민수기 25:13의 인용 해설

so muss er um sie und sie müssen um ihn trauern. Er darf, wenn die Gatten gestorben sind, am Tage der Bestattung weder Dienst im Tempel verrichten, noch Heiligtümer geniessen, was Seb. 101b aus Lev. 10,19 abgeleitet wird. Das Gleiche gilt von den Gatten, wenn der Sohn gestorben ist. Die Mischna kann hier nicht von dem Falle handeln, dass die Frau binnen drei Monaten nach dem Tode des ersten Gatten sich wieder verheiratet hat, da sonst die folgenden Worte: „sie (also beide Gatten) trauern um ihn“ unverständlich wären; auch nicht von dem Falle, dass sie vom ersten Gatten geschieden wurde, da sonst der Sohn beim Tode des ersten Gatten sich an diesem jedenfalls verunreinigen dürfte, während die Mischna ihm dieses verbietet. Ist er nämlich der Sohn des ersten Gatten, so darf er sich an diesem als an seinem Vater verunreinigen, Lev. 21, 2; ist er aber der Sohn des zweiten Gatten, so darf er sich auch an jenem verunreinigen, da er ja als Sohn einer Geschiedenen, die einen Priester geheiratet, ein Entweihter (חלל) ist, dem die Verunreinigung überhaupt nicht verboten ist. Die Mischna kann endlich auch nicht von dem Falle handeln, dass die beiden Männer ihr ausserehelich beigewohnt haben, wodurch der Sohn nicht zum Entweihten wird; denn er dürfte dann nach den Rabbinen keinen Tempeldienst verrichten, weil im Anschluss an die Worte והיתה לו ולזרעו אחריו ברית כהנת עולם Num. 25, 13 gelehrt wird, dass nur derjenige als vollberechtigter Priester gilt, der seinen priesterlichen Vater mit Bestimmtheit nachweisen kann, während er nach dem Schlusssatze der Mischna zum Tempeldienst wohl zugelassen wird. Es kann vielmehr hier nur davon die Rede sein, dass der erste Gatte die Frau nur unter einer bestimmten Bedingung sich angetraut hatte, die aber dann nicht erfüllt wurde. In einem solchen Falle ist die Ehe ungiltig, und die Frau darf auch ohne Scheidebrief einen andren Mann heiraten; der Sohn ist demnach ein legitimer Priester.

ובריתך ינצורו, “and they kept Your covenant.” The covenant G-d made with the priests whose status became hereditary from father to son. (Numbers 25,13)

PHINEHAS, THE SON OF ELEAZAR. The Holy One, blessed be He, [here] informed Moses that He would give Phinehas a good reward for his zeal, because he was zealous for his G-d,¹Verse 13. and for the righteousness²Psalms 106:31: And that was accounted to him [Phinehas] for righteousness. which he did for Israel by bringing about atonement for them, so that they did not all die in the plague. He [also] commanded Moses to tell Israel that he [Phinehas] would be a priest forever,³The promise is expressed here in Verse 13; Ramban’s language though is taken from Psalms 110:4. and this is the sense of the phrase, Therefore say,⁴Ramban’s intent is that Verse 11 [Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron …] was G-d’s communication exclusively to Moses, telling him that He is desirous of rewarding Phinehas for the reasons stated in that verse, but He did not tell him what was to constitute the reward. Verse 12 then continues with the thought: “Since it is My desire to reward Phinehas, Therefore say to the children of Israel … ” Thus the contents of Verse 11 was not to be told to Israel (Aboab). This interpretation of Ramban is unlike that of Rashi from whose words it may be implied that even the contents of Verse 11 was to be told to the people, the object being that they were not to speak disparagingly of Phinehas for having killed a prince of Israel, for G-d testified that he is a descendant of Aaron, who was a lover of peace, and what Phinehas did was to save the honor of Israel. that Moses was to tell this to Israel. Now Scripture does not say: “and it shall be unto him, and to his seed after him ‘an everlasting priesthood, ’” as He said about Aaron,⁵Exodus 29:9: and they shall have the priesthood by a perpetual statute. but instead it says: ‘the covenant’ of an everlasting priesthood,¹Verse 13. and it [also] says, I give unto him ‘My covenant’ of peace, meaning that He will give him a covenant with peace cleaving to it, whereas in the case of Aaron it says for splendor and for beauty.⁶Exodus 28:2. Since this indicates the very high spiritual status achieved by Aaron [as alluded to in the words of kavod and tiphereth, which represent certain Emanations], it was not necessary to mention ‘the covenant of’ an everlasting priesthood, indicating the perfect Unity. But in the case of Phinehas it does not say that his priesthood was for splendor and for beauty; therefore the verse had to mention ‘the covenant of an everlasting priesthood, indicating that Phinehas’ priesthood was also in the perfect Unity, because he was zealous for his G-d (Abusaula). See also my Hebrew commentary, p. 305. Therefore it says [here concerning Phinehas]: because he was zealous for his G-d. The student learned [in the mysteries of the Cabala] will understand.
Scripture mentions, Now the name of the man of Israel that was slain;⁷Verse 14. And the name of the Midianite woman that was slain,⁸Verse 15. in order to indicate that [Phinehas] deserved this great reward because he killed a prince of Israel, and the daughter of a heathen king and [nonetheless] he feared them not in his zeal for his G-d. And after He had requited His good reward to the righteous one [Phinehas], He commanded Moses to punish the wicked ones, and He told him, Harass the Midianites,⁹Verse 17. but first He commanded him to count the people. This is the intent of [the phrase] And it came to pass after the plague [that the Eternal spoke unto Moses … ‘Take the sum etc.’],¹⁰Verse 19 of this chapter, and Verses 1-2 of Chapter 26. meaning that the taking of the census should be done first [before the punishment of the Midianites].