민수기 32:25의 주석

ויאמר בני גד AND THE CHILDREN OF GAD SAID, all of them as one man (ויאמר is the singular form of the verb, whilst the subject בגי גד is the plural; cf. Rashi on Exodus 19:2 s. v.).

עבדיך יעשו, the part of the condition which involves our being the vanguard we will most certainly fulfill.

ויאמר בני גד…עבדיך יעשו The tribe of Gad….said: "your servants will do, etc." One difficulty in this verse is the word לאמור. Whom was Moses to tell of their decision? 2) What did they add that they had not previously told Moses in verse 18 already? They themselves had volunteered to do what Moses now demanded of them! 3) Having already said generally: "your servants will do what my lord commands," why did they have to add verses 26 and 27 altogether? 4) Why did they repeat once more: "as my lord has said (verse 27)? Why did the Torah refer to מצוה "commands" in verse 25 whereas in verse 27 it uses the word דבר, "has said?"

ויאמר בני גד ובני ראובן, ”the Children of Gad and the Children of Reuven said, etc.:” The Torah did not use the plural mode ויאמרו, “they said,” as one spokesman for both tribes did the talking.

All of them as one man. Rashi was answering the question: Why is it written ויאמר [lit. "and he said"] in the singular form? There were many Gadites. He did not wish to explain like Ba’al HaTurim that their leader spoke for all of them, apparently because they were two tribes and thus they had two leaders who were able to speak, each one for his own tribe. R. Yaakov Triosh.

The tribe of Gad said. [It uses the singular verb] because after Moshe added a big condition—that they should not leave any armed man on the eastern side of the Yardein—they did not immediately decide. First, they assembled and came to the decision to accept Moshe’s condition. At that time, they appointed a new leader, since they were now split off from the rest of the tribes, and they were now to begin their settlement. After they appointed a leader, he went to Moshe and the Sanhedrin and spoke on behalf of all of them.

Once you consider that I have explained that Moses stressed to these tribes after their undertaking that the motivation for their joining the war was what mattered foremost, the reply of these two tribes is easy to understand. According to Bamidbar Rabbah on our paragraph Moses also had corrected them when he altered the order of priorities regarding the building of cities and sheepfolds to take care of the children first and not of the livestock as they had indicated in verse 16. There had been two new elements in Moses' speech to them, and they responded positively on both counts. They commenced with that which had been mentioned last, i.e. the concern for their children, by listing their children, wives, and livestock in the appropriate order this time. They followed this up by stressing that all of them were going to cross the Jordan as a vanguard in the presence of the Lord, to show that they were aware of the crucial dimension of their purpose of fighting the enemies of G'd. They refrained from repeating that they would be in the forefront of "the children of Israel" as they had said in verse 17.

We have a rule that in matters involving money one must abide by the terms set even if the person setting the condition is a layman; they wanted to go on record, that in this instance they would have abided by any condition Moses would set inasmch as he was their prophet, leader, etc. G'd had commanded the Israelites to heed everything the prophet would tell them (Deut. 18.15). This is what they had in mind with their first reaction הנה עבדיך יעשו כאשר אדני מצוה. In other words, they now stressed that their motivation in doing what they had undertaken to do was to display their obedience to the command of Moses in his capacity as the prophet. This is why they added כאשר אדני דבר, "as my lord says." The word לאמר too was meant to indicate their awareness of their obligation to do what Moses "said" even if he had not promised them that they would receive their share of the inheritance on the East Bank as a reward for abiding by the conditions he had set for them.

They meant to stress that even if Moses had not phrased his suggestions as a condition but had merely said so, לאמור without embodying his suggestions in the form of a binding contract, they would have taken him at his word and would have complied with his wishes. After all, one is in the habit of honouring financial agreements even if they are made only orally and do not involve the decree issued by a mutually recognised expert in the matter.