Comentario citado sobre Números 21:1

[Daniel 2:1] Vatitpaʿem (וַתִּתְפָּעֶם - His spirit was agitated): [This root פ-ע-ם relates to being struck or agitated,] like [David says]: “I was agitated (nifʿamti - נִפְעַמְתִּי) and could not speak” [Psalms 77:5)]. And their derivation is [related to the striking action in] “striking (holem - הוֹלֵם) the anvil (paʿam - פַּעַם)” [Isaiah 41:7] – like a person who is struck/crushed and struck/crushed again. The Gaon [Saadia Gaon] said: that Pharaoh knew the dream but did not know its interpretation, therefore it is written concerning Pharaoh “and his spirit was agitated” (vattippaʿem rucho - וַתִּפָּעֶם רוּחוֹ, Genesis 41:8), which is from the Nifal conjugation. But [regarding] Nebuchadnezzar, who did not know the dream or the interpretation, it is written concerning him “and his spirit became agitated” (vatitpaʿem rucho - וַתִּתְפָּעֶם רוּחוֹ, Daniel 2:1), [using the Hitpael conjugation]. If so [Ibn Ezra challenges Saadia], what will he do [with the fact] that he [Nebuchadnezzar himself later] says “my spirit was agitated” (vatipaʿem ruchi - וַתִּפָּעֶם רוּחִי) [Daniel 2:3], [using the Nifal form even though he didn't know the dream]? And it is possible that the dagesh [doubling dot] in the Pey [פ] of vatipaʿem (וַתִּפָּעֶם - Nifal form) is instead of the Nun [which typically characterizes] the Nifal conjugation [indicating assimilation]. Because a verb which is transitive [in Qal/Piel] can be [expressed passively/reflexively in the] Nifal – like “and he fought (vayilachem - וַיִּלָּחֶם, Nifal) against Israel” [Numbers 21:1]. Or [alternatively, explaining the Hitpael form וַתִּתְפָּעֶם in this verse, Daniel 2:1], the dagesh in the Pey is due to the assimilation of the Tav [ת] of the Hitpael conjugation [a common feature of this conjugation with certain root letters]. And thus, “his spirit became agitated” (vatitpaʿem rucho) would be like [saying] “his strength became agitated/stirred” (vatipaʿem kocho - וַתִּפָּעֶם כֹּחוֹ). [This is perhaps] in the way of [the grammatical structure in] “And the one being purified (ha-mitaher - הַמִּטַּהֵר, Hitpael participle) shall wash (v'kibbes - וְכִבֶּס, Piel) his clothes” [Leviticus 14:8]. [Regarding the phrase] And his sleep was upon him (וּשְׁנָתוֹ נִהְיְתָה עָלָיו - u-shnato nihyetah alav): The meaning of “was upon him” (nihyetah alav - נִהְיְתָה עָָלָיו) is the opposite of “and my sleep was sweet (arvah - עָרְבָה) to me” [Jeremiah 31:26]; [meaning] in the sense of being disturbed/disrupted (shibbush - שִׁבּוּשׁ). And similar to it is [Daniel's statement]: “I was undone/faint (nihyeiti - נִהְיֵיתִי) and sick” [Daniel 8:27]. And it is close in meaning to [the concept expressed by the similar-sounding root for lamentation, as in] “a lamentation shall be” (n'hi nihyah - נְהִי נִהְיָה) [cf. Micah 2:4].

fine-flour well-ground wheat flour ( sameed in Arabic). It is unfitting for anything to be offered to the Most High that is not of the highest quality.

While living in the wilderness they [experienced God’s] glorious manner⁹Middas Tiferes translated here as “glorious manner” refers to how the Jewish Nation’s daily affairs transcending nature, evoked an admiration from the nations of the world as to the spiritual heights of the Children of Israel and their special bond with God. See Ha’amek Davar on Ex. 28:2 explaining that the special clothing of the High Priest elicited kavod (honor) and tiferes (glory), a recognition from the masses of his spiritual greatness and his worthiness of being a Merkava DeShechina. Merkava DeShechina which is referenced below refers to those individuals or groups of people who attain spiritual heights to the extent they are considered as if they support the Divine Throne, with no intermediary existing between them and the Divine Presence. For a further explanation of the Netziv’s understanding of Merkava DeShechina and how those possessing this trait experience worldly affairs transcending nature, see Darkhah Shel Torah, part 3, chapter 3. In Kabbalistic sources Moses was at an even greater spiritual level, being the single human to rise to the level of Tiferes to become the “bridegroom of the Shechinah,” (see the Introduction to Volume One of The Zohar, Pritzker Edition; pages L-LI). “march to the right of Moses,”¹⁰See Is. 63:12, "Who made His glorious arm march at the right hand of Moses." i.e. totally transcending nature; whereas in the Land of Israel their affairs accorded with nature, concealing the providence of God’s Kingdom, may He be blessed. This transformation began during the fortieth year of their being in the wilderness, as we explained in the parasha of Chukas.¹¹See Num. 20:1, “The entire congregation of the children of Israel arrived at the desert of Zin in the first month, and the people settled in Kadesh. Miriam died there and was buried there.” The Netziv comments that the understanding of this verse accords with the Ibn Ezra, who states that “in the first month” refers to the first month of the fortieth year of their travels in the wilderness. The significance of this date was to make known the time of Miriam’s death and to note the start of the period that their affairs would align with nature. This understanding explains the basis of their complaint, “Why have you taken us out of Egypt to bring us to this evil place? It is not a place for seeds, or for fig trees, grapevines, or pomegranate trees, and there is no water to drink” (Ibid. 20:50). Were they not sustained for 40 years prior to that in a wilderness absent of any type of fruit tree etc.!? Rather, they began to experience a gradual diminution of the glory of God’s miracles and thus began to complain, due to their discomfort and fear of having to depend on God’s sustenance being cloaked in the workings of nature. With this transformation to the way of nature did the Nation of Israel wage war against the Canaanites¹²Num. 21:1-3. The Canaanite king of Arad gained courage to wage war against Israel upon discovery that they scouted out the land and were thus not waging war in a miraculous manner, as stated, “he heard that they had come by the route of the scouts.” and Sichon.¹³Num. 21:21-30. The king Sichon was similarly encouraged to wage war against the Israelites, as they requested permission to pass through his land, thus seeming to demonstrate they could not miraculously defeat their enemies. [For this reason] the staff no longer remained consistently in the hand of Moses except for circumstances of special need, as we have explained ad loc.¹⁴When Moses was directed to cause the rock to bring forth water, Num. 20:8 states that God told Moses to “take the staff,” which implies that the staff was no longer consistently in his hands. The staff symbolized God providing Moses authority to act on God’s behalf in a miraculous manner (see Ha’amek Davar on Ex. 4:17).

To the Kenites. Who were Yisro's descendants,⁹See Shoftim 1:16. who were residing in the wilderness of Yehudah, in the south of Arod, who went to Ya'aveitz to learn Torah, Arod being Amoleik. The Canaanite king of Arod was Amoleik, for it is stated [about him]; "who lived in the South,"¹⁰Bamidbar 21:1. and, "Amoleik dwells in the southern part of the land."¹¹Ibid., 13:29.

פנו וסעו לכם TURN YOU AND JOURNEY — this was the journey to Arad and Hormah mentioned in Numbers 21:1—3.