Tafsiran yang Mengutip untuk Bilangan 27:4

למשפחת מנשה בן יוסף OF THE FAMILIES OF MANASSEH THE SON OF JOSEPH — Why is this stated? Has it not already been said בן מנשה, and consequently we know that they belonged to the family of Manasseh the son of Joseph?! But it is to suggest the following idea to you: Just as Joseph held the Promised Land dear, as it is said, (Genesis 50:25) “And ye shall bring my bones up (to Palestine) from hence”, so, too, his daughters held the Land dear, as it is said, (v. 4) “Give us an inheritance”; and further to teach you that they were righteous all of them (everyone here mentioned in the pedigree), for in every case where a person’s doings and his ancestors’ doings are nowhere plainly described and Scripture somewhere enters into the details of the pedigree in respect to one of them, tracing his genealogy back to someone worthy of praise, it is evident that the person in question is himself a righteous man and a son of a righteous father. But if it gives his genealogy in connection with something deserving of reprobation, — as, for example, (2 Kings 25:25) “Ishmael the son of Nethanian the son of Elishama came … and smote Gedaliah”, then it is quite certain that all who are mentioned in connection with him were wicked people (Sifrei Bamidbar 133:1).

שמור את כל המצוה, “Observe the whole command ment, etc.” The Torah refers to the impending command to erect stones on Mount Eyval (verse 4) after they have been inscribed, stones taken from the river Jordan at the time the people would cross that river. These stones are intended to commemorate the miracles which occurred enabling the Israelites to cross the river without becoming wet at a time of year when it was swollen with melting snow from Mount Hermon. There were a total of 12 such stones as we know from Joshua 4,2 that one stone per tribe was to be erected. Joshua commanded the twelve men to whom he had assigned the task of taking these stones from the river after the people had completed crossing. These stones were carried on the shoulders of the twelve men, each of whom represented his tribe (Joshua 4,1-8). These stones were deposited next to the place at Gilgal where the Israeites spent the first night in the Holy Land, close to the river. The stones which were erected on Mount Eyval had the entire text of the Torah inscribed on them. Another twelve stones (Joshua 4,9) were erected in the river bed of the Jordan at the site of the miracle where the priests with the Holy Ark had crossed and G’d had arrested the flow of the river so as not to swamp the Holy Ark (Joshua 4,7). The reason the stones are described as having to be “large,” is to enable the engravers to inscribe the whole text of the Torah on their surface. The latter stones are reported as still being in existence at the time the Book of Joshua had been written. [What is written in Joshua 4,3-4 is an elaboration of what was mentioned in summary in the preceding verse 2.] (compare Daat Mikra). There were a total of 36 stones, three groups of 12. Twelve were erected in the river bed of the Jordan, before the Jordan had resumed flowing south. 12 were erected at Gilgal. The final twelve were taken all the way to Mount Eyval. These latter stones were made into the altar on Mount Eyval as mentioned by Rashi in his commentary on verse two of our chapter. [According to a view also mentioned by Rashi in conjunction with the Baraitha in Sotah 35, the stones which were made into a (temporary) altar on Mount Eyval were brought back to Gilgal and erected there.]
Our author feels that the plain meaning of our verses allows for only a total of 24 stones, 12 of which were erected in the river bed, whereas the other 12 were taken from the river. The stones erected in the river bed remain to this day and their purpose had been to enable the feet of the priests carrying the Holy Ark not to get wet in the slime while crossing the river. [The actual flow of the water had been arrested in deference to the presence of the Holy Ark. Ed.]
We find the expression באר used in Deut. 1,5 when Moses is reported as “explaining” the Torah. We find it used again in verse 5 of our chapter here. This gives rise to the exegesis by means of a גזרה שוה that just as Moses explained the Torah in 70 languages, the inscribing of the stones with the Torah also was in 70 languages.
The words והקמות לך אבנים גדולות (verse 3) may be understood as a כלל, a general summary of the subject under discussion, whereas the words (verse 4) והיה בעברכם את הירדן תקימו את האבנים האלה may be viewed as the details elaborating on the summary mentioned before. It is as if the Torah wanted to say that the twelve stones mentioned earlier were to be treated in a certain manner. Verse four refers to the aforementioned stones and instructs for them to be erected on Mount Eival. They are to be covered with plaster and then inscribed after the altar on Mount Eival has been erected. [the building of the altar is to precede the erecting of these stones, not as the wording appears at first glance (Rabbi Chavell) Ed.] Following all this, the stones are to be inscribed with the text of the entire Torah, well clarified (verse 8). If we do not explain the verse in this fashion i.e. on the basis of A) summary (כלל) followed by B) detailed instructions (פרט), the entire passage will sound confusing. What would be the point of writing in verse 8 that the entire Torah, well clarified, is to be inscribed on these stones, seeing that G’d had already instructed the Torah to be inscribed on the stones in verse 3? Furthermore, how could the Torah first write: “you are to write upon them” (verse 3), and subsequently “you shall build an altar there?” (verse 5). The Talmud in Sotah 32 also appears to understand our paragraph as an example of the exegetical principle of כלל ופרט.

Another explanation for why “men” is specified: According to what our Sages said (Yalkut Shimoni, Pinchas 773:27), the men hated the land and said, Let us appoint a leader and return to Egypt (Numbers 14:4), while the women loved the land and said, Give us a possession (Numbers 27:4). Therefore, the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: “According to My view, seeing into the future, it would have been better to send women who cherish the land, for they would not speak negatively about it. But for you, according to your understanding — as you believe these men are worthy and you think they cherish the land — send men.” This is the meaning of Send for yourself [lecha — according to your judgment] men. But according to My judgment, it would have been better to send women, as mentioned.

ובאלה לא היה איש וגו׳ BUT AMONG THESE THERE WAS NO MAN [OF THEM WHOM MOSES AND AARON NUMBERED] — no man; but the decree consequent upon the incident of the spies had not been enacted upon the women, because they held the Promised Land dear. The men had said, (Numbers 14:4) “Let us appoint a chief and return to Egypt”, while the women said, (Numbers 27:4) “Give us a possession in the Land”. On this account, too, the chapter regarding the daughters of Zelophehad follows immediately here (Sifrei Bamidbar 133:1).