Commento su Numeri 36:8
וְכָל־בַּ֞ת יֹרֶ֣שֶׁת נַחֲלָ֗ה מִמַּטּוֹת֮ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ לְאֶחָ֗ד מִמִּשְׁפַּ֛חַת מַטֵּ֥ה אָבִ֖יהָ תִּהְיֶ֣ה לְאִשָּׁ֑ה לְמַ֗עַן יִֽירְשׁוּ֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אִ֖ישׁ נַחֲלַ֥ת אֲבֹתָֽיו׃
E ogni figlia, che possiede un'eredità in qualsiasi tribù dei figli d'Israele, sarà moglie di una delle famiglie della tribù di suo padre, affinché i figli d'Israele possano possedere ad ogni uomo l'eredità dei suoi padri.
Rashi on Numbers
וכל בת ירשת נחלה AND EVERY DAUGHTER THAT INHERITS A POSSESSION because her father had no son, [SHALL BE WIFE, etc.]
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rabbeinu Bahya
וכל בת יורשת נחלה ממטות בני ישראל, “and any daughter inheriting ancestral land, etc.” A girl whose father did not have a son who could inherit the land. This is why the Torah had to write a second time (verse 9) “so that the inheritance shall not make the rounds, etc.” (Ibn Ezra).
As a result of this verse it became a custom in Israel that if a girl who had inherited ancestral land married out of her tribe to describe her as a זונה, “a harlot.” She would therefore be deprived of the inheritance from her father.
This is the meaning of the words in Judges 11,1 that Yiftach the Gileadi was the son of a woman known as זונה, harlot [i.e. it is not a reference to her sexual mores. Ed.] The prophet is merely telling us that his mother had belonged to a different tribe than his father. Yonathan ben Uzziel also translates the word זונה in Judges 11,1 in the same way [cited by R' David Kimchi ibid., but is not found in our editions of Targum Yonathan].
Perhaps the meaning of the word לא תסב נחלה refers to persons, not landed property, and this would account for the Torah writing the same words twice. [It would be an oblique reference to the transmigration of the souls. If injustice would occur through the incorrect handling of ancestral property, certain souls thus deprived might have to be placed inside other bodies to right the wrong during another cycle of life on earth. Ed.]
This may also account for the use of the word ידבקו, “they shall cleave” (verse 9), seeing that this is a term applicable to both souls and bodies but not to land. The first time (verse 7) the Torah writes the word it refers to the body, the second time to the soul.
As a result of this verse it became a custom in Israel that if a girl who had inherited ancestral land married out of her tribe to describe her as a זונה, “a harlot.” She would therefore be deprived of the inheritance from her father.
This is the meaning of the words in Judges 11,1 that Yiftach the Gileadi was the son of a woman known as זונה, harlot [i.e. it is not a reference to her sexual mores. Ed.] The prophet is merely telling us that his mother had belonged to a different tribe than his father. Yonathan ben Uzziel also translates the word זונה in Judges 11,1 in the same way [cited by R' David Kimchi ibid., but is not found in our editions of Targum Yonathan].
Perhaps the meaning of the word לא תסב נחלה refers to persons, not landed property, and this would account for the Torah writing the same words twice. [It would be an oblique reference to the transmigration of the souls. If injustice would occur through the incorrect handling of ancestral property, certain souls thus deprived might have to be placed inside other bodies to right the wrong during another cycle of life on earth. Ed.]
This may also account for the use of the word ידבקו, “they shall cleave” (verse 9), seeing that this is a term applicable to both souls and bodies but not to land. The first time (verse 7) the Torah writes the word it refers to the body, the second time to the soul.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rav Hirsch on Torah
V. 8. וכל בת ירשת נחלה ממטות וגו׳. Baba Batra 111 a wird an dem Ausdruck בת ירשת נחלה ממטות בני ישראל, womit eine Tochter als Erbnehmerin aus zwei Stämmen bezeichnet wird, der Rechtssatz gelehrt, dass bei Hinterlassenschaften von Müttern deren Kindern ganz dasselbe Erbrecht zusteht, wie bei Hinterlassenschaften von Vätern, eine Tochter daher, deren Vater und Mutter verschiedenen Stämmen angehören, bei deren Tode Erbnehmerin aus zwei Stämmen wird. Es wird sodann (daselbst 112 a) die Frage verhandelt, ob bei der Verheiratung einer solchen aus zwei Stämmen erbberechtigten Tochter auch auf die Stammesentfremdung des mütterlichen Erbes also Rücksicht zu nehmen wäre, dass der zu wählende Ehemann auch von mütterlicher und väterlicher Seite denselben Stämmen wie die zu verheiratende Tochter angehöre, oder die Rücksicht für das mütterliche Erbe bei der Verheiratung wegfalle, שכבר הוסבה, da eine Entfremdung desselben bereits bei dem Erbanfall an die dem Vaterstamme angehörende Tochter gegeben war. Auch aus diesem Problem ist ersichtlich, wie eine absolute Verhütung der Stammesentfremdung der Erbgüter gar, nicht in Absicht des Gesetzes gelegen sein könne.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy