|
Vol 18.37 - Pinchas 2 Spanish French Audio Video |
| Hebrew Text:
Page 334 Page335 Page336 Page337 Page338 Page339 Page340 Page341 Chumash |
|
Summary:
|
|
Translation: 1. At the conclusion of the Sidra (Num.30:1), after the Parsha lists all the Korbanot, the daily Tamid and the additional Musaf offerings of Shabbat, Rosh Chodesh and of all the festivals, the Torah states: “Moshe spoke to the children of Israel in accordance with all that the L-rd had commanded Moshe”. Why must Scripture state that Moshe conveyed all this to Bnei Yisroel. Is it necessary to inform us that Moshe fulfilled G-d’s command to him, “Command the children of Israel and say to them: My offering etc.”? This is especially so, since we find in many places that Scripture just states G-d’s command to Moshe, and not that Moshe afterward told this to the Yidden. (The reason is simple: it is self-understood that since G-d told this to Moshe in order that he convey this to Yidden, that Moshe certainly did so (moreover, it is so simple, that we do not find that Rashi forewarns this in his commentary)). Therefore, why must Scripture indeed tell us this? Rashi explains: “(This verse is written) to make a pause; (these are) the words of R’ Yishmael. Since up to this point the words of the Omnipresent (were stated), and the (following) Chapter of Vows begins with the words of Moshe, it is necessary to conclude the subject by saying that Moshe reviewed this section with the Israelites. Otherwise, the implication would be that he (Moshe) did not tell them this, but began his discourse with the chapter of vows”. One must however understand: It is indeed true, that if this verse was not stated, (i.e.“Moshe said to the children of Israel”) that the implication of the verses (since immediately afterward – the Chapter of Vows “begins with the words of Moshe”), is that the previous Parsha was not conveyed by Moshe to the Yidden. However, how can there even be a supposition, that Moshe did not fulfill G-d’s command, “Command the children of Israel and say to them”? 2. The Ramban explains the meaning of R’ Yishmael words, “This verse is written to conclude the subject”: If the verse, “Moshe said etc.” would not have been stated, one would not have known which section, the verse, “Moshe spoke to the tribal leaders etc.” applies to. Namely, whether it refers to the laws of laws of Parshat Matot, or to the previous section – the laws of our Parsha. Therefore, it states at the conclusion of our Parsha, “Moshe spoke to the children of Israel”, in order to “conclude the subject”. Namely, that we should know that with the words “Moshe spoke to the tribal leaders etc.”, it begins a new aspect – the Chapter of Vows (פ׳ נדרים). (This is indeed the Pshat of, “to conclude the subject in many places in the Sifra and the Sifri”, as the Ramban states, and as he further adds, that even Rashi himself states on the verse (further on in Parshat Matot – ibid 31:17) “Now execute . . and every woman . . you shall execute” That the second “execute” is stated, “To separate the matter”. And he explains that if after the word “and every woman etc.” it would not have again stated, “execute” one would not have known that “and every woman etc.” applies to the previous category of “execute every male”, or to the following category “All the children . . keep alive for yourselves”). However, in Rashi’s explanation here, one cannot learn so. For Rashi (changes from the wording of the Sifri (“I do not know which matter it is speaking of”, and) expressly writes that if the verse, “Moshe spoke etc.” was not stated, one would have erred (Not that the following verse, “Moshe spoke to the tribal leaders etc.” refers to the previous section, like the view of Ramban, but rather) that “he did not tell this to them” (and that in the Chapter of Vows, he began his words). 3. One must also understand (as the Ramban asks) that even in Parshat Emor, at the end of the “Parshat HaMo’adot” (the section mentioning the festivals), the verse, “And thus Moshe declared the L-rd’s appointed times (of the holy days) (מועדי ה׳) to Bnei Yisroel” is stated there. And we indeed find, in the Midrashim of the Sages, many explanations why this verse must be stated. However, Rashi does not address this. It is not understood: If, in the simple meaning of the verse, an explanation is demanded – why Scripture tells us that Moshe conveyed G-d’s command regarding the festivals to Yidden – Rashi should have explained it there, where we find this is Scripture for the first time (beforehand in Parshat Emor ) and not wait until our verse? Moreover: This explanation that Rashi states here – that it is only, “Since up to this point the words of the Omnipresent (were stated) etc.”, cannot be said in Parshat Emor. For there, the following Parsha begins with “the words of the Omnipresent” – “And the L-rd spoke to Moshe, saying”. 4. The reason why this question – why it must state that Moshe conveyed the command to Bnei Yisroel – is specifically here and not in Parshat Emor – can be answered simply: The “Parshat HaMo’adot” of Parshat Emor was said in conjunction to the erecting of the Mishkan (even before the counting of Bnei Yisroel – “on the first day of the second month” – as it is told in Chumash Bamidbar). Among the Mitzvot and laws there, there are those whose fulfillment is specifically applicable in Eretz Yisroel (for example, Omer, Chadash, the Two Loaves) Therefore, one could think: It is indeed true that Moshe certainly conveyed all of G-d’s command to Yidden. Moreover: In general, he did so immediately after hearing the command from G-d, as is understood from Rashi’s comment (by Matan Torah) “Moshe did not turn his attention to his private affairs, but (he went directly) "from the mountain to the people.” However, in this case, he did not immediately convey (all the particulars of the laws), since they were not immediately applicable, at that time. For this was the time when Moshe was occupied with answering the “difficult matters” that were “brought before Moshe” in order that he “impart to them the path in which they must walk, and the deeds they must do”, in daily life. This is especially so, according to the view of what we learned (in Rashi’s comment in Parshat Emor) that it appears that the “Parshat HaMo’adot”, there, was said after the section of the Degalim/Banners. There are many other Parshiot which were then applicable in practice (for example, the counting of Bnei Yisroel, the banners, the encampments, Pesach Sheini, etc.). Therefore, Scripture adds at the conclusion, “Moshe declared the L-rd’s appointed times (of the holy days) (מועדי ה׳) to Bnei Yisroel” – to inform us that Moshe immediately conveyed all the particulars of the laws of this Parsha to the Yidden. (And this itself teaches us, that the intent of the command to Moshe “Declare the L-rd’s appointed times (of the holy days) (מועדי ה׳) to Bnei Yisroel” was that he should immediately convey all the laws). Whereas in our Parsha, where there is no reason to delay (אפצולייגן), it is self-understood, as aforementioned, that after G-d’s command, “Command the children of Israel and say to them etc.”, that Moshe immediately conveyed all the laws. Especially since it is speaking at the conclusion of the forty years, and ‘if not now, when?' (אם לא עכשיו אימתי). However, according to this it is difficult: What is the verse, “Moshe spoke to the children of Israel” telling us? What it is informing us (מאי קמ״ל)? On this Rashi answers, “This verse is written to conclude the subject. Otherwise, the implication would be that he (Moshe) did not tell them this, but began his discourse with the chapter of vows”, as will be explained in Par. 7 5. According to this, it is also understood why Rashi cites the name of the author of the statement – “the words of R’ Yishmael”: The aforementioned reason why it must state in Parshat Emor, “Moshe spoke . . to the children of Israel”
only fits according to the view of R’ Yishmael, that “General statements were said at Sinai, and the details (of the Mitzvot) were explained to Moshe at a later time in the Tent of Meeting”. Therefore, there is also a place to say here, as aforementioned, that Moshe waited in convey the details of the laws of the festivals. However, according to his opposing colleague (בר פלוגתא) R’ Akiva – who maintains that “Both general statements and the details of Mitzvot were said at Sinai, and later repeated in the Tent of Meeting, and reiterated a third time (by Moshe to the Jewish people) in the plains of Moab”, it comes out that all of the details of the Mitzvot, were conveyed, even when they were not applicable in practice. Therefore, why should we said that, here, Moshe waited to convey the laws until later? Therefore, one must say that according to R’ Akiva, at the very onset, this is not a question. For (he maintains that) this is the style of Scripture (דרך הכתוב). Namely, that sometimes G-d’s Word is stated to Moshe, and something Moshe’s words to Bnei Yisroel, and sometimes both aspects. Therefore, it is also not a question on the verse in our Parsha. Moreover, one cannot ask: Why can we not answer that the verse is stated (Not in order to negate an error in the subject of the Parsha, but) just because that is Scripture‘s style etc. – even according to R’ Yishmael? For one could say that the aforementioned debate between R’ Akiva and R’ Yishmael depends upon this very matter: According to R’ Akiva, that “Both general statements and the details of Mitzvot were said at Sinai, and later repeated in the Tent of Meeting, and reiterated a third time (by Moshe to the Jewish people) in the plains of Moab”, one must say that although all Mitzvot were said three times, in their general and detailed manner – at Sinai, in the Ohel Mo’ed, and in the plains of Moab. Nevertheless, Torah did not detail and explain in three places all the Mitzvot and their particulars. Just a part of them were explained in two places. The same is in our case: Sometimes the Torah specifies (even) the speech of Moshe to Bnei Yisroel, and sometimes not. One could say that the reason of R’ Yishmael that, “General statements were said at Sinai, and the details (of the Mitzvot) were explained to Moshe at a later time in the Tent of Meeting”, Is because R’ Yishmael maintains that, in general, one must accept that every detail and aspect that is written in the Torah, is written as it was in actuality (unless there is a necessity to say that this is not so). Therefore, he maintains that the details of the Mitzvot were said there, as it actually states in Torah. (and not three times - at Sinai, in the Ohel Mo’ed, and in the plains of Moab). The same is in our case: Since the Torah explains and details here, “Moshe spoke . . to the children of Israel”, one must say that this is because there is an innovation here which is related to this Parsha. 6. The reason that the entire aspect of the festivals are divided into two Parshiot,
can be explained in two manners:
(One could say that the reason that the section of the Korbanot of our Parsha was not immediately said after the erecting of the Mishkan (even though that, plainly, one could say that one brought all the Korbanot, even in the desert – except for those where it expressly says “When you come into the Land”) Is because: The innovation of our Parsha is: “Command the children of Israel and say to them etc.”, The exhortation (זירוז־אנזאג) to all Yidden that the communal Korbanot (קרבנות צבור) should be offered in their time. However, the details of the Korbanot themselves were already said to Moshe, beforehand. And he conveyed this to those individuals (יחידים) that were occupied with offering the Korbanot – Aharon and his sons – the Kohanim).
(Which is why it states in the “Parshat HaMo’adot”, “And you shall bring a fire offering etc.” plainly (without explanation what type of Korban, one must bring). For the details of the Korbanot were already said to Moshe, beforehand) However, nevertheless (for a specific reason/ צוליב א טעם) the Torah placed the Parsha of the Korbanot, here, in our Parsha (at the end of forty years). This is like the principle (that Rashi cites in many places in his commentary) “There is no (sequence of) earlier and later events in the Torah” (אין מוקדם ומאוחר בתורה) According to this manner – that both Parshiot (of Emor and our Parsha) were said to Moshe at the same time – it would have been logical, that the command in the beginning of “Parshat HaMo’adot” (in Parshat Emor) “Declare the L-rd’s appointed times (of the holy days) (מועדי ה׳) to Bnei Yisroel” means to separate the subsequent details of all the laws of the festivals which G-d had already beforehand said to Moshe, (the details of the laws in our Parsha), that specifically those details must be conveyed to all Yidden. And not the laws which are stated in our Parsha (since they are not applicable for all Yidden, as aforementioned). (With this one could also explain, the difference for the change in the words of Scripture between “Parshat HaMo’adot” (Parshat Emor) and the “Parshat HaKorbanot” (of our Parsha):
(“And the L-rd spoke to Moshe, saying, Speak to the children of Israel etc.”)
The preface “Command the children of Israel etc.” in our Parsha is a general preface to the entire sections of the festivals and the Korbanot (of our Parsha and Parshat Emor) Afterward, there was a second command, “Speak to the children of Israel and say to them” – the command regarding the details that Moshe must convey to all Yidden (- those that are stated in Parshat Emor, as aforementioned) Therefore, to further emphasize this, G-d specified for each festival, separately, “Speak to the children of Israel”). 7. since the principle, “There is no (sequence of) earlier and later events in the Torah”, is said (according to the simple meaning of the verse) specifically in a case where one must accept that the Parshiot do not concur with the timeline (סדר הזמנים). (as has been spoken of many times) Therefore, it is understood, that according to the simple meaning of the verse, Parshat HaKorbanot (of our Parsha) was said at the end of the forty years. As Rashi precisely notes on the verse, “Command the children of Israel (and say to them: My offering, My food etc.”: “What is stated above? “ Not (like the words of the Midrash) “Why is the Parsha "Let the L-rd, . . appoint” (num. 27:16) juxtaposed (נסמכה) to the Parsha of the Korbanot (Num. 28)” This is because, plainly (בפשטות), one must accept that the Parshat HaKorbanot was (not just “juxtaposed”) here. In other words, that it was not just written close to this yet said previously – rather it was) actually said here. If, however, it would not have, at the end of Parshat HaKorbanot, here stated, “Moshe said to the children of Israel etc.”– which would have “implied” (יש במשמע) that “(Moshe) began his discourse with the chapter of vows”. and that “(Moshe) did not tell them this”, this would have forced one to say that this Parsha, is not stated in its place: It was said to Moshe together with (and even before) “Parshat HaMo’adot”, of Parshat Emor. (yet the Torah juxtaposes the Parsha here for a specific reason) Therefore, it is “(Moshe) did not tell them this” (the details of our Parsha). He just said to all the Yidden the laws of Parshat Emor, as aforementioned, Par. 6. Therefore, the verse, “Moshe spoke to the children of Israel” must be stated at the end of our Parsha – to make clear, that Moshe conveyed, even this Parsha, to the Yidden. Therefore, it is understood that this Parsha was said here, like the plain understanding of the Scripture that the Parshiot are said in order. 8. Another difference between “Parshat HaMo’adot” (of Parshat Emor) and ”Parshat HaKorbanot” (of our Parsha) is:
One could say that the explanation of this (according to Halacha) is:
“Anyone who engages in studying the law of the Olah is ascribed credit as though he sacrificed a Olah . . Anyone who engages etc.” – it states the expression of “saying” (Vayomer/ ויאמר משה) Moreover: The laws of the festivals which exist in all times equally, uses the term “vayedaber” which is a harsh word. G-d strongly demands (מאנט בתוקף) of Yidden that they fulfill these Mitzvot (without distinction if it is during the time of the Beit HaMikdash or whether it is in the time of Galut). Whereas, this very thing that a Yid must occupy himself with the laws of the Olah etc. in the time of Galut is not a complete command, obligation and necessity – it is not demanded with a harsh expression. On the contrary – Yidden demand, “May it be Your will. . to again have mercy on us and rebuild (the Beit HaMikdash) soon etc. There we will offer to You our obligatory sacrifices . . in accordance with the command of Your will, as You have prescribed for us in Your Torah” (meaning – in our Parsha), not just studying the laws etc. as if he offers it. Therefore, it states in our Parsha, the word “saying” (Vayomer) – a soft expression. G-d requests (בעט) from Yidden that they occupy themselves with the “order of the Korbanot” (סדר קרבנות) (including in particular – of our Parsha) reciting the verses in the prayers of the day. In general, occupy oneself with the laws of the Olah etc. (through which it is as if he offered them etc.) This will bring the offering of the Olah etc., literally Melech HaMoshiach etc. build the Mikdash etc. and return us etc. offering Korbanot etc. in all its prescribed manner that is stated in the Torah May it be speedily and in our days – Mamosh. And as aforementioned, “There we will offer to You our obligatory sacrifices . . in accordance with the command of Your will” MSichas Shabbat Parshat Pinchas 5725
|
| Links: |
| Date Delivered: | Reviewer: | ||
| Date Modified: | Date Reviewed: | ||
| Contributor: |