Comentario citado sobre Números 25:10

"Against the Midianites": and not against the Moabites, etc. Another explanation: because of two good doves, etc. It is difficult to understand what this second explanation adds. One could say that according to the first explanation, it is difficult because although the Moabites were involved in the matter of Balaam's curse due to fear and thus were spared, nevertheless, they should not have been spared for the matter of Peor, where they caused Israel to sin by making their daughters available for promiscuity. For one who causes another to sin, it is worse for him than if he were killed, as Rashi explained in the section of "Ki Tetzei." Therefore, the second explanation is offered: because of the two good doves, etc. This means that the Moabites were also deserving of punishment, but they were spared because of the two good doves, meaning two righteous women: Ruth the Moabitess and Naamah the Ammonitess. Although Naamah was an Ammonite, the reason is attributed to Moab because from Ruth the Moabitess came David, and thus she merited to marry Solomon. However, earlier in the section of Pinchas, in the verse "Harass the Midianites," Rashi did not write the first explanation because the term "vengeance" is not used there as it is here, and thus the first explanation does not fit there.

דבר אל בני ישראל, “speak to the Children of Israel;” Nachmanides writes that the reason the name of Aaron has not been mentioned in this paragraph is that in this paragraph the Torah did not mention the additional sacrifices, מוספים, which are offered on every one of the festivals mentioned here. The Torah contents itself with writing –in a general statement- והקרבתם אשה לה', “you are to offer fire-offerings to Hashem.” The details are spelled out only in Numbers chapter 28-29. The reason this has been delayed until there is that by then the details of the occupation of the land of Israel, the key to how to distribute the various parts of the land had been spelled out, and basically, the additional offerings are applicable in the central location where the Tabernacle/Temple would stand and the Israelites would have to make their pilgrimages to that location to honour the festival. In a manner of speaking, these מוספים represent acknowledgment of Hashem having given us our daily bread in the land of Israel. Although at this time, the land had not yet been conquered, the Torah in verses 9-22 speaks about offerings which could not possibly be brought prior to the land having been conquered, seeing that the ingredients are largely produce of that land, the message is that the legislation in the Torah being discussed here is for the duration, throughout the generations. It is noteworthy that the Sabbath, a day that is not connected to calendar considerations, is mentioned as part of these מועדים. The reason is to show that part of this legislation, such as the Sabbath, is capable of being honoured in the performance already immediately. The fact that after having mentioned the Sabbath the Torah reverts to telling the halachic authorities of the people אשר תקראו אותם במועדם, “the festivals that you have to proclaim as such at their appointed times,” makes the distinction between the Sabbath on the one hand, and the festivals on the other hand, quite clear. The reason that the Sabbath is introduced with the words אלה מועדי ה', “these are the appointed festivals of Hashem, etc.” in the plural mode is that the Sabbath occurs so frequently. It is reported in the name of Rabbi Chiya (hasefardi) that when mentioning the Sabbath the words מועדי ה' occur before the words אשר תקראו אותם, “that you are to proclaim,” whereas in connection with the festivals the words אשר תקראו אותם occur after the words מועדי ה'. This is a clear hint that unless the dates of the festivals have been publicly proclaimed in advance, these festivals i.e. their legal status, remains in doubt. It is necessary for the Highest Court of the land to declare the first day of that month as such in order for us to know when the dates mentioned as festivals do occur. Nachmanides mentions further that the words אלה מועדי ה' אשר תקראו אותם וגו' refer to what follows, [not as in Genesis 24, or Exodus 6,19 and many others where the word אלה sums up what had been reported before then. Ed.] This is the reason why the Torah felt compelled to repeat this line seeing it had interrupted its narrative with mention of the Sabbath. There is an essential difference between observing the Sabbath and observing the festivals, as on the Sabbath any manner of מלאכה, creative kind of activity, is prohibited, whereas on the festivals only activities defined as מלאכת עבודה, “work typically performed by slaves, servants,” are forbidden. This enables us to cook, fry, and use fire on the festivals. There is a further allusion in the text that when such a festival day occurs on the Sabbath, the rules pertaining to the festival do not supersede those of the Sabbath and all the activities normally prohibited on the Sabbath are then also prohibited on the day that is both Sabbath and part of the festival. We find a similar syntax in the Torah when the Torah writes אלה הדברים אשר צוה ה' לעשות אותם, “These are the things which Hashem had commanded to do them,” in connection with the building of the Tabernacle, (Exodus 35,1) as there too, the Torah had interrupted its narrative by referring to the rules of Sabbath observance. In light of the above we can understand very well why when introducing this legislation the Torah did not use the words והקרבתם אשה לה' when describing the Sabbath, [although such an offering is, of course tendered every Sabbath, Ed.] as it does at the end of the mention of each festival, and instead it writes at the end of the chapter (verse 37) אלה מועדי ה' אשר תקראו אותם מקראי קודש להקריב אשה לה' מנחה זבח ונסכים דבר יום ביומו. מלבד שבתות ה' ומלבד מתנותיכם וגו' , “These are the appointed festivals of Hashem that you shall proclaim as holy convocations, to offer a fire-offering to Hashem: a burnt offering, and its meal-offering, a feast-offering, and its libation, each day’s requirement each day. Apart from Hashem’s Sabbaths, and apart from your gifts, apart from all your vows, etc.” These verses make crystal clear that the Sabbaths are not included in the list of the festivals. If a further proof were needed you will find this in the very fact that the Torah wrote a separate paragraph commencing with practically the same words in verse 4. If the Sabbath could have been lumped together with the festivals, surely at least that verse could have been saved.

All night until morning. The commentators said that since the burnt offering comes to atone for thoughts of the heart, which mainly occur at night, as it is said: Those who plan iniquity and plot evil on their beds; when morning dawns, they carry it out (Micah 2:1). Therefore, its time is all night. And in the Midrash Tanchuma (Pinchas 13, see there) we find a contradiction to this view, where it concludes Righteousness lodged in it (Isaiah 1:21). Rabbi Yuda bar Simon said: No person spent the night in Jerusalem with sin in their hand. How so? The morning daily offering atoned for the transgressions of the night, and the evening offering atoned for the transgressions of the entire day. This is what is meant by Righteousness lodged in it. And it is written: The people who dwell in it shall be forgiven of iniquity (Isaiah 33:24). Since lodged speaks of one who spends the night in it, the verse needed to bring The people who dwell in it regarding the day, because it is a time of dwelling and not a time of lodging and lying down. According to this, the night offering atoned for the transgressions of the day.
And there is another difficulty: Why did he say that the time of the evening offering is all night, and why didn’t he mention regarding the morning offering that its time is all day? And there is a further difficulty: In Parshat Tetzaveh and Parshat Pinchas, the morning burnt offering is mentioned only once, while the evening offering is mentioned twice.
It seems that this is because the sin of the day is double — in deed and in thought — and furthermore, all day a person is free for transgression. Therefore, he mentioned between the evenings twice, because its atonement is doubled, and its time is all night to atone for the sin of the entire day. But the night is not a time of action, and for the most part, the main sin of the night is in thought, as it is said: Those who plan iniquity and plot evil on their beds; when morning dawns, they carry it out. Additionally, for most of the night, a person is asleep on their bed, and therefore the morning burnt offering only atones for sinful thoughts, and it does not specify that its time is all day because it does not need to atone for the sin of the entire night.

דרך ים סוף BY THE WAY OF THE RED SEA — As soon as Aaron died and this war came upon them they turned back on the way to the Red Sea; this was the way on which they had turned back when there had been enacted against them the decree that they must wander in the wilderness in consequence of their murmuring after having received the report of the spies, as it is said, (Deuteronomy 1:40), “And take your journey into the wilderness by the way to the Red Sea”. Here they went back seven stages, as it is said, (Deuteronomy 10:6), “And the children of Israel journeyed from Beeroth-bene-jaakan to Moserah; there Aaron died”. But did he really die at Moserah; was it not at Mount Hor that he died?” But the explanation is, that there (at Moserah) they again mourned and lamented for him just as though he there lay dead before them. Go and examine the list of the stages (Numbers 33:31—37) and you will find that there are seven stages from Moserah to Mount Hor (Midrash Tanchuma, Chukat 18).

The bulls of the festival: They continue to decrease in the sacrifices of Parashat Pinchas.

'והקרבתם אשה וגו‎‎ BUT YE SHALL OFFER A FIRE-OFFERING etc. — This is identical with the additional offerings due on the first day of Passover which are mentioned in the section of פנחס (Numbers 28:19). But why are these referred to here? In order to intimate that the additional offerings do not impede one another (i. e. that if a particular animal of these מוספים cannot be sacrificed, it is still lawful to bring the others) (Menachot 49a), because it states: —