Comentário sobre Números 33:54
וְהִתְנַחַלְתֶּם֩ אֶת־הָאָ֨רֶץ בְּגוֹרָ֜ל לְמִשְׁפְּחֹֽתֵיכֶ֗ם לָרַ֞ב תַּרְבּ֤וּ אֶת־נַחֲלָתוֹ֙ וְלַמְעַט֙ תַּמְעִ֣יט אֶת־נַחֲלָת֔וֹ אֶל֩ אֲשֶׁר־יֵ֨צֵא ל֥וֹ שָׁ֛מָּה הַגּוֹרָ֖ל ל֣וֹ יִהְיֶ֑ה לְמַטּ֥וֹת אֲבֹתֵיכֶ֖ם תִּתְנֶחָֽלוּ׃
Herdareis a terra por meio de sortes, segundo as vossas famílias: à família que for grande, dareis uma herança maior, e à família que for pequena, dareis uma herança menor; o lugar que por sorte sair para alguém, esse lhe pertencerá; segundo as tribos de vossos pais recebereis as heranças.
Rashi on Numbers
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.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Siftei Chakhamim
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…]”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rav Hirsch on Torah
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.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashi on Numbers
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.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Siftei Chakhamim
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.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy