Commentary for Numbers 32:42

ויקרא לה נבח AND HE CALLED IT NOBAH — The word לה has no Mappik in the ה (as the word לָהּ "to it", usually has). Now I have seen the following in the work of R. Moses the Preacher: Because this name did not remain permanently to it, therefore the letter ה is weak (without a Mappik), — the implication of his explanation being that it (the word לה) is the same as לא “not”. But I wonder what explanation he will give of the two words similar to it, (Ruth 2:14): “And Boaz said לָה", and (Zechariah 5:11): “to build a house לָה”.

VAYIKRA LAH NOBACH’ (AND HE CALLED IT NOBACH). “[The word lah] has no dot in the [letter] hei [as it usually has when it means “to it”]. And I have seen in the work of Rabbi Moshe the Preacher¹⁷⁰See above in Seder Naso, Note 146. that because it did not keep this name permanently, therefore [the letter hei in the word lah] is pronounced softly [without the dot], and the interpretation implied is [as if it said] lo [meaning “not”]. But I am astonished at this, for what interpretation will he [Rabbi Moshe the Preacher] give in the case of two other similar words: ‘Vayomer lah Boaz’ (And Boaz said to her);¹⁷¹Ruth 2:14. ‘livnoth lah bayith’ (to build her a house)¹⁷²Zecharia 5:11. [in both of which places the word lah is also written without a dot in the letter hei]!” This is the language of Rashi.
Now although the Rabbi [Rashi] is “like a filled treasury of knowledge”¹⁷³Gittin 67a. of Torah, Halachoth and Agadoth, yet the explanation of the Rabbis in Midrash Ruth escaped his attention, [for they remarked¹⁷⁴Ruth Rabbah 5:5. on the verse: “Though I [Ruth] be not as one of thy handmaids.¹⁷⁵Ruth 2:13. Said Boaz to Ruth: Far be it from me [to consider you like one of the handmaids!] You are not like one of the handmaids, but like one of the matriarchs!¹⁷⁶Thus the phrase ‘Vayomer lah Boaz’ (and Boaz said to her), which follows Ruth’s remark [though I be not as one of thy handmaids] is written without the dot in the letter hei, the idea being, as Rabbi Moshe the Preacher explained, to convey the thought of lo, meaning a negation. Boaz is therefore saying to Ruth: “‘Lo’ — it is not as you say that you are like one of the handmaids in my eyes; on the contrary, you are like one of the matriarchs, and you are destined to be the ancestress of kings.” Similarly, And Nobach went and conquered Kenath, and the villages thereof, ‘vayikra lah Nobach bi’shmo’ (and he called it Nobach, after his own name) — this [lack of the dot in the letter hei] indicates that this name did not remain. So also, And he said unto me: To build ‘lah’(for her) a house in the land of Shinar¹⁷²Zecharia 5:11. — this teaches us that falsehood does not lead to any salvation.”¹⁷⁷The point here is that the prophet Zechariah saw a measure of falsehood being flown to a certain country. When he asked the angel, Whither do these [messengers] bear the measure? (Zechariah 5:10) he received the answer: ‘livnoth lah bayith’ (to build her a house) in Shinar [which is another name for Babylon]. Now since the word lah is written without the dot in the letter hei, the Rabbis interpreted that this is a negation, as if it said lo, conveying the idea that one may build a house of falsehood, but it will not last. — Thus the Midrash explains both the verses which Rashi found difficult. Thus far is the Agadah. And similarly in the Gemara of Tractate Sanhedrin¹⁷⁸Sanhedrin 24a. the Rabbis said [with reference to the measure seen by the prophet Zechariah]:¹⁷⁷The point here is that the prophet Zechariah saw a measure of falsehood being flown to a certain country. When he asked the angel, Whither do these [messengers] bear the measure? (Zechariah 5:10) he received the answer: ‘livnoth lah bayith’ (to build her a house) in Shinar [which is another name for Babylon]. Now since the word lah is written without the dot in the letter hei, the Rabbis interpreted that this is a negation, as if it said lo, conveying the idea that one may build a house of falsehood, but it will not last. — Thus the Midrash explains both the verses which Rashi found difficult. “This was the measure of flattery and conceit which came down to Babylon;” [Whereupon the Gemara asked that we find elsewhere that conceit settled in Elam, and the answer was:] “It indeed came down [originally] to Babylon, and became dragged along to Elam. You may deduce this also from the verse, ‘livnoth lah bayith’ (to build her a house),”¹⁷²Zecharia 5:11. [which is written without the usual dot in the letter hei]. Thus the interpretation is based upon the absence of this dot [in the letter hei of the word lah, which indicates] that the house [of flattery and conceit] did not last in the land of Shinar [but was dragged along the Elam].
Mas’ei

ויקרא לה נבח בשמו, “He called it (the district) Novach just like himself.” The letter ה in the word לה is “weak,” i.e. without the customary dagesh. Ruth Rabbah 5,5 claims that the reason is that this name did not endure, i.e. the word is almost equivalent to having been spelled לא, “not.” We find other examples of the same defective spelling in Zecharyah 5,11: לבנות לה בית בארץ שנער, “to build a house for her (it) in the land of Shinar.” The subject there is the prophet being shown a measuring device known as eyfah which the angel transported away and the prophet wanted to know its significance. The prophet is informed that those who remain in Babylonia although the Temple was being reconstructed in Jerusalem would not have much of a future, as there is no future for untruth. The missing dagesh in the word לה in that verse alludes to the transience of people who decided to remain in a kingdom built on lies. Solomon expressed himself similarly when speaking about lies in Proverbs 12,19: “Truthful lips will be established forever; but a lying tongue endures only for a moment.” They will soon be tested and found to be lies. This is why man must love truth and hate lies. This is also what Zecharyah 8,19 said: “Love truth and peace!”

How he would expound two [similar] words. Ramban, together with the other commentators raise the difficulty: How is it that Rashi did not see in Midrash Rus (5:5) [which teaches]: “I am not even like one of your maidservants” (Rus 2:13). Boaz said to her, "Heaven forbid! You are not one of the maidservants, rather one of the matriarchs." Similarly regarding “Novach went…” [which teaches that the name did not endure] and similarly, “He said to me: To build her a house in the land of Shinar” (Zechariah 5:11), which teaches that there is no salvation for falsehood. See there. It appears to me that Rashi was also aware of the Midrash, however when he wrote, “I wonder…” this is in accordance with R’ Moshe Hadarshan’s comment that the name of the city did not endure and therefore it is written לה which is silent, as if it had written לא נבח ["not Novach"], for its name did not endure, rather it received another name. Thus one needs to expound the same inference for “Boaz said to her,” that Boaz did not [say it himself], rather it was an emissary, but this could not be. Similarly with “To build her a house,” [it would mean] not a house, rather a tent but this could not be. Therefore, Rashi chose his words and said, “How he would expound” meaning that since he expounds like this here, he should also do so there, but this would not be possible. In truth, the name of the city was not changed, for it was named after Novach. Yet, when it is written לה which is silent, this is because although Novach and the others named the city after Novach, his sons did not call it Novach. As Rambam writes (Mamrim 6:3) and is brought by Tur (Yoreh De’ah 240) that if the name of one's father was the same as that of others, one should change the name of the others [in order to avoid mentioning the name of one's father]. This appears to me to be the explanation of Rashi’s words.

V. 42. לה ,ויקרא לה ohne Mappik. Dazu im מדרש רבות (zu Ruth 2, 14) die Bemerkung: מלמד שלא עמד לה אותו השם, das Personalsuffixum sei ohne lautbarmachendes Mappik geschrieben, um anzudeuten, dass der Stadt und ihrem Gebiete der Name nicht geblieben, somit Nobachs Absicht, sich dadurch zu verewigen, nicht erreicht wurde. Soll damit vielleicht überhaupt ein leiser Tadel über ein solches Verfahren ausgesprochen werden, sich durch Holz und Stein ein Denkmal der Verewigung zu gründen, einer irdischen Verewigung, die der wahre Jude nur durch Großtaten des Geistes und der sittlichen Pflichttreue und durch den Gesamtinhalt eines edel vollbrachten Lebens suchen und finden solle?

ונובח, and Novach, one of the sons of Menashe (not substantiated)

ויקרא לה, “he named it,” he (Novach) renamed K’nath. The word נבח is spelled “weak,” the letter ב not having a dot in it. This suggests that the renaming was temporary, and lasted only until the members of his tribe returned from helping the other tribes conquer the land on the West Bank (14 years). It had to be named so, so that in the interval no one could stake a claim to this land and take it away from its rightful owner who was an absentee. This is what Rashi explains here, quoting Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan. He wonders how Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan can explain this phenomenon in 2 similar situations in Ruth 2,14 and Zecharyah 5,11.where the words בית and בעז also have no dot in the letter ב. There are some commentators who try to explain the absence of the dots in the 2 examples I just mentioned. Their reasoning is brilliant, but I decided that it is not relevant to us here as texts composed by authors of the books of prophets or Scriptures need not be examined as carefully as those in the Torah. Here we must assume that the sages responsible for the vocalisation in the Torah, had been inspired with Holy Spirit when they performed their task.