שְׂעִיר־עִזִּ֥ים אֶחָ֖ד לְחַטָּֽאת׃
속죄 제물로 수염소 하나이며
Ramban
AND THEY BROUGHT THEIR OFFERING BEFORE THE ETERNAL. Since the wagons [which the princes brought] were for the purpose of the offerings [i.e., for transporting the Tabernacle, where offerings are made before G-d] they are also called “offering.” Similarly, And we have brought the Eternal’s offering, what every man hath gotten, of jewels of gold,135Further, 31:50. meaning “an offering” for the repairs of the Tabernacle. Now the princes thought that it would be impossible for the Levites to carry on their shoulders the boards of the Tabernacle and the sockets, which were very heavy, and therefore they brought the wagons of their own accord, for such is the way that all those who carry houses of kings and their palatial tents adopt, transporting them on wagons.
We may also explain that the expression And they brought their offering before the Eternal, six wagons ‘tzov,’ means six large wagons bearing their offerings, and twelve oxen drawing the wagons. Thus they brought the wagons laden [with the offerings], and the oxen [drawing the wagons] before the Tabernacle. And G-d commanded Moses, Take all of it of them, and the wagons and the oxen which were not brought for offerings shall do the service of the Tent of Meeting.136Verse 5. Afterwards the princes took their offerings down from the wagons and brought them before the Tabernacle,137Verse 10. intending to offer them all up on that day since they had been given permission to offer them before Him, but G-d commanded, each prince on his day138Verse 11. shall they bring their offerings. And because of this [i.e., since the wagons that the princes brought contained the animals that they intended to offer up] it was not necessary now that He should say to Moses “take it of them,” [as the original statement136Verse 5. already implies G-d’s consent to the offerings as well].139But according to the first interpretation, that the wagons were empty and were brought so that the Levites could transport the Tabernacle in them, and G-d consented by saying to Moses, Take it of them, the question arises: when the princes came back and brought the actual dedication-offerings, why did G-d likewise not tell Moses to take the offerings from them? Hence the second interpretation is to be preferred. And it is a linguistic expression [in the Sacred Language] to say “wagons” when referring to their contents, just like: those who eat ‘shulchan Izebel’140I Kings 18:19. [literally: “Jezebel’s table,” which means “the food on Jezebel’s table”]. So also: for all ‘sha’ar ami’ do know141Ruth 3:11. [literally: for all “the gates of my people” do know, which means: “for all the people in the gates of my people do know”]. And [likewise we find] in the language of the Sages:142Baba Bathra 146 a. “a hundred wagons of pitchers of wine and pitchers of oil, and of silver and golden vessels” [the meaning being “the amount of wine and oil and vessels that can be contained in a hundred wagons,” and not just wagons of pitchers of wine and oil]. It is possible that the word tzov [six wagons ‘tzov’] means “full,” and so also: ‘uvatzabim’ and upon mules,143Isaiah 66:20. which means “in wagons full of people.” In that case six wagons ‘tzov’ [in the verse before us] means “six wagons laden full,” their load being the dedication-offerings which Scripture specifies further on.
Now Scripture mentions the offerings of each of the princes individually and afterwards it includes them all in a general statement, saying, This was the dedication-offering of the altar, in the day when it was anointed, at the hands of the princes of Israel: twelve silver dishes,144Further, Verse 84. and Rashi wrote:145Ibid., Verse 85. “This teaches you that the vessels of the Sanctuary were exactly equal in weight [as specified in the verses: one silver dish, the weight whereof was a hundred and thirty shekels etc.]. If one weighed each one separately and then weighed them all together, it was neither more nor less [than the total should have been]. This is based on [the explanations of] Rabbi Moshe the Preacher.”146This final statement [“This is based on … “] is not found in our editions of Rashi. Rabbi Moshe the Preacher is however quoted here in Verse 23. He was an older contemporary of Rashi’s who lived in the city of Narbonne. His work was in the nature of a Midrashic commentary compiled from earlier sources. See in Vol. I, p. 424 Note 196. But I cannot understand what they mean in saying this. If we are to consider this a miracle, what benefit is there in the occurrence of this miracle? And if this is the natural result with all weights, why should Scripture specifically mention it? In the Sifre the Rabbis have clearly said:147Sifre Naso 54. “This is to teach you that the vessels of the Sanctuary148Literally: “the Permanent House” (see Vol. II, p. 335, Note 598). Here, however, the term beith olamim refers both to the Tabernacle and to the Sanctuary. were not like ordinary vessels. In the case of ordinary vessels, if one weighs each separately and then weighs them all together, the total is sometimes more or less [than it should have been] etc.”149Now this Sifre “clearly” states [as Ramban wrote above] that there was some special phenomenon in the weighing of the vessels. It does not yet explain what purpose it served; hence Ramban continues to quote from the Sifre the words of Rabbi Nathan. And there [in the Sifre] the Rabbis further said: “Rabbi Nathan says: If one were to weigh all the vessels of the Sanctuary together148Literally: “the Permanent House” (see Vol. II, p. 335, Note 598). Here, however, the term beith olamim refers both to the Tabernacle and to the Sanctuary. and then turn them into bullion, and again make vessels of it, they would be neither more nor less [than the original weight].” He means to say by this that [these vessels were made of] a very pure gold [or silver, as the case may be], so that even if one melted them down and turned them into bullion, they still remained at their original weight. This was not because a miracle happened to them, but because they were made of a very pure gold.
The correct interpretation of the verse is that the Holy One, blessed be He, bestows honor upon those who fear Him, just as He said, for them that honor Me I will honor.150I Samuel 2:30. Now all the princes brought this offering on the same day, because they all agreed to it simultaneously. But since it was impossible that one of them should not precede the others, He honored those who came first in [the position of] the standards to bring their offerings on the earlier days. He wanted, however, to mention them all by name and the details of their offerings, and to cite the day of each one, rather than honoring the first one by saying, This was the offering of Nachshon the son of Amminadab151Verse 17. and then saying “and so did each of the princes offer on his day,” for that would have been a diminution of the honor of the others. Afterwards [i.e., after having listed them all separately] He included them all again in a general verse,144Further, Verse 84. in order to tell us that they were all equal before Him, blessed be He. And so did the Rabbis say in the Sifre:152Sifre Naso 53. “Scripture tells us that just as they were all equal in the thought [of bringing these offerings] so were they all alike in merit. Twelve silver dishes144Further, Verse 84. — these were the same ones that they donated, and nothing which would have invalidated them153Such as becoming chipped or perforated, in which case a sacred vessel may no longer be used. (Kether Kehunah, commentary to Sifre ibid.). occurred to them.”
There is another explanation of this [chapter] in the interpretations of the Rabbis,154Bamidbar Rabbah 13:13. namely that each of the princes intended to bring a dedication-offering to the altar which would be of the amount [specified in the verses, each one of them intending to bring the same offerings], but Nachshon [prince of the tribe of Judah] had a particular reason for [bringing] this number [of offerings], and each of the other princes thought of an independent reason. Thus the Rabbis said155Mentioned by Rashi (in Verse 19) in the name of Rabbi Moshe the Preacher, who doubtless quoted an older source. that Nachshon thought he would bring a ka’arath keseph (a silver dish),156Verse 13. since the numerical value of its [Hebrew] letters is nine hundred thirty,157Kuph is 100; ayin 70; reish, 200; tav 400. Kaph is 20; samech 60; pei 80. The total is 930. corresponding to the years of the first man;158Genesis 5:5. and the weight thereof was a hundred and thirty shekels156Verse 13. indicating the years when he [Adam] begot children [to maintain the existence of the world, i.e., when he begot Seth,159Ibid., Verse 3. from whom the world was founded] — and likewise the whole Midrash, as Rashi wrote it.155Mentioned by Rashi (in Verse 19) in the name of Rabbi Moshe the Preacher, who doubtless quoted an older source. Or [the offerings of each prince were,] according to another Midrash,154Bamidbar Rabbah 13:13. [an allusion to] the tradition each tribe had from our father Jacob about all that would happen to it until the days of the Messiah. And so Nachshon [prince of the tribe of Judah] began by bringing his offerings with reference to royalty. The dish and the basin156Verse 13. corresponded to the two kings who would be descended from him, who would rule over the sea and land, these being Solomon and the Messianic King. This was why Nachshon brought a ka’arah (silver round dish), to symbolize the ocean which covers the whole world and is like a [round] dish.160The basin indicated the earth, as will be explained further on. Incidentally we see clearly that the Midrashic Sages were aware of the spherical shape of the earth. [The weight of the dish was] a hundred and thirty shekels,156Verse 13. since it was on the third day [of Creation] that the Holy One, blessed be He, gathered all seas together to one place and called them yamim, the numerical value of these letters being one hundred;161Yod is 10; mem 40; yod 10; mem 40 — totalling 100. and Solomon added one sea to the work of the Sanctuary, and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.162I Kings 7:23. Thus you have one hundred and thirty. One silver basin of seventy shekels156Verse 13. corresponds to the world which is shaped like a sphere. The seventy shekels symbolize that they [Solomon and the Messiah] will rule over the seventy nations.163See Megillah 11b, where Solomon is mentioned as having ruled over the whole world. Both of them full,156Verse 13. for gifts will be brought to them from all peoples.164Isaiah 66:20. ‘Soleth’ (fine flour)156Verse 13. corresponds to these [two kings — as in the expression: the precious sons of Zion] ‘hamesulaim’ (who were comparable to) ‘fine’ gold.165Lamentations 4:2. Mingled with oil156Verse 13. — A good name is better than precious oil.166Ecclesiastes 7:1. Silver — as it is said, The tongue of the righteous is as choice silver.167Proverbs 10:20. One golden pan of ten shekels,168Verse 14. The continuation of the verse (“full of incense”) affords the basis for the allusion to the ten generations full of righteous deeds. this corresponds to the ten generations from Peretz to David169See Ruth 4:18-22: And these are the generations of Peretz … and Jesse begot David. Ten generations are listed there. who were all righteous men full of good deeds, [as pleasant] as the odor of the incense.168Verse 14. The continuation of the verse (“full of incense”) affords the basis for the allusion to the ten generations full of righteous deeds. One young bullock170Verse 15. — in allusion to Abraham;171Of Abraham it is stated, And Abraham ran unto the herd (Genesis 18:7). one ram170Verse 15. — in allusion to Isaac;172Ibid., 22:13: and he [Abraham] took the ram — as a substitute for Isaac. one he-lamb170Verse 15. — in allusion to Jacob.173Ibid., 30:40: And Jacob separated the lambs. One male of the goats for a sin-offering,174Verse 16. to atone for the deed of Judah who brought Joseph’s coat to his father [dipped in the blood of a he-goat].175Genesis 37:31-32. And for the sacrifice of peace-offerings, two oxen — alluding to David and Solomon, who began the royal line [of the House of David], and who were righteous men [during whose reigns] the kingdom was whole.176During the lifetimes of David and Solomon the kingdom was complete, ruling as they did over all the twelve tribes. After Solomon’s death the kingdom was divided into two parts — Judah and Israel. Hence the allusion here, and for the sacrifice of peace-offerings, two oxen. These are the two kings — David and Solomon — whose reigns were characterized by shelamim [“peace-offerings,” a term which also suggests “peace” and “completeness”]. Five rams, five he-goats, five he-lambs of the first year151Verse 17. — in allusion to the fifteen monarchs from Rehoboam to Zedekiah,177See I Chronicles 3:10-16 — where all these fifteen kings of Judah are listed. who were kings and sons of kings [and may be classified in three groups, just as the fifteen peace-offerings came in three groups], some completely righteous, some average, and some very wicked. This was what Nachshon thought [in bringing these offerings, which symbolized the history of his tribe].
And Nethanel the son of Zuar [prince of the tribe of Issachar] also thought in his heart that he would bring a dedication-offering of this amount, but he had a different reason for it, bringing his offerings in allusion to the Torah, because the special merit of the tribe of Issachar was [in their knowledge] of the wisdom of the Torah.178I Chronicles 12:33. See above, in Seder Bamidbar, Note 117. A silver dish179Verse 19. — referring to the Torah which is called “bread,” as it is said, Come, eat of my bread,180Proverbs 9:5. and it is said of the showbread, And thou shalt make the dishes thereof.181Exodus 25:29. And [the prince of the tribe of] Zebulun brought his offerings in relation to commerce, which he engaged in and exerted himself in, and [from the profits of which he maintained [through his generosity the Torah-studying tribe of] Issachar, with whom he [equally] shared the reward [for the studying of the Torah]. The [round] dish182Verse 25. was symbolic of the ocean, since he [Zebulun] dwelled at the shores of the sea.183Genesis 49:13. — Generosity in support of the study of Torah is thus evident throughout the generations, and its reward is extraordinary as the generous person becomes an equal partner in the sacred venture. Similarly the Rabbis found in that Midrash184Bamidbar Rabbah, Chapters 13-14. a special reason for the offering of each and every tribe and for the amount of the offerings [in accordance with the subsequent history of the tribe]. It is for this reason that Scripture treated them all equally, giving the details of each one separately as if the others had not been mentioned, after which it mentioned them all together, to hint that at the same moment it occurred to each of them to bring the dedication-offering, and none of them preceded the other either in thought or in the actual bringing of the offerings to the Tabernacle. It is because of this Scripture mentioned them all in identical words.
We may also explain that the expression And they brought their offering before the Eternal, six wagons ‘tzov,’ means six large wagons bearing their offerings, and twelve oxen drawing the wagons. Thus they brought the wagons laden [with the offerings], and the oxen [drawing the wagons] before the Tabernacle. And G-d commanded Moses, Take all of it of them, and the wagons and the oxen which were not brought for offerings shall do the service of the Tent of Meeting.136Verse 5. Afterwards the princes took their offerings down from the wagons and brought them before the Tabernacle,137Verse 10. intending to offer them all up on that day since they had been given permission to offer them before Him, but G-d commanded, each prince on his day138Verse 11. shall they bring their offerings. And because of this [i.e., since the wagons that the princes brought contained the animals that they intended to offer up] it was not necessary now that He should say to Moses “take it of them,” [as the original statement136Verse 5. already implies G-d’s consent to the offerings as well].139But according to the first interpretation, that the wagons were empty and were brought so that the Levites could transport the Tabernacle in them, and G-d consented by saying to Moses, Take it of them, the question arises: when the princes came back and brought the actual dedication-offerings, why did G-d likewise not tell Moses to take the offerings from them? Hence the second interpretation is to be preferred. And it is a linguistic expression [in the Sacred Language] to say “wagons” when referring to their contents, just like: those who eat ‘shulchan Izebel’140I Kings 18:19. [literally: “Jezebel’s table,” which means “the food on Jezebel’s table”]. So also: for all ‘sha’ar ami’ do know141Ruth 3:11. [literally: for all “the gates of my people” do know, which means: “for all the people in the gates of my people do know”]. And [likewise we find] in the language of the Sages:142Baba Bathra 146 a. “a hundred wagons of pitchers of wine and pitchers of oil, and of silver and golden vessels” [the meaning being “the amount of wine and oil and vessels that can be contained in a hundred wagons,” and not just wagons of pitchers of wine and oil]. It is possible that the word tzov [six wagons ‘tzov’] means “full,” and so also: ‘uvatzabim’ and upon mules,143Isaiah 66:20. which means “in wagons full of people.” In that case six wagons ‘tzov’ [in the verse before us] means “six wagons laden full,” their load being the dedication-offerings which Scripture specifies further on.
Now Scripture mentions the offerings of each of the princes individually and afterwards it includes them all in a general statement, saying, This was the dedication-offering of the altar, in the day when it was anointed, at the hands of the princes of Israel: twelve silver dishes,144Further, Verse 84. and Rashi wrote:145Ibid., Verse 85. “This teaches you that the vessels of the Sanctuary were exactly equal in weight [as specified in the verses: one silver dish, the weight whereof was a hundred and thirty shekels etc.]. If one weighed each one separately and then weighed them all together, it was neither more nor less [than the total should have been]. This is based on [the explanations of] Rabbi Moshe the Preacher.”146This final statement [“This is based on … “] is not found in our editions of Rashi. Rabbi Moshe the Preacher is however quoted here in Verse 23. He was an older contemporary of Rashi’s who lived in the city of Narbonne. His work was in the nature of a Midrashic commentary compiled from earlier sources. See in Vol. I, p. 424 Note 196. But I cannot understand what they mean in saying this. If we are to consider this a miracle, what benefit is there in the occurrence of this miracle? And if this is the natural result with all weights, why should Scripture specifically mention it? In the Sifre the Rabbis have clearly said:147Sifre Naso 54. “This is to teach you that the vessels of the Sanctuary148Literally: “the Permanent House” (see Vol. II, p. 335, Note 598). Here, however, the term beith olamim refers both to the Tabernacle and to the Sanctuary. were not like ordinary vessels. In the case of ordinary vessels, if one weighs each separately and then weighs them all together, the total is sometimes more or less [than it should have been] etc.”149Now this Sifre “clearly” states [as Ramban wrote above] that there was some special phenomenon in the weighing of the vessels. It does not yet explain what purpose it served; hence Ramban continues to quote from the Sifre the words of Rabbi Nathan. And there [in the Sifre] the Rabbis further said: “Rabbi Nathan says: If one were to weigh all the vessels of the Sanctuary together148Literally: “the Permanent House” (see Vol. II, p. 335, Note 598). Here, however, the term beith olamim refers both to the Tabernacle and to the Sanctuary. and then turn them into bullion, and again make vessels of it, they would be neither more nor less [than the original weight].” He means to say by this that [these vessels were made of] a very pure gold [or silver, as the case may be], so that even if one melted them down and turned them into bullion, they still remained at their original weight. This was not because a miracle happened to them, but because they were made of a very pure gold.
The correct interpretation of the verse is that the Holy One, blessed be He, bestows honor upon those who fear Him, just as He said, for them that honor Me I will honor.150I Samuel 2:30. Now all the princes brought this offering on the same day, because they all agreed to it simultaneously. But since it was impossible that one of them should not precede the others, He honored those who came first in [the position of] the standards to bring their offerings on the earlier days. He wanted, however, to mention them all by name and the details of their offerings, and to cite the day of each one, rather than honoring the first one by saying, This was the offering of Nachshon the son of Amminadab151Verse 17. and then saying “and so did each of the princes offer on his day,” for that would have been a diminution of the honor of the others. Afterwards [i.e., after having listed them all separately] He included them all again in a general verse,144Further, Verse 84. in order to tell us that they were all equal before Him, blessed be He. And so did the Rabbis say in the Sifre:152Sifre Naso 53. “Scripture tells us that just as they were all equal in the thought [of bringing these offerings] so were they all alike in merit. Twelve silver dishes144Further, Verse 84. — these were the same ones that they donated, and nothing which would have invalidated them153Such as becoming chipped or perforated, in which case a sacred vessel may no longer be used. (Kether Kehunah, commentary to Sifre ibid.). occurred to them.”
There is another explanation of this [chapter] in the interpretations of the Rabbis,154Bamidbar Rabbah 13:13. namely that each of the princes intended to bring a dedication-offering to the altar which would be of the amount [specified in the verses, each one of them intending to bring the same offerings], but Nachshon [prince of the tribe of Judah] had a particular reason for [bringing] this number [of offerings], and each of the other princes thought of an independent reason. Thus the Rabbis said155Mentioned by Rashi (in Verse 19) in the name of Rabbi Moshe the Preacher, who doubtless quoted an older source. that Nachshon thought he would bring a ka’arath keseph (a silver dish),156Verse 13. since the numerical value of its [Hebrew] letters is nine hundred thirty,157Kuph is 100; ayin 70; reish, 200; tav 400. Kaph is 20; samech 60; pei 80. The total is 930. corresponding to the years of the first man;158Genesis 5:5. and the weight thereof was a hundred and thirty shekels156Verse 13. indicating the years when he [Adam] begot children [to maintain the existence of the world, i.e., when he begot Seth,159Ibid., Verse 3. from whom the world was founded] — and likewise the whole Midrash, as Rashi wrote it.155Mentioned by Rashi (in Verse 19) in the name of Rabbi Moshe the Preacher, who doubtless quoted an older source. Or [the offerings of each prince were,] according to another Midrash,154Bamidbar Rabbah 13:13. [an allusion to] the tradition each tribe had from our father Jacob about all that would happen to it until the days of the Messiah. And so Nachshon [prince of the tribe of Judah] began by bringing his offerings with reference to royalty. The dish and the basin156Verse 13. corresponded to the two kings who would be descended from him, who would rule over the sea and land, these being Solomon and the Messianic King. This was why Nachshon brought a ka’arah (silver round dish), to symbolize the ocean which covers the whole world and is like a [round] dish.160The basin indicated the earth, as will be explained further on. Incidentally we see clearly that the Midrashic Sages were aware of the spherical shape of the earth. [The weight of the dish was] a hundred and thirty shekels,156Verse 13. since it was on the third day [of Creation] that the Holy One, blessed be He, gathered all seas together to one place and called them yamim, the numerical value of these letters being one hundred;161Yod is 10; mem 40; yod 10; mem 40 — totalling 100. and Solomon added one sea to the work of the Sanctuary, and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.162I Kings 7:23. Thus you have one hundred and thirty. One silver basin of seventy shekels156Verse 13. corresponds to the world which is shaped like a sphere. The seventy shekels symbolize that they [Solomon and the Messiah] will rule over the seventy nations.163See Megillah 11b, where Solomon is mentioned as having ruled over the whole world. Both of them full,156Verse 13. for gifts will be brought to them from all peoples.164Isaiah 66:20. ‘Soleth’ (fine flour)156Verse 13. corresponds to these [two kings — as in the expression: the precious sons of Zion] ‘hamesulaim’ (who were comparable to) ‘fine’ gold.165Lamentations 4:2. Mingled with oil156Verse 13. — A good name is better than precious oil.166Ecclesiastes 7:1. Silver — as it is said, The tongue of the righteous is as choice silver.167Proverbs 10:20. One golden pan of ten shekels,168Verse 14. The continuation of the verse (“full of incense”) affords the basis for the allusion to the ten generations full of righteous deeds. this corresponds to the ten generations from Peretz to David169See Ruth 4:18-22: And these are the generations of Peretz … and Jesse begot David. Ten generations are listed there. who were all righteous men full of good deeds, [as pleasant] as the odor of the incense.168Verse 14. The continuation of the verse (“full of incense”) affords the basis for the allusion to the ten generations full of righteous deeds. One young bullock170Verse 15. — in allusion to Abraham;171Of Abraham it is stated, And Abraham ran unto the herd (Genesis 18:7). one ram170Verse 15. — in allusion to Isaac;172Ibid., 22:13: and he [Abraham] took the ram — as a substitute for Isaac. one he-lamb170Verse 15. — in allusion to Jacob.173Ibid., 30:40: And Jacob separated the lambs. One male of the goats for a sin-offering,174Verse 16. to atone for the deed of Judah who brought Joseph’s coat to his father [dipped in the blood of a he-goat].175Genesis 37:31-32. And for the sacrifice of peace-offerings, two oxen — alluding to David and Solomon, who began the royal line [of the House of David], and who were righteous men [during whose reigns] the kingdom was whole.176During the lifetimes of David and Solomon the kingdom was complete, ruling as they did over all the twelve tribes. After Solomon’s death the kingdom was divided into two parts — Judah and Israel. Hence the allusion here, and for the sacrifice of peace-offerings, two oxen. These are the two kings — David and Solomon — whose reigns were characterized by shelamim [“peace-offerings,” a term which also suggests “peace” and “completeness”]. Five rams, five he-goats, five he-lambs of the first year151Verse 17. — in allusion to the fifteen monarchs from Rehoboam to Zedekiah,177See I Chronicles 3:10-16 — where all these fifteen kings of Judah are listed. who were kings and sons of kings [and may be classified in three groups, just as the fifteen peace-offerings came in three groups], some completely righteous, some average, and some very wicked. This was what Nachshon thought [in bringing these offerings, which symbolized the history of his tribe].
And Nethanel the son of Zuar [prince of the tribe of Issachar] also thought in his heart that he would bring a dedication-offering of this amount, but he had a different reason for it, bringing his offerings in allusion to the Torah, because the special merit of the tribe of Issachar was [in their knowledge] of the wisdom of the Torah.178I Chronicles 12:33. See above, in Seder Bamidbar, Note 117. A silver dish179Verse 19. — referring to the Torah which is called “bread,” as it is said, Come, eat of my bread,180Proverbs 9:5. and it is said of the showbread, And thou shalt make the dishes thereof.181Exodus 25:29. And [the prince of the tribe of] Zebulun brought his offerings in relation to commerce, which he engaged in and exerted himself in, and [from the profits of which he maintained [through his generosity the Torah-studying tribe of] Issachar, with whom he [equally] shared the reward [for the studying of the Torah]. The [round] dish182Verse 25. was symbolic of the ocean, since he [Zebulun] dwelled at the shores of the sea.183Genesis 49:13. — Generosity in support of the study of Torah is thus evident throughout the generations, and its reward is extraordinary as the generous person becomes an equal partner in the sacred venture. Similarly the Rabbis found in that Midrash184Bamidbar Rabbah, Chapters 13-14. a special reason for the offering of each and every tribe and for the amount of the offerings [in accordance with the subsequent history of the tribe]. It is for this reason that Scripture treated them all equally, giving the details of each one separately as if the others had not been mentioned, after which it mentioned them all together, to hint that at the same moment it occurred to each of them to bring the dedication-offering, and none of them preceded the other either in thought or in the actual bringing of the offerings to the Tabernacle. It is because of this Scripture mentioned them all in identical words.
Rabbeinu Bahya
וזאת תורת זבח השלמים, “and this is the law of the peace-offerings, etc.” There were two types of peace-offerings, the one called תודה and the one simply referred to as שלמים. The תודה offering was accompanied by both unleavened bread and leavened bread. There were a total of 40 loaves, of which ten were leavened. The technical names for each group of ten loaves were: Matzah, Chametz, Rekikim, and Revuchim. This is all spelled out in verse 12, i.e. that these loaves be mixed with oil, unleavened wafers smeared with oil and scalded fine flour mixed with oil. The Torah there continues with verse 13: “With loaves of leavened bread shall he bring his offering, with his feast thanksgiving-offering.” In verse 14 we are told that -one of each of these types of loaves be offered “as a portion to the Lord; it shall belong to the Priest.” In other words, the Priest’s function here is to receive a tithe from the offering, 10%. It is very similar to the gift called תרומת מעשר which the Priest receives from the Levites in respect of the tithes the Levites had received from the Israelite farmers.
Our sages (Menachot 77) explain that the total weight of the ten loaves of leavened bread was equivalent to the total weight of the other 30 leaves consisting of three types of unleavened wafers, etc., so that in effect there was an equal amount of leavened bread and unleavened bread which constituted the meal-offering part of the תודה. This can be deduced from the syntax of our verses seeing that the 30 loaves of unleavened wafers, etc., are all mentioned in a single verse, whereas the Torah devotes a separate verse to the ten loaves of leavened breads. This suggests that the quantity of what is mentioned in verse 12 is equal to the quantity (weight) of material mentioned in verse 13.
The offering called שלמים without the word תודה, is not occasioned by the need to express one’s gratitude to Hashem for His having rescued one from danger of one kind or another, but is a free-willed offering called either נדבה or נדר, depending on the wording of one’s vow to donate such an offering. This is why the Torah introduces the legislation pertaining to such an offering with the words: “if his feast-offering (peace-offering) is for a vow or donation, etc.” (verse 16). Anyone bringing this kind of שלמים does not have to add the loaves of leavened and unleavened bread associated with the thanksgiving offering, תודה. [Seeing that it was mandatory to bring such an offering in Jerusalem on the three festivals requiring every male Jew to make this pilgrimage, the translation “feast-offering” as an alternative for “peace-offering” is quite appropriate. Ed.].
There appears to be a contradiction here in the regulations concerning the תודה offering and the fact that it was made up partially of leavened loaves, seeing the Torah had stated elsewhere (Leviticus 2,11) that “no manner of leavened material or honey is to be offered up on the Altar.” The fact is that these loaves of the תודה offering were not put on the Altar at all. Hence there is no contradiction with what the Torah wrote in Leviticus 2,11. The loaves were only “waved” above the Altar not deposited or burned up on it.
Our sages (Menachot 77) explain that the total weight of the ten loaves of leavened bread was equivalent to the total weight of the other 30 leaves consisting of three types of unleavened wafers, etc., so that in effect there was an equal amount of leavened bread and unleavened bread which constituted the meal-offering part of the תודה. This can be deduced from the syntax of our verses seeing that the 30 loaves of unleavened wafers, etc., are all mentioned in a single verse, whereas the Torah devotes a separate verse to the ten loaves of leavened breads. This suggests that the quantity of what is mentioned in verse 12 is equal to the quantity (weight) of material mentioned in verse 13.
The offering called שלמים without the word תודה, is not occasioned by the need to express one’s gratitude to Hashem for His having rescued one from danger of one kind or another, but is a free-willed offering called either נדבה or נדר, depending on the wording of one’s vow to donate such an offering. This is why the Torah introduces the legislation pertaining to such an offering with the words: “if his feast-offering (peace-offering) is for a vow or donation, etc.” (verse 16). Anyone bringing this kind of שלמים does not have to add the loaves of leavened and unleavened bread associated with the thanksgiving offering, תודה. [Seeing that it was mandatory to bring such an offering in Jerusalem on the three festivals requiring every male Jew to make this pilgrimage, the translation “feast-offering” as an alternative for “peace-offering” is quite appropriate. Ed.].
There appears to be a contradiction here in the regulations concerning the תודה offering and the fact that it was made up partially of leavened loaves, seeing the Torah had stated elsewhere (Leviticus 2,11) that “no manner of leavened material or honey is to be offered up on the Altar.” The fact is that these loaves of the תודה offering were not put on the Altar at all. Hence there is no contradiction with what the Torah wrote in Leviticus 2,11. The loaves were only “waved” above the Altar not deposited or burned up on it.
Rabbeinu Bahya
If that indeed were so we would have to ask why Moses only prayed concerning the offering by Datan and Aviram who were not the principal rebels and why he did not also pray concerning the offerings of Korach and the other 250 rebels? Besides, seeing that Moses was not aware of any merit that these people had which would postpone their punishment at this time, why did he have to pray that their offering not be accepted altogether? He should have prayed that equal punishment should befall all of these people, so why single out only Datan and Aviram?br> In view of these problems I believe that the words: “their gift-offering” refer to that by the twelve princes, i.e. to the inaugural offerings which were reported at the end of Parshat Nasso (Numbers 7) when each one of them had offered a bowl full of incense although they were not priests and therefore had no right to do so (Numbers 7,16). Moses did not bother to pray to G’d concerning His possible acceptance of the offering of Datan and Aviram as he was not aware of any merit they had accumulated which could delay the punishment due to them for their provocative conduct. Furthermore, from the moment that these two men had reiterated their refusal to appear near the Tabernacle as directed by Moses he knew that their own mouths had already convicted them and that they were lost in his eyes.
He did, however, pray that G’d not accept the incense offering of the 12 princes who were the mainstay of the other 250 rebels that the merit they had accumulated through their inaugural offerings should not cause G’d to delay their punishment at this time. After Moses had offered his prayer that the offering of the princes not be accepted, he reverted to the comments made by Datan and Aviram, offering his rebuttal of the accusation by these men that he had “lorded it over the people,” by pointing out that he had never been the beneficiary of his position as leader to the extent of even a single donkey, nor had he caused anything negative to befall a single Israelite due to his conduct.
The opinion of our sages in Tanchuma Korach 7 is that the point of Moses’ prayer was that G’d should not accept their financial contribution as expressed by their half-shekel contribution to the daily public offerings which were brought also on their behalf.
He did, however, pray that G’d not accept the incense offering of the 12 princes who were the mainstay of the other 250 rebels that the merit they had accumulated through their inaugural offerings should not cause G’d to delay their punishment at this time. After Moses had offered his prayer that the offering of the princes not be accepted, he reverted to the comments made by Datan and Aviram, offering his rebuttal of the accusation by these men that he had “lorded it over the people,” by pointing out that he had never been the beneficiary of his position as leader to the extent of even a single donkey, nor had he caused anything negative to befall a single Israelite due to his conduct.
The opinion of our sages in Tanchuma Korach 7 is that the point of Moses’ prayer was that G’d should not accept their financial contribution as expressed by their half-shekel contribution to the daily public offerings which were brought also on their behalf.