Commentaire sur Les Nombres 26:57

AND THESE ARE THEY THAT WERE NUMBERED OF THE LEVITES. I do not know why He [commanded] that the Levites should be counted [here], and what purpose [is served] now by counting them [since they did not receive any portion in the Land]. Perhaps [they were counted because] it was only to these [Levites] that they gave the [forty-eight] cities to dwell in and their open land for their cattle,¹³⁹Further, 35:2-7. and not to those who were born afterwards. Or [it may be that this census] was done as an expression of honor for them before G-d, so that “the legion of the King”¹⁴⁰Bamidbar Rabbah 1:10. should not be treated as less important [than the other people], by not bothering to count them like the rest of the people. Scripture mentions Amram and his wife [Jochebed, with the children she bore — Aaron, Moses and Miriam their sister, although it does not do so in connection with any other Levite families], because the sons of [that] Levite [Amram] were counted as two [groups], as priests and as Levites,¹⁴¹In other words, since one son of Amram, i.e., Moses, was counted amongst the Levites, and the other son, Aaron, was counted amongst the priests, therefore Scripture pointed out especially that Amram had two sons. and it was fitting that Aaron and his sons [who were originally Levites but later on became priests] should be counted separately [therefore Scripture mentions especially the names of the parents and of their children].

ואלה פקודי הלוי, “And these are the numbered ones of the tribe of Levi.” Nachmanides writes that he does not know why the census of the Levites is introduced at this juncture. He suggests that perhaps it is because the ones numbered now are the ones to whom each of the tribes had to cede some portion of their land in order to have the 48 cities populated by the Levites who had no land holdings other than the strip of greenbelt surrounding their respective towns. The size of those towns would be based on Levites already alive at this time, those born later would not be able to establish additional such towns or to increase the size allotted to the town in which their parents lived. It is also possible that the Torah inserted this paragraph at this time in honour of these Levites, as otherwise it would appear to the reader that the Kings’ (G’d’s) legion, i.e. the Levites, were treated less respectfully than the commoners. Amram and his wife Yocheved were mentioned by name separately, as the tribe of Levi was basically divided into the plain Levites and the descendants of Aaron who were priests. Nachmanides writes further that he is wondering why the Torah first enumerates the families of Levi by counting three separate family heads of the Levites, i.e. Gershon, Kehat and Merari, and then proceeds to also enumerate the next generation when repeating details of their offspring describing them as משפחות, families, [with their appropriate heads, Ed.] although in the case of Merari there were only two sons, Machli and Mushi, how could the Torah speak of משפחת המררי? (Compare Numbers 3,20) The reason the Torah does not speak of Amram’s family, i.e. משפחת העמרמי, is because this family would be subdivided into Aaron the head of the priests, and the ordinary Levites, be they descended from Gershon, Merari, or Kehat, excluding Aaron son of Amram. The Torah at this juncture does not mention that Aaron was the priest, out of respect for Moses The same holds true for the report of the genealogy of the tribe of Levi in Numbers 3,17, where Aaron’s office as High Priest is not mentioned. [Seeing that Aaron as the priest is listed there in verse 32, this editor does not see the comparison as valid. Ed.] The reason why the family of Yitzhar is described under the heading of Korach, (verse 58) is that originally at the time of the first census Yitzhor had other sons alive, i.e. Zichri and Nefog, and both of these sons had their own sons by now. By the time of the present census the only surviving sons of Yitzhor were the sons of Korach, concerning whom the Torah had testified that they did not die in the uprising. (26,11) As a result, the family of Yitzhar henceforth was known as the descendants of Korach. I do not believe (Nachmanides writing) there was a valid reason why Yitzhar’s name should be expunged among his descendants; however they did this after the revolt of Korach in honour of Korach’s sons who had had the courage to defy their father and to remain loyal to both G’d and Moses, an example for future generations, as testified by the Torah itself. In the Midrash of Rabbi Moshe Hadarshon on the meaning of the words כי אתם המעט, in Deut 7,7 where the letter ה at the beginning of the word "המעט" is understood as a hint at the five of the 70 families that founded the Jewish people and with whom Yaakov descended to Egypt as having died out, this is not correct. He claims that whereas Levi had originally 8 sons, (families) here only five are mentioned. Three of those so-called original eight were only belonging to a different generation, Gershon, Kehat, and Merari. I also do not follow why in lieu of Yitzhar, all his descendants should not describe themselves as descended from Korach. On the contrary, we have a principle that the names of wicked people should rot, and Korach most certainly was such a wicked person. Why should his name be commemorated for all time? (The last paragraph is not part of Nachmanides’ commentary on this verse.)

ואלה פקודי הלוי למשפחותם לגרשון, “and these are the enrollments of the Levites according to their clans. Of Gershon, etc.” The Torah first mentions the oldest of Levi’s sons followed by Livni, Levis’s grandson but omitting Shimi (Exodus 6,17) as he had no sons, or they died during his life time leaving no male offspring (Ibn Ezra).

ואלה פקודי הלוי, “and these were they that were numbered among the Levites;” the purpose of that count was to apportion the 48 towns in which the Levites were to make their homes, fairly. This is spelled out in greater detail in the portion of Massey