Halakhah sobre Números 26:69

Dr. Esh discusses a totally different, and virtually unknown, custom with regard to the reading of Yissokhor, a practice which he finds recorded in Naḥalat Ya'akov, a work devoted to various questions pertaining to the Reading of the Torah. According to this compendium, the name should be vocalized as Yissoskhor in all occurrences prior to Numbers 26:24 and as Yissokhor thereafter. Dr. Esh explains the rationale underlying this uncommon practice. He predicates the custom upon one of the numerous reasons for not pronouncing the second sin of this name. One opinion recorded in Torah Shlemah is that this letter was removed from the name of Issachar in order that it might be added to the name of one of his children. According to this explanation, the name Yashuv, occurring in Numbers 26:24, originally lacked a shin. The person denoted by the name Yashuv is one and the same as Yov, identified in Genesis 46:13 as a son of Issachar. According to some authorities, Yov was also the name of an object of pagan worship. Therefore, Yov requested that a sin be taken from his father's name and added to his name, rendering it Yashuv. This tradition, Torah Shlemah claims, is the basis for the practice in some places of vocalizing the double consonant in Yissokhor throughout Scripture until the point where the sin is recorded as part of the name Yashuv in Numbers 26:24; from this point on, the second sin is not vocalized. Both Dr. Esh and Professor Wiesenberg quote many scholars who reject this custom as being unauthoritative.

Rabbi Weinberg, Seridei Esh, II, no. 48, finds that a census undertaken in Israel under contemporary conditions is permitted because such a census is conducted by means of questionnaires which are filled out by individual householders. The names inserted in the blank spaces provided on the forms are then tabulated in order to reach a final count. The tallying of names, rules Rabbi Weinberg, is an indirect means of counting. He further contends that the considerations of economic planning and national security which require an accurate census suffice to constitute a "purpose." Accordingly, Rabbi Weinberg concludes that the taking of a census is permitted even according to the first analysis presented by Ramban in his commentary on Numbers 1:3. Rabbi Uziel, Mishpetei Uzi'el, Hoshen Mishpat, kelalim, no. 2, also permits the taking of a census on the grounds that it is conducted indirectly by means of written documents and is undertaken for a legitimate purpose. This is also the opinion of both Rabbi Friedman and Rabbi Kasher.²⁶See also Einayim la-Mishpat, millu’im, Berakhot 62b. Rabbi Kasher adds further support to this conclusion by citing the comments of Ralbag, Numbers 1:2 and Numbers 26:53, who declares categorically that the counting of written names is not encompassed within the prohibition. Contradicting the view of other biblical commentators, Ralbag states that the later censuses undertaken by Moses were not conducted by means of collection of half-shekels but "according to the number of names" as indicated in Numbers 1:2 and Numbers 26:53.²⁷Rabbi Kasher, Torah Sheleimah, XXI, 168, further contends that tabulation by mechanical means is not prohibited since the actual counting is not accomplished by a human act. This view is disputed by Rabbi Schwartz, Mispar Bnei Yisra’el, p. 29. It should be noted that R. Naphtali Zevi Yehudah Berlin, in his biblical commentary Ha'amek Davar, also interprets both verses in an identical manner.²⁸In his commentary on Numbers 1:42, Ha’amek Davar cites an intriguing oral tradition attributed to the Ari ha-Kadosh. Ari advances a resolution to a textual difficulty in which he clearly assumes that those censuses were undertaken by counting slips of paper or the like upon which the names and tribal identification were recorded. Ari ha-Kadosh explains that these slips were collected from the entire community of Israel and deposited in a single place. Thereupon the nasi of each tribe came and selected those bearing the names of the members of his tribe and placed them in a separate receptacle. The slips in each of those receptacles were then counted in order to arrive at a census for each tribe. With the removal of the slips bearing the names of the members of the first eleven tribes, all remaining names were perforce known to be names of persons belonging to the twelfth tribe without need for any further selection. Accordingly, explains Ari ha-Kadosh, with regard to each of the first eleven tribes, Scripture states “Of the sons of … according to the number of names,” whereas with regard to Naphtali, the last tribe to be counted, Scripture states simply, “The sons of Naphtali….” With regard to each of the first eleven tribes, explains Ari, the names counted were of the sons of that tribe only, to the exclusion of slips bearing names of members of other tribes. Hence the phrase “of the sons …” which excludes all others. However, when it came time to count the tribe of Naphtali, all names remaining in the hands of Moses were counted since no other names remained.

Several commentaries, by virtue of their answers to the query presented by Tosafot, indicate that, in their opinion, there is no obligation whatsoever to resurrect the dead. The Shitah Mekubezet parallels the previously cited view of Maimonides in stating that the child was not dead but merely in a swoon. Rosh,²³Quoted by Shitah Mekubeḥet, Baba Meẓi‘a 114b. Radbaz,²⁴Vol. V, no. 2203. and Abarbanel²⁵Commentary on the Guide, I, 42. Puzzling is the parallel cited by Abarbanel concerning the slaying of Zimri and Cozbi by Phineas (Num. 25:6–8), a deed which necessarily involved the latter’s defilement. The rabbinic view is that since Phineas was born before the consecration of Eliezer, he was not a priest by virtue of genealogical descent and, accordingly, required personal consecration to achieve priestly status. Rabbinic tradition views the verse “Behold I give him my covenant of peace” (Num. 26:12) as recording that this status was accorded him as a reward for his zeal in the matter of Zimri. Thus, at the time of the slaying, Phineas had not yet attained the status of a priest and was not bound by the priestly prohibition regarding defilement (See Zevaḥim 101b). all state that Elijah's act was a form of hora'at sha'ah—an action having express divine sanction limited to the specific case at hand—and from which no normative halakhic practice can be deduced.

That is that He commanded us to honor the sages, to rise in front of them and to glorify them. And that is His, may He be exalted, saying, "In the presence of the elderly you shall rise and you shall respect an elder" (Leviticus 19:32). And the language of the Sifra is, "Rising that has honor." And the regulations of this commandment have already been explained in the first chapter of Kiddushin. And you should know that even if this commandment is obligatory for all people in general - meaning to honor sages, and even [towards] a sage that is one's equal in wisdom, like they explained in their saying (Bava Metzia 33a), "The Torah scholars in Babylonia would stand up for one another" - you should know that there are additional [obligations] of honor for the student. And that is because the honor a student is obligated towards his teacher is much more than the honor due to a sage [in general]. And along with the honor, he is obligated to fear him. For they have already explained that the law of his teacher upon him is like the law of his father, whom Scripture has obligated him to honor and fear. And they already said (Sanhedrin 5b) that it is not permissible to disagree with his rabbi - meaning a disagreement that breaks with his instruction and legal decision, such that he relies upon his [own] wisdom and teaches or decides and instructs, unless [his teacher] gives him permission. And it is not permissible to quarrel with him, nor to get upset with him. And he may not suspect him regarding his actions or words with various suspicions, as it is possible that this was not [his teacher's] intention. And in the chapter [entitled] Chelek (Sanhedrin 110a), they said, "Anyone who disagrees with his teacher is as if he disagrees with the Divine Presence, as it is stated (Numbers 26:9), 'when they strove against the Lord.' And anyone who argues with his teacher is as if he argues with the Holy One, blessed be He, as it is stated (Numbers 20:13), 'These are the waters of Meribah, [where the children of Israel quarreled with the Lord].' And anyone who gets upset with his teacher is as if he is upset with the Divine Presence, as it is stated (Exodus 16:8), 'Your complaints are not against us, but against the Lord.' And anyone who suspects his teacher is as if he suspects the Divine Presence, as it is stated (Numbers 21:5), 'And the people spoke against God, and against Moses.'" And this is completely clear, since the disagreement of Korach and the argument of the Children of Israel - and their complaint and their accusation and their suspicion - was with Moshe, who was the teacher of all of Israel; but Scripture put all of these matters of theirs towards God. And in the explanation (Avot 4:12), they said, "The fear of your teacher is like the fear of the Heavens." And [this fear] is all deduced and proved from Scripture's commanding [us] to honor parents and sages, as is explained in many places in the Talmud - but that [does not make] it a separate commandement. And understand this. (See Parashat Kedoshim; Mishneh Torah, Torah Study).

From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said that there is no need to say that someone who is not a sage is obligated in the honor of a sage, but rather even a sage is obligated in the honor of [another] sage; as they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bava Metzia 33a), "The Torah scholars in Babylonia get up for one another." And that which they also elucidated that with the honor of a teacher upon his student, there is a great addition upon the honor that he is obligated to any other sage. And they emphasized this to the point that they said (Avot 4:12) "The reverence of your teacher [should be] like the reverence of Heaven." And in the explanation, they said [between] his father and his teacher, his teacher has precedence in honor, in a lost object, in a load and in captivity. But if his father was a sage - even though he was not equivalent to his teacher - his father has precedence. And in the chapter [entitled] Chelek (Sanhedrin 110a), they said, "Anyone who disagrees with his teacher is as if he disagrees with the Divine Presence, as it is stated (Numbers 26:9), 'in their quarreling with the Lord.'" And they spoke at much length about this matter there.

“The order of the reading of the Torah and of circumcision on Yom Kippur” - Containing six paragraphs.
We take out (from the ark) two Torah scrolls.¹⁶⁸Two Torah scrolls are taken out on the festivals because portions from two separate sections of the Torah are read. The Torahs can be set before hand so that they can be opened to the correct portion without the necessity of rolling the scroll from one portion to the next. In the first Torah six men read from the portion “אחרי מות”, (Leviticus 16:1-18:30) until “and he did as the Lord commanded (Moses)”, (Leviticus 16:34). But if (Yom Kippur) falls on Shabbat, seven (men read from the first Torah), and the Maftir¹⁶⁹Maftir, מפטיר, means literally "one who concludes". It is the name given to the man who is the last to read in the Torah and he also usually reads the haftarah (see footnote 170), the section of the prophets that corresponds to the Torah reading. Maftir is also the name given to the three or more concluding verses of the regular weekly Torah portion as well as to the final verses read on festivals and public fast days.
Editorial Staff, E. J., v. 11, p. 685. (the last reader) reads from the second (Torah scroll) from the portion, Pinḥas, (Numbers 25:10-30:1), the section “and you shall have on the tenth day of this seventh month”, (Numbers 29:7-11). The Maftir (the Haftarah section from the Prophets¹⁷⁰The Haftarah, הפטרה, is a portion from the Prophets section of the Bible read after the Torah is read on Sabbaths, festivals, and fast days. On Sabbaths and festivals the haftarah is read during the Morning, Shaḥarit Service (see footnote 17), but on fast days it is read only during the Afternoon, Minḥah Service (see footnote 40). The exception to this is Yom Kippur and Tishah be-Av (see footnote 102) where there is a haftarah after the Torah reading in both the Morning and the Afternoon Service.
The Torah in its regular portions is read straight through during the year but such is not the case on festivals and some special Sabbaths. The haftarot are selected in parts from both the Former and Latter Prophets. Only two prophetic books are read in their entirety as haftarot, the Book of Obadiah which has only twenty-one verses and is read after the Torah portion Va-Yishlaḥ (Genesis 32:4-36-43) according to the Sephardi rite, and the Book of Jonah which is the haftarah for the Minḥah Service on Yom Kippur (see the Shulḥan Arukh, Oraḥ Ḥayyim 622:2).
Haftarot were usually selected so there would be some similarity in content between the Pentateuchal and the Prophetic portions, but often this did not happen and haftarot were chosen because of historical events or because of some special date. Special haftarot are read on special Sabbaths and the haftarah for each festival is based on the nature of the festival.
When the custom of reading the haftarah got started is not known for sure, but it is thought that it began during the persecutions of the Antiochus Epiphanes which preceded the Hasmonean revolt. The Torah was not permitted to be read by the Jews during the persecution for it was felt that the reading of it kept the Jews together and gave them a special strength. As a substitute for the Torah reading, sections form the Prophets were chosen that would remind the Jews of the corresponding Torah portion. Appearantly when the ban against reading the Torah was lifted, the practice of reading the haftarah continued. The first mention of the practice of the reading of the haftarah is found in the New Testament. Acts 13:15 states, "after the reading of the law and the prophets". Haftarot are also discussed in the Talmud as to which are to be read at specific times and festivals. In Mishnaic times different communities read different haftarot, and a set order was probably not established until talmudic times. Some haftarot today differ from those recorded in the Talmud, and there are differences in the Sephardi and Ashkenazi rites.
The maftir, the one who reads the haftarah also reads the last part of the weekly portion, (i.e., the Torah reader reads it for him). On the Sabbath, after the seventh reader from the Torah, the maftir usually rereads the last three verses of the weekly portion. On festivals and the four special Sabbaths, the maftir reads the special section from the second scroll which is usually a short description of of the festival found in the Torah. Before the haftarah is read (or chanted) the maftir precedes the haftarah with two blessings and after he ends the haftarah he recites three blessings to which a fourth one is added on Sabbaths and festivals. This fourth blessing changes with the nature of the day. The Sabbath haftarah usually has a minimum of twenty-one verses while the festival has at least fifteen verses. Lately it has become the custom for the Bar Mitzvah boy (a man upon reaching the age of thirteen) to chant the haftarah to display his ability with a Hebrew text.
Louis Isaac Rabinowitz, E. J., v. 16, pp. 1342-44.) comes from Isaiah, “and shall say, cast you up, cast you up, prepare the way” until “for the mouth of the Lord has spoken it”, (Isaiah 57:14-58:14).