תנ"ך ופרשנות
תנ"ך ופרשנות

פירוש על במדבר 26:24

Rashi on Numbers

לישוב OF JASHUB — He must be identical with Job (Genesis 46:13) who is mentioned amongst those who went down to Egypt, for all the families were called by the names of those who went down to Egypt. But as for those who were born from that time and onwards their families were not called by their own names, except the families of Ephraim and Manasseh, both of whom wore born in Egypt, and Ard and Naaman, the sons of Bela the son of Benjamin (v. 40). And I have found in the work of R. Moses the Preacher why this was so in the case of the two latter — that their mother went down to Egypt when she was already pregnant with them so that they may be regarded as being among those who went down to Egypt, and on this account they formed separate families, just as Chamul and Chezron who were grandchildren of Judah (v. 21), and Cheber and Malkiel who were Asher’s grandchildren (v. 45). If this is an Agada, well and good; but if not, then I say that Bela had many grandchildren and that from these two, Ard and Naaman, there issued from each a large family, and the offspring of the other sons were called after Bela’s name, but the offspring of these two were called after their name. So, too, I say about the sons of Machir who formed two different families, one called after his name, and one called after the name of Gilead, his son, because it was a very large family. Five families are missing from Benjamin’s sons as stated before: here (i.e., by the fact that five of the families had become extinct) there was fulfilled part of his mother’s prophecy which is alluded to in the fact that she called him Ben Oni (my unfortunate son), (Genesis 35:18), whilst by the incident of the concubine in Gibea (Judges 20:35), the whole of it was fulfilled for practically the entire tribe was exterminated. This I found in the work of R. Moses the Preacher.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Siftei Chakhamim

This is Yov… In Parshas Vayigash (Bereishis 46:13). Rashi explains in Divrei Hayomim I (7:1) that he was [really] called Yov, but since they settled down to learn Torah, as it is written (ibid. v.12), “From the sons of Yissachar there were those who had understanding of the times” he merited to be called “Yashuv” (lit. "settled").
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Chizkuni

לישוב, he is identical with Yov (in Genesis 46,13) in that one ש was added to him from the two ש of his father (יששכר), and therefore, (the 2nd Shin) is not read in his father's name.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Siftei Chakhamim

And Ard and Na’aman, the sons of Bela, the son of Binyamin. That is to say that they too were born in Egypt. (Nachalas Yaakov) This raises a difficulty, for if so Yaakov came down to Egypt with seventy-two souls, given that she was pregnant with them, just as Yocheved is considered part of the count of seventy souls for the same reason. One answer is that Yocheved was different because she was born at the entrance to Egypt, inside its walls, while they may have been born after being several months in Egypt. Another answer is that the tribe of Levi is different because they are counted from the age of one month. See there for more detail.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Siftei Chakhamim

That their mother went down to Egypt. Meaning that he gives the reason why the families of Ard and Na’aman, grandsons of Binyamin were counted, even though they were not from those who went down to Egypt.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Siftei Chakhamim

They were therefore divided into separate families… This is what he was saying: Do not ask how it is possible that grandchildren [of Binyamin] are considered as separate families, for the explanation is that it is like Chetzron and Chamul…
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Siftei Chakhamim

If this is from the Aggadah, fine, but if not… Meaning that if R’ Moshe Hadarshan found this reason in the Aggadah then fine, and I am not permitted to disagree with him. “But if not, then I say…” meaning that if he was saying this based on his own reasoning, then I too, am offering another reason that is my own.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Siftei Chakhamim

[From Ard and Na’aman] respectively, large families emanated. Meaning: Ard and Na’aman were counted as families solely because of their large numbers, given that each of them bore many children. Consequently, it was fitting for each of them to be called a family, even though they were not from those who went down to Egypt. [Rashi made this comment] because one could err, [saying] that since Ard and Na’aman were termed families due to their numerous children, their father Bela should not have been termed a family in his own right, just as Yosef was not termed a tribe in of itself, since it had already been divided into the tribes of Efraim and Menashe. [This is not a difficulty] according to R’ Moshe Hadarshan who considers a fetus like a [born] child, for accordingly a father and a child could be counted as two, like Peretz and his sons, since both were among those who went down to Egypt. However, according to Rashi’s explanation there is a difficulty. Therefore he was obliged to say that Bela had many children aside from Ard and Na’aman and they were called by his name, which was not the case for Yosef. Re’m.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Siftei Chakhamim

Five families are missing from the sons of Binyamin. This explanation is also from the commentary of R’ Moshe Hadarshan, therefore Rashi brings it before the comment (v. 36), “These are the sons of Shuselach” [even though Binyamin is not mentioned until v. 38].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
פסוק קודםפרק מלאפסוק הבא