALL THEY SET FORWARD. The reference is to <i>the camps</i>, which refers to the camp of the Israelites. It<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>As they set encamp, so shall they set forward</i>.</i> does not refer to the camp of the Levites. The Gershonites, who pitched on the west<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 3:23.</i> of the sanctuary, and the Merarites on the north<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 3:35.</i> journeyed together,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 10:17. Unlike the way they camped.</i> after the camp of Judah who pitched on the east.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Judah who pitched on the east marched first, followed by Reuben who pitched on the south, followed by Ephraim who pitched on the west, followed by Dan who pitched on the north. However, the Levites who camped on all four sides of the tabernacle did not follow this order.</i> EVERY MAN IN HIS PLACE. The meaning of <i>al yado</i> (in his place) is, in his corner and place.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>yado</i> literally means his hand. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> The same applies to <i>yad ha-yarden</i> (by the side of the Jordan) (Num. 13:29) and <i>ve-yad tiheyah lekha</i> (and thou shalt have a paddle) (Deut. 23:13).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>yad</i>, literally hand, is to be rendered as place in both of these verses.</i> THESE ARE THEY THAT WERE NUMBERED OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. When they journeyed,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">On the twentieth day of the second month (Num. 10:11).</i> they were the same number as on the day that they were counted.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">On the first day of the second month (Num. 1:1).</i> Thus not one of them died in twenty days. This is a great wonder. BUT THE LEVITES WERE NOT NUMBERED AMONG THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. Scripture makes it clear that we should not count even one Levite among those who were counted when they journeyed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture repeats in verse 33 what it said in Num. 1:47 to emphasize this point.</i> THUS DID THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. All the days that they spent in the desert. NOW THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF AARON AND MOSES. Scripture states this<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our Torah portion deals with the census taken in the second year following the Exodus (see Num. 1:1; 3:14). The question thus arises, why does Scripture then tell us how many offspring Moses and Aaron had on the day that the Lord spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai?</i> because it wants to inform us that their offspring did not beget children and did not increase<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the generations of Moses and Aaron were the same at the time of the census as they had been on the day that Moses stood on Mount Sinai ten months earlier. Hence it was not necessary to count them again when the Levites were counted. See verse 15.</i> in close to ten months.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Ten months passed from the day that Moses stood on Mount Sinai in the month of Sivan and the census was taken on the first day of the second month (Iyyar) following the Exodus.</i> God chose the tribe of Levi at the time God spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai, when Moses ascended to atone for the making of the golden calf. God then said to Moses, <i>Bring the tribe of Levi near</i> (v. 6). The Lord then also related all that is contained in the section<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 12 and 13.</i> that opens with <i>And I, behold, I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel</i> (v. 12). When the tabernacle was erected, God told Moses, <i>Number the children of Levi</i> (v. 15). God’s presence was then manifest in the tabernacle. Scripture therefore reads, <i>in the wilderness of Sinai</i> (v. 14).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And not on Mount Sinai. The point is that the Levites were numbered when the tabernacle stood at the foot of Mount Sinai. Scripture tells us that God spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai and told him to number the Levites, because once the tabernacle was erected God’s presence was manifest there, and God spoke to Moses there. Thus what is reported in 3:1-13 took place on Mount Sinai, and what is reported in 3:14-39 took place in the wilderness of Sinai.</i> Now the descendants of Aaron and Moses in the wilderness of Sinai numbered the same as they did at Mount Sinai. However, two sons of Aaron were missing.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is the point of verse 4.</i>I therefore<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. only those who went forth to war were counted by offering half a shekel as ransom for their souls. However, the Levites were in the service of God and did not have to offer a ransom for their souls. See I.E.’s short commentary on Ex. 38:25.</i> said that the Levites did not give a ransom for their souls, for Scripture clearly states, <i>for every one that passed over to them that are numbered</i> (Ex. 38:26). Some say that Moses did not count the Israelites before the tabernacle was constructed. He knew their number only by way of prophecy. However, Scripture contradicts them. It clearly states, <i>When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel</i> (Ex. 30:11). THE PRIESTS THAT WERE ANOINTED. With the anointing oil, for they were high priests.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Being anointed with the anointing oil (<i>shemen ha-mishkhah</i>) gave the sons of Aaron the status of high priests.</i> [AND THEY HAD NO CHILDREN.]<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>And they had no children</i> appears in verse 4, but I.E. comments upon it here.</i> They did not leave behind any grown or small children. Therefore the Levites were lacking in number,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the other tribes increased in number from the first census. The tribe of Levi did not do so due to the loss of Nadab and Abihu.</i> for it is possible for the grown children to beget children.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence Scripture tells us that Nadab and Abihu did not have any.</i> IN THE PRESENCE OF. I have previously explained the meaning of <i>al pene</i> (in the presence of).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Gen. 11:28 (Vol. 1, p. 146). There I.E. explains that <i>al pene</i> means in the presence of. The literal meaning of <i>al pene</i> is, upon the face of.</i> BEFORE AARON THE PRIEST. Who was the prince of the tribe. The meaning of <i>ve-ha’amadt</i> (and set them)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, and stand them up.</i> is, <i>that they may minister. As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand</i> (amadti) (II Kings 5:16) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is, <i>As the Lord liveth, before whom I minister</i>.</i> AND THE CHARGE OF THE WHOLE CONGREGATION. In the offering of sacrifices. AND THE CHARGE OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. They will make sure that an Israelite does not enter the tabernacle. THEY ARE WHOLLY GIVEN UNTO HIM. Forever. Or to them and their descendants who take their place.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew reads, <i>netunim netunim</i> (wholly given). This literally means, given given. I.E.’s first interpretation is that the repetition of the tern <i>netunim</i> indicates forever. His second interpretation is that the first <i>netunim</i> refers to them, and the second to their children.</i> UNTO AARON AND TO HIS SONS. Both those who are presently alive and those who will arise after them. FROM THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. To be separated from the children of Israel. AND THOU SHALT APPOINT AARON AND HIS SONS. <i>His sons</i> includes the sons of his sons. The meaning of <i>and thou shalt appoint</i> (tifkod) is, you shall appoint each one of them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Tifkod</i> can meant to count. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> The meaning of <i>that they may keep their priesthood</i> is that they not do anything that will disqualify them from being priests. AND THE COMMON MAN THAT DRAWETH NIGH. To the priest, to serve as a priest. [SHALL BE PUT TO DEATH.] An Israelite or a Levite who serves as a priest shall be put to death. The chapter that opens with the words <i>And I, behold, I have taken the Levites</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 12 and 13.</i> is also<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Like many other such chapters.</i> connected to the chapter which preceded it,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, verse 12 is connected to verse 10. In the Masoretic Bible, verse 11 opens a new chapter.</i> for the Torah contains chapters that are separated but are connected by content. Similarly, <i>Moreover the hand of the Lord was against them, to discomfit them from the midst of the camp, until they were consumed</i> (Deut. 2:15),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Deut. 2:16 is connected to Deut. 2:17 even though they are in different chapters in the Masoretic Bible. See I.E. on Deut. 2:16.</i> and, <i>And it came to pass on the day when the Lord spoke unto Moses in the land of Egypt</i> (Ex. 6:28).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E., Ex. 6:28 is connected to that which follows even though they are in different chapters in the Masoretic Bible. See I.E. on Ex. 6:28 (Vol. 2, pp. 141-2).</i> AND I, BEHOLD, I HAVE TAKEN THE LEVITES. The Levites have been greatly elevated. FIRST-BORN. <i>Bekhor</i> (first-born) is connected to <i>peter</i> (openeth).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. comments thus because the canticle reading is, every first-born, openeth the womb.</i> AND THE LEVITES SHALL BE MINE. They shall be holy unto Me. FOR ALL THE FIRST-BORN ARE MINE. Its meaning is, for also the first-born are Mine. ON THE DAY THAT I SMOTE. This means at the time that I smote.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The first-born were smitten at night. See Ex. 11:4,5.</i> There are many such cases.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where day means time.</i> MINE THEY SHALL BE. This means they are Mine and they shall be Mine,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The verse opens in the present (for all the first-born are Mine) and concludes with the future (Mine shall they be).</i> for all human first-born and similarly the first-born of unclean cattle<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is only to first-born asses.</i> shall be redeemed. FROM A MONTH OLD AND UPWARD. Until the sun and moon are once again in conjunction,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If the child was born on the New Moon (<i>rosh chodesh</i>) (Rabbi Joseph Tov Elem).</i> or until the moon returns to its approximate place of departure<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If the child was born at any other time of the month.</i> and its original position and its present place are near each other.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For when a child is not born on a New Moon, it is very difficult to visually determine when he is exactly a month old.</i> The intelligent person will understand this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That a complete lunar cycle has astrological significance.</i> GERSHON. For he was the first-born. In Chronicles the name is spelled with a <i>mem</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Gershom.</i> in place of a <i>nun</i> (I Chron. 6:1). OF GERSHON WAS THE FAMILY OF THE LIBNITES, AND THE FAMILY OF THE SHIMEITES. Its meaning is, these two families numbered the following amount.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">7,500. In other words, verses 21 and 22 form one unit.</i> BEHIND THE TABERNACLE. <i>Achare</i> (behind) means the same as <i>achore</i> (behind).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Achare</i> literally means after. Thus <i>achare ha-mishkan</i> literally means after the tabernacle. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> Compare, <i>achor va-kedem</i> (behind and before) (Ps. 139:5).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We thus see that the word <i>achor</i> means behind, for <i>kedem</i> means front.</i> WESTWARD. The term employed for westward is <i>yamah</i> because the great Spanish sea<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Mediterranean. The Hebrew word for sea is <i>yam</i>.</i> lies west of the Land of Israel. THE TABERNACLE. The reference is to the ten curtains.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ex. 26:1.</i> THE TENT. The reference is to the eleven curtains.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ex. 26:7.</i> THE COVERING THEREOF. The covering which covered the cover is included.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Ex. 26:14.</i> WHICH IS BY THE TABERNACLE. Which is inside the court. AND BY THE ALTAR. Which is outside the tabernacle.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In contrast, the altar of incense was inside the tabernacle.</i> [ROUND ABOUT.] Its meaning is that there was no place<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the hangings around the court.</i> that was not enclosed; there was no opening that was uncovered. EVEN WHATSOEVER PERTAINETH TO THE SERVICE THEREOF. I will explain this later.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on verse 31.</i> KEEPERS OF THE CHARGE OF THE HOLY.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ha-kodesh</i>. J.P.S. renders it as the sanctuary.</i> The reference is to the ark. The ark, as I have previously explained,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Lev. 6:23.</i> is referred to as the holy, in contrast to the tabernacle. SOUTHWARD. Kohath was placed at the right<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The south when one faces east.</i> because he was the most important of all the sons of Levi, and the right is more important than the left<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The north when one faces east.</i> or the back.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The west.</i> There is no side, with the exception of the east,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where Moses and Aaron encamped.</i> more important. Gershon had an advantage over Merari, for Gershon was the first-born of Levi. Hence he carried that which was holy,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Gershon carried the covering of the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, its covering, and the covering of <i>tachash</i> that is above it. See Num. 4:25.</i> in contrast to what Merari carried.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the burden of Merari, see verse 36.</i> Gershon<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The first-born of Levi.</i> therefore camped on the west,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 23.</i> like the standard of Ephraim.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The first-born of Joseph. Thus the two first-born camped together.</i> Merari camped on the north<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 35.</i> like Dan,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 2:25.</i> who was the son of the handmaid. Now the Kohathites camped next to the banner of Reuben. Korah<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A Kohathite.</i> therefore joined with Dathan and Abiram.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 16:1.</i> I will explain this later. AND THE ALTARS. Both of them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 16:24.</i> AND THE VESSELS OF THE SANCTUARY WHEREWITH THE PRIESTS MINISTER. The reference is to the vessels of the menorah, the table, and the altars. Many erred in explaining the meaning of <i>and the screen</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They apparently identified the screen with the screen that hung in front of the Holy of Holies (Ex. 40:21). See Rashi on this verse.</i> <i>and all that pertaineth to the service thereof</i>. It is clearly true that the reference is to the screen of the door of the tent of meeting. AND ALL THAT PERTAINETH TO THE SERVICE THEREOF. Its cords. PRINCE OF THE PRINCES OF THE LEVITES. There were three princes of Levi.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See verses 24, 30, and 35.</i> The term <i>nesi’e</i> (princes) in the phrase <i>nesi’e ha-levi</i> (princes of Levi) applies to the word <i>levi</i> and also to another word.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It also applies to the word <i>pekudat</i> (having the oversight of) in the second part of our verse.</i> It is like the word <i>lo</i> (not) in <i>It is not the great that are wise</i> (Job 32:9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The second part of Job 32:9 literally reads, <i>and the aged discern judgment</i>. According to I.E. the word <i>lo</i> is carried over to the second half of the sentence, which is to interpreted, and the aged do not (<i>lo</i>) discern judgment.</i> The second part of our verse is to be interpreted as if written <i>the princes having the oversight of them that keep the charge of the sanctuary</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. interprets our verse as if written, Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest being prince of the princes of the Levites, the princes having the oversight of them that keep the charge of the sanctuary.</i> Its meaning is that these three princes had oversight over the keepers of the charge of the sanctuary, who were Levites. NORTHWARD. It is possible that the word <i>tzafonah</i> (northward) is derived from the word <i>tzafanta</i> (laid up) in <i>Thou hast laid up for them that fear Thee</i> (Ps. 31:20) and from the word <i>tzafon</i> (laid up) in <i>laid up for the righteous</i> (Prov. 13:22). The north is so called because there is nothing in the south.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. apparently believed that no one lives south of the equator, for the temperature there is too hot. It is only in the north where the necessary elements to sustain life are found. See I.E. on Gen. 12:9 (Vol. 1, p. 153).</i> EASTWARD…TOWARD THE SUNRISING. <i>Mizrachah</i> means toward the sunrising. It refers to the place where the circles<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>agalot</i> (wagons). <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38 reads, <i>agulot</i> (circles). It isn’t clear what I.E. is referring to. Meijler suggests that the reference is to where the heaven and earth appear to touch, i.e., the horizon. For other interpretations, see Weiser and Krinsky.</i> come together. Observe, the tent of Moses, the tent of Aaron, and the tent of his children and his children’s children and all their entire households were in the east.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The east is the most important side. See I.E. on verse 47.</i> AND THE COMMON MAN THAT DREW NIGH. To the holy place.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Not to the camp of Moses and Aaron.</i> Note, all the Levites camped around the tabernacle in order to guard it. WERE TWENTY AND TWO THOUSAND. In all. When you add up the figures you will find that they come to three hundred above the figure given in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">7,500 Gershonites (v. 22), 8,600 Kohathites (v. 28), 6,200 Merarites (v. 34). This comes to 22,300.</i> Some say that Scripture is being brief and mentions only the thousands and neglects the hundreds.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, 22,000 is a round number.</i> However, this cannot be the case. Scripture mentions less than three hundred over and above a round number.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In listing the first-born, Scripture gives their number as 22,273 (v. 43). We thus see that Scripture does not employ round numbers in our chapter.</i> The truth is in accordance with tradition which states that a first-born does not free a first-born.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>Bekhorot</i> 4a. In other words, there were 300 first-born who were Levites. These 300 did not free Israelites from the necessity of redemption, because they had to free themselves.</i> The meaning of our verse thus is, all that were numbered of the Levites with the exception of the first-born [were twenty and two thousand]. Judah the Persian<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">An early Karaite scholar. See I.E. on Ex. 12:2 (Vol. 2, p. 203).</i> calculated to prove, from the number that the first-born of the Levites were one seventy-third of the Levites.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">22,000 divided by 300 comes to 73 and a fraction.</i> He went on to say that if you divide the number of Israelites<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">There were 603,550 Israelites (2:32).</i> by seventy-three,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The result of which is 8,267.</i> and take the number of Levites who came to serve in the tabernacle<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">8,580 (Num. 4:8).</i> rather than the number of Levites age one month and above,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of whom there were 22,273.</i> then the number will be close.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If we deduct the 300 uncounted Levites from the number of Levites who served in the tabernacle (8,580), we get 8,280. This is a number close to the 8,267. We thus see that 300 Levites were uncounted in order to provide a relationship between the Levites who served in the tabernacle and one seventy-third of the Israelites (Weiser).</i> However, all this is nothing. The Israelites were counted from twenty and above. No other fixed unit was used.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">There was no other age limitation.</i> However, the Levites were counted from twenty to fifty. There is a large difference between them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">79</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We cannot draw any conclusion from the number of Israelites and the number of Levites given by Scripture, for they apply to different age groups.</i> We will rely only on tradition.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">80</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the 300 were first-born. We cannot prove that this was the case from Scripture itself.</i> NUMBER ALL THE FIRST-BORN MALES. Note that males is an adjective.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">81</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Males (<i>zakhor</i>) qualifies first-born.</i> AND THE CATTLE OF THE LEVITES.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">82</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The cattle of the Levites which redeemed the first-born cattle of the Israelites remained with the Levites. Thus the Levites did not lose.</i> So that the Levites do not lose. The firstlings among the cattle are also for the Lord.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">83</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The first part of our verse indicates that all human first-born belong to the Lord. It does not say the same with regard to the first-born of the cattle. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> TAKE THE LEVITES. A second time.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">84</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, Scripture repeats itself, for it has already told us in verse 41 that God told Moses to take the Levites.</i> It is as if it stated, when you take the Levites, then those who are over and above will be redeemed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">85</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, take the Levites should be interpreted, when you take the Levites. Furthermore, when you take the Levites is connected to verse 46.</i> The word <i>peduye</i> (redemption of) is connected to the number.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">86</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our text reads, <i>peduye ha-sheloshah</i>. Now a word is usually not in the construct with a number. We thus say, <i>shene chakahamim</i> (two wise men), not <i>chakhme shenaim</i> (wise men of two) (Filwarg). Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> There are many other such instances. The disputers say<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">87</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>yesh makhhishim</i> (there are those who dispute). This is a term usually applied to Karaites. However, in view of the fact that what the alleged disputers say is not in contradiction to tradition, it is hard to understand why I.E. refers to them as disputers. Indeed, Motot suggests changing the reading to <i>yesh mefareshim</i> (some interpret), and <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38 reads, <i>Some say</i>. Meijler suggest that the disputers also brought proof from this that (contrary to <i>halakha</i>) the first-born of Levites require redemption, for the first-born of the Levites did not exempt the first-born of Israel for all time.</i> that here we learn that the redemption price of every first-born is five shekels. However, there is no proof here,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">88</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the redemption money for a first-born is five shekalim for all time.</i> for this commandment stands by itself.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">89</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our text deals with a specific case; one cannot derive a law for all times from it.</i> The truth is in keeping with tradition.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">90</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the redemption money is five shekalim. However, we do not derive it from our chapter.</i> REDEMPTION. <i>Pidyom</i> (redemption) is spelled with a <i>mem</i> in place of a <i>nun</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">91</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the Hebrew word for redemption is <i>pidyon</i>.</i> Compare, Gershon.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">92</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here a <i>nun</i> has been substituted for a <i>mem</i>. See I.E. on verse 17.</i> TAKE THE SUM OF THE SONS OF KOHATH. First, because of Moses and Aaron.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Moses and Aaron were descended from Kohath. Hence the sons of Kohath were counted first.</i> FROM THIRTY YEARS OLD AND UPWARD. Close to four weeks.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew word for week is <i>shavu’a. Shavu’a</i> is related to the word <i>sheva</i> (seven). Hence I.E. believes that <i>shavu’a</i> can also refer to seven years. Thus “four weeks” would equal 28 years. According to I.E. there is a mystical significance to the number seven. See I.E. on Gen. 8:5 (Vol. 1, p. 114, n. 16) and the notes thereto. Also see <i>The Secret of the Torah</i>, a translation and annotation of Ibn Ezra’s <i>Yesod Morah</i> by H. Norman Strickman (Jason Aaronson, NJ, 1995, p. 125).</i> [EVEN UNTIL FIFTY YEARS OLD.] A fifty-year-old is seven weeks of age. The body’s strength then declines. TO DO WORK IN THE TENT OF MEETING. The work of bearing. ABOUT THE MOST HOLY THINGS. The reference is to the ark. THE VEIL OF THE SCREEN. Which covers the ark.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew reads, <i>parokhet ha-masakh</i>. This literally means the screen which covers. I.E. explains that the screen is so called because it covers the ark. See Ex. 40:3.</i> AND SHALL PUT THEREON. On the cover.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>ve-natenu alav</i> (and put thereon). However, <i>parokhet</i> is feminine. Thus our text should read <i>aleha</i> rather then <i>alav</i>. Hence I.E. notes than <i>alav</i> refers to the word <i>masakh</i> (covering/screen).</i> Others say that the word <i>alav</i> (thereon) refers to the word <i>et</i> (v. 5), which precedes <i>parokhet</i> (the veil).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>et</i> (the sign of the accusative) serves both the masculine and the feminine. Hence I.E. believes that either a masculine or a feminine proportional pronoun may follow a word which has <i>et</i> in front of it (Filwarg). Thus the word <i>alav</i> can refer to <i>et parokhet</i>.</i> <i>Va-titzpeno</i> (and hid him)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally. See next note.</i> (Josh. 2:6) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The text should have read, <i>and hid them</i>, for the reference is to the two spies sent by Joshua. Now <i>hid him</i> is preceded by <i>et shene ha-anashim</i> (the two men). However, since the word <i>et</i> is used both with the singular and the plural, a singular or a plural may follow a phrase preceded by <i>et</i>.</i> AND SHALL SPREAD OVER IT A CLOTH ALL OF BLUE. <i>Kelil tekhelet</i> means all of blue. OVER IT. Some say, over the covering of <i>tachash</i> (sealskin). However, it appears to me that its meaning is, and they had already spread a cloth all of blue over the screen covering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>u-fareshu</i> (and shall spread) is a pluperfect and is to be rendered, and they had already spread. According to this interpretation, the blue cover was placed on the ark, and the <i>tachash</i> (sealskin) covering was placed over the blue covering.</i> If the blue cover was used in order to glorify the ark, then the first interpretation appears correct.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Blue is a royal color. Hence it stands to reason that if it was placed on the ark, it should be visible.</i> The <i>tachash</i> covering served to protect [the ark] from the rain and the dust.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Unlike the blue covering, which served as a decoration.</i> AND SHALL SET THE STAVES THEREOF. Note, they removed the staves until the ark was covered.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to Ex. 25:15 the staves were never to be removed from the ark. I.E. believes that the staves were momentarily removed while the ark was being covered. Hence Scripture states, and shall set the staves thereof (back in place).</i> Some say that they shall set the staves upon the shoulders of the bearers.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the meaning of <i>and they shall set the staves thereof</i> is, they shall set the staves upon the bearers of the ark. Thus our verse does not imply that the staves were ever removed from the ark. See <i>Tosafot Yoma</i> 72a.</i> AND UPON THE TABLE OF SHOWBREAD. To teach us that there were other tables there<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence Scripture identifies the table.</i> for the use of the meat.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the use of the sacrificial meat.</i> Furthermore, the showbread which was placed upon this table was not removed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence it is referred to as the table of showbread.</i> A CLOTH OF SCARLET. Look. There were two cloth coverings<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">One of blue (v. 7) and one of scarlet (v. 8).</i> plus a covering of skin upon the table. There were similarly a screen covering,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>parokhot ha-masakh</i> (v. 5).</i> a blue cloth covering, and a covering of skin over the ark.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 6.</i> A cloth covering and a cover of skin were over the menorah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 9 and 10.</i> AND SHALL PUT IT UPON A BAR. For it did not have any staves.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By which to carry it.</i> It is similar to <i>and they bore it upon a pole</i> (Num. 13:25).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">There too the grapes, which of course did not have any staves, were placed on a bar in order to be carried. Weiser suggests that I.E. believed that bar is to be interpreted as two bars, in the same manner that pole is to be interpreted as poles.</i> AND UPON THE GOLDEN ALTAR THEY SHALL SPREAD. Another cloth<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>beged acher</i>. Some emend to one cloth (<i>beged echad</i>) (Filwarg).</i> and a covering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is to a covering of <i>tachash</i> (sealskin).</i>[15.] OF COVERING THE HOLY FURNITURE, AND ALL THE HOLY VESSELS.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s comment is misplaced. It belongs in verse 15.</i> The ark, the table, the menorah, the altars, and all the utensils of ministry such as the knives, the spoons, and the plates. AND THEY SHALL TAKE AWAY THE ASHES. It means, and they shall take away the ashes from the altar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>deshen</i> means ashes. Thus <i>ve-dishenu</i> literally means, and they shall ash. This might be taken to mean, and they shall put on ashes. Hence I.E.’s interpretation that <i>ve-dishenu</i> means, and they shall remove the ashes.</i> THESE THINGS ARE THE BURDEN OF THE SONS OF KOHATH IN THE TENT OF MEETING. For they did not carry the tent and the tabernacle.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture states, <i>These things are the burden</i>, because they did not do any carrying.</i> AND THE CHARGE OF. <i>U-fekudat</i> (and the charge of) is related to the word <i>pakid</i> (overseer).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">One who assigns tasks.</i> THE OIL FOR THE LIGHT. Some say that Eleazar carried oil for one night’s light and similarly the continual meal offering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The daily continual meal offering. See <i>Yerushalmi, Sabbath</i> 10:13. Eleazar carried oil for the lighting in his right hand and the sweet incense in his left hand, while the continual meal offering hung from his arm.</i> However, I believe that Eleazar was in charge of giving <i>the oil for the light</i>, that is, of the utensil containing the oil for the light, and similarly the vessel containing the anointing oil and the vessel containing the sweet incense, to the children of Kohath. [HE SHALL HAVE THE CHARGE OF ALL THE TABERNACLE.] Scripture states this because Eleazar had charge over the tabernacle along with his brother Ithamar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If Eleazar was in charge of the entire tabernacle, why does Scripture tell us that he was in charge of the oil, the sweet incense, and the meal offering? Hence I.E.’s comments.</i> However, Eleazar alone had charge over the oil, the sweet incense, and the meal offering because of his great status. [UNTO MOSES AND UNTO AARON.] Scripture states this because Aaron and his sons were commanded to take heed that the sons of Kohath do not come to the penalty of excision (<i>karet</i>). The command <i>Cut ye not off</i> was given to Moses, Aaron and his sons. THAT THEY MAY LIVE. That their lives may be extended. AND NOT DIE. By excision. The meaning of our verse is that the family of the Kohathites will be rewarded if they observe and will be punished if they do not. Without the phrase <i>and not die</i>, our verse could be taken to imply that they will not be punished. AND APPOINT THEM.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ve-samu otam</i>, which literally means, and put them. This can be interpreted as referring to the <i>kohanim</i>. Hence I.E.’s interpretation.</i> The ark, the table, the menorah, and the altars. EVERY ONE TO HIS SERVICE. This refers to the holy vessels. AND TO HIS BURDEN. To be carried on the shoulder. BUT THEY SHALL NOT GO IN. The Kohathites shall not go in to the tent of meeting to see the holy things as they are being covered. The meaning of <i>ke-vala et ha-kodesh</i> (the holy things as they are being covered) is, when the structure is taken down, the veil of the curtain is removed and the ark is revealed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. the meaning of <i>the holy things as they are being covered</i> is, when the holy (i.e., the tabernacle) is taken down.</i> Others say that the meaning of <i>ke-vala</i> is, when they are being covered. Thus the meaning of <i>ke-vala et ha-kodesh</i> is, when they cover the ark in order to carry it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>ke-vala</i> means when it is covered. The word <i>bala</i> means swallowed. Thus <i>ke-vala</i> literally means when he swallows, i.e., when he covers.</i> This interpretation is more plausible than the first one. Now there are two prohibitions. One, not to touch the holy vessels-they are to be carried only by staves. Two, the Kohathites shall not see the holy things. TAKE THE SUM. <i>Naso</i> (take the sum) is an infinitive. It is like <i>zakhor</i> (remember) in <i>Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy</i> (Ex. 20:8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is an infinitive too.</i> The meaning of <i>naso</i> is, take the sum.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, even though <i>naso</i> is an infinitive, it has the meaning of an imperative. The same applies to <i>zakhor</i>.</i> ALSO. Because he had already counted the Kohathites. IN SERVING. To put up the tabernacle, to make the showbread, to slaughter, and to guard. AND IN BEARING BURDENS. <i>Le-massa</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>nun, sin, alef</i>.</i> (bearing burdens) is an infinitive. Similarly <i>le-massa</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>nun, sin, ayin</i>.</i> (causing to set forward) in <i>and for causing the camps to set forward</i> (Num. 10:2). The forms of verbs change.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Le-massa</i> in our verse is vocalized <i>kamatz, pattach</i>. <i>Le-massa</i> in Num. 10:2 is vocalized <i>pattach, pattach</i>. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> AND THE COVERING OF SEALSKIN THAT IS ABOVE IT. Scripture is being brief, for it does not mention the ramskin covering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which was above the sealskin covering. See Ex. 26:14.</i> Some say that the two coverings were attached.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus the covering of sealskin includes the ramskin covering.</i> AND ALL THE INSTRUMENTS OF THEIR SERVICE. Such as tables, pegs, and cords. AND WHATSOEVER THERE MAY BE TO DO WITH THEM. The instruments of service, or the tabernacle and the altar. AS FOR THE SONS OF MERARI. Scripture does not mention that they were counted, for this section<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 29-37.</i> is connected to the one above.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 21-28. Thus the command <i>Take the sum of</i> in verse 22 also applies here.</i> THE WORK OF SERVICE. This is to be understood as I have already explained.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In his comments on verse 15, I.E. hints that the term <i>work of service</i> applies to the carrying of the tent and the tabernacle, which was the work assigned to the sons of Gershon and Merari, while the term <i>the work of bearing burdens</i> refers to the work done by the sons of Kohath (Weiser).</i> Now the meaning of <i>All those that were numbered</i> (v. 46) is, all those from thirty years old that were numbered.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, our verse is a continuation of verse 46.</i> EVERY ONE. The reference is to Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. TO HIS SERVICE, AND TO HIS BURDEN. Hence <i>and his numbered</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>u-fekudav</i>. The singular <i>u-fekudav</i> is employed because the terms which precede it (<i>avodato</i>, his service, and <i>masa’o</i>, his burden) are i n the singular. It should be noted that J.P.S. renders <i>u-fekudav</i> as <i>they were also numbered</i>.</i> follows. The section <i>put out of the camp every leper, and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is unclean by the dead</i> (Num. 5:2) follows, because God’s presence was in the camps of Israel when they journeyed and when they rested.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence all those who were unclean had to leave the camp.</i> EVERY LEPER, AND EVERY ONE THAT HATH AN ISSUE,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>zav</i>. A <i>zav</i> or a <i>zavah</i> is a person who has an abnormal discharge from the genital organs.</i> AND WHOSOEVER IS UNCLEAN BY THE DEAD. These are states of uncleanliness that last for seven days. They also render others unclean.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the uncleanliness of the <i>zav</i> and the <i>zavah</i>, see Lev. 15:1-28. For the uncleanliness of those who come into contact with the dead, see Num. 19:1- 22.</i> Therefore a person who had a seminal omission does not leave the camp.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The camp discussed in our chapter, i.e., the camp of the entire people of Israel. I.E. comments thus because one who has a seminal mission is obligated to leave a camp of soldiers who go to war. See Deut. 23:10-14.</i> Similarly, no place was setaside outside the camp<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See note 3.</i> for the performing of bodily functions.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As there was in the case of a camp of soldiers. See Deut. 23:10-14.</i> On the contrary, each person dug in his own tent<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Dug a pit for his bodily excretions.</i> as is the custom with all the camps, for there were children among them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It would be very difficult to take children outside of the camp every time they had to relieve themselves.</i> Now the section which opens with <i>When thou goest forth in camp against thine enemies</i> (Deut. 23:10) speaks of a small camp wherein there are no women, and the ark is among them and they do not surround the ark.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">With a fence as they do in a large camp (see I.E. on Deut. 23:10). Thus in a small camp, or a war camp, the ark is exposed. Some manuscripts read, and they surround the ark; i.e., they are in close proximity to the ark.</i> [They have to leave the camp],<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A war camp.</i> for God’s presence is in the center of any Israelite camp. I will explain this in its proper place.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Deut. 23:10. For another interpretation, see Weiser.</i> FEMALE. A woman who has an irregular menstrual flow,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Lev. 15:25-28.</i> a normal menstrual flow,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Lev. 15:19-24.</i> a woman who is a leper<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Lev. 13:1-46.</i> or who was made unclean by a dead body.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 19:11-22.</i> AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL DID SO. Immediately, before they journeyed. When the unclean journeyed, they journeyed between the standard of Ephraim<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The standard of Ephraim journeyed in front of the standard of Dan.</i> and the standard of Dan.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The standard of Dan journeyed at the rear. See Num. 10:25.</i> The aforementioned is based on logic,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For it is hard to believe that the unclean traveled outside of the standards and were thus exposed to danger.</i> for this is not explained in Scripture. The section that begins with <i>When a man or woman</i> [<i>shall commit any sin that men commit, to commit a trespass against the Lord</i>]<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 6-10.</i> follows the previous chapter<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 1-4.</i> because leprosy and unclean issue<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>zav</i>.</i> are brought about by trespassing against the Lord.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They are punishments for sin. See <i>Arakin</i> 16b.</i> The reason this section is repeated<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The material in verses 5-10 repeats what has already been stated in Lev. 5:20-26.</i> is that the Torah wants to mention <i>but if the man have no kinsman</i> (v. 8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This law is not mentioned in Lev 5:20-26.</i> THEN THEY SHALL CONFESS. Whichever one it be, a man or a woman. IN FULL. <i>Be-rosho</i> (in full) means as it is, not less than it is.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Be-rosho</i> literally means at its head, or at first. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> AND ADD UNTO IT THE FIFTH PART. If he confesses on his own. However, if there are witnesses then he shall add two fifths. Those who transmitted the law<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Talmudic sages.</i> say a fifth of a fifth.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>Baba Kamma</i> 108a. See Rashi on Lev. 5:24, “If he denies the fifth (i.e., he asserts that he has repaid both capital and fifth, but has not really paid the latter, for which a claim is now made against him) and takes an oath that he has paid it but afterwards admits the claim, then he must now bring (pay) a fifth in addition to this fifth (a fifth of the original fifth which now become the <i>keren</i> (capital) in addition to it).” (Rosenbaum and Silbermann translation).</i> Their minds are greater than ours. THE RESTITUTION…SHALL BE THE LORDS. For he made restitution because of his fear of the Lord.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He confessed because of his fear of the Lord.</i> AND EVERY MAN’S HALLOWED THINGS SHALL BE HIS. Its meaning is that they belong to the one who hallows them. He may give them to any <i>kohen</i> that he wants to. This is noted because Scripture mentions the gifts given to the <i>kohanim</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 9.</i> The portion dealing with a straying wife follows<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The portion that deals with one who trespasses against the Lord.</i> because the straying wife commits a trespass against her husband.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They are thus thematically connected.</i> IF ANY MAN’S WIFE GO ASIDE. <i>Tisteh</i> means will go aside from the right way.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the word <i>tisteh</i> means to go aside. Here, to go aside from the right path.</i> Similarly <i>seteh</i> (go aside) in <i>Go aside from it</i> (Prov. 4:15). CARNALLY. <i>Shikhvat zera</i> (carnally) refers to carnal laying. It is called <i>shikhvat zera</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, laying of seed.</i> because its purpose is for seed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its purpose is for ejaculation (Weiser). Or its purpose is to produce children.</i> AND IT BE HID. She did not reveal the matter. There is not even one witness through whom she is suspect. NEITHER SHE BE TAKEN IN THE ACT. By witnesses, men or women, so that she be suspected. AND THE SPIRIT OF JEALOUSY COME UPON HIM. <i>Ru’ach</i> (spirit) is masculine here.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Avar</i> (come upon), the verb governing <i>ru’ach</i>, is masculine.</i> Similarly <i>ru’ach</i> (wind) in <i>and a great and strong wind</i> (I Kings 19:11).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here too <i>chazak</i> (strong), one of the verbs governing <i>ru’ach</i>, is masculine.</i> COME. Come upon his mind. BRING. Against her will. FOR HER. <i>Aleha</i> (for her) means with her or because of her.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The usual meaning of <i>aleha</i> is, upon her. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> BARLEY MEAL. Our rabbis said, she acted like a beast, let her bring the food of a beast.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Mishnah, Sotah</i> 2:1.</i> A free-will meal offering consists of pure wheat flower so that the celebrant will be remembered for good. However, this meal offering recalls a sin, if a sin was committed. Hence it is an inferior offering and consists of barley without oil and without frankincense. AND THE PRIEST SHALL BRING HER NEAR. <i>Her</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>otah</i>.</i> refers to the meal offering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Not the woman. The word <i>otah</i> literally means her. However, it also means it.</i> AND SET HER<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meal offering. I.E. explains our verse in this way because verse 18 tells us that the <i>kohen</i> is to make the woman stand before the Lord.</i> BEFORE THE LORD. Before the altar. HOLY WATER. From the basin, for it has already become holy.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By being in the basin.</i> ON THE FLOOR OF THE TABERNACLE. The reference is to the well-known floor.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>afar</i> (dust) has a definite article before it, a <i>heh</i> with a <i>segol</i> beneath it. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> The word <i>afar</i> (dust) has a definite article before it. It refers to the earth which is beneath the floor.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>be-afar</i> (in the dust) refers to the earth which is beneath the floor of a certain spot in the tabernacle. See Mishnah <i>Sotah</i> 2:2.</i> AND LET THE HAIR OF THE WOMAN’S HEAD GO LOOSE. <i>Para</i> (go loose) means he shall uncover.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this opinion the meaning of our verse is, <i>and he shall uncover (u-fara) the hair of the woman</i>.</i> However, I believe that it means he shall take out the hair of the woman, which was covered, and let it go loose. THE WATER OF BITTERNESS. It is my opinion that the word <i>me</i> (water) is in the construct<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">With a missing word.</i> and the word <i>ha-marim</i> is an adjective.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Describing the missing word.</i> If so, then its secret is known.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We know what word is missing. According to I.E. the phrase <i>me ha- marim</i> is short for <i>me ha-sammim ha-marim</i> (the water containing the bitter ingredient). See <i>Sotah</i> 20a.</i> It is also possible that the waters were so called because of their ultimate taste.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The waters were not yet bitter. They only turned bitter at the end. Hence I.E. explains that they are called the bitter waters because they were ultimately bitter.</i> Compare, <i>And stripped the naked of their clothing</i> (Job 22:6).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">One cannot strip a naked person. Thus what Scripture means is that the one who was ultimately naked was stripped.</i> <i>And the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her and become bitter</i> (v. 24) is proof of this, for this verse indicates that the <i>oaths</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in verse 19. The waters turned bitter after the oaths were dissolved in it.</i> which <i>they that cause the curses</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The curses come about through her false swearing.</i> refers to, will make the sweet waters bitter. The word <i>ha-me’arerim</i> (that causeth the curse) is a <i>pi’el</i>. It is like the word <i>erarah</i> (cursed) in <i>which the Lord hath cursed</i> (Gen. 5:29).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It too is a <i>pi’el</i>. The root <i>alef, resh, resh</i> usually comes in the <i>kal</i>. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> [SHALL CAUSE HER TO SWEAR.] Its meaning is that the woman shall answer, <i>Amen, Amen</i>. IF NO MAN HAVE LAIN WITH THEE. Its meaning is, if another man has not forced himself upon you.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>If no man have lain with thee</i> cannot be taken literally because we are dealing with a married women. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> AND IF THOU HAST NOT GONE ASIDE. Willingly. <i>Satit</i> means you have gone aside and committed an unclean act.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>satit</i> is short for <i>satit tume’ah</i>.</i> It is similar to <i>thou shalt not build it of hewn stones</i> (Ex. 20:25).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Ex. 20:25 literally reads, <i>you shall not build them uncut stones</i>. I.E. believes that this is short for: you shall not build a hewn structure out of them. See I.E. on Ex. 20:25 and the notes thereto (Vol. 2, p. 443-4).</i> BE THOU FREE. The meaning of <i>hinnaki</i> is, be thou free.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Hinnaki</i> is an imperative. It literally means free yourself. However, it cannot mean that here, for it is not in the power of the woman to free herself. Hence <i>hinnaki</i> must be taken as an imperfect rather than as an imperative, even though it has the form of the latter.</i> It is similar to <i>and die in the mount</i> (Deut. 32:50).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>U-mot</i> (and die), an imperative, must be interpreted as if written <i>ve-tamut</i> (and you will die), for the time of one’s natural death is not in one’s hands. See I.E. on Gen. 1:22 and the notes thereto (Vol. 1, p. 42).</i> It is possible that the first time Scripture says, <i>and the priest shall cause her to swear</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, in our verse.</i> means, and the priest shall cause her to swear by invoking God’s name. The second time this phrase is used<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, in verse 21.</i> it means, as Scripture notes,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 21.</i> via the curses. THY THIGH…THY BELLY. They are the neighbors.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They are near the genital organs.</i> TO SWELL. The word <i>tzavah</i> means to swell. The word is not found anywhere else in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, has no neighbor except in this chapter. Neither this word nor any word with the same root is found any where else in Scripture, only here.</i> TO FALL AWAY. The <i>lamed</i> of <i>lanpil</i> (to fall away) is vocalized with a <i>pattach</i> because the <i>heh</i> of the form<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>hifil</i>.</i> is missing.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Lanpil</i> is short for <i>le-hanpil</i>.</i> The same is true of the word <i>lashmid</i> (to destroy) (Is. 23:11).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Lashmid</i> is short for <i>le-hashmid</i>.</i> AMEN, AMEN. The word amen is repeated for emphasis.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To indicate that the woman fully agrees with what the <i>kohen</i> says.</i> [IN A SCROLL.] They had a specific scroll for curses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. they had a special book which was used for this ritual. Our verse reads <i>ba-sefer</i> (in a book). <i>Ba-sefer</i> literally means in the book. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> THE MEMORIAL-PART THEREOF.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew reads <i>azkaratah</i>. This literally means her memorial. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> That which served as her memorial, for good or bad in accordance with her deeds. AND HAVE ACTED UNFAITHFULLY. <i>Va-timal ma’al</i> (and have acted unfaithfully) is to be understood here as I have explained.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Lev. 5:15.</i> It refers to something covered.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. on Lev. 5:15, the phrase <i>li-me’ol ma’al</i> means to remove a cover (<i>me’il</i>), to uncover that which should remain covered. <i>Va-time’ol ma’al</i> thus means, and have committed an act of treachery.</i> AND SHALL CONCEIVE SEED. God will give her seed in recompense for the shame which befell her. SHALL BEAR HER INIQUITY. If she was defiled. Our verse states, <i>And the man shall be clear from iniquity</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If the woman is exonerated and he has relations with her.</i> For if a spirit of jealousy came upon him she is prohibited to him. He is not allowed to be with her.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If a man suspects his wife of adultery, he is prohibited from having sexual relations with her until she is exonerated.</i> If he sleeps with her, he is guilty of sin. Some say that the section dealing with the Nazirite follows the section dealing with the wife who is accused of adultery because if the latter was not defiled, then she will have a son who is a Nazirite. However, I believe that the chapter dealing with the Nazirite follows [the chapter dealing with the wife who is accused of adultery] because it lays down the law regarding a female Nazirite who is the reverse of the unfaithful wife. Now wine<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which the Nazirite forswears.</i> causes most sins. Furthermore, a woman who does not fix her hair<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Nazirite is prohibited from cutting hair.</i> does not seek sexual relations.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus the female Nazirite who abstains from wine and does not cut her hair is the reverse of the unfaithful wife who drinks wine and does cut her hair.</i> SHALL CLEARLY UTTER A VOW. The word <i>yafli</i> means to set aside. On the other hand, it might mean doing something out of the ordinary,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>yafli</i> is related to the word <i>pele</i> (wonder).</i> for most people follow their lusts.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">But this person took an oath to separate himself from the pleasure of drinking. Hence what he did was wondrous.</i> THE VOW OF A NAZIRITE. <i>Neder nazir</i> means an oath to be a Nazirite, for the word <i>nazir</i> (Nazirite) is an adjective.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Nazir</i> modifies the person who takes the oath, for according to I.E. the meaning of <i>neder nazir</i> is to be a Nazirite person. See Weiser.</i> The word <i>ve-yenazeru</i> (that they separate) (Lev. 22:13) is related to it. [TO CONSECRATE HIMSELF UNTO THE LORD.]<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew reads, <i>le-hazir la-Adonai</i>. This literally means to separate himself unto the Lord. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> To distance himself from lust. He does this in order to serve God, for wine destroys reason and the proper service of God.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus <i>le-nazir la-Adonai</i> means to separate (himself from wine) in order to serve God.</i> I will hint at a secret in the chapter that opens with <i>When thou goest forth in camp against thine enemies</i> (Deut. 23:10). [HE SHALL ABSTAIN FROM WINE AND STRONG DRINK.] Its meaning is, if he took a vow to be a Nazirite and holy, then he shall separate himself from wine and strong drink. According to the transmitters of tradition, <i>shekhar</i> (strong drink) is aged wine.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>shekhar</i> refers to old wine while <i>yayin</i> refers to young wine. See Targum and Rashi.</i> Others say that <i>shekhar</i> is to be taken literally; it refers to any drink that intoxicates a person. [HE SHALL DRINK NO VINEGAR OF WINE…NEITHER SHALL HE DRINK ANY LIQUOR OF GRAPES, NOR EAT FRESH GRAPES.] This explains the oath.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Taken by the Nazirite.</i> He must distance himself from anything connected to wine.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence he must not eat any grapes or grape products even if they are not intoxicating.</i> In the account of the wife of Manoah,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The mother of Samson.</i> Scripture states, <i>and eat not any unclean thing</i> (Jud. 13:7). <i>She</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Samson’s mother.</i> <i>may not eat of any thing that cometh of the grape-vine</i> (Jud. 13:14). LIQUOR OF. The word <i>mishrat</i> (liquor of) is not found elsewhere in Scripture. The <i>tav</i> indicates that the word is feminine and is in the construct. <i>Mishrat anavim</i> refers to anything that has been mashed with grapes. Others say that <i>mishrat anavim</i> refers to a cooked drink.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Made from grapes.</i> PRESSED GRAPES. The word <i>chartzannim</i> (pressed grapes) is not found anywhere else in Scripture. The same applies to the word <i>zag</i> (grape-stone). The commentaries tells us that <i>chartzannim</i> refers to the outer skin of the grape and <i>zag</i> to the pits. Others say the reverse.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>Nazir</i> 34b.</i> According to these interpretations, <i>me-chartzannim</i> (from the pressed grapes)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, <i>me-chartzannim ad zag</i> (from the pressed grapes even to the grape-stone).</i> is connected to <i>nothing that is made of the grape-vine</i>. The meaning of our verse is that the Nazirite shall eat nothing made from the grapevine, that is, from these two things.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The outer skin and the pit of the grape.</i> HE SHALL LET THE LOCKS OF THE HAIR OF HIS HEAD GROW LONG. The word <i>gaddel</i> (grow) is a <i>pi’el</i> infinitive.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture employs an infinitive with the meaning of a third person imperfect (<i>yegaddel</i>).</i> The meaning of <i>gaddel</i> is, he shall grow. THAT HE CONSECRATETH. The word <i>hazziro</i> (that he consecrateth) is a <i>hifil</i> infinitive.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is not a perfect; if it were, it would be vocalized <i>hiziro</i>.</i> A DEAD BODY.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>nefesh met</i>.</i> The word <i>met</i> (dead) is an adjective describing body (<i>nefesh</i>). On the other hand, the word <i>guf</i> (body) is missing from our text.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In this case, the word <i>met</i> is describing the word <i>guf</i>. Our verse reads, <i>nefesh met</i>.</i> FOR HIS FATHER, OR FOR HIS MOTHER. And certainly not for his wife, his daughter, and others. Some say that the word <i>nazir</i> (Nazirite) is related to the word <i>nezer</i> (crown). <i>Because his consecration</i> (nezer) <i>unto God is upon his head</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders this clause, “Because the crown of (<i>nezer</i>) his God is upon his head.”</i> is proof of this. This interpretation is not farfetched.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is not <i>aggadic</i>.</i> Note that most people are slaves to worldly lusts. The true king, the one who has a crown, the one who wears the royal diadem, is the person who is free from this lust.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence the term <i>nazir</i>, the one who wears the crown.</i> VERY SUDDENLY. The words <i>peta</i> and <i>pitom</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">J.P.S. renders <i>peta pitom</i> as very suddenly. According to I.E. the literal meaning of <i>peto pitom</i> is suddenly, suddenly.</i> are close in meaning. The same applies to <i>admat afar</i> (dust of the earth) (Dan. 12:2).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For <i>adamah</i> and <i>afar</i> mean the same. See I.E. on Gen. 8:11 (Vol. 1, p. 115.</i> AND HE DEFILE. The corpse will defile him.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>and he defile his consecrated head</i> does not mean and the Nazirite will defile himself, but that the corpse will defile the Nazirite.</i> IN THE DAY OF HIS CLEANSING. By the waters of purification,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 19:1-22.</i> for he was defiled by a corpse.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ibid</i>.</i> ONE FOR A SIN-OFFERING AND THE OTHER FOR A BURNT-OFFERING. Its secret was explained by the sages. They said that the reward of sin is sin.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Abot</i> 4:2. I.E.’s point is that the Nazirite must have been guilty of some sin for uncleanliness to have befallen him during his period of Naziriteship (Filwarg).</i> FOR THAT HE SINNED BY REASON OF THE BODY.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>nefesh</i>. J.P.S. renders it as dead.</i> The reference is to a dead body. Compare the word <i>nefesh</i> (body) in <i>Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for a body</i> (Lev. 19:28).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>la-nefesh</i>. J.P.S. renders it as the dead.</i> If the sin referred to a sin committed against his very own body,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to Rabbi Eleazar Ha-Kappar, the Nazirite sins by abstaining from wine. See <i>Nazir</i> 19:a; <i>Nedarim</i> 10:2.</i> then Scripture would not command him to return to his sin.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To start the days of his Nazirite term anew (v. 12).</i> AND HE SHALL CONSECRATE UNTO THE LORD THE DAYS OF HIS NAZIRITESHIP. All the days that he vowed to be a Nazirite. He shall now begin to count them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He shall now start to count them anew.</i> BECAUSE HIS CONSECRATION WAS DEFILED. For he vowed to be a Nazirite for a fixed number of days in succession without anything intervening and breaking them up. FULFILLED. <i>Melot</i> (fulfilled) is an infinitive. Its final root letter is an <i>alef</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its root is <i>mem, lamed, alef</i>.</i> It is conjugated like a word that has a <i>heh</i> as a final root letter.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence the ending <i>ot</i>. Words that end in an <i>alef</i> end in an <i>o</i> in the infinitive. Thus the infinitive of <i>mem, lamed, alef</i> should be <i>melo</i>.</i> It is like the word <i>kero’ot</i> (call)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which comes from the root <i>kof, resh, alef</i>, but whose infinitive form follows the paradigm of a word ending in a <i>heh</i>.</i> in <i>that thou didst call us</i> (Jud. 8:1). HE SHALL BRING IT.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>oto</i>. <i>Oto</i> can mean him or it. I.E. renders our phrase, he shall bring him.</i> <i>Yavi oto</i> (he shall bring it) means he<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Nazirite.</i> shall bring himself.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>oto</i> (him) here has the meaning of himself.</i> Compare, <i>but the shepherds fed themselves</i> (Ezek. 34:8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, otam. Literally, them (<i>otam</i>). However, in order to makes sense of the verse we must render <i>otam</i> as themselves. Similarly, <i>oto</i> (him) in our verse is to be rendered as himself.</i> Or <i>yavi oto</i> means that the <i>kohen</i> shall bring him<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Nazirite if he refuses to bring his offering.</i> against his will by commanding that he be forced to bring his sacrifice. ONE HE-LAMB. A male, as is the law regarding all burnt offerings.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Lev. 1:3.</i> ONE EWE-LAMB. A female, as is the law with all sin offerings.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Lev. 4:27-29.</i> AND ONE RAM…FOR PEACE-OFFERINGS. As an expression of joy that he fulfilled his vow. HIS SIN-OFFERING. The sin offering is mentioned first<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In our verse, even though the burnt offering was offered first.</i> because it was mentioned last,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 14.</i> for this is Hebrew style. THE HAIR OF. The Hebrew word for <i>hair of</i> is vocalized in two ways.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Se’ar</i> (<i>sheva, pattach</i>) in our verse, and <i>sa’ar</i> (<i>pattach, pattach</i>) in Is. 7:20.</i> WHEN IT IS SODDEN. The meaning of <i>beshelah</i> (when it is sodden) is, and it<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The shoulder.</i> is sodden.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>ha-zero’ah beshelah</i>. This literally means the shoulder cooked. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> AFTER HE HATH SHAVEN HIS CONSECRATED HEAD. This is a sign that the <i>kodesh hu</i> (this is holy) (v. 20) refers to the word <i>shoulder</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In our verse.</i> for that is the main organ that is being waved. On the other hand, the word <i>hu</i> (this)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In <i>kodesh hu</i>.</i> may refer to all that is waved.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though <i>hu</i> is a singular. Thus <i>kodesh hu</i> refers to all that is being waved.</i> [BESIDE THAT FOR WHICH HIS MEANS SUFFICE.] It means that he is obligated to give in accordance with his wealth. He is also obligated to give in accordance with the days of his vow, whether they are few or whether they are many.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The additional offerings brought by the Nazirite are contingent upon the length of his vow; the longer the vow period, the more sacrifices to be brought.</i> The chapter dealing with the blessings of the <i>kohanim</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 22-26.</i> follows the chapter dealing with the Nazirite because, after concluding the laws of the Nazirite who is holy, Scripture mentions the laws of the <i>kohanim</i> who are holy. Those who contradict Rabbinic tradition<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Karaites.</i> say that the <i>kohen</i> used this blessing to bless all who brought a gift. They claim that the blessing of the <i>kohanim</i> follows the law of the Nazirite because the latter concludes with “beside that which the means of the celebrant suffice.”<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s paraphrase of <i>beside that for which his means suffice</i>.</i> However, the truth is in keeping with the tradition of our sages of blessed memory.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The rabbis teach that this is a blessing to be given to all of Israel. This is so even though it is written in the singular.</i> <i>And Aaron lifted up his hands toward the people, and blessed them</i> (Lev. 9:22)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We thus see that Aaron blessed all of Israel. I.E. assumes that the reference is to the blessing mentioned in verses 24-26.</i> on the eighth day<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of consecration when the tabernacle was dedicated.</i> is proof of this. This portion<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 24-26.</i> was written because God commanded Aaron to bless the people when the tabernacle was erected. Scripture there<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Lev. 9:22.</i> mentions, <i>nesi’at kappayim</i> (the lifting of the hands),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Rabbinic term for the blessing given by the <i>kohanim</i>.</i> for the word <i>kappayim</i> means the same as <i>yadayim</i> (hands).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Lev. 9:22 reads: <i>Va-yissa et yadav</i> (lifted up his hands). According to I.E. this means the same as <i>va-yissa et kapav</i>. Thus Lev. 9:22 refers to what the rabbis call <i>nisi’at kappayim</i>, that is, the blessing given by the <i>kohanim</i>.</i> However, the term <i>yadayim</i> is a more general term.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It takes in the entire hand, while <i>kappayim</i> technically refers to the fingers and their sockets (Weiser).</i> THE LORD BLESS THEE. The Lord increase your life and your wealth.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. a blessing means an increase in the good. See his comments on Gen. 2:3 (Vol. 1, p. 50).</i> AND KEEP THEE. God will protect what he has increased so that no one steals it. THE LORD MAKE HIS FACE TO SHINE UPON THEE. Its meaning is the same as <i>In the light of the king’s countenance is life</i> (Prov. 16:15). It means may God make his face to shine upon you when you ask something of Him and at the time that you make the request. May God accept you and may His will be to immediately fulfill your request. [AND BE GRACIOUS TO THEE.] If you make a request of God in a time of trouble, may He be gracious to you. <i>Ve-yechunekka</i> (and be gracious to thee) is similar to <i>channuni</i> (have pity) in <i>have pity upon me, O ye</i> (Job. 19:21) and <i>chanan</i> (graciously given) in <i>The children whom God hath graciously given</i> (Gen. 33:5).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. this should be rendered, <i>The children whom God out His pity hath given</i>.</i> <i>Ve-yechunekka</i> comes from the same root as <i>chanan</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which I.E. renders, to have pity. See I.E. on Ex. 22:26 (Vol. 2, p. 490).</i> THE LORD LIFT UP HIS COUNTENANCE UPON THEE. The reverse of <i>I will hide Mine eyes from you</i> (Is. 1:15). As I have already explained,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It isn’t clear where I.E. made this comment earlier.</i> its meaning is, wherever you go My face shall be lifted up to you. AND GIVE THEE PEACE. Its meaning is similar to, <i>no evil</i> — from stones, from evil animals, from any enemy — <i>touch thee</i> (Job. 5:19). SO SHALL THEY PUT MY NAME. Its meaning is similar to <i>to set His name there</i> (Deut. 14:24),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It means that “the place” will be sanctified because it shall be called by God’s name.</i> that is, the children of Israel be sanctified by God’s name. Or it means that when they shall mention My name over the children of Israel [I will bless them], for God’s revered and awe-inspiring name is found in each one of the three verses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence this is what <i>So shall they put My name upon the children of Israel</i> refers to.</i> AND I WILL BLESS THEM. It is possible that the <i>mem</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>mem</i> of <i>va-avarekhem</i> is a pronominal suffix meaning them.</i> of <i>avarekhem</i> (I will bless them) refers to the <i>kohanim</i> who utter the blessing. It means they will bless Israel, and I will bless those who bless.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the meaning of <i>So shall they put My name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them</i> is: the <i>kohanim</i> shall bless Israel and I will bless the <i>kohanim</i>.</i> It is also possible that the <i>mem</i> of <i>avarekhem</i> refers to Israel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus <i>and I will bless them</i> means and I will bless Israel.</i> Its meaning is, if the <i>kohanim</i> bless Israel, then I will bless Israel; that is, I will fulfill the blessing of the <i>kohanim</i>. In my opinion, the <i>mem</i> of <i>avarekhem</i> refers to all of them, the <i>kohanim</i> and the Israelites.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus the meaning of <i>and I will bless them</i> is, I will bless both Israel and the <i>kohanim</i>.</i> [AND IT CAME TO PASS ON THE DAY THAT MOSES HAD MADE AN END OF SETTING UP THE TABERNACLE.] Moses made an end to the setting up of the tabernacle after the blessing of the <i>kohanim</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">After the <i>kohanim</i> blessed Israel. See Num. 6:24-26; Lev. 9:22.</i> as this was how events unfolded.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Chapter 7 follows the blessing of the <i>kohanim</i> at the end of chapter 6.</i> On the day that Aaron lifted up his hands toward the people and blessed them,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Lev. 9:22.</i> the dedication of the tabernacle began.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse.</i> The verse <i>And it came to pass on the day that Moses had made an end of setting up the tabernacle</i> is proof of the words of our sages, that Moses took the tabernacle down, raised it up and took it down again, and erected it again throughout the seven days of dedication to train the <i>kohanim</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to the rabbis, <i>had made an end of setting up the tabernacle</i> indicates that the tabernacle had been set up and taken down a number of times. See I.E. on Ex. 40:2 and the notes thereto (Vol. 2, p. 754). It should be noted that I.E. there rejects the opinion that Moses erected and took down the tabernacle during the seven days of dedication.</i> For the meaning of <i>and sanctified them</i> is that he sanctified them [the furniture, the altar, and the vessels] by the sprinkling of the blood<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ex. 29:21; Ex. 29:35-7; Lev. 8:30.</i> during the seven days of dedication.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When the tabernacle was set up and taken down.</i> AND THE ALTAR AND ALL THE VESSELS THEREOF. This is connected to <i>on the day that Moses had made an end of setting up the tabernacle</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>And it came to pass on the day that Moses had made an end of setting up the tabernacle</i> also applies to <i>and the altar</i>.</i> It means that he set the altar up in its place. AND ALL THE VESSELS THEREOF, AND HAD ANOINTED THEM. With the anointing oil AND SANCTIFIED THEM. With blood. Scripture mentions the altar because of its dedication.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Prima facie</i>, the altar is included in <i>the furniture thereof</i>. Hence I.E. points out the altar is singled out for special mention because it had a special dedication. <br>According to I.E. sex is one of the things that creates a barrier between man and God (<i>Yesod Mora</i>, chapter 7, pp. 107 and 108). The Nazirite is an individual who takes a vow to abstain from wine and haircutting. I.E. connects wine and hair to sexuality. He believes that most sexual taboos are violated because the transgressor has imbibed wine. As to the prohibition of cutting the hair, I.E. writes, “A woman who does not fix her hair does not seek to engage in sexual relationships” (Num. 5:31). He similarly notes that the Torah states that “a razor shall not come upon the head of a Nazirite so that he does not make himself attractive to women.” (<i>Yesod Mora</i>, p. 62).</i> THAT THE PRINCES OF ISRAEL…OFFERED. Scripture employs a general term.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse tells us in general terms that the princes brought an offering. Unlike the offerings brought by the princes when the altar was dedicated (verses 12-83), Scripture does not list the offerings prince by prince.</i> Its meaning is that they brought their offering to the Lord before the opening of the tabernacle. COVERED. The word <i>tzav</i> (covered) here is similar to the word <i>tzabbim</i> (Utters) in <i>and in litters, and upon mules</i> (Is. 66:20). The reference is to a type of ox that pulls wagons.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation, here <i>eglot tzav</i> (covered wagons) means wagons pulled by a <i>tzav</i>. This commentary renders Is. 66:20, <i>and upon oxen and mules</i>.</i> Others say that <i>eglot tzav</i> (covered wagons) refers to a wagon that is overloaded and that <i>tzav</i> is connected to the word <i>tzavah</i> (swell) (Num. 5:21). However, this is farfetched. [AND TWELVE OXEN.] I have already explained in my work <i>Moznayim</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A work on grammar.</i> that the <i>mem</i> in <i>shenem asar</i> (twelve) remains both in the absolute<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, in the word two (<i>shenayim</i>).</i> and in the construct.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the phrase <i>shenem asar</i> (twelve). When a word ending in a <i>mem</i> is connected to another word, the <i>mem</i> is dropped. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> The meaning of <i>shenem asar</i> (twelve) is two (<i>shenayim</i>) and ten (<i>eser</i>).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>shenem asar</i> is short for <i>shenayim ve-asar</i>, Hence the change in the vowel, <i>shenem</i> rather than <i>shenayim</i>.</i> The word <i>shenem</i> is connected to <i>aser</i> for purposes of brevity. The same applies to <i>shelosh elleh</i> (these three) (Ex. 21:11).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Shelosh</i> is in the construct with <i>elleh</i>. Otherwise the phrase would be written <i>shalosh elleh</i>. See I.E. on Ex. 21:11 (Vol. 2, p. 464).</i> The phrase <i>shene asar</i> (twelve)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is the form used in our verse.</i> without the <i>mem</i> is an abridged form.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Shene asar</i> is short for <i>shenem asar</i>.</i> FOR EVERY TWO OF THE PRINCES. <i>Al shene ha-nesi’im</i> means for every two of the princes.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>al</i> usually means on. I.E. points out that here it means for.</i> [13. AND HIS OFFERING.] Scripture reads, <i>and his offering</i> because Scripture had already stated, <i>And he that presented</i> [<i>his offering</i>] (v. 12). The <i>vav</i> of <i>ve-korbano</i> (and his offering) means, and this was his offering. Scripture writes with regard to the second day, <i>hikriv et korbano</i> (he offered his offering)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally. J.P.S. renders, <i>he presented for his offering</i>. There is no reason to say he offered his offering. Scripture should have read, he offered.</i> (v. 18), for this is the style of Scripture. Compare, <i>And Isaac spoke unto Abraham his father, and said: ‘My father</i>’ (Gen. 22:7). The word father is repeated because Scripture is being lengthy. <i>Then spoke the king Ahasuerus and said unto Esther the queen</i> (Esth. 7:5) is also similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here too Scripture employs a lengthy style (<i>said</i> and <i>spoke</i>).</i> Scripture does not mention the term <i>hikriv</i> (he presented) with regard to the other princes,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is used only in regard to the offering of Nethanel the son of Zuar.</i> for Scripture wanted to be brief. Similarly the term <i>le-gulgelotam</i> (by their poles) is used only in the numbering of Reuben<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 1:20.</i> and Simeon.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 1:22. Also see I.E. on 1:19.</i> There are many such examples.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where Scripture employs an abbreviated style.</i> ON THE SEVENTH DAY. Some say that Elishama the son of Ammihud presented his offering on the Sabbath. It was a ruling for that time.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For personal offerings cannot be offered on the Sabbath.</i> Others say that the reference is to the seventh day of the dedication of the tabernacle.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation, the Sabbath day is not included in the days of dedication, for no sacrifice was offered on the Sabbath.</i> Those who disagree with our sages say that the first day of the altar’s dedication did not fall on the first day of the week.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence the seventh day of dedication did not fall on the Sabbath.</i> However, this is of no avail, for it is impossible that there be no Sabbath in twelve days.I believe that the second interpretation<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the seventh day refers to the seventh day of dedication, not to the seventh day of the week.</i> is correct, because of the peace offering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Brought by Elishama. Peace offerings were not brought on the Sabbath.</i> The seventh day of the circling of Jericho is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Josh. 6:6-15. According to I.E. the seventh day on which the Israelites circled Jericho was not a Sabbath.</i> Likewise the seven days of the dedication of the temple (I Kings 8:65) because of the Day of Atonement.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The second series of seven days of the dedication of the first temple apparently took in the Day of Atonement. Now if this is the case, then the people ate on Yom Kippur. This is the opinion of the sages of the Talmud. According to I.E. these seven days do not include Yom Kippur, for there were no dedication festivities on that day.</i> ONE YOUNG BULLOCK. <i>Ben bakar</i> means a young bullock. Compare, <i>ben yonah</i> (young dove).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Lev. 1:14.</i> TWO OXEN. These were also male bullocks.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They were of the same sex and kind as the young bullock.</i> The meaning of <i>bakar</i> (oxen) is, from the kind of cattle.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus <i>bakar shenayim</i> (two oxen) literally means two of the kind of cattle, the reference being to two bulls.</i> <i>And all the oxen for the sacrifice of peace-offerings twenty and four bullocks</i> (v. 88) is proof of this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That <i>bakar</i> refers to bullocks.</i> ON THE ELEVENTH DAY. I have already explained in my work <i>moznayim</i> why this number<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ashte asar</i> (eleven).</i> differs [from the other numbers].<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">All the other teens are written by adding the one number to ten. For example, 12 is written <i>shenem</i> (2) <i>asar</i>; 13, <i>sheloshah</i> (3) <i>asar</i> (10); etc. However, the word for eleven in our verse is <i>ashte asar</i> and not <i>ahad</i> (1) <i>asar</i> (10).</i> The word <i>ashte</i> in (<i>ashte asar</i>, eleven) is similar to the word <i>eshtonotav</i> (his thoughts) (Ps. 146:4). It (<i>ashte</i>) refers to that which a person’s thoughts give birth to. The number ten, as it were begets [eleven, etc.]. This is a great secret.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E., “Ten is the foundation of all sums, for all sums that follow ten are made up of a part or parts of ten, or come into being by doubling ten, multiplying ten, or a combination of the two” (<i>The Secret of the Torah</i>, p. 163).</i> Rabbi Jonah the Sephardi<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Jonah ibn Janach, the eleventh-century grammarian.</i> says that <i>ashte asar</i> is short for <i>al shete asar</i>. Its meaning is, the number that precedes twelve.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>ashte asar</i> means eleven.</i> Now Rabbi Jonah made two great mistakes. One, contrary to his words, the number twelve is beyond (<i>al</i>) the number eleven.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the word <i>al</i> means above, not before. Hence if <i>ashte asar</i> is short for <i>al shetem asar</i>, then its meaning is, not before 12 but beyond 12.</i> <i>From twenty years old and upward</i> (va-ma’alah) (Num. 1:3) is proof of the aforementioned.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Va-ma’alah</i> and <i>al</i> come from the same root. We thus see that <i>al</i> means upward or beyond, not before.</i> His second mistake is that if the word <i>ashte</i> is short for <i>al shete</i>, then the text should have read <i>ashne asar</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Because the word for 12 is <i>shenem asar</i>.</i> not <i>ashte asar</i>. For <i>ashte</i> is in the feminine.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to Rabbi Jonah, <i>ashte</i> is short for <i>shetem asar</i>. <i>Shetem asar</i> is feminine. Now <i>yom</i> is masculine. Why would Scripture employ a feminine?</i> <i>Ashte</i> is therefore one word. [AND WHEN MOSES WENT IN.] It is likely that the beginning of God’s word to Moses [in the tabernacle], which is what <i>And the Lord called unto Moses</i> (Lev. 1:1) refers to, was uttered when the dedication of the tabernacle was completed. All the grammarians say that the word <i>middabber</i> (speaking) in <i>speaking unto him</i> is a <i>hitpa’el</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So too Rashi.</i> with the <i>tav</i> swallowed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By the <i>dallet</i>. In other words, <i>middabber</i> is short for <i>mitdabber</i>.</i> However, in my opinion <i>middadbber</i> is an infinitive. It is similar to the word <i>dabber</i> (speak)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is an infinitive.</i> in <i>behold, I cannot speak</i> (Jer. 1:5). The <i>mem</i> prefixed to <i>middabber</i> is in place of the word <i>min</i>, as is the rule in the Hebrew language.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A <i>mem</i> placed in front of a word has the meaning of from. I.E. renders <i>va-yishma et ha-kol middabber elav</i> (then he heard the voice speaking unto him) as, then he heard the voice of the One who spoke to him.</i> The meaning of <i>va-yishma</i> (then he heard) is that only Moses heard the voice. Anyone in the tent of meeting outside of the curtain did not hear the voice. The following is also correct: God made Moses’ ear supersensitive<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So that Moses heard what others did not</i> as he added to the sight of Elisha’s young man (II Kings 6:17). Similarly <i>Then the Lord opened the eyes of Balaam</i> (Num. 22:31).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which, according to I.E., means God made his eyes more sensitive than the eyes of other people.</i> AND HE SPOKE UNTO HIM. This was the way God’s word always came to Moses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Once the tabernacle was erected.</i> SPEAK UNTO AARON. For he is obligated to fulfill the commandment of lighting the lamps.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ex. 27:21.</i> IN FRONT OF THE CANDLESTICK. This explains <i>to give light</i> (he’ir) <i>over against it</i> (Ex. 25:37).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the meaning of <i>to give light over against it</i> is, shall give light in front of the candlestick.</i> Now the word <i>he’ir</i> (give light)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Ex. 25:37.</i> is transitive. It is similar to the word <i>ta’ir</i> (dost light) in <i>For Thou dost light my light</i> (Ps. 18:29). However, this is not the case with the word <i>ya’iru</i> (shall give light)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In our verse. According to I.E., <i>ya’iru</i> (shall give light) is intransitive and means shall shine, not shall shine upon. I.E. renders our clause, <i>shall shine in front of the candlestick</i>.</i> and the word <i>he’irah</i> (did shine) in <i>and the earth did shine</i> (Ezek. 43:2). This section<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 1-4.</i> follows<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The statement telling us that God spoke to Moses in the tent of meeting.</i> in order to teach that God’s word also came at night, for the light was to burn in the tabernacle and was not to be extinguished. AND THIS WAS THE WORK OF THE CANDLESTICK. Scripture teaches that no such menorah was ever seen.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture describes the menorah because it was a unique work of art. The menorah had already been described in Ex. 25:31-40. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> BEATEN. I have already explained the meaning of <i>mikshah</i> (beaten).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">“<i>Mikshah</i> means equal” (I.E. on Ex. 25:31, Vol. 2, p. 547). According to I.E. the various parts of the menorah were of equal size.</i> THE BASE THEREOF. This refers to the shaft upon which it stood,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The shaft, to which the menorah’s branches were attached.</i> for Scripture explicitly states, <i>its base, and its shaft</i> (Ex. 25:31). THE FLOWERS THEREOF. The meaning of the word <i>pirchah</i> (flowers thereof) is well known.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence there is no reason to explain it.</i> If God had not shown Moses the menorah in a prophetic vision, then no wise craftsman would have had the ability to make the menorah described in Scripture. SO HE MADE. This refers to Moses. The meaning of <i>made</i> is, made by command.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Moses commanded a craftsman to make the menorah.</i> The same applies to <i>And thou shalt make a candlestick of pure gold</i> (Ex. 25:31). The section dealing with the Levites follows the one dealing with the lighting of the menorah to teach us that Aaron shall occupy himself with the kindling of the lamps.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By himself, as stated in verse 2.</i> However, the Levites shall assist him in the other services and shall stand before him to do all that he commands.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See verse 19.</i> TAKE THE LEVITES FROM AMONG THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. For they were mixed in.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They were living among the children of Israel.</i> The same was true of all the tribes before they journeyed on from Mount Sinai.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Before the standards were set up, the various tribes were intermingled.</i> THE WATER OF PURIFICATION. <i>Chattat</i> (purification)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>chattat</i> usually means sin. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> here is similar to the word <i>techatteni</i> (purify me) (Ps. 51:9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated according to I.E.</i> Or it is possible that the <i>me chattat</i> (the water of purification) was similar to a sin offering (<i>korban chattat</i>).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In this case, <i>me chattat</i> (the water of purification) means sin water, water which serves as a sin offering. In other words, the water atones for sin.</i> SPRINKLE…UPON THEM. Rabbi Moses<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Moses ibn Gikatilla, an 11th-century Spanish philologist and Bible commentator.</i> says that the first root letter of <i>hazzeh</i> (sprinkle) is a <i>nun</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the root of <i>hazzeh</i> is <i>nun, zayin, heh</i>.</i> Compare, <i>hakkeh</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The root of <i>hakkeh</i> (and of <i>takkeh</i>) is <i>nun, kof, heh</i>. Thus <i>hazzeh</i> is like <i>hakkeh</i>. They are both in the <i>hifil</i> and they both come from a root that opens with a <i>nun</i>.</i> <i>takkeh</i> (thou shalt surely smite) (Deut. 13:16). Rabbi Moses is correct. AND LET THEM CAUSE A RAZOR TO PASS OVER ALL THEIR FLESH. Its meaning is, and they have already caused a razor to pass over their flesh.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>ve-he’eviru</i> (and let them cause to pass) is a pluperfect. I.E. comments thus because the shaving of the body preceded the sprinkling.</i> The sages said<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>Nazir</i> 40-41.</i> even the beard,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Lev. 14:9.</i> but not the corner of the beard.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Lev. 21:5.</i> AND LET THEM WASH THEIR CLOTHES. And after this<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">After they wash their clothes.</i> they will be cleansed, being purified by the waters of purification. [AND CLEANSE THEMSELVES.] The word <i>ve-hitteharu</i> (and cleanse themselves) is a <i>hitpa’el</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though it does not have a <i>tav</i> in it.</i> The <i>tav</i> of the <i>hitpa’el</i> is swallowed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By the <i>tet</i>.</i> Compare, <i>ha-mitkaddeshim ve-ha-mittaharim</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Mittaharim</i> is in the <i>hitpa’el</i> and does not have a <i>tav</i> in it, for its <i>tav</i> is swallowed by its <i>tet</i>.</i> (They that sanctify themselves and purify themselves) (Is. 66:17). A YOUNG BULLOCK. The term <i>ben bakar</i> indicates a young bullock.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew literally reads, a bull (<i>par</i>) <i>ben bakar</i> (the son of cattle). I.E. points out that this should be interpreted as a bull, a young bovine.</i> FINE FLOUR. Three-tenth parts (of an <i>efah</i>) as is the law. SHALT THOU TAKE. By issuing a command, for the Levites shall take.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse opens by saying, <i>Then let them</i> (the Levites) <i>take a young bullock</i>. Thus it is the Levites who do the taking.</i> The meaning of <i>Then let them take</i> (ve-lakechu) is, then let them give.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>shalt thou take</i> means shalt thou offer.</i> Compare, <i>ve-yikechu li terumah</i> (that they take for Me an offering).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, that they give (<i>ve-yikechu</i>) to Me an offering. We thus see that the Hebrew word <i>yikkach</i> (to take) sometimes has the meaning of to give.</i> On the other hand, the meaning of <i>Then let them take</i> might be that they shall take with them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In this case, <i>ve-lakechu</i> (then let them take) has its usual meaning.</i> Compare, <i>they shall take</i> (ve-yikechu) <i>to them every man a lamb, according to their fathers’ houses</i> (Ex. 12:3). BEFORE THE LORD. Its meaning is, when you present the Levites before the tent, the Levites shall lay their hands upon the head of each one of the bullocks.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>al rosh ha-parim</i> (upon the heads of the bullocks). This literally reads, upon the head of the bullocks. I.E. interprets this to mean upon the head of each one of the bullocks.</i> There are many similar instances in Scripture. AND OFFER THOU. Offer by command, for Aaron was the celebrant. Scripture’s statement that the sin offering and also the burnt offering were to make atonement for the Levites is true proof of the aforementioned.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That Aaron was the celebrant, for Aaron was the one making atonement offerings (v. 21).</i> Furthermore, Scripture states, <i>and Aaron made an atonement for them</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Levites.</i> (v. 21). [AND THOU SHALT SET THE LEVITES BEFORE AARON.] After Aaron shall make atonement for the Levites, you shall set them up before Aaron, and Aaron shall offer them for a wave offering. AND OFFER THEM FOR A WAVE-OFFERING. Via your command. Compare, <i>And offer thou</i> (v. 12).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38. The <i>Mikra’ot Gedolot</i> reads, and whatsoever there may be to do with them (Num. 4:26). However, this appears to be an error. See Filwarg.</i> AND THE LEVITES SHALL BE MINE. This is a great status.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the Levites were elevated to a great status.</i> AND AFTER THAT SHALL THE LEVITES GO IN. After you purify them. AND OFFER THEM. Via your command. FOR THEY ARE WHOLLY GIVEN UNTO ME. They, and their children, are given unto Me.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew reads, <i>ki netunim, netunim li</i> (for they are wholly given unto Me). I.E. believes that the first <i>netunim</i> refers to the Levites and the second to the children of the Levites.</i> The Israelites gave them to Me<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See verses 9 and 10.</i> <i>and I took them unto Me</i>;<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">“And I took them unto Me” is I.E.’s paraphrase of <i>have I taken them unto Me</i>.</i> that is, I accepted them. Why are they given [unto Me]?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38. The printed texts apparently read, they are not given (unto me). This is an obvious error.</i> In order to redeem all that openeth the womb. The word <i>pitrat</i> (openeth) and <i>peter</i> (openeth)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse refers to the first born as <i>pitrat…ṙechem</i> (that openeth the womb). The Book of Exodus refers to the first-born as <i>peter…rechem</i> (openeth the womb) (Ex. 13:2).</i> are two different words.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">There is a difference in nuance between these two words. However, I.E. does not explain how they differ. For another interpretation, see Filwarg.</i> Compare, <i>tzedek</i> (righteousness) and <i>tzedakah</i> (righteousness).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Tzedek</i> refers to any act of righteousness. <i>Tzedakah</i> in rabbinic literature refers to a gift of charity.</i> Or they might be the same word in two paradigms.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, there is no difference between <i>peter</i> and <i>pitrat</i>.</i> ON THE DAY THAT I SMOTE. The word <i>yom</i> (day)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here.</i> means time.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The first-born were slain at night. See Ex. 12:29. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> Compare, <i>Thou art this day</i> (yom) <i>to pass over</i> (Deut. 2:18).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of this is, you are about to pass over, for Israel did not pass over the Jordan until Moses died.</i> [AND I HAVE TAKEN THE LEVITES.] Scripture has already stated, <i>have I taken them unto Me</i> (v. 16). This is the style of Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To repeat itself after digressing.</i> <i>And I have taken the Levites</i> is connected to the verse which follows. It means, when I took the Levites, I gave them to Aaron and his sons (v. 19). AND TO MAKE ATONEMENT. To be an atonement for the souls of the children of Israel, as I have already explained.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 32:29.</i> THUS DID MOSES AND AARON. Moses by command, Aaron by waving them, and Israel by the laying of their hands on them. [AND THE LEVITES PURIFIED THEMSELVES.] Scripture tells us that they also performed [purification rituals]. AND AARON MADE ATONEMENT FOR THEM. And Aaron had already made atonement for them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Before Aaron offered them as a sacred gift before the Lord. Thus <i>va-yekhapper</i> is a pluperfect that means had made atonement.</i> Others say that the Levites first purified themselves and afterwards laid their hands on the bullocks.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">After which Aaron offered them for a wave offering and made atonement for them (Krinsky).</i> This interpretation is not far off the mark.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For it is based on a literal interpretation of <i>va-yekhapper</i> (and made atonement).</i> If this is so, then the meaning of <i>And thou shalt set the Levites</i> (v. 13) is: and you have already set the Levites<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The atonement ritual was the final act in the cleansing ritual of the Levites.</i> at the beginning.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, before Aaron made atoonement fot them. Thus our verse does not contradict verse 13. In this case, <i>va-yekhapper</i> (had atoned) is not a pluperfect.</i> SO DID THEY UNTO THEM. So did the sons of Aaron always unto the children of the Levites.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is to the commandments in our chapter regarding the Levites (verses 6-14). This apparently applies to future generations as well.</i> THIS IS THAT WHICH PERTAINETH UNTO THE LEVITES. Its meaning is, this is the set time of service which pertains to the Levites.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>zot</i> (this is) is short for <i>zot ha-kitzvah</i> (the set time of service).</i> The verse reading <i>from thirty years and upward</i> (Num. 4:23)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 4:23 gives as the age of <i>all that enter…to do service in the tent of meeting</i>.</i> does not contradict our verse,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to <i>Hullin</i> 24a, they begin their studies at the age of 25 and their service at the age of 30. See Rashi.</i> for <i>from thirty years and upward</i> refers to the service of bearing burdens (Num. 4:24), while our verse, which reads <i>from twenty and five years all and upward</i>, refers to the service in the work of the tent of meeting. The meaning of <i>li-tzeva</i> (to perform the service) is, to be counted among the host of workers.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>tzava</i> means a host. Hence I.E.’s interpretation.</i> TO KEEP THE CHARGE. This command is directed to the elders.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Levites who are above the age of 50.</i> The section dealing with the Passover follows the section dealing with the consecration of the Levites because the dedication of the altar took place in the first month.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 7:1, Ex. 40:2, and Lev. 9:1.</i> The Levites were separated<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From Israel and consecrated.</i> at that time.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 3:1 and Ex. 32:29.</i> The section dealing with Passover<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 9:1-8.</i> is written here because, concerning the Passover, it was written, <i>And it shall come to pass, when ye be come to the land</i> (Ex. 12:25); <i>And it shall be when the Lord shall bring thee into the land</i> (Ex. 13:5).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">These verses imply that Israel was obligated to offer the Passover sacrifice only in the Land of Israel.</i> This chapter<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 9:1.</i> records that God commanded that they were obligated to offer the Passover sacrifice in the desert also.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Sinai.</i> BUT THERE WERE CERTAIN MEN. It is impossible for a camp to be big as that of the Israelites without people dying every day. WHEREFORE ARE WE TO BE KEPT BACK. <i>Niggara</i> (kept back) is a <i>nifal</i>. STAY YE. At the opening of the tent of meeting. IN A JOURNEY AFAR OFF. We do not have to search for the meaning of this phrase, for our sages have already transmitted to us the meaning of <i>afar off</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to the Mishnah, <i>Pes</i>. 9:2, <i>afar off</i> means outside of the threshold of the temple courtyard. For other opinions see <i>Pes</i>. 9:2.</i> OF YOU. This refers to being unclean by reason of a dead body. OR OF YOUR GENERATIONS. This refers to both a person who is unclean by reason of a dead body and to one in a journey far off. AND IS NOT ON A JOURNEY. <i>U-ve-derekh</i> (and on a journey) is to be rendered, or is on a journey.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the <i>vav</i> of <i>u-ve-derekh</i> is to be rendered “or,” not “and.” I.E. comments thus because he believes that the law of being far off did not apply in the wilderness (I.E. on verse 10). Hence he reads our verse as follows: But the man that is unclean in the wilderness, and is on a journey in future generations. So Filwarg. For additional interpretations see Krinsky and Avi Ezri.</i> <i>U-makkeh aviv ve-immo</i> (and he that smiteth his father, or his mother)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, and he that smiteth his father and his mother.</i> (Ex. 21:15) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In that its meaning is, and he that smiteth his father, or his mother.</i> SHALL BEAR HIS SIN. He alone.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Not his descendants.</i> AND IF A STRANGER SHALL SOJOURN AMONG YOU. He too shall observe the second Passover<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If unclean or far off.</i> in accordance with the ordinance. Others say that the reference is to the first Passover.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Passover observed in Nisan.</i> AND ON THE DAY THAT THE TABERNACLE WAS REARED UP. Scripture begins to count the journeys of Israel. It was thus compelled to make mention of the cloud that rested on the tabernacle, for when it camped they camped and when it journeyed<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38. Our texts read, <i>when they journeyed, they journeyed</i>.</i> they journeyed. EVEN THE TENT OF THE TESTIMONY. <i>Le-ohel</i> (even the tent) is to be rendered, on the tent.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>lamed</i> usually has the meaning of to. Hence I.E.’s comment. I.E. renders our verse, the cloud covered the tabernacle, on the tent of the testimony.</i> There are many such instances in Scripture. AT THE COMMANDMENT OF THE LORD THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL JOURNEYED. Its meaning is clear, for God caused the cloud to rest and God caused it to journey. AND WHEN THE CLOUD TARRIED. The meaning of <i>u- ve-ha’arikh</i> (and when it tarried) is to be rendered, and if it tarried.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Nahmanides interprets similarly.</i> Scripture first speaks in general terms.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That Israel travelled and camped in the wilderness.</i> It then goes on to say that sometimes the Israelites would journey for a few days or encamp according to the commandment of the Lord. OR IF IT CONTINUED BY DAY AND BY NIGHT. They thus occasionally journeyed at night.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This means that <i>yomam va-laylah</i> (by day and by night) is to be rendered, by day <i>or</i> by night. Our verse reads as follows: or if it (the cloud) continued by day or by night, when the cloud was taken up they journeyed. In other words, sometimes the cloud stayed over the tabernacle during the day and was taken up at the beginning of the night. Thus Israel at times took up their journey at night.</i> Others say that <i>yomam va-laylah</i> (by day and by night) is to be interpreted literally.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the <i>vav</i> of <i>yomam va-laylah</i> is to be translated literally. Thus <i>yomam va-laylah</i> means by day <i>and</i> by night. Therefore what the verse is telling us is that the cloud continued on the tabernacle a day and a night and was taken up in the morning, and then Israel journeyed. The verse thus teaches that Israel journeyed in the morning, not at night.</i> This interpretation appears correct to me. The term <i>yomayim</i> (two days) (v. 22)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38. See also Filwarg. The printed texts have <i>yomam</i>.</i> is proof that this interpretation is correct.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The term <i>yomayim</i> follows <i>yomam va-laylah</i>. <i>Yomayim</i> refers to two days and two nights. Hence <i>yomam va-laylah</i> must refer to a day and a night.</i> OR A YEAR. The word <i>yomam</i> means a full year.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Lev. 25:29.</i> AT THE COMMANDMENT OF THE LORD THEY ENCAMPED. This is stated at the end of the chapter to indicate that this was the procedure as long as Israel lived in the wilderness. MAKE THEE TWO TRUMPETS OF SILVER. <i>Chatzotzerot</i> (trumpets) is a noun. In its verbal form, one of the <i>tzadis</i> is not pronounced even though it is written.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>machtzerim</i> (did blow) in I Chron. 15:24. <i>Machtzerim</i> is spelled with two <i>tzadis</i>. However, only one of them is pronounced.</i> FOR THE CALLING. <i>Le-mikra</i> (for the calling) is an infinitive. The same applies to <i>u-le-massa</i> (and for causing to set forward). On the other hand, they might be nouns. In this case, the word <i>le-mikra</i> (for the calling) means at the time of calling, and <i>le-massa</i> (and for causing to set forward), at the time of journeying.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation the last clause of our verse reads, and they shall be unto thee (for use) at the time of the calling of the congregation and at the time when the camps set forward.</i> The first interpretation appears correct to me. AND WHEN THEY SHALL BLOW WITH THEM. And when the trumpeters shall blow with them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The subject of “and when they shall blow” is not in the text. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> It is similar to <i>and he said to Joseph</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Gen. 48:1) <i>and whom she bore to Levi</i> (Num. 26:59).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Gen. 48:1 (Vol. 1, p. 412) and the notes thereto. See also I.E. on Num. 26:58.</i> Now its meaning is,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of our verse.</i> if they blow both trumpets,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s paraphrase of <i>with them</i>.</i> then the princes and the congregation shall gather.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s interpretation of <i>all the congregation</i>.</i> AND IF THEY BLOW BUT WITH ONE. This means if they blow with one trumpet, then the princes alone shall come. If a <i>tru’ah</i> (an alarm)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to tradition a <i>tru’ah</i> is a wavering sound.</i> sounds, then the standard of Judah shall journey, even though the cloud is upon the tabernacle.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And thus could not as yet lead Israel, for the tabernacle was dismantled after the tribe of Judah started their journey. See verse 17. I.E. points this out because, according to Num. 14:14, Israel was led by a cloud. See next note.</i> In the opinion of many, another cloud<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Aside from the one that rested on the tabernacle.</i> journeyed before the Israelites.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For Num. 14:14 clearly states, <i>And Thou goest before them, in a pillar of cloud</i>.</i> THE CAMPS THAT LIE ON THE EAST SIDE SHALL TAKE THEIR JOURNEY. For they consisted of three camps.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is to the standard of Judah (Num. 2:3). Now the standard of Judah (and so every other standard) consisted of three camps. Hence Scripture refers to the standard of Judah by the term “camps.”</i> AN ALARM THE SECOND TIME. So that the standard of Reuben will take up its journey. They did not blow the trumpets again,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">After the tribe of Reuben journeyed.</i> for the family of Kohath and with them the <i>kohanim</i> who blew the trumpets journeyed before the standard of Ephraim.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>kohanim</i> journeyed between the standard of Reuben and the standard of Ephraim. Thus when it came time for Ephraim to journey, the <i>kohanim</i> had already journeyed and were not in a position to sound the trumpets.</i> THEY SHALL BLOW AN ALARM FOR THEIR JOURNEYS. The <i>kohanim</i> shall blow an alarm for their journeys, for they journeyed after the standard of Reuben.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence after the standard of Reuben journeyed, the trumpets were no longer sounded.</i> AND THEY SHALL BE TO YOU FOR A STATUTE FOR EVER. The camps now journeyed to battle.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Israel now journeyed to Canaan where they were going to engage the Canaanites.</i> Is this not Moses’ words<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which allude to war.</i> when the ark journeyed?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See verses 35 and 36.</i> Note that Scripture explains this statute.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture explains what <i>a statute for ever</i> refers to.</i> It says that Israel shall do the following: The <i>kohanim</i> shall sound the alarm upon trumpets when Israel goes forth to war, to battle in the land of their enemies, and similarly if an enemy enters their land and Israel goes forth to fight them. AND YE SHALL BE REMEMBERED. For you have done what God the glorious commanded you do. The alarm (<i>tru’ah</i>) also serves as a reminder to the people to cry out to God.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">An additional reason for sounding the <i>tru’ah</i>.</i> ALSO IN THE DAY OF YOUR GLADNESS, AND IN YOUR APPOINTED SEASONS. When you return from the land of your enemies, or you defeat the enemy who attacks you<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In your own land.</i> and you establish a day of rejoicing, such as the days of Purim or the seven days of rejoicing in the days of Hezekiah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See II Chron. 30:23. Some manuscripts read Chanukah. In this case, the text should be emended to read, the eight days of Chanukah (Krinsky).</i> However, our transmitters of tradition explained that the day of your gladness refers to the Sabbath.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>Sifre</i> on this verse.</i> The trumpets were sounded<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Over the burnt offerings and sacrifices.</i> so that Israel would hear that the burnt offerings were being offered and that they should direct their hearts to God. ON THE TWENTIETH DAY OF THE MONTH. The standards first journeyed on this day. Thus Israel was at Sinai close to a year.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Israel came to the wilderness of Sinai on the first day of the third month. See I.E. on Ex. 19:1 (Vol. 2, p. 370). They journeyed from there on the twentieth day of the second month. They thus spent a year minus ten days in the wilderness of Sinai.</i> BY THEIR STAGES.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, by their journeys. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> As it was fit for them to journey.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By God’s dictate. “In accordance with the regulation set forth for the journeys of their divisions–which should be the first to set out and which the last” (Rashi; Rosenbaum and Silbermann translation).</i> AND THE CLOUD ABODE IN THE WILDERNESS OF PARAN. I will explain this and, <i>And they took their first journey</i> (v. 13)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on verse 31.</i> later. TAKEN DOWN. The Levites took it down. THE BEARERS OF THE SANCTUARY. The reference is to the ark. MIGHT BE SET UP. That the Gershonites and the Merarites might set up the tabernacle before the coming of the Kohathites so that the <i>kohanim</i> could immediately bring the ark into its place. REARWARD. According to the standards,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The standard of Dan was the last to journey.</i> for Naphtali was last.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The tribe of Naphtali, which was part of the standard of Dan, was the last tribe to journey.</i> THUS WERE THE JOURNEYINGS OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. Its meaning is, thus did they journey all the days that they were in the wilderness. [29. AND MOSES SAID UNTO HOBAB, THE SON OF REUEL.] We find Scripture telling us that Zipporah was the daughter of Reuel, for it is written, <i>and he</i> [Reuel] <i>gave Moses Zipporah his daughter</i> (Ex. 2:21). Furthermore, Scripture states, <i>to water their father’s flock</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is to Reuel’s daughters, that is, Zipporah and her sisters.</i> (Ex. 2:16), <i>and to Reuel their</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Zipporah and her sisters.</i> <i>father</i> (Ex. 2:18). Now Hobab was the son of Reuel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is stated in our verse.</i> Thus Hobab<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The son of Reuel.</i> was the brother of Zipporah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The daughter of Reuel.</i> According to a rational analysis of Scripture, Hobab is to be identified with Jethro, because the Torah states, <i>as thou</i> [Hobab] <i>knowest how we are to encamp in the wilderness</i> (v. 31) and it states with regard to Jethro when he came to the wilderness, <i>into the wilderness where he was encamped</i> (Ex. 18:5). Should one disagree<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">With the identification of Hobab with Jethro.</i> and argue that Scripture refers to Jethro as <i>choten mosheh</i> (Moses’ father-in-law) (Ex. 18:1), then one can respond that it is the way of Scripture to refer to the father and the brother of a young woman by the term <i>choten</i> (father-in-law).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus according to I.E. the word <i>choten</i> means a father or brother-in-law.</i> <i>Unto Hobab, the son of Reuel…choten mosheh</i> (Moses’ father-in-law)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse.</i> is proof of the aforementioned. For it has already been made clear to you that Hobab was the brother of Zipporah, and Scripture calls him <i>choten mosheh</i> (Moses’ father-in-law). Should one argue that <i>choten mosheh</i> (Moses’ father-in-law) is not connected to Hobab but to Reuel, then the response is, Scripture explicitly states <i>Hobab choten mosheh</i> (the father-in-law of Moses) (Jud. 4:11). Many say that Hobab and Jethro are one and the same. They maintain that Jethro/Hobab was the father of Zipporah and that Reuel was the grandfather of Zipporah. They argue that Scripture says, <i>to Reuel their father</i> (Ex. 2:18)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The father of Zipporah and her sister.</i> in the same manner that Jacob said, <i>O God of my father Abraham</i> (Gen. 32:10).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Isaac, not Abraham, was Jacob’s father. Thus father is used for grandfather. Similarly, in Ex. 2:18 father refers to grandfather.</i> Scripture similarly refers to Zipporah as Reuel’s daughter in the same manner that it refers to Belshazzar as Nebuchadnezzar’s son,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Dan. 5:2; 18:22.</i> when in fact he was Nebuchadnezzar’s grandson. Our sages say that Jethro had seven names.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Mekhilta,Va-yishma Yitro</i> 1.</i> There are seventy faces to the Torah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A quote from <i>Otiyyot de-Rabbi Akiva</i>, a late aggadic Midrash on the alphabet composed sometime between 700-900 C.E. Some manuscripts read, there are seven faces to the Torah. According to the rabbis, Jethro, Hobab, and Reuel are one and the same person (see Rashi on Ex. 18:1 where he quotes all seven names). Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> TO MINE OWN LAND, AND TO MY KINDRED.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew reads <i>moladti</i>. This literally means my birthplace.</i> Where I was born and where I live unto this very day.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s interpretation of <i>mine own land</i>.</i> LEAVE US NOT, I PRAY THEE. The word <i>na</i> (I pray thee) means now. The same applies to the word <i>na</i> in all of Scripture. The opposite is the case in Arabic.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Arabic the word for now is <i>an</i> or <i>malan</i>. See I.E. on Gen. 12:11 (Vol. 1, p. 154).</i> FORASMUCH AS THOU KNOWEST. <i>Ki al ken</i> (forasmuch) here means the same as <i>ki al ken</i> in <i>forasmuch as I gave her not to Shelah my son</i> (Gen. 38:26). Since (<i>ki al ken</i>)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus the meaning of <i>ki al ken</i> is since.</i> you know the place where we encamped, come with us. AND THOU SHALT BE TO US INSTEAD OF EYES. You will show us the way.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Eyes</i> is a metaphor for a guide (Weiser).</i> Many say that <i>ve-hayita</i> (and thou shalt be) is to be taken as a perfect<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though it is technically an imperfect.</i> and alludes to the advice which Jethro gave Moses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">With regard to the appointment of judges, see Ex. 18:21-23.</i> He showed Moses what Moses did not know. They say this is what eyes refers to.  The meaning of <i>And he said: Leave us not, I pray thee</i> is, and he had already said to him [leave us not I pray thee]<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, what is reported in verse 31 took place before what is reported in verse 30.</i> but it was to no avail.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s paraphrase of our verse.</i> [33. AND THEY SET FORWARD FROM THE MOUNT OF THE LORD THREE DAYS’ JOURNEY.] In my opinion the first journey was unlike the rest of the journeys. The verse which states, <i>and the Kohathites…set forward</i> (v. 21) after the two standards journeyed refers to all the other journeys except this one, for<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">During the first journey.</i> the ark journeyed before the camp of the Israelites.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And in all of the other journeys, it journeyed amidst the camp of the Israelites. See Num. 2:17.</i> However, this was the case for only three days. This is the meaning of <i>three days</i> (v. 33). Similarly, <i>And they went three days’ journey in the wilderness of Etham</i> (Num. 33:8) does not mean that they traveled a three days journey in one day.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It means they traveled for three days.</i> Others say<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the meaning of our verse is.</i> that they traveled a three-day journey in one day.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is the opinion of Rashi.</i> Others say that they traveled a journey of three days corresponding to the journeys when they left Egypt,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When Israel crossed the Sea of Reeds, they journeyed for three days (Ex. 15:22). They similarly journeyed for three days when they left the wilderness of Sinai.</i> and the ark was a three-day distance from them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is how others interpret, <i>And the ark of the covenant…went before them three days’ journey to seek out a resting-place for them</i>.</i> This is the meaning of <i>and the cloud abode in the wilderness of Paran</i> (v. 12).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation Paran is three days’ journey from Sinai. The ark traveled three days’ distance from Israel and rested in the wilderness of Paran. When the ark rested, Israel began its journey.</i> They explain that <i>And they took their first journey</i> (v. 13), means that they journeyed by the command of Moses, for the cloud traveled immediately.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">With the ark. In other words, the cloud which led Israel was with the ark, not with the camp of Israel.</i> However, this is not so, for Moses did not distance himself from the ark, as proved by <i>And it came to pass, when the ark set forward</i> (v. 35) <i>And when it rested</i> (v. 36). What I said above appears correct to me.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the first journey was different from all other journeys (Weiser). Or, that the ark did not travel a three days’ journey from the camp but that it journeyed in front of the camp (Krinsky).</i> <i>Paran</i>, in <i>and the cloud abode in the wilderness of Paran</i> (v. 12), is a general name for Taberah,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 11:3.</i> which is the same as Kibroth-hattaavah (v. 34), Hazeroth (Num. 33:17), Rithmah (Num. 33:18), and many other journeys.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, is the name of the district where Israel encamped in the wilderness.</i> The fact that Scripture does not mention the wilderness of Paran in the Torah portion <i>Elleh Mase</i> (these are the stages)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which lists the journeys of the children of Israel. See Num. 33:1-49.</i> is proof of this. I will explain this later.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of verse 12. See I.E. on Num. 12:16.</i> The meaning of <i>according to the commandment of the Lord</i> (v. 13) is, when the trumpets sounded the alarm.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For Moses and the cloud were traveling before the camp.</i> RISE UP, O LORD. As people do when they rise up to battle. [BE SCATTERED.] When Your enemies see that You arose to do battle, they will immediately be scattered. [THEM THAT HATE THEE.] The word <i>mesanekha</i> (them that hate Thee) is a <i>pi’el</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The term used by I.E. is the heavy added conjugation. I.E. usually uses this phrase to describe a <i>hifil</i>. <i>Pi’el</i> is referred to as the heavy conjugation. There is apparently an error in our texts and manuscripts.</i> The <i>nun</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of <i>mesanekha</i>.</i> does not receive a <i>dagesh</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The middle root letter of words in the <i>pi’el</i> receives a <i>dagesh</i>. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> in order to simplify the enunciation of the word. SCATTERED…FLEE. Scripture repeats itself as is its style in all prophecies,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Gen. 49:3 (Vol. 1, p. 149) and the notes thereto.</i> as I will explain in the portion dealing with Balaam.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 23:7.</i> AND WHEN IT RESTED. When the ark rested. <i>U-venucho</i> (when it rested) is spelled with a <i>heh</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rather than a <i>vav</i>. The pronominal suffix <i>o</i> is usually spelled with a <i>vav</i>. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> in the same way that the word <i>oholo</i> (his tent) (Gen. 13:3) is,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Oholo</i> ends in a <i>heh</i> and not, as expected, in a <i>vav</i>.</i> for the letters <i>alef, heh, vav, yod</i> interchange.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, a <i>heh</i> was substituted for a <i>vav</i> in <i>oholo</i> and <i>u-venucho</i>.</i> RETURN, O LORD. Rabbi Judah, the first grammarian, says that every time the word <i>shav</i> in the <i>kal</i> conjugation is related in meaning to <i>teshuvah</i> (return), it is intransitive, not transitive.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, whenever the word <i>shav</i> has the meaning of return, it is intransitive.</i> However, when it means peace and quiet, as in <i>in sitting still</i> (be-shuvah) <i>and rest shall ye be saved</i> (Is. 30:15), and similarly in <i>Return</i> (shuvah), <i>O Lord, unto the ten thousands of the families of Israel</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Then it is transitive.</i> it means that God will give them rest and they will not be disturbed by any enemy.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">79</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. our clause should be rendered, give rest (<i>shuvah</i>), O Lord, unto the ten thousands of the families of Israel.</i> Note, the word <i>revavah</i> (ten thousand) comes from the same root as the word <i>rav</i> (many). <i>Revavah</i> in our verse is similar to the word <i>revavah</i> (increase) in <i>I cause thee to increase</i> (Ezek. 16:7). It is possible that ten thousand is called a <i>revavah</i> because it is a great number. The word <i>revavah</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">80</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In its plural form <i>revevot</i>.</i> is therefore connected to the word <i>alfe</i> (thousands).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">81</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus I.E. renders our clause, Give rest, O Lord, unto the many thousands of Israel (<i>revevot alfe yisra’el</i>).</i> Moses prayed that God would grant rest and quiet to all of Israel, though they be many. AND THE PEOPLE. This chapter is connected to the one before,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which deals with the journey of the ark.</i> because the Israelites camped in <i>kibroth-hatta’avah</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which, according to I.E., is the same as <i>taverah</i>, the name of the place as quoted in verse 3. See I.E. on Num. 10:31.</i> after the ark journeyed from Sinai. Scripture now tells what happened there.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">At <i>kibroth-hatta’avah</i>.</i> AS MURMURERS. <i>Mitonenim</i> (murmurers) is related to the word <i>aven</i> (evil).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Both words come from the root <i>alef, vav, nun</i>.</i> <i>Onekh</i> (evil) in <i>thy evil</i> (onekh) <i>thoughts</i> (Jer. 4:14) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders <i>va-yehi ha-am ke-mitoninim</i> (and the people were as murmurers) as: and the people uttered evil words.</i> [AND WHEN THE LORD HEARD.] The meaning of <i>when the Lord heard</i> is, and when the Lord heard that they spoke evil. AND DEVOURED. <i>Va-tokhal</i> (and devoured) is penultimately accented. Compare, <i>va-yomer</i> (and he said) (Gen. 14:19).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When this word comes at the beginning of a clause, it is penultimately accented.</i> However, when it ends a clause,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When it comes in the middle of a verse (at an <i>etnachta</i>) or at the end of a verse (<i>sof pasuk</i>).</i> then it is ultimately accented. The latter is contrary to the laws of Hebrew grammar,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the change of accent indicates a change in tense (Weiser).</i> but we find it to be so. AND THE PEOPLE CRIED UNTO MOSES. In a conciliatory manner.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>va-yitzaku</i> (cried) literally means screamed. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> AND THE FIRE ABATED. <i>Va-tishka</i> (abated) means extinguished. The word is not used again in Scripture<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The root <i>shaka</i> means to sink. This root is used in the sense of extinguished only here.</i> with this meaning. TABERAH. I will explain this term later.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Deut. 9:22.</i> AND THE MIXED MULTITUDE. Who were gathered unto the children of Israel but were not of Israelite stock. The <i>asafsuf</i> (the mixed multitude) refers to the <i>erev rav</i> (the mixed multitude).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in Ex. 12:38.</i> The word is constructed by doubling two root letters.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its two final root letters, <i>samekh, feh</i>.</i> Compare, <i>secharchar</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>samekh, chet, resh</i>, doubling the <i>chet</i> and <i>resh</i>.</i> (fluttereth) (Ps. 38:11) and <i>chamarmaru</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>chet, mem, resh</i>, doubling the <i>mem</i> and <i>resh</i>.</i> (burn) (Lam. 1:20). AND…WEPT. After they lusted. THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL…ON THEIR PART. With them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew reads, <i>va-yashuvu va-yivku gam bene yisra’el</i> (and the children of Israel also wept on their part). I.E. interprets <i>va-yashuvu va- yivku</i> as referring to the mixed multitude. He reads our verse as follows: And the mixed multitude that was among them fell a-lusting, and after lusting turned and wept, also the children of Israel with them. I.E.’s point is that the mixed multitude caused Israel to weep and ask for meat (Krinsky).</i> THE FISH. The word <i>dagah</i> (fish) is a general term.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For all the different species of fish.</i> FOR NOUGHT. Cheaply, as if we got it for nothing. THE CUCUMBERS. An <i>alef</i> has been substituted for a <i>heh</i> in the word <i>kishu’im</i> (cucumbers), for <i>kishu’im</i> is related to the word <i>mikshah</i> (cucumber) (Is. 1:8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Mikshah</i> is spelled with a <i>heh</i>.</i> Compare, <i>telu’im</i> (suspense) in <i>And My people are in suspense about returning to Me</i> (Hos. 11:7).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Telu’im</i> is spelled with an <i>alef</i>. However, it comes from the root <i>tav, lamed, heh</i>, and should read <i>teluyim</i>. Thus here too an <i>alef</i> has been substituted for a <i>heh</i>.</i> There are many such instances. MELONS. We can ascertain the meaning of <i>avatichim</i> (melons) from Arabic.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Arabic word for melon is <i>batikha</i>.</i> It has no cognate in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, no neighbor in Scripture.</i> AND THE LEEKS. The word <i>chatzir</i> (leeks) refers to vegetables,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>yerakot</i> (literally, greens).</i> which are the grass of the field.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Chatzir</i> means grass. However, people do not eat grass. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> Compare, <i>Who maketh the mountains to spring with grass</i> (chatzir) (Ps. 147:8). <i>Chatzir</i> is thus an all-inclusive noun.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It refers to all types of greens.</i> However, the Aramaic translation<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Onkelos.</i> says that it refers to a specific kind.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Onkelos renders <i>chatzir</i> by the term <i>kerate</i> (leeks).</i> It too is correct. AND THE ONIONS, AND THE GARLIC. The meaning <i>be-tzalim</i> (onions) and <i>shumim</i> (garlic) is known.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. could find no synonyms for these words. Hence his comment that everybody knows what they mean.</i> They have similar names in Arabic.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Basal</i> and <i>tumeh</i>.</i> BUT NOW OUR SOUL IS DRIED AWAY. The reference is to the lusting soul, which is implanted in the liver.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>The Secret of the Torah</i>, page 96. According to I.E. there are three souls in the body, <i>neshamah, ru’ach</i>, and <i>nefesh</i>. The <i>neshamah</i> (rational soul) is manifested in the brain; the <i>ru’ach</i> (spirit) is located in the heart; and the <i>nefesh</i> (the lusting soul), the part of the psyche that desires food and sex, is in the liver.</i> THERE IS NOTHING AT ALL. We lack everything. TO LOOK TO. For the manna came down from heaven.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We watch the manna come down from the heavens (Weiser).</i> NOW THE MANNA. Scripture<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In this verse.</i> describes the stupidity of those who lusted, for the manna was like coriander seed, which is easy to pick, and it was easy to see, for it was white. Furthermore, they could eat it as it was. They could also grind it in mills and make cakes out of it. They could also beat it in mortars and cook it in pots. It had an especially good taste, for it tasted like [food] with the finest oil. Additionally, it came down after the dew had washed the place [upon which it fell]. It thus descended upon a clean place. LIKE CORIANDER SEED. <i>Zera</i> (seed) is in the construct.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence it is vocalized with a <i>sheva</i> rather than with a <i>segol</i> beneath the <i>zayin</i>.</i> It is like the word <i>neta</i> (plant of)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is vocalized with a <i>sheva</i> rather than with a <i>segol</i> beneath the <i>nun</i>.</i> in <i>the plant of His delight</i> (Is. 5:7). CORIANDER. Some identify this with <i>kusbarta</i>. Others say that it refers to mustard. They connect <i>gad</i> (coriander) with the word <i>gidin</i> (sinews).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Something hard (bitter) to the taste, i.e., mustard seed. See I.E.’s short commentary on Ex. 16:31.</i> However, I do not know its meaning. THE PEOPLE WENT ABOUT. The word <i>shatu</i> (went about) is related to the word <i>shut</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>shin, vav, tet</i>.</i> (going to and fro) in <i>From going to and fro</i> (mi-shut) <i>in the earth</i> (Job 1:7). This shows that the individual pieces of manna did not fall in one place<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, together. It did not fall in one large pile but evenly over some distance.</i> but were spread and scattered. IN MILLS. Operated by hand. The word <i>rechayim</i> (mills) does not come in the singular,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>rechayim</i> is in the plural. However, it also refers to the singular, that is, to a mill as in our verse, for <i>rechayim</i> (mills) is parallel to <i>medochah</i> (mortar), which is singular.</i> for a mill consists of two parts.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">An upper and a lower stone.</i> IN MORTARS. A vessel made out of wood or stone. It is called a <i>medocha</i> (mortars)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, a mortar. See previous note.</i> because they pound in it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>medocha</i> comes from the root <i>dalet, caf, heh</i>, which means to crush.</i> It was also possible to make cakes from what they pounded.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In addition to cooking it. Scripture reads, <i>and seethed it in pots, and made cakes of it</i>. I.E. notes that this should be interpreted, and seethed it in pots, <i>or</i> made cakes of it.</i> AND MADE CAKES. Compare, <i>and make cakes</i> (Gen. 18:6).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We thus see that the word make can mean bake.</i> A CAKE. Some say that the <i>lamed</i> of <i>leshad</i> (cake) is superfluous.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The basic word is <i>shad</i> (breast). According to this interpretation, <i>leshad ha-shamen</i> means breast of the oil. See <i>Sifre</i> on Num. 11:8. “Just as the suckling imbibes, so to speak, every possible flavor with the mother-milk, so the Israelites found all flavors in the manna” (translated by Rosenbaum &amp; Silbermann, Num. p. 54). So too Rashi, “Our Rabbis explained it as meaning breasts.”</i> It is similar to the <i>lamed</i> of <i>shalanan</i> (at ease)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The basic word being <i>sha’anan</i>.</i> in <i>at ease and quiet</i> (Job 21:23). The word <i>ha-shamen</i> (with oil) should have been ultimately accented<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">However, <i>ha-shamen</i> is ultimately accented. When the word <i>shemen</i> or <i>shamen</i> is a noun, it is penultimately accented; when an adjective, it is ultimately accented.</i> because<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation.</i> the word <i>shamen</i> (oil) is an adjective.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Describing <i>leshad</i>.</i> However, I believe that the <i>lamed</i> of <i>leshad</i> is a root letter. The word <i>leshad</i> is similar to the word <i>leshadi</i> (my sap) in <i>My sap was turned</i> (Ps. 32:4). <i>My</i> (leshadi) <i>sap</i> stands in contrast to <i>the droughts</i> (charvone) in <i>the droughts of summer</i> (<i>Ibid</i>.)<i>. Leshad</i> refers to the finest part of the oil that floats on top of all oil. In this case, the word <i>ha-shamen</i> is penultimately vocalized in accordance with the meaning of the word.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the word is a noun.</i> WEEPING, FAMILY BY FAMILY. The families gathered together to cry, as they do when they mourn for the dead. EVERY MAN AT THE DOOR OF HIS TENT. In public. AND MOSES WAS DISPLEASED. The word <i>ra</i> (displeased) is a perfect.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And also a present form. Here it is a past.</i> On the other hand, the word <i>hayah</i> (was) might be missing in our text.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>u-ve’ene moshe ra</i>. The latter literally means: and in the eyes of Moses displeased. I.E. suggests that our verse be interpreted as if it read, <i>u-ve’ene moshe hayah ra</i> (and it was displeasing in the eyes of Moses). In this case, our verse is a continuous present.</i> WHEREFORE HAST THOU DEALT ILL WITH THY SERVANT. Scripture describes an impetuous action.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Moses spoke impulsively, as one is wont to do under pressure.</i> AND WHEREFORE HAVE I NOT FOUND FAVOUR IN THY SIGHT. When I said, <i>send, I pray Thee, by the hand of him whom Thou wilt send</i> (Ex. 4:13).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">You chose me then. Why, then, do I not find favor in your eyes now?</i> The word <i>matzati</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>mem, tzadi, alef</i>.</i> (found) is missing an <i>alef</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, it is spelled here without an <i>alef</i>.</i> There are many such instances. There is nothing to wonder about when king <i>Yehu</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, when either a <i>yod, heh, vav</i>, or <i>alef</i> is dropped. These letters spell the name Yehu, who was a king of Judah. I.E. employs the king’s name as a mnemonic device.</i> is missing. HAVE I CONCEIVED. Am I their mother? HAVE I BROUGHT THEM FORTH. Or am I their father? <i>Yelidtihu</i> (brought them forth) is like the word <i>yalad</i> (begot) in <i>and Shelah begot Eber</i> (Gen. 10:24).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders our clause: Did I beget them?</i> CARRY THEM. Until they come to the land.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture reads, <i>sa’eh…al ha-adamah</i>. This literally means, carry them…upon the land. Hence I.E. points out that the word <i>al</i> here means unto, and <i>al ha-adamah</i> is to be rendered as <i>unto the land</i>.</i> WHENCE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>me-ayin</i>.</i> When the word <i>ayin</i> has a <i>mem</i> prefixed to it,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As in our verse.</i> it means from which place. When <i>ayin</i> appears without a <i>mem</i> prefixed to it, it means no.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Or nothing.</i> We also find the following clause, <i>Behold, ye are nothing</i> (me-ayin) (Is. 41:24).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In this case, <i>me-ayin</i> has the meaning of nothing even though it has a <i>mem</i> prefixed to it.</i> BECAUSE IT IS TOO HEAVY FOR ME. The word <i>kaved</i> (heavy) is a verb in the perfect.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And also a present. In our case, it is a past.</i> Compare, <i>zaken</i> (was old) in <i>And it came to pass, that when Isaac was old</i> (Gen. 27:1).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>zaken</i> can be a perfect or a present form. In Gen. 27:1, it is a perfect.</i> On the other hand, the word <i>hu</i> (it) might be missing from our text.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, our text should be read as if written <i>ki khaved hu mi-menni</i>. In this case, <i>khaved</i> is a present.</i> THOU. The word <i>at</i> (Thou) is used for both males and females.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>at</i> (thou) is usually used when addressing a female. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> It is like <i>lakh</i> (to you), <i>bakh</i> (in you), <i>immakh</i> (with you), and <i>ittakh</i> (with you).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">These words are used for both masculine and feminine in the middle (at an <i>etnachta</i>) and end of a Biblical verse.</i> However, <i>attah</i> (you) is only used for males. KILL ME. <i>Horgeni</i> (kill me) means put me to death. Do this to me because of Your righteousness and my request. This is the meaning of <i>if I have found favour in Thy sight</i>. AND LET ME NOT LOOK. Anymore upon the evil circumstances in which I find myself. There is no need for any scribal emendation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Rashi: “It ought to have written and let me not see their evil, only that Scripture modified the expression [i.e., it used a euphemistic expression referring the evil to himself instead of to the whole people]. This is one of the variations occurring in the Torah such as writers make for the purpose of modifying and improving the phrase” (Rosenbaum and Silbermann translation). See Vol. 1, p. 18, and p. 195, note 33.</i> GATHER UNTO ME. The word <i>esfah</i> (gather) is irregular.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>alef</i> of <i>esfah</i> is vocalized with a <i>segol</i>. However, it should have been vocalized with a short <i>kamatz</i>. Compare, <i>zokhrah</i> (Neh. 5:19).</i> It is possible that this is so because of the guttural.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>alef</i> of <i>esfah</i>.</i> <i>Erkhah</i> (set in order) in <i>Set thy words in order before me, stand forth</i> ((Job 33:5) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>alef</i> in <i>erkhah</i> is vocalized with a <i>segol</i> rather than with a <i>kamatz katan</i>.</i> AND OFFICERS. For there are elders who are advanced in age but are unfit to be officers. There are also officers who are not elders.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. the meaning of <i>the elders of the people and the officers</i> is the elders of the people who also serve as officers.</i> AND I WILL COME DOWN. God’s glory descended in fire in the midst of the cloud.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, it was God’s glory that descended, not God himself.</i> AND SPEAK WITH THEE THERE. When you hear the voice they will also hear. AND I WILL TAKE OF THE SPIRIT. The meaning of <i>ve-atzalti</i> (and I will take of the spirit) is, I will take from that which you possess.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Etzel</i> means near, or in one’s possession.</i> Note that spirit<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here.</i> means wisdom. If some of the wisdom of Reuben is given to Simeon, Reuben’s wisdom is not diminished. It remains as is.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus Moses’ wisdom was not diminished by having some of it imparted to Joshua.</i> Let the light of a candle serve as an example.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A candle’s light is not diminished if it is used to light another candle.</i> SANCTIFY YOURSELVES.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>hitkaddeshu</i>.</i> Words from the root of <i>kodesh</i> (to sanctify) are found in the positive and the negative.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. the word <i>hitkaddeshu</i> (sanctify yourself) in our verse has a negative connotation. See Rashi, who explains the word to mean “prepare yourselves to receive punishment” (Rosenbaum and Silbermann translation).</i> <i>Ha-yikdash</i> (Haggai 2:12), which means <i>shall it be unclean</i>, is similar. NOR TWO DAYS. Twice as much.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">79</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture speaks of one day, two days, five days, ten days, and twenty days. I.E. now goes on to explain the reason for these numbers.</i> NOR FIVE DAYS. Corresponding to the fingers of the hand of those who eat. NEITHER TEN DAYS. Twice the amount, corresponding to the fingers of the two hands of those who eat.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">80</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of those who demanded meat to eat.</i> <i>Nor twenty days</i> has a similar meaning.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">81</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The number 20 corresponds to the hands and toes of those who demanded meat.</i> This may be compared to the saying: Let him eat with the fingers of his hands and with the toes of his feet.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">82</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Let him gorge himself.</i> BUT A WHOLE MONTH. I have already explained the meaning of the word <i>chodesh yamim</i> (a whole month).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">83</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Gen. 4:4 and Ex. 12:2.</i> The phrase <i>chodesh yamim</i> alludes to the time that it takes for the moon’s light to return to its original amount.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">84</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It refers to the time that it takes for the moon to appear the same way that it did when it started its cycle in the sky. In other words, it refers to a complete month.</i> <i>Shenatayim yamim</i> (two full years) (Gen. 41:1) is similar to <i>chodesh yamim</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">85</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It means two complete years.</i> [AT YOUR NOSTRILS.]<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">86</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Me-appekhem</i> (at your nostrils) literally means from your nostrils. Hence I.E.’s comments.</i> The sense of smell is located in the nose. The sense of smell will depart from your nostrils, and will not be found there.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">87</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, you will lose your sense of smell and will no longer enjoy the taste of meat.</i> AND IT BE LOATHSOME. The word <i>le-zara</i> is spelled with an <i>alef</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">88</sup><i class=\"footnote\">At the end of the word.</i> in place of the <i>heh</i>. Compare, <i>mara</i> in <i>call me Mara</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">89</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which has an <i>alef</i> in place of a <i>heh</i> at the end of the word.</i> (Ruth 1:20), for the letters <i>alef, heh, vav, yod</i> interchange. The word <i>zara</i> (loathsome) refers to something which is strange<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">90</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew word for strange is <i>zar</i>.</i> and abhorrent to the nature of a person who is not used to it. SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND MEN ON FOOT. There is no need to mention the lesser ones.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">91</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Those under the age of twenty. If these were included then the number would be much higher. Or the reference is to the 3,550 Israelites above the number of 600,000, for the Israelites numbered 600,350 (Num. 2:32).</i> Many interpret this section in various ways.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">92</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The commentaries were bothered by Moses apparently doubting the ability of God to provide meat for all of the Israelites.</i> Some say that Moses paraphrased what the children of Israel would say to him. When they would ask, what sort of meat,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">93</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, verses 21 and 22 are Moses’ paraphrase of what the people would tell him when he told them that God would provide meat for them.</i> Moses would answer them, you have no need to ask,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">94</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See verse 23.</i> for <i>is the Lord’s hand waxed short</i>?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">95</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In some of the printed editions as well as in the Vatican manuscript, <i>is the Lord’s hand waxed short</i> has been detached from the verse and opens a new comment on verse 23. However, this is an error. See Meijler.</i>I do not know why we must suffer in this manner.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">96</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of seeing the meaning of verses 21 and 22 perverted.</i> The text must be interpreted according to its plain meaning. Moses did not know that God would create a sign or a miracle.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">97</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To satisfy the people’s craving for meat.</i> He thought, as I will explain, that he would do so only to justify his prophet.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">98</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When the prophet is challenged, as in the case of the rebellion of Korach. See Num. 16.</i> WILL THEY SUFFICE THEM. <i>U-matza la-hem</i> (will they suffice them) is to be interpreted as in the Aramaic translation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">99</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Onkelos renders <i>u-matza la-hem</i> as, will they suffice them. The literal meaning of <i>u-matza la-hem</i> is: and he will find them. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> How precious is the interpretation of our ancients to the effect that the word <i>yishachet</i> (be slain) applies to cattle, and <i>ya’asef</i> (be gathered) refers to fish.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">100</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture speaks of slaughtering sheep and gathering fish. According to the rabbis this verse teaches us that cattle require ritual slaughter (<i>shechitah</i>) but fish do not. See <i>Hullin</i> 27b.</i> WHETHER MY WORD SHALL COME TO PASS, The word <i>ha-yikrekha</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">101</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>kof, resh, heh</i>.</i> (shall come to pass) is similar to <i>va-yiker mikrehah</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">102</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Both words come from the root <i>kof, resh, heh</i>.</i> (and her hap was) (Ruth 2:3). AND MOSES WENT OUT. From the tent of meeting. AND TOOK OF THE SPIRIT. In my opinion, the word <i>va-yatzel</i> (and took of the spirit) is a <i>hifil</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">103</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus the meaning of our clause is: He caused some of the spirit that was upon him to move (<i>va-yatzel</i>).</i> [AND THEY PROPHESIED.] The <i>vav</i> of <i>va-yitnabbe’u</i> (and they prophesied) is like an unaspirated <i>fa</i> in Arabic.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">104</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A verb that begins with a conversive <i>vav</i> usually introduces a new clause. Here it does not. Hence I.E. points out that sometimes the conversive <i>vav</i> merely serves as a conjunction, like the <i>fa</i> in Arabic.</i> BUT THY DID SO NO MORE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">105</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ve-lo yasaf</i>.</i> A second time.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">106</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The literal meaning of <i>lo yasefu</i> is, they did not add. Hence I.E. points out that this term is an idiom meaning they did not repeat it.</i> The same applies to the phrase <i>ve-lo yasaf</i> (and it went on no more) in <i>with a great voice, and it went on no more</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">107</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It did not repeat itself.</i> (Deut. 5:19) and <i>ve-lo yasaf</i> (now more) in <i>and he knew her again no more</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">108</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is, he knew her not a second time.</i> (Gen. 38:26). According to the rules of Hebrew grammar, the word <i>yasaf</i> is not related to the word <i>tissafu</i> (swept away)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">109</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the word <i>yasefu</i> comes from the root <i>yod, samekh, peh</i>, while the root of <i>tissafu</i> comes from the root <i>samekh, peh, heh</i>. If our word came from the latter root, it would have read <i>safu</i> not <i>yasefu</i>.</i> in <i>lest ye be swept away in all their sins</i> (Num. 16:26).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">110</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If it were, then the meaning of our phrase would be: but they were not destroyed.</i> Our sages of blessed memory say that Moses took six men from each tribe. Their number thus came to seventy-two. However, Moses dropped the two<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">111</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Eldad and Medad.</i> because God told him to gather seventy men.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">112</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>San</i>. 17a.</i> This is correct. AND THEY WERE OF THEM THAT WERE RECORDED. At first.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">113</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the list of the 72.</i> BUT HAD NOT GONE OUT. From the camp of Israel to the tent of meeting.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">114</sup><i class=\"footnote\">With the others whose names were on the list.</i> AND THERE RAN A YOUNG MAN. The word <i>na’ar</i> (young man) has the definite article prefixed to it because it refers to the young man<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">115</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture does not identify the young man.</i> who, aside from Joshua, was known to serve Moses. For Joshua’s service was not the usual service rendered by young men.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">116</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Joshua served Moses in more dignified tasks.</i> FROM HIS YOUTH UP. Some say that the meaning of <i>mi-bechurav</i> (from his youth up) is, from his youth. It means that he did not speak as an elder speaks.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">117</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He spoke as a youth speaks.</i> Others connect <i>mi-bechurav</i> (from his youth up) to <i>mesharet mosheh</i> (the minister of Moses);<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">118</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They read our text as follows: <i>mesharet mosheh mi-bechurav</i>, meaning the minister of Moses from his (Joshua’s) youth on.</i> this means the one who served Moses from the time of his youth.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">119</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So Onkelos and Rashbam.</i> However, this is incorrect, for this event occurred in the second year.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">120</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Following the Exodus. However, Scripture nowhere tells us that Joshua served Moses before this date.</i> In my opinion, the word <i>mi-bechurav</i> means from the chosen. It means that he was one of those chosen to serve Moses, for there were others with him.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">121</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. our clause should be interpreted: And Joshua the son of Nun, the minister of Moses, one of his chosen, answered and said.</i> Note that the word <i>bachur</i> (youth, or chosen) sometimes changes in the plural and sometimes does not.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">122</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the plural the word is at times vocalized with a <i>pattach</i> (Ps. 78:31) and at other times with a <i>sheva</i> as in our verse (<i>bechurav</i>, rather than <i>bachurav</i>).</i> The same applies to the word <i>saris</i> (officer).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">123</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The plural of <i>saris</i> is both <i>sarisim</i> (Esth. 2:21) and <i>serisim</i> (Gen. 40:7).</i> It is also possible that they belong to two different paradigms.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">124</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Bachurav</i> comes from the singular <i>bachur</i> (vocalized <i>pattach, shurik</i>), <i>bechurav</i> from the singular <i>bachur</i> (vocalized <i>kamatz, shurik</i>). Similarly <i>sarism</i>, and <i>serisim</i>. According to rules of Hebrew grammar, in the former form the <i>kamatz</i> changes to a <i>sheva</i> in the plural. Compare, <i>davar, devarim</i>. However, in the latter case the <i>pattach</i> is maintained in the plural form.</i> SHUT THEM IN. The <i>lamed</i> of <i>kela’em</i> (shut them in) is vocalized with a <i>pattach</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">125</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, a <i>kamatz</i>. There is either a scribal error or I.E. refers to a <i>pattach</i> here by the term <i>kamatz</i>. He occasionally does so in his long commentary on Exodus.</i> because a guttural<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">126</sup><i class=\"footnote\">An <i>alef</i>.</i> follows it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">127</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Compare, <i>kara’em, shelachem</i>.</i> [ART THOU JEALOUS.] The <i>heh</i> of <i>ha-mekanne</i> (art thou jealous) is vocalized with a <i>pattach</i>. However, it should have been vocalized with a <i>sheva</i> and <i>a pattach</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">128</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A <i>chataf pattach</i>, for the <i>heh</i> of <i>ha-mekanneh</i> is an interrogative <i>heh</i>, and interrogative <i>hehs</i> are vocalized with a <i>chataf pattach</i>.</i> It was so vocalized because the <i>mem</i> has a <i>sheva na</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">129</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A vocative <i>sheva</i>.</i> beneath it and two <i>sheva nas</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">130</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>sheva</i> beneath an interrogative <i>heh</i> is a <i>sheva na</i>.</i> are never joined together. [WOULD THAT.] <i>Mi yitten</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">131</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Mi yitten</i> literally means who will give. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> (would that) is an expression of desire here. It is like saying, who will grant me this request and desire? AND MOSES WITHDREW. Moses accompanied the elders in order to honor them. AND THERE WENT FORTH A WIND. On the second day.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">132</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See verse 18.</i> AND BROUGHT ACROSS. The word <i>va-gaz</i> (brought across) means cut. It is similar to the word <i>gazi</i> (cut) in <i>Cut off thy hair</i> (Jer. 7:29). The word <i>gez</i> (cutting) in <i>and the first of the cutting of thy sheep</i> (Deut. 18:4)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">133</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> is related to it. Scripture reads, <i>and cut</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">134</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. our verse reads, and cut quails from the sea. Hence his comments.</i> because the quail on the shore of the sea<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">135</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s interpretation of <i>from the sea</i>.</i> were as numerous as the [grains of] sand. Thus God cut off some of the quail from them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">136</sup><i class=\"footnote\">God cut off a portion of the quail that were at the seashore and sent them to the camp of the Israelites.</i> <i>Va-yagaz</i> comes from a double root.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">137</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its root is <i>gimel, zayin, zayin</i>.</i> It is like the word <i>va-yacham</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">138</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>chet, mem, mem</i>.</i> (waxed warm) in <i>and the flesh of the child waxed warm</i> (II Kings 4:34). AND LET THEM FALL. The meaning of <i>va-yittosh</i> (and let them fall) is, <i>and they spread</i>. The quail were spread [all around the camp] and did not have the strength to fly away.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">139</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence they were easy to catch.</i> Compare, <i>they were spread</i> (netushim) <i>abroad all over the ground</i> (I Sam. 30:16). ROUND ABOUT THE CAMP. Only.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">140</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Only round about the camp. Birds fly from place to place. However, in this case, they were limited to near the camp.</i> In addition to being spread about the camp, the quail were always about two cubits above the high and low ground. AND THEY SPREAD. <i>Va-yishtechu</i> means, and they spread. <i>Shittachti</i> (I have spread) in <i>I have spread forth my hands unto Thee</i> (Ps. 88:10) is similar even though they belong to two different forms.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">141</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Va-yishtechu</i> is a <i>kal</i> and <i>shittachti</i> (I have spread) is a <i>pi’el</i>.</i> WITH A VERY GREAT PLAGUE. It was the plague of murrain.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">142</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>dever</i>.</i> WAS CALLED. By someone or by Moses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">143</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The subject of “called” is omitted. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> THEY BURIED. Those who bury.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">144</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The subject of “buried” is omitted. Hence I.E.’s comment that we should translate our clause: and those who buried.</i> Compare, <i>And said to Jacob</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">145</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally</i> (Gen. 48:1).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">146</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of which is: and the one who said, said to Jacob.</i> THE PEOPLE JOURNEYED UNTO HAZEROTH. <i>Chatzerot</i> (Hazeroth) is to be interpreted as unto Chatzerot. Scripture is being brief.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">147</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our text literally reads, and journeyed Hazeroth. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> <i>And they abode at Hazeroth</i> is connected to <i>And…Miriam spoke</i> (12:1), for they abode there on her account. The latter is clearly stated in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">148</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 12:15,16 wherein it is stated that the people abode in Hazeroth because of Miriam.</i> AND MIRIAM…SPOKE. Miriam spoke. Aaron agreed or was silent.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses</i> is to be interpreted: And Miriam spoke against Moses, and Aaron remained silent (or agreed). I.E. interprets thus because our verse reads, <i>va-tedabber miriam ve-aharon</i>. Now <i>va-tedabber</i> is in the feminine. Thus our verse is to be rendered, And Miriam spoke, and Aaron. If both spoke, then our text should have read, <i>va-yedabberu miriam ve-aharon</i>.</i> Hence he was also punished.<i>Va-tedabber</i> (spoke) is followed by a <i>bet</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As it is in our verse, which reads, <i>va-tedabber miriam ve-aharon be-mosheh</i> (And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses).</i> and has a negative connotation. It is similar to <i>va-yedabber ha-am be-Elohim</i> (And the people spoke against God) (Num. 21:5). The verb <i>dabber</i> (spoke) followed by a <i>bet</i> is also found with a positive connotation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Compare, <i>I will now say</i> (adabberah): <i>Peace be within thee</i> (bakh) (Ps. 122:8).</i> It also appears in prophetic statements.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Compare, <i>The spirit of the Lord spoke by me</i> (II Sam. 23:2).</i> Some say that Moses was king of Cush<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Ethiopia.</i> and took a Cushite woman.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>Yalkut Shimoni</i> on <i>Shemot</i> 168; 247.</i> Onkelos renders Cushite, beautiful.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Onkelos renders <i>ha-ishah ha-cushit</i> (the Cushite woman) as the beautiful women (<i>ittetah shappirtah</i>).</i> According to Onkelos, Cushite is an honorific term. The Arabs similarly call pitch white. We too refer to a blind person by the term <i>sege nahor</i> (rich of light).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>Berachot</i> 58a.</i> But it is illogical<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">However, see Rashi, who explains Zipporah “was called a Cushite because of her beauty. This is similar to the case of a man who calls his beautiful son Cushi so that the evil eye will not harm him.” I.E. apparently did not believe in the evil eye. Hence he did not accept Rashi’s interpretation.</i> to turn a positive name into a negative one.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When something has a negative connotation we employ a euphemism. However, we do not refer to something positive by a negative term. Hence there is no reason to refer to a beautiful woman as a Cushite.</i> Some say that <i>Cush the Benjaminite</i> (Ps. 7:1) refers to Saul.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They believe that Saul was very handsome and hence was called <i>cush</i>. See Rashi and I.E. on Ps. 7:1.</i> They say the same with regard to <i>Are ye not as the children of the Ethiopians</i> (Khushiyyim) <i>unto Me</i> (Amos 9:7).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They say that its meaning is: Are ye not as beautiful children unto me.</i> I have already explained this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Amos 9:7, where he explains this verse to mean: You are acting like Cushites in that you do not serve me.</i>I believe that the Cushite woman is to be identified with Zipporah, for Zipporah was a Midianite.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ex. 2:15-21.</i> The Midianites are Ishmaelites<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Jud. 8:24. Also see I.E. on Gen. 37:28 (Vol. 1, p. 351).</i> and they live in tents.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which are pitched in the wilderness under the hot sun.</i> Scripture similarly writes: <i>The curtains</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is to the curtains of the tents. We thus see that the Midianites live in tents.</i> <i>of the land of Midian do tremble</i> (Hab. 3:7). Because of the sun<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They are very sunburned. See Cant. 1:5.</i> they do not have any whiteness at all. Zipporah was black and was like a Cushite. [FOR HE HAD MARRIED A CUSHITE WOMAN.] These are the words that Miriam spoke. How precious are the words of the ancients who said with regard to the elders, “Happy are they, but woe to their wives.”<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to the rabbis, Zipporah complained that Moses ceased having sexual relations with her ever since he was chosen to receive Divine revelation. The rabbis say that Miriam spoke on behalf of Zipporah and argued that she too was a prophetess and yet did not abstain from relations with her husband. See <i>Mo’ed Katan</i> 17b; <i>Sifre, Devarim</i> 99; and <i>Yalkut Shimoni, Devarim</i> 738.</i> They suspected that Moses refrained from sleeping with Zipporah only because she was not beautiful.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And not because he was a prophet. According to I.E., <i>because of the Cushite woman whom he had married</i> is to be understood as: because he refrained from sleeping with her because she was a Cushite.</i> AND THEY SAID: HATH THE LORD INDEED SPOKEN ONLY WITH MOSES? Miriam offered proof that Moses did not act in this manner because of the sanctity of God, for they too were prophets and they were not prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse. ONLY WITH. Scripture reads, <i>ha-rak akh</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Rak</i> means only; so does <i>akh</i>. Thus our clause, which reads <i>ha-rak akh be-mosheh dibber Adonai</i>, literally reads: Hath the Lord spoken only only with Moses. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> One term<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Rak</i> or <i>akh</i>. Our text should have read, <i>ha-rak be-mosheh</i>, or <i>ha-akh be-mosheh</i>.</i> would have sufficed. However, Scripture is employing elegant language.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is considered poetic to repeat certain words in certain contexts.</i> Compare, <i>ha-mi-mi-beli en kevarim</i> (because there were no graves) (Ex. 14:11).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Beli</i> and <i>en</i> mean the same thing. See I.E. on Ex. 14:11 (Vol. 2, p. 277).</i> AND THE LORD HEARD IT. Even though they spoke in secret.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And did not publicly criticize Moses. Miriam and Aaron spoke only to each other about this. They would not publicly discuss such an intimate matter.</i> WAS VERY MEEK. The word <i>anav</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>ayin, nun, heh</i>.</i> (meek) is similar to the word <i>shalev</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>shin, lamed, heh</i>.</i> (at peace) (Job 16:12).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Both words come from roots that end in a <i>heh</i>. In both words a <i>vav</i> has been substituted for a <i>heh</i>.</i> Its meaning is that Moses did not seek honor over his brother.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Contrary to what Miriam had implied in verse 2, Moses did not consider himself superior to Aaron.</i> SUDDENLY. The <i>mem</i> of <i>pitom</i> (suddenly) is superfluous. It is like the mem of <i>shilshom</i> (three days ago).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>mem</i> of which is superfluous.</i> <i>Pitom</i> is related to <i>peti</i> (a thoughtless one) (Prov. 9:4). It refers to something that one did not think of.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. a <i>peti</i> is a person who does not anticipate the consequences of his acts. Similarly, the word <i>pitom</i> (suddenly) means unanticipated.</i> COME OUT YE THREE UNTO THE TENT OF MEETING. Each one from his tent. Scripture first speaks generally.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>Come out ye three unto the tent of meeting</i> is a general statement.</i> It then goes into detail, namely, <i>And the Lord came down in a pillar of cloud…and called Aaron and Miriam</i> (v. 5), and Moses heard.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">What God told Aaron and Miriam.</i> HEAR NOW MY WORDS. The word <i>na</i> means now.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 10:31.</i> A PROPHET AMONG YOU. If there be a prophet of God among you.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew reads, <i>nevi’akhem</i>, which literally means your prophet. In this case, our verse reads, if your prophet will be. However, this reading makes no sense within the context of our verse. Hence I.E. maintains that <i>im yiheyeh nevi’akhem</i> be rendered, if there be a prophet among you.</i> IN A VISION The meaning of <i>im yiheyeh nevi’akhem Adonai</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This literally reads, if they will be your prophet Lord.</i> (if there be a prophet among you, I the Lord) is, if there be a prophet, one who is a prophet of God among you.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>nevi’akhem Adonai</i> should be read as if written <i>nevi’akhem nevi Adonai</i>.</i> Compare, <i>ve-hanevu’ah oded ha-navi</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. this should be read as if written, <i>ve-ha-nevu’ah nevu’ot oded ha-navi</i> (even the prophecy, prophecy of Oded the prophet), for the word <i>nevu’ah</i> has a definite article prefixed to it and thus cannot be in the construct with <i>oded</i>. See I.E. on Gen. 2:9 (Vol. 1, p. 54).</i> (even the prophecy of Oded the prophet (II Chron. 15:8); and <i>ha-ohelah sarah immo</i> (his mother Sarah’s tent) (Gen. 24:67);<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. this is to be read as if written, <i>ha-ohelah ohel sarah immo</i> (the tent, tent of Sarah his mother). See I.E. on Gen. 24:67 (Vol. 1, p. 243).</i> and <i>kisakha Elohim olam</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. this should be read as if written, <i>kisakha kisse Elohim olam</i> (Thy Throne, Throne of God for ever). See I.E. on Gen. 24:67 (Vol. 1, p. 243).</i> (Thy throne given of God is for ever) (Ps. 45:7). IN A VISION. In the visions of the night. I DO SPEAK WITH HIM IN A DREAM. Scripture repeats itself as is its style in prophecies.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>I do speak with him in a dream</i> repeats <i>I…do make myself known unto him in a vision</i>.</i> HE IS TRUSTED IN ALL MY HOUSE. It means that Moses is, at it were, a member of My house. He enters without permission. If necessary he states his needs. However, in your case when I make myself known to you in a dream, then you are informed. If not, then you have no permission to ask. WITH HIM DO I SPEAK MOUTH TO MOUTH. The meaning is, I speak to him without an intermediary.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E., God at first spoke to Moses via an angel. However, at the giving of the second set of tablets and onward, he spoke to Moses without an intermediary. See I.E. on Ex. 33:21 (Vol. 2, p. 693).</i> EVEN MANIFESTLY, AND NOT IN DARK SPEECHES. This means I illustrate my word to him as I did when I commanded the erection of the tabernacle.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ex. 25:40, <i>And see that thou make them after their pattern, which is being shown thee in the mount</i>.</i> AND NOT IN DARK SPEECHES. Compare, <i>A great eagle</i> (<i>…Came unto Lebanon, And took the top of the cedar</i>) (Ezek. 17:3). AND THE SIMILITUDE OF THE LORD DOTH HE BEHOLD. As in the case of <i>Show me, I pray Thee, Thy glory</i> (Ex. 33:18).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And God responded, as it were, by showing Moses His back.</i> Or its meaning is<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of <i>and the similitude of the Lord doth he behold</i>.</i> that God communicates with Moses when Moses is awake. AND HE DEPARTED. The reference is to God’s glory. <i>And when the cloud was removed</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which immediately follows.</i> (v. 10) proves this. FROM OVER THE TENT. From over the opening of the tent.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where it was up to this time. See verse 5.</i> AND…BEHOLD, MIRIAM WAS LEPROUS. <i>Ve-hinneh metzora’at</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which literally means, and behold, leprous.</i> is to be rendered, and behold, “she” [Miriam] was leprous.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>ve-hinneh metzora’at</i> is to be read as if written, <i>ve-hinneh hi metzora’at</i>.</i> Compare, <i>ka’asher ka’ah</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is to be read as if written, <i>ka’asher hi ka’ah</i>, for <i>ka’asher ka’ah</i> means as spit out.</i> (as it vomited out) (Lev. 18:28). OH MY LORD. I have already explained the meaning of <i>bi adoni</i> (Oh my lord).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Bi</i> is an expression introducing a request, or the phase of <i>bi adoni</i> is short for: upon me (<i>bi</i>), my lord, is the sin. See I.E. on Gen. 43:20 (Vol. 1, p. 392); and Ex. 4:10 (Vol. 2, p. 99).</i> LAY NOT, I PRAY THEE. The meaning of <i>al na</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. the word <i>na</i> means now. Hence his comment.</i> (…not, I pray thee) is, now, do not.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. our verse should be rendered: oh my lord, do not now lay sin upon us.</i> WE HAVE DONE FOOLISHLY. The word <i>no’alnu</i> (we have done foolishly) is a <i>nifal</i>. It has no cognate<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, the root <i>yod, alef, lamed</i> does not appear in Scripture with the meaning of foolishness except when it is in the <i>nifal</i> form. It has a different meaning in the <i>hifil</i>. See Filwarg.</i> except for the word <i>no’alu</i> (are become fools)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And similar <i>nifal</i> forms. See Jer. 5:4 (Filwarg).</i> in <i>The princes of Zoan are become fools</i> (Is. 19:13). Some say that the root of <i>no’alnu</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>No’alnu</i> comes from the root <i>yod, alef, lamed</i>.</i> was formed by inverting the root <i>ivvelet</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>alef, vav</i> (<i>yod</i>), <i>lamed</i>.</i> (foolishness). Compare, <i>Foolishness is bound up</i> (Prov. 22:15) (in the heart of a child). The meaning of <i>no’alnu</i> is known.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is, we have done foolishly.</i> LET HER NOT, I PRAY, BE AS ONE DEAD. Let our sister not now be as a stillborn child, half of whose flesh is consumed when it comes out of its mother’s womb. The same is true of the flesh of a leper.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence Moses compared Miriam to a stillborn child.</i> There is no need for a scribal emendation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to the Midrash, <i>His mothers womb</i> should be read as if written our mother’s womb, and “half of his flesh” as if it read half our flesh, for Scripture employed the third rather than the first person plural because it wanted to avoid using non-flattering language regarding Moses and Aaron. See <i>Sifre debe Rav, Be-Ha’alotekha</i> 105. Also see Rashi on our verse. I.E. apparently believes that the Midrash was of the opinion that the scribes changed the original text of the Torah from the first person to the third person. He disagrees and maintains that there is no need to change the reading when interpreting our verse.</i> AND MOSES CRIED. This shows that Moses was pained because of what happened to his sister. O GOD. You who hold the power in Your hands,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The term used for God in our verse is <i>El</i>. According to I.E. this name alludes to God’s power.</i> heal her now. God therefore answered him as follows: If her father was angry at her and spat in her face, would she not hide in shame from seeing his face for seven days? SHUT UP. As lepers are, so that they do not harm others.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By their proximity to them.</i> AND AFTER THAT SHE SHALL BE BROUGHT IN AGAIN. <i>Ve-acher te’asef</i> (and after that she shall be brought in again) means she shall once again be considered as a member of the community. <i>Va-asafto</i> (and you shall bring him in) in <i>and you shall bring him in from his leprosy</i> (II Kings 5:3) is similar. After Miriam returned to the camp, the people journeyed from Hazeroth. AND PITCHED IN THE WILDERNESS OF PARAN. Many believe that the cloud was there.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Paran.</i> They interpret thus because they found Scripture stating <i>and the cloud abode in the wilderness of Paran</i> (Num. 10:12).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 10:31.</i> They interpret <i>And when the cloud was removed from over the Tent</i> (v. 10) literally.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the cloud left the tent of meeting and took up its journey to Paran. See Num. 10:11.</i> However, I believe that this is not the correct meaning.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is that it left the front of the tent and moved to the top of the tent. See I.E. on verse 10.</i> SEND THOU MEN. Scripture records that God told Israel: <i>go up, take possession</i> (Deut. 1:21)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of the land of Canaan.</i> and Israel answered: <i>Let us send men before us</i> (Deut. 1:22).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus it appears that the spies were sent to Canaan in response to Israel’s request. However, our Torah portion seems to imply that Moses sent spies to Canaan in response to God’s command.</i> God then said, <i>Send thou men</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, what is reported in our verse was in response to Israel’s request reported in Deut. 1:21,22.</i> The meaning of <i>men</i> is, men known for their might. The same applies to <i>all of them men</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is, all of them were men known for their might.</i> (v. 3) and to <i>be thou</i> [Solomon] <i>strong and show thyself a man</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of <i>and show thyself a man</i> is: and show thyself to be a man of valor.</i> (I Kings 2:2), for he [Solomon] was a man.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus <i>and show thyself to be man</i> cannot be taken literally.</i> THAT THEY MAY SPY OUT. The meaning of <i>ve-yaturu</i> (that they may spy out) is that they may search out. Compare, <i>ve-lo taturu</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders <i>ve-lo taturu</i> as: and you shall not search out after what your eyes see.</i> (and that ye go not about) (Num. 15:39). EVERY ONE A PRINCE AMONG THEM. <i>Kol nasi ba-hem</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, every prince among them. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> is to be interpreted: each one was a prince among them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>kol nasi ba-hem</i> is short for <i>kol ehad hu nasi be-hem</i>.</i> On the other hand, the word <i>ehad</i> mentioned earlier in our verse also applies here.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus the word <i>ehad</i> is not missing in our text, and <i>kol echad nasi ba-hem</i> is not short for <i>kol echad hu nasi ba-hem</i>. There doesn’t seem to be much of a difference between the two interpretations offered by I.E. See Filwarg and Krinsky.</i> Compare, <i>And two men, captains of bands, were</i> [captains of] <i>the son of Saul</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (II Sam. 4:2).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This verse is to be interpreted: <i>And two men, captains of</i> (sare) <i>bands, were captains of the son of Saul</i>, for <i>captains of</i> (sare) is to be read as if written twice.</i> There are many such examples.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where a word in a verse is to be read as if written twice in a verse. See I.E. on Gen. 6: 13 (Vol. 1., p. 100, note 36).</i> [THESE ARE THE NAMES OF THE MEN.] The reason that Scripture states, <i>these are the names of the men</i>, after earlier stating, <i>And these were their names</i> (v. 4),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>These are the names of the men</i> after And <i>these were their names</i> appears redundant. Hence I.E. comment.</i> is to teach us that, unlike Hoshea,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Whose name was changed to Joshua (v. 16).</i> their names were never changed. GET YOU UP HERE INTO THE SOUTH. Get you up this way in the south.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>alu zeh ba-negev</i> is to be rendered: get you up this way i n the south (of the land of Canaan). The literal meaning of <i>alu zeh ba-negev</i> is: get you up this into the south. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> It is known that Egypt is south of the land of Israel, as I have explained in the Book of Daniel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Dan. 11:5.</i> The following is proof of this. Egypt is less than thirty degrees north of the equator.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>rochav</i>, a term referring to the distance of a plane to the equator.</i> Jerusalem is thirty-three degrees north of the equator.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See above.</i> The desert of Paran<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where Israel was encamped when Moses sent out the spies.</i> is south of the land of Canaan.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The text reads, south of the land of Egypt. Paran was the place where Israel was when it sent out the spies. Geographically speaking, Paran is not south of Egypt. It is north of Egypt and lies between Egypt and Canaan. Hence a number of commentaries suggest emending the text to read, the wilderness of Paran is south of the land of Israel, or the wilderness of Paran is north of the land of Egypt. See Filwarg, Weiser, Krinsky, and Meijler.</i> Observe that the meaning of <i>in the South</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ba-negev</i>.</i> is not south of the camp<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For taking a road south of the camp would lead them back into Egypt, as Paran is north of Egypt.</i> but in the south of the land of Canaan. Proof of the aforementioned is that Scripture tells us concerning Hebron, which belonged to the tribe of Judah, <i>Judah shall abide in his border on the south</i> (Josh. 18:5).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We thus see that the south (the Negev) is a district in the Land of Israel.</i> AND SEE THE LAND, WHAT IT IS. And the people, what is it?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the term <i>ma hi</i> (what is it) is carried over from <i>ha-aretz</i> (and the land) to <i>ha-am</i> (the people). Thus our text is to be read as if written, <i>et ha-aretz mah hi vet ha-am ma hu</i> (the land, what it is and the people what is it,) i.e., what is their nature.</i> WHETHER THEY ARE STRONG. In battle. Scripture then<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 19.</i> goes on to explain, <i>and see the land</i>. It says, <i>and what the land is…whether it is good</i>, that is, whether its air and water are good. WHETHER IN CAMPS. Like the Kederites,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">An Ishmaelite tribe. See Gen. 25:13; Ps. 120:5.</i> who live in tents. WHETHER IT IS FAT. In producing wheat. [AND CAME UNTO HEBRON.] Our sages of blessed memory said that <i>and came</i> refers to Caleb the son of Jephunneh,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Sotah</i> 34b. Also see Rashi. <i>And came</i> (va-yavo) is in the singular. Hence the rabbinic interpretation.</i> for each one of the men went to a different part of the country.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence Caleb could visit Hebron by himself.</i> ZOAN IN EGYPT. Zoan is the name of a city in Egypt.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>tzo’an mitzrayim</i> literally, Zoan Egypt. Now a proper name does not come in the construct. Hence I.E. points out that here it does, contrary to the rule. According to I.E. <i>tzo’an mitzrayim</i> is short for <i>tzo’an shel mitzrayim</i>, Zoan of Egypt.</i> <i>Of Beth-lehem Judah</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Ruth 1:1)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of which is Beth-lehem of Judah.</i> is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here too two common nouns are in the construct, for Beth-lehem Judah is short for Beth-lehem of Judah.</i> Some say that the word <i>tzo’an</i> (Zoan) is connected to the word <i>yitzan</i> (be removed) in <i>A tent that shall not be removed</i> (Is. 33:20).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">These commentaries interpret <i>tzo’an mitzrayim</i> as meaning the establishment of Egypt</i> However, this is farfetched. Scripture mentions Hebron in order to tell us that Hebron came into being before Zoan. UNTO THE VALLEY OF ESHCOL. These are the words of Moses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The valley of Eshcol was not yet so called when the spies came there. However, Moses called it by the name which the Israelites later used in referring to it.</i> It is possible that it is similar to <i>and pursued as far as Dan</i> (Gen. 14:14) in that it had another name.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Dan had two names, Dan and Layish (Jud. 18:29). However, Moses in writing the Torah used the name by which Israel referred to it. So too Nahal Eshcol had another name, and Moses used the name that the Israelites used. For other interpretations, see Filwarg and Meijler.</i> WAS CALLED. <i>Kara</i> (was called) is to be rendered, someone called.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse literally reads, called that place Nahal Eshcol. Scripture omits the subject. Hence I.E. says that “called” is short for “the caller called,” that is, someone called.</i> Compare, <i>whom she bore to Levi</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Num. 26:59).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here too Scripture does not identify the subject. Thus <i>who she bore</i> has to be rendered whom somebody bore.</i> [AT THE END.] The word <i>mi-ketz</i> (at the end) sometimes means at the beginning and sometimes means at the end.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Deut. 14:28; 31:10.</i> <i>Mi-ketz arba’im yom</i> (and the end of forty days) probably means at the start of the fortieth day.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to the Torah, God decreed that Israel spend a year in the desert for each day that the spies spent in Canaan. Now Israel spent 39 years in the desert (see Rashi on 14:33). Hence I.E. assumes that the spies spent 39 days in Canaan (Filwarg).</i> AND THEY WENT. This informs us that they did not go to their tents, which were in the camp, but immediately went [to Moses, Aaron, and all the congregation]. AND BROUGHT BACK WORD. To Moses and Aaron. AND THEY TOLD HIM. They told Moses, for he was the most important one. AND CALEB STILLED THE PEOPLE. Rabbi Jonah the grammarian says that the meaning of <i>va-yahas</i> (and…stilled) is: and he said be still (<i>hasu</i>). AND THEY SPREAD AN EVIL REPORT OF THE LAND. <i>Va-yotzi’u dibbat ha-aretz</i> (and they spread an evil report) means: and they spread a lie. This is not the meaning of <i>va-yave yosef et dibbatam ra</i> (and Joseph brought evil report of them) (Gen. 37:2), for <i>va-yave</i> (brought) is the reverse of <i>va-yotzi</i> (and they spread).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For there the report was true. In other words, when <i>dibbatam</i> follows <i>va- yave</i>, it refers to the truth. When it follows <i>va-yotzi</i>, it refers to a lie.</i> EVIL REPORT. The word <i>dibbah</i> (evil report) comes from a double root.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its root is <i>dalet, bet, bet</i>, even though it is spelled <i>dalet, bet, heh</i>, which, <i>prima facie</i>, appears to be its root.</i> It comes from the same root as the word <i>dovev</i> (moving gently) in <i>Moving gently the lips of those that are asleep</i> (Cant. 7:10). I have explained it in its place.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Compare, I.E. on Cant. 7:10, “<i>Dovev</i> means to speak. It is possible the word <i>dibbah</i> is similar.” In other words, both <i>dovev</i> and <i>dibbah</i> refer to speech.</i> EATETH UP THE INHABITANTS THEREOF. For its air is bad. MEN OF GREAT STATURE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>anshe middot</i> (literally, men of measurements). Hence I.E.’s comments.</i> Every man is a man of measurements. <i>Anshe middot</i> means men of great measurement, men whose measurements are greater than everyone else’s. The same applies to the phrase <i>anshe levav</i> (men of heart)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Job. 34:34).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is, men of great hearts, i.e., men of great intelligence.</i> There are many other instances similar to the above. THE NEPHILIM. I have already explained this term.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Nephilim “were so named because anyone who saw them lost heart (<i>she-yippol lev ha-ro’eh otam</i>) at their huge stature).” See I.E. on Gen. 6:4 (Vol. 1, p. 96).</i> OF THE NEPHILIM. Its meaning<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, who came of the Nephilim.</i> is that they were of the Nephilim, who <i>were in the earth in those days, and also after that when…came in</i> (Gen 6:4).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The entire verse reads, <i>The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them</i>. Thus the Nephilim were descended from the “sons of God.”</i> I have explained it<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of <i>and also after that</i>.</i> there.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>And also after that</i> refers to after the flood. See I.E. on Gen. 6:4 (Vol. 1, p. 96).</i> THEIR VOICE. <i>Et kolam</i> (their voice) is the object of <i>va-tissa</i> (lifted up) and also of <i>va-yittenu</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, and gave.</i> (and cried).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. reads this verse as follows: And all the congregation lifted up their voice and gave their voice (i.e., they cried).</i> MURMURED. <i>Va-yillonu</i> (murmured) is a <i>nifal</i>. It is an <i>ayin vav</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its root is <i>lamed, vav, nun</i>.</i> When conjugated in the <i>nifal</i> it looks like a whole root. TO RETURN INTO EGYPT. <i>Shuv</i> (to return) is an infinitive.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Shuv</i> can also be an imperative. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> It is like the word <i>kum</i> (to stand)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is an infinitive, even though the word <i>kum</i> can also be an imperative.</i> in <i>I am not able to stand</i> (Lam. 1:14) and <i>kum</i> (rising up) in <i>And the king, against whom there is no rising up</i> (Prov. 30:31). THEN MOSES…FELL. By his own will.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And not as a result of a prophetic trance (Weiser).</i> AND JOSHUA THE SON OF NUN. Moses mentions Joshua first<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though in the list of the spies, Caleb is mentioned first. See Num. 13:6-8.</i> out of regard for Joshua’s elevated status. FOR THEY ARE BREAD. We will eat them like bread. <i>Who eat up My people as they eat bread</i> (Ps. 14:4) is similar. THEIR DEFENSE IS REMOVED FROM OVER THEM.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, their shadow is removed from over them. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> For the heart of a warrior frets when he does not have a shield to protect him and to serve as a shade for him.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, their shadow means their shield. Thus according to I.E. our clause should be understood: their shield is removed from over them; that is, they have no confidence to fight us and they will not confront us with a sword and shield. See Nachmanides on this verse.</i> BADE STONE THEM. Joshua and Caleb. DESPISE ME. <i>Yena’atzuni</i> (despise me) means anger me. It has many cognates in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This word is found many times in Scripture.</i> Scripture employs the singular <i>be-kirbo</i> (among them)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>be-kirbo</i> (among them) literally means among him.</i> because at first they were united to do good. WHEN THE EGYPTIANS SHALL HEAR–FOR THOU BROUGHTEST UP THIS PEOPLE. The meaning of <i>ki he’elita</i> (for thou broughtest up) is: that you brought up.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ki he’elita</i> is to be interpreted as if written <i>asher he’elita</i>. In other words, the <i>ki</i> (for) in our verse is to be rendered <i>asher</i> (that).</i> After Scripture states, <i>When the Egyptians shall hear</i> (ve-shame’u)…they <i>will say to the inhabitants of this land</i>, the reference being to the land of Canaan, it goes on to explain<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 14.</i> what the Egyptians heard. Scripture therefore repeats the word <i>shame’u</i> (have heard) and states they <i>have heard</i> (shame’u) <i>that Thou Lord</i> [Thy glory] <i>art in the midst of this people</i> (v. 14).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the word <i>shame’u</i> in verse 14 picks up the thought which was interrupted by <i>they will say to the inhabitants of the land</i>.</i> ART SEEN FACE TO FACE. The reference is to the glory which the elders saw (Ex. 24:9,10), or to <i>the appearance of the glory of the Lord…in the eyes of the children of Israel</i> (Ex. 24:17). The latter is correct. ART SEEN. The word <i>nirah</i> (seen) is a verb in the perfect.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is a third person perfect. Its meaning is, he was seen.</i> The meaning of <i>attah Adonai nirah</i> is, Thou Lord were seen.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When a second person pronoun (<i>attah</i>) is combined with the third person perfect (<i>nirah</i>) we follow the pronoun.</i> <i>Ve-nishar</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Nishar</i> is a third person perfect.</i> <i>ani</i> (and I was left) (Ezek. 9: 8) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In that we have an anomalous combination of a pronoun and a verb.</i> So is <i>ki umlal</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Umlal</i> is a third person perfect.</i> <i>ani</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ani</i> is a first person pronoun.</i> (for I languish away) (Ps. 6:3), because the <i>lamed</i> of <i>umlal</i> is vocalized with a <i>pattach</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>pattach</i> indicates that <i>umlal</i> is a third person perfect. However, see I.E. on Psalms 6:3.</i> STANDETH OVER THEM. When they camp. THEN THE NATIONS WHICH HAVE HEARD THE FAME OF THEE. The reference is to Egypt. Also to the Canaanites and other nations.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the reference is to the Egyptians, Canaanites, and other nations who heard of God’s fame.</i> ABLE. The word <i>yekholet</i> (able) is a noun. It is similar to the word <i>yevoshet</i> (dried up) in <i>until the waters were dried up</i> (Gen. 8:7). It does not mean a measure as in the midrashic interpretation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A Midrash connects the word <i>yekholet</i> to the word <i>yakhil</i> (held a measure). See Kings I 7:26. According to Krinsky the reference is to <i>Midrash Tanhumah</i> on our verse.</i> THEREFORE HE HATH SLAIN THEM IN THE WILDERNESS. The meaning of <i>va-yishchatem</i> is, He hath slain them. Scripture employs the term <i>va-yishchatem</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which usually applies to the slaughter of cattle.</i> because sheep graze in the wilderness. LET THE POWER OF THE LORD BE GREAT. <i>Let the</i> power…be <i>great</i> connotes being slow to anger, for all who are long-suffering have the great power to break their anger. <i>As Thou hast spoken</i>, that you are slow to anger<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s paraphrase of <i>As Thou hast spoken, saying</i> (v. 17): <i>The Lord is slow to anger</i> (v. 18).</i> is proof of this. I have explained these attributes<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The attributes mentioned in verse 18.</i> in the Torah portion <i>Ki Tissa</i>. PARDON, I PRAY THEE. Since we find Scripture saying <i>surely they shall not see the land</i> (v. 23) after <i>salachti ke-devarekha</i> (I have pardoned according to thy word) (v. 20), we learn that the term <i>salach</i> (pardon) refers to being slow to anger.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If <i>salach</i> meant full pardon, then (he people would have been permitted to enter the land.</i> Similarly, the meaning of <i>ve-nislach lo</i> (and he shall be forgiven) (Num 15:28) is [the punishment shall be held in abeyance] until he fully repents.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Salach</i> in all cases means that punishment is not meted out immediately but is delayed. In the case of Num. 15:28, a sacrifice delays punishment and the person is pardoned if he truly repents.</i> ACCORDING UNTO THE GREATNESS OF THY LOVINGKINDNESS. The meaning of <i>ke-godel chasdekha</i> (according to the greatness of Thy lovingkindness) is: because of Thy great lovingkindness.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>kof</i> usually has the meaning of like or according. Hence I.E.’s comment that here it means because of.</i> AND ACCORDING AS THOU HAST FORGIVEN. The word <i>nasata</i> (Thou hast forgiven) is similar to the word <i>nose</i> (forgiving) in <i>forgiving sin</i> (Ex. 34:7). EVEN UNTIL NOW. Until this place or from the day that they left Egypt until this very day, for the word <i>hennah</i> (now) can refer to a place or to a specific time. Compare, <i>there came men in hither</i> (hennah) (Josh. 2:2) and, <i>and I have not seen him until now</i> (hennah) (Gen. 44:28).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> I have already explained this term.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That <i>hennah</i> in Gen 44:28 refers to time.</i> AS I LIVE. It means as I live, so shall My word come to pass.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>As I live</i> is short for, As I live, so shall my word come to pass.</i> SHALL BE FILLED WITH THE GLORY. As My glory fills the earth.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>yimmale</i> (shall be filled) is to be taken as a present. Thus the meaning of our clause is, and all the earth is filled with the glory of the Lord.</i> However, it most probably refers to the future.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For <i>yimmale</i> is an imperfect.</i> Its meaning is, I shall do this so that my glory shall be known in the world.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation the meaning of our clause is: and all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord.</i> THESE TEN TIMES. The meaning is, these many times. Scripture mentions ten because it is most important. It is the end of the one numbers and the first of the ten numbers in the second series of numbers.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">10,20,30, etc.</i> ANY OF THEM THAT DESPISED ME. From among their children.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If any of their children will follow in their footsteps (Weiser).</i> BUT MY SERVANT CALEB. Caleb alone<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Joshua, the <i>kohanim</i>, and Levites are not mentioned in this verse even though they entered the land.</i> is mentioned because he <i>stilled the people</i> (Num. 13:30). The Levites and the <i>kohanim</i> are not included in the oath,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in verses 21-23.</i> for no prince from among them went to spy out the land. Furthermore, Scripture states, <i>all that were numbered of you, according to your whole number</i> (v. 29).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture explicitly states that God’s decree was limited to those who were numbered. Since the <i>kohanim</i> and the Levites were not among those numbered (Num. 1:49), God’s decree did not apply to them.</i> Now even though there were no <i>kohanim</i> there,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus there was no reason to exclude them in verse 29. By no <i>kohanim</i> I.E. means few <i>kohanim</i>, for Aaron and his sons were there.</i> there were in reality many Levites there.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">There were 8,580 Levites above the age of 30. See Num. 4:47,48. Hence Scripture excludes them in verse 29.</i> ANOTHER SPIRIT. In contrast to the spies. AND HATH FOLLOWED ME FULLY. He did not he but pursued my word and confirmed it by saying that the land is very good. NOW THE AMALEKITE AND THE CANAANITE. The Canaanite refers to the Amorite, for every Amorite is a Canaanite.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Amorites are descended from Canaan. See Gen. 10:16.</i> Scripture does not bother to mention the Amorite by name because the other nation mentioned is the Amalekite, who is of the children of Shem.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture distinguishes between the Canaanite nations when it speaks of the Canaanites <i>per se</i>. However, when it speaks of one of the Canaanite nations along with a non-Canaanite nation, it does not mention its specific name but uses its general name.</i> On the other hand, Canaan, who is the father of the Amorite,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence the term Canaanite includes the Amorites.</i> is of the children of Ham.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Canaanite is mentioned by name and not called the Hammite because Ham had other sons.</i> <i>Then the Amalekite and the Canaanite…came down</i> (Num. 14:45) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">There too the reference is to the Amorite.</i> <i>And the Amorites…came out</i> (Deut. 1:44)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is to the same incident as that in our verse.</i> is proof of this. Scripture does not mention the Amalekite in the aforementioned verse, as the Amorite was the more important.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Amorite carried the brunt of the battle (Weiser).</i> DWELT IN THE VALE. To ambush you. Others say that the meaning of our verse is, even though the Amalekite and the Canaanite dwell in the valley, turn toward the way of the Red Sea and do not fear.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the Canaanites and Amalekites shall pursue you.</i> Now the Israelites did not repent, hence God’s word.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Do not go up for the Lord is not in your midst (v. 42). I.E. believed that verses 39 and 40 do not imply that Israel repented.</i> YOUR CARCASSES. The meaning of <i>pigrekhem</i> is your dead bodies. HAVE MURMURED. <i>Halinotem</i> (have murmured) is related to the word <i>va-yallinu</i> (murmured) in <i>and…murmured against Moses</i> (v. 2). CONCERNING WHICH I LIFTED UP MY HAND. Scripture speaks as humans do, for the sky is above.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence one raises his hand towards heaven when he takes an oath.</i> Caleb is mentioned first<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Before Joshua.</i> because he acted before anyone else to quiet the people. YOUR CARCASSES.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>u-figrekhem attem</i>. Literally, and your carcasses, you. Hence I.E.’s comment that the aforementioned is to be interpreted, and your carcasses, namely, you. In other words, Scripture is being explicit.</i> Namely, you. SHALL BE WANDERERS.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>yiheyu ro’im</i>. Literally, will shepherd. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> For it is the way of shepherds not to remain and rest in one place.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus “shall shepherd” means shall wander.</i> <i>My habitation is plucked up and carried away from me As a shepherd’s tent</i> (Is. 38:12) is proof of this. YOUR STRAYINGS. For you turned away from me and said, <i>Let us make a captain, and let us return into Egypt</i> (Num. 14:4). WHICH YE SPIED OUT. By command.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Via the spies whom you commanded to scout out the land.</i> MY DISPLEASURE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>tenu’ati</i>. I.E. renders this as my breaking. Hence his comments.</i> I will break my word.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">My promise to bring the generation that left Egypt to Canaan. See Ex. 6:8. <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38 reads: If I will break My word. In this case, the reference is to God’s oath, which He took not to bring the generation that left Egypt into Canaan. In view of the belief of I.E. that God is unchangeable (see his comments on Gen. 6:6, Vol. 1, p. 96), the reading of <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38 appears correct.</i> Or, it means<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of <i>tenu’ati</i>, My breaking.</i> who shall break Me; that is, who shall break My oath.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The oath which I took not to allow you to enter the land of Canaan.</i> Compare, <i>But if her father break</i> (heni) <i>her</i> (Num 30:6). THAT ARE GATHERED TOGETHER AGAINST ME. For they wanted to stone<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 10.</i> the servants of God<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Caleb and Joshua. God considers an attack on His servants as an attack on God Himself.</i> because they spoke of God’s glory.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 7-9.</i> IN THIS WILDERNESS. The time set for each one shall come to an end, for God has set a specific time for everyone’s death.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew verse reads, <i>ba-midbar ha-zeh yittamu</i> (in this wilderness they shall be consumed). <i>Ba-midbar ha-zeh yittamu</i> literally means, in this wilderness they shall be finished. I.E. interprets this to mean their time shall be finished; that is, the time allotted for their lives shall come to an end.</i> AND THERE THEY SHALL DIE. All of them, close to the time set by God.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The days of the entire generation shall be completed close to the forty-year period set by God for their sojourn in the desert. In others words, the entire generation shall die in about forty years.</i> And…MADE ALL THE CONGREGATION TO MURMUR AGAINST HIM. <i>Va-yillonu</i> (and made to murmur) is a <i>hifil</i>. DIED. <i>Va-yamutu</i> (died) is to interpreted as if written <i>metu</i> (died).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Va-yamutu</i> (died) means and they died. Like all verbs with a conversive <i>vav</i>, it usually opens a new clause. However, the context indicates that verse 37 does not open a new clause. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> BY THE PLAGUE. All together.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Unlike the generation that died in the wilderness.</i> BUT JOSHUA THE SON OF NUN. These are the words of Moses. He<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Unlike God. See verse 30.</i> mentions Joshua before Caleb. SEEING IT SHALL NOT PROSPER. The ascent of the mountain will not prosper. Or, the violation of God’s command cannot prosper. FORASMUCH AS YE ARE TURNED BACK. <i>Ki al ken shavtem</i> (forasmuch as ye are turned back) means, since you turned back.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>ki al ken</i> means since. The literal meaning of <i>ki al ken</i> is “for on yes.” Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> Compare, <i>since</i> (ki al ken) <i>I gave her not</i> (Gen. 38:26). BUT THEY PRESUMED TO GO UP. <i>Va-yapilu</i> (but they presumed) is related to the word <i>ofel</i> (mound) in <i>the mound and the tower</i> (Is. 32:14). The meaning of <i>va-yapilu</i> is, they went up the hill. AND BEAT THEM DOWN. Rabbi Moses the Spaniard, of blessed memory, says that our text<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which reads <i>va-yakketum</i> (and beat them down).</i> should have read <i>va-yakkitum</i> (and beat them down).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the word is a <i>hifil</i> from the root <i>nun, kaf, tav</i>. Rabbi Moses is only commenting on the irregularity of <i>va-yakketum</i>. The meaning remains the same.</i> <i>Va-yadbeku</i> (followed hard) in <i>even they also followed hard after them</i> (I Sam. 14:22) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here too the reading should be <i>va-yadbiku</i> rather than <i>va-yadbeku</i>, for the word is in the <i>hifil</i>.</i> However, I believe that <i>va-yakketum</i> (and beat them down) comes from a double root<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The root <i>kaf, tav, tav</i>.</i> and is an irregular word.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the word should have read <i>va-yakkitum</i>.</i> EVEN UNTO HORMAH. Hormah is the name of a place. Others say that the meaning of <i>even unto Hormah</i> is, until they destroyed them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>hormah</i> means destruction, and <i>even unto Hormah</i> means even unto destruction.</i> WHEN YE ARE COME INTO THE LAND OF YOUR HABITATIONS. This chapter follows [the one dealing with the spies] in order to console the children by informing them that they would enter the land, for the Israelites grew weak and mourned.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 14:39. This interpretation is found in Rashi.</i> However, the real reason that this chapter follows the one dealing with the spies, is because all the congregation shouted and sinned.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 14:1-4.</i> God forgave their sin because of the prayer of Moses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 14:13-21.</i> Scripture says, <i>And when ye shall err</i> (15:22).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is precisely what Israel had just done.</i> <i>And they shall be forgiven</i> (15:25) is proof of this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The theme connecting the chapters is atonement for sin.</i> Scripture found it necessary to mention the law of the meal offering and of all burnt offerings and sacrifices.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Since Scripture mentioned the sin offering and its accompanying meal and drink offering, it felt compelled to mention the same regarding the burnt and other offerings.</i> At the end,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">After mentioning the various offerings.</i> it states, <i>But the soul that doeth aught with a high hand</i> (v. 30). The latter alludes to Israel’s deeds.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The incident of the spies.</i> Scripture mentions the gatherer of wood (verses 32-34)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">After the sin offering.</i> because he acted with a high hand. God designated the fringes as a sign<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of the commandments.</i> because of His great pity on Israel, so that a person will not act with a high hand or<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Deliberately violate God’s commandments.</i> forget.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Any of God’s commands. <br>While I.E. maintains an independent position regarding Biblical interpretations, he always defers to the sages of the Talmud on <i>halakhic</i> issues. Thus in regard to the law concerning fringes, I.E. notes it is possible that Biblical rules require that the corners of garments be left unwoven so that their threads hang down to form fringes. He further notes that the law of fringes applies to pants. However, he then goes on to say that this interpretation is of no consequence, for the rabbis say that the fringes are specially prepared threads which are placed on the corner of any garment having four corners. Therefore pants are not included in the law of fringes.</i> CLEARLY UTTERED. <i>Le-fale</i> (clearly uttered) means to separate.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E., <i>le-fale neder</i> (in fulfillment of a vow clearly uttered) is to be rendered, in fulfillment of a vow set aside.</i> Similarly the word <i>ve-hiflah</i> (shall make a division) in <i>And the Lord shall make a division</i> (Ex. 9:4). This is so even though <i>ve-hiflah</i> is spelled with a <i>heh</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And <i>le-fale</i> is spelled with an <i>alef</i>.</i> for the letters <i>alef, heh, vav, yod</i> interchange.9.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The printed texts have verse 9. However, the reference appears to be to verse 4, for verse 8 speaks of the herd while verse 3 speaks of the herd and the flock. Furthermore, verse 4 speaks of a tenth of an ephah and verse 9 does not.</i> A MEAL-OFFERING OF…FINE FLOUR. A tenth of an ephah for each one of the flock.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in the previous verse.</i> THE HE-LAMBS. Or the kids.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This comment as it stands appears very difficult. First of all, what is I.E. adding to the Scriptural text, which reads: <i>for each of the he-lambs, or of the kids?</i> Furthermore, I.E. goes on to say, “Scripture similarly states at the end, <i>for each lamb</i>.” We do not find the phrase <i>for each lamb</i> in any of the following verses. Filwarg suggests that the heading verse 11 is an error and should be eliminated and that our note is a continuation of the previous one. It should read as follows:<br>[Verse 4.] A MEAL-OFFERING OF…FINE FLOUR. A tenth of an ephah for each one of the flock, (that is) he-lambs or kids. Scripture similarly states at the end (of the verse), <i>for each lamb</i> (v. 5). See note 15.</i> Scripture similarly states later, <i>for each lamb</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We thus see that the term flock refers to lambs (and by extension also to kids).</i> If the celebrant offers a ram, then his meal offering is doubled,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 6.</i> for a lamb is a small animal. Scripture does not mention the free-will offering<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>nedavah</i>.</i> along with the bullock.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 8. It does so in verse 3. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> It mentions the peace offering<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>shelamim</i>.</i> [with the bullock] because it did not mention it above.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 3.</i> They all have one law.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>neder</i> (vow) mentioned in verses 3 and 8 and the <i>nedavah</i> (free-will offering) mentioned in verse 3 all have one law. They are considered as <i>shelamim</i> (peace offerings). See Lev. 7:16-20 (Weiser).</i> [ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER.] The reference is to the meal offering, the oil, and the wine. OR WHOSOEVER MAY BE AMONG YOU. Today.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E., <i>or whosoever may be among you, throughout your generations</i> should be interpreted as: or whosoever be among you today or throughout your generations.</i> AS FOR THE CONGREGATION. Some say that the <i>heh</i> prefixed to the word <i>kahal</i> (congregation) is the sign of the vocative.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation our verse reads: O congregation (<i>ha-kahal</i>), there shall be one statute both for you, and for the stranger.</i> However, I believe that there is no vocative letter in the holy tongue. The four instances<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where a common noun is repeated. They are: Moses, Moses (Ex. 3:4); Abraham, Abraham (Gen. 22:11); Jacob, Jacob (Gen. 46:2); Samuel, Samuel (I Sam. 3:1).</i> are proof of this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That there is no vocative <i>heh</i>, otherwise why repeat the common noun.</i> One of them is <i>Moses, Moses</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Ex. 3:4. I.E. probably quotes <i>Moses, Moses</i> as an example because he is expounding the Book of Numbers, and Moses is the central human character.</i> On the contrary, this <i>heh</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>heh</i> prefixed to <i>kahal</i>.</i> is the sign of the definite object.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus the meaning of <i>ha-kahal</i> is, the congregation.</i> It is not a sign of the vocative. AS YE ARE, SO SHALL THE STRANGER BE. I have already explained the rule governing two <i>kafs</i> joined together.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. when two <i>kafs</i> are affixed to two words following each other it indicates an abridged clause. Thus our verse, which states <i>ka-khem ka-ger</i> (as you are, so shall the stranger be) is to be interpreted: as you are, so shall the stranger be; as the stranger is, so shall you be. See I.E. on Gen. 44:18 (Vol. 1, p. 396).</i> [ONE LAW.] Its meaning is, one law aside from the burnt offerings, for the burnt offerings are obligated by statute.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For that is what the word <i>chukkah</i> (statute) refers to. Verse 15 states, <i>there shall be one statute</i> (chukkah) <i>both for you, and for the stranger that sojourneth with you</i>. Verse 16 states, <i>One law</i> (Torah) <i>and one ordinance shall be both for you, and for the stranger. Prima facie</i>, Scripture is redundant. Hence I.E. comments that verse 15 deals with that which is obligatory, namely, the burnt offering (for it concludes the law mentioned in verse 14, which deals with sacrifices), and verse 16 deals with all the other commandments, for it speaks of Torah (Filwarg).</i> God also says,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verses 19-21.</i> as you bring a meal offering of fine flour along with the burnt offering, thus shall you do with your dough.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">One must set aside a portion of one’s dough as a gift unto God. Hence the law of <i>hallah</i> follows the law of the meal offering.</i> There is no need to mention what our ancients, of blessed memory, received by tradition, namely, that one is obligated to set aside two offerings, a portion of the dough<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Hallah</i>.</i> and a portion of the grain,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Terumah</i>. In other words, one has to set aside a portion from the dough, even though he has already set aside a portion from the grain out of which this very dough was made (Filwarg).</i> and their amount.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">How much one has to set aside.</i> Their words are true. Everything else is nonsense. [ONE HE-GOAT.] Scripture adds a he-goat.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To the bullock mentioned in Lev. 4:13,14 for the sin committed in error by the congregation.</i> The congregation must bring a sin offering whether they erred by doing something they were prohibited from doing or erred in not doing something they were obligated to do. AND THEIR SIN-OFFERING. The reference is to the he-goat.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>An offering made by fire unto the Lord</i> refers to the bullock, <i>and their sin-offering before the Lord</i> refers to the he-goat.</i> A <i>sei’r izzim</i> (he-goat) refers to a young goat because the word <i>se’ir</i> (he-goat) is connected to <i>izzim</i> (goats). The reverse is the case with the term <i>atud</i> (he-goat).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38. An <i>atud</i> is a mature goat. Some texts read <i>atid</i> (the future) in place of <i>atud</i> (he-goat). However, the latter is practically impossible to explain. See Filwarg.</i> A SHE-GOAT OF THE FIRST YEAR FOR A SIN-OFFERING. This explains <i>a goat, a female</i> (Lev. 4:28).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which the Torah in Lev. 4:28 mandates for one who sins through error.</i> The sin spoken of in our verse refers to a failure, due to error, to do what the Torah commands.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Lev. 4:27-31 deals with one who violates a sin by doing something which the Lord has commanded not to be done. Hence I.E. believes that our verse deals with a failure to observe a positive commandment.</i> Now this law is the same for the one who errs and does what he is commanded not to do.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In both cases he must bring a goat, a female without blemish.</i> ONE LAW.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>torah achat</i>.</i> This is similar to <i>This is the law of</i> (torat) <i>the sin-offering</i> (Lev. 6:18).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>torah</i> (law) (rather than <i>mitzvat, chukkat, mishpat</i>) is used with regard to the rules of the sacrifices (Filwarg).</i> WITH A HIGH HAND. To show all that he does not fear God. BLASPHEMETH. This is the way people speak.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">People consider a high-handed act against God as blasphemous.</i> BECAUSE HE HATH DESPISED THE WORD OF THE LORD. This is what <i>with a high hand</i> refers to. AND HATH BROKEN HIS COMMANDMENT. For God commanded him not to act with a high hand. Others say that <i>and hath broken His commandment</i> refers to one who violates God’s commandment in secret. THAT SOUL. This does not refer to the rational soul.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. held that man has three souls: vegetative, animal, and rational. See Foreword, Vol. 1, p. XIII.</i> as those who err say.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. man’s rational soul is immortal if developed by study.</i> It refers rather to the connection of the soul to the body.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Premature death.</i> HIS INIQUITY SHALL BE UPON HIM. Compare, <i>his blood shall be upon him</i> (Ezek. 33:4). IN THE WILDERNESS. I believe that the reference is to the wilderness of Sinai.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the word <i>midbar</i> (wilderness) has the direct article (<i>ba</i>) prefixed to it. The reference is thus to “the” wilderness, which I.E. is certain must refer to Sinai.</i> I have already mentioned<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on verse 2.</i> why this chapter follows the incident of the spies.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though this incident preceded the sending of the spies, for the sending of the spies took place after Israel journeyed from Sinai.</i> It is also possible that the gatherer of wood acted with a high hand<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He deliberately violated God’s law.</i> and they warned him,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Bible does not explicitly state that the gatherer of wood was warned. According to Jewish law, however, one cannot be executed for a crime unless one is first warned to desist. Hence I.E. suggests that he was warned but to no avail.</i> but to no avail.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He continued to gather wood on the Sabbath. The Sifre explains similarly.</i>[33. BROUGHT HIM.] Some say they brought him in on Saturday night.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For they would not arrest him on the Sabbath.</i> IN WARD. <i>Ba-mishmar</i> (in ward) is vocalized with a <i>pattach</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">What I.E. means is that the <i>bet</i> of <i>ba-mishmar</i> (in ward) is vocalized with a <i>pattach</i>.</i> It refers to a specific place.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the preposition <i>ba</i> is the sign of the direct object.</i> WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO HIM. How he should be put to death.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Torah earlier stated that whoever violates the Sabbath should be put to death (Ex. 35:2). However, it does not state how the culprit should be executed.</i> AS THE LORD COMMANDED. Death by stoning. THAT THEY MAKE THEM…FRINGES.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>tzitzit</i>.</i> It is possible to interpret this in two ways. One, that they make fringes (<i>tzitzit</i>) like those in <i>by the fringes</i> (be-tzitzit)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, the hair.</i> <i>of my head</i> (Ezek. 8:3),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The second interpretation is given in the next verse.</i> the reference in our verse being to threads that are not woven.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation the threads at the corner are not to be woven but are left unfinished, like the hair upon the head. These unfinished threads are to serve as fringes.</i> IN THE CORNERS OF THEIR GARMENTS. Upon smooth garments<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Such as a sheet.</i> or pants,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is still part of the first interpretation.</i> for if pants are divided they will have corners.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence they require fringes now (Krinsky).</i> A THREAD OF BLUE. Upon the fringes. The reason the thread was blue is that blue is a sky-like color. AND IT SHALL BE UNTO YOU FOR A FRINGE. The thread at the end was like the fringe.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The blue thread that was placed on the edge of the garment was to resemble one of the loose hanging threads.</i> The other interpretation is the one which the rabbis of blessed memory transmitted.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the fringes are not part of the garment but are attached to the corners of the garment.</i> Now the first interpretation is nullified in view of the fact that there are true witnesses<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Jewish practice throughout the ages.</i> to the second explanation. The rabbis transmitted to us the law that this commandment applies to a garment that has four corners and that the tzitzit are fringes.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hanging from but not part of the garment.</i> I will explain this law later.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference apparently is to I.E.’s commentary on Deut. 22:11.</i> Now this commandment states that everyone who has a four-cornered garment shall always cover himself with it during the day. He shall not remove it so that he remembers<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38. <i>Mikro’ot Gedolot</i> reads, so that they remember.</i> the commandments. Those who pray with a <i>tallit</i> during the time of prayers do so because they read in the <i>shema</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>shema</i> is part of the morning and evening prayers. It consists of Deut. 6:4-9; Deut. 11:13-21; Num. 15:37-41.</i> <i>And it shall be unto you for a fringe</i> (v. 39) and <i>that they make them throughout their generations fringes</i> (v. 38). However, I believe that one is more obligated to enwrap oneself in fringes when he is not at prayer than during the time of prayer, so that he remembers the commandments and does not err and trespass during the other hours of the day, for in the hour of prayer he will not sin.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">“Now, the person who envelops himself in a tallit [during prayer] does not fully observe the commandment. In reality, one is obligated to wear fringes the entire day, for when a person is in the market and his eyes wander, his heart lusts after what his eyes see much more than it does during prayer.” See <i>The Secret of the Torah</i>, p. 79.</i> THAT YE MAY LOOK UPON IT. The commandment requires that the fringes be seen. AFTER YOUR OWN HEART. Which lusts. The eye sees and the heart desires. The fringes thus serve as a sign and a mark that a person should not pursue the thoughts of his heart and all that his eyes desire. AFTER WHICH YE USE TO GO ASTRAY. For one who follows his desires goes astray from the service of his God. THAT YE MAY REMEMBER. Scripture has previously stated, <i>and remember all the commandments of the Lord</i> (v. 39).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence why repeat itself and state in our verse <i>that ye may remember</i>.</i> The meaning of our verse is: if you remember the commandments of God, you will be holy and you will not defile yourselves with the lusts of the heart which defile the rational soul.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence our verse does not repeat verse 39.</i> I AM THE LORD YOUR GOD. I am He who took you out of Egypt to be your God. I therefore say to you: <i>I am the Lord your God</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, obey My commandments.</i> NOW KORAH, THE SON OF IZHAR…TOOK. This event occurred in the wilderness of Sinai when the first-born were set aside<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From serving as priests.</i> and the Levites were placed in their stead.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 32:29 (Vol. 1, p. 680).</i> Israel thought that our master Moses acted out of his own will in giving his brother an elevated position. They suspected that he acted similarly towards the sons of Kohath, who were his relatives, and to all the sons of Levi who were of his family. The Levites rebelled against Moses because they were subservient to Aaron and his sons. Dathan and Abiram rebelled because Moses<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Actually Jacob did so on his death bed. However, Moses enforced Jacob’s decree. Hence Dathan and Abiram blamed Moses.</i> removed the birthright from Reuben their forefather, and gave it to Joseph. It is also possible that they suspected that Moses favored the tribe of Joseph because Joshua was his assistant.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Joshua was descended from Ephraim the son of Joseph.</i> Korah too was a first-born, as Scripture clearly states.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Ex. 6:21.</i> The banner of Reuben camped in the south.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 2:10.</i> So did Korah, for he was a Kohathite.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The family of Kohath camped south of the tabernacle. See Num. 3:29. Thus these two disgruntled factions camped next to each other. Their proximity facilitated their rebellion.</i> The princes of the congregation were first-born. They offered the burnt offering. They therefore took the fire pans. The miracle of the staff,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The blossoming of the staff of Levi. See Num. 17:23.</i> which demonstrated to all of Israel that God chose the Levites in place of the first-born, is proof that this explanation is correct.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the rebellion was triggered by the rejection of the first-born, for otherwise why demonstrate that God chose the Levites.</i> Hence Scripture reads, <i>that there may be made an end of their murmurings against Me</i> (Num. 17:25), for the murmuring was an account of this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The substitution of the Levites for the first-born.</i> Moses also said, <i>that I have not done them of mine own mind</i> (v. 28). He said the aforementioned because Israel had come to believe that he had acted on his own. Furthermore, Moses said, <i>then the Lord hath not sent me</i> (v. 29) in this thing,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To have the <i>kohanim</i> take the place of the first-born and the Levites be subservient to the <i>kohanim</i>.</i> because Israel had come to believe in him.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That Moses acted in accordance with God’s command in all other things. “In this thing” is part of I.E.’s interpretation of <i>the Lord hath not sent me</i>. It does not appear in the verse.</i> Here is another rigorous proof: <i>seeing all the congregation are holy</i> (v. 3). The aforementioned alludes to the first-born who are holy, for Scripture states, <i>Sanctify unto Me all the first-born</i> (Ex. 13:2). The first-born were the priests <i>that come near to the Lord</i> (Ex. 19:22). They were the most important ones of the congregation. NOW KORAH…TOOK. This is short for, now Korah took men.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word men is not in the Hebrew text. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> Compare, <i>an ass bread</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (I Sam. 16:20).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>An ass bread</i> is short for an ass carrying bread.</i> There are many such instances in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where a word is left out of the text.</i> Rabbi Jonah says that the meaning of <i>Now Korah took</i> is now Korah took himself to rise against Moses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rabbi Jonah connects <i>Now Korah…took</i> (v. 1) to <i>and they rose up</i> (v. 2).</i> IN THE FACE OF MOSES. They did not rise up in secret. There is a difference between <i>li-fene</i> (in the face of) and <i>mi-pene</i> (before the face of) (Gen. 3:8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Mi-pene</i> is the respectful form. Compare, <i>mi-pene sevah takkum</i> (thou that rise up before the hoary head) (Lev. 19:32).</i> THE ELECT MEN OF THE ASSEMBLY. They were called to the tent of meeting. MEN OF RENOWN. Before they left Egypt.A grammarian says that <i>the princes of the congregation</i> are the leaders who stood over those that were numbered (Num 1:4).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This grammarian, unlike I.E., does not identify the princes of the congregation with the first-born.</i> He says that they<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The princes.</i> are the object of took. Our text should be read as if written, And Korah and Dathan and Abiram and On took the princes of Israel to speak to them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To convince them to join the revolt. This commentator reads our text as follows: Now Korah…and Dathan and Abiram…and On…and two hundred and fifty took the princes of the congregation, the elect men of the assembly, men of renown.</i> This interpretation is a bit far-fetched.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The interpretation that the princes were the heads who stood over Israel when they were numbered.</i> YE TAKE TOO MUCH UPON YOU. Enough for you. <sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The literal meaning of <i>rav lakhem</i> is, a lot to you.</i> Its meaning is, you have grabbed the greater portion. SEEING ALL THE CONGREGATION ARE HOLY. For the entire congregation became holy from the day they stood on Sinai. AND THE LORD IS AMONG THEM. For the Levites were chosen after God’s glory dwelt amidst the children of Israel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">At Mt. Sinai.</i> Now if Moses knew when he was on Mount Sinai that the tribe of Levi was chosen, Israel did not know.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus they suspected that Moses acted on his own.</i> WHEREFORE THEN LIFT YE UP YOURSELVES ABOVE THE ASSEMBLY OF THE LORD? For Aaron to be <i>kohen gadol</i> (high priest) and Moses, who taught Aaron, to be above him. HE FELL UPON HIS FACE. Willingly. Other say, like prophets when they receive a prophecy.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>he fell upon his face</i> means he fell into a prophetic trance. See Num. 24:4.</i> WHO ARE HIS. Which is the chosen tribe. This was Moses’ answer to Dathan and Abiram and to the leaders of the congregation who were first-born. AND WHO IS HOLY. In his tribe to be <i>kohen gadol</i>. THIS. Test.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>This do</i>. According to I.E. this is short for this test do.</i> YE TAKE TOO MUCH UPON YOU, YE SONS OF LEVI. The meaning of our clause is found in the following words of Moses: <i>Is it but a small thing unto you</i> (v. 9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 9 and 10 explain what Moses meant by <i>ye take too much upon you</i>.</i> Scripture says, <i>And Moses said unto Korah</i> (v. 8),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 5 reads, <i>And he</i> [Moses] <i>spoke unto Korah</i>. Thus <i>And Moses said unto Korah</i> appears redundant. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> for the first statement<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 5.</i> was addressed to Korah and to all of his company. However, this one was addressed to the Levites. IS IT BUT A SMALL THING UNTO YOU.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ha-me’at mi-kem</i> literally, is it small from you. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> This means is it but a small thing unto you. BEFORE THE CONGREGATION TO MINISTER UNTO THEM. When they bring their burnt offerings and sacrifices. AND THAT HE HATH BROUGHT THEE NEAR. And when he has brought you and your brothers near, will you seek the priesthood also?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, and now that he has brought you and your brothers near Him, you also seek the priesthood? In other words, the <i>vav</i> prefixed to <i>va-yakrev</i> is not to be rendered <i>and</i> but rather as <i>when</i>.</i> THEREFORE. Therefore you and your whole congregation that art gathered together, rebel against the Lord.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>al Adonai</i> means against the Lord, and is to be interpreted as rebel against the Lord. The literal meaning of <i>al Adonai</i> is on the Lord. Thus the literal meaning of our verse is: Therefore you and your whole congregation that are gathered together on the Lord (<i>al ha-Adonai</i>). Hence, I.E.’s comment.</i> Its meaning is similar to <i>And the rulers take counsel together, Against the Lord</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>al Adonai</i> (literally on the Lord). However, its meaning is against the Lord.</i> <i>and against His anointed</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ve-al meshicho</i> (literally, and on His anointed). However, its meaning is, <i>and against His anointed</i>.</i> (Ps. 2:2). They gathered in order to fight with God. <i>When they strove against the Lord</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>al Adonai</i>.</i> (Num. 26:9) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here too <i>al</i> has the meaning of against.</i> Some say that the <i>heh</i> prefixed to <i>no’adim</i> (gathered together) is superfluous.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the word <i>ha-no’adim</i> (that art gathered together) is to be read <i>no’adim</i> (gathered together). If the <i>heh</i> is not superfluous, then our verse is to be interpreted, <i>Therefore thou and all thy company that are gathered together</i> (ha-no’adim) <i>against the Lord</i>. If the <i>heh</i> is superfluous, then our verse reads: Therefore thou and all thy company are gathered (<i>no’adim</i>) together against the Lord.</i> AND AS TO AARON, WHAT IS HE. What is his sin, what did he do? WE WILL NOT COME UP. It is possible that the tent of meeting was on a high place in the middle of the camp.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>We will not come up</i> is to be taken literally.</i> Scripture therefore says, <i>Get you up from about</i> (v. 24). On the other hand, one who goes to serve God or to the chosen place is said to go up. IS IT A SMALL THING. Is it a small thing that thou hast brought us up out of a land flowing with milk and honey?Scripture reads, <i>brought us up</i>, because Egypt is south of the Land of Israel, and one who comes from Egypt to the land of Canaan is in truth going up.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here, <i>brought us up</i> is to be taken literally.</i> BUT THOU MUST NEEDS MAKE THYSELF ALSO A PRINCE OVER US. You brought us out of Egypt in order to make yourself a prince over us. MUST NEEDS MAKE THYSELF A PRINCE OVER US. You and your brother also seek additional positions of power over us.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our clause reads, <i>ki tistarer alenu gam histarer</i> (but thou must needs make thyself also a prince over us). The latter literally reads: That you want to rule over us, also to rule. I.E. interprets this as follows: that you want to rule over us, and you also want additional rulership.</i> MOREOVER THOU HAST NOT BROUGHT US UNTO A LAND FLOWING WITH MILK AND HONEY. Its meaning is: You brought us out of a good place.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 13.</i> Now if you had brought us to a place which is as good as the place you took us out of, and if you had given us fields and vineyards such as we had in Egypt,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. our verse implies that Israel had fields and vineyards in Egypt.</i> and you sought power over us, then we would tolerate it. However, you removed us from a good place, from our fields and vineyards, and you did not bring us to a place as good as the one that you brought us out of. Why then do you seek power?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 13.</i> WILT THOU PUT OUT THE EYES OF THESE MEN? Its meaning is: you want to put out the eyes of these men. This alludes to those who left Egypt. It is as if Korah said, you want to put out their eyes so that they do not see. But what you did is visible to the eyes. Therefore we will not come up. It is metaphoric to say so and so’s eyes are closed and he therefore cannot see.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even when the subject’s eyes are open. Similarly, <i>wilt Thou put out the eyes of these men</i> is not to be taken literally.</i> Others say its meaning<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of <i>Wilt thou put out the eyes of these men</i>?</i> is: Do you want to darken the eyes so that they do not see? In other words, you are fooling us. We will not come up.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Prima facie</i>, this interpretation seems to be identical to the one above. Hence Filwarg suggests that this interpretation is that <i>We will not go up</i> means we will not go up to the Land of Israel. In other words, Korah said you are fooling us, for you have no intention of bringing us to the Land of Israel.</i> Others say its meaning<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of <i>Wilt thou put out the eyes of these men</i>?</i> is: even if you put out our eyes we will not go up. Korah said <i>of these men</i> because he spoke in the manner of the unintelligent, who do not want to say anything negative about themselves.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>of these men</i> refers to Korah himself. According to this interpretation the meaning of <i>wilt thou put out the eyes of these men</i> is, will you put out my eyes?</i> However, I believe that <i>of these men</i> alludes to the elders who were with Moses, for Scripture clearly states, <i>and the elders of Israel followed him</i> (v. 25). AND MOSES WAS VERY WROTH. With what Korah said.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>va-yichar le-mosheh me’od</i> (and Moses was very wroth). The latter literally reads, and to Moses it was wroth very much. I.E. suggest that this be interpreted, <i>va-yichar le-mosheh zeh ha-dibbur me’od</i> (and Moses was very wroth at this statement).</i>I have already explained that the burnt offering and the meal offering put off the punishment of the wicked. Dathan and Abiram were important men and offered meal offerings before this event. This is the meaning of <i>Respect not their offering</i> and turn to me, for I have not placed a burden upon one ass of their asses. [I HAVE NOT TAKEN ONE ASS FROM THEM.] I have not placed a burden upon one of their asses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders <i>nasati</i> (taken) as laden.</i> NEITHER HAVE I HURT ONE OF THEM. In any way. AND MOSES SAID UNTO KORAH. Moses had already said so.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verses 6 and 7, Moses had already told them to take censers.</i> Thus this means: when Moses said to Korah be before God, they took their fire-pan. TOMORROW. This occurred on the day that Moses called to Dathan and Abiram.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See verse 12.</i> It is possible that he called them earlier. The latter appears correct because Scripture reads, <i>in the morning</i> (v. 5).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 5 tells us that Korah and his men were to bring the fire-pans as soon as morning came. This being the case, there would be very little time for Dathan and Abiram to be called.</i> WITH MOSES AND AARON. Moses and Aaron with them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our clause literally reads, and stood at the door of the tent of meeting and Moses and Aaron.</i> SEPARATE YOURSELVES. For they<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Moses and Aaron.</i> were with them in front of the entrance to the tent of meeting. AND THEY FELL UPON THEIR FACES. To pray. [O GOD.] The term <i>El</i> (God) indicates that God has the power to destroy them in a moment.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of <i>El</i> is mighty. See I.E. on Ex. 3:15.</i> God is <i>the God of the spirits</i>. This<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The phrase <i>the God of the spirits</i>.</i> explains the term <i>El</i>, for God can destroy them because their spirits are in His hand. SHALL ONE MAN SIN. The reference<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>One man</i>.</i> is to <i>Korah</i>, who assembled all of the congregation against Moses and Aaron. There are those who say that the meaning of <i>O God, the God of the spirits</i> is: God has the power to investigate human souls, for He is their God. God knows that one man, namely, Korah alone, sinned. He also knows if he [Korah] caused the others to sin.I believe that <i>Separate yourselves from among this congregation</i> refers to Korah and his congregation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the congregation spoken of is Korah’s congregation, not the congregation of Israel.</i> A fire went out and devoured and destroyed them in one moment. THE DWELLING OF KORAH. I believe that Korah had a tent for his household and his wealth. This tent was far from the camp of the Levites. The tents of Dathan and Abiram were close to Korah’s tent, for only Levites camped around the tabernacle.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence the need for the interpretation that Korah had a tent outside the camp of the Levites.</i> We learn from this verse that the bearer of the banner<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The tribe that carried the banner. For the banners, see Num. 2:1-34.</i> camped close to the camp of the Levites.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Korah’s tent was close to the tent of Dathan and Abiram. The Levites camped around the southern, western, and northern sides of the tabernacle (Num. 3:14-38). The Israelites camped around the four sides of the tabernacle (Num. 2:2). The family of Kohath camped on the south side (Num. 3:29). So did the tribe of Reuben (Num. 2:10). Now Korah’s tent was close to the tent of Dathan and Abiram, who came from the tribe of Reuben, because the tribe of Reuben bore the banner of the tribes that camped on the south and were thus close to the Levites.</i> AND THE ELDERS OF ISRAEL FOLLOWED HIM. I believe that the reference is to the chosen seventy elders.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 11:16.</i> AND TOUCH NOTHING OF THEIRS. For if one comes to save their money they will go down to the pit like them. IN ALL THEIR SINS. Because of all their sins.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the <i>bet</i> before the word <i>be-khol</i> (in all) is to be rendered because. Thus <i>be-khol chatotam</i> (in all their sins) means because of all their sins.</i> AND THEIR SONS. The reference is to adults. AND THEIR LITTLE ONES. Male and female minors. TO DO ALL THESE WORKS. To have the Levites take the place of the first-born. Note, it is a major and grievous act to the one who does not believe that God ordered the first-born to be removed from their position as <i>kohanim</i> and to have this status conferred only upon the family of Moses. All of this was done<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The first-born were removed and the Levites substituted in their place.</i> because of the incident of the golden calf, because <i>and offered burnt-offerings, and brought peace-offerings</i> (Ex. 32:6) speaks of the first-born who offered these sacrifices, for they alone were the <i>kohanim</i>. Also, the sons of Levi<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Alone.</i> killed those who served the calf.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The first-born did not join Moses in extirpating the worshippers of the calf. Thus the first-born showed themselves unfit to be <i>kohanim</i>.</i> There is a question here.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It isn’t clear what the question is. I believe it to be the issue of God changing His mind. According to medieval Jewish philosophy, God and His mind are one. Thus God’s mind is immutable. This being the case, how could He change His mind regarding the fitness of the first-born to serve as priests?</i> Its answer is found in the Torah portion which opens with the words <i>va-yelekh mosheh</i> (Deut. 31:1).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. there explains that God does not change. It is people who do. See I.E. on Deut. 31:16. Here I.E. is probably hinting that it wasn’t God who changed His mind but rather the first-born who changed by becoming unfit to serve as <i>kohanim</i>.</i> BUT IF THE LORD MAKE A NEW THING. Some say that the word <i>beri’ah</i> (a new thing) refers to the bringing forth of something that was never in existence.I have already explained that the word <i>beri’ah</i> is related to the word <i>u-vara</i> (hack) in <i>and hack them</i> (Ezek. 23:47).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Gen. 1:1 (Vol. 1, pp. 22,23).</i> Many cities<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Or countries. The text reads <i>medinot</i>.</i> have been split open, and those who dwelt in them have gone down to the pit.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is apparently to earthquakes.</i> The meaning of <i>bara</i> is to cut.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus according to I.E., <i>ve-im beri’ah yivra Adonai</i> (But if the Lord make a new thing) should be interpreted, but if God shall certainly split. An alternative interpretation of I.E. is: The meaning of <i>bara</i> is to decree. According to this interpretation I.E. renders <i>ve-im beri’ah yivra Adonai</i> (but if the Lord make a new thing) as, but if God shall decree.</i> AND THE GROUND OPEN HER MOUTH. The word <i>u-fatzetah</i> means and opened. Compare, <i>yiftzeh</i> (doth open) in <i>doth open his mouth</i> (Job 35:16).I have already hinted<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Gen. 1:26 (Vol. 1, p. 45).</i> that man’s highest soul,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The rational soul. See I.E. on Gen. 1:1 (Vol. 1, p. 25). I.E. believes that man has three souls, a vegetable, an animal and a rational soul. I.E. refers to the soul as “her” for the Hebrew word for soul is <i>neshamah</i>, which is a feminine noun.</i> which comes from the intermediary world,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the three worlds, see I.E. on Ex. 3:15 (Vol. 2, pp. 86-90).</i> employs human language when speaking of things above her,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Such as when speaking of God.</i> for the body is its palace.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">79</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here on earth. Hence it must employ corporeal metaphors. It is philosophically significant that I.E. refers to the body as a palace for the soul.</i> It similarly employs human language when speaking of things below her.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">80</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Such as the earth. Hence Scripture reads, <i>and the ground open her mouth</i>.</i> It does so in order that people understand her. AND THEIR HOUSEHOLDS. This is a general term for their wives, [grown] children, and their little ones. AND THEIR GOODS.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">81</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, the goods.</i> Which all of them possessed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">82</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>the goods</i> is short for all the goods which they possessed.</i> SO THEY…WENT DOWN. Its meaning is: when they went down, the earth closed and they were not seen.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">83</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Prima facie</i>, this verse repeats verse 32. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> AND THE EARTH CLOSED UPON THEM. The earth itself.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">84</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The verb <i>va-tekhas</i> (and closed upon then) literally means and covered. Our clause thus reads, and the earth covered them. Hence <i>va-yekhas</i> may be taken as transitive. In this case, it means that the earth covered them with something. Hence I.E. points out that <i>va-yekhas</i> is intransitive.</i> AND THEY PERISHED. For their children who were to take their place died.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">85</sup><i class=\"footnote\">One who dies without descendants perishes from the face of the earth.</i> AT THE CRY OF THEM. Because of their cry.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">86</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the <i>lamed</i> prefixed to <i>kolam</i> (their voice) means because of. The <i>lamed</i> usually means to.</i> [AND FIFTY MEN.] The <i>heh</i> of <i>ha-chamishim</i> (the fifty) is to be read as if written twice.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">87</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is also to be placed in front of the word <i>u-matayim</i> (and…fifty men). Our text, which reads <i>ha-chamishim u-matayim</i>, should be read as if written, <i>ha-chamishim ve-ha-matayim</i> (and…the two hundred and fifty men). The latter is the correct grammatical construction. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> Some say that Korah was among the ones who were swallowed. They offer as proof, <i>And the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed them up together with Korah</i> (Num. 26:10). Others say that Korah was burned. They offer, <i>with Korah, when that company died; what time the fire devoured</i> (<i>Ibid</i>.) as proof. Our sages say that Korah was burned and swallowed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">88</sup><i class=\"footnote\">San. 110:a.</i>I believe that only the place of Dathan and Abiram split open,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">89</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus it was only Dathan and Abiram and their families who were swallowed by the ground.</i> for no other place is mentioned.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">90</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture does not mention that any other place split open.</i> Korah was standing with his fire-pan with Aaron and the leaders of the congregation who were offering incense.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">91</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And were consumed by fire.</i> <i>With Korah</i> (Num. 26:10) is not connected to <i>and swallowed them up</i> (<i>Ibid</i>.) but rather to <i>when that company died</i> (<i>Ibid</i>.). This is the way the aforementioned verse is to be interpreted. If someone should argue and say, “Why isn’t Korah mentioned among those who were burned?” the answer is: once Scripture mentions that Korah’s company, which came to his aid, was burned, it is not necessary to mention Korah. For we know this by arguing from a minor to a major premise.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">92</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If Korah’s followers were burned, then Korah certainly was.</i> <i>Pharaoh’s chariots and his host hath He cast into the sea</i> (Ex. 15:4) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">93</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In that by employing a similar argument, we learn from this verse that Pharaoh died.</i> Moses does not mention in the song<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">94</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The song of Moses wherein <i>Pharaoh’s chariots and his host hath He cast into the sea</i> is stated.</i> that Pharaoh drowned. The truth is that Pharaoh drowned, for Scripture explicitly states, <i>But overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red Sea</i> (Ps. 136:15). The verse <i>that he fare not as Korah, and as his company</i> (Num. 17:5) is proof that Korah was among those who were burned.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">95</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the term company refers to the 250 men who were consumed by fire.</i> AND SCATTER THOU THE FIRE YONDER. From the altar. FOR THEY ARE BECOME HOLY. The fire-pans are holy because they [<i>Korah and his company</i>] offered them before the Lord. EVEN THE FIRE-PANS OF THESE MEN WHO HAVE SINNED. This explains <i>the fire-pans</i> (v. 2).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>The fire-pans</i> in verse 2 refers to the fire-pans of <i>these men who have sinned</i>.</i> AND LET THEM BE MADE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ve-asu otam</i> (literally, and they shall make them).</i> The reference is to the workers.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, and they shall make them means and the workers shall make them.</i> BEATEN PLATES. Compare, <i>And they did beat</i> (ve-yerakke’u) <i>the gold into thin plates</i> (Ex. 39:3).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the word <i>reku’e</i> (beaten) in our verse is similar in meaning to <i>va-yerakke’u</i> (and they did beat).</i> [FOR THEY ARE BECOME HOLY.] <i>Because they were offered before the Lord</i> explains <i>for they are become holy</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse literally reads, because they were offered before the Lord <i>and</i> they are become holy. I.E. believes this should be interpreted as if written, for they are become holy <i>because</i> they were offered before the Lord.</i> THAT THEY MAY BE A SIGN. A memorial and a mark.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Rashi, “For a memorial, that people will always say: These plates were from those who disputed the priesthood and were burnt.”</i> AND THEY BEAT THEM OUT. The beaters beat them out.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The subject is omitted. Hence I.E.’s comment. See I.E. on verse 3.</i> AS THE LORD SPOKE UNTO HIM BY THE HAND OF MOSES. <i>Unto him</i> (lo) refers to Aaron. Others say that <i>unto him</i> refers to Korah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>San</i>. 110a.</i> However, I believe the latter to be farfetched. ON THE MORROW. Of this day, for <i>mochorat</i> (morrow) is always connected to the previous day.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, it always refers to the next morrow. I.E. comments thus, for the word <i>machar</i> (morrow) can refer to a morrow in the far future.</i> YE HAVE KILLED. Its meaning is, what proof is this<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The fact that the 250 men who offered the incense were burned.</i> that the tribe of Levi is the chosen one, and that Aaron was chosen to be <i>kohen gadol</i>?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">High priest.</i> It is possible that those who offered the fire-pans were burned because of your prayer<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">You prayed that they be burned.</i> or through your knowledge of the sciences.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">You may have arranged for some combustible material to be mixed with the incense.</i> WHEN THE CONGREGATION WAS ASSEMBLED.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>be-hikkahel</i>.</i> Whenever the word <i>kehillah</i> (assembly)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, a word from the root <i>kof, heh, lamed</i>.</i> is followed by the word <i>al</i> (on),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As it does in our verse, which reads, <i>be-hikkahel ha-edah al mosheh ve-al aaron</i> (when the congregation was assembled against Moses and against Aaron). The word <i>al</i> usually means on, not against. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> it refers to an assembly for the sake of quarreling. AND MOSES AND AARON CAME. Because they saw that God’s glory appeared. GET YOU UP. For they sat in the tabernacle, which was on the high ground in the camp of the Levites, as I explained in my comments on <i>Get you up</i> (Num. 16:24).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. apparently renders <i>herommu</i> (Get you up) as, remove yourself from the high place. He cites Num. 16:24, but he actually made his comments on 16:12.</i> AND THEY FELL UPON THEIR FACES. To pray. TAKE THY FIRE-PAN. The reference is to a specific fire-pan.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence the word <i>machtah</i> (fire-pan) has the definite article <i>ha</i> prefixed to it. The literal meaning of <i>kach et ha-machtah</i> is, take the fire-pan. According to I.E. <i>the fire-pan</i> in our verse means the specific fire-pan used to offer incense (Krinsky).</i> AND LAY INCENSE THEREON. Scripture does not say, and lay “the” incense on.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">“The” incense would refer to the incense usually burned in the tabernacle. Since the definite article is not prefaced to <i>ketroret</i> (incense), it refers to another incense.</i> The intelligent will understand.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The difference between the two types of incense. Some of the commentators on I.E. believe that he was of the opinion that the incense used by Moses to stop the plague had the power to clean the air of pollutants that caused the plague (Krinsky, Filwarg).</i> AND CARRY. The word <i>holekh</i> (and carry) is an imperative.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the <i>hifil. Holekh</i> looks like a <i>kal</i> participle. In this case the word would mean goes or walks. However, the context negates such a rendering. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> It is similar to the word <i>hoshev</i> (make to dwell)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A <i>hifil</i> imperative.</i> in <i>make thy father…to dwell</i> (Gen. 47:6). <i>Holekh</i> comes from the same root as <i>helikhi</i> (take away) (Ex. 2:9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its root is <i>yod, lamed, kaf</i>.</i> It means bring,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ve-holekh meherah el ha-edah</i> means: and bring (and carry) the fire-pan quickly to the congregation.</i> the idea being it<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The incense-bearing fire-pan.</i> should go with you. [AND AARON RETURNED.] <i>And Aaron returned</i> is connected to the section that follows,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 15 is connected to verse 16.</i> even though it is separated.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to the <i>masorah</i>, verse 16 starts a new section.</i> I have already given you many such examples.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where verses that are in different section are connected. See I.E. on Gen. 1:9.</i> When Aaron returned and the plague was stayed, God spoke.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is the meaning of verses 15 and 16.</i> RODS. Some say that the rod of Levi is not God’s rod, for God’s rod was already known.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this view the rod of the Lord (the rod employed by Moses to perform miracles in Egypt) was made of different material from that of the other rods.</i> Why then write Aaron’s name on it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If the rod of the tribe of Levi was God’s rod.</i> Others say that the rod<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">God’s rod.</i> was like the other rods. There was no difference between them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this view the rod of God was the rod of the tribe of Levi. In this opinion God’s rod was made of the same material as all the other rods. Hence it was necessary to write Aaron’s name on it (Filwarg).</i> This interpretation appears correct to me. [ONE FOR EACH FATHER’S HOUSE.] Each father’s house means each tribe. Reuben and Simeon are examples.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of tribes and fathers’ houses.</i> [FOR THERE SHALL BE ONE ROD.] Scripture tells us that there shall be one rod for the tribe of Levi because this tribe was divided into <i>kohanim</i> and Levites.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence one might think that each of these divisions has a separate rod.</i> WHERE I MEET WITH YOU. Permanently.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture uses the future form (<i>ivva’ed</i>).</i> I WILL MAKE TO CEASE. The word <i>ve-hashikkoti</i> (I will make to cease) comes from a double root.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its root is <i>shin, kaf, kaf</i>.</i> It is similar to the word <i>ve-hatimmoti</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>tav, mem, mem</i>. Both words are <i>hifils</i>.</i> (and I will consume) in <i>and I will consume thy filthiness from out of thee</i> (Ezek. 22:15). It is related to the word <i>shakhakhah</i> (assuaged) in <i>then was the king’s wrath assuaged</i> (Esth. 7:10).<i>Ve-hashikkoti</i> (I will make to cease) means I [God] will find rest.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. our clause reads: I will find rest from the murmuring of the children of Israel.</i> Scripture employs human language.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When a person is greatly bothered he says, I seek rest from those who trouble me.</i> The rod of Levi was among the twelve. Behold, the tribe of Joseph was represented by one rod.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The tribe of Joseph was divided into Manasseh and Ephraim. These are usually counted as two separate tribes. However, here they are not. Otherwise there would have been thirteen rods.</i> FOR THE HOUSE OF LEVI. The word <i>matteh</i> (rod of) is to be read as if written twice. Our verse<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which literally reads, the rod of Aaron of the house of Levi.</i> is to be read as if written: the rod of Aaron, the rod of the house of Levi. AND BORE RIPE ALMONDS. The word <i>va-yigmol</i> (and bore ripe) is related to the word <i>va-yigammal</i> (and was weaned) in <i>And the child grew, and was weaned</i> (Gen. 21:8). Many say that the rod<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of the tribe of Levi.</i> came from an almond tree because the rod bore almonds. However, this is not proof. The word <i>shekedim</i> (almonds) has midrashically been related to the word <i>shoked</i> (watch) in I <i>watch over My word to perform it</i> (Jer. 1:12).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">God (watches) is quick to punish those who oppose the priesthood. See Rashi.</i> AND THEY LOOKED. At the handwriting of each one. AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL SPOKE UNTO MOSES, SAYING. It is enough for us that we perished and were undone.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s paraphrase of verse 27.</i> Now, in addition, everyone that comes near the tabernacle will die like those who were burnt. O that we should cease dying.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s paraphrase of verse 28.</i> God then spoke to Aaron, who was the leader of the tribe of Levi, and cautioned him that the Levites not cause the Israelites to stumble.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s paraphrase of Num. 18:1.</i> The meaning of <i>unto Aaron</i> (Num. 18:1) is that God communicated with Aaron through Moses. On the other hand, the clause may be taken at face value,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That God spoke directly to Aaron.</i> because Aaron too was a prophet. Also, this section<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In addition to Num. 16. See I.E. on Num. 16:1.</i> is proof that the rebellion took place in the desert of Sinai when the tabernacle was erected and the Levites were chosen, and the first-born were disqualified.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the section tells us that the Israelites were convinced that God chose the tribe of Levi only after their rod miraculously produced almonds.</i> THE INIQUITY OF THE SANCTUARY. Which is on the inside of the veil.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which hung in front of the Holy of Holies. See Ex. 26:31-36 and Lev. 16:1-3.</i> Its meaning is, if you do not guard the sanctuary the sin is upon you. [AND THY FATHERS’ HOUSE.] For they carried the sanctuary.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The children of Kohath carried the tabernacle (Num. 10:21). Kohath was the father of Amram, the father of Aaron.</i> THE INIQUITY OF YOUR PRIESTHOOD. If you do not keep the laws of the priesthood, the sin is upon you. THE TRIBE OF THY FATHER. The reference is to Levi.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>the tribe of Levi, the tribe of thy father</i> is to be understood as the tribe of Levi, the tribe of your patriarch Levi.</i> Our sages say that <i>the tribe of thy father</i> is to be taken at face value.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference being to Amram.</i> However, I believe that it is to be explained in keeping with my earlier interpretation. Our verse is to be read as if written, the tribe of Levi which is the tribe of your father.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Matteh levi shevet avikha</i> is to be read as if written, <i>matteh levi she-hu shevet avikha</i>.</i> THAT THEY MAY BE JOINED. The meaning of <i>ve-yillavu</i> is similar to <i>ve-nispechu</i> (and they shall join) (Is. 14:1). So too the word <i>yillaveh</i> (be joined) in <i>Now this time will my husband be joined</i> (Gen. 29:34). Look, the Levites are joined by their names.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>bi-shemam</i>. Their name indicates that they have joined Aaron. Some editions read, <i>ke-shemam</i>. In this case I.E. reads: The Levites are joined [to Aaron] as their names [indicate].</i> THOU AND THY SONS WITH THEE. You and your sons, and not the Levites, shall abide before the tent of meeting. NEITHER THEY, NOR YE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>gam hem, gam attem</i> (literally, also they, also you).</i> It is the way of Scripture to speak in this manner.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To say also…also… (<i>gam… gam…</i>).</i> Compare, <i>Rule thou over us, also you, also thy son</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Jud. 8:22). That means this one is like this one.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the same law applies to them and to you.</i> [AND THEY SHALL BE JOINED UNTO THEE.] So that you do not need the services of a stranger, namely, an Israelite. AS A SERVICE OF GIFT. And someone who is a common man in regard to the priesthood even if he be a Levite [shall be put to death]. The burnt offering of Samuel, who was a Levi, is no argument<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That a person who is not a <i>kohen</i> may offer a burnt offering, for Samuel offered a burnt offering. See I Sam. 7:9.</i> for it was a temporary ruling, as was the case of Gideon.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Gideon, who was from the tribe of Manasseh, was commanded by God’s angel to personally offer a burnt offering. See Jud. 6:26.</i> FOR A CONSECRATED PORTION.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>le-moshchah</i>.</i> I have already explained this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to one of I.E.’s interpretations in Lev. 7:35, the word <i>le-moshchah</i> means for greatness.</i> OF THE MOST HOLY THINGS. For there are offerings that have a lesser degree of sacredness.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Such as peace offerings.</i> RESERVED FROM THE FIRE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>esh</i>.</i> Of all that they sanctify,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That they offer on the altar.</i> for <i>isheh</i> (fire-offering)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A common term for a sacrifice.</i> and <i>esh</i> (fire) mean the same,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus <i>reserved from the fire</i> (esh) means reserved from the fire offerings.</i> the <i>heh</i> of <i>isheh</i> being superfluous. AND EVERY MEAL-OFFERING OF THEIRS. After they sanctify the memorial part thereof.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>azkarah</i>. The latter refers to the portion of the meal offering offered on the altar. See Lev. 2:2.</i> [AND EVERY SIN-OFFERING OF THEIRS, AND EVERY GUILT-OFFERING OF THEIRS.] After they offer the designated organs of the sin offering and the guilt offering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">On the altar.</i> WHICH THEY MAY RENDER<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>yashivu</i> (literally, which they return).</i>  UNTO ME. The reference is to a trespass.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Money paid in restitution for the unauthorized use of sacred property (<i>me’ilah</i>). See Lev. 5:15.</i> Now the meal offering, the sin offering, and the guilt offering are holier than the peace offerings.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus they, not the peace offerings (<i>shelamim</i>), are mentioned in our verse, which speaks of the more holy sacrifices.</i> IN A MOST HOLY PLACE SHALT THOU EAT THEREOF. Even in a most holy place, namely, in the tent of meeting shalt thou eat thereof. The tent of meeting is called a most holy place in contrast to the courtyard of the tabernacle.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">However, it is not considered a most holy place in contrast to the Holy of Holies. Thus the sacrifices listed in our verse cannot be eaten in the Holy of Holies.</i> THEIR GIFT. A <i>tav</i> is missing in the word <i>mattanam</i> (their gift).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The usual Hebrew word for gift is <i>mattanah</i>. Thus the word for <i>their gift</i> should be <i>mattanatam</i> rather than <i>mattanam</i>.</i> <i>Mattanam</i> is similar to the word <i>pinnah</i> (corner), which has the meaning of <i>pinnatah</i> (her corner) in <i>Passing</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Reading <i>over</i>. Some texts have <i>holekhat</i> (going). However, Prov. 7:8 reads <i>over</i>.</i> <i>through the street near her corner</i> (Prov. 7:8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>pinnah</i> is analogous to <i>mattanam</i> in that it is a feminine noun, but it is connected to the pronominal suffix as if it were masculine.</i> On the other hand, we may be dealing with two forms.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the word gift (<i>mattan</i> and <i>mattnah</i>). <i>Mattanam</i> is the word <i>mattan</i> plus the pronominal suffix.</i> ALL THE BEST OF THE OIL. <i>Chelev</i> (the best) means the most precious, the best. The reference is to the cream of the oil,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The top of the oil.</i> for the word <i>yitzhar</i> (oil) means light.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>tzahor</i>. Others read <i>nahor</i>. Both mean light.</i> Its root is <i>tzadi, heh, resh</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The same root as the one for light.</i> The reference is to the fat of the olive oil. THE FIRST-RIPE FRUITS OF ALL THAT IS IN THEIR LAND.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew literally reads: The first of all that is in their land. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> The first of all the fruits of the ground. [EVERY ONE THAT IS CLEAN IN THY HOUSE MAY EAT THEREOF.] This verse warns that only the clean in your house may eat of fat things<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in verse 12.</i> and of the breast of waving<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Lev. 7:34.</i> and the thigh of heaving<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ibid</i>.</i> and also everything dedicated<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Anything set aside for God.</i> by an Israelite. The Israelite shall not eat of the latter, for it belongs to God. You [the <i>kohen</i>] may eat of it. SHALT THOU SURELY REDEEM. You shall accept the redemption money of the first-born. You shall similarly accept the redemption of the first-born of the unclean beast.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ex. 13:13 <i>And every firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb</i>.</i> AND THEIR REDEMPTION-MONEY. This only refers to the first-born of humans.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See previous verse.</i> THOU SHALT NOT REDEEM. For <i>they are holy</i>. You shall not accept their redemption money. Many say that the word redeem<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, the statement <i>thou shalt not redeem</i> refers to the Israelite. He shall not buy back the animal from the <i>kohen</i>. See Filwarg and Weiser.</i> refers to the Israelites. However,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is either a continuation of the previous opinion or I.E.’s comment upon it.</i> the reverse is true for the word <i>tokhelunu</i> (thou shalt eat it) (Deut. 15:20), in which the prefix thou refers to the <i>kohen</i>, for <i>Thou shalt eat it</i> refers to the one who is obligated to eat it. COVENANT OF SALT. A “cut covenant.”<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Biblical term for making a covenant is, to cut a covenant. Hence I.E.’s note that a salt covenant is a variant of a cut covenant.</i> The word <i>melach</i> (salt) is related to the word <i>melechah</i> (salt)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In that both words have the meaning of cut.</i> in <i>A fruitful land turned into salt</i> (Ps. 107:34). A salted place is said to be cut off, for nothing grows there. Compare, <i>brimstone, and salt</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The verse reads: <i>brimstone, and salt, and a burning, that it is not sown, nor beareth, nor any grass groweth</i>.</i> (Deut. 29:22). IN RETURN. The word <i>chelef</i> means in return. AND HENCEFORTH…SHALL NOT COME NIGH. This<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word henceforth.</i> was written because of Korah’s assembly. BUT THE LEVITES ALONE SHALL DO THE SERVICE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our clause literally reads, But the Levites he (<i>hu</i>) shall do the service of the tent of meeting. Hence the interpretations which follow.</i> The word <i>hu</i> means himself. Others say that <i>hu</i> is the object.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This interpretation renders <i>hu</i> as it. It maintains that <i>But the Levites he</i> (hu) <i>shall do the service of the tent of meeting</i> should be interpreted: But the Levites shall do the service of it (<i>hu</i>), namely, the tent of meeting (Weiser). Filwarg claims that <i>hu</i> refers to the <i>kohen</i>. In this case, <i>But the Levites he</i> (hu) <i>shall do the service of the tent of meeting</i> should be interpreted: But the Levites shall do the service of him (the <i>kohen</i>) and of the tent of meeting.</i> However, this is incorrect, for the service of the tent of meeting is the object.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of <i>ve-avad</i> (shall do the service).</i> AND THEY SHALL BEAR THEIR INIQUITY. If they do not keep the charge. Now, the tithe is their inheritance. I therefore stated: [<i>and among the children of Israel they shall have no inheritance</i>]. AND THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES, SAYING. To Moses, not to Aaron, for Scripture goes on to say that the Levites are to give a tithe to Aaron from the tithe [they received].<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It would be out of place for Aaron to issue such a command.</i> AND AS THE FULNESS. I have already explained the meaning of the word <i>mele’ah</i> (fullness).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 22:25, where he explains <i>mele’ah</i> as referring to wine.</i> OF ALL THE BEST THEREOF.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, of all the fat thereof (<i>chelbo</i>). Hence I.E.’s explanation.</i> The meaning of <i>mi-kol chelbo</i> is, of all the best thereof. <i>And ye shall eat the fat</i> (chelev) <i>of the land</i> (Gen. 45:18) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is, And you shall eat of the best of the land.</i> EVEN THE HALLOWED PART THEREOF. For the tenth part thereof is the holy part.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus <i>the hallowed part thereof</i> refers to its tithe.</i> [WHEN YE SET APART THE BEST THEREOF.] This has already been mentioned by Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the previous verse.</i> It is repeated in order to connect it to that which follows. Its meaning is, you<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Levites.</i> are prohibited to eat of it<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the tithe given to you.</i> until you set apart the best thereof,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A tenth thereof.</i> and afterwards it<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The remainder.</i> shall be counted [as the grain of the threshing floor] and you<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Levites.</i> may eat it in every clean place.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. interprets <i>every place</i> as in every clean place. However, according to the <i>halakha</i> the Levite may eat the remaining tithe even in a cemetery. See Rashi.</i> AND YE SHALL BEAR NO SIN BY REASON OF IT. This means when you set apart the best of it<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A tenth of the tithe.</i> you shall bear no sin through it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By not tithing (Rashi).</i> Furthermore, when you give the hallowed part thereof,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To the <i>kohen</i>.</i> the sacred donations of the children of Israel will be preserved.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The tithes which the children of Israel gave to the Levites will not be desecrated.</i> However, if you do not offer to tithe, then you will bear a sin, for you will have trespassed the commandment and profaned the holy things of the children of Israel because you ate its holy part. THIS IS THE STATUTE. This chapter was also<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Like the incident of Korah. See I.E. on Num 16:1.</i> stated at Sinai. It was given when God commanded <i>that they put out of the camp…whosoever is unclean by the dead</i> (Num. 5:2). There were also people who were unclean by coming into contact with a dead body when Passover<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Celebrated by Israel in the second year after the Exodus.</i> arrived (Num. 9:6). This chapter is placed here<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Following the laws dealing with the tithes.</i> because it relates to the <i>kohen</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>kohen</i> played a major role in the ritual of the red heifer.</i> A RED HEIFER, FAULTLESS. The heifer is not to be small.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the Bible speaks of a <i>parah</i> (cow), not of an <i>eglah</i> (heifer).</i> The Gaon<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rabbi Saadiah Gaon.</i> says that <i>the water of sprinkling</i> (v. 13)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which cleansed the unclean but made the clean unclean.</i> is similar to honey, which is injurious to the one who has red bile<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In medieval medicine red bile was believed to cause a volatile nature. See I.E. on Ex. 23:25 (Vol. 2, p. 516).</i> but stimulates the one who has phlegm.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">An excess of phlegm. This causes a phlegmatic nature.</i> However, there is no need for this interpretation. AND SHE SHALL BE BROUGHT FORTH. Someone shall bring her forth.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The literal meaning of <i>ve-hotzi otah</i> is: and he shall bring her forth. However, since Eleazar did not actually slaughter the cow, I.E. believes that he did not bring it out. Hence his comment.</i> Or it means he shall have her brought forth by his command.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, it means he shall command that it be brought out.</i> The same applies to <i>ve-shachat</i> (and she shall be slain),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which literally means: and he shall slaughter it.</i> for Eleazar did not slaughter the heifer. The word <i>le-fanav</i> (before his face) proves the latter.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If Eleazar did the slaughtering, then what point would there be for Scripture to say “and he [Eleazar] shall slaughter it before his [Eleazar’s] face.”</i> AND THE HEIFER SHALL BE BURNT IN HIS SIGHT. <i>Ve-saraf et ha-parah</i> (and the heifer shall be burnt)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The literal meaning of <i>ve-saraf et ha-parah</i> is: and he shall burn the cow.</i> is to be rendered, and someone shall burn the heifer. The term <i>le’enav</i> (in his sight)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Eleazar’s sight.</i> proves the latter interpretation. CEDAR-WOOD. As in the case of a leper.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Cedar wood was used in cleansing a leper (Lev. 14:4).</i> I have hinted there at some secret.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. points out that there is a connection between leprosy and death. Hence cedar is employed in cleansing someone who has been contaminated by contract with a leper or a dead body.</i> THEN THE PRIEST SHALL WASH HIS CLOTHES. The <i>kohen</i> who burns it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Prima facie</i>, the reference is to the cow. However, in view of the fact that the latter is stated in the next verse, some say that the reference is to the cedar. See Filwarg and Krinsky.</i> AND THE PRIEST SHALL BE UNCLEAN. The meaning of <i>ve-tame ha-kohen</i> (and the priest shall be unclean) is, and the <i>kohen</i> has already been unclean,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>kohen</i> has been made unclean by performing the ritual. According to this interpretation the <i>vav</i> prefixed to <i>ve-tame</i> means “and.” Hence the meaning of <i>ve-tame ha-kohen</i> is: and the <i>kohen</i> was unclean.</i> or, as some say, the <i>kohen</i> shall be unclean.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In this case <i>ve-tame</i> is a future form meaning: and he shall be unclean. The <i>vav</i> is a conversive <i>vav</i>.</i> <i>Until the even</i> refers to the eating of sacred food. A MAN THAT IS CLEAN. The reference is not to the <i>kohen</i> who burns the cow.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Another <i>kohen</i> does this (Krinsky). According to the <i>Sifre</i> on this verse, any clean person, even if not a <i>kohen</i>, may gather the ashes of the red cow. However, I.E. seems to believe that this task was assigned to a <i>kohen</i>.</i> A WATER OF SPRINKLING. The meaning of <i>niddah</i> (sprinkling) is distance.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The person who is unclean is distanced from the sanctuary. Thus <i>me-niddah</i> (water of sprinkling) means the water of the distant, i.e., the water to be used to purify the distant.</i> Compare, <i>me-naddekhem</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Me-naddekhem</i> comes from the same root as <i>niddah</i>. When one hates another person, he keeps his distance from him.</i> (that hate you) (Is. 66:5). AND BE UNCLEAN UNTIL THE EVEN. Once Scripture states that the gatherer of the ashes shall wash his clothes there is no need to mention that he shall wash in water.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For Scripture earlier linked the two. See verse 7.</i> AND UNTO THE STRANGER THAT SOJOURNETH AMONG THEM. For the Land of Israel is holy because God’s glory is there.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence even a stranger (a non-Jew) must abide by this rule.</i> EVEN ANY MAN’S DEAD BODY. Be it the body of a Jew or a non-Jew. MAN’S…BODY. Not the body of an animal. SHALL BE UNCLEAN. The meaning of <i>ve-tame</i> is, shall be unclean. It is a future form, for the <i>vav</i> changes the verb<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Tame</i>, a third person perfect.</i> from a perfect to an imperfect. However, I believe that <i>ve-tame</i> is in the past tense.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its <i>vav</i> being conjunctive. Thus the meaning of <i>ve-tame</i> is: and he was unclean. The import of our verse thus is: and after being unclean for seven days he shall purify himself. See I.E. on verse 7 and the notes thereto.</i> THE SAME SHALL PURIFY HIMSELF THEREWITH. The meaning of <i>hu yitchate vo</i> (the same shall purify himself therewith) is, he shall remove his sin therewith.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, by undergoing this ritual he will remove the potentiality of entering the sanctuary in a state of impurity and thus sinning. The word <i>chet</i> means sin. Hence I.E.’s interpretation.</i> On the other hand, the word <i>yitchate</i> (shall purify himself) is similar to the word <i>techatteni</i> (purge me) in <i>Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean</i> (Ps. 51:9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>yitchatta</i> means purify.</i> Those who are acquainted with the secret of numbers know that the number three is like the number seven.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The number seven has mystical significance in that seven days make up a lunar quarter. The number three is close to half of the number 7. See I.E. on Gen. 34:25 and the notes thereto (Vol. 1, p. 330).</i> BECAUSE THE WATER OF SPRINKLING. Some say that that <i>me niddah</i> (the water of sprinkling) has the same meaning as <i>me niddah</i> (water of sprinkling) in <i>it shall be purified with the water of sprinkling</i> (Num. 31:23).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, both refer to water mixed with the ashes of the red heifer. Num. 31:23 deals with the purification of utensils captured from non-Jews. I.E. prefaces these remarks with “some say” because, according to the rabbis, Num. 31:23 refers to water in which a menstruant immerses herself.</i> WAS NOT DASHED. The word <i>zorak</i> (dashed) refers to the water.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though <i>zorak</i> is singular and <i>me</i> (water of) is plural.</i> IS YET. The word <i>od</i> (is yet) means continuously.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He is continuously unclean until sprinkled.</i> Compare, <i>od</i> (while) in <i>While the earth remaineth</i> (Gen. 8:22). IN A TENT. A house has the same law as a tent. Scripture mentions a tent because Israel then lived in tents. <i>That killeth an ox, or lamb, or goat, in the camp</i> (Lev. 17:3) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The law laid down in Lev. 17:3 applies equally to a town. Scripture speaks of a camp because Israel then lived in tents in a camp.</i> AND EVERY THING THAT IS IN THE TENT. Garments.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the next verse deals with vessels.</i> COVERING CLOSE-BOUND. Two coverings.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture reads, <i>tzamid, petil</i> (close bound). According to I.E. each one of these terms refers to a covering. The <i>tzamid</i> goes over the opening, while the petil goes round about the above covering and the rim of the utensil (Krinsky). Others claim that I.E. believes that the cover is made of two parts. See Krinsky, Filwarg, and Weiser.</i> OR A GRAVE. Of a human being. AND FOR THE UNCLEAN THEY SHALL TAKE. See, Scripture explains how one who comes into contact with the dead shall purge himself.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Earlier, in verse 12, Scripture had said, <i>the same shall purify himself therewith</i>. However, it did not describe the procedure. Now it does.</i> A CLEAN PERSON. The reference is most probably to a <i>kohen</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For <i>kohanim</i> are acquainted with the laws of purification.</i> BUT THE MAN THAT SHALL BE UNCLEAN. Scripture has already mentioned, <i>Whosoever toucheth the dead…that soul shall be cut off from Israel</i> (v. 13). It now warns the one who touches a bone or a grave [not to defile the sanctuary]. SHALL BE UNCLEAN UNTIL EVEN. And shall not become clean until he washes. AND WHATSOEVER THE UNCLEAN PERSON TOUCHETH SHALL BE UNCLEAN. The reference is to one who has become unclean by touching a dead body, a bone, or a grave. SHALL BE UNCLEAN UNTIL EVEN. And washes.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 7.</i> IN THE FIRST MONTH. In the fortieth year.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Following the Exodus.</i> Look, the Torah does not contain any act or prophecy except in the first and the fortieth year.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture describes what happened in the first and the last year of Israel’s sojourn in the wilderness. What happened in the other years is ignored. Actually the Book of Numbers opens with a command to Moses in the second month of the second year. Filwarg explains that I.E. was not being precise. Some editions read, “except for the first year, the fortieth year.” The latter is to be interpreted as if written, and the fortieth year.</i> [AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, EVEN THE WHOLE CONGREGATION, CAME.] Scripture states this because the generation that left Egypt died in the wilderness and they who were entering Canaan came to the desert of Zin.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The phrase <i>even the whole congregation</i> appears to be unnecessary. I.E. says that it refers to those about to enter Canaan. They are now the complete congregation, for none of them need die in the wilderness. Rashi comments similarly.</i> AND THE PEOPLE ABODE IN KADESH. For they dwelt there for many days.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture states, <i>and the people abode in Kadesh</i>, because they dwelt there for many days.</i> The latter is clearly stated in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Deut. 1:46, <i>So ye abode in Kadesh many days</i>.</i> AND THERE WAS NO WATER FOR THE CONGREGATION. Scripture tells of two incidents.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That happened in Kadesh.</i> One, the death of Miriam. Two, the death of Aaron and Moses and their failure to enter the land.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. considers this one incident, for the latter was dependent upon the former.</i> It begins by telling the cause of the latter. AND THE PEOPLE STROVE. <i>Va-yarev</i> (strove) is a <i>hifil</i>. WHEN OUR BRETHREN PERISHED. <i>Bi-geva</i> (when…perished) is an infinitive. It is similar to <i>ki-shekav</i> (when…shall sleep) in <i>when my lord the king shall sleep with his fathers</i> (I Kings 1:21). OUR BRETHREN. The generation that died in the desert. They were servants of the Lord.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture states, <i>our brethren perished</i>. Why add, <i>before the Lord</i>? According to I.E., <i>before the Lord</i> indicates that they worshipped the Lord.</i> AND WHY HAVE YE BROUGHT. This was addressed to Moses and Aaron, for Scripture goes on to say, <i>and they assembled themselves together against Moses and against Aaron</i> (v. 2). Scripture reads, <i>And the people strove with Moses</i>, (v. 3) because their quarrel with Moses was more intense.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Than their quarrel with Aaron.</i> HAVE YE MADE US TO COME UP. <i>He’elitunu</i> (have ye made us to come up) is irregular.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Although this form is grammatically correct, it is not employed in Scripture (Weiser).</i> AND MOSES AND AARON WENT<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, va-yavo’u. This literally means, and they came.</i> FROM THE PRESENCE OF THE ASSEMBLY. Like those who flee.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse is to be rendered, And Moses and Aaron fled from the presence of the assembly. I.E. interprets thus because Scripture reads, <i>from the presence</i> (mi-pene) <i>of the assembly</i>. I.E. believes that the latter indicates that they fled.</i> AND FELL UPON THEIR FACES. To pray. Other interpret, to prophetically inquire of God. TAKE THE ROD. Many interpretations are offered for this incident.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The sin of Moses and Aaron.</i> There is an individual opinion that Moses sinned because he said to Israel, who are the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: <i>Hear now, ye rebels</i> (v. 10). However, if this were the case why did he again say,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">After being punished.</i> <i>ye have been rebellious against the Lord</i> (Deut. 9:7). Others say that the word <i>ve-dibbartem</i> (and speak ye) has the meaning, and ye shall strike. It is similar to the word <i>va-tedabber</i> (and destroyed) in <i>and destroyed all the seed royal</i> (II Chron. 22:10). However, this is incorrect, for <i>va-tedabber</i> is related to the word <i>dever</i> (destruction) or to the word <i>yadber</i> (he subdueth) in <i>He subdueth peoples under us</i> (Ps. 47:4). <i>Va-tedabber</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In II Chron. 22:10.</i> thus means, and destroyed. Indeed, it so reads in the other book.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its parallel in the Book of Kings. We read there, <i>and destroyed</i> (va-te’abbed) <i>all the seed royal</i> (II Kings 11:1).</i> The meaning of <i>ve-dibbartem el ha-sela</i> (and speak ye unto the rock) thus is,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation.</i> and ye shall destroy the rock.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Not, and you shall hit the rock.</i> Furthermore, if this is the meaning of the word,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If <i>ve-dibbartem</i> means, and you shall strike.</i> why was Moses punished? The above commentaries answer, because he hit the rock twice. However, if this is the case why was Aaron punished?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Aaron did not strike the rock.</i> Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen the Spaniard, of blessed memory, says that some signs<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Miracles.</i> are performed by word of mouth, others by action and speech, as in the case of the salt<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Some editions read <i>millat</i> (the incident of).</i> which Elisha cast into the water.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>And he</i> (Elisha) <i>went forth unto the spring of the waters, and cast salt therein, and said, Thus saith the Lord: I have healed these waters; there shall be not be from thence any more death or miscarrying</i>, (II Kings 2:21).</i> God commanded Moses to take the staff and strike the rock as he did in the case of the rock [at Horeb].<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ex. 17:6.</i> He added the word <i>ve-dibbartem</i> (and speak ye)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In our case.</i> so that the water would flow via the speech and the blow. Because Israel angered him, Moses said, are we to bring you forth water from the rock? What Moses meant<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By <i>are we to bring you forth water out of the rock</i>?</i> was, we do not have the power to bring water out of the rock. We can only do so by the power of God. Now Moses did not make himself clear. People thought what he said was that God cannot bring water out of the rock. This is the meaning of <i>because ye sanctified Me not in the midst of the children of Israel</i> (Deut. 32:51). Rabbi Moses offered proof from the words of the poet who said, <i>For they embittered his spirit, And he spoke rashly with his lip</i> (Ps. 106:33). The sin was thus in his expressing, not by striking [the rock]. However, this too is incorrect, for Moses said, <i>are we to bring you forth water out of this rock</i> (v. 10). Why was Aaron punished?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If Moses didn’t make himself understood.</i> Furthermore, no speech is mentioned in the Torah’s description of the act of striking the rock.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus a verbal pronouncement was not part of this event.</i> The proof offered<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From Ps. 106:33.</i> by Rabbi Moses is no proof because the meaning of <i>For they embittered his spirit</i> is that they embittered God’s spirit. Scripture similarly writes, <i>But they rebelled, and grieved His holy spirit</i> (Is. 63:10). This is the meaning of <i>They angered Him also at the waters of Meribah</i> (Ps. 106:32). It means they angered God.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, “him” refers to God, not to Moses.</i> Scripture similarly states, <i>These are the waters of Meribah, where the children of Israel strove with the Lord</i> (Num. 20:13).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus “him” in <i>they angered Him also at the waters of Meribah</i>, refers to God.</i> Scripture says, <i>And it went ill with Moses because of them</i> (Ps. 106:32) because they embittered God’s spirit, and He decreed that Moses not enter the land.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s interpretation of Ps. 106:32.</i> Others say that the meaning of speak to the rock can only mean strike the rock, for a rock cannot hear.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. appears to be referring to Rashbam. It should be noted that Rashbam answers I.E.’s question.</i> Now if this is so, why was Moses punished?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He did what he was instructed to, viz., to strike the rock.</i> Some say that Moses and Aaron were punished because they did not sing a song of praise<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Unto the Lord for giving them water.</i> as in <i>Spring up, O well-sing ye unto it</i> (Num. 21:17). They say that this is the meaning of <i>because ye sanctified Me not</i> (Deut. 32:51).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is, you did not sing a song of praise to me.</i> Others say that God commanded Moses and Aaron to speak to the rock, but they did not speak to it. On the contrary, Moses struck the rock.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is the opinion of Rashi. See Rashi on verse 11.<br>His interpretation is in keeping with the literal meaning of the text.</i> Therefore they were both punished and they were told, <i>ye trespassed</i> (Deut. 32:51); <i>ye rebelled</i> (v. 24); <i>ye believed not in Me</i> (v. 12), and <i>ye sanctified Me not</i> (Deut. 32:52). Those who are guided by reason<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And do not take Scripture literally when it is opposes reason.</i> say that it is impossible that a messenger of God would alter God’s word.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If God told Moses to speak to the rock, then Moses would not strike the rock.</i> If Moses transformed God’s word, how can we believe his Torah?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">What assurance do we have that Moses did not alter the Torah?</i> However, the aforementioned<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Those who said that God told Moses to speak to the rock but that he struck the rock.</i> also spoke incorrectly, for if Moses had altered a commandment he would have been punished immediately.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Moses was not punished immediately. His punishment was delayed.</i> Look, Moses was punished with regard to something which was not an eternal commandment and not a law given to Israel. Nor did he knowingly violate God’s command. He only did so inadvertently because Israel angered him. Moses clearly said, <i>Also the Lord was angry with me for your sakes</i> (Deut. 1:<i>37)</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which shows that he was not punished for deliberately violating God’s command.</i> Others say that Israel told Moses<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The text does not state this. These commentaries assume it.</i> to bring water out of a different rock.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Than the one he was commanded to speak to.</i> They offer <i>this rock</i> as proof (v. 10).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Are we to bring you forth water out of <span class=\"underline\">this</span> rock</i>? implies that we cannot bring water out of <span class=\"underline\">this</span> rock, but we can out of another, that is, the rock about which God commanded us.</i> However, Moses was afraid to alter God’s word.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For this was not the rock he was commanded to strike.</i> Moses was punished because he did not believe that he would be able to bring forth water from the rock that Israel chose. He was therefore punished.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For not striking the rock chosen by Israel.</i> This is the meaning of <i>ye believed not in Me</i> (v. 12). This interpretation is also incorrect, for Scripture states, <i>ye rebelled against My word</i> (v. 24). However, they did not rebel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For they struck the rock which God commanded them to strike.</i>I will reveal in hints the explanation which appears correct to me. Know, when the part<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A person.</i> knows the All,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. often refers to God as the All. See I.E. on Gen. 1:26 (Vol. 1, p. 47). God is the creator of all. He is all. Also see I.E. on Ex. 33:21 (Vol. 2, p. 695).</i> he cleaves to the All and creates signs and wonders with the help of the All.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 33:21 (Vol. 2, p. 695).</i> Now it is true that God told Moses and Aaron, <i>speak ye unto the rock</i>. They did not speak to the rock because the people were quarreling with Moses. The “part” thus remained a “part.”<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Moses was distracted and his mind did not cleave unto God.</i> He struck the rock, and water did not come out of it<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Because he was not cleaving unto God.</i> until he struck it a second time.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">His anger having been assuaged, Moses now cleaved unto God (Krinsky). This explanation is difficult. If Moses’ anger was assuaged, why didn’t he now speak to the rock?</i> Moses and Aaron thus did not sanctify God’s name. They inadvertently rebelled and trespassed. It is also possible to explain that <i>And he spoke rashly with his lips</i> (Ps. 106:33) refers to Moses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And not to God as previously explained.</i> It was unseemly for Moses to say anything<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Such as <i>Hear now, ye rebels</i>, etc. (v. 10).</i> before fulfilling God’s command. Moses was therefore punished. The midrashic interpretation of our ancients, of blessed memory, who said that Moses sinned because he said, <i>Hear now, ye rebels</i> (v. 10) is also in keeping with this interpretation. The rabbis hint at this secret. UNTO THE ROCK. Which I pointed out to you or which is found close to the camp.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence Scripture speaks of <i>the</i> rock and not of <i>a</i> rock.</i> THAT IT GIVE FORTH ITS WATER. Many erred and said that the rock is to be identified with the stone [at Horeb]<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Ex. 17:6.</i> because Scripture reads, <i>its</i> water.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rather than water. These commentaries assume that <i>its</i> water indicates that the stone had already produced water. See Bahya and <i>Da’at zekenim mi-ba’ale ha-tosafot</i>.</i> However, they cannot think straight. The stone was in Horeb and this rock was at the border of the land of Edom, for it was in Kadesh.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See verses 1 and 14.</i> It is also possible to interpret <i>its water</i> as meaning, the water which I will place in it. THE ROD FROM BEFORE THE LORD. The reference is to the rod of God.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ex. 4:20.</i> It was the rod which was placed before the testimony.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 17:1-24.</i> ARE WE TO BRING YOU FORTH WATER OUT OF THIS ROCK? Do we have the power to bring forth water out of this rock for you? BECAUSE YE BELIEVED NOT IN ME. This alludes to the secret at which I hinted, i.e., that God’s name was not sanctified through them. AND HE WAS SANCTIFIED IN THEM. Through Moses and Aaron.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the term <i>bam</i> (in them) does not refer to the water.</i> Our verse has the same meaning as <i>Through them that are nigh unto Me I will be sanctified</i> (Lev. 10:3).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">God is sanctified when he punishes the righteous. See Rashi.</i> FROM KADESH. Kadesh is the name of a place where a city is located. It is not to be identified with Kadesh-barnea,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Deut. 1:2,19; 2:14; 9:23.</i> for the latter was a wilderness.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Deut. 1:19.</i> Thus Scripture reads, <i>The Lord shaketh the wilderness of Kadesh</i> (Ps. 29:8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. assumes that the reference is to Kadesh-barnea, for Kadesh-barnea, unlike Kadesh, was a wilderness. However, his reasoning is circular.</i> THE TRAVAIL. I have already explained the meaning of the word <i>tela’ah</i> (travail).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 18:8 (Vol. 2, p. 353): “Its meaning is, an affliction which a person is unable to bear or verbalize.”</i> EGYPTIANS DEALT ILL WITH US, AND OUR FATHERS. Who died. The meaning of our clause is that their evil<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The evil which the Egyptians did to us, for they afflicted us and our parents.</i> lasted a very long time. AND SENT AN ANGEL.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>malakh</i>. The word <i>malakh</i> can be rendered as messenger or angel. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> This is to be taken literally. Scripture similarly states, <i>And the angel of His presence saved them</i> (Is. 63:9). Many said that the reference is to Moses<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Rashi.</i> for they found <i>Then spoke Haggai the Lord’s messenger</i> (malakh)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We thus see that Scripture refers to a prophet by the term <i>malakh</i>.</i> (Haggai 1:13). However, this is not my opinion. THROUGH FIELD OR THROUGH VINEYARD. So that they do not destroy it. We will not even drink the water of your wells. WE WILL GO ALONG THE KING’S HIGHWAY. The major highway upon which the king travels. Or its meaning is, the road that the king, namely, the king of Edom, will command us to travel in.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation the meaning of our verse is: we will go on any road which you the king will choose for us to travel on.</i> WE WILL GO UP BY THE HIGHWAY. What harm will it cause you if we up by the highway? If we need water you will sell it to us. This is the meaning of <i>mikhram</i> (v. 19). It means the price thereof. [THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.] Its meaning is, <i>the entire congregation</i>. Because Edom went to fight against them, Scripture relates that no one was missing from the children of Israel when they came from the city of Edom to Mount Hor.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, no Jews were killed by the Edomites.</i> AARON SHALL BE GATHERED UNTO HIS PEOPLE. This is similar to <i>and die in the mount</i> (Deut. 32:50).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of which is: and prepare yourself to die, for it is not in one’s hand to determine the moment of death. See I.E. on Gen. 1:26 (Vol. 1, p. 47).</i> It means that Aaron should prepare himself to die, and go up the mountain.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Aaron shall be gathered unto his people</i> means Aaron shall go and be gathered to his people.</i> YE HAVE REBELLED. I have explained this. AT THE WATERS OF MERIBAH. <i>Le-me merivah</i> means at the waters of Meribah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A <i>lamed</i> prefixed to a word means to. Thus <i>le-me meribah</i> might be taken to mean to the water of Meribah. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> It is the name of a place. Or <i>le-me merivah</i> means because of the waters of Meribah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">79</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See previous note.</i> AND STRIP…AND PUT THEM UPON. <i>Ve-hafshet</i> (and strip) and <i>ve-hilbashtam</i> (and put them upon) are <i>hifils</i>. [AND AARON SHALL BE GATHERED.] Its meaning is, as soon as you strip Aaron of his garments, he shall die. AND AARON WAS GATHERED TO HIS PEOPLE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">80</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is not in the Biblical text. Our reading in I.E. is probably a scribal error.</i> I have explained this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">81</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of the word gathered. See I.E. on Gen. 25:8 (Vol. 1, p. 246).</i> AND WHEN ALL THE CONGREGATION SAW. When they saw the event which occurred, they wept for thirty days.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">82</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, And all the congregation saw (the literal interpretation of the verse) is to be rendered, And <i>when</i> all the congregation saw.</i> [DIED.] I have already explained the meaning of the term.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">83</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Gen. 25:8 (Vol. 1, p. 245): “<i>Gava</i> refers to a death wherein the soul leaves the body in a moment without pain and delay.”</i> AND THE CANAANITE, THE KING OF ARAD. The ancients<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The sages of the Talmud.</i> said he<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The king of Arad. See <i>Rosh Ha-Shanah</i> 3a: “Sihon, Arad, and Canaan are one and the same.”</i> is Sihon. He is called a Canaanite, for all Amorites are Canaanites.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Sihon was king of the Amorites. See verse 21.</i> Many say that Joshua wrote this section.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 1-3.</i> <i>The king of Arad, one</i> (Josh. 12:14) is proof of this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Josh. 12 lists the kings that Joshua smote. The king of Arad is included in this list. It thus appears that it was Joshua, not Moses, who defeated the king of Arad.</i> They also found that Scripture states that the children of Judah called the name of the place Hormah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the days of Joshua. See Josh. 12:14.</i> However, they are wrong, for that place<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hormah spoken of in Josh. 12:14.</i> was originally called Zephath<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Jud. 1:17: <i>And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they smote the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And the name of the city was called Hormah</i>.</i> while the place spoken of in our verse was ruled by the king of Arad.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It was always called Arad.</i> In reality they are two places.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hormah mentioned in our verse is not to be identified with the Hormah in Josh. 12:14.</i> There are many such instances in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of two places having the same name.</i> According to the plain meaning of the text the king of Arad ruled over the eastern bank of the Jordan.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And was thus defeated by Moses.</i> This portion<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 1-3.</i> was connected to the death of Aaron, because Scripture relates what happened on Mount Hor<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The place of Aaron’s death.</i> before they [Israel] journeyed from there. <i>And the Canaanite, the king of Arad… heard…and they journeyed from mount Hor</i> (v. 4) is proof of this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the king of Arad fought Israel at Mount Hor.</i> If you want to find what the king of Arad heard, observe, it is clearly stated.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The king heard <i>that Israel came by the way of Atharim</i> (v. 1).</i> THAT ISRAEL CAME BY THE WAY OF ATHARIM. Some say that the <i>alef</i> of <i>atharim</i> is superfluous. They say that the meaning of <i>ha-atharim</i> is, those who spy. The <i>alef of ezro’akha</i> (your arm) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the meaning of <i>ezro’akha</i> is, your arm (<i>zero’akha</i>). The reference is probably to Jer. 32:21. However, the text there reads <i>ezro’a</i>.</i> TO COMPASS THE LAND OF EDOM. Zalmonah and Punon, for this is explicitly stated in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 33:41-45. Scripture here omits the places where Israel camped when they compassed the land of Edom. It does include them in Num. 33:41-45. It tells us there that Israel camped at Zalmonah and Punon when it went around Edom.</i> THIS LIGHT BREAD. The word <i>ha-kelokel</i> (this light) means the very light. The word is formed by doubling the word <i>kal</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Kelokel</i> is an intensified form. Hence the meaning very light.</i> There are many similar instances in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Compare, <i>adamdam</i> (very red), <i>shecharhar</i> (very black).</i> AND THE LORD…SERPENTS. The word <i>ha-serafim</i> (fiery) is an adjective. The following is a midrashic interpretation. Scripture states, <i>If the serpent bite before it is charmed, Then the charmer hath no advantage</i> (Eccles. 10:11). These people<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Who spoke against God and Moses.</i> sent their tongues to bite.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A metaphor for speaking evil.</i> They were repaid with snakes being sent against them. MAKE THEE. A form of a fiery serpent <i>out of brass</i>, for Scripture explicitly says so.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the next verse.</i> AND SET IT UPON A POLE. So that it be on a high place and everyone will be able to see it. Many err. They say that this was an image that had the capability of receiving powers from on high.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It was an image in whom heavenly power resided and thus could heal those bitten by the serpents. See I.E. on Gen. 31:19 (Vol. 1, p. 300) and Ex. 20:20 (Vol. 2, p. 437). According to I.E. such an image is banned by Scripture for it is a type of magical practice.</i> Far be it, far be it [for one to believe such a thing], for this thing was made by God’s command.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">God would not command such an object to be made. According to I.E. this is precisely what Ex. 20:20 prohibits. See I.E. on Ex. 20:20 (Vol. 2, p. 437).</i> We should not investigate why Moses was commanded to make the form of a snake.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And argue that there is a scientific reason for the copper snake.</i> Should someone disagree,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Those who offer scientific explanations.</i> let him show us if there is a tree that makes bitter waters sweet.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Moses healed bitter waters by casting a tree into it. See Ex. 15:22-25.</i> Even honey will not sweeten them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Bitter water.</i> What reason was there to put a cake of figs upon a boil?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When King Hezekiah was ill with boils the prophet Isaiah prescribed that a cake of figs be applied to his boils. See II Kings 20:7; Is. 38:21.</i> It is not in the nature of figs to remove boils. The truth is that the mind of the Almighty is beyond us. AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL JOURNEYED. From the land of Edom, for Scripture states, <i>to compass the land of Edom</i> (v. 4). Punon<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on verse 4.</i> is on the far border of Edom. The Israelites traveled from Punon to Oboth, for Scripture says so.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 33:43.</i> AND PITCHED IN THE VALLEY OF ZERED. Zered is elsewhere referred to as Dibon-gad.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Num. 33:45. The purpose of I.E.’s comments on verses 4, 10, and 12 is to harmonize our chapter with Num. 33.</i> FOR ARNON IS THE BORDER OF MOAB. It was so at first.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Before Israel conquered Sihon.</i> IN THE BOOK OF THE WARS OF THE LORD. It was a separate book in which the wars of the Lord on behalf of His servants was recorded. It is possible that it originated in the days of Abraham,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The first servant of God to wage war. See Gen. 14:13-16.</i> for many books, such as the work of Nathan<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I Chron. 29:29.</i> and Iddo,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">II Chron. 12:15.</i> the chronicles of the kings of Israel,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I Kings 14:19.</i> and the songs of Solomon and his proverbs,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I Kings 5:12.</i> were lost and are not found among us. VAHEB IN SUPHAH. There were wars in these mentioned places in ancient times. The word Vaheb is not Hebrew. Neither is Vophsi (Num. 13:14), Vashti (Esth. 1:9), Vaizatha (Esth. 9:9), and also Vashni (I Chron. 6:13). It is possible that the <i>vav</i> of Vashni is a connective.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In this case, the meaning of <i>Vashni</i> is, and <i>sheni</i> (<i>sheni</i> being a Hebrew name).</i> I say all this<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That these words are not Hebrew.</i> because we do not find the <i>vav</i> to be a root letter at the beginning of a word<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, we do not find the <i>vav</i> to be a first root letter.</i> except in the word <i>vave</i> (hooks) in <i>the hooks of the pillars</i> (Ex. 27:10). It is found<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As a first root letter.</i> only in place of a <i>yod</i>. Compare, <i>valed</i> (child) (II Sam. 6:23).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which comes from the root <i>yod, lamed, dalet</i>.</i> The explanation of the Aramaic translation is known.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Onkelos renders <i>sufah</i> (Suphah) as <i>yama de-suf</i> (the sea of reeds).</i> AND THE SLOPE OF THE VALLEYS. Some say that the word <i>eshed</i> (slope) is Aramaic.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rashi claims that the word <i>eshed</i> means pouring or spilling in Aramaic.</i> The end of the matter is: all of these<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Vaheb, Suphah, Eshed, etc.</i> are names of places.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>eshed</i> is the name of a place.</i> THAT INCLINETH. The reference is to the Israelites,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Israel inclined towards the city of Ar.</i> for they passed by Ar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Israel passed by the city of Ar. They did not enter it. See Deut. 2:9.</i> AND LEANETH UPON THE BORDER OF MOAB. This is what <i>and they</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Israel.</i> <i>abide over against me</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This was said by the king of the Moabites.</i> (Num. 22:5) refers to. Israel journeyed from there<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The border of Moab.</i> to a place called <i>be’er</i>, for the <i>heh</i> of <i>be’erah</i> (to Beer) is in place of the word <i>el</i> (to). It is like the <i>heh</i> of <i>mitzraymah</i> (to Egypt) (Gen. 12 :10).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is in place of the word <i>el</i>.</i> This well<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Spoken of in verse 16.</i> was also<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Like the manna, the waters of Marah, and the like.</i> the result of a miracle. I believe that it is not the well which is called Miriam’s well.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Contrary to the opinion of the rabbis. See <i>Ta’anit</i> 9a.</i> On the contrary, it refers to a place that Moses commanded to be dug. The princes of Israel dug it with their staffs, and water immediately gushed forth. SPRING UP, O WELL. This is how the song opened. Scripture does not record the entire song. SING YE UNTO IT. The word <i>enu</i> (sing) is an imperative. Note, Scripture explains<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 18.</i> how it came into being.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Princes and nobles dug the well.</i> WHICH THE NOBLES OF THE PEOPLE DELVED. Scripture repeats itself,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Which the nobles…delved</i> repeats <i>which the princes digged</i>.</i> as is its style. WITH THE SCEPTRE. The meaning of <i>bi-mechokek</i> (with the sceptre) is, by the governors.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>bet of bi-mechokek</i> means by. The <i>bet</i> usually has the meaning of in. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> Compare, <i>My heart is toward the governors</i> (chokeke) <i>of Israel</i> (Jud. 5:9). This well was in the wilderness, far from an inhabited place. From this wilderness Israel journeyed to Mattanah. From Mattanah they journeyed to Nahaliel. Note that <i>eshed ha-nehalim</i> (the slope of the valleys) and the wilderness which is called Beer and Mattanah and Nahaliel are all names of places. They are also referred to by a general name, <i>viz.</i>, <i>Almon-diblathiam</i> (Num. 33:46), which is found in the Torah portion <i>Ve-Elleh Mase</i> (<i>Ibid.</i>).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which records the journeys of the children of Israel in the wilderness. <i>Eshed ha-nehalim</i> (the slope of the valleys), Beer, Mattanah, and Nahaliel are not mentioned there. <i>Almon-diblathiam</i> is. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> On the other hand, it is also possible that these are the names of places that the Israelites passed over in another journey.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence they are not recorded in Num. 33:46.</i> The mountains of Abarim in front of Nebo (Num. 33:47) are to be identified with Bamoth and the valley that is in the field of Moab (v. 20). The following is proof of this. Scripture states that Israel journeyed from the valley<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is in the field of Moab (v. 10).</i> to the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho (Num. 22:1).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. connects Num. 22:1 to Num. 21:10.</i> It also states that Israel journeyed from the mountains of Abarim to the plains of Moab beyond the Jordon at Jericho (Num. 33:48). It further states, <i>So we abode in the valley</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is in the field of Moab.</i> <i>over against Beth-peor</i> (Deut. 3:29) at the time that I [Moses] pleaded [with God].<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To allow him to enter Canaan. This was shortly before Moses’ death.</i> Scripture elsewhere states, <i>Get thee up into this mountain of Abarim, unto mount Nebo</i> (Deut. 32:49).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We thus see that Moses went up to Mount Nebo from the valley which is the field of Moab.</i> Scripture also states, <i>and he was buried in the valley</i> (Deut. 34:6). The Torah there states, <i>And Moses went up from the plains of Moab unto mount Nebo</i> to the top of Pisgah (Deut. 34:1). The valley was thus at the top of Pisgah. Moses died there, and there was no need to move him after his death.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As would be the case if the “valley” where Moses died was not at the top of the mountain. According to I.E. the “valley” was an indentation at the top of the mountain.</i> WHICH LOOKETH DOWN. <i>Ve-nishkafah</i> (which looketh down) is in the feminine. It refers to the valley.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>guy</i> (valley) can be masculine or feminine.</i> UPON THE DESERT. The word <i>yeshimon</i> (desert) means a wasteland (<i>shemamah</i>). <i>And in the waste, a howling wilderness</i> (yeshimon) (Deut. 32:10) is the proof text. So too is <i>They wandered in the wilderness</i> (yeshimon) <i>in a desert way</i> (Ps. 107:4). TO JAHAZ. <i>Yahtzah</i> means to Jahaz.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>heh</i> at the end of the word is in place of the preposition to.</i> FROM THE ARNON. Which he [the king of Edom] took from Moab. EVEN UNTO THE CHILDREN OF AMMON. Scripture records that half of the land of Ammon belonged to the children of Israel,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Josh. 13:24,25.</i> for they<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Israelites.</i> took it from the Amorites who originally took it from the children of Ammon. Now Scripture tells us that God would not give the Israelites even the size of a footstep from any of the land belonging to the Ammonites and Moabites. The reference is to the land which Ammon and Moab possessed at that time.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the time of Moses.</i> Scripture therefore had to record the words of the poets.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To the effect that Sihon took the city of Heshbon from the Moabites.</i> It did so because Israel lived in Heshbon.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which was originally a Moabite city.</i> The Torah explicitly states, <i>And Israel dwelt in all the cities of the Amorite, in Heshbon</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We thus see that Israel dwelt in Heshbon.</i> (v. 25). AND IN ALL THE TOWNS THEREOF.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, and in all her daughters.</i> Heshbon is like a mother, and the towns are like daughters.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">79</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus, “and in all her daughters” means: and in all the towns thereof.</i> FOR HESHBON WAS THE CITY OF SIHON. It turned into the city of Sihon, for, as was well known, he fought against the former king of Moab.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">80</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture speaks of Sihon’s victory over Moab as a well-known fact.</i> THEY THAT SPEAK IN PARABLES. Who invent parables on their own.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">81</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The literal meaning of <i>ha-moshelim</i> (they that speak in parables) is the parablers.</i> [COME YE TO HESHBON.] They said this to the Amorites. BE BUILT. Better than before. AND ESTABLISHED. To be the city of Sihon. FOR A FIRE IS GONE OUT OF HESHBON. This alludes to the people of Heshbon who conspired against their king.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">82</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. our verse teaches that Moabites conspired against their king.</i> A FLAME. The idea is repeated in accord with poetic style.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">83</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>A flame…</i>repeats <i>For a fire…</i></i> FROM THE CITY OF SIHON. From the city that today belongs to Sihon. AR OF MOAB. Ar is the name of a place. It is in Moab.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">84</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Hebrew reads <i>ar mo’av</i>.</i> Compare, Beth-lehem Judah<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">85</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally. See I.E. on Num. 13:22.</i> (Ruth 1:1). THE HIGH PLACES. <i>Bamot</i> means the high places.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">86</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is not the name of a place.</i> CHEMOSH. The name of an idol; Moab’s god. FUGITIVES. Those who flee. Fugitives that run from the sword. WE HAVE SHOT THEM. These are the words of Moses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">87</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Until now Scripture records what the poets said. Now it records the comments of Moses.</i> The <i>mem</i> of <i>va-niram</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">88</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A pronominal suffix meaning them.</i> (we shot at them) refers to the king of the Amorites and his troops. It has two interpretations. One, that <i>va-niram</i> is related to the word <i>nir</i> (kingship). It<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">89</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>nir</i>.</i> is to be read as if written twice.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">90</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse, which reads <i>va-niram avad cheshbon</i> (we have shot at them—Heshbon is perished), is to be read, <i>va-niram avad nir cheshbon</i> (and their king, the king of Heshbon, was destroyed).</i> It is like <i>even the prophecy, Oded the prophet</i> (II Chron. 15:8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">91</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is to be read as if written, even the prophecy, the prophecy of Oded the prophet. See I.E. on Gen. 6:13 (Vol. 1, p. 100) and the notes thereto.</i> Our verse means, and their king the king of Heshbon was destroyed. <i>Va-niram</i> is similar to the word <i>ha-oholi</i> (my tent) in <i>in the midst of my tent</i> (Josh. 7:21), and to <i>ha-erkekha</i> (thy valuation) (Lev. 27:23).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">92</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>pattach</i> beneath the <i>vav</i> is the sign of the direct object. In other words, <i>va-niram</i> is short for <i>ve-ha-niram</i>. Thus <i>va-niram</i> is similar to <i>ha-oholi</i> and <i>ha-erkekha</i> in that both words are written with the direct object even though they have suffixes. Words with suffixes usually do not come with the direct object. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> <i>Va-niram avad cheshbon</i> (we have shot at them—Heshbon is perished) means, their king, that is, the king of Heshbon, perished. Second, that <i>va-niram</i> is related to <i>yereh va-yor</i> (shoot; and he shot) (II Kings 13:17) and <i>yariti</i> (cast)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">93</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Gen. 31:51). It means,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">94</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Va-niram avad heshbon</i> (we have shot at them–Heshbon is perished).</i> when we shot them Heshbon was destroyed. AND WE HAVE LAID WASTE. <i>Va-nashim</i> comes from a double root.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">95</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though it is spelled with one <i>mem</i>. It comes from the root <i>shin, mem, mem</i>.</i> The <i>chirik</i> is in place of a short <i>kamatz</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">96</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A <i>tzere</i>. In other words, the word should have been vocalized <i>va-nashem</i>.</i> Compare, <i>va-yasev</i> (led about) in <i>But God led the people about</i> (Ex. 13:18).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">97</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is vocalized with a <i>tzere</i>.</i> Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen says that the <i>dagesh</i> in the <i>shin</i> of <i>va-nashim</i> compensates for a missing <i>alef</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">98</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to Rabbi Moses, <i>va-nashim</i> comes from the root <i>alef, shin, mem</i> (guilty).</i> Compare, <i>Who teacheth us more than the beasts of the earth</i> (Job. 35:11) wherein an <i>alef</i> is missing in the word <i>mallefenu</i> (teacheth us).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">99</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which comes from the root <i>alef, lamed, peh</i>.</i> The word <i>va-nashim</i> is related to the word <i>tesham</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">100</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, it comes from the root <i>alef, shin, mem</i>.</i> (shall bear her guilt) in <i>Samaria shall bear her guilt</i> (Hos. 14:1). Some say that Heshbon was always the city of Sihon.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">101</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on verses 26-28.</i> In this case, <i>Come ye to Heshbon</i> (v. 27) is the line that the poets directed at the Moabites who came as captive to Heshbon. And <i>for a fire is gone out of Heshbon</i> is a metaphor for the army of Sihon. When the poets speak on behalf of the Moabites, they say, we thought that Heshbon will be destroyed<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">102</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They interpret our verse as follows: We (the Moabites) shot at them. W e thought Heshbon is perished…even unto Nophah.</i> and the entire land will be laid waste even unto Nophah. Or these<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">103</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>We have shot at them…unto Nophah</i> (v. 30).</i> are the words of Moses. AND THEY TURNED. I have already explained its meaning.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">104</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of <i>va-yifnu</i> (and they turned). See I.E. on Ex. 10:6 (Vol. 2, p. 186). I.E. explains there that <i>va-yifnu</i> means, and they faced.</i> EDREI. To Edrei. Scripture is being brief.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">105</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In omitting the preposition <i>el</i> (to).</i> NONE LEFT HIM REMAINING. No one of the Israelites.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">106</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The verse literally reads, until he left (<i>hishir</i>) him [Og] no remainder. Since the first part of the verse is in the plural, our clause should have read, until <span class=\"underline\">they</span> left (<i>hishiru</i>) him no remainder. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> TO THE AMORITES. The <i>lamed</i> prefixed to the word <i>emori</i> (Amorite) is vocalized with a <i>kamatz</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A <i>lamed</i> so vocalized indicates the definite article.</i> Its reference is to the famous Amorites Sihon and Og. There were no kings among the Canaanites as great as they. <i>Whose height was like the height of the cedars</i> (Amos 2:9) is proof of this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The entire verse reads: <i>Yet I destroyed the Amorite</i> [Sihon and Og] <i>before them, Whose height was like the height of the cedars</i> (Amos 2:9).</i> AND MOAB WAS SORE AFRAID. <i>Va-yagar</i> means was afraid. <i>Guru lakhem</i> (be ye afraid) (Job 19:29) is similar. AND MOAB WAS OVERCOME WITH DREAD. <i>Va-yakatz</i> (overcome with dread) has the same meaning as a similarly spelled word whose letters are inverted.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Va-yatzak. Va-yatzak</i> is spelled <i>vav, yod, tzadi, kof. Va-yakatz</i> is spelled <i>vav, yod, kof, tzadi</i>.</i> <i>U-nekitzennah</i> (and vex it) in <i>Let us go up against Judah, and vex it</i> (Is. 7:6) is similar. UNTO THE ELDERS OF MIDIAN. It is possible that the five Midianite kings are these same elders.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 31:8 speaks of five Midianite kings. I.E. identifies the elders in our verse with them.</i> NOW WILL THIS MULTITUDE LICK UP…AS THE OX LICKETH UP. <i>Yelachakhu</i> (will…lick up) and <i>ki-lechokh</i> (as…licketh up) are two different conjugations.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Yelachakhu</i> (will…lick up) is in the <i>pi’el. Ki-lechokh</i> (as…licketh up) is a <i>kal</i>. Both words come from the root <i>lamed, chet, caf</i>.</i> TO PETHOR. <i>Pethorah</i> means to Pethor.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>heh</i> at the end of the word is in place of the preposition to.</i> Compare, <i>mitzrayemah</i> (to Egypt) (Gen. 37:25). TO THE LAND OF THE CHILDREN OF HIS PEOPLE. Who were Arameans. Scripture similarly states, <i>from Pethor of Aram-naharaim</i> (Deut. 23:5). The midrash<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>San</i>. 105a. Also see <i>Targum Jonathan</i> on Gen. 36:32.</i> identifies Balaam with Bela.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">An Edomite king mentioned in Gen. 36:32.</i> [However, the identification is untenable] because Balaam was an Aramean. If we identify Balaam with Bela because of Beor his father,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Both Bela and Balaam had a father called <i>be’or</i>.</i> then, lo and behold, the son of Ahasuerus<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Darius. See Dan. 9:1.</i> lived before Ahasuerus.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Esth. 1:1. I.E.’s point is that names alone cannot serve to identify historical figures, for more than one person have the same name. According to the midrash (<i>Esther Rabbah</i> 1:1), King Ahasuerus mentioned in the Book of Esther had a son called Darius. There was also a King Darius who lived before Ahasuerus mentioned in the book of Esther. If every Darius in the Bible is one and the same person, then Darius son of Ahasuerus lived before Ahasuerus his father. See I.E. on Dan. 9:1 and Esth. 1:1.</i> They<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Bela and Balaam.</i> are definitely two different people. WHICH IS BY THE RIVER. The reference is to Aram-naharaim. THE FACE OF THE EARTH. I have already explained the meaning of this expression.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is to be taken metaphorically. See I.E. on Ex. 10:5 (Vol. 2, p. 186).</i> CURSE ME. The word <i>arah</i> (curse) is an imperative. It comes from a double root with one of the double letters missing. The same is true of with the word <i>kavah</i> (curse) in curse me (v. 18). The word <i>kov</i> (curse) is vocalized according to the paradigm of <i>shemor</i> (keep).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is vocalized with a <i>cholam</i>.</i> <i>Kavah</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Kavah</i> is an elongated form of <i>kav</i>.</i> in <i>kavah li</i> (curse me) minus the <i>heh</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Pronounced <i>kav</i>.</i> follows the paradigm of <i>shechav</i> (lie), <i>rekhav</i> (ride), and <i>tzelach</i> (rested on).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They are all vocalized with a <i>pattach</i>.</i> THAT WE MAY SMITE THEM. <i>Nakkeh</i> (that we may smite them)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>nun, caf, heh</i>.</i> is an infinitive. The fact that it ends in a <i>heh</i> is no argument against the latter,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>heh</i> changes to a <i>tav</i> in the infinitive in words ending in a <i>heh</i>. Thus our word should have read <i>le-nakkot</i>. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> for the word <i>le-khalle</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>caf, lamed, heh</i>.</i> (to finish), in <i>to finish the transgression</i> (Dan. 9:24) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It too is an infinitive, and Scripture employs the form <i>le-khalle</i> rather than the more usual form <i>le-khallot</i>.</i> IS CURSED. The silent <i>vav of yu’ar</i> (is cursed) is in place of a <i>dagesh</i>, which is in place of the missing double letter.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The root of <i>yu’ar</i> is <i>alef, resh, resh. Yu’ar</i> is spelled with only one <i>resh</i>.</i> Compare, <i>yusav</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Yusav</i> and <i>yu’ar</i> are both <i>pu’als</i>.</i> (turned about)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Yusav</i> comes from the root <i>samekh, bet, bet</i>. In I.E.’s version of Scripture, unlike our versions, it does not have a <i>dagesh</i>.</i> in <i>turned about upon the cummin</i> (Is. 28:27). There is no other word like it in this form, because of the rules concerning gutturals.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>alef</i>. A guttural according to the rules of grammar does not receive a <i>dagesh</i>.</i> THE ELDERS OF MOAB. The wise men.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The elders were wise men (Weiser).</i> WITH THE REWARDS OF DIVINATION IN THEIR HAND. Rabbi Samuel Ha-Nagid the Sephardi, of blessed memory, said that the meaning of <i>u-kesamim</i> (with the reward of divination)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Balaam was the diviner, not the messengers sent to him. Hence Rabbi Samuel’s interpretation.</i> is payment for divination. He offers as proof the word <i>be-yadam</i> (in their hand).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rabbi Samuel believed that <i>in their hand</i> refers to the money which they brought with them for the divination.</i> However, he says nothing. <i>U-kesamim be-yadam</i> is to be taken literally.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It refers to instruments of divination.</i> Scripture tells us that Balak sent diviners like himself to the diviner [Balaam]. Furthermore, Balaam would not be able to tarry, saying, “I can not find a propitious day, and a propitious hour to go and curse,” for the messengers were members of his guild. <i>In his right hand is the instrument of divination</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (ha-kesom) (Ez. 21:27) is proof that <i>u-kesamim be-yadam</i> is to be taken literally.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the verse shows that instruments of divination were held in the hand.</i> AND I WILL BRING YOU BACK WORD. After you spend the night here. AND GOD CAME. Out of regard for Israel, for God knew the coming incident of <i>ba’al pe’or</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A Moabite god worshipped by the Israelites. Twenty-four thousand Israelites died for worshipping this idol. See Num. 25:1-9.</i> Now if Balaam had cursed them then, all of the world would have said that the plague came because of Balaam’s curse.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Otherwise God would have allowed Balaam to curse Israel, for his curse would not have had any effect.</i> WHAT MEN ARE THESE. This was a way of opening and starting a conversation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">God knew who the men were.</i> It is similar to <i>Where is Abel thy brother</i> (Gen. 4:9). Now Cain denied [knowledge of Abel’s whereabouts]. However, God told him, <i>the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth out unto Me</i> (Gen. 4 :10).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus God knew where Abel was. Hence, <i>Where is Abel thy brother</i> was merely a way of starting a conversation.</i> FOR THEY ARE BLESSED. Its meaning is, you cannot curse them, for I have blessed them. THE PRINCES OF BALAK. Scripture does not mention the elders of Midian,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See verse 4 and 7.</i> for Balak was the protagonist and he sent the messengers to Balaam. Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen the Spaniard, of blessed memory, says that even though the <i>yod</i> is the sign of the object<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When suffixed to a verb, as in <i>titti</i> (give me).</i> it can only come with a <i>nun</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, the suffix <i>ni</i> has to be added to the verb in order to indicate the object.</i> Compare, <i>ha-lehorgeni</i> (thinkest thou to kill me) (Ex. 2:14). It does not read <i>ha-lehorgi</i>. However, he forgot <i>le-titti</i> (to give me) in <i>to give me leave to go with you</i> [our verse] and <i>yabbemi</i> (perform the duty of a husband’s brother unto me) in <i>he will not perform the duty of a husband’s brother unto me</i> (Deut. 25:7).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In both of these words the object is indicated by the <i>yod</i> alone.</i> Rabbi Jonah the grammarian says that the <i>yod</i> of <i>le-titti</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>le-titti</i> means the same as <i>la-tet</i>. It means to give, not to give me.</i> is superfluous, but what he says is incorrect.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the absence of the <i>nun</i> does not mean that the object (me) is missing.</i> [TO COME WITH US.]<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, to go with us. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> Its meaning is, to go with us from his place. MORE. The word <i>rabbim</i> (more) is to be taken literally,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is to be rendered as more.</i> or it is to be rendered as great.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In this case, our term is to be rendered as great princes (<i>sarim rabbim</i>).</i> Compare, <i>to all the officers</i> (rav) <i>of his house</i> (Esth. 1:8)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders this as <i>to all the great of his house</i>.</i> and <i>The city</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is to Jerusalem.</i> <i>of the great king</i> (rav) (Ps. 48:3), that is, David, for the city was called <i>the city where David encamped</i> (Is. 29:1). FOR I WILL PROMOTE THEE. With money. AND WHATSOEVER THOU SAYEST UNTO ME I WILL DO. If this is necessary for you to curse them. Balaam’s statement, <i>If Balak would give me his house full of silver and gold</i>, is proof that the meaning of <i>For I will promote</i> is, and I will promote you with money.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For it indicates that Balaam was hinting that he wanted to be well compensated.</i> HIS HOUSE FULL. <i>Melo beto</i> means his house full.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And not the fullness of his house.</i> <i>Melo khol ha-aretz kevodo</i> (the whole earth is full of His glory) (Is. 6:3) is similar. Many err who thought that the meaning of the latter is that the contents of the earth is God’s glory,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They interpreted the verse (Is. 6:3) to mean that God’s glory consists of the contents of the earth (<i>melo khol ha-aretz</i>). However, this interpretation is incorrect, for God’s glory consists of much more than the contents of the earth.</i> as in <i>the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof</i> (Ps. 24:1). SMALL OR GREAT. The words <i>ketannah</i> (small) and <i>gedolah</i> (great) are adjectives. However, the nouns<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which they modify.</i> are missing. <i>But the rich man answers impudent</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Prov. 18:23)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>But the rich man answers impudent</i> is short for, but the rich answers impudent words. Thus here too the noun which the adjective modifies is missing.</i> and, <i>and his food fat</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Hab. 1:16)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>And his food fat</i> is short for, And his food a fat lamb. See I.E. on Hab. 1:16.</i> are similar. HERE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ba-zeh</i>, literally means in this. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> In this place. The Gaon, of blessed memory,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rabbi Saadiah Gaon.</i> says: Should someone argue and say, “How could God tell Balaam rise up, <i>go with them</i> (v. 20) after telling him <i>Thou shalt not go with them</i> (12)?”<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to the medieval Jewish philosophers, God does not change His mind.</i> Then we can answer him that God did not want Balaam to go with these messengers but to wait until Balak sent messengers more honorable than they. However, I believe that there is no need for the Gaon’s interpretation. Its meaning is similar to God telling Israel, <i>Send thou men</i> (Num. 13:2) and <i>go up, take possession</i> (Deut. 1:21). Israel did not believe.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That they could conquer the Canaanites without first spying out the land.</i> On the contrary, they said, <i>Let us send men before us</i> (Deut. 1:22). Moses then asked God.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Whether to send spies or not.</i> God told him, <i>Send thou men</i> (Num. 13:2).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">God told Balaam not to go to Balak to curse Israel. When Balaam told God that he wanted to go, God told him, go but do not curse Israel. In other words, the prohibition was on the cursing, not on the going.</i> Now after God told Balaam, <i>thou shalt not curse the people</i> (v. 12), what need did Balaam have to say, <i>that I may know what the Lord will speak unto me more</i> (v. 19)? Balaam had an evil thought in his heart. God told him go with the men, but take care that you do not say anything save that which I will tell you. <i>And God’s anger was kindled because he went</i> (v. 22) is proof that my explanation is correct.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Otherwise, God would not have been angry at him for going, after he had received permission to go.</i> AND SADDLED. By command.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He did not personally saddle his donkey.</i> FOR AN ADVERSARY AGAINST HIM. I have already explained in the Book of Job that the adversary was an angel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Job 1:6.</i> The words of the Gaon that the adversary was a human being do not help or hinder.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They contribute nothing.</i> OUT OF THE WAY. Which was trodden.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The ass left the trodden path.</i> The ass went into a field wherein there was no path. TO TURN HER INTO THE WAY. The phrase <i>le-hatotah ha-derekh</i> (to turn her the way)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> is abridged. It means to turn her into the way. IN A HOLLOW WAY BETWEEN THE VINEYARDS. The word <i>mishol</i> (hollow way) is to be interpreted according to its context, for it is not found again in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence we do not know its exact meaning.</i> It should be explained as the Aramaic translation renders it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Onkelos renders <i>be-mishol</i> as <i>be-shevil</i> (in a path).</i> AND SHE THRUST HERSELF UNTO THE WALL. <i>Va-tillachetz</i> is to be rendered, and she thrust herself.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The literal meaning of <i>va-tillachetz</i> is, and she was thrust. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> UNTO THE WALL. The reference is to the fence.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in the previous verse.</i> AND HE SMOTE HER AGAIN. For he had already hit her when she turned into the field.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 23.</i> AND THE LORD OPENED THE MOUTH OF THE ASS. The rabbis, of blessed memory, said that ten things were created on Sabbath eve at twilight.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Among them the mouth of Balaam’s ass. See <i>Abot</i> 5:6.</i> I believe that this means that God specifically decreed the creation of these miraculous phenomena,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in <i>Abot</i> 5:6.</i> for they are beyond the laws of nature.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, these miraculous phenomena, one of which was the mouth of Balaam’s ass, were not actually created on Sabbath eve at twilight. God decreed that they come into being at their proper time. Maimonides makes a similar point in his commentary on <i>Abot</i> 5:6.</i> The Gaon<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rabbi Saadiah Gaon.</i> says that the ass did not speak. Rabbi Samuel the son of Hofni attacked the Gaon.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For saying this.</i> However, Rabbi Samuel the Spanish poet tried to save the one who was attacked.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rabbi Samuel the Spanish tried to defend Rabbi Saadiah Gaon.</i> Note, the rationalists had a need for a non-literal interpretation of our text, for they said that God would not create signs in the world to change the laws which he created.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The rationalists argue that God would not change the laws of nature.</i> He would do so only to justify his prophet.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">79</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The rationalists argue that God would only change the laws of nature to prove that what a prophet said was true. This was not the case with Balaam’s ass.</i> However, they did not speak the truth, for, look, a miracle was done for Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, who were not prophets.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">80</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They were saved from a fiery furnace. See Dan. 2.</i> Some of them<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">81</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The rationalists.</i> say that Balaam was a prophet.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">82</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence God suspended the laws of nature for him.</i> However, the truth is that his prophecy<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">83</sup><i class=\"footnote\">God’s appearance to Balaam.</i> was because of Israel’s glory, for Balaam was a diviner. Indeed, this is how Scripture refers to him.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">84</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Balaam…the soothsayer</i> (Josh. 13:22).</i> Some say that Balaam knew the mind of the heavenly beings and was able to channel them by images that he made.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">85</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Balaam made images which had the power to manipulate the heavenly powers.</i> This is the meaning of <i>and he whom thou cursest is cursed</i> (v. 6). However, it appears to me that Balaam was an astrologer. When Balaam saw in the star of a given person that an evil time had befallen him, he would curse him. When evil befell the one whom he cursed, then those who witnessed and heard the imprecation thought that the evil came because of Balaam’s curse. The fact that Balaam spoke with guile to the lords of Balak is proof of this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">86</sup><i class=\"footnote\">First he told them that he couldn’t curse Israel. Then he hinted that he could.</i> The meaning of <i>I can not go beyond the word of the Lord my God</i> (v. 18) is, it is not in the hand of any created being to change a deed or a decree of God. The secret is, the part<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">87</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A human being. A human being is part of creation.</i> can not change a part.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">88</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Any of the laws of nature.</i> It is only the decree of the All<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">89</sup><i class=\"footnote\">God.</i> which can change the decree of the part.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">90</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of nature.</i> I cannot reveal this secret for it is very deep. The correct interpretation is, the ass spoke. If you understand the secret of the angels of Abraham<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">91</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The angels that appeared to Abraham at Elon Moreh took the form of people. See Gen. 18:1,2.</i> and of Jacob,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">92</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The angel that appeared to Jacob at Jabok had the form of a human. See Gen. 32:2; Gen. 32:25-31</i> then you will understand the truth.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">93</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The angel that appeared to Balaam took the form of a man.</i> [WITH HIS STAFF.] Scripture states this because Balaam first hit her with a small piece of wood or with a strap. TIMES. I have already explained the meaning of the term <i>regalim</i> (times).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">94</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It means times. See I.E.’s short commentary on Ex. 23:14. The word <i>regel</i> means a foot. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> HAST MOCKED. I have already explained the term <i>hitalalt</i> (hast mocked).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">95</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. explains the term to refer to manipulating events to inflict harm. See I.E. on Ex. 10:2 (Vol. 2, p. 185).</i> ALL THY LIFE LONG. This means from the day that you started to ride. WAS I EVER WONT. The meaning of <i>ha-hasken hiskanti</i> is, was I ever wont. Its import is, was this my manner. The word <i>hasken</i> (acquaint)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">96</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Or habituate.</i> in <i>Acquaint</i> (hasken) <i>now thyself with him</i> (Job 22:21) is similar. THEN THE LORD OPENED. As in the case of Elisha’s young man (II Kings 6:17).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">97</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Who did not see the angels until God “opened his eyes.”</i> God added to the light of his<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">98</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Balaam’s.</i> eyes<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">99</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So that he could now see what he wasn’t able to see before.</i> or first struck him blind.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">100</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And then opened his eyes.</i> AND BOWED HIS HEAD.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">101</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>appav</i>, literally, his nostrils. According to I.E. our phrase should be rendered, and he bowed with his nostrils.</i> I have already explained its meaning.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">102</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The nostrils protrude from the face and touch the ground when one bows. See I.E. on Gen. 19 and the notes thereto (Vol. 1, p. 202).</i> BECAUSE THY WAY IS CONTRARY UNTO ME. The meaning of <i>yarat</i> (contrary) is perverse.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">103</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders our clause, because the way [you have chosen] is perverse in my sight.</i> The word <i>yirteni</i> (twists me) in <i>And twists me by the hands of the wicked</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">104</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated according to I.E.</i> (Job 16:11), which comes from the root <i>resh, tet, heh</i>, is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">105</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus <i>yarat</i> comes from the root <i>resh, tet, heh</i>.</i> If <i>yirteni</i> comes from the root <i>yod, resh, tet</i>, then it should be vocalized like <i>ye’atani</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">106</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In meaning.</i> (He hath covered me) (Is. 61:10).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">107</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Yeratani</i>.</i> <i>Yarat</i> and <i>yirteni</i> have similar meanings even though they come from two different roots.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">108</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The root of <i>yarat</i> is <i>yod, resh, tet</i> and <i>yirteni</i> comes from <i>resh, tet, heh</i>.</i> We find the same to be the case with the word <i>ye’atani</i> (<i>Ibid</i>.), which is vocalized like the word <i>ye’atzani</i> (given me counsel) (Ps. 16:7).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">109</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ye’atani</i> comes from the root <i>yod, ayin, tet</i>.</i> <i>Ye’atani</i> is similar in meaning to <i>oteh</i> (coverest)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">110</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>ayin, tet, heh</i>.</i> in (Who coverest Thyself with light) (Ps. 104:2).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">111</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Both of these words come from different roots but have a similar meaning.</i> AND THE ASS SAW ME. <i>Va-tirani</i> is spelled with a <i>pattach</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">112</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. reads a long <i>kamatz</i>. However, this appears to be an error. See Filwarg.</i> in place of a <i>tzere</i>. It should have been vocalized <i>va-tireni</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">113</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 14:11 (Vol. 2, p. 277) and the notes thereto.</i> There are many such cases.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">114</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ex. 33:20, which employs <i>yirani</i> in place of <i>yireni</i>.</i> UNLESS. The word <i>ulai</i> (unless) has many meanings. Here it means unless. The word <i>even</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">115</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>gam</i>, literally, also.</i> is evidence that the ass died after she spoke.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">116</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I would have slain <i><span class=\"underline\">also</span></i> you implies that he killed the ass.</i> AND SAVED HER ALIVE. Scripture is being brief. Its<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">117</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of <i>surely now I had even slain thee, and saved her alive</i>.</i> meaning is, as I killed her I would have killed you, or I would have killed you and left her alive.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">118</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>And saved her alive</i> is short for, I would have killed you and left her alive.</i> The above is explained by the following.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">119</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>And saved her alive</i> implies that the ass died. The question arises, “Why?”</i> When a person sees an angel, he dies. <i>And my life is preserved</i> (Gen. 32:1),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">120</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Stated by Jacob with reference to seeing an angel.</i> and the words of Manoah<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">121</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Manoah saw an angel and was afraid that he would die. See Jud. 13:22.</i> are proof. How much more so the case of a beast that has nothing in common with the spirit of an angel as a human being does. GO WITH THE MEN. With these men. BUT ONLY. The word <i>efes</i> means only. The word <i>efes</i> (howbeit) in <i>Howbeit there shall be no needy among you</i> (Deut. 15: 4) and in <i>Howbeit</i> (efes) <i>the people…are fierce</i> (Num. 13:28) is similar. WHEREFORE CAMEST THOU NOT UNTO ME. The word <i>halakhta</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">122</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which literally means you went.</i> is to be rendered camest because it is followed by <i>elai</i> (unto me). The same applies, as I have already explained,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">123</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Gen. 19:2 (Vol. 1, p. 202).</i> to the word <i>va-ysar</i> (departed) (I Sam. 15:6). KIRIATH-HUZOTH. It is the name of a province.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">124</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Or city.</i> BAMOTH-BAAL. This is to be identified with <i>Bamotharnon</i> (the high places of Arnon) (Num. 21:28). AND HE SAW FROM THENCE THE UTMOST PART OF THE PEOPLE. For they camped on all four compass points.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">125</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They were spread out on all sides. Hence he saw only part of the people.</i> SEVEN ALTARS. There are deep secrets which only a few can fathom. The number seven occurs with regard to days,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The seventh day is holy.</i> months,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rosh Ha-Shanah falls on the first day of the seventh month.</i> years;<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The seventh year is a sabbatical year. The year of jubilee similarly follows seven sabbatical years.</i> the seven lambs offered for a burnt offering;<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Offered on the new moon and the festivals, with the exception of Sukkot. See Num. 28 and 29. On Sukkot, 14 lambs (2 times 7) were offered daily as a burnt offering.</i> the seven sprinklings.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">On Yom Kippur and on the leper. See Lev. 16:14; 14:7. All of these are among these secrets.</i> God also told Job, <i>take unto you seven bullocks and seven rams</i> (Job 42:8). When the complete<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Seven is a complete number.</i> is added to the complete,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To seven. When seven bullocks are added to seven lambs and placed on seven altars. Or when seven animals are sacrificed to God the complete, the celebrant is prophetically inspired.</i> then a spirit of understanding is newly created.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the celebrant; i.e., he is prophetically inspired.</i> The intelligent will understand what I speak of. ON EVERY ALTAR A BULLOCK AND A RAM.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, a bullock and a ram on the altar.</i> On each and every altar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Balaam built seven altars. It is unlikely that he built seven altars and used only one. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> Scripture is being brief. It is short for, on one of the many altars.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Balaam used all seven altars. However, Scripture tells us what he offered on one of the altars.</i> WILL COME. <i>Yikkareh</i> (will come) is derived from <i>li-kerati</i> (to meet me).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus <i>yikkareh</i> means will meet me.</i> AND WHATSOEVER<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>devar mah</i>.</i> HE SHOWETH ME. The word <i>devar</i> is connected to <i>mah</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though the word <i>mah</i> is connected by hyphen to <i>yareni</i> (He showeth me), for the word <i>devar</i> is in the construct. If the word were in the absolute it would be vocalized <i>davar</i>. Thus our text should be read, <i>u-devar-mah yareni</i> (And whatsoever He showeth me), rather than <i>u-devar mah-yareni</i>. (And a thing of, what will He show me). The term <i>devar</i> means “thing of.” <i>Mah</i> literally means what.</i> AND HE WENT TO A BARE HEIGHT. The manner in which the Aramaic translator renders <i>shefi</i> (bare) is known. He translates <i>shefi</i> as alone.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Onkelos renders our clause, and he went alone.</i> Now <i>shefi</i> is alone; it is also without a brother.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, it is not found again in Scripture.</i> Other say that the word <i>shefi</i> means <i>broken in heart</i> (Ps. 109:16).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">These commentaries render our clause: And he went with a broken heart.</i> They say that the word <i>shefi</i> is related to <i>shuppu</i> (corrode) in <i>and his bones corrode</i> (Job 33:21). However, I believe that the word <i>shefi</i> is related to <i>shefayim</i> (high hills) in <i>upon the high hills is heard</i> (Jer. 3:20). The word is found spelled both with a <i>yod</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Job 33:21.</i> and with an <i>alef</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Is. 49:9. See I.E. on Is. 49:9. It should be pointed out that our texts of Is. 49:9 do not spell the word with an <i>alef</i>.</i> We find the same thing with the word <i>peta’im</i> (simple) (Prov. 1:4).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is sometimes spelled with an <i>alef</i>, and other times with a <i>yod</i>.</i> The meaning of <i>va-elekh shefi</i> (and he went to a bare height) is, he went to a high hill. The word <i>el</i> (to) has been omitted from the phrase.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our text should be read as if written <i>va-elekh el shefi</i>. Our texts reads <i>va-elekh shefi</i>, which literally means, and he went to high place. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> We find the same in <i>va-yavo yerushalayim</i> (and he came to Jerusalem)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This should be read as if written <i>va-yavo el yerushalayim</i> (and he came to Jerusalem), for the literal meaning of <i>va-yavo yerushalayim</i> is, and he came Jerusalem.</i> (I Kings 3:15) and in <i>nase’u ha-am hazerot</i> (the people journeyed unto Hazeroth)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This should be read as if written <i>nase’u ha-am el hazerot</i> (the people journeyed unto Hazeroth), for <i>nase’u ha-am hazerot</i> means the people journeyed Hazeroth.</i> (Num. 11:35). There are many such instances.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where the preposition <i>el</i> has to be added to the text.</i> Observe, Balaam was divining<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. does not describe the divination which Balaam employed. He may have cast lots, read the entrails of sacrificed animals, interpreted clouds, or the like.</i> when he went,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To the mountain.</i> for Scripture clearly states, <i>he went not, as at other times</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which implies that until then he divined.</i> <i>to meet with enchantments</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Divining.</i> (Num. 24:1). See, I have given you a hint regarding a sealed secret.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That Balaam practiced enchantment using the number seven.</i> AND I HAVE OFFERED UP A BULLOCK AND A RAM ON EVERY ALTAR. By command.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He commanded Balak to build these altars and place the offerings on them. See verse 1.</i> AND HE TOOK UP HIS PARABLE, AND SAID. The parable referred to is, <i>For from the top of rocks I see him</i> (v. 9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verses 7 and 8 are not parables.</i> FROM THE MOUNTAINS OF THE EAST. The word <i>kedem</i> means east.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>kedem</i> can also mean old.</i> COME, CURSE ME JACOB. “And he said” has been omitted from our clause.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse should be read as if written, And he said: Come curse me Jacob, and come…</i> We find many such instances in the Song of Songs. This is an abridged style. EXECRATE ISRAEL. Scripture repeats itself <sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>And come execrate Israel</i> repeats <i>Come curse me Jacob</i>.</i> as is its custom. Its manner is to employ different words to express the same thought. It repeats itself for emphasis. The word <i>zo’amah</i> (execrate)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Zo’amah</i> is vocalized with a <i>cholam</i>.</i> should have been vocalized like the word <i>zokhrah</i> (remember)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Zokrah</i> is vocalized with a short <i>kamatz</i>.</i> in <i>Remember unto me, O my God</i> (Neh. 5:19). However, since the <i>ayin</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of <i>zo’amah</i>.</i> was vocalized with a <i>pattach</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rather than with a <i>sheva</i>.</i> because it is a guttural, a <i>cholam</i> rather than a short <i>kamatz</i> was placed between it and the <i>zayin</i>. HOW SHALL I CURSE, WHOM GOD HATH NOT CURSED. The word <i>kabboh</i> means to curse. Its <i>heh</i> is in place of a <i>vav</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word is spelled <i>kabboh</i> rather than <i>kabbo</i>. The latter is the usual form. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> It is like the <i>heh</i> in <i>oholoh</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word is written <i>oholoh</i> rather than the more usual <i>oholo</i>.</i> (his tent) (Gen. 12:8) and the <i>heh</i> in <i>fera’oh</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rather than <i>fe’aro</i>.</i> (let them loose) in <i>for Aaron had let them loose</i> (Ex. 32:25). <i>Kabboh</i> comes from a double root.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its root is <i>kaf, bet, bet</i>.</i> Its full form<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the perfect.</i> is <i>kavevo</i> (they curse him). Compare, <i>savevo</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the root <i>samekh, bet, bet</i>. Both double root letters are present in <i>savevu</i>.</i> (they surrounded him) although it is irregular.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>savevo</i> is not found in Scripture (Krinsky). The form used is <i>sevavuhu</i> (I Kings 5:17). For other interpretations see Filwarg and Meijler.</i> AND HOW SHALL I EXECRATE, WHOM GOD HATH NOT EXECRATED. The words <i>ezam</i> (shall I execrate) and <i>za’am</i> (execrate) come from the root, <i>zayin, ayin, mem</i> (anger). Scripture repeats itself.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The second half of our verse repeats the first half.</i> FOR FROM THE TOP OF THE ROCKS I SEE HIM. Balaam said this because he was high up on the hill. He went not, as at other times, to meet with enchantments. <i>But he set his face toward the wilderness</i> (Num. 24:1)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. assumes that the wilderness is a flat area.</i> and not toward the high place<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which he previously faced.</i> is proof that my interpretation of <i>shefi</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on verse 3.</i> is correct.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For Scripture contrasts <i>midbar</i> (wilderness), which is a flat area, with <i>sefi</i>. Thus <i>sefi</i> must refer to an elevated area.</i> It is also likely that <i>from the top of the rocks</i> is a parable symbolizing the decrees that come down from heaven. For Balaam in his wisdom<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which came to him from on high.</i> saw that this nation would stand alone and not intermingle with other nations that would overpower her and try to force her to give up God’s Torah, as the nations did. AND SHALL NOT BE RECKONED AMONG THE NATIONS. I will explain this in my comments on <i>When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance</i> (Deut. 32:8). WHO HATH COUNTED. It is a wonder that Israel is not counted with the nations, when they are a nation as numerous as the sand. It is likely for a small nation not to be counted.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Because of its insignificance, but not a large one whose number is like the sand.</i> THE DUST OF JACOB. Its meaning is: Jacob is as numerous as the dust of the earth. OR NUMBERED THE STOCK OF ISRAEL? One standard.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. interprets <i>rova</i> (stock) as a quarter. The camp of Israel was divided into four standards (Num 2:1-31). Thus a quarter of Israel was one standard.</i> It means the same as <i>thou shalt see but the utmost part of them, and shalt not see them all</i> (v. 13).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The idea of our verse is, who can count even part of Israel.</i> [LET ME DIE THE DEATH OF THE RIGHTEOUS, AND LET MINE END BE LIKE HIS!] The Aramaic translator beautifully explained the meaning of <i>yesharim</i> (the righteous).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Onkelos renders <i>yesharim</i> as the honest.</i>I believe that Balaam wanted to die. He wanted his end to be like the end of Israel, who are God’s portion and are not ruled by the stars, for he was a magician.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation Balaam made two requests: to die the death of the righteous and to be granted a share in the world to come.</i> Others say that <i>mine end</i> repeats <i>let me die</i>. Balaam wanted to die like the righteous of Israel, for he knew that he would die by the sword.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation Balaam had one request, to die the death of Israel. The Bible merely repeats itself.</i> The Gaon<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rabbi Saadiah Gaon.</i> says that <i>Who hath counted</i> refers to God. Our verse means: You who are able to count the dust of Jacob, give me the death of the righteous. However, if this is so, then what meaning is there to <i>Or numbered the stock of Israel</i>?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For Balaam would not say to God, <i>You who are able to count a standard of Israel</i> after saying, <i>You who are able to count the dust of Israel</i>.</i> Many explain that <i>rova</i> (the stock of) is similar in meaning to <i>rivi</i>, which means my lying down. Compare, <i>Thou measurest my going about and my lying down</i> (rivi) (Ps. 139:3). They explain that the <i>dust of Jacob</i> refers to the time that Jacob journeys.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They interpret our verse as follows: Who can count Israel when Israel camps; Who can count Israel when Israel journeys.</i> [THOU HAST BLESSED THEM ALTOGETHER.] It is normal usage to place the infinitive first in the perfect and then the imperfect.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When Scripture wants to emphasize a point, it repeats the verb. It does so by placing the infinitive form first and then the appropriate verb next. See Gen. 31:30; Ex. 19:5; and Jud. 15:2.</i> The reverse is true in the imperative.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the imperative the infinitive comes first and the imperative second. See Is. 6:9.</i> However, there are irregular phrases such as <i>u-verakhta barekh</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here the infinitive (<i>barekh</i>) comes last.</i> (thou hast blessed them altogether) (Num. 24:10); <i>and yava vo</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here too the infinitive (<i>vo</i>) comes last.</i> (and he shall come on) in <i>and he shall come on, and overflow, as he passeth through</i> (Dan. 11:1). BUT THE UTMOST. The meaning of <i>efes katzehu</i> is, but the utmost. AND CURSE ME THEM. <i>Ve-kovno</i> (and curse them) is irregular.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word should have read <i>ve-kavnu</i>, for that is the rule when a <i>nun vav</i> is used to indicate the pronoun.</i> According to the rules of grammar the imperative is the same as the imperfect.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is vocalized similarly.</i> The only difference between them is the prefix.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A prefix is placed before the verb in the imperfect.</i> Compare, <i>yirdefehu</i> (he shall pursue him); <i>yirdefenu</i> (he shall pursue him); <i>yirdefuhu</i> (they shall pursue him); and <i>yirdefo</i> (shall pursue him<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The pronoun <i>him</i> is represented by a <i>cholam</i> only when a <i>heh vav</i> or a <i>nun vav</i> is not used to indicate the pronoun.</i>) in <i>The enemy shall pursue him</i> (Hos. 8:3).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">These are examples of verbs in the imperfect combined with the pronoun.</i> However, <i>kovno</i> comes with a <i>nun</i> vocalized with a <i>cholam</i> joined to the root. According to Rabbi Judah, the first grammarian, the word <i>kovno</i> comes from the root <i>kof, bet, nun</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus the <i>nun</i> is not a sign of the pronoun. The word <i>kovno</i> is similar to <i>yirdefo</i>; i.e., the pronoun is represented by a <i>cholam</i>.</i> If this is the case, then <i>kovno</i> cannot be an imperative, for we do not find such a vocalization in the <i>kal</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We do not find the imperative combined with the pronoun <i>him</i> signified by a <i>vav</i> (Filwarg).</i> Perhaps <i>kovno</i> is an infinitive vocalized like the word <i>shomro</i> (keep) in <i>and because He would keep the oath</i> (Deut. 7:8). AND HE TOOK UP HIS PARABLE. The reference is to <i>like the lofty horns of the wild-ox</i> (v. 22) and <i>a people that riseth up as a lioness</i> (v. 24). GIVE EAR UNTO ME. The word <i>adai</i> (unto me) is related to the word <i>ad</i> (unto). The word <i>adai</i> (unto Me) in <i>Yet have ye not returned unto Me</i> (Amos 4:6) is similar. Scripture repeats itself.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The second part of the last clause repeats its first part.</i> The <i>vav</i> in <i>beno tzippor</i> (son of Zippor) is superfluous.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here <i>beno</i> means son of, not his son.</i> It is similar to the <i>vav</i> of <i>le-mayeno</i> (a fountain) in <i>into a fountain of waters</i> (Ps. 114:8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Le-mayeno</i> in this verse means a fountain of, not a fountain.</i> [GOD IS NOT A MAN.] Balaam said this in response to Balak’s request, <i>and curse me them from thence</i> (v. 13). However, Balaam had already told him, <i>God hath not cursed</i> (v. 8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He therefore told him now that God is not a man and consequently does not alter His words.</i> WHEN HE HATH SAID, WILL HE NOT DO IT? His word.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It refers to His word.</i> OR WHEN HE HATH SPOKEN. A word. BEHOLD, I AM BIDDEN TO BLESS. <i>Barekh</i> (to bless)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, blessing.</i> is an infinitive. It has the same meaning as a noun.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture employs an infinitive (<i>barekh</i>) with the meaning of a noun (<i>borakhah</i>). The meaning of our clause is, I have taken a blessing; i.e., God has given me a blessing.</i> AND WHEN HE HATH BLESSED. <i>U-verekh</i> (and when he hath blessed) is a verb in the perfect. Its meaning is, when God pronounced a blessing, I cannot call it back. NONE HATH BEHELD INIQUITY IN JACOB.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">79</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders this as: He (God) did not see iniquity in Israel.</i> I believe that Balak learned from this utterance to send Moabite women into the camp of Israel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">80</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Therefore Balaam reasoned that it would pay for Balak to send Moabite women to the camp of Israel in order to make them sin. See Num. 25:1-3.</i> Scripture’s meaning is that God is not like a man that he should repent (v. 19), for He did not see iniquity in Israel. However, if there be iniquity in Israel, then God’s word will not come to pass, for all of God’s words are conditional unless accompanied by an oath. Compare, <i>At one instant I may speak concerning a nation…to build and to plant…but if it do evil in My sight…then I repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit it</i>. (Jer. 18:7-10). This is the meaning of Balaam’s statement. NEITHER HATH ONE SEEN PERVERSENESS IN ISRAEL.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">81</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders this as: Neither hath He (God) seen perverseness in Israel.</i> Scripture repeats itself.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">82</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Neither hath He (God) seen perverseness in Israel repeats, He (God) did not see iniquity in Israel</i> The word <i>amal</i> (perverseness) is brother to <i>aven</i> (iniquity). <i>Amal</i> (perverseness) is so called because iniquity (<i>aven</i>) ultimately leads to it. Look, as long as God does not see iniquity in Jacob, He is with Israel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">83</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s interpretation of <i>The Lord God is with him…</i></i> AND THE SHOUTING FOR<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">84</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>tru’at</i>.</i> THE KING IS AMONG THEM. In the camp of Israel. The reference is to <i>and when ye blow an alarm</i> (tru’ah) (Num. 10:5).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">85</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Shouting refers to the sounding of the shofar in honor of God (<i>tru’at.</i>). The word used for shouting in our verse is <i>tru’at</i>. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> GOD WHO BROUGHT THEM FORTH OUT OF EGYPT. This God who brought them out of Egypt is mighty and showed his miracles in Egypt. LIKE THE LOFTY HORNS OF THE WILD-OX. <i>Ke-to’afot re’em</i> (like the lofty horns of the wild-ox) is similar to <i>karne re’em</i> (the horns of the wild-ox) (Deut. 33:17).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">86</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>re’em</i> refers to an animal.</i> The meaning of <i>to’afot is</i>, the might of.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">87</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The horns represent the might of the animal.</i> <i>To’afot</i> (the heights of) in <i>The heights of the mountain are His also</i> (Ps. 95:4) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">88</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E., Ps. 95:4 should be rendered: the might of the mountain are also His.</i> It is also possible that the meaning<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">89</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The literal meaning of.</i> of <i>ve-to’afot harim lo</i> (the heights of the mountains are His) is, the horns of the mountains are also His.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">90</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Horns representing might. There is no difference in meaning between the two interpretations. They only differ with regard to the literal meaning of <i>to’afot</i>.</i> The meaning of <i>ve-kehsef to’afot lakh</i> (and precious silver unto thee) (Job 22:25) is, and silver, as mighty as the mountains.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">91</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Job 22:25. <i>To’afot</i> is short for <i>to’afot harim</i> (might of the mountains).</i> Scripture reads <i>lo</i> (to him). [It means to them.] Compare, <i>and the shouting for the King is among them</i> (v. 21). It means that this God made Israel strong. God did all this for them because Israel cleaves to God and does not seek anything from anyone but the Lord, for they have no need for an enchanter and a diviner. NOW IT IS SAID OF JACOB. <i>Ka-et</i> (now) is to be rendered, like this time.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">92</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The literal meaning of <i>ka-et</i> is, like a time. I.E. explains that this means like this time.</i> Its meaning is: at all times it will be told to them without the assistance of an enchanter.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">93</sup><i class=\"footnote\">What God will do.</i> WHAT HATH GOD WROUGHT. <i>Mah pa’al el</i> (what hath God wrought) is to be rendered, what God shall do. All things decreed, even those decreed for the future, are decreed in the past. Hence Scripture employs a perfect (<i>pa’al)</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">94</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For what God will do.</i> This will be told to Israel prophetically. What is told in prophecy is the truth. OF JACOB AND OF ISRAEL. Scripture repeats itself in a prophetic utterance. Compare, <i>From the top of Senir and Hermon</i> (Song of Songs 4:8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">95</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Senir and Hermon refer to the same mountain. See Deut. 3:9.</i> BEHOLD A PEOPLE THAT RISETH UP AS A LIONESS. This hints that Israel will conquer the kings of Canaan. It seems most logical to interpret it this way regarding a soon-to-occur event,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">96</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That it relates to a war that occurred prior to the conquest of Canaan.</i> such as the war against Midian.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">97</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 31:1-12.</i> A war like it was unprecedented. No Israelites were lost in this war<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">98</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 31:49.</i> and five kings died in it,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">99</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 31:8.</i> along with thirty-two thousand females who never slept with a man.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">100</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 31:35.</i> AND DRINK THE BLOOD OF THE SLAIN. The spoil and all their wealth.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">101</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The wealth of the slain. See Num. 31:11.</i> According to the midrashic interpretation it means that Moses would not die until he ate of the prey.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">102</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Moses wouldn’t die until he first defeated and looted the Midianites.</i> Scripture similarly reads: <i>Afterward shalt thou be gathered unto thy people</i> (Num. 31:2). THAT THOU MAYEST CURSE ME THEM. <i>Ve-kabbota</i> (that thou mayest curse) comes from a double root.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">103</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its root is <i>kof, bet, bet</i>.</i> Compare, <i>ve-sabboti ani</i> (therefore I turned) (Eccles. 2:20).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">104</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Sabboti</i> comes from the root <i>samekh, bet, bet</i>.</i> UNTO THE TOP OF PEOR. Balaam did not seek to use sorcery, so God’s spirit came upon him. Balaam acted like this because he saw <i>that there is no enchantment with Jacob</i> (Num. 23:23). BUT HE SET HIS FACE TOWARD THE WILDERNESS. Where Israel was, in the plains of Moab. DWELLING TRIBE BY TRIBE. He saw all the standards.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He saw Israel camped around their standards.</i> Some say that Balaam had a diabolical eye. Such people are called evildoers. Balaam did evil by employing his diabolic eye. I have already made my opinion known to you.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 22:28.</i> AND HE TOOK UP HIS PARABLE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>va-yissa meshalo va-yomar</i>, literally, and he lifted up his parable and said. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> This means he lifted up his voice and uttered his parable. The parable was, <i>As valleys stretched out</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The parable ends with verse 9. What comes before is a description, not a parable.</i> (v. 6). THE SAYING OF. The word <i>ne’um</i> means the saying of. Compare, <i>va-yimamu ne’um</i> (and say: He saith) (Jer. 23:31). Some say that <i>who heareth</i> and also <i>Who seeth</i> means who hears and who sees by divination. However, it most likely refers to that which is heard and seen in a prophetic dream. Compare Eliphaz’s statement, <i>A form was before mine eyes; I heard a still voice</i> (Job 4:16).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Eliphaz was describing a vision he had when asleep.</i> WHOSE EYE IS OPENED. The word <i>shetum</i> (opened) has no brother.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It does not occur elsewhere in Scripture.</i> It can be interpreted only in context. <i>Shetum</i> is the opposite of <i>setum</i> (shut).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus <i>shetum ha-ayin</i> means whose eye is opened.</i> Some say that Balaam had only one eye.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Rashi.</i> However, this is a midrashic interpretation. FALLEN DOWN. Compare, <i>a deep sleep fell upon Abram</i> (Gen. 15:12).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>fallen down</i> means fallen down in sleep.</i> YET WITH OPENED EYES. Even though he sleeps, he sees with his eyes. Compare, [<i>I sleep</i>] <i>but my heart waketh</i> (Cant. 5:2). HOW GOODLY. <i>Tovu</i> (goodly) is a verb in the perfect. It is similar to <i>oru</i> (are brightened) in <i>how mine eyes have brightened</i> (I Sam. 14:29). STRETCHED OUT. The <i>tet</i> of <i>nittayu</i> (stretched out) rceives a <i>dagesh</i> to compensate for the <i>nun</i> of <i>natah</i> (stretched),<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>nittayu</i> comes from the root <i>nun, tet, heh</i>.</i> which is swallowed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Nittayu</i> is a <i>nifal</i>. Its <i>nun</i> is the <i>nun</i> of the <i>nifal</i> form, not the <i>nun</i> of the root. If the <i>nun</i> of the root were present, the word would read <i>nintayu</i>.</i> Scripture reads <i>stretched out</i> because there are rivers that turn here and there and have trees over them. AS ALOES. <i>Ahalim</i> (aloes) is similar to the word <i>ahalot</i> (aloes) in <i>myrrh, and aloes</i> (Ps. 45:9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though <i>ahalim</i> (aloes) is in the masculine and <i>ahalot</i> (aloes) in the feminine.</i> Note, Balaam compares the tents<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of Israel.</i> to stretched-out rivers.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Next to which cedar and aloe trees are planted.</i> AS CEDARS. Scripture repeats itself.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Cedars are parallel to aloes.</i> Balaam mentions cedars in the sense of <i>He shall grow like a cedar in Lebanon</i> (Ps. 92:13). WATER SHALL FLOW. Look, <i>mayim</i> is in the singular.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though <i>mayim</i> is a plural form. The word <i>yizzal</i> (shall flow), which modifies <i>mayim</i> (water), is in the singular. Hence I.E. comment.</i> Compare, <i>the water of</i> (mai) <i>sprinkling was not dashed</i> (zorak)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Zorak</i>, which modifies <i>mayim</i>, is in the singular. See I.E. on Gen. 1:1 (Vol. 1, p. 31).</i> <i>against him</i> (Num. 19:13). FROM HIS BRANCHES. <i>Dalyo</i> (his branches) is similar to <i>daliyyotav</i> (his branches) (Jer. 11:16). AND HIS SEED SHALL BE IN MANY WATERS. Like seed saturated with water. This means he shall flourish and grow every day. AND HIS KING SHALL BE HIGHER THAN AGAG. This is a prophecy regarding Saul, Israel’s first king, for prior to Saul there were judges but no kings. GOD WHO BROUGHT HIM FORTH. The meaning of our verse is: the God who brought him [Israel] out of Egypt made him as powerful as the lofty horns of the wild-ox. Let not the one who would dispute this claim that the word him<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is to the word <i>lo</i> (him) in the clause <i>Is for him like the lofty horns of the wild-ox</i>.</i> refers to God, because Scripture earlier used the plural form <i>motzi’am</i> (brought them forth) when it stated, <i>God who brought them forth</i> (Num. 23:22).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 23:22 literally reads: God who brought them forth out of Egypt, for Him (<i>lo</i>) like the lofty horns of the wild-ox. Our verse reads: God who brought him out of Egypt, for him (<i>lo</i>) like the lofty horns of the wild-ox. Now, just as the word <i>lo</i> (him) in the first verse applies to God, so must the word <i>lo</i> (him) in the second verse apply to God.</i> For such is the style of Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To refer to the nation of Israel both in the singular and in the plural in one verse. Thus the word <i>lo</i> in Num. 23:22 applies to Israel and similarly in our verse.</i> Compare, <i>And they</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Israel.</i> <i>sit at Thy feet; he</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Israel; translated literally.</i> <i>receives</i> (yissa) <i>Thy words</i> (Deut. 33:3); and <i>How long will this</i> (ha-zeh)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Zeh</i> (this) is in the singular.</i> <i>people despise Me</i> (yena’atzuni)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Yena’atzuni</i> (will despise me).</i> (Num. 14:11). There are many such instances. HE SHALL EAT UP THE NATIONS THAT ARE HIS ADVERSARIES. The reference is to the kings of Canaan. AND SHALL BREAK THEIR BONES IN PIECES. <i>Garem</i> means a bone. <i>Yigarem</i> means he shall break their bones.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Garem</i> means a bone. The verb formed from this root means to break a bone.</i> The word <i>itzemo</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A verb related to the noun <i>etzem</i> (bone).</i> (hath broken his bones) (Jer. 50:17) is similar. So too is the word <i>mesa’ef</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A verb related to the word <i>se’if</i> (bough).</i> (shall lop) in <i>Shall lop the boughs with terror</i> (Is. 10:33) and <i>tefa’er</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A verb related to the noun <i>pe’er</i> (bough).</i> (go over the boughs) in <i>thou shalt not go over the boughs</i> (Deut. 24 :20).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">All of these verbs mean to destroy whatever their noun roots refer to.</i> AND PIERCE THEM THROUGH WITH HIS ARROWS. Each one of his arrows shall pierce.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. when a verb in the singular governs a noun in the plural, the verb refers to each one within the plural (see Vol. 1, p. XVII). In our verse the word <i>chitzav</i> (arrows) is in the plural, and <i>yimchatz</i> (pierce), the verb which governs it, is in the singular. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> So too, <i>But the righteous are secure as a young lion</i> (Prov. 28:1);<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It means that each one of the righteous is secure as a young lion, for <i>tzadikim</i> (the righteous) is in the plural while <i>yivtach</i> (is secure) is in the singular.</i> <i>Its branches run over the wall</i> (Gen. 49:22); <i>Blessed be every one that blesseth thee</i> (v. 9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Barukh</i> (blessed be) is in the singular; <i>me-varekhekha</i> (they that bless thee) is in the plural. Similarly, <i>korerekha</i> is in the plural, and <i>arur</i> is in the singular.</i> The latter means, everyone that blesses you wil be blessed. So too, <i>and cursed be everyone that curseth thee</i> (<i>Ibid</i>.). HE COUCHED. The meaning of our verse is: Israel will inherit Canaan, after which the land will be quiet. SHALL ROUSE HIM UP. I have already explained this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">“After a lion tears its prey it sits on its knees and crouches in security and no other passing animal will cause it to get up and flee” (I.E. on Gen. 49:8, Vol. 1, p. 429).</i> AND HE SMOTE HIS HANDS TOGETHER. <i>Va-yispok</i> (and he smote) is similar to <i>safeku</i> (clap) in <i>All that pass by clap Their hands at thee</i> (Lam. 2:15). AND I WILL ANNOUNCE<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>iyatzekha</i>, literally, I will advise thee.</i> TO THEE. Some say that its meaning is: I will advise you with regard to the daughters of Moab. However, this is far-fetched, for Scripture says, <i>in the end of days</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So it cannot refer to an event that was to happen soon.</i> I believe that we should take it according to its plain meaning; namely, I will advise you, so that you know what you should do, for this people will do this to your people.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the end of days.</i> AND KNOWETH THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE MOST HIGH. By prophecy, not through enchantment. I SEE HIM, BUT NOT NOW. It appears to me that this prophecy refers to King David. Balaam said but not now, for it referred to an event four hundred years later. I BEHOLD HIM, BUT NOT NIGH. Scripture repeats itself.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>I behold him, but not nigh</i> repeats, <i>I see him, but not now</i>.</i> The star and the sceptre are the parable. THERE SHALL STEP FORTH A STAR. There are images of stars that step forth in the sky that never existed and were never known.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">New stars appear that were never known. I.E. is probably referring to comets. His point is that the king referred to in our verse shall suddenly appear.</i> AND A SCEPTRE<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>shevet</i> (a rod). Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> SHALL ARISE. The reference is to a royal sceptre.I believe that <i>shall step</i> means that the star shall be seen making its way, as in <i>The stars in their courses</i> (Jud. 5:20). Many explained that the reference is to the messiah. The ancients said that Sanherib<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">An Assyrian king who lived in the eighth century.</i> mixed up the nations.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>Yoma</i> 54a.</i> However, note that Scripture speaks of Moab, Amalek, and Asshur.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus our verse deals with the pre-Sanherib period. Therefore it cannot pertain to the messiah.</i> Furthermore, why does Balaam conclude with <i>and shall afflict Eber</i> (v. 24)?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Eber refers to the Israelites. If Balaam’s prophecy refers to the messiah, why does he conclude with the affliction of Israel? Israel will not be afflicted in the messianic era.</i> On the contrary, Balaam should have ended his parable with <i>There shall step forth a star out of Jacob</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For that is what will take place in the messianic era after Israel is afflicted.</i> Those who lack intelligence think that anyone who explains that <i>There shall step forth a star</i> refers to King David denies the coming of the messiah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For “those who lack intelligence” believe that this verse is necessary for belief in the coming of the messiah. Therefore one who interprets this verse as referring to King David denies the coming of the messiah.</i> Far be it, far be it, for the messiah is clearly stated in the prophecy of Daniel. I have already explained that Daniel first mentions the coming into existence of the Greek kings<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The kingdoms of the Greeks.</i> and the arising of the Hasmoneans. He mentions the existence of the second temple, the years of the siege, the exile, and the salvation. He notes these things in order. There is no conceivable need for another prophet,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We would know about the coming of the messiah even if we did not have the Book of Daniel.</i> since we have the words of Moses, who is the most important prophet: <i>If any of thine that are dispersed be in the uttermost parts of heaven… the Lord thy God will bring thee</i> (Deut. 30:4,5).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Back to the Land of Israel. In other words, although our verse does not allude to the messiah, Deuteronomy does. I.E. notes this because he wants to show that Moses predicted the coming of the messiah.</i> AND SHALL SMITE THROUGH THE CORNERS OF MOAB. This is what David did.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See II Sam. 8:2.</i> AND BREAK DOWN. The word <i>karkar</i> (break down) is similar to <i>mekarkar kir</i> (Is. 22:5), the meaning of which is, breaking the wall. It is similar to the word <i>mesa’ef</i> (shall lop) (Is. 10:33).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In that the verbal form of the noun means to destroy what the noun stands for. See I.E. on verse 8 and the notes thereto.</i> THE SONS OF SETH. People. Seth was the most important son of Adam, for Noah was descended from him. Yitzchaki<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Gen. 36:31 and the notes thereto.</i> says that the reference is to the Amonites and the Moabites, and that Scripture repeats itself.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Sons of Seth is another term for the Moabites.</i> He also says that the word Seth is derived from the word <i>shet</i> (buttocks) in <i>and with buttocks uncovered</i> (Is. 20:4) and that it alludes to the daughters<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The ancestresses of the Moabites and the Ammonites. See Gen. 19:37,38.</i> of Lot.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Their father, whose nakedness his daughters uncovered. See Gen. 19:30-38.</i> However, this appears to me to be farfetched, for <i>shet</i> refers to the backside,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">While Lot’s daughters uncovered his front. The point is, Scripture would not allude to intercourse by employing the phrase “uncovering the buttocks.”</i> which is the foundation of the body.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the basic meaning of <i>shet</i> is foundation, not buttock.</i> Compare, <i>ki ha-shatot yeharesun</i> (When the foundations are destroyed) (Ps. 11:3). Many others have explained that the word <i>shet</i> (Seth) in <i>all the sons of Seth</i>, is related to the word <i>ha-shatot</i> (foundations) in <i>When the foundations are destroyed</i>. It means that the cities will be destroyed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation, <i>ve-karkar kol bene shet</i> (and break down all the sons of Seth) means: and will break down all foundations.</i> This interpretation is not far-fetched. AND EDOM SHALL BE A POSSESSION. The word <i>yereshah</i> (possession) is related to the word <i>torishu</i> (drive out)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders <i>torishu</i> destroy. See I.E. on Ex. 15:9.</i> in <i>But if ye will not drive out</i> (Num. 33:55).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders <i>ve-hayah edom yereshah</i> (And Edom shall be a possession) as, and Edom shall be destroyed.</i> <i>Yereshah</i> is a noun vocalized according to the pattern of the word <i>levenah</i> (tile) in <i>take thee a tile</i> (Ezek. 4:1). It is in place of an adjective. Compare the word <i>shemamah</i> (desolation) in <i>and it shall be a desolation</i> (Is. 17:9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here too Scripture employs a noun (<i>shemamah</i>) in place of an adjective (<i>shomemah</i>).</i> We know that David’s hand overpowered Edom<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See II Sam. 8:14.</i> and Mount Seir.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Edom’s abode.</i> AND OUT OF JACOB SHALL ONE HAVE DOMINION.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ve-yerd mi-ya’akov</i>, literally, and a ruler from Jacob. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> A ruler shall arise out of Jacob. AND SHALL DESTROY THE REMNANT FROM THE CITY. From every city.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From city (<i>me-ir</i>) is short for from every city.</i> Its meaning is, from Edom. The reference is to Joab, for Scripture clearly states, <i>and had smitten every male in Edom</i> (I Kings 11:15). AND HE LOOKED ON AMALEK. Via prophecy.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He did not actually look at Amalek.</i> <i>The first of the nations</i> is the parable. It means Amalek was the first nation to wage war against Israel, but his end shall be utter destruction. This<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The destruction of Amalek.</i> took place in the days of Saul, who slew <i>man and woman, infant and suckling</i> (I Sam. 15:3) and old men. Many explain that the meaning of <i>the first of the nations</i> is that Amalek was considered to be the head of the nations. However, this was not the case.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Amalek was never the chief of the nations.</i> AND HE LOOKED ON THE KENITE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The father-in-law of Moses.</i> The family of Jethro. Scripture writes, <i>These are the Kenites</i> (I Chron. 2:55) and <i>Now Heber the Kenite</i> (Jud. 4:11).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The verse reads, <i>Now Heber the Kenite had severed himself from the Kenites, even from the children of Hobab the father-in-law of Moses</i>. This shows that the Kenites are descended from Moses’ father-in-law.</i> <i>And though thy nest be set in the rock</i> is the parable.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned earlier in the verse.</i> The latter repeats the preceding clause.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>And though thy nest be set in the rock</i> repeats <i>Though firm be thy dwelling place</i>.</i> Its meaning is, though your dwelling place be as high as the nest of a bird, it will not save you. KAIN SHALL BE WASTED. <i>Le-va’er</i> (wasted) is similar to the word <i>le-va’er</i> (eaten up) in <i>it shall again be eaten up</i> (Is. 6:13); and <i>yeva’er</i> (sweepeth) in <i>as a man sweepeth away dung</i> (I Kings 14:10); and <i>u-vi’arta</i> (so shalt thou put away) in <i>So shalt thou put away the evil from thee</i> (Deut. 13:6).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>le-va’er</i> means to destroy.</i> Kain and the Kenite are one and the same. [HOW LONG? ASSHUR SHALL CARRY THEE AWAY CAPTIVE.] Balaam, as it were, said: How long shall Asshur carry thee<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">73</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Kenites.</i> away captive? He will not let go of you until you are wasted. Asshur is feminine. Asshur is short for the camp of Asshur. Compare, <i>va-tipple sheva va-tikkachem</i> (and the Sabeans made a raid) (Job 1:15); <i>Va-ta’arokh yisra’el</i> (and Israel…put the battle in array) (I Sam. 17:21). AND HE TOOK UP HIS PARABLE, AND SAID. The reference is to <i>But ships shall come from the coast of Kittim</i> (v. 24). When Balaam mentioned that the Kenite would be carried away captive, he also said that a time would come when Asshur would be afflicted and Eber along with him. The latter refers to the Hebrews that Asshur carried away captive, for the Kenites lived with the Israelites. The interpretation of the Aramaic translation is well known.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">74</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Onkelos renders <i>ever</i> (Eber) by <i>ever perat</i> (the other side of the Euphrates).</i> However, it is not the practice of Scripture to mention the word <i>ever</i> without the word <i>nahar</i> (river) following it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">75</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When referring to the other side of the Euphrates.</i> Some explain that <i>tzim</i> (ships) is a plural. It is related to the word <i>tzi</i> (ship) in gallant ship (Is. 33:21). Others say that the word <i>tzim</i> is related to the word <i>tziyim</i> (wild-cats) <i>in And the wild-cats shall meet with the jackals</i> (Is. 34:14). Balaam compared the Kittim to wild-cats because people will be gripped by fear when they appear.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">76</sup><i class=\"footnote\">These commentators explain our verse as follows: wild-cats shall come from the land of Kittim.</i> [ALAS, WHO SHALL LIVE AFTER GOD HATH APPOINTED HIM.] The reference is to the king of Asshur who made himself into a god. The latter is noted in the Book of Isaiah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">77</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Is. 10:7. Isaiah did not actually say this. He intimated that the king of Assyria, in destroying nations, acted like a god.</i> Or its meaning is: Who shall survive the decrees which God placed in the world via Asshur, for the king of Assyria conquered all the nations. The latter is clearly stated in Scripture. OF KITTIM. They are descended from Javin, for the latter is clearly stated in Scripture (Gen. 10:4). It is also possible that Scripture alludes to the kingdom of the Greeks. I have already explained in the Book of Daniel, that the kingdom of the Greeks and that of the Kittim are one and the same.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">78</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Dan. 2:39. Some texts read <i>aram</i> instead of <i>kittim</i>. <i>Aram</i> stands for the Romans. See I.E. on Dan. 2:39.</i> There is clear proof that it is the third beast.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">79</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Dan. 7:6.</i> FROM THE COAST OF KITTIM. <i>Mi-yad</i> (from the coast of) means from the place. Compare the word <i>yad</i> in <i>the side</i> (yad) <i>of the Jordan</i> (Num. 13:29) and <i>Thou shalt have a place</i> (Deut. 23:13). AND ALSO HE. The Kittim. Kittim is singular even though it comes in the plural form. <i>And the sons of Javan: Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim</i> (Gen. 10:4) is proof of this. AND BALAAM ROSE UP. For he was lying down. A deep sleep had fallen over him. Scripture clearly states, <i>Fallen down, yet with opened eyes</i> (v. 16). IN SHITTIM. For Scripture clearly states, <i>And they pitched by the Jordan, from Beth-jeshimoth even unto Abel-shittim</i> (Num. 33:49).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, Israel was in Shittim during the incident of Balaam. They did not journey there after the incident.</i> Everything took place in the plains of Moab, for Israel did not move from there.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Until Israel crossed the Jordan and entered Canaan.</i> Also, Joshua sent spies from there (Josh. 2:1). [AND THE PEOPLE BEGAN.] I believe that <i>va-yachel</i> (began) is a <i>hifil</i>. AND BOWED DOWN. Israel and the daughters of Moab.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads: <i>And the people did eat</i> (va-yokhal), <i>and bowed down</i> (va-yishtachavu). <i>Va-yokhal</i> is in the singular. <i>Va-yishtachavu</i> is in the plural. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> AND ISRAEL JOINED HIMSELF. The word <i>va-yitzamed</i> is related to the word <i>tzemed</i> (yoke) in <i>a yoke of oxen</i> (I Sam. 11:7). The reference is to the Moabite women; that is, Israel was joined with the women in the religion of <i>pe’or</i>. AND HANG THEM. The reference is to those who were joined.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Not to the chiefs of the people. The text is vague. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> The proof text is, <i>And Moses said unto the judges of Israel</i> (v. 5).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. identifies the chiefs with the judges.</i> AND HANG THEM. <i>Ve-hoka otam</i> (and hang them) is similar to <i>va-yaki’um</i> (and they hanged them) in <i>and they hanged them in the mountain</i> (II Sam. 21:9). It is to be understood in accordance with the words of the Aramaic translation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Onkelos renders <i>u-ketol de-chayyav ketol</i>: execute those who are guilty of a capital crime. However, I.E.’s reference might be to Targum Jonathan, who renders <i>ve-hiki’um, u-tzelovinun</i> as, and hang them (Krinsky). However, it should also be noted that <i>u-tzelovinun</i> can also be rendered, and crucify them.</i> The proof text is, <i>In the face of the sun</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the reference is to public execution. For they were hung in the mountain so that all in the vicinity could see them executed.</i> The meaning of <i>in the face of the sun</i> is, in public. Compare, <i>in the sight of this sun</i> (II Sam. 12:11).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The entire clause reads, <i>and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun</i>. The next verse continues, <i>but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun</i>.</i> SLAY YE EVERY ONE HIS MEN. From whatever tribe they may be. It is known that they slew,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Those who worshipped <i>pe’or</i>.</i> even though Scripture does not mention this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the judges slew those who worshipped <i>pe’or</i>.</i> AND BROUGHT UNTO HIS BRETHREN. He gave her to his family. WHILE THEY WERE WEEPING. Praying to God. AND WHEN PHINEHAS…SAW. When Phinehas saw this, he rose up from the midst of the congregation, which was in the courtyard of the tent of meeting. There is a question here.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Why did Phinehas kill Zimri? Scripture does not tell us that Zimri worshipped <i>pe’or</i> (Weiser).</i> It is possible to answer that Zimri (v. 14) was joined<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">With Cozbi in the worship of <i>pe’or</i>.</i> in the presence of witnesses. INTO THE CHAMBER. <i>El ha-kubbah</i> (into the chamber) means into the tent. The word has a similar meaning in Arabic, although there is a difference in shape between an <i>ohel</i> (tent) and a <i>kubbah</i> (chamber).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Between what the Hebrews refer to as an <i>ohel</i> and the Arabic <i>kubbah</i>.</i> AND THRUST. <i>Va-yidkor</i> (and thrust) is similar to <i>ve-dokreni</i> (thrust me) in <i>and thrust me through therewith</i> (I Sam. 31:4).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>va-yidkor</i> means and he thrust.</i> THROUGH HER BELLY. <i>El kovatah</i> (through her belly) means in the chamber, that is, in the chamber where she was with Zimri’s brothers. Others say that the word that <i>kovatah</i> is related to is the word <i>kevah</i> (maw) in <i>the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw</i> (Deut. 18:3).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>kovatah</i> means her belly.</i> There is also a midrashic statement to the effect that ten miracles were performed for Phinehas.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>Sifre</i> and <i>Tanchuma</i> on our Torah portion list 12 miracles.</i> However, Scripture does not mention them. IN THAT HE WAS VERY JEALOUS FOR MY SAKE AMONG THEM. There is no <i>dagesh</i> in the <i>nun</i> of <i>be-kano</i> (in that he was very jealous) in order to simplify enunciation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Kano</i> is in the <i>pi’el</i>. The middle root letters in the <i>pi’el</i> receive a <i>dagesh</i>. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> It means that Phinehas was jealous like his creator.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38 reads: He acted jealously in My place.</i> Scripture tells us that God is <i>a jealous God</i> (Ex. 20:5) when it comes to idolatry. [SO THAT I CONSUMED NOT THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL IN MY JEALOUSY.] If Phinehas had not been jealous for My sake, then I would have destroyed all of Israel in My jealousy. MY COVENANT OF PEACE. The meaning of <i>beriti shalom</i> (My covenant of peace) is:<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The literal meaning of <i>beriti shalom</i> is: My covenant peace. “Of” is not in the Hebrew text. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> My covenant, a covenant of peace.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>beriti shalom</i> should be read as if written <i>beriti, berit shalom</i>.</i> Compare, <i>Thy throne God</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (Ps. 45:7).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which should be read as if written, Thy throne, throne of God. See I.E. on Num. 12:6.</i> There are many such cases.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where a word is missing in the Biblical text and has to be supplied by the reader.</i> Its meaning is that Phinehas should not fear the brothers of Zimri for Zimri<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Who came from a powerful family which might avenge his death.</i> was a prince of a father’s house (v. 14). Phinehas was rewarded with the covenant of priesthood for himself and his seed forever, for all the high priests were descendants of Phinehas. It is possible that Eleazar<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Who served as high priest after the passing of Aaron. See Num. 20:22-29.</i> had other sons.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The high priesthood would in any case have been passed on through Phinehas.</i> The word <i>acharav</i> (after him) (v. 13)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The phrase “after him” means after his death.</i> is proof that Phinehas died and is in no way to be identified with Elijah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Who did not die. Some of the rabbis believe that Phinehas is Elijah. See <i>Yalkut Shimoni</i> on the Torah portion, <i>Phinehas</i>.</i> I have already explained it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Jud. 20:28.</i> Phinehas <i>was ruler over them</i> [Israel] (I Chron. 9:20). He was alive during the incident of the concubine from Gibeah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Judges, chapters 19-21. These citations, which occurred before the story of Elijah, prove that Phinehas could not be Elijah.</i> BECAUSE HE WAS JEALOUS FOR HIS GOD. He acted out of his love for God. He also did good for Israel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s paraphrase of <i>and made atonement for the children of Israel</i>.</i> According to the midrashic interpretation, the father<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Phinehas.</i> atoned and the children<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Phinehas’s descendants.</i> will atone.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence the connection between <i>an everlasting priesthood</i> and <i>because he…made atonement for the children of Israel</i>.</i> WHO WAS SLAIN WITH THE MIDIANITISH WOMAN. <i>Et ha-midyanit</i> is to be rendered, with the Midianitish woman.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>et</i> here means with.</i> There are many such instances.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where <i>et</i> has the meaning of with. See I.E. on Ex. 1:1 (Vol. 2, p. 3).</i> A PRINCE OF A FATHER’S HOUSE AMONG THE SIMEONITES. One of the five fathers’ [houses] of the children of Simeon.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 26:12,13.</i> The head of his father’s house was greater than he.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The tribe of Simeon was divided into five branches, each of which was called a father’s house. Zimri was a prince of one of the five branches of the tribe of Simeon (Num. 1:4). Midian was similarly divided into five houses.</i> ZUR. Zur was one of the kings of Midian. Note, each of the five kings of Midian ruled over a house. HARASS. <i>Tzaror</i> (harass) is an infinitive.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is vocalized with a <i>kamatz</i>. An imperative is vocalized with a <i>sheva</i>.</i> It is like the word <i>zakhor</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is also vocalized with a <i>kamatz</i> rather than with a <i>sheva</i>.</i> (remember) in <i>Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy</i>. FOR THEY HARASS YOU. <i>Ki tzorerim</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Tzorerim</i> is a present form. However, Scripture tells of what the Midianites did to the Israelites. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> <i>hem lakhem</i> (for they harass you) is to be rendered: for they harassed you. BY THEIR WILES. <i>Be-nikhlehem</i> (by their wiles) means by their evil thoughts. <i>Be-nikhlehem</i> is related to the word <i>va-yitnakkelu</i> (they conspired) in <i>they conspired against him</i> (Gen. 37:18).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Both words come from the same root, <i>nun, kaf, lamed</i>.</i> AND IN THE MATTER OF COZBI. Furthermore, they intend to harm you because of what happened to Cozbi their sister. AND IT CAME TO PASS AFTER THE PLAGUE.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This line concludes chapter 25, verse 19, and continues into chapter 26, verse 1.</i> God spoke to Moses. He also spoke to Eleazar via Moses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s interpretation of: <i>That the Lord spoke unto Moses and unto Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest…</i></i> <i>And Moses and the elders of Israel commanded the people</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is: Moses commanded the elders, who then commanded Israel.</i> (Deut. 27:1) and <i>Then sang Moses and the children of Israel</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is: Moses taught the song to the Israelites. See I.E. on Ex. 15:1 (Vol. 2, p. 291).</i> (Ex. 15:1) are similar. Scripture states <i>after the plague</i> because God said, <i>Unto these</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Those who survived the plague.</i> <i>the land shall be divided</i> (v. 53). AND MOSES AND ELEAZAR THE PRIEST SPOKE. In place of his father.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Now that Aaron was dead, Eleazar spoke God’s word to the people.</i> It is possible that Eleazar served as Moses’ spokesman as Aaron did.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He not only served as spokesman in this case but did so in all other cases.</i> WITH THEM. <i>Otam</i> (with them)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Otam</i> means them. Scripture should have read <i>ittam</i> (with them). Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> is similar to <i>dabbero</i> (speak…unto him) in <i>speak peaceably unto him</i> (Gen. 37:4).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Dabbero</i> is irregular, for it is a compound of <i>dabber</i> (speak) and <i>oto</i> (him). <i>Dabbero</i> literally means speak him. We thus sees that Scripture employs the term “him” with the meaning of “with him.” The same applies to the term <i>otam</i> (them). Scripture occasionally employs it with the meaning of “with them.”</i> FROM TWENTY YEARS OLD AND UPWARD. This means that they took the sum of the people<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>From twenty years old and upward</i> is short for: they took up the sum of the people from twenty years old and up.</i> as God commanded Moses. [AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, THAT CAME FORTH OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT.] Scripture states the aforementioned because there were many among those who were numbered who came out of Egypt.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Those who were under the age of twenty when they left Egypt did not die in the wilderness.</i> They most likely came to about half the number of the Israelites. Scripture starts with Reuben in imitation of the manner in which the Israelites<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 1:20.</i> were first numbered in the wilderness of Sinai. WHO STROVE. The word <i>hitzu</i> (strove) is similar in meaning to the word <i>yinnatzu</i> (strive) in <i>And if men strive together</i> (Ex. 21:22).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>hitzu</i> means strove.</i> WITH KORAH. I have already explained this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 16:35.</i> AND THEY BECAME A SIGN.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>nes</i>.</i> Compare, <i>that they may be a sign</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ot</i>.</i> <i>unto the children of Israel</i> (Num. 17:3).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>nes</i> here means a sign. The word <i>nes</i> can mean banner or miracle. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> NOTWITHSTANDING THE SONS OF KORAH DIED NOT. Samuel,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The prophet Samuel.</i> his sons, and his grandsons who were singers<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the temple.</i> and were called the Korahites<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I Chron. 6:18-23.</i> is proof of this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That Korah’s children did not die.</i> The Book of Psalms states, <i>For the leader; a Psalm of the sons of Korah</i> (Ps. 49:1). The Torah also records the family of the Korahites (v. 58). Scripture mentions the sons of Korah with the sons of Reuben because the adult and the minor sons of Dathan and Abiram died. The wickedness of Dathan and Abiram was thus greater than the wickedness of Korah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence their children died. When Moses asked Dathan and Abiram to come to him, they refused and insulted Moses. We do not find the same with Korah (Num. 16:12-14).</i> THE JAMINITES. Do not seek grammatical consistency in names. Compare, <i>puvvah</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Puvvah the son of Issachar.</i> and <i>puni</i> (Punites) (v. 23).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We would expect <i>puvvi</i> rather than <i>puni</i> to be used for a member of Puvvah’s family.</i> From <i>shefufam</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The son of Benjamin.</i> Scripture derives <i>shufami</i> (v. 39).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As the term for a member of his family. However, we would expect the term <i>shefufami</i> to be used.</i> Scripture also reads: <i>of yimnah</i> (Imnah), <i>the family of yimnah</i> (v. 44), not <i>ha-yemini</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is the correct grammatical form for a member of the family of <i>yimnah</i>.</i> as it does in the case of <i>bri’ah</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The son of Asher.</i> and <i>beri’iy</i> (Beriites)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The family of Beriah.</i> (v. 44); <i>Chaggi</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Chaggi</i> and <i>shuni</i> were sons of Gad. Scripture refers to members of their family by the terms <i>chaggi</i> and <i>shuni</i> rather than <i>chaggi’iy</i> or <i>shuni’iy</i>.</i> and <i>shuni</i> (v. 15) lacking the <i>yod</i> gentile.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">These terms are thus irregular.</i> On the other hand, the <i>yod</i> of <i>chaggi</i> and <i>shuni</i> might be the <i>yod</i> gentile and the <i>yod</i> of the proper name<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>yod</i> of the names of <i>chaggi</i> and <i>shuni</i>.</i> is missing. The latter is correct. After Reuben, Scripture lists Simeon and Gad, who pitched next to Reuben.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And similarly the other tribes. In other words, Scripture does not list the tribes in the order of their births but by their banners. See Num. 10:11-28.</i> However, Manasseh is mentioned before Ephraim.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verses 28-34.</i> The order is reversed in the wilderness of Sinai.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Num. 1:32-35.</i> It appears that this is due to their number, for the sons of Ephraim were more numerous than the sons of Manasseh in the wilderness of Sinai by eight thousand and three hundred,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence they were there mentioned first. At the census taken in the wilderness of Sinai, Ephraim numbered 40,500 (Num. 1:33) and Manasseh numbered 32,200 (<i>Ibid</i>., 35).</i> and in the plains of Moab the sons of Manasseh numbered more than the sons of Ephraim by twenty thousand and two hundred.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence they were mentioned first. See verses 34 and 37.</i> No mention is made of the family of the following five sons of Benjamin: Becher, Gera, Naaman, Rosh, and Ard.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Gen. 46:21.</i> OF AHIRAM.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">There is a discrepancy between the sons of Benjamin as given in verses 38-40 and those given in Gen. 46:21. Hence I.E.’s comments.</i> Ahiram<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In our verse.</i> is the same as Ehi.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Gen. 46:21.</i> Shephupham<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 39.</i> is the same as Muppim,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Gen. 46:21.</i> and Hupham<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verse 39.</i> is the same as Huppim.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Gen. 46:21.</i> The Ard and Naaman mentioned in our verse are the sons of Bela.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Whereas the persons bearing the same names mentioned in Gen. 46:21 are the sons of Benjamin.</i> Others say that Naaman and Ard<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in our verse.</i> were among those who descended to Egypt and that they are the sons of Bela the son of Benjamin.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, they and the Naaman and Ard mentioned in Genesis are one and the same. However, Scripture omitted their father’s name in Genesis.</i> OF SHUHAM. He is the same as Hushim.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in Gen. 46:23. There is thus no discrepancy in the names of the son of Dan.</i> THESE ARE THE FAMILIES OF DAN AFTER THEIR FAMILIES. For <i>hushim</i> was divided into many families.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence <i>the family of the Shuhamites</i> follows <i>of Shuham</i> (also called Hushim).</i> THE LAND SHALL BE DIVIDED. It means that the land shall be divided among the tribes by lot. ACCORDING TO THE LOT SHALL THEIR INHERITANCE BE DIVIDED BETWEEN THE MORE AND THE FEWER. To those who were numbered.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Those who were counted by Moses and Eleazar. See Num. 26:1,2.</i> OF GERSHON. Scripture opens with the first-born.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of Levi. See Gen. 46:11.</i> It mentions Gershon’s son Libni. It does not mention Shimei.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Gershon’s other son. See Ex. 6:17.</i> It is possible that he had no children. On the other hand, Shimei might have had children and they died childless. Scripture then mentions the children of Hebron the son of Kohath.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Ex. 6:18.</i> It does not name Uzziel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Son of Kohath. See Ex. 6:18.</i> It then mentions the sons of Merari<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>The family of the Mahlites, the family of the Mushites</i>. Mahli and Mushi were sons of Merari. See Ex. 6:19.</i> and goes back and refers to the sons of Itzhar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Korahites. See Num. 16:1.</i> Then it mentions the sons of Amram.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Amram was Kohath’s first-born. See Ex. 6:18.</i> Scripture places them last<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though Amram was born before Hebron and Izhar.</i> because it goes on to explain what happened to the grandsons of Amram.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verses 60 and 61.</i> THE KORAHITES. They are the sons of Korah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For Korah was then dead.</i> Scripture mentions Jochebed out of respect to her sons. It does not speak of her mother, because Scripture is being brief.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse literally reads: And the name of Amram’s wife was Jochebed, the daughter of Levi, whom she bore. Scripture does not identify the one who did the bearing, i.e., Jochebed’s mother.</i> <i>Asriel, whom she bore</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (I Chron. 7:14) is similar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Here too Scripture omits the subject.</i> AND THEY THAT WERE NUMBERED. The Levites. The Levites increased by seven hundred in this numbering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The first time the Levites were counted they numbered 22,300. See Num. 3:39 along with I.E.’s comment on it. Their number here is given as 23,000. The Levites thus increased by 700 in close to 40 years.</i> It is amazing that the Levites increased by only seven hundred. Look! The Israelites from among whom all those above the age of twenty died<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By the time the census recorded in our chapter was taken. See verse 64.</i> numbered about the same as they did during their first numbering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The number of Israelites at the first census came to 603,550 (Num. 1:46). They now numbered 601,730.</i> [The small increase in the number of Levites is strange] for the Levites were not included in the numbering of Israel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By God’s decree only those above the age of 20 who were numbered in the wilderness of Sinai had died by the time of the second census. See verse 64 and Num. 14:29. This decree did not fall upon the Levites.</i> Eleazar the Kohen proves the latter.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Had the Levites been included in the numbering, Eleazar too would be dead, for he was most likely above the age of twenty when the first census was taken.</i> BUT AMONG THESE THERE WAS NOT A MAN. This verse refers to the number of the children of Israel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The term <i>these</i> refers to the number of the children of Israel.</i> SAVE CALEB THE SON OF JEPHUNNEH. Caleb is mentioned before Joshua,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though Joshua was more important.</i> following God’s word.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">God mentioned Caleb before Joshua in Num. 14:30.</i> AND HE WAS NOT AMONG THE COMPANY. The daughters<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of Zelophehad.</i> thought that the children of those who gathered themselves together against the Lord<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the company of Korah (Num. 16:1-19).</i> would not inherit.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence they said that their father was not in Korah’s company.</i> BUT HE DIED IN HIS OWN SIN. Rabbi Judah Ha-Levi the Spaniard says <i>but he died in his own sin</i> is to be understood as connected to <i>and he had no sons</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the meaning here is: he died without sons because of his sins.</i> It is as we say today, such and such occurred to so and so because of his sins. This interpretation is not far off. BECAUSE HE HAD NO SON. <i>Ki en lo ben</i> is to be rendered, because he had no son.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the meaning of <i>ki</i> in our verse is because. <i>Ki</i> has a number of meanings. Hence I.E.’s comments.</i> RIGHT. <i>Ken</i> means true.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation our clause reads: The daughters of Zelophehad speak the truth (<i>ken</i>).</i> Or, the thing is so.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According this interpretation our clause reads: The facts are (<i>ken</i>) as the daughters of Zelophehad speak.</i> AND THOU SHALT CAUSE THE INHERITANCE. What he should have received, they shall receive. AND HAVE NO SON. This is proof that a son inherits his father’s property. UNTO HIS BRETHREN. From his father or mother. UNTO HIS KINSMAN THAT IS NEXT TO HIM. From all of his family.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is closest to the deceased.</i> AND HE SHALL POSSESS IT. The inheritance. I have already explained the approach of the rabbis in my comments on <i>unto a foreign people</i> (Ex. 21:8).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>ve-yarash otah</i>. The rabbis render this, and he (the husband) shall inherit her (<i>otah</i>). According to the rabbis our verse teaches that a man inherits his wife’s property but a woman does not inherit her husband’s property. See <i>Baba Batra</i> 111b and I.E.’s short commentary on Ex. 21:8.</i> We need rabbinic tradition to know the laws of inheritance with regard to whether a father or a mother inherits a son’s property or what a woman inherits. The rabbis of blessed memory said that the chapter that opens with the words, <i>Get thee up into this mountain</i> (v. 12), follows the laws of inheritance because Moses wanted to know who would inherit his position. TO SANCTIFY ME. The word <i>le-hakdesheni</i> (to sanctify me) is connected to <i>meritem</i> (ye rebelled).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though these words do not follow each other.</i> Its meaning is, ye rebelled with regard to sanctifying me.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is, you rebelled against me by not sanctifying me.</i> This, I have explained,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 20:8.</i> is the meaning of <i>because ye sanctified Me not in the midst of the children of Israel</i> (Deut. 32:51). THE GOD OF THE SPIRITS. He knows the spirits. He knows which spirit is fit.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To lead the congregation.</i> [SET.] The word <i>yifkod</i> (set) is related to the word <i>pakid</i> (official).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Thus <i>yifkod</i> means let Him appoint a leader.</i> WHO MAY GO OUT BEFORE THEM. In war. WHO MAY LEAD THEM OUT. <i>Va-asher yotzi’em</i> (who may lead them out) means who will direct someone else to lead them out.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The verse reads <i>va-asher yotzi’em. Yotzi’em</i> is a <i>hifil</i>. It literally means shall cause them to go out. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> IN WHOM IS SPIRIT. Now all living persons have spirit in them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Why then does Scripture say, <i>a man in whom is spirit</i>?</i> Its meaning can only be similar to that of <i>be thou strong therefore, and show thyself a man</i> (I Kings 2:2).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Solomon was a man. What point was there in telling him show thyself a man? Thus show thyself a man means show thyself to be a man of valor.</i> AND LAY THY HAND UPON HIM. To show Israel that he was in Moses’ place and that he<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Only he.</i> was the one on whom Moses had placed his hands. AND THOU SHALT PUT OF THY HONOR UPON HIM. You will honor Joshua in front of all of Israel. THAT…MAY HEARKEN. For Israel already believes in you. When they see that you honored Joshua they will respect him, for they will follow your ways. AT HIS WORD SHALL THEY GO OUT. Upon the word of Eleazar by the judgment of the Urim.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In others words, <i>al piv</i> (at his word) refers to Eleazar’s word.</i> Others say, in accordance to the judgment of the Urim.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation, <i>al piv</i> (at his word) refers to the Urim. For the Urim see Ex. 28:30 and I.E.’s comment on Ex. 28:5 (Vol. 2, pp. 591-598).</i> The first interpretation appears correct to me. BOTH HE, AND ALL THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. In regard to that which pertains to all. EVEN ALL THE CONGREGATION. They gathered in the tent of meeting concerning a matter that pertained to the congregation. The reason the chapter dealing with the sacrifices follows<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The chapter dealing with the appointment of Joshua to succeed Moses.</i> is that God then<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Following the appointment of Joshua.</i> ordered Moses to command the children of Israel regarding the sacrifices they are obligated to offer,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the Land of Israel.</i> for Moses was not to enter the land with them. Scripture starts with the daily burnt offering even though it was mentioned earlier.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Ex. 29:42. The point is, why repeat the law of the burnt offering.</i> It is possible that the earlier burnt offering was the one offered at Mount Sinai.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When Israel camped around Mount Sinai. In other words, it does not pertain to the daily burnt offering to be made when they entered the Land of Israel.</i> On the other hand, it is possible that Scripture wants to insure that the arrangement of the sacrifices is in order.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture repeats the law of the burnt offering here because it wants to list in order all of the burnt offerings which the congregation is obligated to bring, i.e., the daily burnt offering, the new moon burnt offering, the Passover offering, etc.</i> MY FOOD. I have previously explained the meaning of the term <i>lechem</i> (food).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In his comments on Ex. 16:4, I.E. explains that the term <i>lechem</i> can refer to bread, meat, or fruit. See I.E. on Ex. 16:4 (Vol. 2, p. 316).</i> MADE BY FIRE. I have previously explained the meaning of <i>le-ishai</i> (made by fire).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E. the word <i>isheh</i> means a burnt offering. Thus <i>le-ishai</i> means for my burnt offerings.</i> The meaning of <i>lachmi le-ishai re’ach nicho’ach</i> (My food…made by fire, of a sweet savour unto Me) is, food for my fire, for a sweet savour unto Me. IN ITS DUE SEASON. It shall not be bought before the morning, nor delayed after evening. THE ONE LAMB. Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen the Spaniard says that our verse is abridged. It should be read as if written <i>ha-keves, keves echad</i> (the lamb, one lamb).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>et ha-keves echad</i> (the one lamb). A word with the direct object prefixed to it cannot be in the construct. Our verse reads, the lamb one in the morning. This is incorrect syntax. Hence Rabbi Moses’ interpretation.</i> However, I believe that the <i>heh</i> of <i>keves</i> is to be read as if written twice.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse is to be read as if written, <i>et ha-keves, keves echad ba-boker</i>.</i> I have already shown you many such cases.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where a letter is to be read as if written twice.</i> WHICH WAS OFFERED IN MOUNT SINAI. Its meaning is, as you offered on Mount Sinai.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, they were not to bring the very same offering which they had brought at Sinai, for that offering no longer existed. They were to bring a similar offering.</i> This verse<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In addition to Ex. 29:42. See I.E. on Ex. 29:42 (Vol. 2, p. 620).</i> is an additional proof that Israel did not offer burnt offerings in the wilderness after they journeyed from Sinai,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse speaks of the burnt offering at Sinai. It does not speak of the one offered in the wilderness. This implies that no burnt offering was offered in the wilderness.</i> as I previously explained with perfect proof.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 29:42.</i> SHALT THOU POUR OUT A DRINK-OFFERING OF STRONG DRINK. The stem <i>nun</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of the root <i>nun, samekh, caf</i>, the root of <i>hassekh</i> (shalt thou pour out).</i> is swallowed by the <i>samekh</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the word <i>hassekh</i> (shalt thou pour out). Hence the <i>dagesh</i> in the <i>samekh</i>.</i> We will rely on the words of our sages of blessed memory as to its meaning.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We will rely on the sages concerning what Scripture means by the term <i>nesekh</i> (strong drink). According to the sages it refers to undiluted wine. In ancient times wine for drinking was mixed with water.</i> OF EVERY SABBATH. The <i>vav</i> suffixed to the word <i>shabbat</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is to the <i>vav</i> in the word <i>shabbato</i> (every Sabbath).</i> refers to the day of Sabbath.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Shabbat</i> is feminine. Thus Scripture should have used the term <i>shabbatah</i> if the reference was to every Sabbath. Hence I.E.’s comment that the <i>vav</i> refers to the word <i>yom</i> in verse 9, which is masculine. Thus according to I.E. we should render <i>shabbato</i> (every Sabbath) as every Sabbath day.</i> This is so even though we find the word <i>me-challelo</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Rather than <i>mechallelah</i>.</i> (from profaning it<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is to the Sabbath. We thus see that Scripture treats <i>shabbat</i> as masculine.</i>) in <i>Every one that keepeth the sabbath from profaning it</i> (Is. 56:6). The meaning of <i>be-shabbato</i> (of every Sabbath) is, <i>every sabbath and sabbath</i>. Compare, <i>yom be-yomo</i> (daily) (Ex. 5:13). BESIDE THE CONTINUAL BURNT-OFFERING. This means after the continual burnt offering. The Sabbath burnt offering shall follow it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, he shall place the Sabbath burnt offering upon it.</i> AND IN YOUR NEW MOONS. Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen the Spaniard, who rests in paradise, says that <i>u-ve-roshe chodshekhem</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, and in the first of your months. Hence Rabbi Moses’ interpretation.</i> (and in your new moons) refers to the new moon of Nisan, for Scripture clearly states, <i>it shall be the first month of the year to you</i> (Ex. 12:2).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence the first of your months (see previous note) refers to the first month of the year, i.e., the new moon of Nisan.</i> Scripture then goes on to say, <i>This is the burnt-offering of every new moon</i> (v. 14), that is, they shall offer this burnt offering<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The same burnt offering that was offered on the new moon of Nisan.</i> on every new moon. The Torah therefore adds, <i>throughout the months of the year</i> (<i>Ibid.</i>).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A similar burnt offering shall be offered on the new moons throughout the year.</i> Rabbi Moses’ interpretation is correct. He is right even though the <i>yod</i> in <i>u-ve-roshe chodshekhem</i> (and in your new moons) argues against his interpretation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Roshe</i> is a plural. Hence <i>roshe chodshekhem</i> seems to mean the many first days of the month. If the reference was to the new moon of Nisan, then Scripture should have read <i>u-ve-rosh chodshekem</i> (and on the first day of your months).</i> However, the fact that we find <i>hinneh chodesh machar</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Not <i>hinneh rosh chodesh machar</i>.</i> (Behold, tomorrow is the new moon) (I Sam. 20:5) shows that what he says is correct.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Book of Samuel refers to the new moon as <i>chodesh</i>. This implies that an ordinary new moon is called <i>chodesh</i>, and the new moon of Nisan <i>rosh chodesh</i>. Otherwise Samuel would have referred to the new moon by the phrase <i>rosh chodesh</i>.</i> OF EVERY NEW MOON. <i>Chodesh be-chodsho</i> (of every new moon) is similar<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In meaning.</i> to <i>shabbat be-shabbato</i> (of every sabbath) (Num. 28 :10).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the meaning of <i>chodesh be-chodsho</i> is every new moon.</i> According to the plain meaning of the text there is no possibility of interpreting it any other way,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Some interpreted <i>chodesh be-chodsho</i> to mean when it (the moon) renews itself.</i> for there is no mention of the moon in our verse.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If we take <i>chodesh</i> to mean new and <i>chodesh be-chodsho</i> to mean as when it renews itself, then the subject (the word moon) is missing from the text.</i> Furthermore, we only find the Hebrew form for the verb new in the <i>pi’el</i>, which has a <i>dagesh</i> placed in it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, if our text intended to say “when it renews itself” the text would have read, <i>chodesh be-chiddusho</i>, not <i>chodesh be-chodsho</i>.</i> However, here<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In <i>chodesh be-chodsho</i>.</i> the <i>dalet</i> has no <i>dagesh</i> in it. AND ONE HE-GOAT FOR A SIN-OFFERING UNTO THE LORD. Compare, <i>upon which the lot fell for the Lord, and offer him for a sin-offering</i> (Lev. 16:9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse literally reads for a “sin” unto the Lord. Lev. 16:9 teaches us that in our context “sin” stands for, a sin offering.</i> Note, in Hebrew the sin is connected to the sinner whenever the word <i>chattat</i> is followed by a <i>lamed</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>lamed</i> prefaced to a word sometimes means of. Compare, <i>mizmor le-david</i> (a psalm of David). Thus the phrase <i>chattat la-Adonai</i> might be taken to mean a sin of God. Therefore I.E. points out that its meaning is, an offering to God to atone for a sin.</i> Can’t you see that Scripture reads, <i>ve-chatati le-avi</i> <sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ve-chatati le-avi</i> literally means I will sin to my father.</i> (I shall bear the blame to my father) (Gen. 44:32). Look, this is contrary to the midrashic interpretation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to the midrash, <i>le-chattat la-Adonai</i> (for a sin-offering unto the Lord), which literally states, for a sin offering for the Lord, means that the sin offering is offered on behalf of God for diminishing the size of the moon. See <i>Shavu’ot</i> 9a.</i> However, the midrashic interpretation has a secret meaning.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. does not give us its secret meaning. However, in his <i>Yesod Ha-Ibbur</i> he indicates that the sin offering is to avert the unfavorable consequences which come about when the moon is full. See Meijler on this verse.</i> ON THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF THE MONTH. Scripture does not mention at dusk.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As it does in Ex. 12:6.</i> This verse is also a support for those who transmit tradition,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to the rabbis the paschal lamb could be offered after midday, at the moment the sun moves to the west. See I.E. on Ex. 12:6 (Vol. 2, p. 221).</i> even though their words need no support. AND ONE HE-GOAT FOR A SIN-OFFERING. <i>U-se’ir chattat echad</i> (and he-goat for a sin-offering) is the same as <i>u-se’ir izzim echad le-chattat</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is the phrase normally used for a he-goat offering. See verses 15 and 30 in our chapter and verses 5, 11, 16, and 25 in chapter 29.</i> (and one he-goat for a sin-offering). Our verse is abridged.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Se’ir</i> is short for <i>se’ir izzim</i>.</i> Observe, Scripture does not mention the Sabbath burnt offering<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38. Also see Krinsky and Meijler. The printed texts omit the word Sabbath.</i> which is to be brought during the seven days of Passover. It similarly omits<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the Passover offerings.</i> the burnt offering which accompanied the waved sheaf.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">On the second day of Passover. See Lev. 23:9-14.</i> We need tradition.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As to when the Sabbath offering is to be brought on a Sabbath during the week of Passover (Meijler).</i> For the verse (v. 10) tells us that [the burnt offering] <i>of every sabbath</i> shall follow the daily burnt offering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The question arises, when is the Sabbath offering to be offered on a Sabbath which falls during the week of Passover? Is it to be before or after the additional Passover offerings? According to tradition, the Sabbath offering came before the Passover offerings.</i> WHEN YE BRING A NEW MEAL-OFFERING UNTO THE LORD. The two waveloaves<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which were offered on <i>Shavu’ot</i>. See Lev. 23:17-21.</i> were the main offerings.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In contradistinction to the sacrifices that were brought along with them.</i> The seven lambs, one young bullock, two rams and two lambs of peace offering<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in Lev. 23:17-21.</i> were brought along with it. The burnt offering mentioned in our chapter<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In verses 27-31.</i> refers to the obligatory sacrifice of the festival day.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">While those listed in Lev. 23:17-21 were secondary to the wave offering.</i> The fact that Scripture does not state<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In chapter 23 of Leviticus.</i> anything at all<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, how many sacrifices are to be offered.</i> about the Sabbath and festivals, but only mentions <i>And ye shall bring an offering made by fire</i> without telling us the number of sacrificial animals for the festival of unleavened bread (Lev. 23:8), and Sukkot (Lev. 23:36), and the holiday celebrated on the tenth day of Tishri (Lev. 23:27) is proof of the words of our sages.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That our chapter deals with the festival offerings.</i> The same is true for the day of the shofar sounding.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Lev. 23:25. Scripture does not mention there the number of burnt offerings to be brought on Rosh Ha-Shanah.</i> Scripture does not mention the new moon burnt offering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In citing Rosh Ha-Shanah offerings. See Lev. 23:24,25.</i> <i>And the continual burnt-offering and the meal-offering thereof</i> (Num. 29:6) refers to the first burnt offering.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The one offered in the morning. Another was offered in the evening. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> IT IS A DAY OF BLOWING THE HORN.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>yom tru’ah</i>. Literally, a day of <i>tru’ah</i>. I.E.’s interpretation of <i>yom tru’ah</i> is, a day of sounding a <i>tru’ah</i>.</i> It is a commandment to sound a <i>tru’ah</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A <i>tru’ah</i> is a wavering blast.</i> If this statement referred to the burnt offering offered on this day,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Torah tells us to sound the trumpets over the special burnt offerings that were offered on the festivals. See Num. 10:10.</i> then why is it not mentioned with regard to the other festivals?<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If the reference of <i>yom tru’ah</i> was to the sound to be played over the burnt offerings on the festivals cited in Num. 10:10, then the Torah should have mentioned the sounding of the <i>tru’ah</i> with regard to the other festivals.</i> Furthermore, the Torah tells us to sound a <i>teki’ah</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">A steady blast.</i> over the burnt offerings, not a <i>tru’ah</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse speaks of a <i>tru’ah</i>. If the reference was to the sound played over the burnt offerings, the Torah would have spoken of a <i>teki’ah</i>.</i> ONE YOUNG BULLOCK. Brought by the congregation. The same applies to one ram. The reference is not to the bullock and ram offered by the <i>kohen gadol</i> (high priest).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Lev. 16:3. These came from the high priest’s personal property.</i>I believe that the ram mentioned in the Torah portion <i>Achare mot,</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Lev. 16:5.</i> which the <i>kohen</i> took from the people,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To offer as a sacrifice.</i> is not the ram mentioned in our verse, for Scripture says, with regard to the high priest’s ram and the ram of the people, <i>and offer his burnt-offering and the burnt-offering of the people</i> (Lev. 16:24).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The Torah does not designate the ram in our verse as an <i>olat ha’am</i> (the burnt offering of the people).</i> The fact that there are seven additional lambs<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Offered along with the bullock and ram spoken of in our verse.</i> is proof of this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That the ram spoken of in our verse is not to be identified with the ram spoken of in Lev. 16. For the ram offered by the <i>kohen</i> in our chapter was accompanied by seven lambs, while the ram spoken of in Leviticus was not so accompanied.</i> The one he-goat for a sin offering<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Spoken of in verse 11.</i> is not to be identified with one of the he-goats chosen by lot.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in Lev. 16:6-9.</i> Scripture therefore states,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">With regard to the he-goat.</i> <i>beside the sin-offering of atonement</i> (v. 11) mentioned in the Torah portion <i>Achare mot</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Lev. 16:9. In other words, the meaning of <i>beside the sin-offering of atonement</i> (v. 11) is, beside the sin offering (the he-goat) mentioned in the Torah portion <i>Achare mot</i>.</i> A SOLEMN ASSEMBLY. I have already explained the meaning of the term <i>atzeret</i> (a solemn assembly).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Lev. 23:36.</i> OR YOUR MEAL-OFFERINGS, OR YOUR DRINK-OFFERINGS. To each and every burnt offering, in accordance with its law. UNTO THE HEADS OF THE TRIBES. I believe that this section<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The section dealing with the laws of vows.</i> followed the war with Midian.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though it precedes it. The war with Midian is described in chapter 31.</i> The Midianite war<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which inspired this chapter.</i> therefore comes after it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s point is that the laws of vows and the war with Midian are juxtaposed with each other because they occurred at the same time.</i> Compare, <i>And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses</i> (Num. 12:1), which comes after <i>and they abode in Hazeroth</i> (Num. 11:35)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">We thus see that Scripture sometimes puts first that which came after, when that which came later was the cause of that which is described first. For Israel dwelled in Hazeroth because Miriam spoke against Moses (Krinsky).</i> as I explained. Scripture tells us that the children of Gad came to Moses and Eleazar and the princes of the congregation, and spoke their piece (Num. 32:2-6). Scripture then writes, <i>So Moses gave charge concerning them to Eleazar the priest, and to Joshua the son of Nun, and to the heads of the fathers’ houses</i> (Num. 32:28). The <i>heads of the fathers’</i> houses refers to the already-mentioned princes (Num. 32:2).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The heads of the fathers’ houses are to be identified with the princes mentioned in Num. 32:6, for the princes mentioned in Num. 7 were no longer alive.</i> Moses told the children of Gad and the children of Reuben, <i>and do that which hath proceeded out of your mouth</i> (Num. 32:24). Scripture therefore reads,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In our verse.</i> <i>And Moses spoke unto the heads of the tribes</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For they were to see to it that the tribes of Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh kept their word.</i> <i>saying…</i>(v. 2). <i>When a man voweth a vow…he shall not break his word</i>. Scripture there<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, here.</i> writes, <i>he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth</i> (v. 3). OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. That they should relate this to the children of Israel. UNTO THE LORD. He mentions God’s name. He vows as follows: If this comes to pass, then I will give the following sum to God, or I will fast. SWEARETH. <i>Hishavah</i> (sweareth) is an infinitive. It is connected to a noun.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When an infinitive is connected to a word, that word is usually a verb. Compare, <i>ve-rappo yerrape</i> (and shall cause him to be thoroughly healed) (Ex. 21:19). Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> There are many such cases.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Compare, <i>shefot ha-shofetim</i> (when the judges judged) (Ruth 1:1).</i> HE SHALL NOT BREAK HIS WORD. <i>Lo yahel</i> (he shall not break) means he shall not profane. The word <i>yahel</i> is not related to the word <i>mechilah</i> (forgiveness). We need tradition,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To ascertain the age at which one is obligated to keep one’s vows.</i> for Scripture speaks of a man and a women but does not tell us at what age a person is considered a man or at what age a female is considered a women.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And is obligated to keep his or her vows.</i> AND BINDETH HERSELF BY A BOND. Or bindeth herself by a bond.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>vav</i> of <i>ve-aserah</i> means or, not and.</i>[5.] HER BOND. <i>Essarah</i> (her bond) belongs to a different form.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From <i>issar</i>.</i> It is not the same as <i>issar</i> (bond).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For <i>issar</i> has a <i>dagesh</i> in the <i>samekh</i>. In other words, <i>esar</i> and <i>issar</i> come from the same root but belong to different forms.</i> DISALLOW. The word <i>heni</i> (disallow) means broke or nullified. Compare, <i>tenu’ati</i> (My displeasure) (Num. 14:34). IN THE DAY THAT HE HEARETH. And not on any other day. WHILE HER VOWS ARE UPON HER. In her father’s house. If her father does not nullify her vows, her husband may disallow her vows. HE HEARETH IT. The word from her mouth. AND THE CLEAR UTTERANCE OF HER LIPS. The oath. AND IF A WOMAN VOWED IN HER HUSBAND’S HOUSE. If the widow vowed in an earlier time and her husband disallowed it, then she does not have to keep the vow in her widowhood. This speaks about a vow which she vowed regarding the future, and the husband died before the vow was to take effect.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Otherwise our verse would be repeating verse 9. For if a husband can annul his wife’s vow which was made when she was under her father’s charge, he can certainly annul avow made under his charge. Hence I.E. explains that our verse deals with a divorcee or widow who uttered a vow while married and had the vow nullified by her husband, who died before the vow became due. Our verse teaches that in such a case the nullification of the vow retains its efficacy.</i> The meaning of <i>selichah</i> (forgiveness) has been previously explained.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 14:19.</i> TO AFFLICT THE SOUL. Even to afflict the soul. I have already explained that “affliction of the soul” refers to fasting.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Lev. 16:29.</i> THEN HE CAUSETH ALL HER VOWS TO STAND. He has already caused all of her vows to stand.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>ve-hekim</i> means: has already caused, rather than: and he will cause.</i> Scripture then explains how he caused her vows to stand, namely, because he held his peace in the day that he heard them. THEN HE SHALL BEAR HER INIQUITY. For she is under his care. BETWEEN A MAN AND HIS WIFE. His wife being a woman who is an adult. BETWEEN A FATHER AND HIS DAUGHTER. If she has not reached adulthood. Hence Scripture reads, <i>being in her youth</i>. ARM YE MEN. The meaning of <i>hechaletzu</i> (arm ye men) is, gird your men of war.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Gird a sword upon your men of war (Krinsky). Or, gird the loins of your men of war. <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38 reads gird your loins. See Job 38:3 and Is. 5:27. The word <i>hechaletzu</i> can also be rendered as strip. Hence I.E.’s comment (Meijler).</i> TO EXECUTE THE LORD’S VENGEANCE. The reference is to Israel’s vengeance<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 2 says, <i>Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites</i>. However, verse 3 states, <i>to execute the Lord’s vengeance on Midian</i>. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> because they were enticed<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By the Midianites. See Num. 25:6 and Num. 31:15,16.</i> into worshipping idols. SO WERE DELIVERED. <i>Va-yimasseru</i> means and they were delivered. The word <i>li-mesor</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally. Verse 16 reads, <i>li-mesor ma’al</i> (to revolt so as to break faith).</i> (to deliver) (v. 16) is close in meaning to it. WITH THE HOLY VESSELS. The ark. AND THEY SLEW EVERY MALE. Adult males.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The little ones were taken captive (v. 17). Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> AND ZUR. The father of Cozbi.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 25:15.</i> BALAAM ALSO THE SON OF BEOR. Some say that after Balaam returned to his place,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 24:25.</i> he went back to Midian as soon as he learned of the plague that struck Israel because of his advice. He came back to receive money from the elders of Midian.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See <i>San</i>. 106a.</i> AND ALL THEIR GOODS. The word <i>chelam</i> (their goods) is a general term. It refers to gold, silver, copper, iron, and garments. AND ALL THEIR CITIES IN THE PLACES WHEREIN THEY DWELT. An all-inclusive term<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Their cities.</i> followed by a limiting term.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Their <i>moshvotam</i> (the places wherein they dwelt).</i> AND ALL THEIR ENCAMPMENTS. <i>Tirotam</i> (their encampments) means the palaces of the kings.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>tirotam</i> means their palaces.</i> AND THEY TOOK ALL THE SPOIL, AND ALL THE PREY. <i>Malko’ach</i> (prey) is a general term for men and cattle. THE CAPTIVES. <i>Shevi</i> (captive) is a specific term. It refers to humans. THE SPOIL. <i>Shalal</i> (spoil) refers to garments. WITH THE OFFICERS OF THE HOST. The word <i>pekudai</i> (officers of) is related to the word <i>yifkod</i> (set) in <i>Let the Lord…set</i> (Num. 27 :16).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>pekudai he-chayil</i> (the officers of the host) are those who are set over the host.</i> It<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Pekudai he-chayil</i>.</i> is similar to <i>pekide he-chayil</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So Vat. Ebr. 38.</i> Similarly, the word <i>keru’e</i> (the elect of) (Num. 1:16) means the same as <i>keri’e</i> (the elect of) (Num. 16:2). THE CAPTAINS OF THOUSANDS AND THE CAPTAINS OF HUNDREDS. They totaled one hundred and thirty-two.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">There were 12 captains of thousands and 120 captains of hundreds over the 12,000 Israelites who went to war.</i> HAVE YE SAVED ALL THE WOMEN ALIVE. The meaning of <i>kol nekevah</i> (all the women) is, even one woman.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the word <i>kol</i> (all) sometimes means a part of.</i> <i>En kol</i> (had nothing)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It does not mean did not have anything, for he had a lamb. We thus see that the word <i>kol</i> does not always mean all things.</i> (II Sam. 12:3)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reference is to a poor person who had only a lamb.</i> is similar. It is also possible that <i>have ye saved all the women alive</i> is to be taken literally, for they kept all the females alive. There are many such instances.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Where a rhetorical question is raised.</i> THE LITTLE ONES. <i>Taf</i> (little ones) is a general term for male and female minors. YE AND YOUR CAPTIVES.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Shall encamp outside of the camp until you are purified.</i> Because of the glory which dwells among you. AND ALL WORK OF GOATS’ HAIR.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ma’aseh izzim</i>. Literally, goats’ work. Hence I.E.’s comments.</i> This is to be interpreted in accordance with my earlier explanation.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 25:4 (Vol. 2, p. 534) “<i>Izzim</i> (goats) is to be rendered as goats’ hair.” In other words, “goats’ work” means a garment made out of goats’ hair.</i> Observe, the garment<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Mentioned in our verse.</i> is unclean because it touched a corpse. The meaning of our verse is, the garments shall be with you<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the meaning of <i>ve-khol beged</i> (and as to every garment) is, and with you all garments. I.E. reads our verse as follows: And all garments taken in spoil…[shall be with you outside of the camp] until you are purified. I.E. interprets thus because <i>titchate’u</i> is in the <i>hitpa’el</i>. Words in the <i>hitpa’el</i> are reflexive.</i> until you are purified.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. interprets <i>titchate’u</i> (ye shall purify) as if written <i>ad she-titchatu’e</i> (until you are purified).</i> On the other hand, <i>titchate’u</i> (ye shall purify) might be transitive.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>titchate’u</i> means ye shall purify, i.e., the garments.</i> <i>Ve-hitavvitem</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It too is in the <i>hitpa’el</i>.</i> <i>lakhem</i> (and ye shall mark out) (Num. 34:10) is similar,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For it too is transitive even though it is in the <i>hitpa’el</i>.</i> for <i>gevul</i> (line)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which follows “and ye shall mark out.”</i> is the object.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence <i>ve-hitavvitem</i> (and ye shall mark out) is transitive.</i> AND ELEAZAR THE PRIEST SAID. For the law regarding the cow<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The red heifer.</i> was given to Eleazar.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Num. 19:3.</i> Moses told the people in a general manner, <i>ye shall purify</i> (v. 20). However, Eleazar explained it to them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In detail.</i> THE TIN. The meaning of the <i>bedil</i> (tin) is known.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. could not find a synonym for this word. Hence his comment.</i> NEVERTHELESS IT SHALL BE PURIFIED WITH THE WATER OF SPRINKLING.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>me niddah</i>.</i> It would have appeared to us that the reference is to the mixture of the water and tahe ashes of the cow,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The red heifer.</i> as in <i>because the water of sprinkling</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>me-niddah</i>.</i> <i>was not dashed against him</i> (Num. 19:13). However, our wise men of blessed memory say that its meaning is, in the amount of water in which a menstruant bathes.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The utensils are to be immersed in a pool of water which is fit for a menstruant to purify herself. See <i>Avodah Zara</i> 75b.</i> Their mind is much greater than our minds. TAKE THE SUM. I have already explained the meaning of <i>sa et rosh</i> (take the sum).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 30:12 (Vol. 2, p. 631). Also see I.E. on Gen. 40:13 (Vol. 1, p. 369).</i> OF THE PREY. <i>Malko’ach</i> (the prey) refers to the cattle. THAT WAS TAKEN. <i>Ha-shevi</i> (that was taken) refers to humans. A <i>vav</i> is missing,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>malko’ach shevi</i> (the prey that was taken). I.E. says that this should be read as if written <i>malko’ach ve-ha-shevi</i> (the cattle and human captives).</i> as in <i>shemesh yare’ach</i> (sun moon)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally. This is to be read as if written, <i>shemesh ve-yare’ach</i> (the sun and the moon).</i> (Hab. 3:11). AND THE HEADS OF THE FATHERS’ HOUSES OF THE CONGREGATION. The reference is to the princes.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of the tribes.</i> AND DIVIDE THE PREY. <i>Malko’ach</i> (prey) is a general term.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For humans and cattle. See I.E.’s comment on verse 11.</i> ONE SOUL. <i>Echad nefesh</i> means the same as <i>nefesh echad</i> (one soul).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Nefesh echad</i> is the usual form. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> ONE DRAWN. <i>Achuz</i> (drawn) is similar to <i>ve-ha’achuz achuz</i> (and proportionally) (I Chron. 24:6).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reading in I Chron. 24:6 is <i>ve-achuz achuz</i>, slightly different from what I.E. quotes.</i> As I have explained,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It isn’t clear where.</i> they are connected.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ve-achuz achuz</i> is to be interpreted as one word (Filwarg). Some interpret: verse 28 and 30 are connected to each other. See Weiser.</i> EVEN OF ALL THE CATTLE. Camels.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Even all the cattle</i> seems to add something new. Since cattle, flock, asses are clearly mentioned in our verse, I.E. reasons that <i>even of all the cattle</i> refers to camels.</i> Look, Eleazar did not take a portion from them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The camels.</i> Perhaps they were few. Hence neither the number which they brought nor the amount which the Levites took is mentioned.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In our verse.</i> OVER AND ABOVE THE BOOTY.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, the remnant of the booty.</i> Aside from what they consumed. Scripture therefore reads <i>yeter</i> (above).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, the remnant of. See previous note.</i> The Torah mentions the amount of spoil because it consisted of a vast number. We never heard of a similar amount of spoil.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Scripture.</i> Scripture also mentions the tribute,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Given unto the Lord. See verses 37-41.</i> for it too was very great. The word <i>mekhes</i> (tribute) (v. 37) comes from a double root.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its root is <i>kaf, samekh, samekh</i>.</i> It is vocalized like the word <i>memer</i> (bitterness)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">It is vocalized with two <i>segols</i>.</i> in <i>and bitterness to her that bore him</i> (Prov. 17:25). <i>Mekhes</i> is related to the word <i>takhossu</i> (ye shall make your count) in <i>ye shall make your count for the lamb</i> (Ex. 12:4). The meaning of <i>mekhes</i> (tribute) is a portion. [BOTH OF MAN AND OF BEAST.] Scripture states <i>both of man and of beast</i>. Man<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>adam</i>. It takes in males and females, adults and children.</i> and beast<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>behemah</i>. It takes in cattle, asses, and camels.</i> are general terms. THE OFFICERS<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>ha-pekudim</i>.</i>. I have already explained this term.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E.’s comment on verse 14.</i> THAT ARE UNDER OUR CHARGE. <i>Asher be-yadenu</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, that are under our hand.</i> means that they were in their<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. used the word their. However, it means our, as in the text.</i> charge. Compare, <i>yadekh</i> (in your hands) in <i>And take with thee ten loaves</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So the Bible. Our text reads ten men.</i> <i>in your hands</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Translated literally.</i> (I Kings 14:3).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its meaning is, take ten loaves in your charge, for it is unlikely for someone to carry ten loaves of bread in his hands.</i> AND WE HAVE BROUGHT. In thought or by mouth.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The verb <i>va-nakrev</i> (and we brought) is a perfect. Hence its meaning must be, we dedicated.</i> ARMLETS. <i>Etzadah</i> (armlet) is an ornament placed on the arm. This is explicitly stated in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">67</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See II Sam. 1:10.</i> AND BRACELETS. A <i>tzamid</i> (bracelet) is an ornament placed on the wrist.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">68</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Gen. 24:22.</i> SIGNET-RINGS. <i>Taba’at</i> (signet ring) refers to an ornament placed on the finger.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">69</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This is the accepted meaning of the word.</i> EAR-RINGS. <i>Agil</i> is an earring. This is clearly stated in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">70</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ezek. 16:12.</i> This ornament is possibly so called because it is round (<i>agul</i>). GIRDLES. <i>Kumaz</i> (girdles) is similar to its neighboring objects.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">71</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E., <i>kumaz</i> is a type of ornament.</i> EVEN ALL THE WROUGHT JEWELS.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">72</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>keli ma’aseh</i>. I.E. renders this as articles fit for use.</i> Scripture tells us that there was no broken object among them. FOR THE MEN OF WAR HAD TAKEN BOOTY, EVERY MAN FOR HIMSELF. Scripture mentions this to inform us that each one of the men of war took a vast amount of gold and wrought articles. THE CHILDREN OF REUBEN. For he was the son of the mistress.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The son of Leah. Scripture mentions Reuben before Gad because he was the son of Leah whereas Gad was the son of Zilpah, who was a handmaiden. I.E. comments thus because the reverse is the case in verse 2.</i> WAS A PLACE FOR CATTLE. For there it was good pasture. THE CHILDREN OF GAD…CAME. They thought of this first. Hence Scripture places them first.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Before the tribe of Reuben, even though the tribe of Reuben was descended from Leah and the tribe of Gad from Zilpah,</i> AND THEY SAID…LET THIS LAND BE GIVEN. Scripture repeats, <i>and they said</i> because they spoke at length.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 2 tells us that the children of Gad and the children of Reuben spoke (<i>va-yomeru</i>). Our verse reads, <i>va-yomeru</i> (and they said). The latter is superfluous. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> Some say that the word <i>et</i> is the object of <i>yuttan</i> (be given).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>yuttan et ha-aretz</i> (let…[the] land be given). Now <i>eretz</i> is feminine. Thus our verse should read, <i>tuttan et ha-aretz</i>. Hence this opinion.</i> I do not know why.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">These commentaries have to go to such extreme length.</i> Look, Scripture reads: <i>netam eretz</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Netem</i> is masculine. We thus see that Scripture at times treats <i>eretz</i> as masculine.</i> (the land is burnt up) (Is. 9:18); <i>yechalek ha-aretz</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Yechalek</i> is masculine.</i> (the land shall be divided) (Num. 26:55);<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The reading in Num. 26:55 is, <i>yechalek et ha-aretz</i>. I.E. omits the <i>et</i> in his quote.</i> <i>ve-lo nasa otom ha-aretz</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Nasa</i> is masculine.</i> (and the land was not able to bear them) (Gen. 13:6); and <i>asher hu va shammah be-kirbo</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Be-kirbo</i> is masculine and refers to the land previously mentioned in the verse. See I.E. on Deut. 31:16.</i> (whither they go to be among them) (Deut. 31:16). YE TURN AWAY. <i>Teniyun</i> (ye turn away) means you break. FOR WHEN THEY WENT UP UNTO THE VALLEY OF ESHCOL. For those who went up<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Scripture reads, <i>and they went up</i>. According to I.E. this implies going north.</i> to the north, went to the south.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They went north from Kadesh-barnea, where they were camped, to the south of Israel. See I.E. on Num. 13:17. Note that we have rendered <i>mi-tzafon</i> to the north, for I.E. occasionally uses the <i>mem</i> to mean to. <i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38 reads: They went from the south to the north.</i> THEY HAVE NOT WHOLLY FOLLOWED ME. There is no <i>dagesh</i> in the <i>lamed</i> of <i>mile’u</i> (wholly followed). <i>Mile’u</i> is a <i>pi’el</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">And therefore should have a <i>dagesh</i> in it.</i> Compare, <i>malle</i> (fill)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Malle</i> is a <i>pi’el</i> and has a <i>dagesh</i> in it. See I.E.’s comments on verse 12.</i> in <i>fill thy horn with oil</i> (I Sam. 16:1). They did not complete what they started.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of <i>lo mile’u acharai</i> (because they have not wholly followed me).</i> CALEB THE SON OF JEPHUNNEH. Caleb is mentioned first, as in the case of God’s oath.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">God mentioned Caleb before Joshua. See Num. 14:30. and I.E.’s comments thereto.</i> The word <i>mile’u</i> (wholly followed) is similar to the word <i>bikshu</i> (have sought) in <i>have sought after my soul</i> (Ps. 44:5) and <i>shilchu</i> (they have set) in <i>They have set Thy sanctuary on fire</i> (Ps. 74:7).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Both <i>bikshu</i> and <i>shilchu</i> are <i>pi’els</i> but, contrary to the rule, do not have a <i>dagesh</i> in them.</i> AND HE MADE THEM WANDER. <i>Va-yeni’em</i> (and he made them wander) is related to the word <i>na</i> (a fugitive) in <i>a fugitive and a wanderer</i> (Gen. 4:12). Scripture reads <i>va-yeni’em</i> because they did not rest.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">During their sojourn in the wilderness.</i> A BROOD. The word <i>tarbut</i> (a brood) is connected to the word <i>ribbiti</i> (brought up) in <i>That I have dandled and brought up</i> (Lam. 2:22). It is close in meaning to the word <i>rav</i> (officers) in <i>all the officers</i> (rav) <i>of his house</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders this as, all those brought up in his house.</i> (Esther 1:8). The meaning of <i>tarbut</i> is, grown up in years. TO AUGMENT. <i>Li-sepot</i> (to augment) means the same as <i>le-hosif</i> (to add). However, it comes from a different root.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Li-sepot</i> comes from the root <i>samekh, peh, heh</i>. <i>Hosif</i> comes from the root <i>yod, samekh, peh</i>.</i> The word <i>sofu</i> (add) in <i>Add…unto your sacrifices</i> (Jer. 7:21) is similar,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To <i>li-sepot</i>; i.e., it comes from the root <i>samekh, peh, heh</i>.</i> for we do not find this root<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The root <i>yod, samekh, heh</i>.</i> among the stems that begin with a <i>yod</i> and drop the <i>yod</i> in the <i>kal</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence its root must be <i>samekh, peh, heh</i>.</i> AND CITIES. First<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Before we build the sheepfolds. This interpretations is contra the rabbis, who believed that the sons of Reuben and Gad valued their sheep over their little ones. See Rashi.</i> for our little ones. READY. The word <i>chushim</i> (ready) is vocalized like the word <i>mulim</i> (circumcised) in <i>were circumcised</i> (Josh. 5:5). It means quickly. It is related to the word <i>chushah</i> (hasten) in <i>Make speed, hasten, stay not</i> (I Sam. 20:38). AND FORWARD. The word <i>ve-hale’ah</i> (and forward) is used with regard to both place<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Gen. 35:21: <i>And Israel journeyed, and spread his tent beyond</i> (me-hale’ah) <i>Migdal-eder</i>.</i> and time.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Lev. 22:27. <i>But from the eighth day and thenceforth</i> (ve-hale’ah).</i> The meaning of <i>ve-hale’ah</i> is, and above.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That is, forward.</i> UNTIL HE HATH DRIVEN OUT. God.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Horisho</i> (He hath driven out) refers to God.</i> BEFORE THE LORD. For the ark was there.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Among the people.</i> <i>Before the Lord</i> is to be taken as I have explained,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 16:34 (Vol. 2, p. 332). <i>Before the Lord</i> means before the divine glory which is upon the cherubim.</i> for the phrase<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">31</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Li-fene Adonai</i>.</i> is always used in a positive sense.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">32</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>li-fene Adonai</i> (before the Lord) literally means before the Lord’s face. This can be taken in a negative sense, that is, to anger God. See I.E. on the word <i>li-fene</i> in Gen. 11:28 (Vol. 1, p. 146).</i> FOR YOUR SHEEP. The <i>alef</i> in <i>tzonakhem</i> (your sheep) is superfluous.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">33</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The usual form of the word is <i>tzonkhem</i>.</i> It is like the <i>alef</i> in <i>he’eznichu</i> (become foul) in <i>and the rivers shall become foul</i> (Is. 19:6).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">34</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is superfluous. The usual form is <i>hiznichu</i>.</i> EVERY MAN THAT IS ARMED FOR WAR. <i>Kol chalutz tzava</i> (every man that is armed for war) is similar to <i>ha-aron ha-berit</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">35</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ha-aron</i> has a <i>heh</i>, the definite article, prefixed to it. Such a word cannot be in the construct. Hence our phrase reads, the ark, the covenant. This should be read as if written, the ark, ark of the covenant. See I.E. on Gen. 2:9 (Vol. 1, p. 54, and the notes thereto).</i> (the ark of the covenant) (Josh. 3:14). Its meaning is, <i>every man armed, armed for war</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">36</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In I.E.’s edition of the Pentateuch the word <i>chalutz</i> was apparently vocalized with a <i>kamatz</i>. This being the case, the verse read, armed, war. Hence I.E. suggests that our verse be read as if written, armed, armed for war (Motot). It should be noted that in our versions of Scripture the word <i>chalutz</i> is vocalized with a <i>chataf pattach</i> and is in the construct with <i>tzava</i>. It thus reads, armed for war.</i> THEN YE SHALL GIVE THEM. The meaning of <i>u-netattem la-hem</i> is, you shall give them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">37</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the <i>vav</i> prefixed to <i>netattem</i> does not mean and. It is placed there for emphasis and is not to be translated.</i> The <i>vav</i> is like the Arabic <i>fa</i>,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">38</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. On Gen. 1:2, (Vol. 1, p. 30).</i> for such is the rule of the language.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">39</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To employ a non-translatable <i>yod</i>.</i> THEY SHALL HAVE POSSESSIONS AMONG YOU. He gave them respect,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">40</sup><i class=\"footnote\">He spoke to them with respect.</i> for the meaning of our verse is, if they<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">41</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The tribes of Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh.</i> will not go armed before you, then you shall force them to go with you and they shall have possessions among you.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">42</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse says this in a diplomatic way.</i> Or, if they change their minds, then they shall have possessions among you. The word <i>ve-nochazu</i> (they shall have possessions) follows the rules of a root that has a <i>yod</i> as its first letter,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">43</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ve-nochazu</i> is vocalized as if it came from the root <i>yod, chet zayin</i>, when in reality its root is <i>alef, chet, zayin</i>.</i> for the letters <i>alef, heh, vav</i>, and <i>yod</i> interchange. AND THE CHILDREN OF GAD…ANSWERED. A second time for emphasis. WE WILL PASS. The form <i>nachnu</i> (we) is the original form of the word. The <i>alef</i> in <i>anachnu</i> (we)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">44</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The more usual employed term for we.</i> is added. The half tribe of Manasseh is not mentioned until now because it was but half a tribe. AND NEBO. It is likely that the reference is to Mount Nebo, where, as I shall explain,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">45</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Deut. 34:6.</i> Moses was buried. THEIR NAMES BEING CHANGED. These cities had their names changed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">46</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>musabbot shem</i> (their names being changed) is not the name of a city.</i> The same applies to Sibmah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">47</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Its name was also changed.</i> AND DISPOSSESSED. Some say that Machir was alive.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">48</sup><i class=\"footnote\">That Machir the son of Manasseh was still alive, and that it is he to whom <i>va-yoresh</i> (and [he] dispossessed) applies. These commentaries interpret thus because verse 40 states, <i>And Moses gave Gilead unto Machir</i>. The latter is taken literally.</i> However, I believe that <i>and dispossessed</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">49</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, and he dispossessed.</i> refers to the warrior that was in the family.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">50</sup><i class=\"footnote\">One of Machir’s descendants was a great warrior. He dispossessed the Amorites.</i> [UNTO MACHIR THE SON OF MANASSEH.] The meaning of <i>unto Machir the son of Manasseh</i> is, unto the sons of Machir the son of Manasseh.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">51</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For Machir the son of Manasseh was no longer alive.</i> Compare, <i>And Judah said unto Simeon his brother</i> (Jud. 1:3).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">52</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The meaning of which is, and the descendants of Judah said to the descendants of Simeon his brother, for the tribal patriarchs Reuben and Judah were no longer alive.</i> AND JAIR THE SON OF MANASSEH. Jair was from the family of Judah.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">53</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the tribe of Judah. This raises the question: Why does Scripture identify him as a son of Manasseh?</i> This is explicitly stated.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">54</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Scripture.</i> For Hezron<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">55</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The son of Judah.</i> took the daughter of Machir the son of Manasseh, and she bore him Segub. Segub begot Jair,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">56</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I Chron. 2:1-22.</i> who had cities among the cities of Gilead.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">57</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ibid</i>.</i> Jair is called after his mother’s family. There were also <i>kohanim</i> who were called after the name of the children of Barzillai the Gileadite.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">58</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The children of Barzillai were not <i>kohanim</i>.</i> The latter is clearly stated in Scripture.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">59</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ezra 2:61.</i> This is no reason to ask: How did Jair<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">60</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Who was from the tribe of Judah.</i> inherit among another tribe,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">61</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Manasseh. Each tribe was allocated a portion by lot. Only members of the tribe received a portion in the land belonging to the tribe. The question thus arises, by what right did Jair receive a part of the land within the area allocated to Manasseh.</i> for it was the land of Canaan that was divided,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">62</sup><i class=\"footnote\">By lot.</i> not the land of the Amorites that was on the eastern side of the Jordan,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">63</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The land on the eastern bank of the Jordan was not allocated by lot to the tribe of Manasseh. Hence it was possible for Jair to obtain a part of the eastern bank of the Jordan by conquest.</i> for<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">64</sup><i class=\"footnote\">What follows is merely noted for informational purposes. It does no affect the interpretation.</i> there were Amorites in the land of Canaan<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">65</sup><i class=\"footnote\">As there were in Transjordan.</i> and they were the mightiest of the seven nations. THE VILLAGES THEREOF. <i>Chavvotehem</i> (villages thereof) is to be interpreted in context.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">66</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word is not found elsewhere in Scripture.</i> It means walled cities. THESE ARE THE STAGES. Moses recorded all the journeys of the Israelites when the children of Israel camped in the plains of Moab<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Verse 48.</i> and stayed there for a number of months, until the afore-mentioned cities<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The cities mentioned in Num. 32:33-42.</i> were built. They did not move from there until Aaron died.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This appears to be an error, for Aaron died at Mount Hor before Israel came to the plains of Moab. See Num. 20:22-29. The proper reading should be, until Moses died.</i> THEIR GOINGS FORTH. How they went from place to place. Therefore <i>their goings forth</i> follows. BY THE COMMANDMENT OF THE LORD. This is connected to <i>stage by stage</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our text should be read: Stage by stage by the commandment of the Lord.</i> ON THE MORROW AFTER THE PASSOVER. I have explained this,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Lev. 23:11.</i> and <i>with a high hand</i> (Ex. 14:8)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Lev. 23:11.</i> as well. UPON THEIR GODS ALSO THE LORD EXECUTED JUDGMENTS. As in the incident with Dagan’s head.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I Sam. 5:4. Dagan fell headless, armless, and footless before the ark of God.</i> For God said so to Moses.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, God executed judgment as he had told Moses he would (Ex. 12:12). I. E. notes this because Scripture does not previously tells us that God actually executed judgment on the Egyptian gods.</i> AND TURNED BACK. This alludes to the cloud<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which accompanied Israel. <i>Va-yisu</i> (and they journeyed) is in the plural. <i>Va-yashav</i> (and turned back) is in the singular. Thus our verse may be rendered: and they journeyed and it turned back. Hence I.E.’s interpretation.</i> or to Israel.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to this interpretation Scripture refers to Israel in the singular.</i> FROM PENE-HAHIROTH. Pene-hahirot and Pi-hahiroth<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See Ex. 14:2.</i> refers to the same place. The mouth is in the face.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Pi</i> means mouth of; <i>pene</i> face of. Hence the names Pi-hahiroth and Pene-hahiroth for the same place.</i> THREE DAYS’ JOURNEY. I have already explained this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 10:31.</i> KIBROTH-HATTAAVAH. The latter is in Kadesh-barnea,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 20:14.</i> as I explained. AND THEY JOURNEYED FROM KADESH. Kadesh is the name of a city.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 20:14.</i> [AND THE CANAANITE…HEARD.] Scripture tells us this here<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">After mentioning Mount Hor.</i> because the Canaanite fought with Israel at Hor ha-Hor.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Following the death of Aaron. See Num. 21:1-3.</i> ZALMONAH, AND…PUNON. I have explained this.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 21:4.</i> ALMON-DIBLATHAIM. This is a general term for many journeys, as I explained in the Torah portion, <i>This is the statute of the law</i> (Num. 19:2).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 21:18.</i> FROM BETH-JESHIMOTH. This is the valley which looks down upon the wasteland.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Num. 21:20.</i> God then commanded Moses to warn Israel<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To drive out the inhabitants of Canaan (v. 55).</i> because they were soon to pass over.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Into Canaan.</i> THEIR FIGURED STONES. <i>Maskiyyotam</i> (their figured stones) is similar to <i>ve-even maskit</i> (any figured stone) (Lev. 26:1). THEIR HIGH PLACES. <i>Bamotam</i> means their high places. Compare, <i>bamate aretz</i> (the high places of the earth) (Is. 58:14). AND YE SHALL INHERIT THE LAND. <i>Ve-hitnachaltem</i> (and ye shall inherit) is similar to <i>ve-hitavvitem</i> (and ye shall mark out) (Num. 34 :10).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Both verbs are in the <i>hitpa’el</i> and are transitive. Most verbs in the <i>hitpa’el</i> are intransitive. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> <i>Ha-aretz</i> (the land) is the object.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, <i>ve-hitnachaltem</i> is transitive.</i> Scripture mentions <i>to the more ye shall give the more inheritance</i> to connect <i>But if ye will not drive out the inhabitants</i> (v. 55) which comes after it.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, the law commanding Israel to drive out the Canaanites follows the law telling Israel to inherit Canaan, in order to warn Israel that they will not inherit the land if they permit Canaanites to dwell therein.</i> AS THORNS. <i>Sikkim</i> refers to sharp thorns. It is related to the word <i>mesukkato</i> (hedge thereof)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The hedge spoken of in Is. 5:5 was made of sharp thorns.</i> in <i>the hedge thereof</i> (Is. 5:5) and the word <i>sakh</i> (hedge) in <i>behold, I will hedge up thy way with thorns</i> (Hos. 2:8). AND AS PRICKS. The word <i>tzeninim</i> (pricks) is to be explained according to its context. It means the same as <i>u-leshotet be-tziddekhem</i> (a scourge in your sides) (Josh. 23:13), which<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">27</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to its context. See Weiser.</i> refers to a blow delivered by a whip.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">28</sup><i class=\"footnote\">So too the word <i>tzeninim</i>. Thus <i>ve-litzninim be-tziddekhem</i> (and as pricks in your sides) means, and lashes in their sides.</i> On the other hand, the word <i>tzeninim</i> (pricks) might refer to sharp thorns, as in <i>Thorns</i> (tzinnim) <i>and snares in the way of the froward</i> (Prov. 22:5).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">29</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In this case, <i>ve-litzninim be-tziddekhem</i> (and for pricks in your sides) means, and for thorns in their sides.</i> Observe, Scripture further explains<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">30</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In chapter 34.</i> the borders of their inheritance from which they are obligated to expel the inhabitants of the land. INTO THE LAND OF CANAAN. <i>Ha-aretz kena’an</i> (the land of Canaan) is similar to <i>ve-hanevu’ah oded ha-navi</i> (even the prophecy of Oded the prophet) (II Chron. 15:8), the meaning of which is, the prophecy, prophecy of Oded the prophet. The meaning of our clause is, the land, land of Canaan.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ha-aretz</i> has the definite article prefixed to it. According to the rules of Hebrew grammar, a word with the definite article cannot be in the construct. The literal meaning of <i>ha-aretz kena’an</i> (the land of Canaan) thus is, the land Canaan. Hence I.E.’s comment that our verse be read as if written, <i>ha-aretz, eretz kena’an. Ve-hanevu’ah oded ha-navi</i> (even the prophecy of Oded the prophet) (II Chron. 15:8) is, for similar reasons, to be read, <i>ve-hanevu’ah nevu’at oded ha-navi</i>. See I.E. on Gen. 2:9 (Vol. 1, p. 54).</i> BY THE SIDE OF EDOM. The word <i>yede</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, hands of. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> (side of) means place of. Compare, <i>by the side of</i> (yad)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, hand of. See I.E. on Gen. 1:26 (Vol. 1, pp. 45-46).</i> <i>the Jordan</i> (Num. 13:29). UNTO THE BROOK OF EGYPT. <i>Nachlah mitzrayim</i> means unto the brook of Egypt.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For the <i>heh</i> suffixed to <i>nachlah</i> is in place of the preposition <i>el</i> (unto).</i> It does not refer to the Nile. THE GREAT SEA. The Spanish sea.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s term for the Mediterranean Sea.</i> The meaning of our verse is: And the Great Sea shall be your western border.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse reads, <i>u-gavel yam</i>. This should be rendered, and for the western border not, and the sea. The word <i>yam</i> can mean either the sea or the west. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> The Great Sea itself shall serve as the border.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse literally reads, and the border on the west, ye shall have the Great Sea, and a border. I.E. renders this, you shall have the Great Sea itself serve as your border on the west</i> AND YE SHALL MARK OUT. The <i>alef</i> in <i>ve-hitavvitem</i> (and ye shall mark out) is in place of a <i>vav</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Vat. Ebr</i>. 38 reads, in place of a <i>tav</i>. The root of <i>ve-hitavvitem</i> appears to be <i>alef, vav, heh</i>. This root means to desire. <i>And you shall desire</i> appears out of place here. Hence I.E.’s suggestion that <i>ve-hitavvitem</i> comes from the root <i>tav, vav, heh</i>, which means to mark out. <i>And you shall mark out</i> fits in well within the context of our verse.</i> Compare, <i>ve-hitvita</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which comes from the root <i>tav, vav, heh</i>.</i> <i>tav</i> (and set a mark) (Ezek. 9:4). This is so, even though the forms differ.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Ve-hitavvitem</i> is in the <i>hitpa’el</i> while <i>ve-hitvita</i> is a <i>hif’il</i>.</i> AND YE SHALL MARK OUT. <i>Ve-hitavvitem</i> (and ye shall mark out) is similar to the word <i>ta’avat</i> (utmost bound) in <i>Unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills</i> (Gen. 49:26).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. makes the same point in Genesis. See Vol. 1, p. 447.</i> AND SHALL STRIKE. The word <i>machah</i> (strike) is to be interpreted as the ancients did. It means it shall break.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When the boundary line reaches the lake of Kinneret, it will create a broken (not a straight) border (Weiser).</i> It is related to the word <i>yimcha’u</i> (clap) in <i>Let the floods clap their hands</i> (Ps. 98:8). THE TWO TRIBES. Scripture mentions this a second time<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The first half of our verse repeats the previous verse.</i> in order to explain the place of their inheritance.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The second part of our verse tells us where the two and a half tribes received their inheritance.</i> SHALL TAKE POSSESSION. <i>Yinchalu</i> (shall take possession) is a causative.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though it is a <i>kal</i>. According to I. E. the word <i>yinchalu</i> here should be rendered, shall cause you to take possession, rather than shall take possession.</i> The same applies to the word <i>u-nechaltanu</i> (and take us for Thine inheritance) (Ex. 34:9)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">According to I.E., <i>u-nechaltanu</i> (and take us for Thine inheritance) should be rendered, you will cause us to inherit. See I.E.’s short commentary on Ex. 34:9.</i> in the opinion of the grammarians. ELEAZAR. He is mentioned first<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Before Joshua.</i> because Joshua went out by his command. Furthermore, Eleazar was also the son of Aaron. Scripture does not mention the princes of the tribes of Reuben or Gad,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In listing the princes of the tribes in verses 17-28.</i> for they<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Their tribes.</i> had already taken their share. The commentaries say that Scripture starts<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In listing the tribes.</i> with Judah,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Even though Simeon was older.</i> for that is the way the lot came out at first.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">When the land was actually divided. See Joshua 15:1.</i> However, there is a great argument against them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If Scripture followed the order in which the tribes actually received their inheritance, the children of Joseph should have followed Judah, for they took their inheritance after Judah. See Joshua 16.</i> Nevertheless, the comments appear correct to us.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">For no one can offer a better reason than these commentaries for listing Judah first (Weiser).</i> PEDAHEL. If the <i>heh</i> in Pedahel is silent then we have two words each with its own meaning,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>heh</i> is silent only when it comes at the end of a word. It is not silent when it comes in the middle of a word. Since the <i>heh</i> in the name Pedahel is silent we must interpret it as two words, <i>padah el</i> (God redeemed). I.E.’s point is that while many of the Hebrew names containing God’s name are partially abbreviated, this is not the case with Pedahel.</i> for the <i>heh</i> is not an implied letter.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In the middle of a word. See I.E. on Ex. 3:15 (Vol. 2, p. 85).</i> AND OPEN LAND. The meaning of <i>migrash</i> (open land) is known.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence there is no need to explain its meaning.</i> INTO THE LAND OF CANAAN. The meaning of <i>artzah kena’an</i> (into the land of Canaan) is known.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The <i>heh</i> of <i>artzah</i> is in place of the preposition <i>el</i>. Thus <i>artzah kena’an</i> means into the land of Canaan.</i> This chapter, like others,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Like other chapters which I.E. had previously pointed out.</i> is connected.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">To the chapter which precedes it.</i> THEN YE SHALL APPOINT YOU CITIES. The word <i>ve-hikritem</i> (then shall ye appoint you) is related to the word <i>kiryah</i> (cities).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">From the word <i>kir</i>, a wall. <i>Kiryah</i> is thus a walled city. <i>Ve-hikritem lakhem arim</i> thus means, and you shall build walled cities.</i> FOR THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. This is not connected to the previous verse,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our verse is not a continuation of the previous verse. It is an independent clause.</i> for the preceding verse states that these cities will be cities of refuge. However, it does not state for whom they shall serve as cities of refuge. Scripture then explains<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In our verse.</i> that these six cities shall serve as cities of refuge <i>for the children of Israel, and for the stranger…who lives among them</i>. WHEN HE MEETETH HIM. The <i>feh</i> of <i>bi-figo</i> (when he meeteth him) is vocalized with a <i>chirik</i><sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In place of a short <i>kamatz</i>. Compare <i>shomoro, kotvo</i>, etc.</i> like the word <i>shivri</i> (I break) in <i>when I break</i> (Lev. 26:26), for vocalization changes in the infinitive.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Not all infinitives follow the same vocalization.</i> AND IF HE THRUST HIM. From a high place. OR HURLED AT HIM. An inclining wall<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Pushed the wall down upon him.</i> or a deadly object. LYING IN WAIT. I have previously explained the meaning of <i>bi-tzediyyah</i> (lying in wait).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">See I.E. on Ex. 21:13.</i> SUDDENLY. The meaning of <i>be-feta</i> is suddenly.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The usual word for suddenly is <i>pitom</i>. Hence I.E.’s comment.</i> SEEING HIM NOT. <i>Re’ot</i> is an infinitive. AND HE WAS NOT HIS ENEMY. He had no intention of seeking his harm. THEREIN UNTIL THE DEATH OF THE HIGH PRIEST. Some say that the meaning of <i>until the death of</i> is, until the investigation of.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Until the high priest investigates the death of the victim. For other interpretations see Filwarg.</i> They compare it to <i>And wisdom shall die with you</i> (Job. 12:2).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">They render this, and with you is wisdom searched out.</i> However, what they say is worthless. For <i>And wisdom shall die with you</i> means exactly what it says,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\"><i>Tamut</i> means shall die, not shall search out.</i> as does <i>until the death of the high priest</i>.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is to be taken literally.</i> For the high priest atones on behalf of Israel, and this incident happened during his lifetime.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hence the murderer shall remain in the city of exile to remind the high priest of his failing. The high priest’s piety should have prevented the murder (see Rashi). Or, the murderer shall remain in exile to remind the high priest to pray constantly that God forgive Israel for the bloodshed in its midst.</i> THE BORDER OF HIS CITY. <i>Et gevul</i> means beyond<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">18</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Literally, from.</i> the border.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">19</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word <i>et</i> is usually not translated. Hence I.E. points out that here it means from.</i> Compare, <i>et ha-ir</i> (out of the city) in <i>as I am gone out of the city</i> (Ex. 9:29). BLOODGUILTINESS. I have already explained the meaning of <i>dam</i> (bloodguiltiness).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">20</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Our clause literally reads, he has no blood. Hence I.E. points out that blood means bloodshed. Thus our clause should be rendered, he is not guilty of bloodshed. See I.E. on Ex. 22:1.</i> SO YE SHALL NOT POLLUTE. Do evil in secret. SHED IT. <i>Shofkho</i> (shed it) is a verb.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">21</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Not a noun. It is made up of the verb <i>shofekh</i> (shedder) and the word <i>shelo</i> (its)</i> Compare <i>go’alo</i> (his redeemer)<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">22</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Which is a verb made up of the word <i>go’el</i> (redeems) and <i>shelo</i> (him) (translated according to I.E.).</i> in <i>then shall his redeemer…come</i> (Lev. 25:25). AND THOU SHALT NOT DEFILE<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">23</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Hebrew, <i>titamme</i>. <i>Titamme</i> can be rendered either as you shall defile or it shall defile. Hence the interpretations which follow.</i> THE LAND. The pollution shall not defile the land.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">24</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This interpretation renders <i>ve-lo titamme</i>, it shall not defile.</i> Or it is a command.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">25</sup><i class=\"footnote\">This interpretation renders <i>ve-lo titamme</i>, you shall not defile.</i> The land shall not be polluted because I dwell among them.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">26</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E.’s paraphrase of <i>the Lord dwells in the midst of the children of Israel</i>.</i> I do not dwell there out of respect for the land but out of respect for the children of Israel. Therefore Scripture says, <i>I the Lord dwell in the midst of the children of Israel</i> (v. 34). CAME NEAR. This chapter<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">1</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Like other chapters.</i> also is connected to the one that comes before it. When Moses commanded the Israelites to give the Levites cities from the inheritance of Israel [the heads of the fathers’ houses drew near]. THE HEADS OF THE FATHERS’ HOUSES. The reference is to the princes.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">2</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Of the tribes. Hence Scripture reads, <i>before the princes, the heads of the fathers’ houses of the children of Israel</i> (v. 1).</i> AND WHEN THE JUBILEE…SHALL BE. Even if the jubilee shall be,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">3</sup><i class=\"footnote\">I.E. renders <i>ve-im yiheyah ha-yovel</i> (and when the jubilee shall be), and even if the jubilee shall be.</i> we have no hope of the inheritance returning to us, for it shall be added to the inheritance of the tribe.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">4</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Into which they married.</i> THE TRIBE OF THE SONS OF JOSEPH SPEAKETH RIGHT. For the heads of the fathers’ houses spoke on behalf of the entire tribe. [SO SHALL NO INHERITANCE OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL REMOVE FROM TRIBE TO TRIBE.] The meaning of <i>tissov</i> (remove) is, shall not turn<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">5</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Shall not move around. <i>Tissov</i> comes from the root <i>samekh, bet, bet</i>, meaning to turn.</i> from here to there,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">6</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Emending <i>mi-po u-mi-po</i> (from here and from here) to <i>mi-po le-po</i> (from here to there) (Filwarg).</i> be it from them<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">7</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The tribe of Joseph, who argued their case before Moses.</i> or from others.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">8</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Any other tribe.</i> The meaning of <i>so shall no inheritance be removed</i> is, no inheritance shall be removed from this day and onward even though they had not as yet inherited the land. AND EVERY DAUGHTER, THAT POSSESSETH AN INHERITANCE. After the inheritance of the land. Scripture therefore states a second time, <i>So shall no inheritance remove</i> [<i>from one tribe to another tribe</i>] (v. 9).<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">9</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In other words, verse 7 speaks of the present. Verse 8 speaks of the future.</i> MAHLAH, TIRZAH. Scripture first mentioned them<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">10</sup><i class=\"footnote\">In Num. 27:1.</i> in the order of their birth. It now mentions them in the order in which they were first taken by men in marriage. THEY WERE MARRIED INTO THE FAMILIES. This<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">11</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The word families.</i> is a sign that their cousins<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">12</sup><i class=\"footnote\">The cousins who married the daughters of Zelophehad.</i> were not all brothers.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">13</sup><i class=\"footnote\">If they were, then Scripture would have read, they were married into the “family” rather than they married into the “families.”</i> THESE ARE THE COMMANDMENTS. Relating to inheritance,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">14</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 33:50-56; 34; 35:1-8.</i> vows,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">15</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 30:2-17.</i> and every daughter that possesseth an inheritance,<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">16</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 36:8,9.</i> and the laws regarding bloodshed.<sup class=\"footnote-marker\">17</sup><i class=\"footnote\">Num. 35:9-34.</i> BY THE JORDAN AT JERICHO. On the eastern bank.",
    "book": "Ibn Ezra on Numbers",
    "format": "bulk_text",
    "complete": true
  },
  "downloaded_at": "2026-01-15T23:01:04.809397",
  "provider": "sefaria"
}