Tanach
Bamidbar 27:1-5 במדבר כ״ז:א׳-ה׳
Part of: PinchasPinchas, Aliyah 3Chapter 27
Reading: Hebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlyHebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlySimple English onlyFaithful translation onlySide by sideRashi
וַתִּקְרַבְנָה בְּנוֹת צְלׇפְחָד בֶּן־חֵפֶר בֶּן־גִּלְעָד בֶּן־מָכִיר בֶּן־מְנַשֶּׁה לְמִשְׁפְּחֹת מְנַשֶּׁה בֶן־יוֹסֵף וְאֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹת בְּנֹתָיו מַחְלָה נֹעָה וְחׇגְלָה וּמִלְכָּה וְתִרְצָֽה׃
And they approached—the daughters of Tzelofchad, son of Cheifer, son of Gil’ad, son of Machir, son of Menashe, of the families of Menashe the son of Yoseif. The names of his daughters were: Machlah, No’ah, Choglah, Milkah and Sirtzah.
And they approached—the daughters of Tzelofchad, son of Cheifer, son of Gil’ad, son of Machir, son of Menashe, of the families of Menashe the son of Yoseif. The names of his daughters were: Machlah, No’ah, Choglah, Milkah and Sirtzah.
Rashi
מחלה נעה וגו'. וּלְהַלָּן (במדבר לו יא) הוּא אוֹמֵר "וַתִּהְיֶינָה מַחְלָה תִרְצָה", מַגִּיד שֶׁכֻּלָּן שְׁקוּלוֹת — זוֹ כְּזוֹ, לְפִיכָךְ שִׁנָּה אֶת סִדְרָן (שם):
Machlah, No’ah, etc. Below it says, “Machlah and Sirtzah were. . .” This teaches that they were all equal — the order was, therefore, changed.
וַֽתַּעֲמֹדְנָה לִפְנֵי מֹשֶׁה וְלִפְנֵי אֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן וְלִפְנֵי הַנְּשִׂיאִם וְכׇל־הָעֵדָה פֶּתַח אֹֽהֶל־מוֹעֵד לֵאמֹֽר׃
They stood before Moshe and before Elozor the kohein, and before the princes, and the entire community at the Tent of Meeting entrance, saying:
They stood before Moshe and before Elozor the kohein, and before the princes, and the entire community at the Tent of Meeting entrance, saying:
Rashi
לפני משה ולפני אלעזר. מַגִּיד שֶׁלֹּא עָמְדוּ לִפְנֵיהֶם אֶלָּא בִשְׁנַת הָאַרְבָּעִים, אַחַר שֶׁמֵּת אַהֲרֹן (שם):
Before Moshe and before Elozor. This teaches that they only stood before them in the fortieth year, after Aharon had died.
לפני משה. וְאַחַר כָּךְ לִפְנֵי אֶלְעָזָר? אֶפְשַׁר אִם מֹשֶׁה לֹא יָדַע אֶלְעָזָר יוֹדֵעַ? אֶלָּא סָרֵס הַמִּקְרָא וְדָרְשֵׁהוּ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יֹאשִׁיָּה. אַבָּא חָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ הָיוּ יוֹשְׁבִים וְעָמְדוּ לִפְנֵי כֻלָּם (שם; בבא בתרא קי"ט):
Before Moshe. And afterward before Elozor? Is it possible that Moshe did not know and that Elozor did know? But, rearrange the passage and expound upon it. This is R’ Yoshiyah’s interpretation. Aba Chanan said in the name of R’ Elozor: “They were seated in the study hall, and they stood before all of them.”
אָבִינוּ מֵת בַּמִּדְבָּר וְהוּא לֹא־הָיָה בְּתוֹךְ הָעֵדָה הַנּוֹעָדִים עַל־יְהֹוָה בַּעֲדַת־קֹרַח כִּֽי־בְחֶטְאוֹ מֵת וּבָנִים לֹא־הָיוּ לֽוֹ׃
“Our father died in the wilderness, but he was not among the group that banded together against Adonoy, in the company of Korach, but he died because of his own sin without leaving any sons.
“Our father died in the wilderness, but he was not among the group that banded together against Adonoy, in the company of Korach, but he died because of his own sin without leaving any sons.
Rashi
והוא לא היה וגו'. לְפִי שֶׁהָיוּ בָאוֹת לוֹמַר בחטאו מת, נִזְקְקוּ לוֹמַר לֹא בְחֵטְא מִתְלוֹנְנִים וְלֹא בַעֲדַת קֹרַח שֶׁהִצּוּ עַל הַקָּבָּ"ה הָיָה, אֶלָּא בְּחֶטְאוֹ לְבַדּוֹ מֵת, וְלֹא הֶחֱטִיא אֶת אֲחֵרִים עִמּוֹ (ספרי); רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר מְקוֹשֵׁשׁ עֵצִים הָיָה וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר מִן הַמַּעְפִּילִים הָיָה (שבת צ"ו):
But he was not, etc. Since they were going to say that he died because of his sin, they needed to say, ‘not the sin of the complainers, nor with Korach's assembly, who incited [the people] against the Holy One, Blessed is He — was he. Rather, he died by his sin alone, without provoking others to sin with him.’ R’ Akiva said, ”He was the wood gatherer,” R’ Shimon said, “He was among those who ascended defiantly.”
לָמָּה יִגָּרַע שֵׁם־אָבִינוּ מִתּוֹךְ מִשְׁפַּחְתּוֹ כִּי אֵין לוֹ בֵּן תְּנָה־לָּנוּ אֲחֻזָּה בְּתוֹךְ אֲחֵי אָבִֽינוּ׃
Why should the name of our father be omitted from his family because he did not have a son? Give us a possession [of land] among our father’s brothers.”
Why should the name of our father be omitted from his family because he did not have a son? Give us a possession [of land] among our father’s brothers.”
Rashi
למה יגרע שם אבינו. אָנוּ בִּמְקוֹם בֵּן עוֹמְדוֹת, וְאִם אֵין הַנְּקֵבוֹת חֲשׁוּבוֹת זֶרַע, תִּתְיַבֵּם אִמֵּנוּ לְיָבָם (בבא בתרא קיט):
Why should the name of our father be omitted. We are substitutes for a son. And if females are not considered issue, then let our mother perform levirate marriage with her brother-in-law.
כי אין לו בן. הָא אִם הָיָה לוֹ בֵן, לֹא הָיוּ תוֹבְעוֹת כְּלוּם, מַגִּיד שֶׁחַכְמָנִיּוֹת הָיוּ (שם):
Because he did not have a son. But if he had a son, they would not have entered a claim. This teaches that they were learned.
וַיַּקְרֵב מֹשֶׁה אֶת־מִשְׁפָּטָן לִפְנֵי יְהֹוָֽה׃ {פ}
Moshe brought their case before Adonoy.
Moshe brought their case before Adonoy.
Rashi
ויקרב משה את משפטן. נִתְעַלְּמָה הֲלָכָה מִמֶּנּוּ, וְכָאן נִפְרַע עַל שֶׁנָּטַל עֲטָרָה לוֹמַר (דברים א') "וְהַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר יִקְשֶׁה מִכֶּם תַּקְרִבוּן אֵלַי"; דָּ"אַ — רְאוּיָה הָיְתָה פָרָשָׁה זוֹ לְהִכָּתֵב עַל יְדֵי מֹשֶׁה, אֶלָּא שֶׁזָּכוּ בְנוֹת צְלָפְחָד וְנִכְתְּבָה עַל יָדָן (בבא בתרא קי"ט; סנהדרין ח'):
Moshe brought their case. The halachah was concealed from him. Here he was punished for assuming the crown by saying, “Matters too difficult for you, you may bring before me.” Another interpretation: It was fitting that this chapter be written through Moshe, but the daughters of Tzelofchad were meritorious, and it was written through them.
למשפחת מנשה בן יוסף. לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר? וַהֲלֹא כְבָר נֶאֱמַר בן מנשה, אֶלָּא לוֹמַר לְךָ, יוֹסֵף חִבֵּב אֶת הָאָרֶץ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "וְהַעֲלִתֶם אֶת עַצְמֹתַי" וְגוֹ' (בראשית נ') וּבְנוֹתָיו חִבְּבוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר תְּנָה לָּנוּ אֲחֻזָּה, וּלְלַמֶּדְךָ שֶׁהָיוּ כֻלָּם צַדִּיקִים, שֶׁכָּל מִי שֶׁמַּעֲשָׂיו וּמַעֲשֵׂה אֲבוֹתָיו סְתוּמִים וּפֵרֵט לְךָ הַכָּתוּב בְּאֶחָד מֵהֶם לְיַחֲסוֹ לְשֶׁבַח, הֲרֵי זֶה צַדִּיק בֶּן צַדִּיק, וְאִם יִחֲסוֹ לִגְנַאי, כְּגוֹן "בָּא יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן נְתַנְיָה בֶּן אֱלִישָׁמָע" (מלכים ב כ"ה), בְיָדוּעַ שֶׁכָּל הַנִּזְכָּרִים עִמּוֹ רְשָׁעִים הָיוּ (ספרי):
Of the families of Menashe the son of Yoseif. Why is this said? Has it not already said “the son of Menashe”? But it teaches you: Yoseif cherished the land, as it is said: “You must carry up my bones up, etc.,” and his daughters cherished the land, as it is said: “Give us possession,”! And to teach you, that they were all righteous. For where someone’s deeds, and the deeds of his forefathers, are not defined, and Scripture specifically relates one of them to a virtuous ancestor, then this is a righteous person, the son of a righteous person. If he is related disparagingly, as, for example, “Yishmael, the son of Nesanyah, the son of Elishama,” then it is known that everyone mentioned with him was villainous.