민수기 12:1의 주석

ותדבר AND [MIRIAM AND AARON] SPAKE — The term דבר in every passage where it is used implies harsh language, for so it stales, (Genesis 42:30) “The man, the lord of the land spake (דבר) roughly to us”. The term אמר, however, is always an expression denoting supplication, for so it states, (Genesis 19:7) “And he said (ויאמר) ‘I beg of you (נא), my brethren, do not so wickedly” ; (verse 6 of this chapter) “And He said (ויאמר), Hear, I pray you (נא), My words’ — for the word נא always expresses supplication (Sifrei Bamidbar 99).

ותדבר מרים במשה, Miriam uttered criticism of Moses, etc. It is possible that Miriam and Aaron spoke in Moses' presence. Logic would dictate that this was indeed the case. Had they only been talking amongst each other, what difference would it have made to Moses? We must assume therefore that they said what they did as a rebuke to Moses. I believe Sifri confirms my opinion as the author quotes the words: וישמע ה׳ והאיש משה as belonging together, i.e. Moses too heard what Miriam said.

הכושית, from one of the tribes going back to Cham.

ותדבר מרים ואהרן....האשה הכושית, “Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses….on account of the Cushite woman (whom he had married).” Ibn Ezra writes that some people claim that Moses had been king in the land of Cush for many years and had married a Cushite woman in that country. Onkelos, on the other hand, translates the word כושית as describing Tzipporah’s physical beauty. Although generally speaking, the term is derogatory, Miriam is described as referring to Tzipporah as we refer to a blind man by calling him סגי נהור, “endowed with exceptionally good eyesight.” [This makes Miriam’s comment a sarcastic one. Ed.] I consider it most unlikely that Miriam used a term that is used as a complimentary one and turned it into an insulting one. Tzipporah, apparently was dark-skinned, similarly to the Negroes of the land of Cush. Tzipporah’s being a Midianite, people who live like Bedouins in a hot climate, with constant exposure to the sun, was therefore not unlike the Negroes in her skin colour. Miriam and Aaron suspected that Moses had separated from Tzipporah due to the colour of her skin. They could not imagine that Moses’ separation from Tzipporah was connected to his status as a prophet, and that is why they asked the rhetorical question: “does G’d only speak to him, did He not also speak to us?” They implied that the status of being a prophet does not require for the prophet to abandon normal family life, as they had not abandoned it either. Other commentators believe that Miriam and Aaron criticized Moses for not having married a woman of better lineage, of more aristocratic background. They considered themselves as superior to Moses because of their wives or husbands being of superior background. In other words, they used the word Cushite as a derogatory term. Miriam contrasted Aaron’s wife the sister of Nachshon, who was of impeccable heritage with that of Moses, who in her opinion, had married “beneath” him, socially and culturally. She added, if one were to say that nonetheless Moses himself remained of superior statute on account of his prophetic abilities, they themselves had also been found worthy of having communications from Hashem.

ותדבר מרים, “Miriam spoke out.” She spoke and that is why she was punished; Aaron remained silent or agreed with her and we find that he was punished also. This is the meaning of verse 9 ויחר אף ה' בם, “G’d was angry at them.” Wherever the Torah reports that G’d became angry at someone this is followed by a noticeable phenomenon. Seeing that Miriam had commen-ced speaking לשון הרע, “unseemly comments,” the Torah spelled out her punishment. In Aaron’s case the Torah did not spell out his punishment out of regard for him.

How did [Miriam] know. Meaning: It is not the behavior of modest women to complain to their neighbors about their husbands concerning intimate relations.

Kap. 12. VV. 1 u. 2. ותדבר מרים. Diese Verse bieten dem Verständnis erhebliche Schwierigkeiten. Sie berichten, dass Mirjam und Aharon Nachteiliges über Mosche geredet und zwar in Veranlassung האשה הכשית אשר לקח, welches ohne weiteres heißen würde: in Veranlassung der äthiopischen Frau, die er geheiratet hatte, כי denn, wurde hinzugefügt, das Faktum an sich wäre wahr, er hatte eine äthiopische Frau geheiratet, אשה כושית לקח. So weit wäre das Verständnis klar, und wäre dann nur nicht sowohl auffallend, dass Mirjam und Aharon sich über dieses Faktum aufgehalten, als dass in der Tat Mosche eine Äthiopierin geheiratet haben sollte! Wollte man aber in dieser Äthiopierin oder Abessynierin keine andere als die Midjanitin Zipora erblicken, so wäre, abgesehen davon, dass כוש doch nicht identisch mit מדין ist, ein Zweifaches nicht abzusehen, einmal, was in dieser Heirat Tadelnswertes gewesen, und ferner ist uns das Faktum längst ja bekannt und braucht wahrlich nicht erst noch als ein Novum bestätigt zu werden: כי אשה usw. Allein sofort die uns V. 2 mitgeteilten Worte Mirjams und Aharons lassen ja überhaupt es gar nicht zu, dass die Heirat mit der אשה כשית an sich, möge sie nun gewesen sein, wer sie wolle, Gegenstand der tadelnden Äußerung der Geschwister gewesen sein könne. Offenbar setzen nämlich die Worte: הרק אך במשה דבר ד, das Faktum כי אשה כשית לקח im engen Zusammenhang zu Mosche Prophetie und zwar ebenso unzweideutig dargestellt, dass Mosche אשה כשית לקח, weil דבר ד׳ בו die Geschwister aber in diesem דבר ד׳ במשה keine Rechtfertigung für לקיחת אשה כשית fanden, indem Mosche nicht der einzige war, mit welchem Gott geredet, und alle die andern, Mirjam und Aharon selbst, obgleich auch sie der Prophetie gewürdigt worden, doch darum sich nicht veranlasst gesehen לקחת אשה כושית! Nun liegt es aber völlig außer dem Bereiche denkbarer Möglichkeit, dass Mosche, dass überhaupt irgend jemand, weil er der Prophetie von Gott gewürdigt worden "deshalb" eine Äthiopierin geheiratet haben solle! Ist daher, wie der ganze Zusammenhang nicht anders zulässt, das Faktum, כי אשה כשית לקח, durch Mosches prophetischen Beruf motiviert, so muss damit etwas anderes ausgedrückt sein, als dass er eine Äthiopierin geheiratet habe! Sehen wir uns im ganzen Bereiche des Gotteswortes nach einer Beziehung ehelicher Verhältnisse zur Prophetie um, so finden wir nur die einzige Stelle Schmot 19, 15, wo das Volk, das der unvermittelten Vernehmung des göttlichen Wortes gewürdigt werden sollte, als Vorbereitung dazu des ehelichen Umganges mit den Frauen sich zu enthalten hatte, und zwar muss diese Vorbedingung eine so wesentlich von dem Momente geforderte sein, dass sie stillschweigend in der allgemeinen Anordnung וקדשתם וגו׳ והיו נכונים וגו׳ (Verse 10 und 11 daselbst) enthalten war. In der Tat erklärt auch die Überlieferung (ספרי) als Gegenstand der tadelnden Äußerung der Geschwister die Entfernung, in welcher sich Mosche von seiner Frau gehalten, פירש מן האשה, ein Umstand, der ihnen erst bei Gelegenheit der Prophetie der berufenen Ältesten bekannt geworden, den sie lediglich im Interesse der Frau für unrecht, weil eben durch Mosche Prophetenberuf nicht geboten hielten, da sie selber und so ja auch die Väter vor ihnen des göttlichen Wortes gewürdigt worden waren, ohne dass dadurch das eheliche Zusammenleben hätte Störung erleiden müssen. Sie übersahen den Abstand zwischen Mosche Stufe und der ihrigen und wussten nicht, dass als nach Schluss der Sinaioffenbarung an das Volk (Dewarim 5, 27) diesem mit den Worten: שובו לכם לאהליכם die Rückkehr ins Familienleben und in die eheliche Gemeinsamkeit gestattet und geboten wurde, Mosche das Verharren in der Entfernung mit den Worten: ואתה פה עמד עמדי ואדברה אליך וגו׳, zur Pflicht gemacht war (daselbst 28). Dass dies der Sinn unserer Stelle ist, ist nach dem ganzen Zusammenhange ganz unzweifelhaft. Unterstützt dürfte sich diese Erklärung noch durch die Erwägung finden, dass in allen Stellen, in welchen der Ausdruck על אודות in ähnlichem Zusammenhange in der תורה vorkommt, er stets den leidenden Gegenstand bezeichnet, dessen Interesse zur Sprache kommt. So Bereschit 21, 11: וירע וגו׳ על אודות בנו, daselbst 25: והכיח וגו׳ על אדות באר. Schmot 18, 8: אשר עשה ד׳ לפרעה וגו׳ על אודת ישראל. So ist auch hier die אשה כושית nicht der Gegenstand, über welchen, sondern in dessen Interesse die Klage geführt wurde. Es bleibt nur noch die Bedeutung des האשה הכשית אשר לקח aus dem Zusammenhange mit dem unzweifelhaften Sinne der Stelle zu erörtern übrig, und da möchten wir zu glauben wagen, es sei nicht unmöglich, dass לקוח אשה כושית eben nichts anderes als ein umschreibender Ausdruck für: "in getrennter Ehe leben" sein möge. Der Ausdruck כושי findet sich noch einigemal in typischer Bedeutung. In היהפוך כושי עורו (Jirmija 13, 23) bezeichnet es den Schwarzen, den Mohren überhaupt. In הלא כבני כושיים אתם לי (Amos 9,7) bezeichnet es die allerletzten und tiefstehenden Menschengeschlechter unter den Völkern. "Und wäret ihr die Kinder der Negervölker, wäret ihr nicht gleichwohl mein?!" In שגיון לדוד אשר שר לד׳ על דברי כוש בן ימיני (Ps. 7, 1). bezeichnet es die ganze Tiefe des Gegensatzes, welchen Sauls Handlungsweise zu dem an den Tag legte, was von einem בן ימיני von dem Sohne eines jüdischen Stammes zu erwarten gewesen wäre. Es war dies eine solche moralische Entartung, wie es eine physiologische wäre, wenn von einem jüdischen Stamme ein Neger geboren worden wäre. Sollte die geschlechtliche Verbindung mit einer Mohrin nicht als etwas also Widerstehendes und Unvereinbares betrachtet worden sein, dass eine Ehe eingegangen sein, in welcher doch die Gatten ein getrenntes Leben führen, "eine Mohrin geheiratet haben" genannt werden konnte? Wir können dies allerdings nur als Vermutung geben, glauben aber damit nichts Unwahrscheinliches angenommen zu haben, und hätte, wenn wir das Richtige getroffen, damit unsere Stelle ihre natürlichste Deutung gefunden.

ותדבר מרים ואהרן במשה, “Miriam and Aaron spoke critically about Moses.” Seeing that it is a fact that women indulge more in loose talk, Miriam is mentioned here first, seeing that she was a woman.

According to the simple meaning of the text, a gentile black woman. But who had converted. And Aaron and Miriam thought that this was why Moshe separated himself from her. That his wife was not of Israelite lineage. And they were saying that under no circumstances is this proper. After he had taken her and knew she was a non-Israelite and she didn't deceive him. Therefore it's not fair to make her sad and separate himself from her. [Afterwards I saw this commentary in the book "Paanekh Razei" who as his custom explains כושית as being black.

ותדבר מרים ואהרן במשה, “Miriam and Aaron spoke out critically against Moses;” how did either of them know that Moses had separated from his wife? They had both noted that Tzipporah no longer wore the jewelry she had been in the habit of wearing. Miriam asked Tzipporah why she no longer wore that jewelry. Tzipporah replied that it was because Miriam’s brother (Moses) did not pay any attention to her jewelry. This was a hint that he had separated from her. She told Aaron about this and they talked about that situation criticizing him.

ותדבר מרים ואהרן AND MIRIAM AND AARON SPAKE — She opened the conversation, therefore Scripture mentions her first. And whence did Miriam know that Moses had separated himself from his wife (for this was the statement she made; cf. Rashi below)? R. Nathan answered: “Miriam was beside Zipporah When it was told to Moses, ‘Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp’ (Numbers 11:27). When Zipporah heard this, she exclaimed, Woe to the wives of these if they have anything to do with prophecy, for they will separate from their wives just has my husband has separated from me!” It was from this that Miriam knew about it, and she told it to Aaron. Now what was the case with Miriam who had no intention to disparage him? She was punished thus severely! How much the more will this be so in the case of one who intentionally speaks in disparagement of this fellow”! (Sifrei Bamidbar 99).

כי אשה כושית לקח, as reported in the biography of Moses (compare Yalkut Shimoni, edition by Heiman-Shiloni on Exodus page 34, glossary 18) According to that version, Moses ruled for 40 years as king over the land of Cush, took himself a woman as his queen but never slept with her, as reported there. Miriam and Aaron were never aware of the fact that Moses had not consummated that union. This is the plain meaning of our verse.
If, as some believe, Miriam and Aaron spoke about Moses and Tzipporah, what need was there for the Torah to describe Moses’ wife as אשה כושית when everyone is well aware that Moses married Tzipporah the daughter of Yitro who was a Midianite, not a Cushite. Tzipporah could not have been described as Cushite seeing that the Cushites are descended from Cham, and the Midianites are descendents of the sons of Keturah, Avraham’s concubine, who bore 6 sons for him one of them being Midian. [Rash’bam’s argument is tenuous, for if Keturah was the same person as Hagar, according to most commentators, seeing that Hagar was an Egyptian, a woman descended from her could be described as Cushite, seeing that Mitzrayim, Egypt, was a descendant of Cham, also. Ed.]

Just as everyone. For if this were not so, why is the Torah calling her a Cushite? Was she a Cushite? — surely she was a Midianite! Rather, just as a Cushite’s skin is unique, so too her skin was unique in its beauty. (Gur Aryeh) Because it is somewhat incongruous for the Torah to speak in this cryptic manner, Rashi therefore says that כושית is the numerical equivalent of יפת תואר “beautiful appearance.”

הרק אך וגו׳. Diese Verdoppelung der beschränkenden Partikeln spricht das völlig Ausschließliche aus, in welchem, wie sie meinten, Mosche seine Stellung begriffen haben musste, dass er sich zu einem solchen Verfahren gegen seine Frau hatte veranlaßt glauben können. "Hat denn so ganz und gar Gott nur mit Mosche geredet?" Auch Abraham, Isaak und Jakob sind des göttlichen Wortes gewürdigt worden, und haben doch nicht die eheliche Gemeinschaft mit ihren Frauen aufgegeben! הלא גם בנו דבר, sind doch wir selbst des göttlichen Wortes gewürdigt worden, ohne dass wir unser eheliches Zusammenleben hätten aufgeben müssen! וישמע ד׳. Sie taten die Äußerung nur unter einander, aber Gott hörte sie.

כי אשה כושית לקח, “for he had married a woman from the land of Cush.” (Ethiopia) According to Moses’ biography, Moses had been king in that country and his wife had been a queen in her own right previously. Moses had ruled over that land for a period of forty years (before coming to Midian) This is why the Torah reported Miriam and Aaron as speaking critically only of Moses (“did G–d only speak with Moses?”) They thought that seeing that G–d had spoken with Moses, Moses had felt that no Jewish woman was good enough for him to marry, i.e. that he had given himself airs. They did not criticise Moses for having married Tzipporah, as he had done so in circumstances when he was a refugee from Egyptian justice at the time.

Because of the Cushite woman whom he had married: According to the simple meaning, they were saying, "And did Moses not find a woman from the Children of Israel to take as a wife, that he went to take [one] from the daughters of Cush, who are uncircumcised? And was it because the Holy One, blessed be He, spoke with him, that he became haughty; such that he not want to marry a woman from the daughters of Israel and sought a woman from far away? 'Did he not also speak with us,' and we married from [within] Israel, and did not become haughty about this."

על אודות האשה הכושית, they wondered why Moses had chosen this point in time to separate from Tzipporah and concluded that it was because she was a Negress (ugly), and they could not understand that he had married her in the first place seeing that she had always been a Negress. A different interpretation of this line: She had been a queen in her land, the land of Kush. This would fit with what we have read in Chronicles that Moses had been a King in that land. At the time, he had to marry a local woman. Now there was no need for him to remain married to a Kushite woman. If this were correct, our verse would not refer to Tzipporah, for the line: “for he had married a Kushite woman,” would not make any sense as Tzipporah was a Midianite woman as we know from Exodus 2,21. The Kushites were descended from Cham, the third son of Noach, and as such were a cursed people, and a Jew would not have married a woman from a cursed nation [although, Keturah, Avraham’s second and last wife, was an Egyptian and therefore also from a cursed nation, as Mitzrayim was the second son of Cham, Kush having been his firstborn (Genesis 10,6) Midian himself was a son of Keturah an Egyptian (Genesis 25,2), and therefore descendant of a cursed nation. Ed.]

האשה הכשית THE CUSHITE WOMAN — This tells us that all agreed as to her beauty just as all agree as to the blackness of an Aethopian (cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 99).

Concerning her divorce. Meaning concerning her husband’s separation from her; this is an abbreviated verse. Why did Rashi reverse the order and explain first the words “the Cushite woman”? It appears that one may have thought that they spoke about him because he in fact married a Cushite woman, as the Midrash says; therefore Rashi first explains that the woman with a hei refers to Tziporah, while the word “Cushite” means that “just as…” Afterwards he explains that “concerning the woman” means concerning her divorce. Subsequently he again explains the word “Cushite” — “What does the Torah teach? — You find…” And then he explains the word “the Cushite” — meaning the hei (indicating the definite article) — teaching “because of her beauty…” This teaches that she appeared this way to everyone and was known for this, consequently the Torah writes “האשה הכושית” (lit. the Cushite the woman). Finally Rashi explains “for [he married a Cushite] woman” teaching why the Torah provided a reason. He explains that this means that he should have either not married or he should have remained with her and not have separated from her. R. Yaakov Triosh.

For he had married a Cushite woman: Since we did not find in another place that Moses took a Cushite woman, the verse tells you [here] that he definitely married a Cushite woman. But they did not speak about Zipporah not being from Israel, because that had then been out of his control; since he had been a fugitive and could not go go to Egypt among the Children of Israel.

כושית — The numerical value of this word (736) is the same as that of יפת מראה, a woman of beautiful appearance.

על אדות האשה BECAUSE OF THE [CUSHITE] WOMAN — because of her having been divorced by Moses (cf. Note on previous passage).

כי אשה כשית לקח FOR HE HAD MARRIED A CUSHITE WOMAN — What is the force of this statement? (It appears superfluous; since על אדות וכו has been explained to refer to Moses having divorced his Cushite wife, it is unnecessary to state afterwards that he had married her)! But it is made to suggest the following: You may find a woman who is pleasant an account of her beauty but who is not pleasant by reason of her deeds (conduct); or one pleasant because of her conduct but not because of her beauty. This woman, however, was pleasant in every respect (Sifrei Bamidbar 99).

האשה הכשית THE CUSHITE WOMAN — Because of her beauty-she was called, “the Aethiopian” just as a man calls his handsome son “Moor”, in order that the evil eye should have no power over him (Midrash Tanchuma, Tzav 13).

כי אשה כשית לקח THAT HE HAD MARRIED A CUSHITE (a beautiful) WOMAN, and had now divorced her.