Tafsiran yang Mengutip untuk Ulangan 2:6

כי יש שבר במצרים, “that there is grain for sale in Egypt.” The word שבר usually refers to something for sale as we know from Deut. 2,6 אוכל תשברו מאתם, “purchase food provisions from them.” It is noteworthy that Yaakov neither mentioned the word “food,” nor the word “grain,” The reason he referred to grain by saying שבר is because that word includes both “trading or selling” as well as “‘grain.” He continued using this word when he told his sons in Genesis 43,2: שובו שברו לנו מעט אוכל, “go back and secure for us some food (by buying grain).” In our verse (2) he said: שברו לנו משם, without the word אוכל. When Yaakov described the journey to Egypt he asked his sons to undertake as רדו שמה, “descend there,” instead of לכו שמה, “go there,” he also foreshadowed that any journey to Egypt would be but a prelude to the family’s eventual exile in Egypt. The number of years the Jewish people would be enslaved in Egypt corresponded to the numerical value of the letters in the word רדו, i.e. 210 years. When he used the expression ושברו משם, he meant that he foresaw both food supply as well as enslavement or exile as emanating from Egypt.

In Schimeons und Lewis Charakter tritt ein Zug hervor, der sie, um an die Spitze der künftigen Leitung gestellt zu werden, eigentlich ganz besonders befähigt hätte. Sie sind אחים, haben das brüderliche Gesamtgefühl (von אחה durch einen alle durchschlingenden Faden an einander gereiht) in hohem Grade bewährt, das ohne allen Egoismus sich von dem dem Geringsten des Familienkreises zugefügten Unrecht ebenso getroffen fühlt, als wäre es ihm selbst geworden. Allein: .כלי חמס מכרתיהם מכרתיהם: entweder von כור, wovon כור, der Tiegel, in welchem etwas bereitet wird, und dann מכֵרה allgemein: Mittel; wahrscheinlicher aber von כרה .כרה: graben; im Vergleich mit חפר ergibt sich, daß חפר bis auf den Grund graben, Wasser aus der Tiefe holen heißt, daher überhaupt: Verborgenes ans Licht bringen, wovon: erspähen, und auch jenes Erschrecken und Erbleichen, das eintritt, wenn eines Menschen bisher verborgen gewesene Vergangenheit ans Licht gezogen wird, während בוש vielmehr die Scham über getäuschte Erwartung von der Zukunft ausdrückt. Dem zur Seite heißt כרה: das erste Abstechen einer Grube, die erste Anlage, dann überhaupt: Zurichtung, z. B. eines Mahles, endlich auch: die Erwerbung, Aneignung eines Gutes oder einer Person: אשר כריתי לי (Bamidbar 50, 5), ואכרה לי (Hosea 3, 2), so daß die Wurzel in ihrer ursprünglichen Bedeutung mit קרה ,קרא: etwas zu sich rufen, verwandt, und somit: etwas zu sich bringen, etwas zu erlangen suchen, zu bedeuten scheint. So: וגם selbst Wasser habt ihr nur auf ganz (Bamidbar 2, 6) מים תכרו מאתם בכסף ושתיתם friedlichem Wege von ihnen für Geld zu erlangen suchen müssen für euren Durst. Im Hinblick auf die zitierte Stelle Hosea 3, 2 dürfte dann מְכֵרָה ganz eigentlich die Bewerbungen um eine Person bedeuten. Schimeon und Lewi haben ihre ganz friedlich und freundlich aussehenden Bewerbungsmittel, Bedingungen, die sie unter dem Scheine als מהר ומתן dem Schechem auferlegten, zu Werkzeugen der schreiendsten Gewalttat gebraucht.

כאשר עשו לי בני עשו, “as the descendants of Esau did for me.” This was not a reference to traversing their territory, but a reference to their letting the Israelites buy their water and food from them. The Torah had never spelled this out before, but it is logical to assume that they had done so, seeing that the Torah had specifically permitted them to do so. (Deut. 2,6) Our verse merely explains what was meant in verse 6., כאשר עשו לי בני עשו היושבים בשעיר והמואבים היושבים בער“as the descendants of Esau who live in Seir have done for me, as well as the Moabites who dwell in Or.” It sounds clear that both the Moabites mentioned here as well as the Edomites mentioned here had volunteered to supply the Israelites with these victuals. This is in stark contrast to what the Torah had described in Deut. 23,4 as the reason why proselytes from the Moabites and the Ammonites must not be accepted. It says there that these two tribes had not come forward with offers of bread and water for a nation that had just come out of Egypt, and had hired Bileam to curse the Israelites. How do we reconcile these two verses? Moreover, the Talmud in tractate Yevamot, folio 77, even tells that several hundreds of years later, some of the Israelites wanted to declare King David as not fit to be their king, but as not being Jewish, since his maternal ancestor Ruth had been a Moabite, and her conversion therefore was null and void. In light of all this, some commentators feel forced to conclude that the verses from Deut. 2,6 until and including verse 29, are only Moses’ formulation of the words the delegation were to say to the rulers of that land, but are not to be understood as testimony by the Torah, and that some Moabites and some Edomites had come forward with such offers. What follows are words by Moses recalling what had happened in how making war on Sichon and Og had not been aggression by the Israelites, but self defense, as the other side had started the hostilities. Instead of understanding the Torah as telling us that the Moabites of Or and the Ammonites had been generous, Moses includes them all in a negative light. None of these kings had allowed the Israelites to cross their lands. The ones that got away with it were the ones whom G-d had commanded the Israelites not to harass as they were not Canaanites, on the contrary, were related to the Israelites through Avraham‘s family.