Commentaire sur Les Nombres 26:5

משפחת החנכי THE FAMILY OF THE HANOCHITES — Because the heathen nations spoke slightingly of Israel, saying, “How can these trace their descent by their tribes? Do they think that the Egyptians did not overmaster their mothers? If they showed themselves master of their bodies, it is quite certain that they did so over those of their wives!”. On this account the Holy One, blessed be He, set His name upon them: the letter ה on one side of their name and the letter י on the other side (חנכיה), to intimate: I bear testimony for them that they are the sons of their reputed fathers (and not of the Egyptians) (Shir HaShirim Rabbah 4:12). This it is that is expressed by David, (Psalms 122:4) שבטי יה עדות לישראל: “that the tribes bear the name of the Lord (יה) is a testimony regarding Israel” — this Divine Name (יה) bears testimony regarding their tribes (i.e. that they rightly attach themselves to those tribes to which they claim to belong). On this account in the case of all of them it is written החנכי and הפלואי but in the case of ימנה (v. 44) it was not felt necessary to state “of the family of הימני”, because the Divine Name is already attached to it — the י at the beginning and the ה at the end (ימנה) (Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 773).

[REUBEN, THE FIRSTBORN OF ISRAEL: THE SONS OF REUBEN]: HANOCH, THE FAMILY OF THE HANOCHITES. Perhaps [the reason why the individual families of each tribe are mentioned here is that] when the Land was divided among the tribes [in equal parts] according to the opinion of our Rabbis,³²Baba Bathra 122a. See Vol. I, pp. 570-572. so that Simeon, the smallest of the tribes,³³The tribe of Simeon numbered 22,200 men (further, Verse 14). took [a share] equal to that of Judah, the most populous of the tribes,³⁴The tribe of Judah numbered 76,500 (Verse 22). it was also divided up [amongst each tribe itself] according to the number of families that went down to Egypt. Thus they made out of Reuben’s inheritance four [equal] parts [because it consisted of four main families: Hanoch, Pallu, Hezron, and Carmi], and the Hanochites received a share equal to that allotted to the Palluites, the Hezronites, and the Carmites, even though these [four families] were not all equal in the number of names … by their polls³⁵Above, 1:18. This is the reason here for counting [the people] in this manner, [namely] by counting the family according to those who went down to Egypt, and it does not mention [here] by their polls, even though it mentions the numbers [of each tribe] as a whole. And when Scripture states [here]: To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance, [and to the fewer thou shalt give the less inheritance,³⁶Further, Verse 54. which seems to indicate that the Land was divided according to population,³⁷As is indeed Rashi’s opinion. See further, Verse 54, for a complete discussion. Ramban also touches briefly on this subject in Genesis 48:6 (Vol. I, pp. 571-572). it refers to the [division amongst the] members of each [small] family,³⁸Thus when, for example, the family-group of Hanochites received their quarter-share of Reuben’s overall inheritance, they further subdivided it amongst their members according to the number of individuals in each family. However, they themselves received a share — [one quarter] — of the total inheritance of Reuben, equal to that received by the three other main families of Reuben, despite differences in their respective populations. Likewise each of the twelve tribes, whether large in population, like Judah, or small like Simeon, received an equal share of the whole Land [that is, equal in value, although not in area] (Baba Bathra 122a). for each [of these minor families] received a share according to their numbers by their polls.³⁵Above, 1:18. It is for this reason that in the Book of Joshua [when speaking of] the division of the Land, it says according to their families, as is stated in the verse, And the lot for the tribe of the children of Judah ‘according to their families,’³⁹Joshua 15:1. and similarly in the case of all the other [tribes]. Or the meaning of [the phrase there] according to their families may be: “to ‘all’ the families of the tribe” [meaning that each minor family of each tribe was taken into account, according to the numbers of its individual members, as explained above]; or that they divided the Land according to their families, so that each family received its share in one place, so that it did not become mixed up with [that of] another family. This [latter interpretation] appears to me to be the correct one.

משפחת החנכי, the family of Chanoch. Yalkut Shimoni on our verse (item 773) quotes Rav Idi who says that whenever you have the letter ה at the beginning of a name and the letter י at the end this is a sign that the person named was a son of the person who claimed to be his father. The string of such names here proves that the Israelites practiced marital fidelity. [The two letters discussed here together form the name of G'd i.e. י־ה so that what Rav Idi means is that G'd associated His name with the names of these families. Ed.]

חנוך משפחת החנוכי, Chanoch, the Chanochi family;” Nachmanides speculates that the reason why suddenly the tribes are divided into their respective families, may have to do with the opinion according to which the land was distributed in equal measure to the 12 tribes, so that the numerically weak tribe of Shimon received as much land as the numerically strong tribe of Yehudah. The Torah would then be telling us that the distribution of the land within each tribe followed a similar pattern, i.e. the basic family units, בית אב which was based on the 20 year olds at the time of the Israelites arriving in Egypt. At that time Reuven had four sons, so that the land allocated to the tribe of Reuven would have been split into 4 equal parts, regardless of demographic changes in the respective numerical strength during the intervening 250 years. [210 in Egypt 40 in the desert. Ed.] Although, at the time of this census, the families of Chanoch, Phalu, Chetzron and Carmi, were quite different from one another numerically, for the purpose of the distribution of their family plots in the land of Israel they were all treated as equal in numerical strength. As far as the Torah instructing (verse 54) לרב תרבה נחלתו ולמעט תמעיט נחלתו איש לפי פקודיו יתן נחלתו, “to the numerically strong you shall increase the amount of his inheritance, whereas to the numerically weak you shall give proportionately less, each according to his count shall be given his inheritance,” this is a principle that is repeated in Joshua This is the reason why at this census the basic units are the composition of the families that had descended from Canaan to Egypt with their patriarch Yaakov. This is also why,- as opposed to the census in Parshat Bamidbar -the word לגולגלותם, “according to their headcount,” does not appear at all.

חנוך משפחת החנוכי, “Chanoch the clan of the Chanochites.” According to Rashi, the reason for such detailed emphasis on the certainty of the Israelites’ paternity was necessary to counter the sneering comments by the Gentiles who ridiculed the claim that the Egyptians during their control of the Jewish people had not been able to sleep with their wives. The Torah therefore testifies by the manner these descendants are attributed to their respective fathers that there was never a doubt about an Israelite’s paternity, i.e. his being fathered by an Israelite. By appending the two letters of the Lord’s name ה and י respectively to the front and end of the respective names of these people, G’d testified that the people mentioned were sired by Jews. David proclaims this even more clearly when he speaks about the tribes of Israel being שבטי י-ה, “the tribes of G’d” (Psalms 122,4). The extra letters are absent only in the name ימנה of the tribe of Asher as the name as it is without prefix or suffix already features the letters י and ה, respectively (verse 44).

The ה' on one side and the י' on the other. You might ask: Surely regarding gentiles the Torah also writes in this manner, as it is written וירד העמלקי והכנעני ["the Amalekite and the Canaanite descended"] (Bamidbar 14:45). The answer is that if had written, “The descendants of Reuvein are: the Chanochite family” without adding “from Chanoch” there would have been no difficulty, just as [the Torah writes] regarding the Amalekite. However, now that it is written, “The descendants of Reuvein are: from Chanoch, the Chanochite family” there is a difficulty as to why the Torah [also] placed the ה' on the one side and the י' on the other?

V. 5. משפחת החנכי. Jeder Stamm teilte sich in mehrere Familienzweige, deren den Familiennamen gebende Ahnen bei den meisten die ersten Söhne des Stammvaters waren, nur dass sich bei einigen, wie dies ja noch mit Vornamen so häufig geschieht, die Namen etwas anders nuancierten. Bei einigen wie bei Jehuda, Efrajim und Benjamin bildeten auch die Enkel, bei Menasche selbst die Urenkel noch besonders genannte Familienzweige. Dass, wie רמב׳׳ן bemerkt, die Zahl der Familienzweige nicht von der größeren oder geringeren Volkszahl des Stammes bedingt war, ist z. B. aus dem Vergleich Benjamins und Dans ersichtlich. Von Benjamin werden sieben besondere Familienzweige genannt, bei einer Bevölkerung von fünfundvierzigtausend, von Dan nur ein Familienzweig und er zählte vierundsechzigtausend.

משפחת הפלאי, “the family of the Paliy.” Actually, this family did not reach the land of Israel as the Reuvenites except for the family of Nemuel, the latter’s great grandson perished during the uprising of Korach. (Compare verse 89)

Having read Rav Idi's comment, we need to understand why these two letters appear in the reverse order, i.e. ה־י instead of י־ה. We may understand this with the help of some introductory remarks based on Tikkuney Hazohar 10. We are told there that the overall pool of souls of the Jewish people originates from an area beneath the throne of G'd which is called Heychal Kodsho, the Sanctuary of His Holiness. This aspect of G'd is called in our parlance א־ד־נ־י. Our halachic codifiers such as Tur Shulchan Aruch Or Hachayim 5 have told us that when someone utters the name of G'd during his prayers he must think of each single letter in the name of G'd he utters. When he utters names which we are permitted to utter and which are spelled in the prayerbook with the letters א־ד־נ־י, he must think of G'd in terms of His sovereignty. When he encounters the name of G'd spelled י־ה, he is to think of G'd in terms of His being eternal. When he encounters the Ineffable Name, i.e. י־ה־ו־ה, he is to think of G'd in terms of His being supremely powerful. He should also think of G'd as multifaceted as portrayed by the various ways His name appears in print. We have a verse in Psalms 11,4 where the ineffable name of G'd appears both before and after the words היכל קדשו, "the Sanctuary of His holiness." In that instance you will find that the letter ה at the end of the name of G'd before the expression היכל קדשו and the letter י immediately after the expression היכל קדשו form the reverse of the usual י־ה, i.e. ה־י just as in the sequence of the name החנכי. These two letters then may be viewed as the seal of the היכל קדשו, and together they represent the two letters י־ה which form the name of G'd most often manifest in our lives ever since the destruction of the Temple.