Comentário sobre Deuteronômio 18:2

כאשר דבר לו AS HE SPOKE TO HIM i.e., to Aaron [saying],“You shall not inherit in their land… I am your portion [and your inheritance, among the children of Israel].”- (Numbers 18:20)

ונחלה לא יהיה לו, “He shall not have an inheritance.” Rashi, taking his cue from the Sifri, commenting on Exodus 13,5 where only the names of five Canaanite tribes are mentioned, says that all seven tribes were meant. Nachmanides writes that in that verse the reason that only five Canaanite tribes were mentioned is that the territory of those five fell under the heading of “a land flowing with milk and honey,” whereas the territory of the P’rizi and Girgashi, omitted on that occasion, was less fruitful. This is the reason why produce grown on land that used to belong to those two tribes was not subject to the bikkurim legislation, i.e. that the farmer in those lands did not have to bring the first ripe fruit to Jerusalem. If the basic legislation that the priests and Levites had no ancestral share in the land of Israel is repeated here, it was in order to make the point that these Levites also did not have an ancestral share in the lands formerly owned by the P’rizi and Girgashi.

ונחלה לא יהיה לו, “He shall not have an inheritance with Israel.” The word נחלה in verse one refers to distribution of the land of the seven Canaanite tribes being dispossessed in the immediate future, whereas the same word in our verse refers to the land of the remaining three Canaanite tribes, the Kenizi, Keyni, and Kadmoni, which will become part of the land of Israel only in the future.
בקרב אחיו, “among his brothers;” this is a reference to his “full” brothers the other sons of Leah.
ה' הוא נחלתו, “the Lord is his heritage;” Levi was the tenth of the brothers if one counts from the youngest to the oldest something I have elaborated on in Numbers 18,19. This is why this tribe is described as G’d’s heritage, and this is why the tithes are given to this tribe.

ונחלה לא יהיה לו, “and that tribe shall not own ancestral plots of land;” according to Sifri, as quoted by Rashi on this verse, the word נחלה, refers to sharing land with his five brothers from his mother, whereas the additional words: בקרב אחיו, “among his brothers”, refer to sharing ancestral land with the other seven brothers that are only half-brothers through his father. The tribe of Levi is not even to share in the ancestral land of those brothers.

ונחלה לא יהיה לו בקרב אחיו, “they shall have no inheritance among their brethren.” In the Sifri (according to the version at the disposal of Rashi) the word נחלה is understood to refer to inherited land i.e. through being brothers only through the father’s side, whereas the words בקרב אחיו, would refer to brothers both from the same father and the same mother. [in other words the sons of Leah, Ed.] The Torah was forced to list these two categories separately; as if it had not included each category separately we might have thought that when their claim was based on being full brothers by sharing the same father and mother they would qualify for such an inheritance. [In order for this to make sense, we would have to distinguish between ancestral land allocations made by Moses during his lifetime, and that made by Joshua. Once the land had been distributed and settled no questions could arise, as Levites had been born to Levites and priests to priests, and neither had a father who had left him his ancestral share of the land. The versions of this Sifri are confusing and who are we to determine the correct version? Ed.]