וַיָּבֹ֣א אֵלָ֗יו וְהִנּ֤וֹ נִצָּב֙ עַל־עֹ֣לָת֔וֹ וְשָׂרֵ֥י מוֹאָ֖ב אִתּ֑וֹ וַיֹּ֤אמֶר לוֹ֙ בָּלָ֔ק מַה־דִּבֶּ֖ר יְהוָֽה׃
Il revint près de lui, et le trouva debout près de son holocauste, les princes de Moab à ses côtés. Et Balak lui demanda: "Qu’a dit l’Éternel?"
Rabbeinu Bahya
The most important aspect of the commandment to count in our verse is that one must begin the count on the 16th of the month of Nissan. This is the first day of the reaping of the barley harvest. The first cut barley (of good grade) is offered as a communal offering as a gift to the Lord as described in verses 12-13. The number 50 (of counting) comes to an end with the harvesting of the first wheat from which again an offering is brought in the form of two loaves of bread which are baked as leavened loaves (as spelled out in verses 18-20). The principal part of the whole commandment is the ritual of the offering of these two loaves. The accompanying animal sacrifices were precisely that, they did not constitute the principal part of the combined offerings. If, for some reason, no new wheat was available on that date the accompanying animal sacrifices mentioned here would not be offered.
The word חדשה, ”new,” which the Torah writes describing this gift-offering of two loaves of bread from the new wheat harvest which is to be brought on the fiftieth day of the count, constitutes the festival of Shavuot. When giving further details of this counting etc., the Torah adds that it is to be an “eternal statute in all your dwellings” (verse 14). Seeing that the performance of the Omer sacrifice is dependent on the subsequent offering of the two loaves on the Shavuot festival, it would have been easy to imagine that in the absence of a Temple where the latter could be offered, the former, i.e. the “count-down” would also become redundant; therefore the Torah had to write that this applies throughout the generations in all our dwellings, as distinct from “in your dwellings” (verse 17) which is the Torah’s wording for the applicability of the offering of the two loaves. Not only the counting but also the accompanying prohibition of eating from the new barley prior to the beginning of the count-down is applicable nowadays also. The commandment not to perform work on the Shavuot festival is also in effect just as it was when the Temple was standing, although the only commandment which dis- tinguishes that festival cannot be performed in our time. The common denominator of all the festivals listed in the Torah is that they apply both in the land of Israel and in the Diaspora and both when the Temple is standing and when it is not. If the Torah saw fit to emphasise that the Day of Atonement remains in effect throughout the earth and regardless of whether the Temple is standing, this may be due to the fact that our atonement is linked to the sacrifices offered on that day. Seeing we are not able to offer these sacrifices while we are in exile, we might have assumed that the day has lost its sanctity. The Torah therefore makes clear that the sacrifices are not the condition for the effectiveness of the Day of Atonement. In our portion the words “an eternal statute in all your dwellings” are not mentioned in connection with Passover, seeing this has already been mentioned in Exodus 12,14,17, where the Torah speaks of the consumption of unleavened bread and bitter herbs. Seeing that these parts of the ritual can be performed without the Temple, the Torah there had to spell this out. This is the commentary of Nachmanides on the Torah omitting the words “an eternal statute in all your dwellings” in connection with Passover in this portion.
The word חדשה, ”new,” which the Torah writes describing this gift-offering of two loaves of bread from the new wheat harvest which is to be brought on the fiftieth day of the count, constitutes the festival of Shavuot. When giving further details of this counting etc., the Torah adds that it is to be an “eternal statute in all your dwellings” (verse 14). Seeing that the performance of the Omer sacrifice is dependent on the subsequent offering of the two loaves on the Shavuot festival, it would have been easy to imagine that in the absence of a Temple where the latter could be offered, the former, i.e. the “count-down” would also become redundant; therefore the Torah had to write that this applies throughout the generations in all our dwellings, as distinct from “in your dwellings” (verse 17) which is the Torah’s wording for the applicability of the offering of the two loaves. Not only the counting but also the accompanying prohibition of eating from the new barley prior to the beginning of the count-down is applicable nowadays also. The commandment not to perform work on the Shavuot festival is also in effect just as it was when the Temple was standing, although the only commandment which dis- tinguishes that festival cannot be performed in our time. The common denominator of all the festivals listed in the Torah is that they apply both in the land of Israel and in the Diaspora and both when the Temple is standing and when it is not. If the Torah saw fit to emphasise that the Day of Atonement remains in effect throughout the earth and regardless of whether the Temple is standing, this may be due to the fact that our atonement is linked to the sacrifices offered on that day. Seeing we are not able to offer these sacrifices while we are in exile, we might have assumed that the day has lost its sanctity. The Torah therefore makes clear that the sacrifices are not the condition for the effectiveness of the Day of Atonement. In our portion the words “an eternal statute in all your dwellings” are not mentioned in connection with Passover, seeing this has already been mentioned in Exodus 12,14,17, where the Torah speaks of the consumption of unleavened bread and bitter herbs. Seeing that these parts of the ritual can be performed without the Temple, the Torah there had to spell this out. This is the commentary of Nachmanides on the Torah omitting the words “an eternal statute in all your dwellings” in connection with Passover in this portion.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויקם השדה והמערה אשר בו , “and the field and the cave which is in it ‘rose.’” The Torah appears to repeat itself as we had been told already in verses 17-18 that the field and the cave passed from the possession of Efron to that of Avraham and the Torah specified its precise location. However, verses 17-18 speak about what happened to the field and the cave before Sarah was buried in there. At that time the property passed to the hands of Avraham only as a מקנה, a “purchase.” Now that Sarah had been buried in the cave of Machpelah the Torah speaks of it becoming an אחוזה, an inalienable piece of property. By burying Sarah in that cave Avraham had performed an act of permanent acquisition. The reason the Torah again stresses מאת בני חת, as if the sellers had been a whole group of people instead of merely Efron is of crucial importance. The Torah wants to forestall anyone ever raising any objection against this sale. This is why the Torah repeats the story of the acquisition of this piece of property again at the end of the Book of Genesis (49,32) prior to Yaakov being buried there.