ציטירנדיקער פּירוש אויף במדבר 10:31

כי על כן, eine schwer zu erklärende Konjunktionsform. Es scheint, daß sie elliptisch zu verstehen sei: denn darum (tue ich dies, wünsche ich dies etc.) weil usw. Es scheint überall ein von dem vorauszusetzenden verschiedenes Motiv einer Bitte, einer Tätigkeit usw. einzuleiten. So כי על כן ידעת חנותנו במדבר (Bamidbar 10, 31), nicht etwa um deinetwillen, denn darum (bitte ich dich, bei uns zu bleiben), du kennst jeden Ort in der Wüste, an welchem Gott uns zu lagern gebietet. כי על כן לא נתתיה לשלה בני (Bereschit 38, 26). Sie ist gerechter als ich, sie war nur durch reine Motive . geleitet, denn darum (hatte sie es getan), weil ich sie nicht meinem Sohne gegeben hatte. כי על כן ראיתי פניך כראות פני אלקי׳ (Bereschit 33, 10). Denn (nicht weil du es etwa nötig hättest, sondern) darum, weil ich dir meine Anerkennung ausdrücken möchte. So auch hier: Nicht weil ihr etwa bedürftig seid, sondern darum: ihr seid einmal an meinem Zelte vorbeigekommen, und mein Zelt möchte sich gegen jeden Vorübergehenden gastfrei erweisen. —

“For (כי) you ought to do this because that (על כן) I have seen thy face”; (Genesis 38:26) “for (כי) she has done right because that (על כן) I gave her not”; (Numbers 10:31) “for (כי) thou ought to accompany us because that (על כן) thou knowest how we are to encamp”.

Sichon and Og. (Kitzur Mizrochi) Rashi is answering the question: How could he say “they have covered the face of the earth”? Surely the [breadth] of the Israelite camp was only twelve mil? Therefore, he explains that they killed Sichon and Og whom they were relying upon. Thus the meaning of עין [translated as "face" but literally meaning "eye"] is the same as “you will be our eyes” (Bamidbar 10:31).

ויהי ממחרת AND IT CAME TO PASS ON THE MORROW — This was really the day after the Day of Atonement: so have we learnt in Siphré (Mekhilta). Since the Day of Atonement is not mentioned anywhere in this section that deals with the Giving of the Law what is the force of ממחרת? i. e. in relation to what particular day in the history of the Law-giving is the term ממחרת, “on the morrow”, used? It means the morrow after he (Moses) descended from the Mount Sinai, and you must admit that it is impossible to say that this was any other day but the morrow after the Day of Atonement because, before the giving of the Torah, one could not say, (v. 16) “and I do make them know the statutes [of God and His laws]” (which are part of the Torah), and from the day when the Torah was given until the Day of Atonement Moses did not sit down to judge the people, since immediately after the Torah was given he ascended the mountain and descended only on the seventeenth of Tammuz when he broke the tablets in pieces. On the next day he again ascended the mountain early in the morning and stayed there eighty days, descending on the Day of Atonement (cf. Tanchuma כי תשא, Rashi on 33:11, Deuteronomy 9:18 and 10:1). Consequently this section is not written (placed) in its chronological order, for this paragraph commencing with ויהי ממחרת and ending with “Moses let his father-in-law go and he (Jethro) went his way into his own land” was not said before the second year after the Exodus. For even according to the view of one who says that Jethro came to Moses before the giving of the Torah (Avodah Zarah 24a) his dismissal into his own land did not take place until the second year, for it is stated here (v. 27) “Moses let his father-in-law go”, and we find in the account of Israel’s journey through the wilderness beneath their banners (which according to Numbers 10:11 began in the second year) that Moses said to him, (Numbers 10:29, 31) “We are journeying etc…. Forsake us not, I pray thee”. Now if this incident happened before the giving of the Torah (including Jethro’s departure) where do we find it related that he returned after he had let him go and he had taken departure? And if you object that there (in the section in Numbers which Rashi has quoted as evidence that Jethro’s departure took place in the second year) it does not mention Jethro at all but Hobab, and that the latter was not Jethro but the son of Jethro, then I reply that Hobab is identical with Jethro and not his son, because it is written, (Judges 4:11) “of the sons of Hobab, the father-in-law of Moses”.

Because they turned away from following Him Heb. אשר על-כן as in (Num. 10:31), “because (על- כן) you knew our camping in the desert.” [This is] like: because (מפני אשר) they turned away from following Him, and they brought before Him and upon Him the cry of the poor.

כי על כן שבתם — means: for (כי) this will come upon you, because (על כן) ye have turned away etc. (cf. Rashi on Genesis 18:5 and Numbers 10:31).

Because I loved Heb. על-כן. Because I loved Your commandments, it is fitting that You teach me a time of good will, and what I should do for You that You should accept me. There are many [instances of] על-כן that are to be interpreted as “because”; e.g., (Gen. 33:10): “because (כי על-כן) I have seen your face”; (Num. 10:33). “because (כי על-כן) you know our encampment”; (Isa. 15: 7), “Because of (כי על-כן) the many things they did.”