Komentarz do Liczb 33:54

אל אשר יצא לו שמה — This is an elliptical verse, the meaning being, the place where the lot falleth to anyone, that shall be his.

Taking into account those who came out of Egypt. Here Rashi does not explain as he did in Parshas Pinchas (26:53), for there his explanation implied that they divided [the land] according to those who entered the land and had reached twenty years of age. There is a dispute in Bava Basra 117a, and one opinion is that [the words] “The land shall be apportioned among these…” (26:53) refers to those who entered the land, and there he explained in accordance with that opinion. However, here Rashi explains in accordance with the opinion that [the words] “The land shall be apportioned among these” refers to those who came out of Egypt. [Alternatively] it is possible to give a forced answer that this is in accordance with the explanation above (26:55) that “This inheritance is different [from all others…]”

V. 54. והתנחלתם וגו׳ (siehe zu Kap. 26, 52-56). בגורל, in einer durch אורים ותומים bestätigten Weise (siehe daselbst). Jedem aber, dem durch ein von Gott bestätigtes Los ein Landesteil angewiesen worden, dem war eben damit die Aufgabe erteilt, es zuvor durch Vertreibung der Bewohner und der polytheistischen Denkmäler für seine Besitznahme bereit zu stellen.

למטות אבותיכם ACCORDING TO THE TRIBES OF YOUR FATHERS [YE SHALL DIVIDE INHERITANCE] — i.e., according to the number of those who came out of Egypt (Bava Batra 117a; cf. Rashi on Numbers 26:55). Another explanation: ye shall divide it into twelve districts, as is the number of the tribes.

With twelve border demarcations. Meaning: The entire border demarcation was referred to by its tribe [e.g.] this being the border demarcation of Reuven and that being the border demarcation of Shimon. Now we can understand Rashi’s comment in Parshas Vayechi (Bereishis 48:6) that [even though the land was apportioned by population], “Nonetheless only these were termed tribes…” as meaning that the inheritance of Ephraim and Menashe would also be referred to by their name, as the border of Ephraim or the border of Menashe. Re’m writes: This is puzzling, because this is not like either opinion (Bava Basra 117a). For Rabbi Yoshiya says the land was apportioned to those who left Egypt, as it says, “According to the names of their fathers’ tribes should they inherit it” (26:55), while Rabbi Yochanan says that the land of Israel was apportioned to those who came into the land, as it says, “The land shall be apportioned among these…” (26:53). Therefore, how am I to understand [Rashi’s comment (26:55)] “according to the names of their tribes — this inheritance is different…”? He leaves the question unresolved. The answer is that Rashi is answering a question: According to both explanations there is a difficulty as to what is meant by “According to [the names] of their fathers’ tribes.” For it should have merely said, “According to the names of their fathers should they inherit it.” Why was the word “tribes” necessary? Rather, one must say that it was also to expound, “With twelve border demarcations…” This forced Rashi to bring the other interpretation. However, according to the second interpretation there is also the difficulty as to why it said, “fathers” for it should have merely said, “According to the names of the tribes”. Therefore the first reason is also necessary.