פירוש על במדבר 4:51

Kap. 4. V. 1. In dem vorigen Kapitel war die Zählung aller für den Levitenberuf Bestimmten angeordnet, sie traf alle Leviten vom zurückgelegten ersten Monat an und weiter. Hier folgt die Zählung der zum aktiven Dienst des auf der Wanderung zu tragenden und zu wahrenden Heiligtums Berufenen, und die nähere Anweisung der dabei einem jeden der drei Levitenhäuser zu erteilenden Obliegenheit. Dieser, einen Kraftaufwand erfordernde Dienst des Hebens und Tragens der Bestandteile des Heiligtums, war auf das Lebensalter von dreißig bis fünfzig Jahren beschränkt. Bereits zu Kap. 2, 17 ist angemerkt, dass auch auf der Wanderung in seine Teile zerlegt das Heiligtum seine Bedeutung bewahrte.

אל משה ואל אהרן, “to Moses and to Aaron;” seeing that Aaron and his sons had to place the Holy Ark and its contents on the shoulders of the Kehatites.

נשא את ראש וגו׳ TAKE THE SUM OF [THE SONS OF KOHATH] — Count those that are fit among them for the service of carrying, and these are the men from thirty to fifty years, for a person less than thirty has not yet attained his full strength, — hence they (the Rabbis) said (Avot 5:21) “a man of thirty has reached the age when he enters into full strength”, — as for one who is older than fifty, his strength gradually diminishes from then.

נשא את ראש בני קהת, "take the sum of the members of the Kehatites, etc." We have already explained in Parshat Ki Tissa that the act of elevating the Israelites, i.e. numbering them (Exodus 30,12) was performed through their handing over the half shekel which formed their ransom money for the sin of the golden calf and that this is the reason the Torah used the term כי תשא את ראש when you "lift the head" when describing their being counted. This is in contrast with the members of the tribe of Levi who had no need to pay a ransom for their soul seeing they had not been guilty of that sin. This is why the Torah introduced the instruction to count the Levites (3,15) with the words: פקד את בני לוי, "count the members of the tribe of Levi." If all this is correct, why did the Torah change its wording when it came to counting the Kehatites and employ the same term נשא when instructing Moses and Aaron to count them?

For the service of carrying. Rashi intends to explain the reason for the count: All those enumerated are normally counted from one month, from twenty or from thirteen years of age, but this number is not similar to any other. Therefore he explains “count those among them suited…” Re’m.

V. 2. נשא וגו׳ מתוך וגו׳. Zuerst werden die Kehatiden hervorgehoben, denen bereits Kap. 3, 31 die heiligsten Objekte der Wohnung überwiesen waren.

נשא את ראש בני קהת, “take the sum of the of the sons of Kehat;” even though Gershon was the older son of Kehat, Kehat was given precedence, as he had been chosen to carry the most holy furnishing of the Tabernacle, the Holy Ark.

Perhaps the fact that the Kehatites were entrusted with a task such as carrying the Holy Ark and the Table which required them to enter the Tabernacle was a special elevation for them and this is why the Torah wanted us to know this and wrote the term נשא. It is a relative term and shows that their function was more highly rated than that of the family of the clan of Gershon although Gershon was the older of Levi's sons. The reason that G'd chose the Kehatites for this task was that they provided "light for the world" in that Moses and Aaron were descended from them. It was no more than fair that the branch of the Levites who had produced Moses and Aaron should be the ones entrusted with carrying the Torah which Moses had communicated to the people.

Our verse is careful to say מתוך בני ישראל, "from the midst of the children of Israel," seeing that Kehat was the middle son of Levi's three sons Gershon, Kehat and Merari.

לעשות מלאכה, to perform work, etc. The Torah describes the task of the Kehatites differently from that of the sons of Gershon and that of the sons of Merari where the Torah uses the term לעבוד עבודה. The Torah was anxious to make it plain that though the Kehatites entered the Tabernacle what they did there did not qualify as עבודה, as priestly service. On the contrary, the ark is reputed to have carried its carriers as we know from Bamidbar Rabbah 4. What the Kehatites did was simply מלאכה, ordinary work. Furthermore, because the Kehatites had to carry the Holy Ark on their shoulders, i.e. perform physical labour as part of their assigned tasks, the Torah used the appropriate word מלאכה to describe their function. The tasks to be performed by the clan of Gershon and Merari respectively did not entail physical work of any major kind.

V. 3. כל בא לצבא siehe zu Kap. 1, 3.

קדש הקדשים [THIS SHALL BE THE SERVICE OF THE SONS OF KOHATH] THE קדש הקדשים — i.e., whatever is most holy of them all: the Ark, the table, the candelabrum, the altars, the Partition Veil and the vessels of service.

ובא אהרן ובניו וגו׳ AND [WHEN THE CAMP SETTETH FORWARD,] AARON SHALL COME, AND HIS SONS, etc. — They shall put every object into its wrapping that is prescribed for it in this section, so that the sons of Kohath should have nothing to do except to carry them.

בנסוע המחנה, after the cloud above it had already withdrawn, for prior to that they were forbidden to enter the Tabernacle.

אהרן ובניו בנסוע המחנה, the two “flags” who journeyed first, ahead of the parts of the prefabricated Tabernacle which had been dismantled and which was being transported by the Levites.

ובא אהרן ובניו, “Aaron and his sons shall come, etc.” The sequence of covering up the furnishings of the Tabernacle was as follows: they would spread the dividing curtain over the Ark of Testimony; over this would be spread the tachash-skins which had been part of the roof; this in turn would be covered with a cloth made of techelet, blue wool. Next they would wrap the Table with a woolen cloth made of techelet. The appurtenances of the Table would also be wrapped in that cloth. These in turn would have an outer wrapping of tolaat-shani, scarlet-coloured wool. This in turn would be enclosed in the tachash-skins. The Menorah, candlestick, would be covered in an inner covering of techelet-coloured wool, and an outer covering of tachash-skins. They would cover the golden Altar with a techelet-coloured woolen cloth, and wrap it in tachash-skins. The copper Altar would be covered with a purple-covered woolen cloth. This in turn they would wrap in the tachash-skin. You will note that all the furnishings whether they were wrapped in techelet-coloured woolen cloth or different red cloths had an outer covering of tachash-skin around them. This was the same skin which formed the outer cover of the four layers of the ceiling of the Tabernacle and its appearance was familiar to everybody. The only furnishing the Torah did not want to enclose in that tachash-skin was the Holy Ark, preferring to have it wrapped in techelet-blue wool to remind the onlooker of the colour of heaven.

When the cloud rises. Meaning that one should not raise the difficulty: How did they know the time that they were to travel, in order to begin to dismantle the Mishkon? Because it is not respectful for the Holy Ark to be covered after the banner of the camp of Yehudah had traveled — since it would appear that the departure of the banner of Yehudah was the reason to dismantle the Mishkon and to cover the Ark.

V. 5. ובא אהרן וגו׳. An die eigentlichen Objekte des Heiligtums, מנורה ,שולחן ארון ,מזבחות, durften auch die Leviten nicht mit Berührung nahen (V. 15), sie wurden ihnen mit ihren Wanderhüllen bedeckt von den Priestern eingehändigt, und unter Erwägung der bereits angedeuteten Tatsache, dass auch zerlegt und wandernd der "Wohnung des Zeugnisses" ihre heilige und heiligende Bedeutung für die sammelnde Einigung der Nation verblieb, war diese Einhüllung und Bereitstellung für die Wanderschaft selbst ein bedeutungsvoller priesterlicher Akt. Die Hüllen selbst entsprechen dem Charakter des zu Verhüllenden. Der durch kein Hindernis aufzuhaltenden Wanderung entsprechend, war die Schutzbedeckung aller עור תחש: ein Fell vom "Eiltier" (Schmot Kap. 26, 14). Die dem קדש הקדשים und קדש angehörenden מזבח הזהב מנודה ,שולחן ,ארון erhalten eine Hülle von תכלת, der Farbe des Gott nahen Heiligen (daselbst Kap. 25, 3-8), und zwar nur beim ארון, der zunächst in den ja ihm angehörigen schützend scheidenden Cherubimvorhang eingehüllt war, als oberste, somit von außen sichtbare Überdeckung, damit die Lade des Zeugnisses als כליל תכלת, als in Gott naher Heiligkeit höchster Potenz kennzeichnend. Auf dem ebenfalls mit dem תכלת-Gewande der Heiligkeit bekleideten "Tisch der Vorsehung" ruhte das Brot der "steten göttlichen Fürsorge" mit den die Bedingungen dieser Fürsorge so tief charakterisierenden, gestaltenden, Gott hingebenden, rein und aufrecht erhaltenden Geräten (daselbst Kap. 25, 3-8). Über dieses "Brot" des jüdischen Nationalwohlstandes war ein Gewand von תולעת שני gebreitet, so wie über den מזבח העולה ein Gewand von ארגמן. Wir haben zu Schmot 25, 3-8 erläutert, wie, wenn rot überhaubt das "Leben" repräsentiert, שני die untergeordnete, animalische Seite des Lebens, ארגמן aber die höhere, menschliche ausdrückt. Durch Überdeckung des Angesichtsbrotes mit שני, des Opferaltars aber mit ארגמן ist beiden die gegenseitige Stufenordnung zugewiesen: Mit allen von Gottes "Angesicht" gewährten Mitteln der Existenz und des Wohlstandes ist erst שני, das animalisch-leibliche Leben, gegeben. ארגמן, der Purpur des Menschtums, ist kein von Gott Gegebenes, sondern nur vom Menschen, und zwar mit der freien Beherrschung, Unterordnung und Hingebung alles Animalisch-leiblichen an die Erfüllung des göttlichen Willens zu erringen, wie dies eben der Opferaltar mit den Opferhandlungen vergegenwärtigt, denen er bestimmt und geweiht ist.

וכסו בו את ארון העדות , “they will cover with it the Ark of the Testimony;” at the end of verse six, the Torah adds: ושמו בדיו, “they shall set the staves thereof.” This means that these staves would be attached to the Holy Ark, but not in the ordinary sense of the words, seeing that the Torah, in Exodus 25,15 had already decreed that these staves were never to be removed from the Holy Ark.

וכסו בה, “and the shall cover it;” the prefix ב is used in this sense also in Leviticus 8,32: והנותר בבשר ובלחם, “and the surfeit of the flesh and bread;” compare also Leviticus 7,36: ביום משחו אותם, “on the day they were anointed (by means of it). Compare also Numbers 4,9: אשר ישרתו לה בהם, “wherewith they minister unto it.”

בנסוע המחנה WHEN THE CAMP SETTETH FORWARD — When the cloud departed they knew that they were to set out on the journey (see Rashi on Numbers 1:51, and Note thereon).

ושמו בדיו kann nicht, wie bei den anderen כלים, ein Einsetzen, sondern nur ein Einrichten der Tragstangen bedeuten, da nach Schmot 25, 15 die Tragstangen nie aus den Ringen der Lade herausgenommen werden durften.

AND THEY SHALL PUT THEREON [on the ark of the Testimony] A COVERING OF ‘TACHASH’¹⁸⁶“Tachash was a kind of wild animal which only existed at the time [when Israel built the Tabernacle]. Its hide was multicolored” (Rashi, Exodus 25:5). SKIN, AND THEY SHALL SPREAD OVER IT A CLOTH ALL OF BLUE. Because of the importance of the ark, the covering of tachash skin was not visible [at all] upon it; for they covered [the ark firstly] with the Veil as a screening partition,¹⁸⁷Verse 5. and then they covered both of them [the ark and the Veil] with the covering of the tachash skin [as a protection] against the rains, and above them all they spread a cloth all of blue so that this distinguished garment, which was the like of the very heaven for clearness,¹⁸⁸Exodus 24:10. should be seen upon it. But as for all the other vessels — the table, the candelabrum, and the altars — the covering of the tachash skin¹⁸⁶“Tachash was a kind of wild animal which only existed at the time [when Israel built the Tabernacle]. Its hide was multicolored” (Rashi, Exodus 25:5). was visible over them.¹⁸⁹Verses 8-14. And some scholars¹⁹⁰This opinion is stated here by Ibn Ezra. say that the meaning of the verse [before us] and they shall spread over it a cloth all of blue refers to the screening partition Veil [mentioned in the preceding Verse 5, thus meaning: “and they had already spread over it a cloth all of blue”], and they shall put thereon, that is, on the ark and the Veil, the covering of the ‘tachash’ skin.¹⁹¹Thus according to this interpretation, it was the covering of the tachash-skin that was visible on top of the ark when it was carried, and beneath it was the cloth all of blue, and not, as explained before, that the cloth of blue was spread on top over the tachash skin.
And they shall set the staves thereof. This means, they shall put them on the shoulders of the priests.¹⁹²In Ibn Ezra, who quotes this interpretation in the name of “some scholars”, the reading is: “those who are to carry the ark,” namely the Levites of the Kohath family, instead of: “the priests”. See my Hebrew commentary p. 205, Note 74. — Ibn Ezra also mentions another interpretation, namely, that the meaning of the expression and they shall set the staves thereof is that they should replace the staves which they had previously removed while the ark was being wrapped. Ramban evidently rejects this interpretation because of the verse, The staves shall be in the rings of the ark; they shall not be taken from it (Exodus 25:15), which clearly states that the staves are to remain in the rings permanently. See text further. The correct interpretation is that the word v’samu (and they shall set) means that they should adjust them [the staves] so that they should protrude outside [the ark] in such a way that they can carry it by means of them, for the rings [in which the staves were permanently fixed] were wide, so that they were able to lengthen the staves at will, provided only that they were not taken out from them.¹⁹³See Note 192.

ונתנו עליו כסוי עור תחש, “they shall place upon it a covering of Tachash hide.” Nachmanides writes that the Holy Ark was first wrapped in the curtain of blue wool that divided the Sanctuary from the Holy of Holies; after that the tachash hide cover was used to wrap both the Holy Ark and the dividing curtain around them. This was unlike the procedure used with the other furnishings of the Tabernacle, such as the table, the golden altar and the menorah. The latter were wrapped in a cover of tachash hide only. The reason why so much more care was used to wrap the Holy Ark was the fact that its sanctity was greater than that of the other furnishings. It was desirable that the blue wool curtain be visible through the tachash hide as it reminds us of the blue sky, which in turn reminds us of Hashem whose throne is in the heavens beyond. Other commentators hold that the tachash hide was used to cover both the Holy Ark and the other furnishings, the former having first been wrapped in the dividing curtain.

ושמו בדיו, “they shall position its staves.” Some commentators understand the word ושמו as meaning: ”they shall adjust,” i.e. the staves were to be adjusted as the Kehatites carried the Ark on their shoulders. Others understand the expression as referring to the positioning of these staves through the rings in the Ark in a manner that assured their proper balance prior to their being hoisted on to the shoulders of the men carrying it. The rings were considerably wider than needed to insert the staves into them. The staves were, however, not to be withdrawn from the Ark altogether.

קערת וכפת וקשות ומנקיות — I have already described these in the chapter dealing with the work of the Tabernacle (Exodus XXV).

AND THE CONTINUAL BREAD SHALL REMAIN THEREON. On the table itself was to be the bread,¹⁹⁴The verse reads: And upon the table of showbread they shall spread a cloth of blue, and put thereon the dishes, and the pans … and the continual bread shall remain thereon. Ramban interprets the verse to mean: “and upon the table of showbread, on which the continual bread shall remain, they shall spread a cloth of blue etc.” and upon them [i.e., the twelve loaves of bread] a cloth of blue, and upon this cloth which was on the table they put all the vessels, and afterwards they spread upon the vessels and the table a cloth of scarlet.¹⁹⁵Verse 8. For in honor of the bread which was arranged on the table according to the precept [of the Torah], they spread this cloth of blue in order to divide between the table and its bread [beneath the cloth], and the vessels [which lay above the cloth]; and the upper cover was a cloth of scarlet, which was a hue of red, because the table is a sign of the crown of royalty, which is [manifested by] the attribute of justice. But the ark and the golden altar were [covered on top] with a cloth of blue,¹⁹⁶Verse 6 (the ark); Verse 11 (the golden altar). alluding to the attribute which is comprised of hakol (the All),¹⁹⁷See Vol. I, p. 292. and the altar of the burnt-offering [was covered] with a purple cloth,¹⁹⁸Verse 13. which is redder than the first [i.e., the cloth of scarlet which was upon the table], for it is there [on the altar of the burnt-offering] that the blood of the offerings, which is a ransom for the souls [of those who offer them], is sprinkled.

לחם התמיד עליו יהיה, “and the constant bread shall remain on it.” According to Nachmanides the meaning of the verse is that the show breads be remaining on the actual (flat surface of the) table, as opposed to the superstructure on which they rested when the Tabernacle was in its operational mode. The bread was then wrapped in the blue wool cover. The various appurtenances of the table, such as the spoons, dishes, shelving tubes, etc. (compare Exodus 25,29), would be placed above. This procedure was necessary in order to keep the actual breads and the appurtenances apart from one another when the people were on the move. The appurtenances were then covered with a cloth made of wool dyed scarlet. This colour was appropriate as the table symbolized the crown of a king, which in turn symbolizes the attribute of Justice. The other appurtenances that were wrapped in blue wool symbolized the crown of Torah. The cover of the main altar situated in the courtyard was made of purple wool, an intense red, as the altar upon which so much blood was sprinkled on a daily basis was close to that colour anyway.

V. 7. ולחם התמיד עליו יהיה. Obgleich alles was מקודש בכלי, durch ein Heiligtumsgefäß für das Heiligtum aufgenommen worden, durch Entfernung aus dem räumlichen Bereiche des Heiligtums als ihm entfremdet פסול יוצא wird (siehe zu Schmot 22, 30), so bleibt doch selbst auf der Wanderschaft das Brot auf dem Tisch in seiner engen Beziehung zum Heiligtum und wird nicht נפסל ביוצא (Menachot 95 a; siehe zu Kap. 1, 17).

ועל שולחן הפנים, “and on the table of the showbreads; ”from this wording (the prefix letter ה in the word הפנים) we may assume that there were also other tables in the Sanctuary on which the sacred flesh was placed. (that flesh was removed daily as opposed to the showbreads. Ibn Ezra)

הנסך means, “covering”, — having the same meaning as מסך, the screen, — as it is written, (Exodus 25:29) “the covers by which they shall be covered (יסך)” (cf. Rashi on that verse and the Note thereon).

ולחם התמיד עליו יהיה, “the continual bread shall remain on it constantly.” How could these showbreads stay upright and not fall down during the journeys? [Our verse is G-d’s assurance that it would.]

מלקחיה — a kind of tongs whereby one draws the wick in any direction one wishes.

In which the oil [and wicks] are placed. The word נרותיה (its lamps) does not refer to the wick that is lit as [it does] in “the lamp of God…” (Mishlei 20:27) Therefore Rashi explains here that it refers to the container, because the word “lamp” can also pertain to the container.

מחתתיה — a kind of small ladle, the bottom of which was flat, not rounded (concave), and it had no wall in front (no piece projecting upwards) but only at its sides; and he (the priest) raked into it the ashes of the lamps when he cleansed them out (cf. Rashi on Exodus 25:28).

נרתיה ITS LAMPS — luces in O. F., the receptacles into which people put the oil and the wicks (not the lights as the word sometimes means; see e. g. Exodus 40:4).

אל מכסה עור תחש [AND THEY SHALL PUT IT, AND ALL THE VESSELS] WITHIN A COVERING OF TACHASH SKINS — This was a kind of packing bag.

ונתנו על המוט; after that the Levites were permitted to carry all these parts.

ונתנו על המוט. Rabbi Joseph Kara (1060-1130, Troyes) erred in understanding this verse, thinking that since the Torah did not mention two staves, as in Numbers 13,23) for instance, that it follows that this stave was underneath the vessels, seeing that the Torah wrote the word על, “above.” I would counter that the staves (poles) were always on the sides of the vessels being transported and that they had been inserted through rings fastened to the respective objects being transported by them. We find that the Torah spells this out in Exodus 25,14, 25,27, 27,7, and 30,4.
The singular במוט is indeed found in connection with carrying something by means of poles in Exodus 25,28 and in Isaiah 46,7 as well as in Chronicles II 35,3. We must not be misled by the word being in the singular. It simply means to describe the “method” of transportation, this method being poles. [when we speak of כסף meaning “money,” we also do not necessarily refer to a single coin. Ed.]

Sack. A large sack in which one places merchandise; because it is written “into the covering,” it is clear that it has an inside.

את כל כלי השרת אשר ישרתו בם בקדש [AND THEY SHALL TAKE] ALL THE VESSELS OF MINISTRY, WHEREWITH THEY MINISTER IN THE HOLY PLACE — i.e. in the Tabernacle which is called holy; these were the vessels for the incense with which they performed the ministry at the inner altar.

Inside the Mishkon which is holy. Rashi is answering the question: It simply should have stated “with which they serve.” Why did it add “בקדש — in the sanctuary” (lit. in the Holy)? He answers that it is written בקדש to teach that they would not serve on the altar with these utensils, but rather in the Mishkon. For they did not need utensils for the inner altar, since they would only burn incense on it. (Gur Aryeh) One is not to explain [the verse to mean] that they served there in holiness, because if this were so, the Torah should have vowelized the beis with a shva (בְקדש). However, now that it was vowelized with a pasach (בַקדש) it is implies a known “holy” (i.e. the holy) entity and this is the Mishkon, for it was the most known [holy entity].

את כל כלי השרת, “all the vessels of ministry;” knives, bowls, and ladles.

ונתנו על המוט, “and they shall put them on the bar.” Not below the bar so that they would not get damaged by being dragged along the ground.

ודשנו את המזבח AND THEY SHALL TAKE AWAY THE ASHES FROM THE ALTAR — from the brazen altar.

They shall take the ashes. Not that they should place the ashes there (as the word ודשנו might imply).

ודשנו means, they shall remove the ashes from off it (cf. Rashi on Exodus 27:3).

Like a lion. Specifically at the time when they traveled the coals appeared like a lion, however when they camped it was not visible because of the fire of the pyre that was placed above it. At the time of departure they removed this fire and the coal was visible.

ופרשו עליו בגד ארגמן AND THEY SHALL SPREAD A GARMENT OF RED PURPLE THEREON — But the fire that descended from heaven on the altar (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 1:7) lay beneath the garment in the form of a lion during the journeyings; it did not, however, burn it because they inverted a large vessel of copper over it (cf. Yoma 21b).

Vessel. At the end of Perek HaMotzi Tefillin (Eiruvin 104b), Rashi explains that a פסכתר was a copper pot. The word סירות (Shemos 27:3) — “pots” is translated by the Targum as פסכתרות.

מחתת THE CENSERS into which the coals were raked for the purpose of the ceremony of תרומת הדשן, removing a pan of ashes from the copper altar (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 6:4), and which were formed like a pan which has only three walls (none in front) and with the front of it draws in the coals.

ונתנו עליו את כליו, “they shall put on it all its vessels.” The pots were not mentioned as they were identical with wicker baskets made of copper which served three different purposes. They were used to transport fire (glowing coal) on to the altar during the journeys in order to fulfill the instruction that there must always be fire on the altar (Leviticus 6,6.) They would also contain ashes and not completely burned up remains of sacrifices to be carried beyond the boundaries of the camp. While service was in progress they were used to throw from the ramp to the ground next to it. They would land with a bang and be picked up by any priest who had heard the bang. (Compare Tamid 5,5 where all this is explained in great detail)

מזלגת — copper hooks (cf. Rashi on Exodus 27:3) which they stuck forcibly into the limbs that were on the altar in order to turn them over so that they might become thoroughly and quickly consumed.

יעים are shovels; in O. F. vedil. They were of copper and with them they cleared the ashes from off the altar.

לכסת את הקדש [AND AARON AND HIS SONS FINISHED] COVERING THE HOLY THINGS — the Ark and the altar,

ואחרי כן יבאו בני קהת, after the ark and the other furnishings in the Tabernacle had been covered.

The Menorah and the service vessels. (Nachalas Yaakov) This raises a difficulty: Previously (v. 4) Rashi explained that the Holy of Holies referred to the Ark, the Table, the Menorah, the Paroches, and the service vessels, but here he does not mention the Table and the Altars. After I wrote this I found in the Midrash Rabbah “and the holy utensils” — these are the Table and the Menorah and the two Altars and their utensils.

V. 15. את הקדש bezeichnet wohl den ארון עדות als קדש in Vorzüglichkeit, dessen Beziehungen erst allem andern קדושה erteilt. כלי הקדש sind מזבחות ,מנורה ,שולחן die sich zum ארון wie zweckvollbringendes כלי zum zwecksetzenden Objekt verhalten.

ואת כל כלי הקדש AND ALL THE VESSELS OF THE SANCTUARY — the candelabrum and the vessels for service,

Since, if they touch they will be subject. Not that if they do not touch they will die, as is implied by the simple reading of the verse. The word ימותו “and they will die” is not together with the words ולא יגעו— “they shall not touch,” only with the word יגעו “touch.” Thus we are to infer “they shall not touch,” but if they do touch, then ימותו “they will die.”

ומתו [SO THAT THEY SHALL NOT TOUCH ANY THING OF HOLINESS] LEST THEY DIE — because if they do touch they become liable to death by Heaven.

ופקדת אלעזר AND THE CHARGE OF ELEAZAR … [WERE THE OIL FOR THE LIGHT, AND THE INCENSE OF AROMATICS, AND THE CONTINUAL MEAL OFFERING, AND THE ANOINTING OIL] — This means: the charge of Eleazar who was appointed over them to carry them were the oil, and the incense and the anointing oil. As regards the continual meal-offering mentioned here, upon him lay the charge to give orders and to urge on that it should be offered at the time when they encamped.

AND THE CHARGE OF ELEAZAR THE SON OF AARON THE PRIEST SHALL BE THE OIL FOR THE LIGHT, AND THE SWEET INCENSE, AND THE CONTINUAL MEAL-OFFERING, AND THE ANOINTING OIL: HE SHALL HAVE THE CHARGE OF ALL THE TABERNACLE, AND OF ALL THAT THEREIN IS, IN THE SANCTUARY, AND IN THE VESSELS THEREOF. Scripture is stating that Eleazar was in charge of all these things, and the meaning of [the end of the verse] is that “he was in charge of all the Tabernacle and in charge of all that therein is.” And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained that it means that “Eleazar’s charge extended also to the Tabernacle and to all its vessels, together with his brother Ithamar,¹⁹⁹Ibn Ezra’s interpretation is intended to answer the following point: Scripture further on (4:28, 33) explains that it was Ithamar the son of Aaron who was in charge of the work of the sons of Gershon [in carrying the curtains, etc.] and of the work of the sons of Merari [in carrying the boards and bars of the Tabernacle, etc.]. Why then does Scripture state here that the charge of Eleazar was all the Tabernacle etc.? Ibn Ezra answers that Eleazar shared together with his brother Ithamar in the charge of all the Tabernacle etc., and that the first part of our verse is pointing out that in addition to sharing the general charge of the Tabernacle, Eleazar was, due to his great distinction, solely in charge of the oil for the light etc. Ramban objects to this interpretation and suggests his own explanation. and that due to Eleazar’s great distinction, he alone was in charge of the oil [for the light], and the incense.” But this is not correct, since Scripture states [that the services of the sons of Gershon and Merari were] under the hand of Ithamar²⁰⁰Further, 4:28, 33. [which thus indicates that Eleazar had no share in it]! And [Scripture] explained here [that Eleazar’s charge was] in the Sanctuary and in the vessels thereof, and similarly it stated above, And Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest, was prince over the princes of the Levites and had the oversight of them that keep the charge of the Sanctuary²⁰¹Above, 3:32. meaning to say that he was the prince [who supervised] the charge of those that guarded the Sanctuary, which was in the hands of the Kohathites²⁰²Ramban’s meaning is as follows. It is clear from Scripture’s explanations that Eleazar was the prince of the princes of the Levites inasmuch as he supervised the most holy things. In Verse 4 above it is clearly stated that the sons of Kohath — alone — were in charge of the most holy things, thus disproving Ibn Ezra’s explanation quoted above. If so, the phrase the charge of all the Tabernacle must be in apposition to the end of the verse namely in the Sanctuary, and in the vessels thereof, and the meaning is as follows: “the charge of the oil for the light, etc., the charge of all the Tabernacle, that is, in the Sanctuary, and in the vessels thereof which refers to the most holy things [the ark, etc.] they were given over to the Kohathites — and all these were under the charge of Eleazar,” just as Ithamar was in charge of the work of the sons of Gershon and Merari. In addition to supervising the Kohathites, and assigning each one his particular duty, Eleazar was also chief of all three main Levite families, as will be explained. [i.e., he supervised the most holy things — the ark, the table, candelabrum, altars, Veils and the vessels used in the Divine Service]. But the meaning of the charge of all the Tabernacle is that “the charge of … the oil for the light, and the incense, and the meal-offering, and the anointing oil, and the charge of all the Tabernacle — in the Sanctuary, and of all that therein is of the holy vessels — they were all under the hand of Eleazar,”²⁰²Ramban’s meaning is as follows. It is clear from Scripture’s explanations that Eleazar was the prince of the princes of the Levites inasmuch as he supervised the most holy things. In Verse 4 above it is clearly stated that the sons of Kohath — alone — were in charge of the most holy things, thus disproving Ibn Ezra’s explanation quoted above. If so, the phrase the charge of all the Tabernacle must be in apposition to the end of the verse namely in the Sanctuary, and in the vessels thereof, and the meaning is as follows: “the charge of the oil for the light, etc., the charge of all the Tabernacle, that is, in the Sanctuary, and in the vessels thereof which refers to the most holy things [the ark, etc.] they were given over to the Kohathites — and all these were under the charge of Eleazar,” just as Ithamar was in charge of the work of the sons of Gershon and Merari. In addition to supervising the Kohathites, and assigning each one his particular duty, Eleazar was also chief of all three main Levite families, as will be explained. and they are those mentioned here when He stated, And when Aaron and his sons have made an end of covering the Sanctuary and all the vessels of the Sanctuary.²⁰³Verse 15. Eleazar was thus officer over the three princes²⁰⁴The prince of the Gershonites was Eliasaph the son of Lael (above, 3:24); of the Kohathites, Elitzaphan the son of Uzziel (ibid., Verse 30), and of the families of Merari, Tzuriel the son of Abichail (ibid., Verse 35). The prince over the princes of the Levites was Eleazar the son of Aaron (ibid., Verse 32). [of the Levites], and [also] overseer of the charge of the Kohathites, and Ithamar was overseer of [the charges of the families of] Gershon and Merari. Now since Scripture does not say that Eleazar “shall bear” [the oil for the light etc.] as is said of the Levites,²⁰⁵Further, Verse 25: And they shall bear … it would appear that Eleazar did not carry them, but was in charge over them and would give them from hand to hand to those Kohathites whom he chose because of their zeal and piety. It was they who carried them, and they returned them to his control when the Tabernacle was set up. This also [is the meaning of the verse which says that Eleazar was the prince over the princes of the Levites,] having the oversight of them that keep the charge of the Sanctuary,²⁰⁶Above, 3:32. and the verse stating, and by name ye shall appoint the vessels of the charge of their burden²⁰⁷Further, 4:32. [conveying the same thought, that the individual families of the Levites were to be told by the overseer what their particular kind of work would be, and Eleazar, as the prince over the princes, was the overseer of all the service of the Levites].
But according to the opinion of the Yerushalmi²⁰⁸Ramban is not referring to Rashi here, but to Rashi’s commentary to Shabbath 92 a. On the term “Yerushalmi,” see Leviticus, Seder Metzora, (p. 192, Note 44). mentioned in the commentaries of Rashi²⁰⁹This expression [“mentioned in the commentaries of Rashi”] clearly indicates that Ramban does not mean Rashi’s commentary on the Torah, as he never refers to it by that description. Rather, the reference is to Rashi’s commentary on the Talmud. See Note 208. that he [Eleazar himself] carried them [all the objects enumerated], it would be a heavy load! For the incense consisted of three hundred and sixty-eight manehs,²¹⁰Kerithoth 6 a. There was one for each day of the solar year, and 3 extra manehs for the Service on the Day of Atonement. arid [surely] Moses our teacher would not have prepared [only] half of the required quantity,²¹¹“If he compounded only half the required amount [i.e., 184 manehs] it would be valid” (Yerushalmi Yoma IV, 5). This rule applies to the compounding of the incense, which was to be done once every year. But, continues Ramban, although valid if done in this manner, surely Moses would prepare the complete, and not just half, the required amount. Hence Eleazar carried the full quantity [except, of course, for the amount that had been used up from the time of the erection of the Tabernacle until the camps set forth]. and the oil for the light for a whole year was a large amount, namely one hundred and eighty-three logs,²¹²Half a log of oil was used up every night of the year (Menachoth 89 a). This was the measure that was estimated to be sufficient for the longest night of the year ; if any of the oil was left over on the shorter nights, it did not matter (ibid). and as for [the ingredients required for] the continual meal-offering, we do not know how many days’ supply he carried! But [we would have to say that] Eleazar was very strong and powerful, as was our patriarch Jacob,²¹³And Jacob went near, and rolled the stone from the well’s mouth (Genesis 29:10) — “as easily as one draws the stopper from the mouth of a bottle. Scripture thus informs you how strong he was” (Rashi ibid., on the basis of Bereshith Rabbah 70:10). and so also were Moses our teacher²¹⁴Nedarim 38 a. and his brother Aaron,²¹⁵Vayikra Rabbah 26:10. Proof for his great strength is brought there from the fact that he lifted twenty-two Levites in one day (further, 8:21). and they that wait for the Eternal shall renew their strength.²¹⁶Isaiah 40:31.

ופקדת אלעזר, to issue orders who was to do what; i.e. who was to carry which parts of the Tabernacle.

ופקודת אלעזר ...הכהן, שמן המאור, וקטורת הסמים..פקודת כל המשכן וכל אשר בקודש ובכליו, “the supervision of Eleazar, son of Aaron the Priest, was the oil for illumination, the incense of spices the supervision of the entire Tabernacle and everything in it.” In other words, Eleazar was the keeper of all the items mentioned, and would hand to whoever had occasion to use any of these items during the performance of their duties, the correct quantities needed to perform their task. Ibn Ezra writes that the expression פקודת כל המשכן means although there were also subordinate tasks and supervisions, some of which had been entrusted to his brother Ittamar, the Torah wanted us to know that Eleazar was the person responsible for the overall functioning of all matters pertaining to the Tabernacle. Seeing that he was the person in charge, the Torah singles out his supervising the oil for illumination and the spices for the incense as being Eleazar’s specific concern Nachmanides writes that Ibn Ezra’s commentary is not correct, seeing that we have another verse in which Ittamar’s functions are specifically spelled out (Numbers 4,28, 4,31 et al) In those instances no mention is made of Eleazar. Also in Numbers 3,32 Eleazar is described only as the chieftain of the various chieftains of Levi whose task it was to look after the sacred objects and guard their well being. It is clear from there that what are referred to are the objects to be carried by the members of the group of Levites headed by the descendants of Kehat. Therefore, in Nachmanides’ opinion, the meaning of the expression פקודת כל המשכן must be the looking after the oil for illumination, the spices for the incense, the ingredients for the daily minchah offering, the oil for anointment, and other matters pertaining directly to the Tabernacle. It included all the items listed in this paragraph. They are summed up when the Torah writes (4,15) “and Aaron and his sons shall finish covering the holy, and all the holy utensils when the camp breaks up, in order to journey.” At that point the Torah had spoken of Aaron and his sons (pl.), whereas in the verse following, the specific duties of Eleazar are detailed separately. Eleazar was the treasurer or administrator for the three leaders of the Levites as well as the keeper of the furnishings entrusted to the Kehatites, whereas Ittamar was the treasurer of the Gershonites and Merarites. Seeing that the Torah did not mention that Eleazar engaged in carrying any utensils, as it had done in connection with all the other Levites, it seems clear that his task was merely that of a supervisor. He ensured that the other Levites were handed whatever it was they needed to transport, and that when the camp came to rest that they handed back whatever it was they had been carrying during the most recent journey of the people. According to a view expressed in the Jerusalem Talmud as understood by Rashi, Eleazar, personally carried the quantities of spices, a heavy load indeed, seeing that at certain periods of the year 365 portions of such incense were kept in stock, ready and prepared for use. He also carried a full year’s lighting oil supply, surely a very heavy load indeed. (183 login=slightly over 100000 ccm) As far as the daily minchah offering is concerned, we do not know the quantity of components kept in store at all times in the Tabernacle’s storage room. At any rate, it appears that Eleazar must have been of a very powerful physique, like Yaakov who rolled the heavy rock single-handedly, if as reported in the Jerusalem Talmud, he did indeed carry all this by himself.

To carry … and to offer. You might ask: Doesn’t the written verse implies “to carry them” (rather than to offer)? The answer is that he means that Elazar was assigned “to carry them — the oil, incense and anointing oil.” However for the continual meal-offering it was his responsibility [to issue orders…]. Even though the word “to carry” appears to refer to all of them, even to the meal-offering, it is impossible to say this. The meal-offering was flour that was offered with a sacrifice — an issaron for the sheep — and the flour was only termed a meal-offering at the time when it was brought together with the offering. This was only at the time of camping for then they would offer, but not at the time of traveling. Furthermore one cannot say that Rashi refers to the setting aside of flour or its sanctification in a utensil, because if so it would have become invalid after leaving the courtyard of the Mishkon. Also why would they set it aside earlier, since a mitzvah is most dear at its allotted time? Thus, it is impossible to say that they carried it at the time of traveling. Consequently Rashi explains that Elazar was responsible to issue orders, and with this Ramban’s question on Rashi’s explanation is rejected.

V. 16. ופקדת וגו׳ פקדת וגו׳. Nach der Stellung dieser Sätze ist der zweite Satz eine Erläuterung des ersten. Elasars Aufgabe usw. Dies ist aber die Aufgabe usw. d. h. Elasar war das Leuchtöl, das Räucherwerk, das Mehl des täglichen Huldigungsopfers (es ist dies die ein jedes תמיד begleitende מנחת סולת, nach der Lesart des Jalkut im ירושלמי Schabbat V, 3 sind dies die חביתי כה׳׳ג siehe Wajikra 6, 13) und das Salböl übergeben, damit war ihm aber Zweck und Aufgabe der ganzen Wohnung und ihres ganzen Inhalts, nämlich des קדש( ארון) und des שולחן, der מנורה und כליו) מזבחות vergl. V. 15) übergeben. מנחת התמיד ,קטרת הסמים ,שמן המאור, נשמן המשחה Erleuchtung, gänzliches Aufgehen in Gottes Wohlgefallen, Huldigung mit jedem Augenblick der Existenz und Heiligung, das sind die Zwecke, die mit Lade, Tisch, Leuchter und Altären erstrebt werden sollen; nicht mit dem bloßen Vorhandensein der den Kehatiden übergebenen Objekte, sondern erst mit den an sie sich knüpfenden Vollbringungen, deren Repräsentanten Elasar anvertraut sind, gewinnt das משכן Leben und Ziel. Mit den Elasar übergebenen Mitteln dieser Vollbringungen war ihm somit das ganze Heiligtum mit seinem ganzen Inhalt und dessen letzten und eigentlichen Zwecken in die Hand gegeben.

ופקדת אלעזר שמן המאור, “and the charge of Elazar was the oil for the lighting of the menorah;” he was also charged with guarding the oil for anointing. He would carry one type in his right hand and the other in his left hand. He would carry the incense in his lapel, and the חביתים, “the daily offering of the High Priest”, consisting of a meal offering, so called, he would carry on his shoulders.

פקדת כל המשכן means: and further he was appointed over the burden of the sons of Kohath, i.e., to give each man orders regarding his service and his burden, which was the Tabernacle and all that was therein — all the articles set forth above in this section. The burden of the sons of Gershon and of the sons of Merari, however, which did not appertain to things of most holy character, was carried out by order of Ithamar, as is set forth in the section commencing with the word נשא (vv. 21—34).

פקדת כל המשכן; responsibility for the whole Tabernacle at the time when they broke camp to start their journeys and again when it came time to make camp.

To issue orders for everyone. Meaning that he would not carry them himself like the oil for illumination and the other items, because the Torah had already written above (v. 15) “and after that, the sons of Kehos shall come to carry [these items].” Rashi adds that he oversaw the load of Kehos, so that one does not err and say that the loads of Gershon and Merrori were also the responsibility of Elazar — given that the Torah here writes “the entire Mishkon.” However this is not the case because the loads of Gershon and Merrori were the responsibility of Isamar. Thus Rashi explains that Elazar was assigned to the load of Kehos.

בקדש ובכיליו, “whether belonging to the Sanctuary or its furnishings.” There is a dot above the letter ב in the word בקדש. (In our editions the dot is over the letter ק.)

V. 17. וידבר וגו׳. Im Vorhergehenden war bestimmt, dass den Kehatiden die von ihnen zu tragenden heiligen Gegenstände nur eingehüllt übergeben werden sollen, damit sie die Heiligtümer selbst nicht berühren. Hier wird nun angeordnet, dass sie nicht einmal zugegen sein sollen, wenn die Heiligtümer in ihre Verhüllungen gebracht werden. Sie sollen die Heiligtümer "nicht sehen" wenn sie eingehüllt werden. Irren wir nicht, so wird durch dieses Verbot bewirkt, dass die Heiligtümer ihren Trägern Gegenstände des Gedankens, nicht Gegenstände sinnlicher Wahrnehmung bleiben und umsomehr ihren Geist mit dem Gedanken ihrer Bedeutung erfüllen. Diese geistige Vergegenwärtigung der ihnen anvertrauten Heiligtümer dürfte aber ein wesentliches Moment ihrer Obliegenheiten bilden und das Verweilen mit dem sinnlichen Auge auf den Gegenständen ihrer Obhut im Momente der Verhüllung dieselben für die Auffassung ihrer Träger störend entweihen.

אל תכריתו CUT YE NOT OFF [THE TRIBE OF THE FAMILIES OF THE KOHATHITES] — Do not bring it about for them that they shall die.

אל תכריתו, do not allow the procedure of carrying parts of the Tabernacle to be a free for all, the one first on the spot carrying the part he chooses to, for if you do this the resulting chaos will lead to destruction, to death. Such chaotic conditions will inevitably lead to desecration of holy things, holy objects, with tragic results, i.e. loss of life. Our sages illustrated what is meant when describing the race between priests to be the first to carry out the cleaning of the ashes off the top of the altar. (compare Yuma 23-24).

Do not cause. Rashi thus informs us that the word תכריתו — “cut off” is from the causative הפעיל construct and it refers to the third person.

V. 18. שבט (siehe zu Kap. 3, 15).

משפחות הקהתי, “the families of the Kehatites.” The Torah deliberately did not write “the family (sing) of Kehat,” being aware that many of them would be members of the rebellion of Korach against Moses and Aaron. In spite of this foreknowledge, G’d said that every care must be taken not to cause the Kehatites to become guilty of serious sins. By writing the word אל תכריתו in this form the Torah added two letters (יו) of the name of G’d in order to append them to the name קהת. You may understand the idea behind this by means of a parable. A king had a son who kept bad company and eventually was arrested with the thieves he had joined. The king’s response was that at this time he would deal leniently with the thieves themselves seeing that his own son was also part of that group. However, he warned that there would not be a second time when such leniency would be practiced. This is also the meaning of Isaiah 48,9: “for the sake of My name I control My wrath; to My own glory I am patient with you and will not destroy you.”

ושמו איש איש על עבודתו ואל משאו, assign to each of them his specific duty in order to avoid a free for all. By doing this, you will insure that each Levite will wait patiently until his turn comes to carry out his assigned duty.

וזאת עשו להם, "and this is what you are to do for them, etc." This means that the Kehatites were not to consider themselves as performing their task on their own authority. If they would do so there was a danger that anyone who loved the sacred vessels would arrogate to themselves a part in the service of the Tabernacle. Rather, all the Kehatites did was to be under the supervision of Aaron and his sons and at their direction. This would ensure that every member of the Kehatites knew his place. This is the deeper meaning of the words אותם איש. When the Torah continues ולא יבואו לראות, "so that they will not come and take a (unauthorised) look at the Sanctuary when the vessels are being covered," this tells us that even looking at something that was not their place to see could prove deadly. The words ושמו אותם stress that it was not enough for each Kehatite to know his place but that they had to wait before putting their hands on the vessels they were to carry until instructed to do so by Aaron. This was different from what the clan of Gershon did; although in that connection the Torah also writes that their task was performed על פי אהרון, at the command of Aaron, the Torah did not add the cautionary words ושמו אותם as they did not face death if they acted prematurely (compare 4,27).

וחיו ולא ימותו, "so that they may live and not die, etc." The Torah means that carrying the Holy Ark whose contents, the Torah (and the Tablets), is a dispenser of life will ensure that the Kehatites carrying same would enjoy long life. Seeing that some Kehatites might be afraid that unauthorised touching or viewing would cause them to die, the Torah adds the words ולא ימותו, "so that they will not die," to put at rest such fears of the Kehatites that they would die by accidentally touching or viewing what they were not supposed to view or touch.

ולא יבאו לראות כבלע את הקדש BUT THEY SHALL NOT COME IN TO SEE WHEN THE HOLY THINGS ARE WRAPPED IN, each into its wrapping, as I have explained above in this section (v. 5 ff.): ‘‘and they shall spread upon it such-and-such a garment”, “and they shall cover it over with such-and-such a cover”, — for the “wrapping-up’ of it mentioned here is identical with the “covering up” of it mentioned in those passages.

AND THEY [i.e., the Kohathites] SHALL NOT GO IN TO SEE THE HOLY THING ‘K’VALA’ (AS THEY ARE BEING COVERED) — “as they [the priests] put each vessel into its wrapping, as I have explained above in this section: ‘and they shall spread upon it such-and-such a garment, and they shall cover it with such-and-such a cover,’ the [term] ‘k’vala’ referring to its ‘covering.’” This is Rashi’s language. It is also Onkelos’ opinion [who translated the verse as quoted above]. But our Rabbis have said in Tractate Sanhedrin²¹⁷Sanhedrin 61 b. that this verse constitutes a prohibition against stealing a sacred vessel, for which one suffers death [by the hand of Heaven], and zealous people have the right to strike such a thief, for stealing and robbing are referred to as b’liah (swallowing, devouring), as in the expressions: ‘bala’ (he hath swallowed down) riches, and he shall vomit them up again;²¹⁸Job 20:15. and I will bring forth out of his mouth ‘eth bil’o’ (that which he hath swallowed up).²¹⁹Jeremiah 51:44.
But Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained [the verse] in its plain sense: that [the Kohathites] should not come in to see when the screening Veil is removed and the ark becomes exposed; only afterwards when it is covered are they to come in to carry it. Accordingly, the expression k’vala eth hakodesh means [they shall not come in to see] “when the structure [i.e., the screening Veil] is being removed from the ark, which is hakodesh (the holiness),” [the word ‘k’vala’] being related to the expressions: ‘bila Hashem’ (the Eternal hath swallowed up) unsparingly²²⁰Lamentations 2:2. [which means that He “destroyed the structure” of the habitations of Jacob mentioned further on in the verse]; Thy hands have framed me … together round about; yet ‘va’tval’eini’ (Thou dost destroy me).²²¹Job 10:8.
Thus the Levites are warned not to touch the holy ark lest they die, and only by means of its staves are they to carry it. He furthermore warned them against coming in at all to see the dismantling of the structure, while Aaron is taking down the screening Veil, in a similar way to that which is said [of the people of Beth-shemesh that they were punished] because they had gazed upon the ark of the Eternal.²²²I Samuel 6:19. He [i.e., Ibn Ezra] has explained it well [i.e., the simple meaning of the verse]. But the [true] intention of the verse is that since the Glory that resides upon the cherubim [on the cover of the ark] is there, the Levites were warned not to break through “to see the Eternal”²²³See Exodus 19:24. until the priests take down the Veil, for then the Glory is seen in the hiding of His power,²²⁴Habakkuk 3:4. and it returns to its former place²²⁵See Hosea 5:15. in “the Holy of Holies.”²²⁶“In the Holy of Holies on Above” (Abusaula). In this way the expression k’vala eth hakodesh is to be understood in its literal sense. The student learned in the mysteries of the Cabala will understand.
Naso

ולא יבאו לראות, by having a previously assigned roster of individual duties you will avoid that someone will see things forbidden to be seen by him, as a result of which he would have to die. He will avoid watching the priests covering the holy vessels, something which would cause their death.

כבלע את הקודש, when the roof and walls of the Tabernacles were being dismantled these furnishings would suddenly be revealed to all. If people would look at these objects they would die. We know this from the inhabitants of Beyt Shemesh who had seen the ark with their own eyes. (Samuel I 6,19)

ולא יבואו לראות כבלע את הקודש ומתו, “but they shall not come and look as the holy is being wrapped lest they die.” According to Rashi the word כבלע means: “when it is being covered.” Ibn Ezra understands the verse to mean that people must not approach and look on when the dividing curtain that enveloped the Holy Ark was being removed from it prior to it being placed back in the Tabernacle. However, he adds that the word כבלע, based on the word בלע as in בלע המוות, “banish, remove death,” refers to the dismantling of the Tabernacle prior to the people’s journeying. The very process of the dismantling must not be watched by people who had no part in performing that duty.

Its “בלוע” refers to the covering of it. Similarly the Targum translates כד מכסן ית מני קודשא — “when the holy vessels are covered.”

V. 20. בלע .כבלע וגו׳: etwas ganz in einen andern Körper versenken: daher verschlucken, daher auch wie פלא das für den Gedankeneinblick Unzugängliche, so. auch בלע etwas für den Augenanblick unzugänglich machen, es ganz dem Anblick entziehen. So ודרך ארחתיך בלעו, sie haben den einzigen rechten Weg unter allen von dir einzuschlagenden Pfaden deinem Blicke völlig entzogen (Jes.3, 12).

כבלע את הקדש, “as the sacred furnishings were being covered;” the expression: בלע is also found in Lamentations 2,2, i.e. בלע ה' ולא חמל, “the Lord consumed without pity;” in light of this we may understand it here as meaning that if anyone wanted to feast his eyes by watching the Tabernacle being dissembled he would die while doing so. We find that something similar happened to the people in Beyt Shemesh (Samuel I 6,19) [where 57000 men were killed by G-d for having dared to look inside the ark that the Philistines had captured from the Israelite soldiers and returned after it had created havoc among them. Ed.] We therefore hear that the Israelites in the desert, every time when the Tabernacle was dissembled prior to the next step in their journey, kept a distance from that area. (Compare verse 5 in our chapter and the whole discussion of what might otherwise be considered trivial detail as it had no historic significance, no portable Temple ever having been constructed again.) [The lesson surely must be, as already hinted at in Exodus chapter 24, where the elite of the people feasted their eyes on what they perceived as a vision of G-d. The Torah pointed out there that G-d took no action against them then as it was such a happy day in the Jewish people’s history. Ed.] The warning in our verse extended even to the people personally charged with the covering of these sacred items.

כבלע, similar to בלע ה' in Lamentations 2,2 or in Isaiah 3,12 ודרך אורחותיך בלעו, “they have swallowed up the way of Your paths.” [swallowing is a form of making something disappear, destroying it. The author quotes more examples of the verb בלע, which I have omitted. Ed.] We have noted from verse 5-15 that from the time the Tabernacle was being dismantled the Levites immediately proceeded to cover up its furnishings. Even the members of the family of Kehat withdrew at the time when Aaron and sons alone lowered the dividing curtain. The entire procedure of dismantling the Tabernacle was performed exclusively by Aaron and his sons.

-22. וידבר ה׳…נשא, G'd said to Moses: "Take the sum, etc." The Torah had to repeat the line וידבר ה׳ אל משה although it had used this introduction when telling Moses to count the Kehatites. The reason is that in this instance the Torah added the instruction to elevate the status of the clan of Gershon in relation to that of the clan of Merari. The elevation of the clan of Gershon was not of the same nature as that of the Kehatites as compared to the clan of Gershon. The former were distinguished in that they carried the Holy Ark. We would not have known that the clan of Gershon were more distinguished than the clan of Merari had the Torah not employed the term נשא in respect to their tasks. The Torah makes this even clearer when it does not preface the instruction detailing the tasks of the clan of Merari by G'd giving Moses a separate command (compare verse 29). The Torah contents itself with telling Moses to count (תפקד) the members of that clan before detailing their tasks.

אל משה, to Moses. Interestingly, when the count is actually being performed (verse 34) the Torah reports that both Moses and Aaron did the counting. This was because already in 4,1 G'd had commanded both Moses and Aaron to do the counting. G'd included Aaron in the commandment to instruct the Kehatites to be very careful so that they would not incur death seeing Aaron himself was liable to death if he entered the Holy of Holies, the site where the Holy Ark was situated in an unauthorised fashion at an unauthorised time. There was no need to include Aaron then in the command to assign the tasks of the clan of Gershon or of Merari.

נשא את ראש בני גרשון גם הם TAKE ALSO THE SUM OF THE SONS OF GERSHON - "also" implies: even as I have commanded you regarding the sons of Kohath; i.e. to see how many of them have already reached the age to be included amongst those fit for service.

גם הם; seeing the Torah had written earlier (4,2) “elevate the members of the family of Kehat.”

נשא את ראש, “take a census, etc.” The expression נשא for counting in the sense of “elevating” is used only with the Kehatites and the Gershonites, but not with the members of the family of Merari The reason is that Gershon was especially distinguished by reason of being the eldest of the sons of Levi, whereas Kehat was distinguished by reason of his having been chosen to carry the Holy Ark, etc. This is also why the Torah adds the words: גם הם, “they too,” when speaking of the Gershonites, as their distinction was only by reason of heredity rather than merit, and that although they did not perform the task of carrying parts of the Tabernacle that had been sanctified, they nonetheless qualify for this kind of census. When speaking of the members of the family of the Merarites, the Torah neither uses the term נשא nor the term גם הם. My sainted father, the רא'ש said that the expression גם הם refers to the previous census when the Levites were counted from the age of one month and up. On that occasion the order in which they were counted began with the Gershonites (3,18) seeing that Gershon was the eldest of the three. Now, when the count includes only men who had reached the age of 30 and could therefore begin to perform their allocated tasks, Kehat is counted first as he carried the most sacred furnishings of the Tabernacle, and they had been chosen to carry the holy vessels on their shoulders, as opposed to items of lesser sanctity which were transported by the wagons. The Torah therefore had to write the words גם הם, “they too,” to make plain that these Gershonites were also to be counted from the age of 30 and up at this junction. In connection with both Gershon and Merari, the Torah uses the expression כל הבא, whereas in connection with the Kehatites the Torah speaks of כל בא (compare 4,3) The meaning of the letter ה is that these Levites came of their own volition, did not wait to be assigned their tasks. This was natural, seeing that they had to take part in the dismantling of the Tabernacle. At that stage there was nothing as yet for the Kehatites to do. They had to await Moses’ call to indicate that the time had come to wrap up the Holy Ark, etc. In connection with both the Gershonites and the Merarites, the Torah speaks of לעבוד עבודה, “to perform heavy labour,” whereas in connection with the Kehatites the Torah speaks of לעשות מלאכה, “to carry out the work.” The duties performed by both the Gershonites and the Merarites involved strenuous physical labour. The Kehatites’ duties were easier to perform.

Just as I commanded you. Rashi stated “just as I commanded you concerning the sons of Kehos” rather than “just as you counted the sons of Kehos” because he had not yet counted them. Hashem had commanded Moshe to count them, previously in Parshas Bamidbar (4:2), and the act of doing so is recorded in this Parshah. Therefore Rashi writes “just as I commanded you concerning the sons of Kehos,” meaning that I am also commanding you to do the same for the sons of Gershon. Consequently the word גם (also) is connected to the phrase “according to the house of their fathers, according to their families.” Alternatively, one may say that Rashi was answering the question: The Torah should have stated “גם אותם (also them)” because the word הם is normally used as a subject, for example הם ילכו (they shall go), הם ישרתו (they shall serve). However the word הם is not used [when referring to an object] as with the word נשא (count), rather [the word] אותם is used. Therefore Rashi explains “just as I commanded you…” and אותם is not used with these two words—that are either in the active פועל or in the passive נפעל constructs.

V. 22. נשא וגו׳. Die Zählung der Kehatiden war vorangegangen. Obgleich Gerschon der ältere war, so waren doch hier, wo zugleich die Übergabe der Heiligtumsobjekte beim Lageraufbruch bestimmt wird, die Kehatiden zuerst zu besprechen, da deren Aufgabe die heiligsten Gegenstände bildeten, deren Einhüllung und Übergabe auch beim Lageraufbruch zuerst erfolgte. Es war daher die Zählung derselben mit dem Ausdruck מתוך בני לוי geboten worden, da sie ein Hervorheben derselben involvierte. Indem nun jetzt die Zählung der Gersoniden und ihre Anweisung folgt, heißt es im Hinblick hierauf: גם הם, wohl um zu sagen, dass mit dieser scheinbaren Zurücksetzung keine wirkliche Zurücksetzung beabsichtigt sei. Vielleicht heißt es darum auch hier: לבית אבתם למשפחתם, wie in bezug auf den ganzen Levitenstamm Kap. 3, 15, während es sonst למשפחתם לבית אבתם lautet. Es ist damit gesagt, dass die Gersoniden nicht minder als die übrigen ein eigenes Stammeshaus bilden: מהו שאמר הכתוב גם הם שלא תאמר :מ׳׳ר שלכך מנה בני גרשון שניים שהם פחותים מבני קהת לאו אלא כתב גם הם שאף בני גרשן ביוצא בהם של בני קהת אלא שהקדימם הכתוב כאן בשביל כבוד התורה (לפי שקהת היה מטועני הארון) וכו׳.

נשא את ראש בני גרשון גם הם, “take the sum of the sons of Gershon, also;” seeing that on the first occasion, (Numbers 3,17) when the Levites were counted from 30 days old and up, the Gersonides were listed first, (seeing he was the oldest of sons of Levi, as per Genesis 46,11) whereas here when only the ones thirty years and older were counted and Kehot was counted first, (seeing that he performed the most holy tasks of the Levites), the words גם הם, “they also,” were added here to show that this section of the Levites also was counted.

נשא את ראש בני גרשון גם הם, “count the number of the members of the house of Gershon, also;” even though I have ordered you to count the members of the house of Kehat first, seeing that the most important part of that work is the transportation of the Ark, the Table, the altars and the menorah, as has been stated in chapter 7,1, do not fail to also count the members of the house of Gershon, even though they do not do any carrying, as their work is being performed by the wagons donated by the princes. After all, the members of the house of Gershon are the firstborns of the house of Levi, and for that reason deserve to be counted next.

Have reached [the working] category. Rashi did not state “just as I commanded you concerning the sons of Kehos to count them” because he was answering the question: Why didn’t the Torah write “also count the sons of Gershon according to the house of their fathers…” such that there would have been no need to write הם (them). He answers that if it had written “also count…” this would have implied that you should also take their count from twenty-five years and above, or alternatively from one month and above. Therefore it wrote גם (also) at the end of this phrase to indicate that גם does not refer to the count mentioned previously, rather to the phrase “from thirty years…” below (v. 23). This is why Rashi stated “[how many] have reached the working category,” which lasts from the age of thirty until fifty.

Take the count. The likely explanation for this is that the Holy One wanted to show that “the wise shall inherit honor.” The nation needed to be taught that they should honor those that study Torah, and that “the holy of Hashem should be honored,” to give them precedence in every matter of holiness. Thus, Kehos was counted first because they carried the Aron with the word of Hashem. If the Aron had been given to Gershon, the firstborn, and his family was counted first, we might have thought he was counted first because he was the firstborn and we would not have attached the importance to being the bearers of the Aron. Therefore, the Aron was given to Kehos and he was counted first. Thus, all would know to give honor to the Torah and those who study it. Another explanation: The task of carrying the Aron was not given to the firstborn so that he would not become haughty. Some say the reason Kehos was counted first is because of Moshe and Aharon, who received the Torah, and were descended from Kehos.

נשא את ראש בני גרשון גם הם לבית אבותם למשפחותהם, מבן שלשים שנה ומעלה עד בן חמישים שנה, “take a census of the sons of Gershon, as well, according to their fathers’ household, according to their families.” The words גם הם mean that the same procedure which was observed concerning the census of the Kehatites was followed here. Although Gershon was the oldest of the sons of Levi, the Kehatites were counted first as they were entrusted with transporting the Holy Ark as well as other holy vessels. I have already mentioned earlier that just as the encampments of the twelve tribes were four, three tribes in each direction, so the Levites also were divided into four groups, the three sons of Levi (descendants) Kehat, Gershon, and Merari who were encamped around the Tabernacle in three directions, and Moses, Aaron, and his sons who had their tents to the east of the Tabernacle.

תפקד אותם, "you will count them." Why did the Torah have to repeat the instruction to count seeing the word נשא already meant "to count?" I have explained this in connection with the instruction to count the Kehatites (4,20).

לעבוד, “to perform service;” their service consisted of erecting and dismantling the Tabernacle, as is written: יורידו אותו הלוים יקימו אותו הלוים, “the Levites are to erect it, the Levites are to dismantle it.” (Numbers 1,51)

לצבא צבא, "to perform public service etc." When speaking of the service to be rendered by the Kehatites the Torah described this only as לצבא, without the word צבא. This was because they carried only the holy vessels that formed the interior furnishings of the Tabernacle. The materials carried by the clan of Gershon were only vessels for the vessels so to speak, i.e. לצבא צבא. [The author perceives the furnishings of the Tabernacle as being the "army" of the Tabernacle, so to speak. Ed.]

לעבוד ולמשא. The former, לעבוד, while the people were encamped; the latter while the people were journeying. ולמשא, at the time of the journeys. Seeing that earlier when the Torah said:ומשמרת בני גרשון באהל מועד, (3,25) it spoke about their carrying out their function at the time of the people being encamped, the Torah also stated that everything which was under their control while the people were encamped remained under their control during the journeys.

את יריעת המשכן THE CURTAINS OF THE TABERNACLE — the ten lower ones,

ומכסה התחש אשר עליו, “and the covering of Tachash hide which was over it, etc.” Ibn Ezra writes that the verse abbreviated the description, omitting reference to the covering consisting of the ram’s hides dyed red, which also covered the Tabernacle. (Compare Exodus 36,19) Some commentators believe that both of these coverings were glued to one another so that they formed one cover.

The ten lower ones. Re’m explains that Rashi knew this because the Torah afterwards writes “and [of] the אהל (Tent) of Meeting,” which refers to the eleven goat-hair tapestries. They were termed an אהל when the Torah wrote “and make goat-hair tapestries לאהל (to cover)” (Shemos 26:7).

ואת אהל מועד AND THE TENT OF MEETING i.e. the curtains of goats’ skins which were made as a tent above it (the Tabernacle).

Goat-hair tapestries. I explained all of this is Parshas Veyakhel (Shemos 35:11).

מכסהו ITS COVERING — the rams’ skins dyed red.

Red dyed. As if the Torah had said ומכסהו (and its covering) however it omitted the vav; there are many examples like this. If one did not say this, why would the Torah have mentioned the tachash skins alone without the cover of the ram skins?

מסך פתח THE SCREEN FOR THE ENTRANCE — the Veil at the east side.

The eastern curtain. This was already explained in Parshas Bamidbar (3:25). When Rashi writes “the eastern [curtain]” this does distinguish it, because there was no other curtain at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting aside from the eastern one. Thus this is only an embellishment of the explanation. Gur Aryeh explains that Rashi means to exclude the half curtain that was folded over in front of the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, to the east, as mentioned previously in Parshas Terumah (Shemos 26:9). It was joined to the other curtains and it did not have a distinct identity in of itself.

אשר על המשכן [AND THE HANGINGS OF THE ENCLOSURE, AND THE SCREEN FOR THE ENTRANCE OF THE GATE OF THE ENCLOSURE] WHICH ARE על המשכן — that is to say, the hangings and the screen of the court which together screen and shelter the Tabernacle and the copper altar on all sides.

V’EITH KOL ASHER ‘YEI’ASEH’ LAHEM.¹The verse is part of the section dealing with the work to be done by the families of the Gershonites in carrying the parts of the Tabernacle and its equipment. The verse before us states that they are to carry the hangings of the court … and their cords, and all the vessels of their service ‘v’eith kol asher yei’aseh lahem’ [literally: “and all which will be made to them”]. The question Ramban discusses is what the pronoun lahem (“to them” or “for them”) refers to and what the meaning of yei’aseh is. “[This is to be understood] as the Targum [of Onkelos rendered it]: ‘and with whatever is handed over to them,’ that is, to the sons of Gershon [so shall they serve].” This is Rashi’s language. But if so [if the pronoun lahem refers to the Gershonites, and not to all the vessels of the Tabernacle and altar mentioned in the first part of the verse], then the word yei’aseh [does not have its usual meaning of “doing,” but is to be understood as “possessions” or “articles in a person’s control,” the sense of the verse being: “and all ‘the objects handed over’ to them — they, the Gershonites shall serve with”], as in the verse: And there was a man in Maon ‘uma’aseihu’ were in Carmel,²I Samuel 25:2. The verse obviously cannot be understood in its literal sense, “his deeds,” because if he was in Maon, how could “his deeds” be in Carmel! The context of the verse also indicates that it means “his possessions.” which means “his possessions with which he ‘does’ [his occupation].” A more correct interpretation [of our verse] is that it means: “and with whatever [accessories] are made ‘for them’ — the Tabernacle and the altar — for they had many vessels [so shall they — the sons of Gershon — serve].”

ועבדו, during the periods when the Israelites were encamped their duties consisted of watching over all the vessels which formed part of the auxiliary equipment of the Tabernacle, i.e. אשר יעשה להם, “watching over all that would be done with them or to them.” For instance, seeing to it that the tools enabling the pegs to be firmly implanted in the earth so that the wind could not blow away the carpets forming the roof of the Tabernacle would be in good shape and position.

Guard over the Mishkon. Rashi is answering the question: The hanging tapestries were like walls around the courtyard; thus the term “על (lit. above) the Mishkon” is not appropriate, because “above the Mishkon” implies that they were above — on top of the Mishkon. He answers that it means that they protect and guard over the Mishkon. As if to say that one has to “add” a word such that it reads “which protect over the Mishkon.” It would be acceptable language to say that it guarded over the Mishkon and that it guarded over it on all sides. There are those who ask: Why didn’t Rashi explain this above in Parshas Bamidbar when it wrote “the hanging tapestries of the courtyard and the screen at the entrance of the courtyard which is over the Mishkon and the Altar on all sides…” (3:26)? He did not say anything there. [We may explain this] with the comment of Re’m at the beginning of Parshas Beha’aloscha regarding the lighting of the Ner Tamid — that in Parshas Emor Rashi did not give any explanation. There he writes that sometimes a commentator will explain all of the matters that apply to a certain term, sometimes only some of them and sometimes he relies on what he explains elsewhere, not explaining anything there. It appears to me that Rashi was forced to explain this here, even though it is obvious, because the verse wrote “and the screen for the entrance to the gate of the courtyard…” This raises a difficulty: Why did the Torah use this repetitive language — stating both “entrance” and “gate”. Furthermore one may raise a difficulty with the pause between the word “entrance” and the word “gate”. This could cause one to err and explain the verse as if it had said “and the screen for the entrance and the screen for the gate of the courtyard.” Thus one would explain that the screen for the entrance of the courtyard was the eastern gate of the courtyard while the screen for the gate was the screen for the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. This [latter] is also termed “the gate of the courtyard” since it opened into the courtyard of the Mishkon. Accordingly the Torah said “which are over the Mishkon” meaning the gate of the courtyard that is close to the Mishkon and to the Altar. The word על (over) would thus be understood as a term of closeness. When the Torah previously wrote “and the screen for the entrance of the Tent of Meeting” this would have meant the Paroches that is in front of the Holy of Holies, being termed the “entrance to the Tent of Meeting” because it stands inside the Tent of Meeting. Thus one would have thought to say that the Paroches in front of the Holy of Holies was also part of the load of the sons of Gershon. However, this was not true because the Paroches screen was part of the load of the sons of Kehos, as is written above in Parshas Bamidbar (4:5) “Aharon [and his sons] shall enter … and take down the Paroches screen and with it they shall cover the Ark of the Testimony.” Therefore Rashi explains that “which are over the Mishkon” refers to the hanging tapestries etc. that protect and guard over the Mishkon.

V. 26. ואת כל אשר וגו׳. Alles was für Bewahrung und Transport der ihnen überwiesenen Teile der Wohnung und des Vorhofs zu bewirken ist, haben sie zu leisten. מ׳׳ד) כל מה שהי׳ נעשה לכל הכלים יהיו בני גרשון עושים).

ועל המזבח סביב ואת מיתריהם, “and by the altar around and their cords;” why were the pegs for the hangings of the courtyard not mentioned here? (According to Nachmanides, the pegs, and their being fastened into the ground was the duty of the house of Merari)

ואת כל אשר יעשה להם — Understand this as the Targum does; “and everything that is handed over to them” — i.e. to the sons of Gershon.

The copper altar. Rashi is answering the question: Since the hanging tapestries protected the Mishkon it is obvious that they were all around the altar that was inside the Mishkon. Furthermore, the beams of the Mishkon would guard over the golden altar. He answers that the verse does not refer to the Golden Altar that was in the Mishkon, rather to the copper altar that was outside the Mishkon.

ואת כל אשר יעשה בהם, “and whatever was to be done with them;” we find this type of construction also Genesis 39,22. in connection with Joseph’s duties in the house of Potiphar.

All that will be given. Meaning that this does not refer to the parts just mentioned, because there were no other vessels needed for their service. Furthermore, neither the term “giving” nor the term “making” would be applicable to them. Rather the term “giving” refers to the sons of Gershon. Furthermore, if it referred to parts, the Torah should have written “that will be made to them for their service.” Therefore Rashi brought the translation of the Targum which explains that יעשה (lit. will be made) is a term of giving and the word “to them” refers to the sons of Gershon who were mentioned above. This teaches that everything mentioned in this passage was given over into their hands.

על פי אהרן ובניו AT THE APPOINTMENT OF AARON AND HIS SONS [SHALL BE ALL THE SERVICE OF THE SONS OF THE GERSHONITES] — and which of his sons shall be appointed over them? Everything was (v. 28) “under the hand of Ithamar the son of Aaron the priest”.

AT THE COMMANDMENT OF AARON AND HIS SONS SHALL BE ALL THE SERVICE OF THE SONS OF THE GERSHONITES — “and which of Aaron’s sons shall be appointed over them? Ithamar” [as is stated in the following verse]. This is Rashi’s language. But it is not correct for [if only Ithamar was appointed], why mention Aaron [at all — at the commandment of Aaron etc.]? Rather, the meaning of [the expression] at the commandment of Aaron and his sons shall be all the service is that the services of the Gershonites shall be at their command. They are to appoint the Gershonites to their work, saying: “This particular Gershonite shall be the overseer for such-and-such a matter” — “This one shall sing [at the services] in such-and-such a way, or attend to the gates³See further Note 31. and for Scriptural basis see my translation of Sefer Hamitzvoth (“The Commandments,” Vol. I, pp. 32-33). in a certain manner, or shall carry a certain number of the curtains.” At the time of journeying they were also not permitted to dismantle the Tabernacle or to begin loading it until Aaron and his sons commanded them to do so. Thus all of them [Aaron and his sons] were needed for the appointed charge, Eleazar being the chief over the three princes [of the three main families of the Levites],⁴See in Seder Bamidbar Note 204. and Ithamar being the overseer over the sons of Gershon⁵Verse 28. and Merari.⁶Verse 33.
Scripture states and ‘ye’ shall appoint unto them in charge [all which they have to carry]⁷Verse 27. because Moses was to be with them at the time of the appointments, when the charges were given to them; but their charge shall be under the hand of Ithamar,⁵Verse 28. meaning that each one was to return the vessels to his control when the Tabernacle came to rest, saying to him: “Here you have the vessels that were handed over to me.”

לכל משאם, at the time of the journey,

על פי אהרן ובניו תהיה כל עבודת בני הגרשוני, “all the work of the Gershonides is to be performed according to the instructions of Aaron and his sons.” Rashi writes that Ittamar was the son of Aaron who was in overall charge of all these activities. [Rashi, based on Midrash Rabbah explains that there is no contradiction with the verse following, which names Ittamar, exclusively, as the executive supervisor. Ed.] Nachmanides disagrees with Rashi, saying that if it were so why would Aaron and his other son be referred to in our verse at all? He therefore explains the words in our verse to mean that Aaron and sons appointed different members of Gershon and Merari to be responsible for specific functions, say the loading of the beams on to the wagons, etc., Ittamar was supervisor of all of the Merari’s activities, whereas Aaron and Eleazar supervised the activities of the Kehatites and Gershonites.

Appointed over them. Rashi is answering the question: The verses contradict each other, because here it says “by the instruction of Aharon and his sons” and afterwards it writes (v.28) “under the supervision of Isamar son of Aharon the Kohein.” He answers that the second verse explains the previous one — which of his sons was appointed over them? [the second verse] explains that it was Isamar son of Aharon. You might ask: Since only Isamar was appointed, why did it write ובניו (lit. and his sons) in the plural. However this is not a question because in many places we see the plural used for a single son, for example “ובני (lit. and the sons) of Don is Chushim” (Bereishis 46:23) and “ובני (lit. and the sons) of Palu is Eliav” (Bamidbar 26:8).

V. 27. את כל משאם :ופקדתם עליהם במשמרת וגו׳. Alles, was sie zu tragen erhalten, haben sie nicht als bloß mechanische Lastträger zu übernehmen, sondern es wird dabei ihre Intelligenz und ihr Bewusstsein in Anspruch genommen, es ist ihnen ein mit Hüterpflicht zu erfüllendes Amt. מ׳׳ר) שיהיו מצווים עליהם שיהיו שומרים על כל מה שנושאים).

ופקדתם עליהם במשמרת, “you shall appoint their entire burden as their charge.” This is an instruction that we do not find in connection with the duties of the house of Kehat. The reason is that everything that the Kehatites carried was covered and not visible to anyone else, as we have read in 4,15: וכלה אהרן ובניו לכסות את הקדש ואת כל כלי הקדש בנסוע המחנה ואחרי כן יבואו בני קהת, “and when Aaron and his sons had completed to cover the holy furnishings and the holy vessels when the camp was ready to move. Then the sons of Kehat shall approach, etc.”

ולכל עבודתם, when the people would be encamped.

ופקדתם עליהם במשמרת, “you are to appoint their entire burden as their charge.” From these words we learn that Moses was present at the time when Aaron and sons made these various appointments. However, once these appointments had been ratified by Moses, Ittamar was the supervisor on site, the one to whom any queries would be directed if doubts about anything arose. His task was in particular to ensure that all of the many items that had been moved from the Tabernacle would be replaced in good order as soon as the people made camp.

V. 28. ומשמרתם: ihre erste Diensteinweisung geschah durch Aharon und seine Söhne (V. 27), fortan standen sie unter Itamar (מ׳׳ר).

לעבוד את עבודת אהל מועד, "to perform the service connected with the Tent of Meeting." When describing the parallel task performed by the sons of Gershon the Torah wrote לעבוד עבודה באהל מועד, to perform service inside the Tent of Meeting. The reason is that they had to transport the coverings of the Tabernacle, the curtain, etc., all of which were part of the actual Tabernacle; the sons of Merari, however, transported the outer parts of the Tabernacle, the boards, the bolts, the sockets supporting the boards, etc. This is also why the Torah described the work of the Merarites as לעבד את…הקרשים as this represents the עבודת אהל מועד, i.e. work related to the Tabernacle. The Torah did not fear that by writing only the word לצבא alone instead of לצבא צבא that we would misunderstand its meaning, seeing it had spelled out exactly what the duties of the Merarties were.

ויתדתם ומיתריהם [AND THE COLUMNS OF THE ENCLOSURE ROUND ABOUT IT AND THEIR SOCKETS] AND THEIR PINS, AND THEIR CORDS — i.e. the pins and cords of the columns only, because the pins and cords of the hangings were part of the burden of the Gershonites (not of the sons of Merari). There were, as a matter of fact, pegs and cords for the curtains and the hangings on their lower edges in order that the wind should not raise them, there were also pegs and cords for the columns, round about, upon which to suspend the hangings by their upper edges on poles and rails, just as it is set forth in the Boraitha dealing with the work of the Tabernacle (cf. Rashi on Exodus 27:10, 19; Numbers 3:26 and our Note thereon).

AND THE PILLARS OF THE COURT ROUND ABOUT, AND THEIR SOCKETS, AND THEIR PINS, AND THEIR CORDS. “[These sockets, pins and cords refer only to] those of the pillars, because the pins and cords of the hangings were part of the burden of the Gershonites [as stated above in Verse 26, and here Scripture is speaking of the work of the sons of Merari]. For there were pins and cords for the curtains and hangings on their lower edges, so that the wind should not raise them, and there were [also] pins and cords round about the pillars, in order to suspend the hangings on them at their upper edges with poles and rails, as we have been taught in [the Beraitha] on the work of the Tabernacle.” This is Rashi’s language. But I do not understand what pins have to do with the pillars!⁸The pins were made of brass (Exodus 27:19) and their purpose was to secure the hangings to the ground so that the wind would not blow them from side to side. The poles and rods to which the upper end of the hangings was fixed, however, were made of wood, not of brass, and are not included in the Hebrew word for pins. Therefore Ramban asks what do the pins [made of brass] have to do with the pillars? (Kur Zahav). Moreover, [even if the pillars did have pins], why were the pins of the pillars different from the other pins, in that [the other pins were given] to the sons of Gershon, and those [of the pillars were given] to the sons of Merari? Nor have I found in the Mishnah⁹See further in the following text, and also in Ramban on Exodus 26: 17, from which it is clear that Ramban when referring to the “Mishnah”, is in fact referring to the Beraitha on the construction of the Tabernacle. For the nature of this book, see Vol. II, p. 448, Note 108. on the work of the Tabernacle that there were pins to the pillars! Instead, the Rabbis taught there the following:¹⁰M’lecheth Hamishkan, Chapter 5 (p. 33, in Ish Shalom’s edition). “He [Moses] joined the rails by means of cords to the pillars, and attached them to the pins of the Tent. And just as there were pins to the Tabernacle, so were there pins to the court, as it is said, All the instruments of the Tabernacle in all the service thereof, and all the pins thereof, and all the pins of the court, round about, shall be of brass. ”¹¹Exodus 27:19. The expression “round about” is found ibid., 38:20. This is the language of the Beraitha. And it does not teach there that there were pins to the pillars.
But we must rather explain that the pins and cords of the hangings of the court¹²Above, Verse 26. were in the hands of the sons of Merari [not, as Rashi understands, that they were in the charge of the Gershonites]; whereas it is the cords and pins of the Tabernacle and Tent¹³See Note 179 in Seder Bamidbar. that were in the hands of the Gershonites, for [the prepositions] and ‘their’ cords, and all the instruments of ‘their’ service¹²Above, Verse 26. [mentioned in connection with the charge of the Gershonites] are a reference to the curtains of the Tabernacle and the Tent of Meeting¹⁴Ibid., Verse 25. mentioned in [the beginning of] the previous verse [relating to the work to be done by the Gershonite], and do not refer to [the hangings of] the court [as Rashi wrote]. Similarly, when He said above [with reference to the charge of the Gershonites], and the cords ‘of it’¹⁵Ibid., 3:26. [the preposition “it”] alludes to the Tabernacle mentioned there [in the preceding verse],¹⁶Ibid., Verse 25: And the charge of the sons of Gershon in the Tent of Meeting, the Tabernacle and the Tent etc. — Ramban is thus, interpreting the preposition “it” [and the cords of ‘it’] — in 3:26 — as referring back to Verse 25 which mentions the Tabernacle and Tent and does not refer to the hangings of the court mentioned in the selfsame Verse 26. To prove this method of exegesis, Ramban proceeds to bring examples from other places in Scripture where this principle perforce applies. and not to the hangings of the court [mentioned in the same verse]. A similar case [of a Scriptural reference to a prior subject] is [G-d’s command addressed to Aaron]: only ‘they’ shall not come nigh unto the vessels of holiness and unto the altar¹⁷Further, 18:3. [where the pronoun “they”] refers back to the more distant [phrase, namely: thy brethren, the tribe of Levi] the tribe of thy father¹⁸Ibid., Verse 2. [mentioned] in the preceding verse, and does not refer to the nearer [phrase] thy sons. So also the verse, And ‘their’ redemption-money — from a month old shalt thou redeem them¹⁹Ibid., Verse 16. [where the word “their”] refers back to the firstborn of man²⁰Ibid., Verse 15. [mentioned in the earlier part of the preceding verse], and not to the firstling of unclean beasts [stated at the end of the preceding verse]. There are many cases like this.
However, it appears to me that according to the text of the Beraitha [mentioned further on] the Gershonites only carried cloths, but [did] not [carry] any brass and wood at all. This is the Beraitha wherein we are taught:²¹M’lecheth Hamishkan, Chapter 13 (p. 80, in Ish Shalom’s edition). “The sons of Gershon were assigned [to pitch] on the west²²Above, 3:23. [of the Tabernacle], and they were in charge of all woven materials.” If so, the meaning of the term and their pins [mentioned in the verse before us dealing with the charge of the sons of Merari] is: “[the pins] of the Tabernacle and of the pillars of the court,” while [the term] and their cords refers only to those of the pillars of the court [since the cords of the Tabernacle itself were in the hands of the Gershonites]. Similarly He said above [with reference to the burden of the sons of Merari]: the boards of the Tabernacle, and the bars thereof, and the pillars thereof, and the sockets thereof, and all the instruments thereof, and all that pertaineth to the service thereof,²³Ibid., Verse 36. including [in general terms] the pins thereof [i.e., of both the Tabernacle and the pillars of the court]. Therefore He mentioned the cords [in speaking of] both [the burdens of the sons of Gershon²⁴Verse 26. and those of Merari,²⁵In this verse. because the cords of the Tabernacle were carried by the sons of Gershon, and those of the pillars of the court by the sons of Merari], but the pins He mentioned only [in the verse before us] with reference to the sons of Merari [because the Gershonites carried no objects of brass or wood at all, but which instead were carried by the sons of Merari].

ועמודי החצר סביב ואדניהם ויתידותם ומיתריהם, “and the pillars of the Courtyard all around and their sockets, their pegs and their ropes, etc.” According to Rashi the sockets and pegs mentioned in our verse were needed to support the pillars mentioned in our verse. Nachmanides, commenting on this, writes that he does not know how these pegs could have been of any use to the pillars. Moreover, Nachmanides could not see in what sense the pegs of the pillars would have been different from those of the קלעים, the curtains of the courtyard that were transported by the Gershonites. He arrives at the conclusion therefore that the pegs and their ropes mentioned must have been the ones used to hold down the curtains covering the Tabernacle as a roof, and that these were the ones looked after by the Gershonites, whereas the ones pertaining to the pillars of the courtyard and their ropes were the ones looked after by the Merarites.

And ropes for the pillars. With this Rashi explains how both [Gershon and Merori] had stakes and ropes. You might ask: Previously in Parshas Bamidbar (3:26) Rashi explained [that Gershon’s load was] the ropes of the Mishkon and the Tent but not of the courtyard. If so how can he explain that the sons of Gershon also carried the ropes of the courtyard? The answer is: When Rashi said previously “but not of the courtyard” he meant that the ropes of the Mishkon were all in the load of the sons of Gershon. However the ropes of the courtyard were not all in their load, rather some were in the load of the sons of Gershon and some in the load of the sons of Merori, as he explains here.

V. 32. ובשמת תפקדו את כלי משמרת משאם. Auch die den Merariden anvertrauten Gegenstände sind bedeutungsvolle, mit Bewusstsein ihrer Bedeutung (siehe zu Kap. 2, 29 f.) zu wahrende Objekte. Sie sind daher mit ihren "Namen" zu nennen, indem sie übergeben werden.

ובשמות תפקדו את כלי משמרת משאם, “and by their respective names you shall appoint them for the various instruments.”

AND BY NAME YE SHALL APPOINT THE INSTRUMENTS OF THE CHARGE OF THEIR BURDENS. This means that he [Ithamar] should put the vessels which they were to carry in the hands of each man, according to the number of names, by their polls.²⁶Above, 1:18. He [Ithamar] is to say: “This person shall carry a certain number of the boards, and that person a certain number of the bars or of the pillars,” rather than commanding [generally]: “The sons of Merari as a whole shall carry all the boards, sockets and pillars.” He mentioned this first in the case of the sons of Merari although this principle applied also to the work done by the sons of Kohath and Gershon because of the weight of their burdens, for each one [of the sons of Merari] might [be inclined to] make his load lighter by putting it upon his fellowman, [therefore the command had to be given to each person individually].

ובשמות תפקדו את כלי משמרת משאם, “you shall appoint the people keeping watch over these various utensils by name.” In other words, every person in charge of carrying a single beam, etc., would be assigned to “beam # such and such.” What the Torah mentions here in connection with the Merarites applied in equal measure to Gershonites and the Kehatites. You should not think that seeing the Merarites carried heavy burdens there might have been some who tried to shirk their duty.

By their upper border. Re’m explains that stakes were connected to the pillars. They were made like rods called falush, which are stakes six tefachim long and three tefachim wide with a copper ring in the middle. One would wrap the border of the curtain around it with the ropes in a position next to each pillar, and hang the rod with the ring on hooks that were on the pillar, made in the shape of the letter vav with one side bent upwards and the other inserted into the pillar.

And rods. In Parshas Terumah (Shemos 27:10) this is explained fully.

ויפקד משה ואהרון ונשיאי העדה, Moses, Aaron and the princes of the congregation counted, etc. Why were three groups of people needed to perform this count? Moses was G'd's agent; Aaron was required as the Levites were subject to his instructions as the Torah made plain in 3,9. The princes of the various tribes had also been appointed to be in charge of the people who were numbered (compare Numbers 7,2). Why were the princes not involved when the Levites were counted who replaced the firstborn, i.e. the Levites from the age of one month and over (3,40-43)? On that occasion the total number was determined by G'd and this is why even babies in a crib had to be included. Bamidbar Rabbah 3,9 describes how Moses asked G'd if he was really expected to enter the tent of every Levite family and examine if there was a male baby of 30 days and over. G'd responded that if Moses were to stand outside He would convey to him the number of Levites who qualified for the count inside that tent. As this information was given only to Moses, neither Aaron nor the princes were involved in that count.

אלפים שבע מאות וחמשים, two thousand seven hundred and fifty. Here, when reporting the number of Kehatites the Torah did not write: "and seven hundred," i.e. ושבע מאות, as it did when reporting the number of the clan of Gershon between thirty and fifty in verse 40. Also, when reporting the number of Merarites in verse 44 the "hundreds" are preceded by the conjunctive letter ו i.e. ומאתים. Perhaps the absence of the letter ו when reporting the number of Kehatites is an allusion to Korach and those who died with him seeing they belonged to the clan of Kehat. Alternatively, the number seven hundred was subject to correction shortly after the time of the count as the uprising of Korach occurred either immediately before the debacle with the spies or shortly thereafter, at any rate during the same summer. While it is true that the Torah mentioned only one Kehatite by name during that uprising, i.e. Korach himself, other relatives may have been inclined to join him; at least they shared part of his guilt by not protesting Korach's conduct.

על פי ה' ביד משה, “at the command of G–d, through Moses.” The counting of the sons of Kehot and the sons of Merari are described as having been done by Moses, whereas when it came to the counting of the sons of Gershon, the Torah only wrote: “at the command of the Lord,” without adding the words: “through Moses.” What is the reason for this? During the previous paragraph in verse 18, the Torah had written: וידבר ה' אל משה ואל אהרן, “the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, whereas in this paragraph G–d had only spoken to Moses; when the sons of Merari were counted, (verse 29) no mention was made of this having been at the command of G–d; it was necessary therefore to inform us that that count had also been commanded by the Lord. In order to make up for the omission of mentioning that the sons of Merari had also been counted at the command of the Lord, the Torah had to add that also the last section of Levites to be counted the sons of Gershon, had been counted at the express command by G–d to Moses.

עבדת עבדה THE SERVICE OF THE MINISTRY — (lit., a service of a service). This is the song of the Levites with accompaniment of cymbals and harps, this being the service attached to another service (the sacrificial service) (Arakhin 11a).

Service for [another] service. Meaning that at the time when the Kohanim were making offerings and dealing with the service, the Levites were singing and playing on their cymbals and harps. Thus they performed a service for the service of the Kohanim.

V. 47. עבדת עבדה ועבדת משא. Arachin 11 a wird unter עבודת עבודה der Tempelgesang beim Opfer verstanden, איזהו עבודה שצריכה עבודה הוי אומר זו שירה, es ist eine עבודה, die nur als Begleitung einer andern עבודה auftritt. Es wäre dann die Opfervollbringung mit dem in der תורה hierfür seltenen (siehe zu Schmot 2, 25) Namen עבודה bezeichnet und als Hilfsleistung dieser Vollbringung, als Förderung des Zweckes ihrer Bestimmung der sie begleitende Gesang begriffen. Die völlige Unterordnung, und zwar nicht die passiv duldende, die aktiv schaffende Unterordnung unter Gottes Willen, der freudige Eintritt in den Tatendienst der Gotteszwecke auf Erden, das ist die Opferbedeutung unter den Begriff עבודה gefasst, dessen Seligkeit den Gipfel ihres Ausdruckes im Momente der נסכים findet, in welchem die Freudenschale unserer Empfindungen in den Grund des Gesetzesaltares hinabrauscht. Kennt doch das Menschenbewusstsein über den Gedanken eines im Dienste Gottes treu verlebten Daseins keine Seligkeit hinaus. Und diesem seligen, beseligten und beseligenden Bewusstsein entquillt das Tempellied, welches die Gedanken und Empfindungen in Worte kleidet, deren Tatausdruck die Opferhandlung ist. שירה ist daher עבודת עבודה.

לעבוד עבודת עבודה, “who were subject to the duties of service and porterage. Seeing that the specific tasks performed by the priests included the slaughtering of the sacrificial animals, removing their skins, and the cutting up of the various parts of them, the Levites were commanded to perform auxiliary tasks as detailed in by Ezra in the Book of in Chronicles II 29,34 in connection with the Passover festival celebrated under the reign of King Chizkiyahu, when due to the few number of priests available, the Levites were called upon to help in skinning the many animals that had been slaughtered on that day.

לעבוד עבודת עבודה, “to perform the work of bearing burdens.” This task of dismantling and reerecting the Tabernacle was shared in equal measure by all the Levites.

ועבדת משא is what it literally implies: AND THE SERVICE OF CARRYING.

As the phrase indicates. Meaning that even though “the service of the service” is explained as “the service for a service,” nonetheless the “the service of carrying” is not explained as the service for carrying, rather as the phrase indicates it means “the service that is carrying.” (R. Hendel)

ועבודת משא, “and the work of carrying;” a reference to the table, the Ark, the menorah, and the two altars carried by the Kehatites.

ופקדיו אשר צוה ה' את משה — This means, and those appointed by him (Moses) were appointed under the terms of the command which God had given to Moses (v. 43): from thirty years to fifty years old.

UPHKUDAV’ (THUS WERE THEY NUMBERED OF HIM) ‘ASHER’ THE ETERNAL COMMANDED MOSES. “A Masorah²⁷The Masorah is the tradition handed down from generation to generation of the exact Scriptural text, and also refers to a collection of exegetical notes on the Scriptural text. The comment before us is of this second class. has it: Five [words in the Scriptures] are written asher (‘which,’ or ‘that’) but they are to be understood as ka’asher (‘as’),²⁸This whole sentence is not found in our texts of Rashi. See however, Berliner’s edition of Rashi, p. 286. — The point though is clear. The Hebrew text reads: asher tziva Hashem literally meaning: [and his countings] “which the Eternal commanded,” and Rashi on the basis of a Masorah interpreted it to mean: ka’asher tziva Hashem — [thus were they numbered] “‘as’ the Eternal commanded.” Ramban later on interprets the text asher tziva Hashem in its literal meaning. [this being one of the five cases, and therefore the above expression is to be interpreted as follows: thus were they numbered of him ‘as’ the Eternal commanded Moses]. And those counted were, in accordance with the command, from thirty to fifty years old.” This is Rashi’s language. If this is so, the word, uphkudav refers to Moses [thus were they numbered ‘of him’ — by Moses]. But Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that [the meaning of the verse is as follows]: every one, that is to say, of the three [Levitical] families — namely, Gershon, Kohath, and Merari — Moses appointed to his service, and to his burden as Scripture mentioned above [that he should appoint them]. And this is the meaning of [the word] uphkudav, namely “[the appointment] of every one” mentioned.
But it is possible that the expression ‘asher’ tziva be understood in its plain sense [i.e., “which” He commanded, and not, as Rashi has it, as if it said ‘ka’asher’ tziva — “as” He commanded]. Scripture would thus be saying that Moses appointed [each of the sons of] these three brothers [i.e., Gershon, Kohath, and Merari] to his service and to his burden as explained above; ‘uphkudav’ (and the numbered individuals) of each of them ‘which’ the Eternal commanded Moses to count by their polls, he appointed to his service, and to his burden. Thus the verse mentioned that Moses numbered them by their families, and also that he appointed the [numbered] individuals by their polls, every one to his service, and to his burden.²⁹In brief: a) according to Rashi asher tziva is to be understood as ka’asher tziva (“as” the Eternal commanded). b) Rashi explains uphkudav as meaning “his countings,” i.e., those of Moses. Ibn Ezra interprets it as “his appointments,” the pronoun “his” referring to each of the three Levitical families. c) Ramban explains asher tziva in its literal sense, “which” the Eternal commanded [as explained in the text], the word uphkudav he understands as does Rashi, i.e., as “countings,” but the pronoun [“his”] Ramban explains as referring to each of the three brothers [Gershon, Kohath, and Merari — not personally, but in the sense of the descendants of each of them] ‘which G-d commanded’ Moses to count by their polls — each of them he assigned to his individual work. And such indeed is the law, that a Levite [of one group] is not permitted to do the work of another group or to assist therein, just as the Rabbis have said:³⁰Arakhin 11b. “It once happened that Rabbi Yehoshua the son of Chananyah wanted to help [his fellow-Levite] Rabbi Yochanan the son of Gudgada to close the gates [of the Sanctuary]; whereupon [the latter] said to him: ‘Turn back, [for if you do not do so] your life is already forfeit, since I am one of the gatekeepers, and you are one of the singers.’”³¹All the Levites were divided into two groups, those who attended only to the gates in the Sanctuary, and those who attended to the singing at the Services. It was forbidden for a Levite of one group to do the work generally assigned to one of the other group (see “The Commandments,” Vol. II, pp. 70-72).

על פי ה׳ פקד אותם, He counted them at the command of G'd, etc. The actual command to appoint the Kehatites to their respective tasks, the Gershonides to their respective tasks, etc., was given only to Moses. Aaron had no hand in these appointments. Once Moses had counted them Aaron allocated the various tasks to each of the Levites who had been counted. When the Torah writes ופקודיו, "and his appointees," this is a reference to the appointments Aaron and his sons had made. This too, however, was only in compliance with instructions given by G'd to Moses.

ופקודיו אשר צוה ה' את משה, “and his count coincided with what Hashem had commanded to Moses.” Rashi writes that all those mentioned by name were between 30 and 50 years of age. Nachmanides writes that if that had been so the subject of the word ופקודיו would have to be Moses. Ibn Ezra explains that the words איש איש, refer to Gershon, Kehat, and Merari, respectively, whom Moses had each appointed individually to specific tasks as we have explained earlier. This would be the meaning of the word ופקודיו, i.e. “the tasks to which each person had been appointed.” It is possible to understand the word אשר as part of the plain meaning, i.e. that Moses had assigned to each of the three brothers Gershon, Kehat, and Merari, his specific service, or task respectively. Each of these brothers in turn carried out his designated task in accordance with what G’d had instructed Moses to convey to them. This involved appointing many individuals to many individual tasks.

From the ages of thirty to fifty. The opinion of Rashi is that the word ופקודיו (and they were counted) refers to Moshe, as the verse wrote previously “he counted them, by the hand of Moshe.” The words “אשר (that) [Hashem] commanded” are thus understood as “כאשר (as) [Hashem] commanded.” Consequently the verse is saying “the counting of Moshe as Hashem commanded Moshe,” meaning from the ages of thirty to fifty. This is why Rashi said “those counted were, as commanded, from the ages of thirty to fifty.” Do not ask why it writes Moshe’s name twice, instead of writing “him,” even though it refers to Moshe earlier in the verse. The answer is that many verses speak in this way, for example “He said to Moshe: come up to Hashem” (Shemos 24:1) where it could have said “come up to Me.” Similarly “Hashem rained down sulfur and fire upon Sodom and upon Ammorah, and the fire came from Hashem” (Bereishis 19:24) where it could have said “from Him.” Similarly “Lemech said to his wives Adah and Tzilah: Hear my voice, wives of Lemech” (Bereishis 4:23) where he could have said “my wives.” One might ask: Why did Rashi need to explain this — doesn’t the Torah state “from the ages of thirty…” many times? The answer is: Because it wrote (v.48) “Their numbers were eight thousand five hundred and eighty” and afterwards said “according to the word of Hashem he counted them,” you might want to explain that this refers to another count that was made in Parshas Beha’aloscha, which was from the age of twenty-five. Therefore Rashi explains that “those counted…” His proof is from the fact that it writes “as Hashem commanded Moshe” implying that they had already been commanded about this, however the command to count from the age of twenty-five was only said later. There are those who explain that ופקודיו means “and they were appointed” and that Rashi explains “ואותם הפקודים…” meaning that those appointed — Elazar and Isamar who were appointed over them — must also be between the ages of thirty and fifty. I found this explanation in the name of a certain great scholar.

V. 49. ופקדיו: Gottes Gezählte, auf Gottes Geheiß, für Gott gezählt. (Ähnlich מ׳׳ר z. St.)