פירוש על במדבר 1:58

וידבר… במדבר סיני … באחד לחדש וגו׳ AND [THE LORD] SPOKE [UNTO MOSES] IN THE DESERT OF SINAI … ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE [SECOND] MONTH … [TAKE YE THE SUM OF ALL THE CONGREGATION] etc. — Because they were dear to him, He counts them every now and then: when they went forth from Egypt He counted them (Exodus 12:37), when many of them fell in consequence of their having worshipped the golden calf He counted them to ascertain the number of those left (cf. Rashi Exodus 30:16); when he was about to make His Shechinah dwell amongst them (i. e. when He commanded them to make a Tabernacle), He again took their census; for on the first day of Nisan the Tabernacle was erected (Exodus 40:2) and shortly afterwards, on the first day of Iyar, He counted them.

AND THE ETERNAL SPOKE UNTO MOSES IN THE WILDERNESS OF SINAI, IN THE TENT OF MEETING. Because He had interrupted with the commandments about the Sabbatical year and the Jubilee, of which He said that they were spoken in Mount Sinai¹²Leviticus 25:1. [in contrast to all the other commandments in the Book of Leviticus, which, as mentioned at the beginning of that book, G-d told Moses from the Tent of Meeting], He stated here again that this communication was given from the Tent of Meeting, as were all the communications which He had mentioned since the beginning of the Book of Leviticus. And all of them from now onwards [were said to Moses] from the Tent of Meeting, for since the time that the Tabernacle was set up and G-d called him [Moses] from the Tent of Meeting,¹³Ibid., 1:1. He only communicated with him from there.
Scripture mentions here in the wilderness of Sinai in order to tell us that they did not travel away from there until they were counted [the first time, as described here], for the second census¹⁴Further, 26:1-51. was taken in the plains of Moab,¹⁵Ibid., Verse 3. but the [actual] communication was in the Tent of Meeting.

"In the Sinai Desert..." Our Rabbis expounded precious understandings through this text in Bamidbar Rabbah 1. It is only left to ask why HaShem did not use consistent measures in this verse. When it describes where they were, the general location (the Sinai Desert) is mentioned first and only afterwards does it specific 'in the Tent of Meeting;' but when it mentions the time the specific is mentioned first, 'on the first day of the second month,' and afterwards the general - 'in the second year.'
It appears, actually, that in a very intelligent fashion the verse did use consistent measures. This can be understood in the same way they explain "...see there is a place near Me..." (Shemot 33:21) in Bereshit Rabbah 68, saying 'that the place of the Holy One is secondary to Him.' From this perspective, every place is secondary in relation to the place where Gd encamps. Therefore, in our verse, the Tent of Meeting is actually the encompassing measure and the desert is secondary to it. In order that we read the verse from this perspective, the second half was joined to it 'on the first of the month...in the second year.' The phrase 'Tent of Meeting' is actually the encompassing measure, and therefore was placed second just as the words 'second year' were placed afterthe phrase 'on the first day of the month.' You can know how immeasurably awesome is the place where the Lord is from the fact that six hundred thousand men of Israel stood in the two cubits between the poles of the ark (Bereshit Rabbah 5). Though it appears little to the eye, it is great from the perspective of the One who dwells there, Blessed be He.

במדבר סיני באהל מועד באחד לחודש השני, all the communications, instructions, we heard about in the first year of the Israelites’ wanderings, before the Tabernacle had been erected, were characterised by the words בהר סיני, at Mount Sinai. Once the Tabernacle had been erected on the first day of the first month of the second year, the words בהר סיני as the source of the legislation do not appear again, but are replaced by the words במדבר סיני באהל מועד. The point is proved in Numbers 3,1 where the Torah, when referring to a date preceding the erection of the Tabernacle, speaking of Aaron and his sons, naming 4 sons, (3,2) adds the words “at Mount Sinai.” This must have taken place before the erection of the Tabernacle since two of Aaron’s sons, Nadav and Avihu, died at the hand of G’d immediately the Tabernacle became functional on the first day of Nissan of the second year. In verse 4 of that same chapter where reference is made to the death of Nadav and Avihu, the Torah, in explaining where this took place, adds the words “in the desert of Sinai,” although it could have written “at Mount Sinai,” as at that time the Israelites were still encamped at Mount Sinai.

וידבר ה' אל משה במדבר סיני באהל מועד, ”Hashem spoke to Moses in the desert of Sinai, in the Tent of Meeting.” Nachmanides writes that now that the laws pertaining to sacrificial offerings had been concluded, the Torah moves on to discuss laws governing the Tent of Meeting. G’d had already warned concerning the sin of entering the Tent of Meeting in a state of ritual uncleanness as well as against offering sacrifices which were in a state of ritual unfitness. Now the Torah wishes to restrict the presence of non priests in the Tabernacle and its immediate surroundings in the desert, similar to the restrictions imposed on the Temple and its immediate surroundings on Mount Moriah in the future. Non priests who violate these rules are subject to the death penalty by stoning. The Torah also forbids looking at sacred furnishings normally inside the Tabernacle, but exposed to potential view seeing that the Israelites were so often on the move, and the whole Tabernacle had to be dismantled each time, and the holy objects had to be carefully wrapped before being transported on the shoulders of the Kehatites. All of these precautions were designed to prevent the people from entering sacred grounds en masse and falling victim to the warnings issued. The Torah issues detailed instructions about the wrapping of these furnishings, by whom and where the parts of the Tabernacle were to be guarded. Seeing that the Torah in the Book of Leviticus had interrupted some of these subjects by writing about the sh’mittah and Jubilee years, of which we had been told that these instructions had been issued to Moses while he was on Mount Sinai, the Torah now mentions that the instructions reported here were communicated to him in the Tent of Meeting. There had been no direct communication from G’d to Moses since the time the Tabernacle had been assembled and inaugurated in the first month of the second year. The desert of Sinai is mentioned here again, as the people had not moved from there, since arriving at Mount Sinai on the first day of Sivan in the first year of the Exodus until the 2oth of Iyar of the second year. [Almost an entire lunar year. Ed.]

Because they are precious. Rashi wishes to explain why the Torah writes all of these details. He answers that “Because they are precious … [Hashem counts them all the time].” He means to say that even without these details one would have to explain why the Torah writes “Take a head count of the entire congregation” (v. 2), given that He had already counted them in Parshas Ki Siso. Therefore one must say that these details are mentioned “Because they are precious.”

Kap. 1. V. 1. Nachdem am Schlusse des zweiten Buches die Errichtung des Gesetzesheiligtums berichtet ward, war das ganze dritte Buch den Anforderungen gewidmet, die dieses Heiligtum im symbolischen Opferausdruck und in konkreter Heiligung des ganzen Lebens an Israel stellt. Es war damit das Ideal gezeichnet, das im Leben jedes einzelnen und der nationalen Gesamtheit seine Verwirklichung finden soll, und es hatte das Schlusskapitel in den נדרי הקדש dem eventuellen Verlangen gesetzlichen Raum gegeben, dass einer das Bedürfnis fühlen möchte, seiner besonderen Beziehung zu diesem Heiligtum durch symbolische Weiheschätzung der Person oder Weihegelobung von Gütern besonderen Ausdruck zu gewähren.

In the Sinai Desert: ... Since only those that go out in the army were counted - meaning those fitting to be counted in the force of the King for war with the Canaanites. And the earlier count was 605,550 and the [requirement for] the dwelling of the Divine Presence was fixed at that amount, and it was known that it was necessary for there to be this amount in the desert. And from then on, even if there were many that turned twenty, they did not enter the army to fill this amount with [these] others who turned twenty. And since they stood in one place [since that count], the Holy One, blessed be He, did not concern Himself to command that they fill the army [for those that had died in between], until the twentieth day of the second month approached. As they were then prepared to leave on the journey with God at their head, like a king at the head of his armies. Hence the command came to count again and to fill this amount... [just like] every king knows how many are going out in the army in his force and how many units, and the amount in each unit...

במדבר סיני, “in the desert of Sinai;” at what location did G-d speak to Moses? From the Tabernacle; before the Tabernacle had been erected, G-d had communicated from the top of Mount Sinai. From the day the Ten Commandments had been given, G-d’s presence had not moved away from Mount Sinai until the day after the Tabernacle had been erected on the first day of Nissan of the second year, as we have been told in the Talmud, tractate Beytzah, folio 5.

To know the number of those who remained. It is written [regarding the golden calf] “From the people approximately three thousand men fell” (Shemos 32:28), so by counting the fallen, [Hashem] knew the [number of the] remainder. Thus Rashi explains: When they fell because of the calf He counted the dead to know how many remained alive.

I believe that if we look at the text closely we will see that the Torah follows a thoroughly logical pattern. We have to remember the comment of Shemot Rabbah 45,6 on Exodus 33,21: "there is a place here beside Me," where the meaning of the word "beside" is interpreted as emphasising that the place is secondary to G'd. Were this not so, the Torah would have quoted G'd as saying: "here I am in this place." In other words, the whole concept of space, i.e. מקום, is something secondary as far as G'd is concerned. Once we appreciate this fact, we know that any time the Torah mentions G'd's appearance in a certain place the place mentioned is of minor significance. When the Torah mentions the desert this is really only a detail relative to G'd communicating with Moses out of the אהל מועד, which is the essential message in the verse. The Torah draws our attention to this by first mentioning the day and the month when this occurred before telling us in which year it took place. Further evidence of the miraculous change a place undergoes when G'd honours it with His presence is provided by Bereshit Rabbah 4,4 as well as 5,6 where the Midrash describes the fact that G'd who was able to call into existence the whole universe and fill it with His presence would most certainly be able to speak to the Israelite people from between the staves of the Holy Ark. 600.000 Israelites were able to "squeeze" into the space of 2 cubits between the staves by which the Holy Ark was carried. We normally perceive of small quantities fitting into containers designed to accomodate larger quantities. Such laws of nature may be reversed at G'd's will and this was a condition He made with nature at the time of creation.

Dieses vierte Buch tritt wieder in die nationale Wirklichkeit ein und zeigt uns nun das konkrete Israel, die wirkliche Nation in ihrem Verhalten zu dem im dritten Buche gezeichneten Ideale ihrer Bestimmung. Es beginnt damit, die Nation als עדה, als eben durch die Gemeinsamkeit dieser Bestimmung und für dieselbe geeinigte Gemeinde, in allen ihren selbständigen Gliedern einzeln gezählt werden zu lassen. Durch eine solche Zählung wird der Gesamtheitsrepräsentanz das Bewusstsein, dass die Gesamtheit nicht als Idee, sondern nur in der wirklichen Allheit ihrer Glieder bestehe, und es wird jedem einzelnen das Bewusstsein, dass er ein bedeutungsvoll mitzählendes Glied dieser Gesamtheit bilde, und die von allen zu lösende Aufgabe auf die Pflichttreue und bewusstvolle Hingebung jedes einzelnen an,die gemeinsame Bestimmung rechne.

בשנת השנית לצאתם, (on the first of the second month) in the second year of the Exodus. Regarding all other matters, the first of Tishrey was considered as the first day of the New Year.

And on the first of Iyar He counted them. Re’m writes: This count occurred once the Divine Presence had rested among them. Do not ask why [Hashem] did not count them in Nissan when the Divine Presence first rested. He answers that that on the first of Nissan the Divine Presence rested and so when He counted them on the first of Iyar, it was as if He counted them in Nissan. It appears to me that Rashi’s intent here so that you should not ask how he knows that Hashem counted them three times. Perhaps [you may think that] He only counted them twice! This would seem to be the case because the total mentioned here and the one mentioned in Parshas Ki Siso are one and the same. Accordingly, Rashi explains that on the first of Nissan the Mishkon was set up, and on the first of Iyar [Hashem] counted them. Because if this count was the one mentioned previously, why is it written there (Shemos 38:27) that they made sockets for the Mishkon from the silver that they brought as an atonement for the count of their souls, while here it is written that “on the first of Iyar He counted them.” Surely the Mishkon had already been erected on the first of Nissan. Rather, this must have been a different count. You might ask: Why did the Torah not count them immediately after the setting up of the Mishkon, since immediately afterwards the Divine Presence came to rest. The answer is, as we say concerning oaths, (Bava Basra 8a): If one prohibits oneself from benefiting from the residents of a town, he is permitted to benefit from people who have not lived there for thirty days because they are not considered established there. Similarly, Hashem did not count them until the Divine Presence had been established for thirty days.

Das dritte Buch hatte mit weihender Zählung der Herden in Herdegruppen durch den Eigener der Herden geendet. Das vierte Buch beginnt damit, die Nation als die "Gottesherde" für ihren "Hirten" nach ihren gotteigenen Familien- und Stammesgruppen zählen zu lassen, und es tritt auch hier der einzelne unter den Stab seines Hirten hin und läßt sich zählen als selbständiges Glied seiner Herde.

במדבר סיני. Die Wüste, als Örtlichkeit dieser Zählung, bürgt dafür, dass dieser "Volkszählung" keinerlei nationalökonomische, politische Zwecke, für welche in der "Wüste" alle und jede Veranlassung fehlte, zu Grunde lag; vielmehr sagt sofort der Beisatz סיני und אהל מועד, dass diese Zählung im Dienste des Gesetzes stehe, das auf dem Sinai gegeben worden und im אהל מועד seine Huldigungsstätte gefunden hatte. Nachdem auf dem Sinai das Gesetz empfangen worden und mit dem ersten Nissan das wiedergeschenkte Gesetzeszeugnis als Unterpfand der Wiederaufnahme der Nation aus der Egelverirrung in den Gottesbund seine ideale Stätte gefunden, sollten mit dem ersten Ijar alle Stämme, Familien und Männer der Nation sich für dieses Gesetz zählen und um dieses Gesetz als dessen Wahrer und Vollbringer sich scharen.

On the first of the second month. The Sages compared the Jewish people’s connection to Hashem to the marriage of a bride and groom in regard to two events: The first one is the Giving of the Torah, based on the verse (Shemos 31:18): “And He gave to Moshe when He finished (ככלתו).” The word ככלתו is written without the vav suggesting that just as the Torah was given to him as a bride (כלה), who is adorned with twenty-four adornments, so, too, a Torah scholar must be knowledgeable in the twenty-four books. The second event was the inauguration of the Mishkon, as it says (7:1): “It came to pass, on the day Moshe finished erecting the Mishkon.” Rashi explains that on the day the Mishkon was erected, the Israelites were like a bride entering the wedding canopy. This teaches us that the Giving of the Torah was like betrothal (erusin), and the day the Mishkon was erected was like marriage (nisuin). In between there was about ten months, which is comparable to the ten months given to a bride from the time of betrothal to marriage to be adorned in the twenty-four types of adornments mentioned in Yeshayahu (3:18-22).

באחד לחודש השני, “on the first of the second month.” The subject matter of G’d’s conversation with Moses at that time was the details of the encampment, the positioning of the flags, in which order the people should break camp and in which order they should make camp. (this needs elaboration as a) our portion does not contain any of the 613 commandments, b) the Jewish people did not start journeying until the twenty-second of that month). The reason why this portion follows the chapter dealing with the laws about exchanging the objects of vows made (Leviticus 27), is to remind us that G’d is One, is Unique, and there are no substitutes for Him. Just as there are no substitutes for G’d, so there is no substitute for the unique Jewish people and He will never exchange us for any other nation. We have this on the authority of Song of Songs 2,16 דודי לי ואני לו, “My beloved belongs to me and I to Him.” We also have a verse spelling out the other half of this relationship when we read in Samuel I 2,3 (Chanah speaking) אין קדוש כה' ואין בלתך, “there is none as holy as G’d and there is none beside You.” Furthermore, we find that the Jewish people are referred to as G’d’s “flock” in Ezekiel 34,31. Just as we learned in the last chapter of Leviticus that no member of the flock once it has been sanctified must be exchanged, so we may rest assured that G’d will never exchange His flock, i.e. the Jewish people.

למשפחתם — [TAKE YE THE SUM OF THE CONGREGATION …] AFTER THEIR FAMILIES — in order to ascertain the number of individuals in each tribe.

שאו את ראש, to organise them so that they could proceed to the land of Israel immediately, without delay, each one of them knowing to which unit (flag) he belonged. At that point, no war of conquest had even been envisaged, the assumption having been that G’d would remove the inhabitants of the land of Canaan so that no face-to-face encounter would even be necessary. Evidence from Isaiah 17,9 suggests that in fact, at least partially, this even occurred after the 40 years in the desert. The prophet there reports that once again, as at the time when the Emorite and the Hittite abandoned their cities in the face of the advancing armies of the Israelites, history will repeat itself. [based on the Septuagint. Our author assumes that Isaiah may have referred to the tribe of the Girgashi, quoting Jerusalem Talmud Sh’viit 6,1 Ed.]
At any rate, due to the sin of the spies the seven Canaanites nations survived another 40 years during which they added to their sins so that at the end of that time G’d did not merely exile them but exterminated them.

שאו את ראש כל עדת בני ישראל, "Count the whole community of Israel, etc." We need to know why the Israelites had to be numbered at this time. Rashi quotes a Midrash according to which G'd ordered the census as soon as He was ready to again allow His Presence to dwell amongst the Israelites (after the sin of the golden calf). This is insufficient to answer our question. If the census had only been an indication of G'd's reconciliation with His people He should have ordered it to take place before the month of Nissan when the Tabernacle was inaugurated, not a month later.

שאו את ראש כל עדת, from this point on the Israelites were headed for the land of Israel, and all males over the age of 20 were enlisted in the army for that purpose, because on the 20th of the second month the Torah speaks of the people leaving the region of Mount Sinai, the cloud having lifted off the Tabernacle and begun to move ahead of the people. (Compare Numbers 10,11). In that chapter, verse 29, Moses invited his father-in-law Yitro to accompany the people who were now “journeying” toward the promised land. G’d issued the command to count the people so that one could keep track of how many soldiers there were. [and know if any would have become casualties in any battle. My words. Ed.]

שאו את ראש, “take a census of the whole community.” Rashi on Numbers 31,26, explains the use of the expression שאו ראש, as “take a count of the heads,” [in the sense of according value to the head of each person so counted. Ed] Nachmanides [who apparently had a different version of Rashi in which the words שאו ראש are compared to the command to an executioner to behead his victim Ed.] who understood these words in a derogatory sense, raises the question why it should be interpreted derogatively. He points out that in Midrash Rabbah on this verse the interpretation is one that is complimentary to the Jewish people, quoting G’d as telling the people that He had given them the highest rank, ראש, among the nations in a number of areas. One example for the admissibility of such an interpretation is when Joseph interprets to the head of the cupbearers of Pharaoh that he will be reinstated to his former position, saying ישא פרעה את ראשך, “Pharaoh will raise your head, etc.” (Genesis 40,13) On the other hand, should the Israelites fail to qualify for G’d’s benevolence, the same words may signal their impending destruction, as in the case of the chief of the bakers who was also told of his impending fate by Joseph employing the same introductory words.

The number of each tribe. But not each and every family — because the Torah does not mention a count of families in the subsequent verses, only a count of the tribes (Gur Aryeh). You might ask: Then why did it write “according to their families”? The answer is that through the families they knew the count of the tribes, as the Torah writes (v. 18), “and they were registered by family ancestry” implying that they were not known by the name of their tribe. Therefore, one must say that it was by their families that Moshe and Aharon knew which tribe they were from.

V. 2. שאו את ראש. Siehe zu Schmot 30, 12 ff. Nach den dort in Versen 12 und 16 gegebenen Bestimmungen war eine jede solche Zählung durch eine Halbschekelspende von jedem zu Zählenden zu vollziehen, die zusammen dann als הקדש בדק הבית für die Bauzwecke, des Heiligtums, על עבדת אהל מועד, zur Verwendung kamen. Durch diese Spende, in welcher ganz eigentlich ein jeder jüdische Mann nur nach seiner Leistungstreue für das Gesetz "gezählt" wird, spricht sich ebenfalls eine jede Zählung als im Dienste des Heiligtums und für dessen Zwecke vollzogen aus und steht auch durch diese Zählungsform dieses das vierte Buch einleitende Kapitel im unmittelbaren Zusammenhange mit dem ערכים ונדרי הקדש Kapitel, mit welchem das dritte Buch geschlossen.

שאו את ראש בני ישראל , “take a census of the sum of Children of Israel;” according to Rav b’chor shor, this census was performed by means of each person included handing over a shekel, as opposed to the census in Exodus 30,13, where only the total number of Israelite males between the ages of 20 and 60 was of interest. Here we find that the number counted in each tribe is listed separately, and they were listed according to families, i.e. each individual was of consequence. In Numbers, in the fortieth year after the Exodus it was of interest to number of members of each tribe all of whom had replaced the generation that had been condemned to die in the desert. This latter count did not include a single person who had been counted by Moses and Aaron at this time.

שאו את ראש, “take a count of the sum;” seeing that within twenty days the Israelites would break camp and start marching toward the Holy Land, as reported in chapter 10 verse 29 of this Book. There it has been spelled out: נוסעים אנחנו אל המקום, “we are about to set out on the journey to the place, etc;” (Moses speaking to his fatherinlaw Yitro).

לבית אבתם BY THE HOUSE OF THEIR FATHERS — One whose father belongs to one tribe and his mother to another tribe shall take his stand with the tribe of his father (cf. Bava Batra 109b).

במספר שמות, at that time, the names of the individuals reflected their specific individuality, in recognition of their individual virtues. [They were not merely named after their fathers or other departed relatives. Ed.] References to names reflecting an individual’s virtues are found in Exodus 33,17 when G’d said to Moses that He would ואדעך בשם, “I have singled you out by name;” the generation which eventually entered the Holy Land were not described as being counted במספר שמות (Numbers 26,2). The Torah there refers only to the people counted being of military age, i.e. above 20.
[The author, true to his concept of the highpoint of Jewish history having been the revelation at Mount Sinai, followed by an ongoing spiritual descent, only briefly and partially reversed on a few occasions, sees this as a further example of the generation which did enter the Holy Land already being inferior to the ones experiencing the revelation, i.e. before the sin of the golden calf and the spies. Ed.] The count of the Israelites at this point assumed that the very people being counted would each enter the Holy Land unless some sin occurred which would interfere with this lofty vision.

Maintained in his father’s tribe. Meaning that if his father was from one tribe and his mother was from another tribe, he would be maintained in his father’s tribe. However, it does not refer to [a case where] his father was from one family and his mother was from another family, even if they were from the same tribe, as would be understood from the plain meaning of the verse. Because what difference would there be if the father was from the Chanochite family and the mother was from the Paluite family, and consequently they were included among the Chanochites? Since both were from the tribe of Reuven, there would be no difference whether he is established in the family of the father or the mother.

Before investigating the reason for this delay in the census we have to remember that the previous census which is reported in Parshat Pekudey (38,26) gave the number of the male Israelites over the age of twenty as 603,550. This was six months after the sin of the golden calf when the half shekel contributed by each male Israelite over the age of 20 represented his soul's ransom. This number exceeded the number of male Israelites above the age of 20 who left Egypt by (about) 3550 although in the interval during the episode of the golden calf many Israelites had died or had been executed by the Levites because they had participated in the worship of the golden calf. If it had taken only 6 months to replenish their number as reported in Parshat Pekudey, how do we account for the fact that between then and now the number had not increased by even one? Surely a number of Israelites had reached the age of twenty in the interval between the census which is mentioned in Parshat Pekudey and that reported here? It is unlikely that any of these people died during a period they were all busy with performing the commandment to bring their contributions for the Tabernacle.

עדה .כל עדת בני ישראל, wie דעה ,לדה ,שנה usw. von יעד, verwandt mit יחד: sich für ein bestimmtes Ziel vereinigen, bezeichnet die für eine gemeinsame, Bestimmung und durch die Gemeinsamkeit dieser Bestimmung Vereinigten: die Gemeinde, die somit nicht durch ein äußeres Machtgebot, sondern durch ein gemeinsames Inneres Gemeinde wird. בני ישראל ist das ganze jüdische Volk, innerhalb dessen die עדה die selbständigen Träger und Wahrer der Gesamtaufgabe: der Erfüllung des göttlichen Gesetzes, bilden. Was hier עדה heißt, ist oben Schmot 30, 12 durch לפקדיהם ausgedrückt, welches denselben Begriff wiedergibt. פקודי בני ישראל sind diejenigen, deren die jüdische Gesamtaufgabe "denkt", die damit "Beauftragten" "Betrauten", es ist dies jeder "Mann" in Israel. Es handelt sich somit nicht um eine Volkszählung, es wird nicht die Seelenzahl ermittelt, sondern es soll sich herausstellen, auf wie viel "Männer" in Israel das Gesetz zu zählen habe.

לגלגלתם BY THEIR POLLS — i. e. by means of shekels — “a beka a head (לגלגלת)”, as was prescribed on a previous occasion (Exodus 38:26).

Through the shekolim. Rashi wishes to answer why they were counted. Surely a plague comes when one counts them [directly]. Therefore he explains that it was done “through the shekolim.”

Our question is reinforced when we consider a comment in Pessikta Zutra according to which the words ויהיו כל הפקודים in Numbers 1,46 are proof that as long as the Israelites were occupied with the work pertaining to the Tabernacle not a single one of them died. This comment seems very far fetched if it is based only on the expression ויהיו, "they remained (alive)." When we look at the numbers presented here we are bound to conclude that more of the people died after the people commenced with the work of the Tabernacle than during the episode of the golden calf!

למשפחותם לבית אבתם. Es traten aber die einzelnen Männer nicht sofort und unvermittelt zur Volksgemeinde hin. Es hat vielmehr der große, alle umfassende Kreis der Gemeinde noch zwei Arten konzentrischer Kreise. Es bildet sich die Gemeinde aus Stämmen und jeder Stamm aus Familien. Es sind somit die Männer in ihrer Zusammenhörigkeit zur Familie und die Familien in ihrer Zusammenhörigkeit zum Stamme zu zählen, und die Stämme zusammen bilden die Gesamtzahl der עדת בני ישראל.

However, according to our understanding of Shekalim 1,3 the members of the tribe of Levi were included in the count of the people who had contributed a half shekel per person. We may conclude that in our verse the Levites were most certainly not included in the census seeing that the Torah commands that they be counted separately. The question is then resolved quite easily. In fact, the reason the Torah added the apparently redundant comment that the Levites were not included in the sum of the census given here (1,47), was precisely in order to make this point. It emerges that the natural increase of the Israelites between the time the work on the Tabernacle began and the second month of the second year of their wanderings was equivalent to the entire number of Levites who had been counted on the previous occasion. If the Torah had concluded the paragraph ending with verse 47 with the words: "as G'd had commanded them" as it did at the end of the paragraph dealing with the flags in 2,33, I would have concluded that the mention of the Levites not being included in the count was only to show that the Israelites complied with G'd's instructions not to lump them together with the other tribes. The fact that the Torah did not add these words proves that G'd wanted to alert us not to be surprised at the fact that the number of people counted was so small, relatively speaking, and at first glance did not appear to reflect a natural increase in the population of the Jewish people.

משפחה von שפח, verwandt mit ספח, anschließen, und שפע, das wie שפעת יהוא (Kön. II. 9, 17) שפעת גמלים (Jes.60, 6), שפעת סוסיו (Ezech. 26, 10) eine gesammelte und räumlich zusammenhaltende Menge bedeutet, bezeichnet mit vorgesetztem משפחה ,מ־, das Moment, das die einzelnen in natürlichen Gruppen verbindet und hält: die Familie; das Familien bildende Moment ist aber die gemeinsame Abstammung und die die Frau in das Haus des Mannes überführende Ehe. — בית אבותם: aus Stellen wie Kap. 2, 2. 32. 34; 7, 2; 17. 17. u. 18 und sonst, ist mit Entschiedenheit klar, dass unter בית אב die Stammeseinheit verstanden ist. Die einzelnen gruppieren sich zuerst in Familien, und die Familien gehen wieder durch die gemeinsame Abstammung ihrer Väter aus Einem Hause in Stämme zusammen, sowie sämtliche Stämme zuletzt wieder in die höhere Einheit der Abstammung aus einem Hause, in das "Haus Israel"; בית ישראל aufgehen. Nach ihrem Auseinandergehen aus dem einen gemeinschaftlichen Urstamme heißen die Stämme: מטות, eigentlich Äste (vergl. Ezech. 19, 11-14), nach ihrer Zurückführung der einzelnen abgestammten Familien in den gemeinsamen Ursprung: בתי אבות. Das eine בית ישראל bestand somit aus zwölf בתי אבות, jedes בית אב aus mehreren משפחות, welche die erste Einheit bildeten, die die einzelnen in Gruppen verbanden. Der aus der Volksgesamtheit zu einer besonderen Einheit ausgeschiedene Stamm Levi zeigt dieselbe Gruppierung im kleinen. Für ihn ist לוי, was für das Gesamthaus Israels ישראל ist. לוי's Söhne גרשון קהת ומררי bilden בתי אבות (Kap. 3, 24 u. 30, 35), deren Söhne לבני ושמעי ,עמדם ויצהר חברון ועוזיאל ,מחלי ומושי bilden die משפחת הלוי לבית אכתם (daselbst 18-20). Diese Tatsache, dass die Gesamtnation immer als ein Haus, als בית ישראל, als Söhne Eines Mannes, als בני ישראל, angeschaut und genannt wurde, und andererseits innerhalb dieser einen Einheit gesonderte und doch derselben sich unterordnende und von ihr umfasste, besondere Einheiten, משפחות ,בתי אבות erhalten und in Beachtung bleiben, bildet die Eigenart der jüdischen Nationalität. Durch die Auffassung der Nation als "Haus Israels" und aller Nationalen als "Söhne Israels" ist der Begriff der jüdischen "Nation" davor geschützt, als gegenstandslose Einheitsidee sich zu verflüchtigen oder in die Scheineinheit einer Elitenrepräsentanz als Fiktion sich zu retten, wird er vielmehr wesentlich immer und immer in der vereinten wirklichen Allheit seiner Glieder gedacht, die durch ein gemeinsames Innere eins sind, und deren jedes ein konkretes Teil dieser Einheit darstellt. Auch als die Nachkommen des einen jüdischen Mannes Israel zu sechsmalhunderttausend Männern angewachsen waren, waren sie alle noch Glieder "Eines Hauses" Söhne "Eines Mannes", Ein Gepräge in Geist und Herz, Eine Aufgabe, Ein Geschick als Erbschaft durch die Jahrtausende tragend. Und mitten in dieser Grundeinheit und unter deren Einfluss die größte Mannigfaltigkeit in Stammesund Familieneigentümlichkeit geflissentlich und sorgfältig gepflegt, auf dass — wie wir dies bereits wiederholt im Bereschit angedeutet — die Eine große Menschenbestimmung, wie sie das Gottesgesetz gezeichnet, unbeirrt durch jede Besonderheit, in der ganzen Mannigfaltigkeit der Charaktere, Anlagen, Berufsarten und Lebensstellungen, für die Gesamtmenschheit mustergültig zur Verwirklichung komme. Jeder Stamm in seiner Besonderheit und jede Familie in ihrer Eigenart haben die gemeinsame Aufgabe des Hauses Israels in ihrer Besonderheit und Eigenart zu verarbeiten und erziehend und bildend auf ihre Glieder und in ihren Gliedern zu vererben. Darum treten hier nicht die Hunderttausende ל des Hauses Israels als ungegliederte Menge zur Volksgemeinde hin, sondern למשפחתם לבית אבתם: nach Familien, und diese Familien nach ihrer Stammeszusammengehörigkeit. Es wird die Männerzahl eines jeden Stammes aufgenommen, und zwar die Familien eines jeden Stammes gesondert. Und jede Familie במספר שמות, es wird jeder namentlich bei der Zählung genannt, damit tritt jeder bewusstvoll in der Bedeutung seiner Persönlichkeit zum Ganzen hin, und zwar כל זכר לגלגלתם, es hat sich jeder persönlich selbst zur Zählung mit seinem halben Schekel einzufinden und denselben als der und der von der und der Familie und dem und dem Stamme abzugeben, oder es war die Stammes- und Familienzusammengehörigkeit bereits durch vorgängige Gruppierung ausgesprochen. Jedenfalls war jedem zur Zählung Kommenden sein persönliches, sein Familien- und sein Stammesverhältnis zum Bewusstsein gebracht, und ward er "als solcher" zum Ganzen gezählt. — Implizite ist durch למשפחתם לבית אבתם zugleich der Grundsatz gegeben, dass sich der Stammescharakter, ob שמעוני ,יהודי ,לוי ,כהן usw. und ebenso im Erbrecht die Familienverwandtschaft durch den Vater und nicht durch die Mutter vererbt, משפחת אב קרוי׳ משפחה משפחת אם אינה קרוי׳ משפחה (B. B. 109 b u. 110 b). גלגלת, eigentlich: Schädel, steht bei Zählungen für das konkrete, körperlich gegenwärtige Individuum. Bei einer Masse zusammenstehender Menschen bieten sich zunächst die Köpfe als zu zählende Einheit dar. Bei der jüdischen Zählung wurden aber nicht die Köpfe, sondern) בקע לגלגלת Schmot 38, 26) für jeden Kopf eine Schekelhälfte gezählt.

The meaning of the words in Pessikta Zutra is abundantly clear. The author wants to justify the totally disproportinate natural increase in the number of male Israelites above twenty during such a short period of time as יום כפור of the first year and the beginning of Iyar of the second year by reminding us that no Israelite died during the period they were busy assembling the materials for the Tabernacle and constructing it. G'd waited with this census until this date so as to ensure that the total number being counted would not be smaller than the number mentioned in Parshat Pekudey. Deuteronomy 4,11 which ascribes the fact that the Israelites are alive as of that date to their having cleaved to G'd provides the basis for the statement by the author of Pessikta Zutra that no one died during the period under discussion.

כל יצא צבא [FROM TWENTY YEARS OLD AND UPWARDS] ALL THAT GO FORTH TO THE HOST — This tells us that no one less than twenty years of age goes forth to the host (cf. Rashi on Exodus 30:14 and Note thereon).

FROM TWENTY YEARS OLD AND UPWARD, ‘KOL YOTZEI TZAVA’ (ALL THAT ARE ABLE TO GO FORTH TO THE HOST) IN ISRAEL. “This tells us that no one under the age of twenty goes forth to the host. ‘Se’u eth rosh’ [literally: ‘take the head’ and generally translated: take ye the sum] of all the congregation of Israel.¹⁶Verse 2. This is as one says to an executioner: ‘take that man’s head’.”¹⁷The meaning of this text which stems from Bamidbar Rabbah 1:9 will be explained further on by Ramban. The final quote is not found in our texts of Rashi, although Ramban quotes it from his commentary. The reason for its disappearance from all other texts of Rashi may well be its sharpness of expression which on first sight baffles the student. Ramban, however, recognizing that it is a genuine text which stems from Midrash Rabbah proceeds to explain it appropriately. This is Rashi’s language.
Perhaps the reason for this [law that a male under twenty years old was not liable to military service] is because he is not strong enough for war under the age of twenty, as the Rabbis have said:¹⁸Aboth 5:21. “Twenty is the age for pursuit.”¹⁹The Hebrew is lirdof, which is variously interpreted as: “for seeking a livelihood:” or “for seeking one’s life-pursuit.” Ramban here understands it in its literal sense — “to pursue [the enemy in battle].” But it may be that the meaning of the phrase kol yotzei tzava is “all who go forth to be assembled in the congregation,” because the young men do not take part in such an assembly of the people, and every gathering of the people is called tzava, as in ‘[litzvo] tzava’ (to be counted among the host) for the work of the Tent of Meeting;²⁰Further, 8:24. he shall return from the ‘tz’va’ of the work;²¹Ibid., Verse 25. with the mirrors of the ‘tzov’oth’ that ‘tzav’u’ (women that congregated together);²²Exodus 38:8. and similarly ‘tz’va’ (the host of) heaven;²³Deuteronomy 4:19. and all ‘tz’va’am’ (their host) I commanded.²⁴Isaiah 45:12. Therefore Scripture explains when speaking of men of war: ‘mi’tz’va’ (from the host of) the war;²⁵Further, 31:14. and the number of them reckoned ‘bi’tz’va’ (by the host) for the war.²⁶I Chronicles 7: 40. Scripture states here all that go forth to the host, similar to what it says, all that went out of the gate of the city.²⁷Genesis 34: 24. Ramban’s meaning is that the intention of the verses is: “all that are able to go,” even if they have not actually gone. It states, ye shall number them by their ‘hosts’ [in the plural], because they consisted of many hosts, since each and every tribe was a great host.
But as for Rashi’s expression when he wrote — “This is as one says to an executioner: ‘take that man’s head’” — it is not clear to me why the Sages should interpret the verse in this derogatory manner. If it is because [the people counted here] died in the desert [therefore He said, take the head …] whereas in the case of the tribe of Levi He said Number the children of Levi,²⁸Further, 3: 15. since they were not included in the decree [that they die in the desert] — [this cannot be so], for in the second census [taken] of those who were to come into the Land it also uses the same [expression], take the head of all the congregation of the children of Israel!²⁹Ibid., 26:2. But in the Agadah (homiletic exposition) of Vayikra Rabbah³⁰I did not find it there. But a similar exposition is found in Bamidbar Rabbah 1:7. See my Hebrew commentary p. 196, Note 26 for the full text. the Rabbis explain it as an expression of praise [for the people]: “The term se’u always means ‘greatness’, as it is written, Pharaoh ‘yisa’ (shall lift up) thy head, and restore thee unto thy office.³¹Genesis 40:13. Said the Holy One, blessed be He, to Israel: ‘I have given you an exaltation of the head, and I have likened you to Myself. Just as I am exalted above all inhabitants of the world, as it is said, Thine is the kingdom, O Eternal, and Thou art exalted as head above all,³²I Chronicles 29:11. so to you also I have given an elevation of the head, as it is said, Lift up the head of all the congregation of the children of Israel, thus fulfilling that which is said, And He hath lifted up a horn for His people,³³Psalms 148:14. and similarly it is said, and the Eternal thy G-d will set thee on high above all the nations of the earth. ' ”³⁴Deuteronomy 28:1.
I have found further in Bamidbar Sinai Rabbah that the Sages have stated:³⁵Bamidbar Rabbah 1:9. “Said Rabbi Pinchas in the name of Rabbi Idi: What is [the meaning of] that which is written at the beginning of this book, ‘se’u eth rosh’ (take the head)? It does not say: ‘lift up the head,’ ‘elevate the head,’ but it says se’u eth rosh, like a man who says to an executioner: ‘take this man’s head’. Here He gave a hint to Moses, se’u eth rosh, meaning that if the people are worthy they will become exalted, just as it is written, Pharaoh ‘yisa’ (shall lift up) thy head, and restore thee unto thy office;³¹Genesis 40:13. but if they are not worthy, they will all die, just as it is written, Pharaoh ‘yisa’ (shall lift up) thy head from off thee, and shall hang thee on a tree. ”³⁶Genesis 40:19. Thus the expression [se’u eth rosh which, as Rashi explained, is used in connection with execution] is to be interpreted according to the intention [of the speaker] — in a good way for those who are good.³⁷See Psalms 125:4: Do good, O Eternal, unto the good. Thus Pharaoh said unto the chief executioner: “Take the chief butler and lift up his head and restore him to his office.” But as for such as turn aside unto their crooked ways, the Eternal will lead them away with the workers of iniquity (ibid., Verse 5). Thus in the case of the chief baker, the same expression signified his downfall. In short, the expression of the Midrash which Rashi quoted can be interpreted either for bad or for good. And since it is an expression of elevation etc. And since it is [also] an expression of elevation, and it is used [here] in the first census, He used the same expression in the second census.²⁹Ibid., 26:2.

תפקדו אתם, "you shall number them." The reason the Torah repeats this instruction, something which is contained in the command of "count the people" in verse two, is explained by Yalkut Shimoni on this verse as connected with the jealousy the Gentile nations would display when they became aware that G'd deemed only the Jews worthy of being counted individually. G'd would counter their complaint by inviting them to produce books tracing each family's genealogy. If they were able to do so they too would qualify for a census based on family affiliation as was being conducted amongst the Israelites. This is why G'd employed the expression שאו when He first commanded the Israelites to be counted; He told them that being counted was a form of elevation, promotion, for them as implied in the word שאו, "elevate, uplift!" Subsequently G'd explained in verse three that the males above the age of twenty were so elevated. It follows that the words תפקדו אתם are necessary to describe the actual commandment to count the people.

כל יוצא צבא בישראל, “every one who goes to join the army among the Israelites.” Rashi comments that we learn from this verse that no one under the age of twenty is to join the army, something that corresponds to what we learned in Avot, בן עשרים לרדוף, “at the age of twenty one has matured enough to give chase.” (Avot, 5,25) It is possible to interpret the words כל יוצא צבא, as referring to all the men old enough to participate in general assemblies of the people. We know that every such general assembly is described as צבא, as for instance in לצבא צבא לעבודה באהל מועד, “to take part in the assembly around the Tent of Meeting in order to perform service” (Numbers 4,23). Another example of such a meaning of the word צבא would be the well-known term צבא השמים, “heavenly assemblies.” (Deut 4,19 and 15 other examples throughout the Bible) This is the reason why men participating in wars are not just described as חיילים, or אנשים לבושים בדים, “soldiers, or men wearing uniforms, but as יוצאי צבא, similar to יוצאי שער עירו, (Genesis 24,34) “all those assembled in the public square of his town.”

מבן עשרים שנה ולמעלה, “from twenty years old and up.” The reason that the under twenty-year olds were not included in the census was because they were not yet strong enough physically to be recruited for army duty. This is reflected in the statement by our sages in Avot, 5 (near end) that at twenty one is strong enough to engage in pursuit (of an enemy).

Below the age of twenty. You might ask: From where does Rashi know this? Perhaps even those younger than twenty were eligible for the army. And accordingly, the Torah would be understood as saying that you shall count those from twenty years old and above who are eligible for the army. However, if they are twenty years old but are not eligible, such as the old or sick, or are eligible but are not twenty years old — do not count them. The answer is that if this were so the Torah should have stated “from twenty years and above who are eligible for the army,” why then does the Torah state “all those eligible for the army.” Thus, it is certain that the verse must be explained as Rashi says. Similarly, when Rashi writes in Parshas Ki Siso (Shemos 30:14) that below the age of twenty no one is eligible for the army, this is derived from here (Re’m). See also Parshas Ki Siso.

V. 3. צבא .מבן עשרים וגו׳ כל יצא צבא בישראל ist durchaus nicht nur, nicht einmal zunächst das Kriegsheer oder der Kriegsdienst. Kap. 4, 3: כל בא לצבא לעשות מלאכה באהל מועד daselbst 23: לצבא צבא לעבד וגו׳, und sonst dort vom Levitendienst am Tempelzelt gebraucht, ebenso 8, 24 u. 25 sind Stellen, die beweisen, dass unter צבא überhaupt jede unter höherem Befehl zu öffentlichem Dienst vereinigte Menge, oder der von solcher zu leistende Dienst, verstanden wird. Und auch hier ist nicht notwendig an Kriegsdienst zu denken. יצא צבא בישראל dürfte vielmehr jeden bezeichnen, der verpflichtet ist, so oft erforderlich, aus dem bloßen Privatleben in den öffentlichen Gesamtdienst hinauszutreten, jeden somit, auf welchen die Gemeinde für Erledigung ihrer Gesamtanliegen zu rechnen hat; es ist dies כל זכר, jedes männliche Individuum, מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה. Von den Leviten, deren ganzes Leben im öffentlichen Dienste der Gesamtheit stand, heißt es daher Kap. 4 nicht: יוצא צבא, sondern: תפקדו אתם — .בא לצבא, siehe zu Schmot 30, 12. — לצבאתם, siehe daselbst 12, 51.

מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה, “from twenty years old and up;” from that age and up the males were considered as mature enough to serve in the army. Based on this verse, our sages at the end of chapter 5 in Ethics of our fathers, made the well known statement: בן עשרים לרדוף, “when having attained the age of twenty, one is fit to join the pursuit.”

תפקדו אותם, “you are to count them.” Nachmanides writes that the use of the term פקידה instead of ספירה for counting is meant to show that each individual so counted was elevated to a higher status than he had possessed prior to being counted. He was brought to the special attention of G’d’s benevolent supervision of his individual fate. We find an example of the use of the word פקד in this sense when it did not involve counting at all, in Genesis 21,1 וה' פקד את שרה, “Hashem had remembered Sarah specifically, etc.” In our context the term implies that all the men so counted would henceforth enjoy G’d’s special individual protection. This became evident when we do not read about the armies of the Jewish people suffering any casualties with the single exception of the attack by the Canaanites after the death of Aaron, and even then the sole casualty, i.e. a captive, appears to have been a civilian. (Numbers 21,1) Instead of being counted head by head, each soldier tendered a silver coin of the value of half a shekel, as atonement for any sin he might have been guilty of at the time he was counted. When Yoav reluctantly counted part of the Jewish people at the insistence of King David, (Samuel II chapter 24) we find that the prophet describes the result of the census as מספר מפקד, this appears to mean that the total was arrived at after counting the number of silver coins tendered. We believe that the reason why G’d was so angry at the counting was not at the manner in which the census was taken, but was on account of the entire census having been unnecessary as no military threat existed at the time against the Kingdom of David. He wanted to glory in the vast number of subjects he ruled over. It is also possible that the word מספר there is justified as David commanded Yoav also to count men under 20 years of age, i.e. from 13 years and up. Doing this may have been the reason why he was punished, as he had never been permitted to count the people below the age of 20. One of the reasons G’d does not want the entire Jewish population to be counted may be because then the promise that they are as numerous as the stars, i.e. beyond man’s ability to count them, would not be true. When, in the above mentioned chapter when Yoav counted the people, there appears a line saying “the entire Jewish nation numbered one million three hundred thousand (including the men from the tribe of Yehudah) that could handle a sword;” this does not mean that all of these people were fighting in the front line, it merely means that all these people were physically fit and healthy, and in case of need could be mobilized for war. The sick, the elderly, and the handicapped were not included in that count, as no one can boast about being the ruler of such people.

כל יוצא צבא, “all those able to bear arms.”

TIPHKEDU OTHAM.’ The term p’kidah is an expression meaning remembrance of and attention to a certain matter, as in the phrase, And the Eternal ‘pakad’ (remembered) Sarah as He had said,³⁸Genesis 21:1. See Ramban there (Vol. I, p. 268). and this in my opinion is its interpretation in all places, without any exception. The expression pikadon [which means a bailment or deposit of goods] is also [from this root], because his guarding and supervision is on it [i.e., because the bailee must guard it]. And therefore when He commanded that Israel be counted He stated tiphkedu otham, in order to hint that he [Moses] was not to count them [by persons] but that they were each to give half a shekel as a ransom for their soul,³⁹Exodus 30:12-13. and he should supervise them [the half-shekels] and thereby know the number of the people. In the case of David Scripture states: the sum of ‘miphkad’ (the numbering) of the people⁴⁰II Samuel 24:9. because he knew their numbers through the counting of [the half-shekel] ransom [that each one gave]. For it appears to me unlikely that David should not be careful about that which Scripture states, that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them.⁴¹Exodus 30:12. And even if David did perhaps make a mistake,⁴²In Exodus, at the beginning of Seder Ki Thisa, Ramban in fact does explain that David made a mistake and did indeed count them without half-shekels [a theory to which he reverts here briefly at the end of the verse]. For the reason for his mistake, see ibid., (Vol. II, p. 511). why did Joab [the captain of the host in charge of the census] not take [the census through] shekels, for the king’s word was abominable to Joab,⁴³I Chronicles 21:6. and Joab [in fact] said to the king, Why doth my lord require this thing? Why will he be a cause of guilt unto Israel?⁴⁴Ibid., Verse 3. So why did he [Joab] not count them through the shekels, so that he should not sin?
But in my opinion the [Divine] wrath was [aroused] against him [David] because he counted them unnecessarily, since he was not going forth to war, nor did he do anything with them [the men he counted, so that he would need to know their number] at that time, and [the census] was only to make him rejoice that he ruled over a large people. Therefore Joab said [to David], Now the Eternal thy G-d add unto the people, how many soever they may be, a hundredfold, and may the eyes of my lord the king see it; but why doth my lord the king delight in this thing?⁴⁵II Samuel 24:3. And I have seen in Bamidbar Sinai Rabbah:⁴⁶Bamidbar Rabbah 2:17. “Rabbi Eliezer in the name of Rabbi Yosei ben Zimra said: Whenever Israel was counted for a purpose, their numbers did not diminish; but when they were counted for no purpose, they became diminished. When were they counted for a purpose? In the days of Moses, and⁴⁷In our Midrash Rabbah the word “and” is not found in the Hebrew text, so that it refers to only one, not two times: “When were they counted for a purpose? In the days of Moses for the [setting up of the] standards” as described here in Chapter 2. See, however, Rashi on Verse 1 above, who is of the opinion that the people were counted at the exodus from Egypt (Exodus 12:37), and again after the worship of the golden calf to ascertain the number of those left. In that case Ramban’s version in the text of Bamidbar Rabbah is fully understandable, for there were numberings in the days of Moses preceding the one at the time of setting up the standards. for the [setting up of the] standards and at the division of the Land.⁴⁸Further, Chapter 26; ibid., Verse 53. [When were they counted] for no purpose? In the days of David.”
It is also possible to say by way of explanation that David commanded that every “man” in Israel be counted, meaning thereby to include everyone above the age of thirteen years old, who is regarded as “a man” [and not from the age of twenty years upwards], since it is nowhere mentioned in [describing] his counting: “from twenty years old and upwards”, but instead David said, Go, number Israel from Beer-sheba even to Dan … that I may know the sum of them.⁴⁹I Chronicles 21:2. And this was [the reason for] his punishment, for Scripture only allowed counting to be done from twenty years old and upwards⁵⁰Exodus 30:14. by means of the shekels. It was because this is not clearly expressed in Scripture [that even by means of the half-shekels the people are only to be counted from the age of twenty years and over] that David made this mistake, for he thought that when Scripture says that there be no plague among them⁴¹Exodus 30:12. it is because of the shekels, which are a ransom [of the soul] for them [and therefore he thought that as long as he counted them by means of the shekels and not by direct census there would be no plague even if he counted them from above the age of thirteen years old, instead of twenty], but Joab applied his heart [to understand the matter] and was concerned because of it.
And Scripture [itself] stirs me to this thought by saying: But David took not the number of them from twenty years old and under, because the Eternal had said He would increase Israel like to the stars of heaven. Joab the son of Zeruiah began to number, but finished not; and there came wrath for this upon Israel.⁵¹I Chronicles 27:23-24. It is apparent that Ramban interprets these verses as follows: But David took not the number of them from twenty years old ‘and under’ because Joab began … but finished not for the reason that he [Joab] applied his heart to understand the matter and was concerned about the breach of the law in taking the census from twenty years old and under. From this it appears that Joab’s census included those under twenty years old, and this was [the reason for] the “wrath”, because G-d does not want all Israel to be limited by numbers since He will multiply them like the stars of heaven, as He said [to Abraham], Look now toward heaven, and count the stars, if thou be able to count them.⁵²Genesis 15:5. And when the verse says concerning that census [of Joab], And all they of Israel were a thousand thousand and a hundred thousand men that drew sword,⁵³I Chronicles 21:5. it does not mean to say that they were all eligible for military service [since, as explained above, they included also thirteen-year olds who do not go to war], but its correct interpretation is that they were all sufficiently healthy and strong to be able to go to battle, thus stating that he did not count the sick, the weak, and the old, because the king’s word was abominable to him.⁴³I Chronicles 21:6. This interpretation is very appropriate.
But according to the opinion of the Midrash Agadah [a homiletic exposition⁵⁴Berachoth 62 b: “And when he [David] counted them he did not take from them the ransom of soul etc.” This would seem to indicate that David’s mistake was that he counted them by persons, [from twenty years old and upwards], and not, as Ramban suggested above, because he included in the count [which was done with shekels] people under twenty but over thirteen years old. from which it would appear] that there was an actual census [i.e., that the people were counted without the use of shekels, we must say that] they all erred. This is why David said [to Joab], Go, ‘number’ Israel,⁵⁵II Samuel 24:1. and it is further written, after that he had ‘numbered’ the people⁵⁶Ibid., Verse 10. [expressions which indicate that there was an actual counting of persons without using half-shekels], for in the Torah the term “numbering” of people is not mentioned at all, and the meaning of the expression according to the number of names¹⁶Verse 2. is that each one should tell his name when he is counted through bringing his ransom [of half a shekel].

כל יצא צבא בישראל, “all who are able to go to war on behalf of Israel;” the repetition of this word excluded the mixed multitude who had joined the people only at the Exodus.

לצבאותם, “according to their legions.” There were numerous legions, the army of each tribe representing one legion.

The Torah adds the word בישראל, “among the Israelites,” to exclude members of the recent converts to Judaism, the mixed multitude (Ibn Ezra).

תפקדו אותם, “you are to count them.” The reason that the Torah did not use the word תספרו for counting here is that this was not a head count. The term פקידה implies (divine) supervision. The Israelites were commanded to find out how many of them there were, but they did not arrive at the number through counting heads but through counting the half-shekel each one of these men had to contribute.

ואתכם יהיו AND WITH YOU THERE SHALL BE [A MAN OF EVERY TRIBE] — when you number them there shall be with you the princes of each tribe.

That is that He commanded us to believe in His awe, may He be exalted, and to be afraid of Him. And we should not be like the heretics who walk brazen-heartedly and heedlessly, but should be scared with the fear of His punishment at all times. And that is His saying, "And you shall fear the Lord, your God." And in the Gemara (Sanhedrin 56a), they said by way of give and take about His saying, "And if he pronounces (nokev) the name, Lord, he shall be put to death" (Leviticus 24:16) - "Say that [nokev] is to mention, as it is stated (Numbers 1:17), 'who were mentioned (nikvu) by name,' and its prohibition is from, 'And you shall fear the Lord, your God.'" That is to say, maybe His saying, "And if he pronounces," is only that he mention [God's] name [even] without cursing. And if you will say, "What transgression is there in that" - we will say that it is because he neglected fear. For included in the fear of God is not to mention His name gratuitously. The answer to this question, and its rejection, was, "First, you need the name with the name" - as they said, "Yossi should smite Yossi" - "and also, that this is [only] a prohibition of a positive commandment. And any prohibition of a positive commandment is not called a prohibition" - for it is a command and a positive commandment, and we cannot prohibit with a positive commandment. Behold it has been made clear to you that His saying, "And you shall fear the Lord, your God," is a positive commandment. (See Parashat Ekev; Mishneh Torah, Foundations of the Torah.)

איש ראש לבית אבותיו, this is emphasised to show that no one challenged the authority and authenticity of the people representing themselves as the “heads of his family.” When the count occurred, אתכם in the presence of the family heads each one testifying to the age of the individuals concerned, no one would dare to challenge the accuracy of the data provided by the family head.

When you count them, there shall be with you. One might ask: From where does Rashi know this? Perhaps they should be with you for other matters, but not when you count them. Furthermore, from where does he know that the Torah refers to the leaders of the tribes, perhaps it refers to other people? The answer is: Since it is later written “these are the ones called from the congregation, the leaders of their fathers’ tribes” (v. 16), one can infer that they were the leaders of the tribes. Furthermore, it is written “Moshe and Aharon took these men … and they gathered together the entire congregation” (vs. 17-18) from there one may infer that they did the counting along with Moshe.

V. 4. ואתכם וגו׳. Es scheint, dass bei dem ganzen Zählungsakt die Häupter aller Stämme und nicht nur jeder bei Zählung seines Stammes assistieren sollten (siehe zu Kap.7, 2).

Head of his fathers’ house. The tribal leaders were already agreed upon by each tribe as worthy to be the head. Here, Hashem agreed with their selection and appointed them with His word. And this is what the verse means, “Each man shall be the head of his fathers’ house” — the man who was already the head will be appointed to take charge of the counting by Hashem’s command. This teaches us that even the congregation of Israel did not chose leaders based on their wealth or their ability to fulfill the duties of the position alone. Rather, they chose them based on the criteria that they were outstanding in Torah and yiras Hashem as well.

לראובן, Ibn Ezra writes that the reason why the members of the tribe of Reuven were counted first was because chronologically speaking, he was the first born of Yaakov’s children. Once all the children of Leah had been counted, the Torah switches to Joseph who was Rachel’s first born. Ephrayim was counted first, in accordance with the rank accorded him when Yaakov blessed him on his deathbed, switching hands in order to place his right hand on him. This was followed by counting the tribe of Dan, who was the senior son of the maidservants of Leah and Rachel. Then followed Asher, who was the leading tribe in the camp of Dan. He in turn was by followed by Naftali, who represented the senior son of Leah’s servant maid.

V. 5. Das ל־ in לשמעון ,לראובן usw. dürfte: für Reuben, für Simeon usw. bedeuten; der Stamm war durch sein Haupt vertreten.

לראובן אליצור בן שדיאור, “of Reuven, Elitzur son of Sh’deyur. He was mentioned first, as the original Reuven had been Yaakov’s firstborn son.”

שלומיאל בו צורישדי, “Shlumiel son of Tzurishaday.” This was his name. He was also known as זמרי בן סלוא, (compare Numbers 25,14) or שאול בן הכנענית, “Saul, son theCanaanite woman.” (According to the Talmud, tractate Sanhedrin, folio 82 where this statement is elaborated on.)

לבני יוסף לאפרים, “For the children of Joseph,- for Ephrayim;” after the Torah had first enumerated all the sons of Leah it now turns to the sons of Rachel, mentioning Ephrayim ahead of Menashe the older seeing Yaakov had blessed Ephrayim first on is deathbed (compare Genesis 48,20). Afterwards the Torah mentioned the descendants of Binyamin. Although born last, the Torah honoured the memory of Rachel by mentioning him ahead of the sons of the maidservants. When listing the four sons of the maidservants, the Torah begins with Dan who was the senior of those four sons, whereas the Torah lists Asher next seeing that he was encamped next to Dan (compare 2,27). Next the Torah lists Gad who was the older of the sons of Zilpah. Next to him was Naftali.

לבני יוסף, “of the Children of Joseph;” they are mentioned after the children of Leah as a sign of respect to their mother Rachel. The Torah mentions the younger son Ephrayim first, as this is what their father Yaakov did when he blessed them before his death. (Ibn Ezra) Ephrayim and Menashe, though grandsons of Yaakov, are mentioned before his son Binyamin, as combined they represented Rachel’s firstborn son Joseph.

לדן, “of Dan;” he is mentioned first among the four sons of the concubines, as he was the firstborn among them. Asher is mentioned next to him, as his tribe was the leading one in the group of tribes encamped around his flag. (Numbers 2,27) This is followed by Gad, who was the firstborn son of Leah’s servant maid.

אלה קרואי העדה THESE WERE THOSE CALLED OF THE CONGREGATION — those who were called upon for every matter of importance that happened in the congregation.

קרואי העדה, “the above named were so described as their importance was such that no decisions were taken unless these men were present.”

To everything of importance. Rashi wishes to explain: Was their importance [only] that they called to the entire the congregation? Thus Rashi explains they were “invited to everything” meaning they were invited to deliberate and decide matters affecting the congregation.

V. 16. קרואי העדה, geschrieben: קָרִיא .קריאי העדה , Substantivform wie נדיב, שכיר, bezeichnet das Gerufenwerden als stehenden Charakter des Mannes. קָרוּא , Verbalform des zweiten Partizips, sagt, dass er ad hoc zu der in Frage stehenden Angelegenheit gerufen worden. Die hier bezeichneten Männer waren diejenigen, die die Volksgemeine zur Leitung und Ausführung ihrer Gesamtanliegen zu berufen pflegte, sie waren קריאי העדה sie besaßen somit das Vertrauen und die Anerkennung der für die nationale קרואי Gesamtaufgabe verpflichteten und berechtigten Gesamtgemeinde, und sie waren העדה, sie waren für dieses zu erledigende Zählungsgeschäft besonders berufen. Sie waren auch נשיאי מטות אבותם, innerhalb ihrer Stämme vermöge ihrer sozialen Stellung als die "gehobenen Träger" an die Spitze gestellt. Sie waren somit ראשי אלפי ישראל, diejenigen, in welchen das ganze Volk vermöge ihres Charakters und ihrer Stellung seine Häupter erkannte.

אלה קריאי, “these are the elect, etc.” the word קריאי, is read as if it had been spelled ;קרואי

ראשי אלפי ישראל, “the heads of the thousands of Israel.” Each of the people named here was the head of the thousands belonging to his tribe.

האנשים האלה [AND MOSES AND AARON] TOOK THESE MEN — these twelve princes.

Those twelve leaders. Rashi wished to explain: The Torah should have stated “Moshe and Aharon took them,” and since it previously listed the leaders of the congregation we would automatically know that they were the leaders already mentioned. However, it is clear that because it is written “these men” I might now say that it refers to others, not the leaders of the tribes. Therefore, Rashi explains that it does indeed refer to the twelve leaders. Furthermore, if one were to say that they were others, Rashi explains that [this cannot be because] they were “designated to him here by their names,” and it was the leaders who were designated here by name. The phrase “to him” was added because without it, it would not be known to whom they were designated. One might ask: From where does Rashi know to explain so, perhaps they were indeed others? The answer is: It is written האנשים האלה (those [specific] men) with a hei (implying the definite article) rather than אנשים אלה. If one asks: Then why does it not simply say they “took them,” as the Minchas Yehudah asks? The answer appears to be: The Torah initially said “the head of the fathers’ house” (v.4) while now it says “the leaders of their fathers’ tribes” (v.16). Thus, one might think that the heads of the fathers’ houses were not the leaders of the tribes, only of their families. And when here the Torah writes “the ones called from the congregation, leaders of their fathers’ tribes” it refers to the leaders themselves — but those listed above were indeed others. Consequently the Torah here would have said “the ones called from the congregation” only to inform us that they are the ones called “to any matter of importance.” For this reason the Torah states “these [specific] men” to teach that they were the very same leaders listed above. Maharshal writes that Rashi is answering the question: Why did the Torah write “who were designated by name,” when it would be sufficient to write “these men”? Therefore he explains that they were designated to him here by name, as a matter of importance, that they were worthy of their greatness and leadership. This is in contrast to the spies who were referred to by name in disgrace, due to what would befall them in the end, as is taught in Midrash Rabbah.

אשר נקבו WHO WERE MENTIONED to him (Moses) here בשמות BY NAME.

ויתילדו על משפחותם THEY DECLARED THEIR PEDIGREES AFTER THEIR FAMILIES — They brought the records of their pedigree and witnesses to confirm the prevalent presumption regarding their parentage, so that each might establish his pedigree with regard to the particular tribe (cf. Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 684).

AND THEY ASSEMBLED ALL THE CONGREGATION TOGETHER ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE SECOND MONTH. Scripture mentions [the date although it is already stated in Verse 1 above, to indicate] the zeal of our teacher Moses in [fulfilling] the command of G-d for on the very day of the communication [that he was to take a census of the people] he took the princes of the tribes and assembled all the congregation and began to count them. The count, however, was not completed in one day, and therefore He states again, so did he number them in the wilderness of Sinai,⁵⁷Verse 19. in order to inform [us] that the counting was all done in that place, but was not all [finished] on that day.

ויתילדו על משפחותם, seeing the purpose of the count was to know who would have to join the ranks of those going to war, it was important to have genealogically pure men, not any who were the product of forbidden unions. Knowledge that they were the children of unblemished parentage would protect them when exposed to the dangers present in any war and battle. We find a similar thought expressed in Kidushin 76 that “the credentials of people recorded in the king’s register need not be investigated any further.” On folio 70 of the Talmud there we also find the statement that the Shechinah does not rest protectively except over genetically “pure” families.

ואת כל העדה…באחד לחדש, and the entire community, on the first of the second month. The Torah announced that the Israelites assembled on the very day the instructions were issued. This is proof that everyone was equipped with a "book" showing who he was and who his father was. The people did not have to go and look for corroboration of their family status by looking for witnesses, etc. This is what the Torah meant by the word ויתילדו being written next to the words "on the first of the second month."

ואת כל העדה הקהילו באחד לחודש השנית, “They called together the whole assembly on the first of the second month, etc.” Nachmanides points out with what alacrity Moses went about his task, in taking the princes on the very day he had received the instructions from Hashem; he assembled the whole community and began the task of taking the census. Clearly, the taking of the census was a task that could not be completed on that day, but took considerably longer.

ואת כל העדה הקהילו באחד לחדש השני, “They gathered together the entire assembly on the first of the second month;” On the very day G’d spoke to Moses, Moses and Aaron assembled the entire people and began to organise and count them; however, the count was not completed in a single day. This is why the Torah had to write: “he numbered them in the desert of Sinai“ (verse 19). He completed the count in the same spot though not on the same date. This is the view of Nachmanides.

Genealogical documents and witnesses. Rashi was obliged to explain so because the word ויתילדו is from the reflexive התפעל construct. Thus, according to its simple meaning as a term of giving birth, it would imply that they caused themselves to give birth. Therefore Rashi explains that they themselves brought their genealogical documents.

V. 18. ויתילדו על משפחתם וגו׳. Sie gaben sich nach ihrer auf Geburt beruhenden Familien- und Stammesangehörigkeit mit Nennung ihres Namens an. זאת כל העדה וגו׳ ויתילדו וגו׳ מבן עשרים וגו׳. Die עדה bestand eben aus allen Männern über zwanzig Jahren (siehe zu V. 2).

ויתילדו, “they declared their pedigrees;” (according to Rashi). Another interpretation of this word: they asked their parents for details of when they had been born in order to determine if they had been twenty years old at the time of the Exodus. (Ibn Ezra)

VA’YITHYALDU’ (AND THEY DECLARED THEIR PEDIGREES) AFTER THEIR FAMILIES. “They brought the documents of their genealogy and witnesses confirming the birth of each of them, so as to prove their descent from their [respective] tribes.” This is Rashi’s language. But it does not appear [correct to say] that they should have to bring genealogical documents and witnesses with regard to belonging to a [particular] tribe. Rather, va’yithyaldu means that they were counted by their generations, by their families, by their fathers’ houses,⁵⁸Verses 20, 22, etc. the sense thereof being to state that the whole congregation assembled, as Moses had commanded them by the order of the Holy One, blessed be He, at the door of the Tent of Meeting, except for the mixed multitude⁵⁹Exodus 12:38. who were not of the children of Israel,⁶⁰II Samuel 21:2. for they were recognizable amongst them from the day that they had gone out of Egypt. Thus each man in the congregation brought his [half-] shekel and said to Moses and the princes: “I so-and-so was born to such-and-such a person of such-and-such a family, which is of the tribe of Reuben,” or some other tribe, and Moses put the shekels of each particular tribe in a special place [to be counted later], so that he would know the sum of [each] individual [tribe] and of all the tribes together. And the proof for this⁶¹I.e., a proof that they did not have to bring their genealogical documents, as Rashi explained, but that va’yithyaldu means merely that they declared to which family and tribe they belonged, is that etc. is that at the second census [taken when they were about to enter the Land of Israel] where the families [of each tribe] are mentioned,⁶²I.e., mentioned by name, in contrast to this census [taken at the arrangement of the people into four main groups headed by the four standards] where the names of the families of each tribe are not listed. it does not say va’yithyaldu, nor does it mention according to the number of names, by their polls, [as it says here in Verse 19]. This is because ever since the tribes had pitched by their standards, they were separated from each other and it was clearly known to which tribe each family belonged; thus they only had to know how many families there were in each tribe, and each family counted its men by their polls, but not according to the number of names.⁶³But if va’yithyaldu means, as Rashi explained that they were to produce their genealogical documents, the question arises why was that not required at the second census? According to Ramban, however, who explains that va’yithyaldu means that they each declared to which family and which tribe they belonged, we can understand why va’yithyaldu is not mentioned at the second census. For once they pitched by their standards, each person’s place would indicate to which tribe he belonged, and the families themselves counted their own numbers, whilst Moses counted the numbers of all the families. Hence it was no longer necessary to declare to which family and which tribe one belonged. Therefore the princes of the tribes did not have to be present [with Moses] at that [second] census [as was stipulated at the first census — in Verse 4 — since the princes of the tribes were only needed in order to identify which families belonged to which tribe, and this was already known at the time of the second census]. And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explains that va’yithyaldu means that they were asked when they were born, in order to ascertain whether they were [over] twenty years of age.

ויתילדו על משפחותם לבית אבותם, “they established their genealogy according to their families, according to their father’s household.” Rashi claims that each of the people concerned submitted a booklet containing the respective family tree. They also supplied witnesses that testified to their true ages, i.e. when each one of them had been born, (as explained by Onkelos) Nachmanides writes that it appears quite unreasonable to suggest that each person had to document his claim to which family he belonged and when he had been born. He claims that the meaning of the words ויתילדו וגו', simply mean that they identified themselves as belonging to certain families in certain tribes, the family being defined in terms of the respective fathers. The entire procedure had been commanded to Moses, more or less to the last detail, i.e. these people all came to the entrance of the Tabernacle to present themselves for the count; the census takers did not make house calls. The only ones who did not present themselves at that time were the members of the ערב רב, the mixed multitude who accompanied the Israelites when they left Egypt, all people who were not natural born Jews. Each person made a verbal declaration in front of Moses and the respective leader of his tribe that he was so-and-so and was of age. Moses deposited the coins according to the respective tribe of the person who tendered it, so that he knew at the end how many men of military age each tribe had contributed to the grand total. Proof that this was the procedure may be seen when at the second count no mention is made in the Torah of the line ויתילדו על משפחותם, neither is the expression במספר שמות לגולגלותם, “according to their headcount” repeated there. (Compare Numbers chapter 26). The reason why there was no need for this at the time of the second census was simply that the division into tribal units had already been made on the occasion of the first census and those records were readily available. When these people were counted as members of individual families, it appears that there was no objection to the “headcount.” They did not then have to present a coin or shard. There also was no need at that time for the respective princes of each tribe to be present during the count. Ibn Ezra says that the word ויתילדו means that each one had to inform Moses and his tribal prince of the date and year of his birth. Some commentators say that the reason why we find here the words במספר שמות, “according to the number of names,” added, was to teach us that none of them had changed the name by which they had been known in Egypt.

ויתילדו על משפחותם, “they proved their genealogy according to their families.” They had to ask their parents when exactly they had been born in order to know if they had reached the age of twenty. Alternatively, the Torah means that each one recorded their genealogy in writing proving which tribe he belonged to. This is the view of Ibn Ezra.

Verified the status of their birth. The word חזקת (status) is a term of honor. Rashi explains so in Parshas Behar (Vayikro 25:41) where “he returns to his fathers’ possession” alludes to his fathers’ status, a term of honor.

ויתילדו, "they declared their pedigrees, etc." Rashi comments: "they each brought a book showing their pedigrees and witnesses to their birth in order to prove which tribe they belonged to." Nachmanides does not agree that there was a need for documentation of their status but claims that when each Israelite brought his half shekel he announced who he was and to which tribe he belonged. Moses placed the shekalim of each tribe in a separate box so that he knew how many members each tribe numbered. Perhaps the reason that at this point it had become necessary to produce documentation plus witnesses was to foil the attempt of any bastard who was aware of who his father was and who would produce a book listing his father's prior pedigree claiming to be a member of that tribe based on information provided by his mother.

ויפקדם במדבר סיני, the reason why the Torah mentions the location of this count is because during the second such count in Numbers 26,3 the Torah mentions that it took place in the wilderness around Moav, prior to the assault on the land of Israel before crossing the Jordan river. At that time after the death of Aaron, Moses issued these instructions to Eleazar, Aaron’s son and successor.

V. 19. ויפקדם במדבר סיני durch diese Wiederholung ist vor Beginn der Zählung nochmals Begriff und Bedeutung derselben in Erinnerung gebracht (siehe zu V. 1).

כאשר צוה ה' את משה, “as the Lord had commanded Moses;” these words belong to verse 18, where Moses is reported as having assembled all the people. [I suppose our author found a sentence commencing with “as, כאשר,” as somewhat unusual. Ed.]

ויפקדם במדבר סיני, “he counted them in the desert of Sinai.” The tribes were counted there, one after another in the order in which their respective flags had been arrangedHe commenced the count with the eldest son of Yaakov, Reuven.

בכור ישראל. He had not lost his status in the books kept in heaven as he had repented his sin as testified in Genesis 35,22-23 commencing with the otherwise unnecessary words ויהיו בני יעקב שנים עשר, “that Yaakov’s sons remained twelve.” This was in contrast to Reuven’s birthright privileges here on earth having been revoked in favour of Joseph.

כל יוצא צבא, all who were able to go to war. The Torah repeats this comment every time the number of males in a tribe is given. This is because the Torah wants to tell us that amongst all the males over the age of twenty counted there was not even one who was physically unfit to go to war.

V. 20. ויהיו בני ראובן וגו׳. Die Reihenfolge der Stämme, in welcher sie zur Zählung kamen, entspricht ganz ihrer Gruppierung in מחנות, wie sie das zweite Kapitel enthält (über diese siehe daselbst).

ויהיו בני ראובן בכור ישראל, “the number of males counted of the tribe of Reuven, Yaakov’s firstborn son was etc.” this is pointed out, as when it came to the marching in order of the tribes, Yehudah was the first. Reuven was mentioned here first is that he was Yaakov’s firstborn son.

ויהיו בני ראובן, “and the members of the tribe of Reuven, (the males over 20 years) amounted to, etc;” the tribes (excluding the tribe of Levi) were counted there one after another, in the order of their respective flags. Therefore Moses began with Reuven, followed by Yehudah the leader of all the tribes, followed Ephrayim and Dan.

במספר שמות לגגלתם, “according to the number of their names, head by head.” Why does the word לגלגלתם occur only in connection with the members of the tribe of Reuven and Shimon, and none of the other tribes? The reason is that when Yaakov spoke to each of his sons prior to dying, he chided both Reuven and Shimon, instead of giving them an outright blessing. They were therefore in need of atonement, forgiveness. The function of counting by means of the silver coins was in order to achieve atonement, [although these descendants had no special need to atone for the sins of their forefathers. Ed.] At any rate, Moses wished to assure them that they had no longer any need for atonement.

ראובן בכור ישראל, “Reuven, Israel’s firstborn;” this point had to be made again as the first tribe in the marching order was Yehudah. (B’chor shor) The reason why this point was made by the Torah at this juncture, was to explain that the only reason why he was counted first was that biologically, he was the first son of his father.

V. 22. תולדתם וגו׳. Alle diese, diese Zählung so bedeutsam charakterisierenden und bei der Zählung und durch dieselbe jedem zu Zählenden bewusst zu machenden Momente werden bei jedem Stamme ausdrücklich wiederholt. Es ist damit die völlige Gleichheit und gleiche Wertschätzung der Stämme und deren Angehörigen in ihrer Bedeutung für die Gesamtheit gewahrt, und ist dies gleich bei dem zweiten, Simeon, noch besonders durch das Wort פקדיו hervorgehoben: auch seine, Simeons Zählungen, geschehen ganz buchstäblich in der gesetzlich vorgeschriebenen Weise, und so selbstverständlich alle folgenden, bei welchen übrigens ebenfalls alle die wesentlichen Momente noch besonders wiederholt werden.

לבני גד, “of the members of the tribe of Gad;” the Torah ranks him as third in the list, as he was the firstborn of the maidservants of his mother. (His mother was the maidservant of Leah, who also had produced Yaakov’s firstborn).

OF THE CHILDREN OF JOSEPH, NAMELY, OF THE CHILDREN OF EPHRAIM. Scripture mentioned Ephraim before Menasheh, and stated Joseph’s relationship to him [which it does not do in the case of Menasheh],⁶⁴Verse 34. and similarly later [Scripture gave Ephraim precedence] at the [division of the tribes according to their] standards, by making him master of the standard, [whilst Menasheh is mentioned merely as one of the two tribes gathered around him], because in accordance with Jacob’s blessing⁶⁵Genesis 48:20. he was to be [given the honor accorded to] the firstborn, and his brother [Menasheh] was to be second to him. Moreover, the sons of Ephraim were more numerous than those of Menasheh⁶⁶Ephraim totalled 40,500 (Verse 33), whilst Menasheh numbered 32,200 (Verse 35). [and hence Ephraim was mentioned first]. But at the second census in the plains of Moab⁶⁷Further, 26:3. Scripture mentioned Menasheh first, because at that time his sons were more numerous [than those of Ephraim],⁶⁸The children of Menasheh were then 52,700 (ibid., Verse 34), whilst Ephraim had only 32,500 (ibid., Verse 37). and [also because] they took their inheritance first.⁶⁹Half of the tribe of Menasheh joined the tribes of Gad and Reuben in settling during the lifetime of Moses on the east side of the Jordan (ibid., 32:33). Similarly when mentioning the princes of the Land [who were to take possession of the Land for their respective tribes] Scripture mentioned Menasheh first, and also Joseph’s relationship to him.⁷⁰Ibid., 34:23: Of the children of Joseph; of the tribe of the children of Menasheh. In the following verse Scripture mentions the prince of the children of Ephraim. In [the story of] the spies, however, Scripture mentioned Ephraim first, and Joseph’s relationship it stated only in referring to the tribe of Menasheh.⁷¹Ibid., 13:8, 11. It appears to me by way of homiletic exposition that it is on account of the evil report that Joseph brought [to his father] concerning his brothers⁷²Genesis 37: 2. that Scripture, [in the story of the spies], associates with him the spy who [was among those who] spread the evil report [about the Land, namely the spy from the tribe of Menasheh, whereas the spy from the tribe of Ephraim was Joshua the son of Nun, who was not among those who spread the evil report]. Or it may be that Scripture [in relating the story of the spies] gave honor to both [tribes who were descended from Joseph], and Ephraim had sufficient honor in its prince [Joshua the son of Nun who ministered to Moses, therefore Scripture mentioned the honor of descent from Joseph only in the case of Menasheh].

לבני יוסף לבני אפרים, Nachmanides writes that Ephrayim, the younger son of Joseph was given precedence over his older brother Menashe and Joseph’s genealogy is linked to him both here and when it came to the “flags,” the groupings of three tribes each around their flags, seeing that he was the one in his group that was the flag bearer, and also because he was numerically a much larger tribe (41.500) than his brother tribe Menashe. (32.500) However, on the occasion of the census in the 40th year in the wilderness of Moav, you will note that the tribe of Menashe (52.700) had in the meantime become more numerous than Ephrayim. (32.500) They also received their ancestral land before Ephrayim, seeing that half the tribe remained on the East bank of the Jordan with the tribes Reuven and Gad. He also took precedence when the Torah reports the names of the tribal heads in charge at the time of the entry of he people into their ancestral land. (Numbers 34, 23-24) On the other hand, although Ephrayim’s representative of the 12 tribes during the mission of the spies is listed first, Joseph himself, in that connection, is linked directly to Menashe. (Numbers 13,8) In trying to understand the various occasions when the respective brothers Ephrayim and Menashe appear in different sequences, perhaps the fact that just as Joseph, who, in his youth was guilty of slandering his brothers, Menashe, i.e. the spy representing the Tribe of Joseph-Menashe, Gad, did join the majority in slandering the land of Israel, as opposed to the representative of his younger brother Ephrayim, i.e. Joshua, who did not. Moses may have listed Ephrayim first, without mentioning that he was part of the tribe of Joseph. (Numbers 13,8) This may serve as a reminder that sometimes the son commits the same type of error as had his father. (Compare daat z’keynim baaley tossaphot Numbers 13,11) Ibn Ezra explains that the army was made up of 12 tribes excluding the tribe of Levi, so that the tribe of Joseph was represented by his two sons Ephrayim and Menashe. There were four army groups of three tribes each placed in the four directions of the surface of the earth. Leah had 6 sons, Seeing that the tribe of Levi, descended from one of Leah’s sons was not included in the men serving in the army, the first camp, (flag) comprised of the tribes Reuven and Shimon, both from the sons of Leah, co-opted a third, Gad, the senior son of Leah’s maid Zilpah. The second camp (flag) was comprised of the tribes of Yehudah, who was joined by tribes descended from his younger brothers Issachar and Zevulun. The third camp contained only tribes descended from Rachel, i.e. Ephrayim, Menashe and Binyamin. The fourth camp was comprised of Dan, Asher and Naftali. Naftali was the younger one of the three tribes comprising that camp. He was listed first in order that the flag of that camp be guarded by the senior son of Rachel’s maidservant Bilhah. The reason why Yehudah’s group was placed at the head and Dan’s at the rear, was that these two tribes excelled in valour and in the art of warfare.

V. 42. בני נפתלי, hier heißt es nicht wie bei allen Vorangehenden: לבני נפתלי und bestätigt dies, dass das לבני גד ,לבני שמעון usw. nicht: von, sondern zu den Söhnen Simeon usw. und zwar in dem Sinne heiße: aus der versammelten Volksgemeinde (V. 18) treten zum Stamme Simeons usw. als zu ihm gehörig, hin usw. Nachdem so elf Stämme gezählt waren, blieb der Rest, die noch ungezählten, von selbst als die den zwölften Stamm bildenden übrig und brauchten sich nicht erst durch Hintritt als solche zu bekennen. Daher nicht לבני נפתלי, sondern: בני נפתלי. Ein solches fehlendes ל־ ist ein sprechendes Merkmal des Berichtes eines unmittelbar selbst erlebten Vorganges.

אלה הפקודים, every single one of the aforementioned had been personally counted by Moses and Aaron.

AND ALL THOSE THAT WERE NUMBERED OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL BY THEIR FATHERS’ HOUSES … ALL THAT WERE ABLE TO GO FORTH TO WAR IN ISRAEL. It was necessary for Scripture to state the collective number of the people although it had already stated the individual numbers [of each of the tribes], because Moses and Aaron were commanded to ascertain the total number of the people counted, as well as the number of [people in] each tribe, for such is the way of kings when they take a census of their people.
However I have not understood the reason for this commandment, namely why the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded [that they should ascertain the number of the people]. For whilst there was indeed a need for them [the people] to establish their relationship to the [individual] tribes because of the [division of the tribes of Israel according to four] standards, I cannot understand why G-d commanded that they find out the number [of men in each tribe]. Perhaps it was in order to proclaim His mercy over them, for it was with [only] threescore and ten persons that their fathers went down into Egypt,⁷³See Deuteronomy 10:22. and now they were as the sand of the sea, so many men [above] the age of twenty [not to mention the women and children]. After every epidemic and plague He counted them again in order that they should know that it is He that increaseth the nations;⁷⁴Job 12:23. He woundeth, and His hands make whole.⁷⁵Ibid., 5:18. It is for this reason that our Rabbis have said:⁷⁶Mentioned by Rashi, above. Verse 1; see also Bamidbar Rabbah 4:2. “Because of His abundant love for them He counts them every now and then.” Furthermore, he who comes before the father of the prophets, and his brother [Aaron] the holy one of the Eternal⁷⁷Psalms 106:16. and becomes known to them by name, receives thereby a merit and life, because he has come in the council of the people and in the register of the house of Israel,⁷⁸Ezekiel 13:9. The prophet Ezekiel states it in the negative as a punishment for sinners: they shall not be in the council of My people, neither shall they be written in the register of the house of Israel. Ramban, as indicated, applies it in the positive, namely, that those possessing merit will be included in the council of G-d’s people and be written in the register of the house of Israel. It is possible that Ramban also hints to the concluding part of that verse: neither shall they enter into the Land of Israel, thus intimating that those who are deserving of reward will enter into the Land. and he receives a part in the merits of the community by being included in their numbers. Similarly, each of the people receive a special merit through being counted by number before Moses and Aaron, for they will set their eyes upon them for good,⁷⁹Jeremiah 24:6. and intercede on their behalf for mercy, [just as it is said], The Eternal, the G-d of your fathers, make you a thousand times so many more as ye are,⁸⁰Deuteronomy 1:11. and He will not reduce your numbers, and the shekels shall be a redemption for your souls. And in Bamidbar Sinai Rabbah I have seen the following text:⁸¹I have not found the source thereof. “According to the number of names … by their polls.⁸²Verse 18 above. The Holy One, blessed be He, told Moses to count them each with respect and [to treat] each one of them with [the honor due to] greatness. [Thus He said]: You shall not say to the head of the family: ‘How many people are there in your family? How many sons do you have?’ but they are each to pass before you with awe and in respect, and you shall count them. — It is with reference to this that it is written, according to the number of names, from twenty years old and upward, by their polls. ”⁸²Verse 18 above.
It is also possible for us to say that [the reason for ascertaining their numbers] was similar to the practice of governments before fighting a war, since they were now ready to enter into the Land and to fight against the kings of the Amorite that were on the other side of the Jordan [eastward] and all the others, as Moses said [unto Hobab], We are journeying unto the place of which the Eternal said: This I will give unto you.⁸³Further, 10:29. Therefore Moses and the princes [of the tribes] had to know the number of those armed for war, and also the numbers of each and every tribe, [in order to decide] what to command each of them in the plains of Moab [when drawing up] the battle-lines, for the Torah does not rely on the miracle of one chasing a thousand.⁸⁴See Deuteronomy 32:30. This is the purport of the expression, all that go forth to the host in Israel,⁸⁵Above, Verse 3. namely that the census was for the purpose of [determining the number of] men that will go forth to war; and also so that he should distribute the Land to them according to their numbers, and should know how many parts will be allotted to them of the Land that they capture, since if not for the affair of the spies, they would have entered the Land immediately.

ויהיו כל פקודי....כל יוצאי בישראל צבא, none were over sixty years of age, as people of that age and beyond were not allowed to go out to war. We know this from Baba Batra 121 concerning Yair ben Menashe and others included in the count mentioned there. The decree that the generation of the spies would have to die in the desert applied only to the ones between 20-60. Those younger or older at the time of the spies’ trip were exempt from this decree.

ויהיו כל הפקודים, “the grand total of all the men thus mustered, etc.” Nachmanides, in searching for a reason why the Torah had to tell us the total again, seeing it had already told us the number of men that were counted in each tribe, claims that this is the manner in which kings conduct themselves when they take a census of their subjects. However, he admits that he does not know why G’d commanded Moses to do so. He speculates that possibly the Torah wanted the people to reflect on the fact that a family who had numbered only 70 souls and children included, had grown within the relatively short period of 211 years to comprise at least two and a half million souls when allowing for the people under 20 and all the women. It is also possible that the Torah did proceed here in the manner human kings proceed before going into battle, counting totals in addition to the number and composition of each army group. After all, when the Jewish people left Mount Sinai they were poised to begin the conquest of the land of their forefathers, and if they had not insisted on spying out the land (something that consumed 40 days) they would most likely have found themselves at war within a few days of their departure, Moses himself described the distance to the boundary of that land as only 11 days’ march (Deuteronomy 1,2) Moses, when inviting his father-in-law to join the people had told him that they were about to depart for their ultimate destination. (Numbers 10,29) It was necessary for both Moses and the princes to know the numbers of each tribe and army group in order to be able to account for each soldier after the campaign, and to determine if there had been any casualties and how many there had been. Although, in the event there were none, Judaism, i.e. the Torah, does not base its calculations on supernatural miracles occurring.

BUT THE LEVITES AFTER THE TRIBE OF THEIR FATHERS WERE NOT NUMBERED AMONG THEM. Moses had understood at the beginning of his own accord that he should not count the Levites [with the other tribes], because he had been told, And with you there shall be a man of every tribe etc.,⁸⁶Ibid., Verse 4. meaning that each of the tribes that were to be counted should have their prince present, and since G-d had not appointed a prince for the tribe of Levi, hence he [Moses] did not count them. Therefore he was in doubt about the Levites and did not know what to do with them. And when he had finished all those who were counted of the people, and the Levites remained alone [uncounted], the Holy One, blessed be He, explained to him that he was not to count them among the children of Israel but that he should take their sum separately, for he was to appoint them over the Tabernacle of the Testimony.⁸⁷Further, Verse 50.
He stated ‘p’kod’ [‘number’ — in the singular] the children of Levi⁸⁸Ibid., 3:15. meaning that he [Moses] was to count them by himself without [the assistance of] the princes, and it was he [Moses] who called upon Aaron to be with him,⁸⁹Ibid., Verse 39: All that were numbered of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron numbered etc. Thus it is clear that Aaron also participated in the counting of the Levites. Since his name was not mentioned when Moses was commanded to take that census, Ramban suggests that he joined at Moses’ invitation, see further in text of Ramban that Moses’ action was alluded to in the words of G-d. See Note 93. since he [Aaron] was the prince of that tribe, and just as the princes of Israel were [present] at [the counting of] their tribes, so was the prince of the Levites to be present when they were counted. Perhaps that is the reason for the dots [in the Torah] on the word ‘v’Aharon’ [and Aaron, in the phrase: All that were numbered of the Levites, whom Moses ‘and Aaron’ numbered]⁸⁹Ibid., Verse 39: All that were numbered of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron numbered etc. Thus it is clear that Aaron also participated in the counting of the Levites. Since his name was not mentioned when Moses was commanded to take that census, Ramban suggests that he joined at Moses’ invitation, see further in text of Ramban that Moses’ action was alluded to in the words of G-d. See Note 93. since his [assistance in the counting] was not by the express commandment of G-d.⁹⁰Rashi however, [basing himself on Bechoroth 4a] states that the dots indicate that “Aaron himself was not in the census of the Levites.” This will be mentioned by Ramban further on in a somewhat different form (see Note 95). Afterwards, [however], when the Levites were appointed to their individual services and burdens, Moses called upon the princes of the congregation to be with him, as it is said, All those that were numbered of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron and the princes of Israel numbered,⁹¹Further, 4: 46. since it was fitting that they should all give their assent to and supervise the establishment of the mishmaroth.⁹²A mishmar [literally: a guard] is a Division of priests and Levites for duty in the Sanctuary. According to tradition, Moses divided the priests into eight Divisions, four from the families of Eleazar and four from Ithamar, and later on when the Sanctuary was built in Jerusalem, David and Samuel sub-divided them into twenty-four Divisions. Each Division served for a period of one week, and during the three Festivals all the Divisions were in attendance simultaneously (see “The Commandments” Vol. I, pp. 46-47). See also Ramban further, Verse 53, and at Note 96, for additional aspects of this term as used by Ramban. — It should be noted that the concept of mishmaroth applied also to the Levites and Israelites, for just as the priests were divided into twenty-four Divisions, so also were the other two groups. Each week a new mishmar of priests, Levites, and Israelites would arrive in Jerusalem to attend to the Divine Services in the Sanctuary. The Israelites’ function was to “stand by” the daily offerings brought for the whole congregation of Israel, for “how can a man’s offering be offered while he does not stand by it?” (Taanith 26a). Such a group of Israelites is referred to as a ma’amad (literally: “stand by”). In the text of Ramban before us, however, reference is only to the Divisions of the priests and Levites. And Scripture repeats in another place, These are they that were numbered of the families of the Kohathites … whom Moses and Aaron numbered ‘according to the commandment of the Eternal’ by the hand of Moses⁹³Further, 4:37. The verse seems to indicate that G-d had explicitly commanded Aaron’s presence at the census, which does not corroborate Ramban’s interpretation above. Ramban therefore explains that although there was no explicit command, there had been a hint, and Moses therefore, in asking Aaron to be present, was indeed acting according to the command of the Eternal. Because He had already hinted through the dots [on the word v’Aharon⁸⁹Ibid., Verse 39: All that were numbered of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron numbered etc. Thus it is clear that Aaron also participated in the counting of the Levites. Since his name was not mentioned when Moses was commanded to take that census, Ramban suggests that he joined at Moses’ invitation, see further in text of Ramban that Moses’ action was alluded to in the words of G-d. See Note 93.] that Aaron had to be there, from which Moses understood that he was to do so, [hence it says according to the commandment of the Eternal].⁹³Further, 4:37. The verse seems to indicate that G-d had explicitly commanded Aaron’s presence at the census, which does not corroborate Ramban’s interpretation above. Ramban therefore explains that although there was no explicit command, there had been a hint, and Moses therefore, in asking Aaron to be present, was indeed acting according to the command of the Eternal. But the [presence of the] princes of the congregation [at the numbering of the Levites]⁹¹Further, 4: 46. was not obligatory, and Moses called them in order to show them respect, [therefore Scripture does not state that their presence was “according to the commandment of the Eternal”]. In Tractate Bechoroth⁹⁴Bechoroth 4a. the Rabbis have said that the dots on the word Aharon⁸⁹Ibid., Verse 39: All that were numbered of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron numbered etc. Thus it is clear that Aaron also participated in the counting of the Levites. Since his name was not mentioned when Moses was commanded to take that census, Ramban suggests that he joined at Moses’ invitation, see further in text of Ramban that Moses’ action was alluded to in the words of G-d. See Note 93. are to hint that Aaron himself was not counted at all in the census of the Levites.⁹⁵There is a marked difference on this point between the language of Rashi (see above Note 90) and that of Ramban. According to Rashi, the dots on the word Aharon indicate that “he was not in the census of the Levites,” which can be interpreted as saying that he did not participate in counting the people, and only Moses did it. Mizrachi in fact interprets Rashi in this way, since the verse [whom Moses and Aaron counted] refers to those who did the actual counting of the Levites, thus the dots on the word “Aaron” indicate that he did not participate in the counting — but he himself may well have been counted. Ramban’s language, however, clearly means that “Aaron himself was not counted at all in the census of the Levites.” This explains why Ramban does not quote this explanation of the Gemara in the name of Rashi, as he is wont to do, since his interpretation of the text of Bechoroth 4a is different than Rashi’s.

לא התפקדו, were not counted by the officials appointed to conduct the census, nor did they count themselves. (compare Ibn Ezra on this) They had not prepared themselves as had the other people for coming to the assembly point and providing documents proving their identity and genealogy. What is mentioned in this verse all referred to the time prior to G’d announcing in verse 49 that the tribe of Levi should not be included in this census. The Levites had been awaiting instructions concerning how they were going to be counted. The reason they had reason to wonder was that the tribe of Levi had not been mentioned in the list of tribes during this entire chapter when the Torah referred to “each man per each tribe” in verse 4.

והלוים…לא התפקדו בתוכם, and the Levites…were not numbered among them. I have explained this in connection with verse 2.

והלוים למטה אבותם לא התפקדו בתוכם, as will be spelled out in detail later in verse 49 where the command not to count them with the other tribes is reported. The reason why they were counted separately was that they had never been meant to be part of the military, so that they never would have formed part of such a census. Their duties were defined in terms of their ministering to the needs of the Tabernacle.

והלוים...לא התפקדו בתוכם, “But the Levites’ census was not included in that of the other twelve tribes.” Nachmanides writes, that notwithstanding the fact that up until then no directive had been given to count the Levites separately and according to different criteria, Moses realized on his own that he was not meant to include them as an integral part of that census. One of the reasons was that whereas a leader had been named for each of the other tribes, no one had been appointed as the leader of the tribe of Levi. At any rate, while Moses was in doubt how to proceed, he would not arrogate the decision to himself, and as soon as he had concluded the counting of the other twelve tribes, G’d told him how to proceed with the Levites. He called Aaron, in order to give him the honour, seeing that he was the de facto leader of the tribe. Perhaps this is the reason why we find dots on the word ואהרן (verse 39) i.e. a hint that Aaron was in Moses‘ company when G’d told him how to count the Levites. Subsequently, in 4,46 as well as in 4,36 and 4,45 we are also told about the respective leaders’ presence during these counts, as everything had to be done with the approval of all the notables concerned. The same applied to the division of the tasks to be performed by the various groups of Levites, each group headed by descendants of one of the three sons of Levi, son of Yaakov.

V. 47. לא התפקדו, eine aus התפעל und הפעל zusammengesetzte Form: sie waren nicht zugelassen oder nicht veranlasst worden, sich mit unter die Volksgemeinde zu zählen. Nicht aus eigenem Antriebe, weil etwa sie sich etwas Besonderes dünkten, sind sie von der Zählung zurückgeblieben. Sie hätten sich mitgezählt, allein es ist dies auf höheren Befehl unterblieben, wie der folgende Vers sogleich berichtet.

והלוים למטה אבותם לא התפקדו בתוכם, and the Levites according to their tribal affiliations had not been included in this census. The reason was that the basis of counting them was not the same; they were counted from thirty days and up instead from twenty years and up. They were also only counted from thirty years and up when they were ready to perform their duties. (Numbers 4,3). (Compare Bamidbar Rabbah 1,12)

The Levites. The main reason [they were not counted] is as the Rashbam wrote that they did not go out to war in the army but rather were appointed to oversee the Mishkon. This was also the reason they were not counted before the Divine command was given, since their tribe did not have a total that was fitting to form a battalion of warriors, as they were Torah scholars.

V. 48. Wir haben bereits zu V. 2 angemerkt, wie dem Begriff עדה wesentlich das Merkmal der Gemeinsamkeit einer Bestimmung innewohne, die Grund und Zweck der Gemeindeeinheit bildet, ein Einigungselement, das für die jüdische Volksgemeinde nichts anderes als das Gottesgesetz ist. Dieses innere Einigungsmoment sollte auch ruhend und wandernd auf ihren Zügen zum sichtbaren Ausdruck gelangen. Das konkrete Zeugnis der Offenbarung dieses Gesetzes waren die Gesetztafeln, zu welchen sich später das Gesetz selbst in Abschrift gesellte, und dessen Wohnung, das Tempelzelt, die Anforderungen und Wirkungen seiner Verwirklichung symbolisch vergegenwärtigte. Sie, die, "Wohnung dieses Zeugnisses" soll stets den Mittelpunkt bilden, um welchen sich Israels Söhne in den Gruppen der Familien- und Stammesgliederungen scharen. Allein, wie bei der Erteilung dieses zur Einigungsseele des jüdischen Volkes bestimmten Gesetzes durch הגבלה und התקדשות, — worauf schon רמב''ן in seinem Kommentar hinweist — durch fernhaltende und heiligende Umgrenzung, die Tatsache veranschaulicht werden sollte, wie wir dies zu Schmot 19, 10-13 u. 20-25 zu erkennen glaubten, dass das Gesetz nicht aus dem Volke, sondern an das Volk, nicht menschlich irdischen, sondern göttlichen Ursprungs und das unantastbar hoch aufgestellte Ideal war und ist, das jeden in Israel und Israel insgesamt mit ewig göttlicher Kraft zu sich hinan in seine Kreise ziehen soll, zu dem wir aber nimmer in solche Gemeinsamkeit treten können, dass wir es antastend zu meistern vermöchten: also erhielt, auch nachdem es bereits in Israels Mitte eingezogen und, wie dies das Psalmlied (Ps. 68, 18) feiert, ד׳ בם סיני בקדש, Gott bereits in ihrer Mitte und der Sinai fortan im Heiligtum war, dieses Gesetz und sein Heiligtum, "die Wohnung des Zeugnisses", ein vom Volk gesondertes Gebiet, ward zum "gesonderten Mittelpunkt", um welchen, wie es Kap. 2, 2 bedeutsam heißt, מנגד סביב, "aus einer auf den Mittelpunkt gerichteten Ferne ihn umkreisend", Israels Söhne sich zu scharen hatten. Durch diesen Fernkreis blieb das Gesetz das Ewiggegebene, Ewiganziehende und doch nimmer in uns Aufgehende, vielmehr beherrschend uns in die von ihm gezeichneten Bahnen weisend und haltend. Und der Stamm, der bei dem ersten Abfall von diesem Gesetze, als das Volk, das Gegebene desselben verkennend, dahin schritt, sich selber einen göttlichen Moses zu machen, treu bei Gott und seinem Gesetze geblieben und dessen Unantastbarkeit dem Volke und den eigenen Verwandten gegenüber verteidigte und rettete, der Stamm Levi, blieb auch als "Wächter" um dieses Gesetz und für dieses Gesetz dem Volke gegenüber ausgeschieden, er gehörte nicht der "Gemeinde", sondern dem "Zeugnis" an, das die beherrschende Seele der Gemeinde bilden und als solche erhalten werden sollte, und er war daher, wie dies bereits der vorige Vers ausgesprochen und wie im folgenden näher entwickelt wird, nicht בתוך בני ישראל zu zählen.

אך את מטה לוי לא תפקד ONLY THOU SHALT NOT NUMBER THE TRIBE OF LEVI — The legion of the King is worthy to be numbered by itself (cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Bamidbar 15). — Another explanation is: The Holy One, blessed be He, foresaw that a decree would once be made against all those that had been numbered from twenty years and upwards, viz., that they should die in the wilderness (Numbers 14:29). He therefore said: Let these (the Levites) not be included amongst those now counted, in which case they must die, because they are Mine, since they did not sin by worshipping the golden calf (cf. Numbers Rabbah 3:7; Bava Batra 121b).

אך את מטה לוי, even though I had said “count all the heads of the community of Israel,” (verse 2) and it was understood that the Levites were included in this, they are distinct from the other tribes in that they will be counted separately, according to different criteria, such as —

לא תפקד…לא תשא. "do not count…nor take their sum, etc." The meaning is that the Levites should neither be counted by the traditional means of tendering a half shekel nor by any other means at the same time as the other tribes were being counted. Please refer to my comments in Parshat Ki Tissa on this subject.

Counted separately. Meaning that they would not be counted from the age of twenty, but from the age of one month. Since the Levites were the legion of the King, the Levites’ children who had passed the stage when a baby may be categorized as stillborn, were considered as important as those who go forth into the army of Israel.

V. 49. אך את מטה לוי לא תפקד וגו׳ בתוך בני ישראל: es soll der einzelne seine Bestimmung nicht innerhalb der Volksgemeinde erhalten, ואת ראשם לא תשא וגו׳ und als Gesamtheit bilden sie eine von der Volksgemeinde gesonderte Gemeinschaft, sie gehören nicht zur עדה, sondern zum עדות.

אך את מטה לוי לא תפקוד, “but do not count the tribe of Levi;” this verse excludes the tribe of Levi from the decree of requiring atonement for the sin of dying in the desert which was a decree that was going to be imposed on the males who had been adults at the time of the Exodus after the spies came back declaring that the people could not conquer the Land of Canaan. (Numbers 14,29) Seeing that would be so, G–d did not even want to count them here with the other tribes of Israel.

ואת ראשם לא תשא בתוך בני ישראל, “and you are not tonumber them as part of the Children of Israel.” The reason was that the criteria for counting the Levites were not the same as the ones applied to the other (12) tribes. The Levites were counted from age thirty days in this portion, (3,14), on the one hand, and again from the age of 3050 (in chapter 4,47.) A different interpretation: seeing that none of them would serve in the army, but they would only perform duties as security guards for the holy objects, a different yardstick was applied to them.

לא תפקוד different age groups, and —

Another interpretation; … foresaw. According to the first reason, one could ask why it is written אך (however), because the word אך always comes to exclude something. Therefore Rashi explained here that exclusion was from the decree that those aged over twenty should die in the desert. One might ask: Rashi should have said that they did not err during the episode of the spies, whereas the decree of death in the desert was due to this. The answer is: Even the Levites erred in the episode of the spies, and it was only with the golden calf that they did not err. Therefore, they were not punished [for the episode of the spies] given that even the rest of Yisroel were only punished because of these two sins together. Rashi proves this in Parshas Shlach Lecha (Bamidbar 14:33), where the Torah writes “bear your sins” rather than “bear your sin.” Consequently, it is certain that two sins of the golden calf and of the spies were the cause. [You might question:] Rashi explains later in Parshas Devarim (Devarim 1:23) that the Levites were not with them at the sending of the spies, or even at the decision to do so, as we will explain later. The answer is: Initially at the sending they were not with them, even for the decision, however when the spies returned and made an evil report about the land —when the entire congregation raised their voices and wept — the tribe of Levi was included in that weeping. They too said “why would Hashem bring us … to fall by the sword, our women and children to be taken captive.” With this, one may also answer the question that is widely asked: Even if they were counted from the age of twenty, if the Levites did not sin they would not have been included in the decree — because “it is not the serpent that causes death rather it is sin.” Thus we can certainly see that the Levites sinned during the episode of the spies and because of this they were not counted.

ואת ראשם לא תשא when you compute the total number of people in the general census their number will not be included.

ואתה הפקד את הלוים BUT THOU SHALT APPOINT THE LEVITES OVERSEERS [OVER THE TABERNACLE etc.] — Understand the word הפקד as the Targum does: ,מני “appoint”; it (the word מני) is an expression for appointing a person to control that thing over which he has been appointed; similar is, (Esther 2:3) “and let the king appoint (ויפקד) officers”.

ואתה הפקד, the commandment to count them is repeated to make clear that they are in a class by themselves. The reason was that only this census rated as a holy activity.

Authority. One might ask: Why does Rashi explain that this word is to be understood as the Targum translates (with the word מני — “appoint”), was it merely so that one would not say that הפקד (appoint) is a term of counting? What answer is this, given that the Targum also renders terms of counting with the word מני? The answer is: Wherever the Targum uses the word מני for an appointment to authority, the nun is punctuated with a dagesh (מנּי), and here is also punctuated so. Thus we may infer that it refers to an appointment to authority. However, when the nun of the word מני is not punctuated, it refers to counting. Another answer is that Rashi explains that the word is to be understood as the Targum translates, because the word הפקד is also a term of remembrance, as in “Hashem פקד (remembered) Sarah” (Bereishis 21:1) and sometimes it is a term of omission as with “and not one of us is missing” (Bamidbar 31:49). Therefore Rashi explains that it is to be understood as the Targum translates, to exclude those two explanations (remembrance and omission) of the word. One is unable to say that it is a term of counting; therefore he explains that it is to be understood as in the phrase “let the king appoint officials.”

V. 50. ואתה הפקד וגו׳. Wie sie im Leben das Gesetz zu pflegen und zu vertreten haben, soll ihnen auch die, Pflege und Vertretung des Gesetzesheiligtums übertragen sein. Die Pflege spricht sich im Tragen des Heiligtums und seiner Geräte, sowie im Herrichten desselben, dem: ישרתהו aus; die Vertretung in dem Wache haltenden Lagern um das Heiligtum.

המה ישאו, “they will carry;” whenever the people broke camp and continued on their journey.

והמה ישרתוהו, “and they would minister to it;” when the Tabernacle would be put up again.

וסביב למשכן יחנו, and they would encamp immediately around the Tabernacle from all sides to ensure that no unauthorized person would enter the Tabernacle.

יורידו אתו [AND WHEN THE DWELLING SETTETH FORWARD] THE LEVITES SHALL TAKE IT DOWN — Understand יורידו as the Targum does: they shall take it apart. Whenever they were about to set out on a journey in the wilderness from one station to another (cf. Rashi Exodus 40:38) they took the structure apart (lit., they took it apart from its state of being put up) and carried it to the place where the cloud afterwards abode, and there they encamped and erected it (the Tabernacle).

As Targum translates, “they shall dismantle.” Meaning that they dismantle the parts of the Mishkon, separating them from the place where they are attached and leaving each piece on its own. However, they did not take it down from a high place to a low place, as might be understood from the term “take down.”

V. 51. ואתה הפקד את הלוים — .מיתה בידי שמים :והזר הקרב יומת hieß es im vorigen Verse. Nur in Folge angewiesenen Pflichtgebotes durften selbst die לוים der Wohnung des Zeugnisses mit ihren Leistungen nahen. Jeder Nichtverpflichtete war ein Nichtbefugter, war ein זר, so sehr, dass selbst der Levite nur zu der in Folge der Arbeitsteilung ihm überwiesenen Leistung befugt und der Übergang von einer Funktion zur andern verpönt war, נקיטינן משורר ששיער בשל חברו במיתה (Arachin 11 b). Ja, wie der Levite von der Priesterfunktion fern zu bleiben hatte, so war auch der Priester nicht zu den Leistungen der Leviten befugt (daselbst). So sehr war dem ganzen Dienst am Heiligtum der Charakter des "Gegebenen" und der "Unantastbarkeit" aufgeprägt, und war eben das, was durch diese Aussonderung des Gesetzesheiligtums und seiner Diener fortwährend gegenwärtig gehalten werden soll (siehe zu Kap. 3, 10).

יורידו אותו הלוים, יקימו אותו, “the Levites will dissemble it and will reassemble it;” they will do so by inserting the bolts through the rings in the planks and removing same, as required. This is all considered as part of their ministrations.

And the stranger who approaches. Even a kohein who attempts to do the Levite’s service in dismantling and erecting the Mishkan is liable for death, for a kohein is called a “stranger” regarding this service. He will die by the hands of Heaven, because every mention of death regarding the Mikdosh and its holiness are death by the hands of Heaven.

והזר הקרב AND THE LAYMAN THAT COMETH NIGH to this service of theirs,

When they were going to depart. Rashi is answering the question: Why is it written ובנסוע המשכן (lit. when the Mishkon moved), did the Mishkon move? — Surely the people would move it! Furthermore he answers the question: Did they not dismantle it before the journey? Yet the verse implies that they would dismantle during the time of the journey. Therefore Rashi explains: “When they were going to depart” meaning that the departure is referring to the people. He added that they would “carry it…” so that you would not say that only the taking down was an obligation of the Levites, but not the carrying. Even though there is no mention here of their carrying it, it is inferred in a later passage, as explained in Parshas Naso (Bamidbar 4:25, 31).

והזר הקרב יומת, “and a common man that comes too near will be executed.” Levites are also considered “common” men in this respect. They may not enter these holy precincts once the Tabernacle had been reassembled. Assembling or dissembling did not require their entering, and when the Tabernacle had been taken apart, the site it had stood on was no longer considered as a holy site.

יומת SHALL BE PUT TO DEATH by heaven (not by sentence of the court) (cf. Sanhedrin 84a).

To [perform] this service of theirs. This is the dismantling and the assembly. Rashi wishes to answer the question: Scripture had already warned several times that one who comes close to perform the service of the altar or who enters the sanctuary would die. Therefore he explains that “to [perform] this service” refers to the dismantling and assembly of the Mishkon. It does not refer to approaching the altar.

By the hand of heaven. One might ask: From where does Rashi know this, surely any death penalty mentioned by the Torah that is not detailed, normally refers to strangulation. The answer is: Rashi himself explains this shortly (v. 53) where he writes that “so that there will not be anger…” refers to death at the hand of heaven, as one finds in the section dealing with Korach, “for the anger had emerged” (Bamidbar 17:11) which refers to death at the hand of heaven. See also above in Parshas Emor (Vayikro 22:9).

ואיש על דגלו [AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL SHALL ENCAMP, EVERY MAN BY HIS OWN CAMP] AND EVERY MAN BY HIS OWN STANDARD, just as the order of the banners is given in this Book (Numbers) — three tribes for every banner.

V. 52. וחנו בני ישראל וגו׳. Wie im folgenden Kapitel näher angeordnet wird, soll die ganze Nation in vier Lager geteilt lagern und wandern; jedes Lager umfasst drei Stämme, deren einem die Führerschaft des Lagers zufiel. Es gab ein Lager Juda, ein Lager Reuben, ein Lager Efraim und ein Lager Dan. Obgleich nun in dem folgenden Kapitel Fahnen ausdrücklich nur bei dem Führerstamm eines jeden Lagers genannt sind, דגל מחנה ראובן ,רגל מחנה יהודה usw. so ordnet doch V. 2 daselbst: איש על רגלו באתת לבית אבתם offenbar jedem Stamme eine Fahne zu und auch in unserem Verse ist offenbar מחנהו und רגלו nicht identisch. Vielmehr wird hier gesagt: jeder lagere bei seinem Lager und im Lager bei seiner Fahne, d. i. bei seinem Stamm. So wird dies auch in במדבר רבה verstanden, dass jeder Stamm seine besondere Fahne hatte, deren Farbe mit der Farbe des Edelsteins im Brustschild des Hohenpriesters korrespondierte, welcher den Namen des Stammes trug. Vielleicht ist auch im V. 2 des folgenden Kapitels דגלו von den אתת לבית אבתם zu unterscheiden, רגל ist vielleicht die große Lagerfahne des Führerstammes, welchem je zwei der anderen Stämme zugeteilt waren, und אתת לבית אבתם sind kleinere Feldzeichen für jeden Stamm. In unserem Verse lässt sich jedoch das איש על רגלו, wie wir glauben, nur von der Stammesfahne verstehen, לצבאתם sind dann die noch kleineren Gruppen der Familien innerhalb eines jeden Stammes, und auch im Verse 2 des folgenden Kapitels spricht die Akzentuierung nur für die erste Auffassung. — רגל ist vermutlich verwandt. mit דקל, dem chaldäischen Worte für Palme, ein säulenförmig hoch aufsteigender Baum, der mit seinem weithin sichtbaren Wipfel leicht zum Ausdruck für Feldzeichen werden konnte. So heißen auch hoch aufsteigende Rauchsäulen: Rauchpalmen, תמרות עשן (Joel 3, 3 und Hohel. 3, 6).

ולא יהיה קצף THAT THERE BE NO ANGER [UPON THE CONGREGATION] — If you act according to My commands there will be no anger, but if not, — i.e., that strangers take part in this their (the Levites’) service, there will be anger, just as we find at the incident with Korah (Numbers 17:11): “for there is anger gone forth [from the Lord]”.

AND THE LEVITES SHALL PITCH ROUND ABOUT THE TABERNACLE OF THE TESTIMONY, THAT THERE BE NO WRATH UPON THE CONGREGATION OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, AND THE LEVITES SHALL KEEP THE CHARGE OF THE TABERNACLE OF THE TESTIMONY. Although this [verse] was said [specifically] about the Tabernacle set up between the standards in the desert, it constitutes a commandment for all times, [and thus applies] also to the Sanctuary [in Jerusalem], and it is on the basis of this [verse] that [David and Samuel] instituted the mishmaroth.⁹⁶The “guards” of the Sanctuary. Guard was kept in the Sanctuary at Jerusalem at twenty-four places; the guards being priests and Levites. The priests kept watch at three places, the Levites at twenty-one (Midoth 1:1). Thus Ramban understands that the order of the mishmaroth was a twofold one: consisting of the Divisions, as explained above in Note 92, and of guards, as explained here. See my Hebrew commentary p. 200. And the meaning of [the verse before us], and the Levites shall keep the charge at the Tabernacle of the Testimony is that they should keep guard of and patrol the Tabernacle at night, just as the Rabbis have said:⁹⁷Sifre Korach 116. “The priests are to keep watch within [the enclosures or the walls], and the Levites outside,” all of them constituting a kind of “guard of the king’s head.” Similarly we have been taught in the Beraitha of Thirty-two Rules:⁹⁸In interpreting the legal precepts of the Torah, there are thirteen basic principles of exegesis formulated by Rabbi Ishmael. For explaining the Agadic (homiletic) teachings of the Torah, there are thirty-two such rules, formulated by Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Yosei the Galilean. Ramban’s quotation here is found in Enelow’s edition of the work, page 30. See in Genesis (Vol. I, p. 437) where Ramban refers to this Tannaitic work as “the Midrash of Thirty-two Rules by which Agadah is explained.” Thus, although a wider latitude of interpretation was applied to the homiletic teachings of the Torah, they were yet guarded by a set of rules which assured all such elucidations as being authentic expressions of the Torah. “What is [an example of] a subject not explained in its [proper] place but explained elsewhere? It is written etc. Similarly, it is stated: The families of the sons of Kohath were to pitch on the side of the Tabernacle southward;⁹⁹Further, 3:29. The families of the Gershonites were to pitch behind the Tabernacle westward;¹⁰⁰Ibid., Verse 23. And the prince of the father’s house of the families of Merari being Zuriel the son of Abichail, they were to pitch on the side of the Tabernacle northward.¹⁰¹Ibid., Verse 35. We have not yet heard, however, that the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded [Aaron] that he should divide his sons into twenty-four Divisions.⁹²A mishmar [literally: a guard] is a Division of priests and Levites for duty in the Sanctuary. According to tradition, Moses divided the priests into eight Divisions, four from the families of Eleazar and four from Ithamar, and later on when the Sanctuary was built in Jerusalem, David and Samuel sub-divided them into twenty-four Divisions. Each Division served for a period of one week, and during the three Festivals all the Divisions were in attendance simultaneously (see “The Commandments” Vol. I, pp. 46-47). See also Ramban further, Verse 53, and at Note 96, for additional aspects of this term as used by Ramban. — It should be noted that the concept of mishmaroth applied also to the Levites and Israelites, for just as the priests were divided into twenty-four Divisions, so also were the other two groups. Each week a new mishmar of priests, Levites, and Israelites would arrive in Jerusalem to attend to the Divine Services in the Sanctuary. The Israelites’ function was to “stand by” the daily offerings brought for the whole congregation of Israel, for “how can a man’s offering be offered while he does not stand by it?” (Taanith 26a). Such a group of Israelites is referred to as a ma’amad (literally: “stand by”). In the text of Ramban before us, however, reference is only to the Divisions of the priests and Levites. Where, then, have we heard it? [In the verse in I Chronicles 24: 19, following the division of the priests by David and Zadok into twenty-four Divisions, where it is stated]: These were the orderings of them in their service, to come into the House of the Eternal according to the ordinance given unto them by the hand of Aaron their father, as the Eternal, the G-d of Israel, had commanded him. We thus learn that this commandment [of dividing the priests into mishmaroth]⁹²A mishmar [literally: a guard] is a Division of priests and Levites for duty in the Sanctuary. According to tradition, Moses divided the priests into eight Divisions, four from the families of Eleazar and four from Ithamar, and later on when the Sanctuary was built in Jerusalem, David and Samuel sub-divided them into twenty-four Divisions. Each Division served for a period of one week, and during the three Festivals all the Divisions were in attendance simultaneously (see “The Commandments” Vol. I, pp. 46-47). See also Ramban further, Verse 53, and at Note 96, for additional aspects of this term as used by Ramban. — It should be noted that the concept of mishmaroth applied also to the Levites and Israelites, for just as the priests were divided into twenty-four Divisions, so also were the other two groups. Each week a new mishmar of priests, Levites, and Israelites would arrive in Jerusalem to attend to the Divine Services in the Sanctuary. The Israelites’ function was to “stand by” the daily offerings brought for the whole congregation of Israel, for “how can a man’s offering be offered while he does not stand by it?” (Taanith 26a). Such a group of Israelites is referred to as a ma’amad (literally: “stand by”). In the text of Ramban before us, however, reference is only to the Divisions of the priests and Levites. was already given to Moses and Aaron.”
We have also been taught in Tractate Tamid:¹⁰²Tamid 25 b. “The priests kept watch at three places in the Sanctuary.” And in the Gemara there the Rabbis said:¹⁰³Ibid., 26 a. The Mishnah there explains which were the three specific places in the Temple at Jerusalem where the priests used to keep watch. “Whence do we know this? Said Abaye: Scripture states, And those that were to pitch before the Tabernacle eastward were Moses, and after him Aaron and his [two] sons, keeping the charge of the Sanctuary.¹⁰⁴Further, 3:38. [This teaches us that] Aaron was [to guard] in one place and his [two] sons in two [other] places etc.,” as is explained there. Thus we learn that these commandments apply for all times and not only at the Tabernacle, and the verses in the Book of Chronicles¹⁰⁵The twenty-four Divisions of the priests are mentioned in I Chronicles 24:7-18; those of the Levites, ibid., Verses 20-31. Verse 19 there [quoted above in the text] states that the command to make such Divisions was already given to Moses and Aaron. See also ibid., 9:22. It remained, however, an oral tradition among the priests that they would be finally divided into such twenty-four Divisions until Ezra (the author of the Book of Chronicles) came and showed that the total number of these Divisions has been alluded to, in the Torah. explain the subject of the mishmaroth⁹²A mishmar [literally: a guard] is a Division of priests and Levites for duty in the Sanctuary. According to tradition, Moses divided the priests into eight Divisions, four from the families of Eleazar and four from Ithamar, and later on when the Sanctuary was built in Jerusalem, David and Samuel sub-divided them into twenty-four Divisions. Each Division served for a period of one week, and during the three Festivals all the Divisions were in attendance simultaneously (see “The Commandments” Vol. I, pp. 46-47). See also Ramban further, Verse 53, and at Note 96, for additional aspects of this term as used by Ramban. — It should be noted that the concept of mishmaroth applied also to the Levites and Israelites, for just as the priests were divided into twenty-four Divisions, so also were the other two groups. Each week a new mishmar of priests, Levites, and Israelites would arrive in Jerusalem to attend to the Divine Services in the Sanctuary. The Israelites’ function was to “stand by” the daily offerings brought for the whole congregation of Israel, for “how can a man’s offering be offered while he does not stand by it?” (Taanith 26a). Such a group of Israelites is referred to as a ma’amad (literally: “stand by”). In the text of Ramban before us, however, reference is only to the Divisions of the priests and Levites. and the [details of the] whole institutions.

והלוים יחנו סביבת, this is another difference between the Levites and the other tribes, i.e. that they were to be encamped immediately adjacent to the sacred domain of the Tabernacle. Whereas the other tribes encamped each around its flag, the Levites’ “flag” was the Tabernacle.

, והלוים יחנו סביב למשכן העדות, “and the Levites shall encamp around the Tabernacle of Testimony.” Nachmanides writes that what the Torah records here as applicable to the Tabernacle, henceforth would become applicable to the Temple, and the division of the Levites into משמרות, guard duty whose components were the same, and who alternated with one another regularly, formed the pattern for the many hundreds of years that the Temple stood in Jerusalem. The words ושמרו את משמרת וגו' refer to night duty performed by the Levites in guarding the Tabernacle. They would walk around the Tabernacle at night ensuring no unauthorised person would attempt to enter it. The priests guarded the inside of the Tabernacle, whereas the Levites guarded it from the outside.

על עדת ”on the assembly of the Children of Israel;” against each one individually (Ibn Ezra).

There will be anger. There are those who ask: In all of the Torah inferences are mentioned, and from one side of the inference you may infer the other [so what is Rashi adding]? The answer is: Rashi elaborates here so that you do not err and say that when the Torah writes “so that there will not be anger” it refers to that which was juxtaposed to it “Bnei Yisroel shall camp … and the Levites shall camp…” (v. 52-53). Therefore, Rashi explains “if you fulfill my commandments … and if you do not fulfill my commandments…” which refers to the service of the Mishkon — it’s dismantling, loading and assembly, “as we find in the episode of Korach.”

V. 53. ולא יהי' קצף וגו׳. Vergl. Kap. 17. 11 u.18, 6. Der Aufstand Korahs war nichts als eine Leugnung des göttlichen Ursprungs der gesetzlichen Ordnung und der Unantastbarkeit des Gesetzes, die eben durch die Unnahbarkeit des Gesetzesheiligtums für jeden Unbefugten ihre ewige Erkenntnis und Anerkenntnis finden soll.

והלוים יחנו סביב, “and the Levites are to encamp around it.” Their camp was situated between that of the priests and that of the ordinary Israelites. This fact prevented them from approaching too close to it. (B‘chor shor)

As we find. Rashi says this because of his explanation above where he said that they would die at the hand of heaven. So that one should not question his source, he mentions the incident with Korach.

והלוים יחנו סביב, when the same statement was made earlier in verse 50, why was the wording different, i.e. וסביב למשכן יחנו, “and around the Tabernacle they are to encamp?”In verse 50 the Torah spoke about carrying the Holy Ark when the people broke camp, something of the highest degree of holiness. Here the Torah only speaks about the Tabernacle which houses the sacred vessels. Its holiness derives from the vessels it houses.

ולא יהיה קצף, “so that there will not be Divine anger against the community of Israel.” The Torah had already warned of this in verse 51, when spelling out that coming too close was a capital offence and would be punished with execution. (Ibn Ezra) This is precisely what happened in Samuel II 6,7 when Uzza mistakenly, and with noble intentions, touched the Holy Ark in order to steady it and prevent it from falling from the wagon.

על עדת בני ישראל, against a member of the community of Israel, not against the whole community. We find similar construction in Exodus 21,11: אם שלש אלה לא יעשה לה, which does not mean that the master has not done ail these three procedures for the servant maid, but that he has failed to do even one of them. Compare also: ויקבר בערי הגלעד, “he was buried in the towns of Gilead;” (Judges 12,7) The meaning is not that different parts of Yiftach were buried in different towns, but that his remains were buried in one of those towns. Compare also Zecharyah 9,9, ועל עיר בן אתונות, “but riding on a young donkey, born by asses.” The meaning is not that this donkey had more than one mother, but “by one of the many sheasses.” (Ibn Ezra)

כן עשו, “so they did.” They were warned never to touch the Tabernacle.

V. 54. שריחקו עצמן מן המשכן ונתנו מקום ללוים לחנות סביב למשכן :ויעשו וגו׳ (במדבר רבה): sie zogen sich von der Wohnung des Zeugnisses zurück und gaben den Leviten Raum, die Wohnung zu umlagern.

'ויעשו בני ישראל ככל אשר צוה וגו, “The Children of Israel did in accordance with all that the Lord had commanded Moses;” why did this Book not mention Aaron thus far? Rabbi Joshua son of Nechemyah quoting Rabbi Chiyah, says that Aaron had been busy establishing his family’s pedigree. The people had said to him that until he could prove the pedigree of Pinchas (his grandson) and to whom his son Elazar was married, (not to a daughter of Putiel, as written in Exodus 6,25, where he is reported as having married one of the daughters of that man, an idolater), he could not be included in the census. When G-d saw that the people were trying to belittle Aaron, He Himself testified that Pinchas was the son of Elazar who was the son of Aaron the High Priest, (Numbers 25,11) one fanatic having sired another fanatic. (Vayikra Rabbah 33,4)[This is a veiled reference to the founding father of the tribe of Levi, having been a fanatic, as is clear from when Levi and his brother Shimon killed all the males in the town of Sh’chem as retribution for the rape of their sister Dinah. (Genesis 34,2526) Pinchas had inherited part of that DNA when he killed Zimri the prince of Shimon for having cohabited with the Midianite woman Cosbi. (Numbers 25,15) Ed.] An alternate explanation: the verse above is testimony that none of the Israelites ever violated the commandment not to enter the sacred area of the Tabernacle and thus become liable to execution. (Ibn Ezra)