Commentary for Numbers 32:38

ואת נבו ואת בעל מעון מוסבת שם AND NEBO AND AND BAAL-MEON, THEIR NAMES BEING CHANGED — Nebo and Baal-Meon were names of idols, and the Ammonites used to call their cities by the names of their gods. The children of Reuben therefore changed their names into other names. This is the meaning of מוסבת שם: Nebo and Baal-Meon were changed to other names.

AND NEBO, AND BAAL-MEON — THEIR NAMES BEING CHANGED. “Nebo and Baal-meon were names of idols, and the Amorites used to call their cities by the names of their idols, therefore the children of Reuben changed [the names of these cities and gave them] different names, this being the meaning of the expression their names being changed, which means that Nebo and Baal-meon were changed to other names.” This is Rashi’s language. But the [concluding part of this] verse which says, and they called their names unto the cities which they builded refers to all the cities [mentioned there], and not only to Nebo and Baal-meon [and therefore the phrase their names being changed cannot be understood as Rashi explained it]. Furthermore, what sense would there be in Scripture mentioning the cities [only] by the names of their idols, and saying that the children of Reuben built them and changed their names, without mentioning the good names which they were [now] given! And indeed it is quite usual for Scripture when speaking about [any] captured cities to mention always the new names [given them, as in the following cases]: and they called Leshem, Dan, after the name of Dan their father;¹³⁹Joshua 19:47. and he called them the hamlets of Jair;¹⁴⁰Further, Verse 41. and he called it Nobach.¹⁴¹Ibid., Verse 42. And likewise wherever the name [of a city] was changed [for any reason] Scripture mentions [the new name as well, as it is said], Now the name of Hebron beforetime was Kiryath-arba;¹⁴²Joshua 14:15. now the name of Debir beforetime was Kiryath-sepher.¹⁴³Ibid., 15:15.
The most likely explanation seems to me to be that these names [Nebo, Baal-meon, etc.] were the names of the cities when they were in the possession of Moab, and Sihon captured all these cities from the former king of Moab,¹⁴⁴Above, 21:26. for thus it is written about Heshbon, Dibon and Medeba, as it is said, We have shot at them; Heshbon is perished, even unto Dibon etc.¹⁴⁵Ibid., Verse 30. This also appears to me to be the [meaning of the] words of Jephthah, when he said, While Israel dwelt in Heshbon and its towns, and in Aroer and its towns, and in all the cities that are along by the side of the Arnon,¹⁴⁶Judges 11:26. this being the same Aroer [mentioned here in Verse 34] which they took from Sihon. Now when Tiglath-pileser the king of Assyria¹⁴⁷II Kings 15:29. exiled the Reubenites and the Gadites, the Moabites returned and settled in their lands and cities, for we find in the Book of Jeremiah that when Nebuchadnezzar [king of Babylon] destroyed Moab, he conquered from them all these cities. And [the Book of Jeremiah] mentions by name Heshbon and Elealeh,¹⁴⁸Jeremiah 48:34. Kiryathaim,¹⁴⁹Ibid., Verse 23. Dibon and Nebo,¹⁵⁰Ibid., Verse 22. Jazer,¹⁵¹Ibid., Verse 32. Aroer,¹⁵²Ibid., Verse 19. and Baal-meon¹⁵³Of Verse 38 here. which is [there] called Beth-meon,¹⁴⁹Ibid., Verse 23. and Beth nimrah¹⁵⁴Verse 36 here. which is [there] called Nimrim,¹⁴⁸Jeremiah 48:34. and Jahza.¹⁵⁵Ibid., Verse 21. Thus you see that all these cities mentioned [in these verses] belonged [originally] to Moab, [and Sihon, king of the Amorites captured them from Moab]. Similarly in [the Book of] Isaiah most of these cities are mentioned¹⁵⁶Isaiah 15:2-9. when Sennacherib [king of Assyria] overran Moab, for he first exiled the Reubenites and the Gadites, and afterwards he overran Ammon and Moab.
Therefore it appears that the meaning of [the phrase] their names being changed is that all these cities had [previously] had their names changed, because the Amorites changed their original names when they captured them [from Moab] and these [names] were their original names which they had when they still belonged to Moab. But the children of Reuben and of Gad still called them by [these Moabite] names when they rebuilt them. [This explanation is borne out by the fact that] the verse does not say, “and they gave names to the cities which they built,” but it says, and they called by names the names of the cities [which they builded], meaning that they called them by name with the same names which they originally had [when they were still under the rule of Moab. This was] because they wanted to refer to them by the names with which they had previously been known, either in order to shame Moab, or, as our Rabbis have mentioned,¹⁵⁷In the Midrash Agadah on our verse, quoted by Rashi at the beginning of the section. Thus Rashi and Ramban still differ as to the meaning of the verse here that the names of the cities were changed. According to Rashi, the phrase their names being changed means that they were changed by the children of Reuben and Gad, because their [Amorite] names were the names of idols. According to Ramban, the phrase refers to the Amorites, who changed the original Moabite names in an attempt to erase the Moabite origin of these cities. Since the Amorites gave them the names of their idols, therefore the children of Reuben and Gad reverted to the original Moabite names in order not to have to mention the names of idols, or, as Ramban suggests, in order to shame the Moabites. because [they did not want to use the Amorite names since] the Amorites used to call their cities by the names of their idols. However, we do not find that Joshua changed the names of the cities which he captured.

ואת נבו ואת בעל מעון מוסבות שם, “and Nebo and Baal-meon, with altered names;” Rashi says that the names Nebo and Baal-meon were names of pagan deities and the members of the tribe of Reuven changed the names of these towns. Nachmanides raises the question that this is not sufficient reason to inform us of the names of these pagan deities. All the Torah had to write was that the members of the tribe of Reuven rebuilt these towns and changed their names. The names of the idolatries did not need to be revealed. It is the Torah’s custom elsewhere that when cities of pagans were captured to inform us only of the new names given to them by their captors. Furthermore, the words את שמות הערים אשר בנו “the names of the cities which they built,” are completely superfluous, as we already have been told in the first half of the verse that we are speaking of cities rebuilt by the members of the tribe of Reuven. These words therefore cannot refer to the cities of Nebo and Baal-meon. I believe therefore, that the names mentioned used to be the names of these towns while they were still part of the land of Moav, before Sichon had captured them from the first King of Moav. The members of the tribe of Reuven continued to call them by these names, as the Torah nowhere says that ויקראו שמות לערים אשר בנו, “they gave names to the cities that they had built.” The Torah only wrote: ויקראו בשמות את שמות הערים, meaning they named the cities they had built by the names they had borne previously. They wanted that these cities would be known as the cities that existed on that site originally. It is also possible that they meant to embarrass the Moabites by showing the world that these formerly Moabite cities now belonged to the Israelites.

Would name their cities after idols. Meaning that [the Reuvenites] changed the names of the cities before rebuilding them, in order not to recall the names of the idols, for Nevo and Ba’al Me’on were the names of idols, and [the Emorites] named these cities after them. Thus, the sons of Reuven changed their names, as the Rabbis teach [they were named] Beis Galiah and Beis Kariah. However, the names of the other cities were changed after rebuilding them, as is the manner of all city builders.

V. 38. מוסבת שם. Nebo und Baal Meon — beides Götternamen, — erhielten veränderte Namen, ויקראו בשמות וגו׳, im übrigen nannten auch sie die Namen der Städte, die sie ausgebaut hatten, d. h. sie behielten die alten Namen bei. Nach רמב ן wäre aber mit מוסבת שם gesagt, die Städte hätten unter der Herrschaft Sichons andere Namen erhalten, ויקראו וגו׳ die Söhne Reuben aber gaben ihnen die alten Namen wieder, die sie ursprünglich unter Moab gehabt hatten.

מוסבות שם, “their names having been changed;” originally they had been named by the Ammonites and Moabites. After being conquered by Sichon, their names were changed. When they were conquered by the Israelites their names were changed again to sound Jewish.

Their names having been changed. It is prohibited to mention the name of idols only when the name of the idol not written in the Torah (Sanhedrin 63b). Therefore, before the Torah was sealed and they did not know if the names would be mentioned in the Torah, they changed the names. Afterwards, when the Torah was sealed, they saw the names were mentioned, so they reverted back to the original names. They retained the names. They added the names of the builders to the original names, and then part of the name fell into disuse.

מוסבות שם, “their names being changed;” originally they had been known as Ammon and Moav; subsequently they became known as Sichon and Og.

ואת שבמה AND SIBMAH — i.e., they built (cf. v. 37) Sibmah also. This is identical with Sebam that is mentioned above (v. 3).

The meaning of the words ואת שבמה, is that they built that town (from scratch). This was not a town that was rebuilt.

They built Sivmah… Rashi wishes to answer the question: Why did the verse not mention them together [writing] “Nevo, Ba’al Me’on and Sivmah, their names having been changed.”? Rashi answers that it was specifically Nevo and Ba’al Me’on that had their names changed, in accordance with the comment that before they were rebuilt their names were changed in order not to recall the names of idols. However, the names of the other cities were changed after having been rebuilt. Thus, “Sivmah” is associated with the word “built” (v. 37) above, but not with “their names having been changed.” Rashi says that one should not think that it is associated with “their names having been changed” because Sevam and Sivmah are one and the same.

AND SIBMAH. The meaning of this is that “they built Sibmah,” but it was not [a city] whose name was changed.