וַיִּתֵּ֤ן מֹשֶׁה֙ אֶת־הַגִּלְעָ֔ד לְמָכִ֖יר בֶּן־מְנַשֶּׁ֑ה וַיֵּ֖שֶׁב בָּֽהּ׃
Et Moïse donna le Galaad à Makhir, fils de Manassé, qui s’y établit.
Radak
Gilead who dwelt beyond the Jordan and did not come to the war. And one should wonder: And did not Makhir say that he was coming to the war? And Makhir was the father of of Gilead. So the Gilead (region) went to the House of Makhir, as it stated (Numbers 32:40), "And he gave the Gilead to Makhir, the son of Menashe." But it can be explained that that which it said, Gilead dwelt beyond the Jordan, was about the House of Yair, the son of Menashe, as his portion was also in the land of Gilead, as it stated (Numbers 32:41), "And Yair, the son of Menashe, went and conquered their villages." And it can further be explained that what it stated, that Gilead dwelt beyond the Jordan, is by way of a question. And it is saying it to Reuven - why did you sit in your house and not come to the war: Gilead did like you and settled on the other side of the Jordan. Did he not tremble and come to help in Israel's war? So why did you not do so? And even though you are from the other side of the Jordan, is he not also from the other side of the Jordan? But it can also be explained with the same idea as this understanding, not by way of a question. That is to say, does not Gilead also dwell on the other side of the Jordan like you and his portion and inheritance is there? Nevertheless, he crossed over and came to the help of Israel. But you, why did you not do this?
Rabbeinu Bahya
ראו עתה כי אני אני הוא, “see now, that I, I am He.” The word אני, as well as the words אתה or הוא, describe a presence, an existence of the subject. They are both nouns [as opposed to pronouns. Ed.] just as in Sukkah 48: אני והו הושיעה נא. I have already explained that verse in Exodus 15,2 when discussing the words זה א-לי ואנוהו.
Moses is at the point where he sums up what he has been saying in this song. The function of these nouns (names) here is to express love and foretell that those who have been scattered will once again be gathered in and united [describing Himself in the first person as well as in the third person is G’d’s way of hinting at the fact that what had been scattered can be fused together again. Ed.]
Subsequently, G’d continues with: “I kill, but I also revive.” This is an allusion to the resurrection which will follow the redemption after a relatively brief interval. He then continues, quoting the Lord, with: “I am the One Who lives forever.” (verse 40). This is an allusion to the world of the future which will follow the era of the life of the resurrected bodies. This is in accordance with the view expressed in Sanhedrin 90 that the dead who will be resurrected at the time of the resurrection will not die again. (See lengthy treatment of the subject on Deut. 30,15). These people will be transferred to a celestial region with body and soul intact, where they will continue a life which knows no death. Concerning this life, our sages always say that “people destined for it have been ‘invited’ to the world of the future.” This is the ultimate purpose of the whole system of reward and punishment, and concerning this experience even the prophet Isaiah 64,3 already said that it is beyond the powers of any prophet to describe, as none has been privileged to have been shown a vision of it. It is something reserved exclusively for G’d to show to the people so honored.
To give us an even stronger hint of the concealed nature of what life in that region will be like, the word לעלם, “forever,” has been spelled without the letter ו. Our sages compare this to the first vision of G’d Moses experienced in Exodus 3,15 where G’d also used this word when He said זה שמי לעלם, “this is My Name forever.” There too our sages point to he absence of the letter ו, i.e. at the concealed elements of such a future. Whereas up until now, Moses had been speaking, at this juncture, G’d resumes speaking. Hearing the promise of a redemption from G’d directly is more reassuring than hearing it through the words of an intermediary. It convinces the listeners that the ingathering will be orchestrated by G’d Himself, not through one of His agents. If and when this occurs, all the nations will sing the praises of His people (verse 43).
Moses is at the point where he sums up what he has been saying in this song. The function of these nouns (names) here is to express love and foretell that those who have been scattered will once again be gathered in and united [describing Himself in the first person as well as in the third person is G’d’s way of hinting at the fact that what had been scattered can be fused together again. Ed.]
Subsequently, G’d continues with: “I kill, but I also revive.” This is an allusion to the resurrection which will follow the redemption after a relatively brief interval. He then continues, quoting the Lord, with: “I am the One Who lives forever.” (verse 40). This is an allusion to the world of the future which will follow the era of the life of the resurrected bodies. This is in accordance with the view expressed in Sanhedrin 90 that the dead who will be resurrected at the time of the resurrection will not die again. (See lengthy treatment of the subject on Deut. 30,15). These people will be transferred to a celestial region with body and soul intact, where they will continue a life which knows no death. Concerning this life, our sages always say that “people destined for it have been ‘invited’ to the world of the future.” This is the ultimate purpose of the whole system of reward and punishment, and concerning this experience even the prophet Isaiah 64,3 already said that it is beyond the powers of any prophet to describe, as none has been privileged to have been shown a vision of it. It is something reserved exclusively for G’d to show to the people so honored.
To give us an even stronger hint of the concealed nature of what life in that region will be like, the word לעלם, “forever,” has been spelled without the letter ו. Our sages compare this to the first vision of G’d Moses experienced in Exodus 3,15 where G’d also used this word when He said זה שמי לעלם, “this is My Name forever.” There too our sages point to he absence of the letter ו, i.e. at the concealed elements of such a future. Whereas up until now, Moses had been speaking, at this juncture, G’d resumes speaking. Hearing the promise of a redemption from G’d directly is more reassuring than hearing it through the words of an intermediary. It convinces the listeners that the ingathering will be orchestrated by G’d Himself, not through one of His agents. If and when this occurs, all the nations will sing the praises of His people (verse 43).
Ramban
AND JAIR THE SON OF MENASHEH. This man [who was in fact from the tribe of Judah, as will be explained] is [here] traced back by genealogy to his mother’s family [Menasheh], because he took his inheritance together with them [i.e., the children of Menasheh]. And in the Book of Chronicles158I Chronicles 2:21-22. it says explicitly that he was a son159Actually “a grandson,” for his father was Segub, the son of Hezron (ibid., Verse 22). of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, and his mother was the daughter of Machir the son of Menasheh, as it says, And afterward Hezron went in to the daughter of Machir the father of Gilead; whom he took to wife when he was threeescore years old, and she bore him Segub. And Segub begot Jair, who had three and twenty cities in the land of Gilead;158I Chronicles 2:21-22. and it is [further] written, And Geshur and Aram took the hamlets of Jair from them, Kenath, and the villages thereof, even threescore cities. All these were the sons of Machir the father of Gilead.160Ibid., Verse 23. From this [fact that Kenath is here described as being amongst ‘the hamlets of Jair’] it would appear that Nobach [mentioned here in Verse 42] who conquered Kenath and the villages thereof was a son of Jair, [although it is not mentioned here], and therefore these cities were also called ‘the hamlets of Jair.’161Ramban here means that the explanation of the phrase at the end of Verse 42, vayikra lah Nobach bi’shmo is: “Nobach called it [i.e., Kenath and the villages thereof] by his name” [i.e., by the name of Jair — his father — mentioned in the previous verse]; hence these towns also came to be called ‘the hamlets of Jair,’ as they are described in I Chronicles ibid.
And the meaning of the verse, And Moses gave Gilead unto Machir the son of Menasheh162Verse 40 here. is [not “unto Machir” himself, but unto] his family, for it was his sons who conquered it.163Verse 39: And the children of Machir the son of Menasheh went to Gilead and conquered it. Similarly, And unto Machir I gave Gilead164Deuteronomy 3:15. means “unto the Machirites,” for since Machir was an honored man and the chief of all his descendants, therefore his children were called by his name, and in the same way the verses refer to the heads of the tribes in connection with the inheritance [given to their children]: southward it was Ephraim’s, and northward it was Menasheh’s.165Joshua 17:10. So also: The land of Tappuah belonged to Menasheh etc.166Ibid., Verse 8. And when Scripture says in the Book of Joshua, And this was the lot for the tribe of Menasheh; for he was the firstborn of Joseph. As for Machir the firstborn of Menasheh, the father of Gilead, because he was a man of war, therefore he had Gilead and Bashan,167Ibid., Verse 1. it also refers to his sons, who were men of war, for it was they who went to Gilead and conquered it, and therefore Moses gave them a great part of these lands. Perhaps Machir was still alive [at the time of the division of the Land in the days of Joshua], for the decree [against the generation] of the wilderness [resulting from the incident of the spies, that they were to die in the desert] had not been decreed upon him, as he was not amongst those counted by Moses and Aaron, being he was more than sixty years old [at the time of the first census after the exodus],168Baba Bathra 121b. and he enjoyed longevity as did the earlier generations.169See Vol. I, pp. 98-99.
And the meaning of the verse, And Moses gave Gilead unto Machir the son of Menasheh162Verse 40 here. is [not “unto Machir” himself, but unto] his family, for it was his sons who conquered it.163Verse 39: And the children of Machir the son of Menasheh went to Gilead and conquered it. Similarly, And unto Machir I gave Gilead164Deuteronomy 3:15. means “unto the Machirites,” for since Machir was an honored man and the chief of all his descendants, therefore his children were called by his name, and in the same way the verses refer to the heads of the tribes in connection with the inheritance [given to their children]: southward it was Ephraim’s, and northward it was Menasheh’s.165Joshua 17:10. So also: The land of Tappuah belonged to Menasheh etc.166Ibid., Verse 8. And when Scripture says in the Book of Joshua, And this was the lot for the tribe of Menasheh; for he was the firstborn of Joseph. As for Machir the firstborn of Menasheh, the father of Gilead, because he was a man of war, therefore he had Gilead and Bashan,167Ibid., Verse 1. it also refers to his sons, who were men of war, for it was they who went to Gilead and conquered it, and therefore Moses gave them a great part of these lands. Perhaps Machir was still alive [at the time of the division of the Land in the days of Joshua], for the decree [against the generation] of the wilderness [resulting from the incident of the spies, that they were to die in the desert] had not been decreed upon him, as he was not amongst those counted by Moses and Aaron, being he was more than sixty years old [at the time of the first census after the exodus],168Baba Bathra 121b. and he enjoyed longevity as did the earlier generations.169See Vol. I, pp. 98-99.