Kommentar zu Bamidbar 17:29

Kap. 17. VV. 1 — 3. כי קדשו. Man könnte annehmen, die מקריבי הקטרת hätten die מחתות zuvor allgemein zu כלי שרת geheiligt und wäre diese קדושה durch den gesetzwidrigen Gebrauch nicht verloren gegangen. Allein das כי הקריבם לפני ד׳ ויקדשו des folgenden Verses scheint doch deren קדושה erst aus der הקרבה לפני ד׳ hervorgehen zu lassen, die doch als gesetzwidrige Handlung, wie schon רמב׳׳ן z. St. bemerkt, schwerlich in gewöhnlichem Sinne geeignet sein dürfte, einem Objekt קדושה zu erteilen. Vielleicht dürfte es also zu fassen sein: קדשו, dem Zwecke, dem sie geweiht worden, bleiben sie geheiligt. הקריבום לפני ד׳, sie hatten sie vor Gott hingebracht, um damit eine Gottesentscheidung über das wahre und wirkliche, von Gott gewollte Priestertum zu erzielen. Dieses Ziel haben sie erreicht, wenn gleich auf Kosten des Untergangs derer, die es damit gesucht und daran חטאים בנפשתם geworden. Die Erreichung dieses Zieles ist aber für das Gottesheiligtum und seine Zukunft eine so heilig wichtige Tatsache, deren ewige Vergegenwärtigung bedingt so sehr die ganze sittliche Heiligung, welche von diesem Heiligtum und seinem Altardienste für das ganze Volksleben ausgehen soll, dass diese מחתות, wie sie der Erreichung dieses heiligen Zieles gedient, also auch der Festhaltung des Erreichten im Dienste des Heiligtums geweiht bleiben sollen, ויקדשו und so sind sie im doppelten Sinne "heilig" geworden! Sie bleiben ihrem ursprünglichen Zwecke, der Dokumentierung des echten Priestertums, geweiht, und indem sie durch diese bleibende Bestimmung dauernd den heiligsten Zwecken des Heiligtums angehören, sind sie damit selber heilig geworden, wie alles, was dem Dienste des Heiligtums angehört.

ואת האש זרה הלאה das auf ihnen dargebrachte Feuer bleibt verworfen, und eben zum ewigen Gedächtnis, dass das auf ihnen dargebrachte Opfer ein verworfenes war, dafür sollen die Pfannen erhalten bleiben.

את מחתות וגו׳ stellt das Objekt, der folgenden Tätigkeit voran, um darauf den besonderen Nachdruck zu legen und den Charakter hervorzuheben, unter welchem sie :אות ein Lehr- und Warnezeichen bleiben sollen. Mit diesen מחתות sind Opferer an ihrer eigenen Person zu Sündern geworden! Haben sich damit an sich selbst versündigt und ihren eigenen Untergang herbeigeführt! In dem Zusammenhang, in welchem diese Versündigung an sich selbst mit der Bestimmung der מחתות zum צפוי des Altars hier ausgesprochen ist, את מחתות החטאים וגו׳ ועשו אתם וגו׳, dürfte wohl der Gedanke liegen: ihre Ehrsucht hat eine Erschütterung des von Gott geordneten Altardienstes gesucht, an diesem Versuch sind sie zu Grunde gegangen und ihr Untergang hat nur noch zur Festigung dieses von Gott geordneten Altares gedient (siehe Psalmen, Kommentar zu Ps. 42, 1).

ואת האש AND THE FIRE — that is in the censers (not, as might be assumed, that of the burning materials — the שרפה just mentioned).

SPEAK UNTO ELEAZAR THE SON OF AARON THE PRIEST, THAT HE TAKE UP THE CENSERS OUT OF THE BURNING, AND SCATTER THOU THE FIRE YONDER; FOR THEY ARE BECOME HOLY. “The censers [have become holy]. And it is prohibited to have any benefit from them, since they had already made them ‘vessels of service.’” This is Rashi’s language. But I do not know the reason for this prohibition, since it was “strange incense” [which was not part of the daily commandment] that they offered, and if a non-priest makes a vessel of service in order to bring an offering in it outside [the prescribed place in the Tabernacle or Sanctuary], that vessel does not become sanctified! However, it is possible to say that since they did so at the command of Moses, the vessels did become holy, because they dedicated them to G-d, thinking that He would answer them through the [Heavenly] fire and that these censers would remain forever in the Tent of Meeting as [sacred] vessels of service. The correct interpretation, [however,], appears to me to be that Scripture is saying, Because they were offered before the Eternal, therefore they are hallowed, and they shall be for a sign unto the children of Israel,¹⁶⁹Verse 3. meaning: “I [the Eternal],¹⁶⁹Verse 3. have sanctified them [so that they may not be used], from the moment that they were offered before Me, in order that they shall be a sign unto the children of Israel.”

ואת האש זרה הלאה, not on the place where the remains of burned offerings were stacked on the altar. The reason was that it was incense that should never have been allowed into the precincts of the Tabernacle.

אמר אל אלעזר, "say to Eleazar, etc." The reason Moses instructed Eleazar to collect these censers rather than Aaron was that he did not think the High Priest should perform such a menial task. It is also possible that seeing that these people had died in order to prove that Aaron was the High Priest, i.e. that Aaron had been a cause of their death, G'd did not want that the act of giving some status to these censers should be performed by Aaron.

כי קדשו, “for they have become holy.” Rashi understands the word “holy” here in the negative sense, meaning that they are out of bounds to the people, that no one is allowed to derive private advantage of these remains as they have attained the same status as holy vessels in the Tabernacle. Nachmanides does not understand why these remains should have become forbidden for private use seeing that the incense offered by these two hundred and fifty men had never become sanctified, was not part of the sacrificial service. When something becomes sanctified for use outside consecrated grounds it is not holy in the true sense of the word. One may answer that when such items have become sanctified at the express command of Moses, they become truly holy as the 250 men had sanctified them for use in the service of heaven, believing that G’d would respond positively by means of heavenly fire consuming their offerings as it expressed their innermost desire to serve Him in the capacity of priests, their censers would all have become sanctified for all times. Personally, (Nachmanides speaking) I believe the Torah itself answers any of our doubts when it testifies that “these 250 men had used the censers to come closer to Hashem so that they had become holy, henceforth serving as a sign for the Children of Israel,” G’d says that He Himself had sanctified these censers.

In the firepans. But not the fire that was on the altar, because if so, what is meant by “for they were sanctified”? How does the fire that was upon the altar affect their sanctification?

אמור אל אלעזר, “say to Elazar, etc.;” G-d did not want that Aaron the High Priest become ritually impure, as he was involved actively in offering sacrifices, that is why He asked Moses to give these instructions to his son Elazar.

זרה הלאה SCATTER YONDER on the ground from off the censers.

כי קדשו, for only the pans had become holy so that they could not be treated with disrespect.

From the firepans. But not at a distance, because if so Scripture should have explained where [it was to be scattered].

וירם את המחתות, and he shall lift up the censers, etc. In view of the fact that this was a totally new commandment why did the Torah write the conjunctive letter ו at the beginning of the word וירם? Perhaps the Torah considered this use of the censers as part of the demise of Korach and associates. G'd wanted the people to see that the Priesthood of Aaron had been His doing and that He would reinforce this decision by reminding the people of it throughout the generations when they would observe that the censers of the people who had challenged Aaron's status were being used by Aaron when he performed the sacrificial service on the altar.

כי קדשו FOR THEY — the censers — ARE HALLOWED, and are therefore forbidden for any profane use, since they have made them into “vessels of service” (כלי שרת) (by using them for offering incense).

The firepans. But not the fire, because if so, it should not have been thrown to the ground. Rashi afterwards explains why they were sanctified and thus prohibited from being used for personal benefit. It is because those who offered the incense had designated them as sacred service utensils and thus they had to be stored away.

החטאים האלא בנפשתם THESE SINNERS AGAINST THEIR OWN SOULS — i.e. who became wilful transgressors against their own souls, because they rebelled against the Holy One, blessed be He.

כי הקריבום לפני ה' ויקדשו, they had become sanctified as vessels used for service for the Lord except if used of unauthorised service. This fact qualified these copper pans to be used as an overlay on the copper altar.

החטאים האלה בנפשתם, "of these sinners who sinned at the cost of their souls." The reason the Torah repeats this may have been so that Aaron and Moses would not feel badly at having been involved in causing the deaths of these people. The Israelites should also not attribute the death of Korach and associates to any fault on the part of Moses or Aaron. The Torah therefore emphasises that not Moses and Aaron but solely these sinners themselves were to blame for what happened to them. In spite of all this, the Israelites did not understand G'd's intention and accused Moses and Aaron of being the cause of the death of these people (17,6).

את מחתות החטאים האלה בנפשותם, “the fire-pans of these people who sinned at the cost of their lives.” The reason the Torah added the word “against their souls” was to reinforce the point that they forfeited the lives of their souls in the hereafter.

They became willful sinners with their souls. Rashi is answering the following question: Surely Moshe warned them. If so, why did the Torah write חטאים (sinners) which has the connotation of unintentional sin? Therefore he explains that they were willful sinners, as it is written (v. 30) “That these men have angered…” which connotes rebellion, meaning that they willfully rebelled in disputing what Hashem had commanded. The reason why the Torah states חטאים (unintentional sinners) rather than פושעים (willful sinners) appears to be because most of them were from the tribe of Reuven, Korach’s neighbors, whom he incited. Similarly, the Rabbis say about them, “Woe to the wicked and woe to his neighbor.” This implies that initially it was not because of their own wickedness that they joined him, only because Korach was their neighbor. Therefore, they were considered as if they were unintentional sinners. R. Yaakov Triosh.

החטאים האלה בנפשותם, “these sinners who paid for their sins with their lives;” they brought their death upon themselves. Moses had warned them in 16,7, when he made clear that only one person of all of them would be chosen by G-d. In other words, all the others would die as a result of this test. All of them foolishly risked their lives, knowing that 249 of them would die.

רקעי means beaten out (flattened).

The copper altar. Not the golden altar, because the firepans were copper and one could not use copper on the golden altar. Re’m. Furthermore, I have found [further proof that this is so] because it is written “and they shall be a sign for Bnei Yisroel” and a Yisroel is not permitted to enter the area of the golden altar.

כי הקריבום לפני ה׳ ויקדשו, "because they were offered before the Lord and have become sanctified." G'd explains that if He ordered these censers to be turned into a cover for the altar this did not mean that He was pleased with the incense that had been offered in them; on the contrary, the incense was repugnant to Him. However, the fact that these censers had been used for a holy purpose made them holy themselves. The new dimension of all this is that these censers were considered holy before the wrong people offered incense in them as they had been constructed for a holy purpose. ויקדשו, "they have become sanctified;" when someone donates silver or golden trinkets for the Temple, these trinkets become sanctified. Consider the status of these censers if the associates of Korach had decided at the last moment not to go through with their challenge to offer incense in them. The censers would have remained holy although they had not been used for the purpose for which they had been designated. As to the argument of Nachmanides against Rashi that the status of these censers was similar to vessels a non-priest constructed in order to offer a sacrifice outside the precincts of the Temple [and which therefore are not holy, Ed.], the Torah writes: "they have been offered before the Lord and become sanctified" (i.e. inside the precincts of the Tabernacle). The situation is not comparable to the one described by Nachmanides then as these censers had been brought to a site which was sanctified.

ועשו אותם, “so that they will make out of them, etc.” Moses, i.e. G-d refers to skilled artisans. This verse is abbreviated, as we find in similar verses such as Genesis 48,1 ויאמר אל יוסף, “he said to Joseph,” where the subject is missing, or verse 2 in the same chapter where the person giving this information to Yaakov has also not been named.

פחים are plates beaten out thin, tendus in O. F.

צפוי למזבח FOR AN OVERLAYING FOR THE ALTAR — i.e. for the copper altar.

ויהיו לאות AND THEY SHALL BE AS AN אות — The word לאות is the same as לזכרון, something to be mentioned (cf. Exodus 13:9) — that people will always say: These plates were from (once belonged to) those who raised dissension about the priesthood and were burnt.

וירקעום AND THEY EXTENDED THEM — Etendre in O. F.

ויקח אלעזר, “Elazar took;” at first glance this does not appear the proper place for this verse. This verse should have begun with the words: זכרון לבני ישראל, “to be a memorial for the Children of Israel, etc.” Verse 4 was inserted here in order to provide a separation so that we would understand that from the beginning of this whole paragraph until the words: ויהיו לאות לבני ישראל, “so that will be a sign unto the Children of Israel,” Moses was told to speak to Elazar, whereas from verse 5 he was told to speak to Aaron, something which becomes clear at the end of that verse. Proof for this is provided by Sifri on chapter 18,8: וידבר ה' אל אהרן וגו', “the Lord spoke to Aaron, etc.

צפוי למזבח, “a covering for the altar.” Until now the altar did not have a roof.

ולא יהיה כקרח means in order that he be not as Korah.

THAT HE BE NOT AS KORACH, AND AS HIS COMPANY, AS THE ETERNAL SPOKE BY THE HAND OF MOSES ‘LO.’ “The word lo [literally: ‘to him’] is like alav (‘about him’), that is, about Korach. And what is the meaning of by ‘the hand’ of Moses, and why is it not written ‘unto Moses’ [as is written elsewhere]? It is a hint to those who dispute the priesthood, that they will be stricken with leprosy, just as Moses was stricken [with it] on ‘his hand.’¹⁷⁰Exodus 4:6. It was for this reason that Uzziah [king of Judah] was stricken with leprosy [when he attempted to usurp the function of the priests and to offer incense].¹⁷¹II Chronicles 26:19. And according to the plain meaning of Scripture,¹⁷²This interpretation is not found in our texts of Rashi. It is mentioned, however, by Rambam in his Book of the Commandments (see my translation, “The Commandments,” Vol. II, the Eighth Principle, p. 393). [the interpretation is as follows: if anybody disputes the priesthood and claims it for himself, his punishment] will not be that of being swallowed up and burnt, as happened to Korach and his company; instead, [his punishment] will be like that which Moses received on his hand when it was stricken with leprosy. And some scholars¹⁷³This interpretation is brought [in our editions of Rashi], by Rashi himself in his own name at the very beginning of the verse. It is thus obvious that Ramban had a completely different text of Rashi before him here. interpret [the verse to mean]: that no common man, that is not of the seed of Aaron, draw near to burn incense before the Eternal¹⁷⁴Verse 5 before us. — as the Eternal spoke by the hand of Moses with regard to Aaron, that he and his sons should be priests, and not a layman.” This is Rashi’s language. The correct interpretation is that [the word lo (to him)] refers to Eleazar who is mentioned [at the beginning of the section], when Scripture said, Speak unto Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest etc.,¹⁷⁵Verse 2. and the correct order [in meaning] of the verses [before us] is as follows: And Eleazar the priest took the copper censers wherewith they that were burnt had offered, and they beat them out for a covering of the altar¹⁷⁶Verse 4. — as the Eternal spoke to him by the hand of Moses¹⁷⁴Verse 5 before us. — to be a memorial unto the children of Israel etc.¹⁷⁴Verse 5 before us.

למען אשר לא יקרב איש זר "in order that a non-priest should not approach, etc." Why did the Torah add the words "and so that he shall not become like Korach?" Sanhedrin 110 derives from these words that if someone helps a quarrel to continue he is guilty of transgressing a negative commandment. In addition to this interpretation in the Talmud the Torah may have wanted to explain why it had to recall to people, זכרון, what happened to Korach who brought an unauthorised offering, and why it was not sufficient to merely forbid such offerings in the normal manner and to warn of the death that had befallen Korach. People would not be frightened by this. They would consider it an exceptional occurrence. Only the addition of the word זכרון would impress upon them how seriously G'd viewed the offence of someone arrogating to himself the privileges reserved for the priests.

כאשר דבר ה' ביד משה לו. This phrase is a continuation of what had been introduced at the beginning of verse 4 concerning the pans used by the insurgents for their incense.

כאשר דבר ה' ביד משה לו, “as G’d said concerning him (Aaron) through Moses.” Nachmanides writes that the word לו refers to Eleazar who had been mentioned previously in verses 2 and 4, and who had been commanded what to do with the copper remains of the censers and who had made them into a cover for the altar. [The first half of the verse makes better sense if we understand the whole verse as confirming Aaron’s exclusive position as High Priest. Ed.]

ולא יהיה כקרח וכעדתו, “and so that they not become like Korach and his congregation.” Our sages in Sanhedrin 110 derive from this verse that if one participates in and reinforces a quarrel one is guilty of infringing on a negative commandment. The meaning of the whole verse is: “one should not become like Korach and his congregation who had been swallowed by the earth and had been burned but one should prefer to be afflicted with tzoraat.” This is an allusion to people who merely quarrel against the “exclusive hereditary nature of the priesthood” such as King Uzziah who arrogated to himself the privilege reserved for priests. He was punished by becoming a צרוע for the remainder of his days (Chronicles II 26,21). He did not die and did not forfeit his afterlife. [I believe the author uses the words: “a negative commandment” as an example of something not carrying the death penalty. Korach did not merely quarrel but made a “federal case” out of his complaint. Hence his special punishment. Ed.]

In order not to be. Meaning: The Torah is giving a reason, not a warning [indicating a negative commandment]. When the Rabbis say “anyone who strengthens a dispute transgresses the negative prohibition that states ‘Do not be like Korach…’” it is only a Scriptural allusion to a Rabbinic law.

V. 5. קטרת ,להקטיר קטרת steht hier wohl im uneigentlichen Sinne für alles, was מוקטר לפני ד׳ wird, also für alles, was auf dem Altare dem Feuer übergeben wird. So קטרת אילים (Ps. 66, 15). Wird doch eigentliches קטרת überhaupt auf dem מזבח הנחשת nicht dargebracht und kann eine an diesen Altar geknüpfte Warnung am allerwenigsten sich hierauf beziehen. — כאשר דבר וגו׳, die Kap. 16, 5—7 an Korach gerichteten Worte hatte Mosche auf Gottes Geheiß gesprochen. Für einen Mann wie Korach lag darin zugleich die Warnung, sich nicht einer für den Nichtberechtigten jedenfalls verhängnisvollen Gottesentscheidung auszusetzen. Wie die dem Korach angekündigte Entscheidung an ihm in Erfüllung gegangen, so wird sie an jedem Unberechtigten sich erfüllen, der es wagen wird, dem Altare als Priester zu nahen, ohne dazu durch Abstammung von Aharon befugt zu sein. Eine Warnung, die sich auch am König Usia erfüllte (Chron. II. 20, 6).

כאשר דבר ה' ביד משה, “as the Lord had said via Moses.” The plain meaning of the verse is that Eleazar took the copper fire-pans as he had been instructed to do by Moses, whom G–d had told to instruct with this task.

זכרון לבני ישראל למען אשר לא יקרב איש זר, “a reminder to the Children of Israel so that no non priest, etc.;” why was such a reminder necessary? Someone looking at the copper cover on the earthen altar (which was outside the Tabernacle) would be liable to ask: seeing that the Torah had written in Exodus 20,21 “make for Me an earthen altar,” i.e. fill the hollow with earth, what is the good of that earth if it was now going to be covered with copper sheathing?” He would be answered that this sheathing was constructed from the pans used by the rebels who had supported Korach in his rebellion against the hereditary institution of the priesthood. Seeing what had happened to the owners of these censers the people were afraid to question the institution of the priesthood in the future.

כאשר דבר ה' ביד משה לו AS THE LORD HAD SPOKEN BY THE AGENCY OF MOSES לו — The latter word is the same as עליו, “with regard to him”, i.e. “with regard to Aaron”: He had spoken to Moses that he and his sons should be priests; therefore a layman, who is not of the seed of Aaron, shall not approach etc. Similarly in every instance of the words לי or לו or להם which are connected with forms of the verb דבר, their meaning is the same as על, “concerning”. A Midrashic explanation is that לו, “with regard to him”, means: with regard to Korah (not to Aaron). But what, then, is meant by the expression “by the hand of Moses”; why does it not write “unto Moses”? It is used as an intimation to those who rebel against the institution of the priesthood: that they will become stricken with leprosy, just as Moses was stricken with it on his hand, as it is said, (Exodus 4:6) “and he took it (the hand) forth and, behold, it was leprous, white as snow”. And on account of this (that he insisted on offering incense in spite of the priests’ protest) Uzziah was stricken with leprosy (II Chronicles 26:19) (Midrash Tanchuma, Tzav 1 on צו; cf. also Sanhedrin 110a and Rashi on Isaiah 6:4).

The unusual ending לו after the words ביד משה means that G’d had told Moses to relate this instruction to Eleazar. [giving special instructions to Eleazar (verse 2) while his father the High Priest was alive, may have reflected a special sensitivity to Aaron’s feelings on the subject which G’d displayed on this occasion. Ed.]

About Korach. Even though the Torah often writes ביד משה (lit. ‘in the hand of Moshe’ but normally meaning ‘through Moshe’) as in Parshas Beha'aloscha where it writes “according to the word of Hashem in the hand of Moshe” (Bamidbar 9:23, 10:13) and similarly in Parshas Bechukosai (Vayikra 26:46) and Parshas Pinchos (Bamidbar 27:23). Nevertheless, Rashi is answering a question: What is the meaning of “in the hand of Moshe”? For one cannot answer that Hashem said through Moshe to Korach that he would be punished if he disputed the kehunah, since we do not find this in the Torah. Furthermore why would He have commanded Korach any more than the rest of Yisroel? The phrase “to him” certainly refers to Korach, according to the Midrash which says, “This alludes that those who enter a dispute,” a reference to Korach who disputed. Rather one must say that “in the hand of Moshe” comes for one to expound an “allusion that those who dispute…” meaning that it is written “in the hand of Moshe” and there (Shemos 4:6) it is written “Please place your hand in your chest.” Just as there the Torah refers to tzora’as, so too here, those who enter a dispute will be stricken with tzora’as.

כאשר דבר ה׳ ביד משה לו, "as G'd had said to him by means of Moses." The wording of this verse reveals that when Moses had told Korach that G'd would create something new and that he would descend into the bowels of the earth after the earth would split, he had not said this until G'd Himself had told him so. Had the Torah not written this we would have thought that Moses initiated this thought and that G'd did his bidding.

ביד משה לו, ”through Moses to him.” The “him” refers to Korach. The meaning is; concerning Korach. The construction is similar to Genesis 28,15: כי לא אעזבך עד אשר עם עשיתי את אשר דברתי לך, “I will not abandon you until I have carried out all that I have said to you (promised to you) [G-d speaking in Yaakov’s dream of the ladder. Ed.] There too the word לב is to be understood as עליך, “concerning you.”An alternate interpretation understands the word לו, as referring to what Moses had said to Aaron. (Rashi and Ibn Ezra)

Are stricken with tzora’as. Because the Midrash expounds the verse in this manner, we have proof that לו “to him” refers to Korach, the one who disputed the kehunah. For one cannot explain that it refers to Aharon, given that tzora’as has no bearing to him.

YE HAVE KILLED THE PEOPLE OF THE ETERNAL.’ Onkelos rendered it: “You have caused the death of the people of the Eternal.” Thus he interprets the verse [to mean that] the people accused Moses and Aaron that because they advised Korach and his company to offer up strange incense to G-d of their own accord, those who offered it up were burnt, since G-d had not told Moses to offer up this incense, nor did he tell Israel to do so in the name of G-d; thus they of their own accord proposed this matter as a result of which the people died — when they could have [just as well] given another sign or miracle, through the rod, or [through] some other [harmless] test.
And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said [that the verse means that the people said]: “What proof is this that the tribe of Levi has been chosen, and that Aaron was chosen to be the High Priest? It is possible that by your prayer or by some [secret] wisdom which you possess you burnt those that offered the incense.” [All this is the language of Ibn Ezra]. And so indeed it appears, that they did not yet believe [in the Divine selection of the tribe of Levi], for when He stated afterwards, Speak unto the children of Israel, and take of them rods, one for each fathers’ house;¹⁷⁷Further, Verse 17. And it shall come to pass, that the man whom I shall choose, his rod shall bud, and I will make to cease from Me the murmurings etc.¹⁷⁸Ibid., Verse 20. — this proves that the people did not [yet] believe, as a result of the fire, that the Levites were chosen [for service in the Sanctuary] and that the firstborn had been exchanged for them, but they thought that Moses and Aaron had caused the fire [of their own accord]. Or [it may be that the people thought] that the punishment came because they burnt the incense with strange fire which He had not commanded them,¹⁷⁹Leviticus 10:1. and [that Aaron was saved because] Aaron’s incense was the [daily] incense of the morning [commanded by G-d],¹⁸⁰Exodus 30:7. as I have explained.¹⁸¹Above, 16:5. [According to this interpretation] the complaint [of the people] was only about [those two hundred and fifty men who offered the incense and who were consumed by] the fire,¹⁸²Ibid., Verse 35. but not about those men [Korach, Dathan, and Abiram] who were swallowed up by the earth,¹⁸³Ibid., Verse 32. for G-d had said to Moses, Get you up from about the dwelling of Korach, Dathan, and Abiram,¹⁸⁴Ibid., Verse 24. and this alluded to the opening of the mouth of the earth. Moses had told this to Israel in the name of G-d. Furthermore, Dathan and Abiram were guilty to a greater extent [in this incident than the two hundred and fifty others], since they mocked the messengers of G-d, and despised His words, and scoffed at His prophets.¹⁸⁵II Chronicles 36:16. [Hence the people did not complain about the punishment meted out to Korach, Dathan, and Abiram, but only about the fire that consumed the two hundred and fifty men who offered up the incense.]¹⁸⁶Ramban wrote all the above as a commentary on Ibn Ezra’s interpretation. In the following text, he presents his own view of this matter.
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that the people now believed in the priesthood of Aaron [that he and his descendants were chosen by G-d to serve as priests], since a fire had already come forth from before the Eternal and consumed his offerings,¹⁸⁷See Leviticus 9:24. but they wanted the firstborn to minister in the Tabernacle instead of the Levites, and they did not like the exchange [for the Levites] which they had done to them, but they wanted all the tribes [through their firstborn] to have a share in the Service of the House of G-d. Thus they complained: “You have killed them, for you advised them that they should offer up incense like priests, when they were only fit to do the service of the Levites, but not to act as priests who offer up the incense.” This is the meaning of the expression, and, behold, the rod of Aaron for the house of Levi was budded¹⁸⁸Further, Verse 23. [thus showing that the people’s complaint was because of the appointment of the tribe of Levi to minister in the Tabernacle, and now it was confirmed that they were indeed chosen instead of the firstborn of all the tribes].

'אתם המתם את עם ה, by telling all these people to test G’d by offering incense, something that is only fit to be offered together with the public burnt-offering burned on the altar every day in the morning and evening by the individual priest performing that service. If you wanted to make such a test you should have done so with meat offerings, a procedure in which a large number of priests can participate.

וילנו כל עדת בני ישראל, The whole congregation of Israel murmured, etc. What is the meaning of the word לאמר in this verse? Seeing the complaint was directed only at Moses and Aaron as has been stated what could the word לאמר possibly add? Perhaps the people did not spell out their complaint as did the Torah., i.e. they did not actually say: "you have killed the people of G'd." They merely voiced complaints which amounted to much the same as if they had made this direct accusation which the Torah summarised here. The words וילנו לאמר read together were equivalent to their having said the words quoted in their name in our verse.

'אתם המתם את עם ה, they meant that while they agreed that Datan and Aviram having been swallowed up by the earth as being an appropriate punishment for them, they did not see why the 250 men with them who had offered incense deserved the same fate.

אתם המתם את עם ה', “you have killed the people of Hashem. Nachmanides points out that Onkelos by his translation of אתון גרמתון דמות עמא, i.e. “you have caused the death of the people,” that the accusation meant that by inducing the 250 men to offer the incense, Moses and Aaron had made themselves guilty of their deaths. The people did not believe that this suggestion by Moses had been either made at the command of G’d, or even with the silent approval of G’d, but had been of his own doing. They felt that the point Moses and Aaron were trying to make could easily have been made by a test such as the one with the staffs, and then no one would have had to die. They claimed that Moses must have known that presenting incense in an unauthorized manner would lead to the death of those offering it. Their accusation then was: “although you knew that following your suggestion meant that they would die, you still made this suggestion.” Ibn Ezra, taking a different approach, writes that the people rejected the notion that the death of the 250 men as well as the death of Korach and his family proved that G’d had selected the tribe of Levi over the firstborn, and that Aaron was His choice as High Priest. Moses may simply have prayed to G’d to kill the rebels, and in his capacity of prophet, an undisputed capacity, G’d had accepted his prayer. Ibn Ezra’s explanation makes sense seeing that the people accepted the ruling that Aaron was the chosen High Priest only after the staff representing the tribe of Levi had sprouted blossoms and produced almonds, as we have been told in Concerning that experiment, the Torah had written (verse 20) that Hashem would cause the complaints against Him to cease. According to Ibn Ezra, the people’s complaint at this stage did not refer to the descent below the earth of Korach and his cohorts, it only concerned the death by burning of the 250 people who had genuinely wanted to come closer to G’d by exercising the privilege to present an incense offering. After all, they had all heard (or understood) that G’d had told Moses that the people should remove themselves from around Korach, whereas no such instruction had been given concerning standing close to the 250 men. The guilt of Datan and Aviram, who had publicly ridiculed G’d’s appointed leaders was obviously even greater, so that no one challenged the fact that they had died for their sin. Personally, (Nachmanides writing) the correct interpre-tation of all the foregoing is that the people did believe that Aaron was G’d’s chosen priest, for they had observed previously that fire had come down from heaven consuming his incense without his coming to any harm thereby. What the people wanted was that the firstborn be allowed to continue performing secondary tasks in the Tabernacle, the tasks that had now been allocated to the Levites. Only in this way, did they feel, would all the tribes have representation in the Tabernacle and the service being performed therein. They accused Moses of having designed a test for the firstborn that would have equated them with the priests, something that they had not even aspired to, and as a result by their overstepping themselves Moses had caused the death of these 250 firstborn.

V. 6. אתם המתם וגו׳. Sie hatten, wie es aus V. 17 f. scheint, aus dem Sterben der zweihundertundfünfzig noch nicht die Überzeugung geschöpft, dass die Erwählung Aharons zum ausschließlichen Priestertum rein nur auf einer von Gott ausgehenden, das Wesen seines Heiligtums sichernden, von allem Persönlichen ferne stehenden Anordnung beruhe. Sie begriffen, wie es scheint, die allerdings auf göttlicher Anordnung beruhende Erwählung Aharons doch nur mehr als eine dem Bruder Mosche gewährte persönliche Auszeichnung, das Verbrechen der zweihundertundfünfzig daher als eine von Gott bestrafte persönliche Beleidigung Mosche und Aharons, die, wie sie meinten, durch Verzeihung der erlittenen Beleidigung dem Untergange einer so bedeutenden Anzahl Familienväter wohl hätten vorbeugen können und — sollen. Sie begriffen das rein Sachliche des Vorgangs nicht, dem in keiner Weise durch eine solche Verzeihung ein Genüge zu leisten war, das vielmehr gebieterisch eine Gottesentscheidung forderte, wenn das Gotteswerk, dem gegenüber Mosche und Aharon nur bedeutungslos verschwindende Organe waren, überhaupt für sein ewiges Ziel gerettet und erhalten bleiben sollte.

'אתם המיתם את עם ה, “you (Moses and Aaron) have killed the Lord’s people!” The people accused Moses and Aaron as having done this knowingly, as they knew telling them to offer incense outside the sacred soil of the Tabernacle would result in their death. After all, Nadav and Avihu who had been anointed as priests, as opposed to the 250 men Moses told to offer incense had been killed on the spot for doing so in the wrong place and at the wrong time. Moses told Aaron to take the fire-pans that had served these 250 men as the base for their incense and to demonstrate that it was not the incense nor the pans in which it had been offered that killed people but that it was their sins which killed them. When the people heard this, they replied that this was no proof, as they may have died seeing that they were not worthy of becoming priests. G–d therefore ordered Moses to take staffs from each of the leaders of the tribes of Israel and to place them side by side inside the Tent of testimony, (Tabernacle) each staff belonging to the respective leader of their tribe, (verse 17) [people whom they considered most worthy, Ed.]) In this way, from the results of this test, G–d hoped to silence the people’s complaints about nepotism once and for all. (verse 25)

You have killed the people of Adonoy. The people were not complaining about Korach, Dasan and Aviram. On the contrary, they were happy that they died, as I explained (Devorim 11:6). They were pained about the death of the 250 men, though, and they suspected that Moshe and Aharon invented the advice to offer the incense. If Moshe and Aharon had not given them those instructions, the 250 men would not have done anything before Korach, Dasan and Aviram were swallowed up, and they would have repented. However, in truth all this was done through prophecy as well, as I explained earlier.

'אתם המתם את עם ה, “you are killing G-d’s people!” They meant that Moses and Aaron, by suggesting that the two hundred and fifty men offer incense, something non priests were forbidden to do, and doing it in a location where incense was not to be offered, were the direct cause of these people dying a sudden death. All of this had been caused by Moses and Aaron substituting the Levites for the firstborn, who previously were in their rights to offer incense.

Furthermore, the audacity of the people who had witnessed how Moses had not stood on ceremony but had himself gone to Datan and Aviram in order to give them a chance to escape death if they recanted, is impossible to understand. What could Moses and Aaron possibly have been guilty of? We must conclude therefore that the complaint of the people concerned the very type of test Moses and Aaron arranged, i.e. the offering of incense of all the associates of Korach at one and the same time. They claimed that Moses only had to make this test between Korach and Aaron and as a result, as soon as G'd had shown that He accepted the incense from Aaron and not from Korach, the other 250 men would have learned their lesson and would not have had to die by engaging in this confrontation. The word לאמר was an accusation against Moses who had made all these men offer incense. The people did not complain about the death of either Korach or Datan and Aviram. They were only angry at the death of the 250 men who represented the elite of the nation, its most senior judges, etc., who they claimed had died through an exercise orchestrated by Moses and Aaron. According to some of our sages, the people's complaint was directed at the very nature of the offering Moses had insisted on, i.e. קטורת, the holiest of the holy. He should have allowed them to perform a relatively minor form of Temple service instead. According to that view the word לאמר addresses the instruction to offer incense.

GET YOU UP FROM AMONG THIS CONGREGATION, THAT I MAY CONSUME THEM IN A MOMENT. I have not understood the intention of this verse, nor of its companion above, Separate yourselves from among this congregation,¹⁸⁹Above, 16:21. for G-d has the power to kill many people in a plague around one righteous person, and he alone remains [alive], as happened during [the plague on] the firstborn of Egypt. Similarly it happened in all other plagues [throughout the generations], that three people would sleep under one blanket — two of them would die whilst the middle one would be saved! It would appear, therefore, that the wrath went forth to slay even the whole congregation with the death of these sinners [Korach and his associates], who had followed in their way, [and so became liable to death either] by the earth opening its mouth or by a consuming fire — these being general punishments which kill all those who are standing there together, unless a miracle of an unusual nature occurs [to save some individuals amongst the people].¹⁹⁰The thought suggested here is as follows: Moses and Aaron would have been in no danger themselves even if they had not gone away from the midst of the congregation. But since there were some people there who had sympathized with Korach, Moses was commanded to leave that place so that all people should realize the danger involved in remaining there (Kur Zahav). Or it may be that the Holy One, blessed be He, said this [Get you up …] in honor of the righteous men, for as long as they were amongst them [the sinners], He would not stretch forth His hand against them. The intention in these and similar words is to inform them that they have to plead for mercy and forgiveness, and Moses in his zeal did so immediately.

הרמו מתון העדה הזאת, "get up from amongst this congregation, etc." G'd did not speak about Moses and Aaron but to all those who had not joined the ones who had accused Moses and Aaron. Proof of the fact that my interpretation is correct is the word לאמר, which always means that others are to be informed. The word הזאת, "this," further indicates that only the people who had actively accused Moses of wrongdoing were slated to be destroyed. This also explains the need for G'd to have said הרומו altogether. After all, G'd has no problem in killing the wicked in the very presence of the righteous as He had done when He killed the firstborn in Egypt and their family members did not have to leave their houses first. If you accept our interpretation, however, the instruction הרמו makes sense as even the people not guilty of accusing Moses now were under sentence of death already and unless they demonstrated that they were not involved in this sin the angel of death would execute them now. (I refer you to my commentary on Numbers 16,21).

הרמו, a similar construction in the imperative mode to המולו in Jeremiah 4,4. However, on account of the letter ר in our word the vowel chirik has been changed to the vowel tzeyre. We encounter similar changes in the vowel pattern in such words as ברך, beyrech, and birech on account of the dagesh. The reason why the Torah speaks here of הרמו instead of הבדלו in 16,21 which was a far weaker command is that by now G’d’s anger was at full strength as Korach’s punishment had apparently not had the desired effect.

הרומו מתוך העדה הזאת, “remove yourselves from among this congregation!” Nachmanides commences his commentary by writing that he fails to make sense of this whole verse, as well as of the parallel verse in 16,20 where Moses and Aaron are also commanded to put physical distance between themselves and the complainants. Why was this necessary? Surely G’d possesses the power to kill many people and leave those whom He does not wish to harm alive and unscathed without their first having to “run for their lives!” G’d had demonstrated this power when killing the firstborn in Egypt while no Israelite firstborn had to run for his life. Even Egyptian firstborn hiding in homes of the Israelites would not have been spared. We must assume that in our situation G’d’s anger was directed at people who formed part of an assembly, as this was indicative of their sympathies being with the person or persons at the core of that assembly. In order to be saved one had to demonstrate by an act, such as the act of removing oneself physically from the rebels, that one did not share their attitudes. It is also possible that G’d issued these instructions not so much in order to save the righteous as to show them respect, as He did not feel free to kill the wicked while the righteous were still among them, trying to get them to desist from their rebellious attitude. Moses hastened to inform the innocent that they themselves were in need of mercy, and that if they did not separate themselves they would share the fate of the sinners.

VV. 10 u. 11. הרמו וגו׳. Diese Anklage war allerdings ein rein persönlicher Vorwurf, in dessen Folge Gott zu Mosche sprach: Wenn ihr wollt, so hebet euch hinweg, und ich vernichte die wider euch aufständische Menge sofort. Sie aber huben sich nicht hinweg, warfen sich vielmehr auf ihr Angesicht vor Gott nieder und, statt sich hinweg zu begeben und, wie die aufständische Menge ihnen unterschob, den Tod ihrer Beleidiger zur Sühne zu fordern und Boten des Todes unter dem Gottesvolke zu sein, musste Aharon mitten hinein in die Mitte der dem Tode geweihten Menge eilen und mit dem zu Gott aufsteigenden קטרת-Ausdruck der innigsten Hingebung an Gott sühnend und rettend dastehen zwischen den Sterbenden und Lebenden und sich und seine Sendung dem Volke vielmehr als rettende Überwinder des Todes bewähren. —

וכפר עליהם AND MAKE AN EXPIATION FOR THEM — This secret the Angel of Death communicated to him (Moses) when he went up unto heaven to receive the Torah, viz., that the incense holds back the plague — as is related in Treatise Shabbat 89a.

קח את המחתה, "take the censer, etc." Inasmuch as the people had claimed that the reason the 250 men had died was due to Moses having challenged them to offer the deadly incense, Moses now wanted to demonstrate that incense is far from deadly; on the contrary, this very "deadly" incense would now save the people's lives. The reason the incense had appeared to be "deadly" was because the wrong people had offered it at the wrong time and at the wrong place. Our sages in Shabbat 89 claim that Moses had learned the life-saving property of the incense offering from the angel of death himself when he had been on Mount Sinai waiting to receive the Tablets and the Torah.

ושים קטורת, to teach the people the lesson that the same incense which is causing death when used by non priests is a remedy when used by the priests. This is further priests that only the priests are worthy of performing sacrificial service.

אש מעל המזבח, “fire taken from the altar;” Moses warned Aaron not to err and because of haste to use non consecrated fire as had done two of his sons who had paid with their lives for their error.

ושים קטרת, “and lay incense;” in order to show them that you are a priest, and that the incense which they thought is the cause of death, is actually the cause of life if used by people authorised to do so, i.e. a priest.

וכפר עליהם, “and make atonement for them;” the smoke of the incense will act as a barrier against the plague.

ויקח אהרן כאשר דבר משה, And Aaron took just as Moses had said, etc. This means that Aaron did so as soon as he received the instructions from Moses. Aaron's action is remarkable because he had witnessed what happens when one offers incense at the wrong time. and the wrong place. He might have waited until the appropriate time and offered it inside the Sanctuary. Instead, he knowingly endangered himself having received his instructions from Moses the acknowledged prophet who was entitled to violate a commandment temporarily in order to deal with an emergency. Another example of a prophet acting in this manner was the prophet Elijah on Mount Carmel when he repaired a private altar at a time when private altars were forbidden (Kings I 18,30).

ויעמד בין המתים וגו׳ AND HE STOOD BETWEEN THE DEAD [AND THE LIVING] — He (Aaron) seized the Angel of Death and stopped him despite himself. The angel said to him, “Let me be, so that I may carry out my commission!” He (Aaron) answered him, “Moses has bidden me prevent you”. The angel replied, “I am the messenger of the Omnipresent whilst you are but the messenger of Moses!” Aaron retorted, “Moses does not say anything out of his own mind, but only at the command of the Almighty. If you do not believe me, behold, the Holy One, blessed be He, and Moses are at the entrance of the appointed tent; come with me and ask them!” This is the meaning of what is stated (v. 15): And Aaron returned unto Moses (i.e. returned together with the Angel of Death) (cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Tetzaveh 15 at end of תצוה). Another explanation is: Wherefore was the plague stayed by means of the incense? Because the Israelites were traducing and speaking ill of the incense, saying, “It is a deadly poison: through it Nadab and Abihu died; through it the two hundred and fifty men were burnt!” therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, said, You will see that it is also a means for restraining the plague, and it is only sin that brings death” (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:5:3 on Exodus 17:5).

ויעמוד בין המתים ובין החיים, after he had already reached that spot he waited in order to help cure the ones who had taken sick but had not died yet. Instead of distancing himself from the congregation of sinners (verse 21) Aaron did the opposite in order to save whom he could save.

ויעמד בין המתים ובין החיים. He stood between the dead and between the living. This expression can best be understood with the help of Tanchuma on Tetzaveh paragraph 15. The Midrash explains there that Aaron took hold of the angel of death physically and prevented him from killing. At the same time he counted the number of dead to make sure that the angel of death would not add to their number. The correct translation of our verse then is: "he stood, i.e. arrested or limited the number of dead that had died from amongst the living." This explains why the Torah added that at that moment the number of dead from the plague was (already) 14,700. No additional people died once Aaron offered the incense.

ויעמד בין המתים וכין החיים, the destroyer (angel of death) did not cross beyond where the incense was held by Aaron.

He grasped the angel. For if not so, what is the meaning of “Between the living and the dead”? Were the living on one side and the dead on another such that Aharon could stand between them? But if it refers to the angel then it is understandable, and means that they no longer died. (Kitzur Mizrochi) Rashi explains this before his following comment “Another interpretation…” because it appears to contradict his previous comment (v. 11) “This was the secret [the Angel of Death] conveyed to him.” For if this were so, why was the plague not stopped immediately instead of him having to go to the Tent of Meeting? Therefore Rashi explains that Aharon immediately held the angel against his will with the incense; however the Angel of Death did not want to believe that Hashem now wished to use this remedy, given that the plague came because of the gravity of the sin. This secret would only apply when a plague comes naturally and the generation does not have the merit to overturn it, for only then does the incense help. Therefore, they had to go to the Tent of Meeting. After answering this difficulty, Rashi returned to explain the alternative interpretation.

ותעצר המגפה. Not a single Israelite was struck by the pestilence from that moment on.

An alternative interpretation: Why with incense. Because according to the first reason there is a difficulty why did he not pray immediately so that the plague would not start, or at very least [why did he not pray] once it had started. Therefore, Rashi gives the alternative interpretation that it was a decree from Hashem. However, according to this alternative interpretation there is the difficulty that we do not find that Hashem said this to him. Therefore, Rashi also gives the first interpretation, “This was the secret…”

ותעצר המגפה. Not a single Israelite was struck by the pestilence from that moment on.

וישב אהרן…והמגפה נעצרה. Aaron returned and the plague had been arrested. The reason the Torah repeats once more that the plague had been arrested is to inform us that even after the cloud of smoke from the incense had dissipated the plague did not break out again. We should not think that the effect of Aaron's offering was limited to while he was in the process of offering incense. We might have thought so in view of what the Torah told us in Exodus 17,11 that Israel's army prevailed over Amalek only while Moses managed to keep his hands raised heavenwards.

וישב אהרן אל משה אל פסח אהל מועד והמגפה נעצרה, “Aaron returned to Moses at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting and the plague had been arrested.” Seeing that the Torah had already reported in verse 13 that as soon as Aaron put incense in his censer and stood between the living and the dead the plague stopped, why did the Torah have to repeat the fact that the plague had been arrested? The Torah teaches us here that Aaron forced the angel to come to the entrance of the Tabernacle where Moses stood. This is part of what is described in Tanchuma Tetzaveh 15, excerpts of which we have quoted already. When the angel had challenged Aaron’s interference saying that he was an agent of G’d, Aaron had countered that he was an agent of Moses. The angel ridiculed this saying that Aaron was only the messenger of a mortal human being whereas he was the messenger of eternal G’d. Aaron challenged the angel to accompany him to the entrance of the Tabernacle where both G’d and Moses could be found. The angel refused to accompany Aaron until the latter took hold of his loins and dragged him along. The Torah alludes to all this when it reports about Moses’ last day on earth in Deut. 33,11 when he blesses each of the tribes and writes ברך ה' חילו ופועל ידיו תרצה, “may the Lord bless his (Aaron’s) resources and may the work of his hands be pleasing (in the eyes of the Almighty).” This was a veiled reference to Aaron’s performance in our paragraph. Moses wished that future High Priests from the tribe of Levi be similarly successful in their efforts to intercede on behalf of the Jewish people when the need would arise to do so. The whole passage teaches how beloved the offering of incense is in the eyes of the Lord.

We may also understand this repetition in light of the Midrash Tanchuma on that verse who claims that the angel of death refused to take orders from Aaron until Aaron brought him to the entrance of the Tabernacle where he heard from the voice of G'd that he was to desist. The meaning of the word והמגפה would then be a reference to the angel of death who is defined as "the plague." At this juncture the angel of death agreed to become inactive, i.e. to stop killing the people of Israel. Whereas in the previous verse the Torah wrote ותעצר המגפה, in this instance the Torah wrote והמגפה נעצרה. In the previous verse the Torah refers to Aaron's role in stopping the plague although the angel of death had not agreed yet; in this verse the Torah describes that the cause of the plague, i.e. the angel of death himself agreed to desist.

'ויקח מאתם מטה, מטה וגו, after the people had complained about the incense accusing Moses and Aaron as causing death among the people (verse 6) and there had not been clear cut proof that the priesthood was reserved for Aaron and his direct descendants, G’d told Moses that He would furnish additional proof of this, the kind of proof which would preclude any further challenge to this as an established fact confirmed by G’d through a miracle.

TWELVE RODS. Aaron’s rod was one of the twelve, since it does not say: “and you shall take a rod for the house of Levi and write Aaron’s name upon it” [but instead it says in the following verse, And thou shalt write Aaron’s name upon the rod of Levi]; for he was included in the number mentioned. Thus Joseph was counted as only one tribe [and not as two separate tribes — Ephraim and Menasheh], the reason being that the tribes of Israel are always counted as twelve, and because He counted Levi [here as one tribe], He counted Joseph as only one. I will explain this further in Seder V’zoth Habrachah,¹⁹¹Deuteronomy 33:6. if G-d will bless me to reach it [in my commentary].

דבר אל בני ישראל וקח מאתם, "speak to the children of Israel and take from them, etc." The expressions דבר plus קח suggest that we are speaking about two separate subjects. G'd said דבר, referring to the fact that 1) the Israelites were to bring one rod representing their respective tribes; 2) Moses was to accept these rods from them. Although the Torah did not spell out who was to bring these rods to Moses, the letter ו at the beginning of the words וקח alludes to this. [The problem is that the Torah did not spell out exactly what it was that Moses was to take from the children of Israel. Ed.] An additional reason for the Torah to write וקח with the extra letter ו may be that this demonstration was additional to the conversion of the 250 censers into covers for the altar which had also been described as being a memorial to what happened to Korach and associates. The people had to be given visual evidence that G'd had chosen Aaron.

שנים עשר מטות, “twelve staffs.” Aaron’s staff was included in the twelve, seeing that it does not say that Moses should take the staff of Levi and inscribe Aaron’s name on it, but it does say: “inscribe Aaron’s name on the staff representing the tribe of Levi.” In other words, there already was a staff representing the tribe of Levi. The tribe of Joseph was represented here by only one staff as it is axiomatic that the total number of tribes in the Jewish people would be 12 at all times.

V. 17. דבר וגו׳. Wir haben zu Kap. 1, 2 entwickelt, wie nach ihrer Verzweigung aus dem einen gemeinsamen Urstamme die Stämme des jüdischen Volkes :מטות Äste heißen, und finden sie daher hier in "מטות" den sprechendsten Ausdruck. Insofern jedoch ein jeder Stamm wieder eine besondere Eigentümlichkeit innerhalb des gemeinsamen Nationalganzen auf seine Angehörigen vererbte, bilden sie ein jeder ein besonderes בית אב innerhalb des einen gemeinsamen בית ישראל. Als מטות werden sie daher in ihrer Gleichheit, als בתי אבות in ihrer gesonderten Eigentümlichkeit begriffen. Indem daher hier die zwölf בתי אבות des jüdischen Volkes durch zwölf מטות repräsentiert werden sollen, so ist damit dem Gedanken Raum gegeben, dass ungeachtet ihrer eigentümlichen Sonderheit sie doch vielleicht wegen des charakteristischen Gemeinsamen einer Gleichheit hinsichtlich der hier zur Entscheidung stehenden Beziehung gewürdigt werden könnten, oder ungeachtet der gemeinsamen Gleichheit die charakteristische Sonderheit einer solchen Gleichwürdigkeit entgegenstehen könnte.

וקח מאתם מטה מטה, “and take from each of them a staff;” seeing that they are still complaining about the tribe (מטה) of Levi being the one G-d has selected to perform special duties, they were to realise that the significance of handling incense was not something that applied only to Aaron, but that Aaron’s tribe, the Levites, had a special role to perform. There was a need to demonstrate this by an additional miracle.

THOU SHALT WRITE EVERY MAN’S NAME UPON HIS ROD. Some commentators¹⁹²I have not identified these sources. See Ibn Ezra. explain that this refers to the name of the founder of the tribe: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah. The correct interpretation is that it means the names of the [present] princes [of the tribes at that time], and He considered Aaron the prince of the tribe of Levi. It was necessary to explain¹⁹³In Verses 18 and 21. that they each had only one rod and one prince, meaning: “Even though I have divided them [the Levites] into two families, the priests separately and the Levites separately, yet they are [in fact] one tribe, and have only one prince. The reason for this is as I have explained,¹⁹⁴Above, Verse 6 (towards the end). that they only needed proof that it was that tribe [i.e., the tribe of Levi] which was chosen out of all the tribes of Israel [to minister in the Tabernacle].

Nachmanides writes that there are some scholars who believe that the meaning of the words is that the names of the respective staffs were Reuven, Shimon, Levi, etc., but this is not correct. The names inscribed were those of the princes of each tribe at that time, i.e. Elitzur, Shlumiel, etc, and Levi’s prince was Aaron.

מאתם…מאת כל נשיאהם, "from them…from all their princes." The reason the Torah said both מאתם and did not content itself with writing מאת נשיאהם, is to ensure that Moses would accept these rods only from the princes and that he should not set aside 12 rods on behalf of the respective tribes. Had the Torah only written that Moses was to take these rods from the princes this would not have obligated the princes to come forward and present Moses with these rods. Moses could have acted as their representative and assigned a rod for each tribe. Alternatively, we could have thought that if the Torah had only written the words מאת נשיאהם this meant that the rods should be the property of the various princes but that Moses should take them, i.e. select them; therefore the Torah added the word מאתם to teach that the princes themselves must bring these rods to Moses. At any rate, the reason the Torah was so specific was to prevent anyone from claiming afterwards that Moses had selected a rod for them that never had a chance to blossom and that therefore the fact that Aaron's rod blossomed did not prove anything.

כי מטה אחד FOR ONE STAFF SHALL BE (FOR THE HEAD OF THE HOUSE OF THEIR FATHERS) — i.e. although I have divided them into two families, the family of the priests apart, and that of the Levites apart, yet it is only one tribe, [and they shall therefore have but one staff].

ואת שם אהרון תכתב על מטה לוי, "and you will inscribe the name Aaron on the rod of the tribe of Levi." The Torah had to mention this as it had not previously written that the tribe of Levi was one of the 12 tribes for whom rods were to be taken. [Menashe and Ephrayim could have made up the tribe of Joseph. Ed.] It is possible that the whole procedure was that they took one long rod and divided it into 12 equal lengths and every tribal head came and took one length of the same original rod. In that way the test was absolutely fair as all the parts of that rod had come from the same root. If this was the procedure we can also understand the meaning of the words ומטה אהרון בתוך מטותם, "that the rod of Aaron was a part of their rods" (verse 21). I have found an opinion quoted in Bamidbar Rabbah 18,23 which confirms what I have just written.

כי מטה אחד לראש בית אבותם, “for there shall be one staff for each head of an ancestral house.” The Torah emphasizes this point seeing that the tribe of Levi had been divided in its functions between “ordinary” Levites and the priests, (descendants of Aaron).

V. 18. ואת שם אהרן וגו׳. Wir haben bereits zu Wajikra 22, 9 entwickelt, wie der jüdische Priester nicht aufgehört habe, Levite zu sein, wie vielmehr das Priestertum nur als das potenzierte Levitentum in reinster Vollendung zu begreifen sei und daher im Priesterstamm der Stamm Levi nichts als die Elite seiner unteilbaren Gesamtheit zu erblicken, sowie der Priester seine Sendung nur als höchste Lösung der Levitenaufgabe zu begreifen habe. Daher ist Aharon nichts als ראש לבית לוי und sein Stab ist der Stab Levis, מטה לוי.

כי מטה אחד, “for there shall be one staff, etc.” even though there is an internal division between ordinary Levites and the priests, they all belong to the same tribe.”

V. 19. והנחתם וגו׳. Indem die "Stäbe" und in ihnen die "Stämme" vor das עדות אשר אועד לכם שמה niedergelegt werden, wird die Frage gleichsam diesem עדות zur Entscheidung vorgelegt und von dessen Standpunkt aus zur Erledigung gebracht. Es ist damit dem Volke gesagt, dass es sich hier nicht, wie sie (V. 6) irrig vorausgesetzt, um eine Frage "persönlicher" Auszeichnung, sondern um eine solche Institution handle, bei welcher das "die Gegenwart Gottes im Volke bedingende Gotteszeugnis" und dessen Wirksamkeit am Volke in erster Linie in Frage stehe. Es gilt den מטה den Ast am Baume des jüdischen Nationalganzen als den von Gott erwählten zu bezeichnen, der eben vermöge seiner Eigentümlichkeit zur Vertretung dieses Zeugnisses und zur Wartung seines Dienstes im Volke sich Gott als für diese Wahl am geeignetsten darstellt.

Before the testimony where there I meet you. There were two types of meeting: One was a meeting with the Word of Hashem, which was for generations, and that is the voice that went out from above the testimony. The second, which was only for the time, was a voice that went out from the Aron in general. Hashem commanded that the staffs should be placed “before the testimony where there I meet you” in order that they would know that this sign came for the time and for generations. Furthermore, they would understand that it did not appear due to happenstance, by Moshe’s request, or for another reason. Rather, it was like all the other laws of the Torah that preceded the creation of heaven and earth and will never change.

והשכתי AND I WILL CAUSE TO CEASE — This word is the same as in (Genesis 8:1) “and the waters abated (וישכו)”; (Esther 7:10) “and the wrath of the king was abated (שככה)”.

והיה האיש אשר אבחר בו, "and it will be that the rod of the man whom I choose will bud." All the miracles G'd had performed with Korach had not sufficed to convince the people. Perhaps this was because the people thought that Korach's sin was that he challenged Moses so that G'd had had to defend the honour of His prophet, but that this did not prove that G'd was not willing to choose another tribe from which the High Priest would be chosen.

והשיכותי, the word is derived from שככה, “calmed down,” as in Esther 7,10 which describes the king’s state of mind once Haman at whom he had been furious had been hanged.

V. 20. והיה וגו׳. Wessen מטה blühen wird, dessen מטה wohnt nach Gottes Urteil der Keim zur Blüte und Frucht für die Zukunft Seines Zeugnisses im Volke inne und der Inhaber dieses "Stabes" ist zugleich, als der rechte "Träger" dieses "erwählten Stammes" von Gott gekennzeichnet. — שכך .והשכתי וגו׳ ist ganz eigentlich das zur Ruhe bringen eines Aufwallenden, Brausenden (vergl. Bereschit 8, 1 und Esther 2, 1). Bisher hat Aharons Auszeichnung die Leidenschaften des Volkes gegen euch, eigentlich aber gegen mich aufgeregt, da diese Auszeichnung nicht euer, sondern mein Werk ist. Jedes Aufwallen gegen euch fällt daher eigentlich gleichsam auf mich zurück; dies wird fortan aufhören, indem Aharons Priestertum als ein Akt reiner Gotteswahl und nach seinen Motiven frei von jeder persönlichen Begünstigung des Erwählten bekundet und für ewige Zeiten bezeugt sein wird.

והשכותי מעלי את תלונות בני ישראל, “and I will put an end to the complaints of the Children of Israel against Me.” Their complaints were that you, Moses and Aaron, had acted arbitrarily when selecting a special rank for the members of the tribe of Levi in lieu of the firstborns of each family.

בתוך מטותם [AND THE STAFF OF AARON WAS] IN THE MIDST OF THEIR STAVES — He placed Aarons staff in the middle (בתוך) in order that people should not say, “It is only because he placed it at the side where the Shechinah is that it blossomed” (Midrash Tanchuma, Achrei Mot 8 on אחרי מות).

ומטה אהרן בתוך מטותם, “and Aaron’s staff among their staffs.” [בתוך מטותם can be translated "in the middle of their staffs." The other tribes’ staffs were placed surrounding that of Aaron] so that it could not be argued that this miracle occurred because only his staff had been deposited near the Shechinah.

In the middle. Once the Torah writes “twelve staffs,” why is it necessary to say that “the staff of Aharon was among their staffs”? Rather this was to teach that before he placed them in the Mishkon, they arranged the staffs before them and Aharon’s staff was placed in the middle. Re’m writes that Rashi may have found Midrashic support for his words, and it is not that the word “among” indicates this.

V. 21. ומטה אהרן וגו׳, äußerlich unterschied sich Aharons Stab in nichts von den Stäben der anderen, es war ein Stab wie ihre Stäbe.

V. 22. לפני ד׳: zur Gottesentscheidung.

וינח משה , “and Moses laid out, etc.” the letter נ in the word וינח, has a dot in it.

ויצא פרח AND IT BROUGHT FORTH A BLOSSOM — Take this as what it literally implies.

ויגמל שקדים, it bore ripe almonds. Our sages in Bamidbar Rabbah 18,23 say that the reason G'd chose almonds was to serve as a warning that anyone who would challenge that the priesthood belonged to the descendants of Aaron would be dealt with very promptly. It appears to me that what forced the sages to come to this conclusion was that if someone is desirous of having a miracle performed for him he does not wish the fruit to ripen prematurely as this could reflect something negative about the one who performs the miracle and is unable to deliver fully ripened fruit. If G'd nonetheless exposed Himself to such an interpretation by the people who watched this miracle it could only be because He had considerations which outweighed those of how His own image was being perceived.

ויוצא פרח ויצץ ציץ ויגמל שקדים, according to the plain meaning of the words when Moses came to inspect these staffs he merely found that Aaron’s staff had blossomed.

והנה פרח מטה אהרן לבית לוי, “and behold! The staff of Aaron, representing the ancestral house of Levi, sprouted, etc.” It did so because Aaron was part of the ancestral house of Levi.

When the blossoms drop. We find ציץ ("buds") mentioned before פרח ("blossom") as the verse states יציץ ופרח - "buds and blossom" (Yeshayahu 27:6) therefore Rashi explains “blossomed” as the plain interpretation. You might ask: Why does Rashi not explain ציץ ("bud") like its plain interpretation and explain that פרח is something that comes before the bud, for example the sap of the tree? The answer is that after mentioning ציץ ("buds"), the verse says “and bore ripe almonds,” and the budding of the fruit immediately precedes the ripening of the almonds. I have found a further explanation: Wherever there are two terms, such as here where the Torah states פרח ("blossom") and then states ויצץ ציץ ("and bloomed buds"), and the meaning of "blossom" is evident but the meaning of "buds" is not, then Rashi will explain “blossom” as its plain interpretation without the need for further explanation. However, since the meaning of ציץ ("buds") is not evident, he needs to explain “this refers to the budding of the fruit.” Similarly “their minchah-offerings, their sin-offerings and their guilt-offerings” (Bamidbar 18:9) where Rashi explains “like the plain interpretation” because it is evident what they are. However, he then has to explain that “which they return to me” refers to the proselyte’s stolen property because I would not know its meaning. This is unlike “their minchah-offerings, their sin-offerings and their guilt-offerings” the meaning of which is according to the plain interpretation, whether referring to the offerings of the congregation or to the offerings of an individual. Rashi in Parshas Vayeshev (Bereishis 40:10) writes that a פרח is the same as a נץ ("forming-fruit"), only that נץ is larger than the פרח. Accordingly, פרח would refer to a small forming-fruit while יוצא פרח ("a פרח came forth") here refers to a larger forming-fruit, given that both terms can be referred to as פרח. However, it is only when the blossom has not yet fallen that the נץ is also called a פרח. It refers to one which it is larger [than a normal פרח] which is termed a נץ קטן ("small forming-fruit"). But once the blossom falls, as here, the part remaining is called a ציץ ("[fruit]-bud").

V. 23. מטה אהרן לבית לוי es war damit gleichzeitig der Stamm Levi aus den anderen Stämmen und Aharon aus den übrigen Leviten erwählt (siehe zu V. 18).

והנה פרח מטה אהרן, “and behold the rod of Aaron of the house of Levi, had begun to sprout blooms.” From this verse we learn that there are two kinds of flowers, פרח and ציץ. Not only did these blooms sprout forth, but they retained their freshness and did not wilt, as do normal flowers. The flowers were still in bloom after having already produced fruit, i.e. almonds. We have proof of the above from the Talmud, tractate Yuma folio 21, (based on Isaiah 35,2) as well as from the chapter in the Talmud discussing items in the Temple that were hidden to prevent them from falling into the hands of our enemies. Some sages believe that this staff of Aaron was hidden during that period, which would prove that it and its fruit had remained in prime condition for hundreds of years.

ויצא פרח, “and bloomed blossoms;” this was to be a symbol that the young priests would come forth from the sons of Aaron.

ציץ is the first stage in the growth of the fruit when the blossom has fallen off.

ויצץ ציץ, the sprouting of a bud and almonds ripening happened when Moses displayed the staffs to the people. This also explains the word והנה in connection with the blossom, i.e. Moses found something which had already happened, whereas the other details occurred in full view of the people. Had it been otherwise there would have been no point in the Torah writing any more that that ripe almonds were found on Aaron’s staff, i.e. the staff representing the Levites.

ויוצא פרח ויצץ ציץ, “it had brought forth sprouts, produced blossoms, and borne almonds.” The reason the staff produced almonds instead of some other fruit [seeing the almond is not one of the fruit for which the land of Israel is famous, Ed.] is because not only are almonds highly regarded but they are the first to mature after winter. The word שקד suggests a kind of eagerness such as the prophet Jeremiah describing G’d as “eager” to carry out His promise/threat [having shown Jeremiah an almond tree in a vision, Jeremiah 1,11-12. Ed.]. In that particular instance the almond tree symbolized the bitter taste of some almonds and G’d used it as a threat of the Jewish people tasting the bitterness of exile. We have other examples of similar meanings of the simile of almonds. The people of Israel were to learn from this that if someone challenges the hierarchy as established by the Torah not only would he be punished but his punishment would be swift. The attribute of Justice would be activated against such a person. King Uzziah was a case in point; he was punished immediately he offered incense, his forehead becoming afflicted with tzoraat, the dreaded skin disease (Chronicles II 26,19).

Why almonds. (Gur Aryeh) Meaning: Once we have explained that “and bore ripe almonds” means “when the fruit was discernable…” why does the Torah say almonds and not a different species? It would have been understandable if the fruit was not discernable, merely standing in its blossom stage. Then one could have said that it was because this fruit blossoms most quickly, and even though it was a miracle, Hashem chose something that blossoms quickly, given that it produced the blossoms in one night. However if one says that the fruit was already discernable, there is a difficulty as to why this species in particular was chosen. For now there would be no difference between this fruit and another. Although this species blossoms quickly, it does not produce fruit that quickly. Since we must say that miraculously it produced fruit, it would have been possible to miraculously produce a different fruit. Rashi answers that this species was merely used as an allusion [that they will be punished quickly] given that it is the type of fruit which blossoms most quickly.

ויצא פרח וגו׳. Während פרח (verwandt mit פרה — siehe Bereschit 1, 11-13) mit Entschiedenheit Blume und Blüte, und daher auch פרח überwiegend: blühen bedeutet, spricht alles dafür, in ציץ nur den Ausdruck für das sich hervordrängende Sprossen zu erblicken, und dürfte man daher schwerlich berechtigt sein, hier in ציץ ein weiteres Stadium der Blüte zu erkennen. In einem noch weit höheren Grade als der Apfelbaum (siehe Schabbat 88a) und die anderen Kernobstpflanzen, hat aber der Mandelbaum die Eigentümlichkeit, im Frühling zuerst Blüten und dann Blätter zu treiben. Kaum einen Ansatz zur Blattbildung zeigt derselbe, wenn er bereits im Schmucke der Blüten steht. Wir glauben daher ויצץ ציץ von dem Hervortreiben der Blätter verstehen zu müssen. In hohem Grade dürfte aber eben das Aufblühen des Stabes als Mandelbaumzweig die hier entsprechenden Gedanken zu vergegenwärtigen geeignet sein. Liegen nicht in allen Fruchtbaumzweigen einander ähnlich Blatt- und Blüte- und Fruchttriebe, trägt sie nicht alle ein Boden, tränkt sie nicht alle ein Nass, haucht nicht eine Luft sie alle an und wärmt nicht einer Sonne Strahl sie alle? Und doch steht der Mandelbaum allein unter allen seinen Flurgenossen in charakteristischer Einzigkeit ausgezeichnet da. Und worin? In שקידה, wovon er seinen Namen hat, in Eifer, in wachster, munterster, rüstigster, voranschreitendster Hingebung und Tatkraft für das, was er zu leisten hat. Während seine Bruderbäume alle sich erst noch besinnen, hat er schon vollbracht und stellt gleich von vornherein das Ziel, die Fruchtblüte, voran, dem sein ganzes Dasein gilt und für welches er dann seine Blätterlungen treibt, um ihm, diesem Ziele zu alle seine Säfte umwandelnd zuzubereiten. Das ist aber in vollendetster Prägnanz der Levitengeist, durch den sich der Stamm Levi zum Vertreter des Gottesgesetzes und Seines Heiligtums geadelt, als er allein unter allen seinen Genossen auf den Aufruf מי לד׳ אלי um Mosche sich scharte, und der in der Elite seiner Familie, in Aharon und seinen Nachkommen, in reinster Vollendung sich vererben sollte. (vergl. Schmot Kap. 25, Ende. — Wir haben dort im ציץ unserer Stelle: Staubfäden verstanden. Wir zweifeln aber an der Richtigkeit dieser Auffassung, da mit dem Aufbrechen der Blüte auch die Staubfäden vorhanden gegeben sind und nicht erst einem späteren Stadium angehören). Gleichzeitig dürfte aber eben darin die tröstende Zuversicht ausgesprochen sein, dass so wie der Mandelbaum nur früher blüht und Früchte zeitigt, somit seinen Flurgenossen nur "vorangeht" in einer Entfaltung, welcher die andern sodann nachfolgen, also auch die Leviten und Aharoniden nur ewig "vorangehen" werden mit einer Geistes- und Lebensentfaltung, welcher zu folgen und sie sich eigen zu machen alle anderen Bruderstämme im Volke ihnen gleich berufen sind.

ויצץ ציץ, “it had budded;” a sign that priests would come forth. The High Priests descended from Aaron would wear this ציץ, headband, engraved with the word: kodesh, holy, on their forehand (compare Exodus 28,36). ויגמול שקדים, “it bore ripe almonds.” This was an allusion to the eagerness with which the priests descended from Aaron would perform their duties. Throughout history the priests were lauded for the eagerness with which they performed their duties. They were cited as examples of such eagerness, i.e. כהנים זריזים הם (compare Talmud tractate Shabbat, folio 20) According to some opinions, this phenomenon of Aaron’s staff producing blossoms and almonds was also one of the miracles for which G-d had provided the potential during dusk on the sixth day of creation. (Compare tractate Avot, chapter 5, Mishnah 6)

ויגמל שקדים AND RIPENED INTO ALMONDS — This means that when the fruit was recognisable as such it could be recognised that they were almonds. The verb has the same meaning as in (Genesis 21:8) “And the child grew ויגמל, and became a full child” (i.e., able to do without its mother’s milk). This expression is frequently used of the fruit of trees, as e.g. (Isaiah 18:5) “And the blossom becometh a ripening (גמל) grape” (cf. Rashi on Genesis 40:10). — But why did it bring forth almonds? Because it is a fruit that blossoms earlier than all other fruits; so, too, the punishment of him who sets himself in opposition to the constituted priesthood comes quickly, just as we find stated in the case of Uzziah (II Chronicles 26:19) “And the leprosy instantly broke out in his forehead”. — Its translation in the Targum is: וכפת שגדין, meaning that it produced a kind of cluster of almonds, knotted together one upon the other (Aramaic כפת denotes “tied”).

ויראו ויקחו איש מטהו. This was the reminder for all times, a miracle which silenced their complaints forthwith.

ויראו ויקח איש מטהו, “when they saw, each (tribal representative) took his own staff.” Each one knew which was his staff as they had inscribed their names on it.

למשמרת לאות TO BE KEPT AS A SIGN — i.e. as a reminder that I have chosen Aaron to be the priest and that they should therefore not murmur any more against the priesthood.

PUT BACK THE ROD OF AARON BEFORE THE TESTIMONY, TO BE KEPT THERE, FOR A TOKEN. “As a reminder that I have chosen Aaron to be the priest, so that they should no longer murmur about the [right to the] priesthood.” This is Rashi’s language. But this rod was only a sign that the tribe of Levi was chosen from the rest of the tribes, but did not [serve as a sign] that Aaron should have the priesthood [since the people did not dispute his right to it ever since the Heavenly fire had descended on the eighth day of the installation of the priests and consumed Aaron’s offerings, as explained above].¹⁹⁴Above, Verse 6 (towards the end). The correct interpretation is that [the expression] to be kept there, for a token means [that the budding of the rod of the house of Levi was to serve as a reminder to Israel that G-d had chosen] the tribe of Levi in exchange for the firstborn. This is because the burning [of Aaron’s offerings by the Heavenly fire] was a sign [that Aaron had been chosen] for the priesthood, and the budding [of the rod was an indication] that the Levites [had been selected for their functions in the Tabernacle], as I have explained.¹⁹⁴Above, Verse 6 (towards the end). This is the meaning of the expression, and, behold, the rod of Aaron ‘for the house of Levi’ was budded,¹⁹⁵Verse 23. because it budded for [the benefit of] the whole tribe of Levi, and in their merit [to confirm their appointment to do the holy service]. It is possible that since it became known through the [budding of the] rod that G-d did not desire the service of the firstborn, but preferred that of the Levites, the priesthood [automatically could be given] to Aaron without complaint [on the part of the people], since he was the most honored person in the tribe, being the prince thereof, and it was befitting that he should have the authority of that tribe. But this does not appear to me to be correct, since Gershon was the firstborn of Levi.¹⁹⁶Exodus 6:16. Aaron was a grandson of Kohath, who was the second son of Levi. Hence the budding of the rod could only have served as a reminder that G-d had chosen the tribe of Levi to perform the service rather than the firstborn of all tribes, but it could not have confirmed Aaron’s personal position as High Priest and prince of the tribe, since Gershon was the firstborn, and thereby exercised a claim to it. Therefore we must say that Aaron’s personal right to authority was confirmed by the Heavenly fire which consumed his offerings, as explained above.

לאות לבני מרי, as a sign to forestall similar challenges by future generations to the priesthood and its hereditary transfer from father to son.

למשמרת לאות לבני מרי, “as a safekeeping to serve as a sign for the rebellious ones.” Rashi understands this line as “a reminder that I have selected Aaron as My Priest, and that further complaints about the priesthood should cease.” Nachmanides counters that the staff and its blossoming was a sign only that the tribe of Levi enjoys a special status among the other tribes, but it did not signify anything about the priesthood. He therefore understands the word לאות as a reference to the special status of the tribe of Levi. He claims that there was no need at all to furnish a sign that the priesthood belonged to Aaron, seeing that whenever heavenly fire descended on the censer of Aaron and he did not get burned by it this was sufficient proof that G’d approved of him in his capacity as High Priest. This is also the meaning of the words והנה פרח מטה אהרן לבית לוי, “here the staff of Aaron, member of the house of Levi blossomed.” Aaron’s position among the tribe of Levi, which was already special, flowered even further.

As a remembrance that I chose Aharon. The staff of Aharon sprouted for he was the one who gave over the staff, not his son Elozor who was the leader of the tribe of Levi. This was in contrast to the other leaders. With this they would know that Aharon was chosen, because the main dispute was over the kehunah and not over the elevation of the tribe if Levi. Thus a symbol of remembrance was only needed for the kehunah, and the blossoming of Aharon’s staff would be sufficient a symbol for the service of the Levites, given that there was only one staff for the tribe of Levi. This is a summation of the words of Re’m. It appears to me that the blossoming of the staff of Aharon, who was from the tribe of Levi, was testimony that Hashem chose Levi over the other tribes. This was because the blossoming was on Aharon’s name, rather than on another place on the staff, as I wrote, providing testimony that Hashem had chosen Aharon over the rest of the Levites.

V. 25. ויאמר וגו׳. Wie die לוחת העדות das Faktum des göttlichen Ursprungs des Gesetzes bezeugen, so bezeugt der מטה אהרן das Faktum des göttlichen Ursprungs der Wahl der Aharoniden zu Priestern des Heiligtums dieses Gesetzes. In dieser Beiordnung des מטה אהרן zu den לוחת העדות im Heiligtum dürfte sich die Heraushebung der Aharoniden aus den Leviten und dieser aus dem damit vom Gesetzesheiligtum fern gehaltenen Volke als eine Fortsetzung der הגבלה (siehe Schmot 19, 10 — 13) begreifen lassen, durch welche gleich bei der Erteilung des Gesetzes, deren Zeugnis die לוחות verewigen, das Gelangen des Gesetzes an das Volk, im Gegensatz zu einem Entstehen aus dem Volke, vergegenwärtigt werden sollte. Wir haben bereits daselbst entwickelt, welche hohe Bedeutsamkeit dieser Tatsache innewohne; die ganze Unverbrüchlichkeit, Unantastbarkeit und Ewigkeit des Gesetzes beruht auf ihr. Ganz dieselbe הגבלה wird aber durch die Gruppierung der Aharoniden und Leviten um das Gesetzesheiligtum und die Fernhaltung des Volkes von diesem für alle Zeiten fortgesetzt, und damit dieselbe Tatsache des außermenschlichen Ursprungs und der örtlichen und zeitlichen Unbedingtheit des Gesetzes für alle Zeiten festgehalten. Je mehr nämlich gerade das jüdische Volk unterschiedlos in allen seinen Schichten und unabhängig von jeglicher Berufsart zur rückhaltlosen Erkenntnis, Anerkenntnis und Verwirklichung dieses Gesetzes berufen ist, je mehr im Laufe der Zeiten dieses Gesetz seine Sendung an diesem Volke vollbringt und alle Geister, alle Herzen, alle Gedanken, alle Empfindungen, alle Lebensanschauungen und Lebenserfüllungen durchdringt, je mehr somit im Laufe der Zeiten der aus diesem Gesetze sich erzeugende und im Volke sich vererbende Volksgeist dem Geiste dieses Gesetzes nahe und verwandt wird, je mehr endlich die Kluft schwindet zwischen dem Ideale dieses Gesetzes und seiner Verwirklichung im Volke, je mehr im Laufe der Zeiten die korachidische Behauptung: כל העדה כולם קדושים ובתוכם ד׳ an Anmaßung verliert: umsomehr dürfte die Befürchtung Boden gewinnen, es könne sodann der Menschengeist sich gegen die Quelle seiner Erleuchtung wenden und, deren göttlichen Ursprung verleugnend und ihr einen Menschengeist als Erzeuger unterschiebend, aufhören, Schüler, Jünger und Diener dieses Gesetzes zu sein und sich zu dessen kritischer Meisterung erkühnen. Dem tritt die alle Zeiten durchdauernde הגבלה des Volkes von dem עדות und dessen Heiligtum durch die לוים und כהנים mit ernster Mahnung entgegen und zeigt selbst dem Erkenntnishöchsten der jüdischen Geister das Gesetz, das doch den steten Gegenstand seines inneren Lebens und seinen vertrautesten geistigen Umgang bildet, in seiner göttlich gegebenen unnahbaren Objektivität, deren עדות selbst die כהנים nicht in ihrer menschlichen Individualität, sondern nur in der Kleidung seiner Dienstsymbolik und nach קידוש ידים ורגלים zu nahen wagen dürfen, und ruft alle Jahrhunderte hindurch die הגבלה-Warnung vom Sinai her (Schmot 19, 21-22): רד העד פו יהרסו אל ד׳ קראות ונפל ממנו רב וגם הכהנים הנגשים אל ד׳ יתקדשו פו יפרץ בהם ד׳!

ותכל תלונתם. “so that their complaints will cease.” Our author understands the word as if the Torah had written: ותכלה אתה תלונתן של ישראל, “so that you will be able to bring to an end the Israelites’ complaints.” He cites two similar constructions in Deuteronomy 3,28: וצו את יהושע, and Genesis 38,14 ותכס בצעיף.

ותכל תלונתם is the same as וּתְכַלֶּה תלונתם, AND THOU SHALT MAKE AN END OF THEIR MURMURING. This form (תלנֹתם) is a nomen actionis (שם מפעל), singular number, feminine gender, the same as is תלונָתם; in O. F. murmures. But there is a difference in sense between תלנֹתם and תלונָתם. The word תלונָתם denotes a single act of murmuring; תלנתם is a noun with singular meaning although there may be many acts of murmuring.

ותכל תלונותם, in the future such as when king Uziah arrogated to himself to offer incense in the Temple (Chronicles Ii 26,15). The construction of the word ותכל when we would have expected ותכלה, is parallel to the occasions when the Torah writes צו! as an abbreviated imperative instead of צוה, “tzaveh!”

Feminine [verbl noun]. For if not so, it should have said ותכלינה ("[their complaints] will end" in the plural). Rashi did not explain ותכל as a reference to Moshe, meaning that Hashem said to him that with this action you will end their complaining against Me, because to end the complaining was not Moshe’s task, rather it would occur on its own as a result of this action.

ויעש משה כאשר צוה השם כן עשה, Moses did as G'd commanded, so he did. The reason that the Torah repeated the same statement twice may be as follows: The first statement indicates that Moses carried out G'd's instructions immediately; the second statement כן עשה refers to his replacing the rod of Aaron in the Sanctuary. The word כאשר therefore refers to both actions.

אבדנו, a reference to 15,33 when the people swallowed by the earth during Korach’s uprising had been described by the Torah as ויאבדו, “they became lost.” The people now felt that a similar fate might befall them on any day if the Tabernacle was so inaccessible to them.

VV. 27 u. 28. ויאמרו וגו׳. Durch alle diese Erfahrungen und das schließliche Zeugnis des מטה אהרן war dem Volke endlich das Bewusstsein von dem unabänderlichen Ernst der von Gott gewürdigten, in der göttlichen קדושה des עדות wurzelnden ausschließlichen Nahelassung der Aharoniden und Leviten zum Heiligtume aufgegangen, also dass sie nun selbst aus einer unabsichtlichen, unvermeidlichen Annäherung den Untergang fürchteten. Sie sahen sich schon, wenn auch noch nicht tot, doch dem unvermeidlichen Tode nahe, כגויעה, im Übergangsstadium zum Sterben, und sie sprachen in ihrer Angst treffend die scharfe, gefahrbringende, schmale Linie aus, auf welche überhaupt jeder Jude dem göttlichen Heiligtum gegenüber gestellt ist. Jeder ist קרב und darf doch nicht zu קרב werden! Das Heiligtum ist nicht da, um nur ein opus operatum der Priester zu sein. Jeder ist in seine Nähe berufen — und darf doch nicht zu nahe kommen. Das göttliche Gesetz, dessen Zeugnis im Heiligtum ruht, ist eben "Feuer", wie das Wort der Weisen im ספרי zu Dewarim 33, 2 bemerkt, קרוב לאדם נכוה רחוק ממנה צונן, zu nahe verbrennt man sich, fern davon bleibt man kalt. Man hat sich zu nahen, in der Nähe jedoch sich immer des nötigen Abstandes bewusst zu bleiben. —

הן גוענו אבדנו, “here we are perishing;” some of the people would die from natural causes, whereas others would perish from external causes. When the people said this they were still under the impression that anyone, not only non priests, would expose themselves to death by approaching the Tabernacle. They did not realise that only blemished priests were included in this prohibition to approach too closely. (Compare Numbers 1,51) The subsequent general prohibition was in effect only for people who, having eaten holy things in a state of ritual impurity, dared approach sacred precincts.

כל הקרב הקרב אל משכן ה' ימות, they spell out what they mean by predicting that they may die any moment. Remember that the prohibition for non-priests not to enter the Tabernacle’s precincts had not been issued yet; this legislation had not yet been published. This is the reason why later in our portion (18,4) as well as in 18,7 both the prohibition and the penalty for violating it are spelled out precisely. In Leviticus where similar legislation did appear it referred only to the offering of sacrifices in the Tabernacle by non-priests (Leviticus 21,17 as well as 22, 3). In that context only priests afflicted with a blemish had been banned from partaking in such activities as had been reserved for priests. Also in chapter 22 there only the eating of sacrificial meat in a state of ritual impurity had been forbidden. At any rate, no death penalty had yet been spelled out for non-priests violating the rules for entering the Tabernacle or handling its furnishings had been discussed.

Es ist aber in Wahrheit hinsichtlich der קריבה אל משכן ד׳, hinsichtlich des Nahens zum Heiligtum, zwischen Priester und Nichtpriester keine so große Kluft, wie hier dem Volke in seiner Angst vorschwebt. Ein willkürliches, nicht von den Zwecken der עבודה gebotenes Betreten des היכל ist auch für den כהן verboten, und des קדש הקדשים auch für ihn mit מיתה בידי שמים bedroht (siehe Wajikra zu 16, 2); zu Zwecken des Heiligtums aber, לבנות לתקן ולהוציא את הטומאה, ist auch erforderlichen Falles das Betreten des היכל Nichtkohanim gestattet (Eruwin 105a; — siehe מל׳מ Ende הל׳ ביאת מקדש). Nur hinsichtlich der עבודה-Vollziehungen tritt eine Scheidung zwischen Kohen und Nichtkohen ein, deren bewusstvolle Verletzung, במזיד, und zwar auch nur in beschränktem Gebiete, mit מיתה בידי שמים belegt ist (siehe Kap. 18, 3-7).

כל הקרב הקרב וגו׳ WHOSOEVER APPROACHETH [UNTO THE DWELLING OF THE LORD SHALL DIE] — The meaning is: “We cannot be cautious enough in this matter: we are all of us allowed to enter into the court of the appointed tent, but one who betakes himself nearer than his fellow and goes into the appointed tent itself will die!

כל הקרב הקרב..ימות, "Anyone that comes near..that comes near will die." Only now did the message penetrate the average Israelite's head although they had been informed about this previously. This is remindful of a proverb cited in Shir Hashirim Rabbah on the verse (Song of Songs, 1,2: "May he kiss me with the kisses of his mouth." The proverb says that if one slaughters an animal one will suffer terrible pain."

The courtyard of the Tent of Meeting. Meaning: The first הקרב ("anyone approaching") refers to the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting and the second הקרב refers to the inside of the Tent. And it is as if the verse had said, “Anyone who approaches the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting will die when he approaches the inside of the Tent of Meeting.” The verse did not say simply “anyone approaching the Mishkon of Hashem will die” because it would not be likely for one who is outside the courtyard to enter the Tent of Meeting. Thus there is no reason for them to be concerned about this and say “have we been consigned to die.” However those standing in the courtyard were close to entering the Tent of Meeting and they have reason to be concerned. Re’m.

האם תמנו לגוע means are we perhaps constantly to be freely exposed to the danger of death?

[Perhaps] we have been abandoned to die. Not that they had already been consigned to death, because the hei prefix of האם (have…?) which denotes a question would not be appropriate. Furthermore, they did not actually die. Rather “perhaps…”