Commentary for Numbers 18:3

ושמרו משמרתך ומשמרת האהל, the Levites are to guard the Holy of Holies (structure) which in itself is your domain; they are also to guard all the other sacred locations outside the Holy of Holies.

גם הם גם אתם, "neither they nor you." According to the plain meaning the words גם הם mean "just as the Israelites who approach;" the words גם אתם mean "when you act on their account" just as in the previous verse the words about אתה ובניך.

ולא ימותו גם הם גם אתם, “so that not both you and they will die.” This is the source for the halachah that the functions of the Levites are not interchangeable, that a priest may not perform functions designated for the Levite, nor the Levite functions reserved for the priest (Erchin 11, Maimonides Hilchot Kley Hamikdash 3,10). Not only this, but even priests who have been assigned certain tasks must not exchange their duties with priests who have been assigned different priestly assignments, nor must Levites exchange duties within the framework of what is their exclusive domain. If a Levite was assigned the duty to play an instrument or participate in the songs the Levites sing, he must not instead engage in washing the hands of the priests, for instance! This is why the Torah writes (Numbers 4,49) איש איש על עבודתו, “each man to his designated task.” This is the way these words have been defined in Sifri 116. The words: “but to the holy vessels and to the Altar they shall not approach,” are a warning, whereas the words following “so that they will not die,” are the Torah’s way of spelling out the penalty for non-observance of the warning. The words גם הם, “they also,” are the source for the inadmissibility of exchanging duties either by mutual consent or willful pre-empting the duties assigned to a colleague. It occurred once that Rabbi Joshua ben Chanayah wished to assist a colleague in closing the doors and he was stopped from doing so by Rabban Yochanan who told him that seeing he was one of the singers he had not business to concern himself with the duties of those who were in charge of the gates (Erchin 11).

V. 3. ושמרו וגו׳ (vergl. Kap. 3, 6-8). משמרתך ist der Dienst, den sie in deinem Auftrage und dir helfend zur Seite zu erfüllen haben; משמרת כל האהל ist alles dasjenige, was sie selbständig für Herstellung, Erhaltung und Hut des ihnen anvertrauten Tempelzeltes zu leisten haben. אך אל כלי הקדש וגו׳: nicht die Berührung und das Nahekommen, die Handhabung der Gefäße im Dienste, das Hinantreten zum Altare im Dienste, עבודה ist hier verpönt (siehe 72 ל׳׳ת ,ספר מצות ,רמב׳׳ם und מ׳׳למ Ende הל׳ ביאת המקדש. So auch ולא ימותו גם הם גם אתם — . (297 ל׳׳ת סמ׳׳ג: אתם בשלהם והם בשלכם במיתה (Arachin 11b), wie der Opferdienst den Priestern, so ist der Sängerdienst den Leviten überwiesen, und wie der Levite keinen Priesterdienst, so darf auch der Priester keinen Levitendienst vollziehen. Beides ist mit מיתה בידי שמים bedroht. Ja auch הם בשלהם, unter den Leviten selbst ist der willkürliche Übergang von משורר zum משוער, vom Sänger- zum Wachtdienst oder umgekehrt באזהרה oder auch במיתה untersagt (daselbst; siehe zu Kap. 1, 51).

אך אל כלי הקודש, the ones housed within the Tabernacle, comprising the Table, the Lampstand and the golden altar,

Our sages in Erchin 11 quote the following Baraitha: גם הם גם אתם; you with what is theirs and they with what is yours in respect to the death penalty; they with what is theirs without death penalty but subject only to the penalty due for violating an ordinary negative commandment." [Priests who perform the songs allocated to the Levites are guilty of the death penalty (at the hands of heaven) just as the Levites are guilty of the death penalty if they perform the sacrificial service which is the exclusive domain of the priests. Levites who are assigned to watching the doors and sing or play musisc instead, or vice versa, are not subject to the death penalty. Ed.] Abbaye disagrees and says that even if a Levite who is assigned a certain task normally performed by the Levites performs the task allocated to another Levite instead he is also subject to death at the hands of Heaven. Rashi explains that Abbaye does not accept the wording of the Baraitha which said הם בשלהם אינה במיתה. He quoted another Tannaitic scholar who holds his view.

they must not approach, whereas the copper altar although it is outside the walls of the Tabernacle they must not approach either.

Maimonides who deals with this problem in chapter 3 of his Hilchot kley Hamikdash, writes as follows: "if a Levite assisted in the performance of a task which was not assigned to him [but to another Levite, Ed.] he is guilty of death as the Torah wrote ולא ימותו, "in order that they not die (our verse)." However, if a priest performs a task which is really one to be performed by a Levite he has transgressed an ordinary negative commandment but is not guilty of the death penalty." Thus far Maimonides. There are difficulties with everything Maimonides wrote in this regard. There is not a single opinion in the Talmud which supports his view that a Levite who merely assisted another Levite in the carrying out his specific task is guilty of death. In fact, all opinions agree that the prohibition of a Levite assisting another Levite in the task allotted to the latter, is only a rabbinic injunction. How could one possibly be guilty of death for violating such an injunction? Even if we accept the Talmud's concensus that the prohibition in question, namely the switching of tasks between Levites, is Biblical but does not carry the penalty of death at the hands of heaven, it follows that if a Levite actually sings although not appointed he is not guilty of death. How could Maimonides arrive at the ruling that the second Levite who merely assisted the first, albeit unbidden, should be guilty of death? Even if we were to posit that Maimonides accepted the view of Abbaye that the Levite who sang in place of the Levite who was appointed to sing is guilty of death, we still have two problems. 1) Abbaye said nothing about a Levite who only assisted the first Levite in the former's task; the Talmud makes it clear that there is a difference between someone who carries out a task and someone who merely assists. 2) Abbaye arrives at his ruling based on the verse והזר הקרב יומת (Numbers 18, 7), that the non-priest who approaches the Sanctuary (and performs sacrificial service) will be executed, whereas Maimonides quotes our verse that ולא ימותו גם הם גם אתם, that the various categories of Israelites involved would be guilty of death. [The Talmud in Erchin 11 proves that the word זר in this instance does not mean simply a non-priest but the category of priest or Levite to whom the task in question had not been allocated. Ed.] Seeing that Maimonides derives his ruling from our verse, how can we assume that he agrees with Abbaye? Why does Maimonides disagree with the Talmud?

Apparently Maimonides found support for his view in a Baraitha quoted in Sifri Zuta which writes as follows: "Rabbi Joshua ben Chananyah (a Levite) tried to assist Rabbi Yochanan ben Gudgada [a fellow Levite who also lived while the Temple was still standing. Ed.] in the matter of הגפת דלתות, "the closing of the Temple doors." He said to him: 'desist' for you have already become guilty of the death penalty for I am one of the people appointed to be the one to lock these gates whereas you are one of the people assigned to sing." We see from this incident that a Levite who assists another Levite who performs in performing his task is guilty of the death penalty even if he only wanted to assist the Levite appointed for that task. This then is what Maimonides' ruling is based on.

Although it is dear that the Talmud ruled differently, Maimonides accepted the version of Sifri Zuta as binding for 2 reasons. [The author continues to debate the merit of Maimonides' ruling in this matter for another six pages. In order to appreciate the subject it is necessary to study the matter in Erchin 11 thoroughly. The reader who is interested is referred to the original. In the end, our author demonstrates that both Maimonides, the Baraitha in Erchin and the Baraitha in Sifri Zuta are really on the same track. Ed.]