| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 Netanel |
B'midbar 34 |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 1842 (12/04/09 09:43:18) |
Shalom Rabbi,
I have a question about the way that Hashem calls the tribes. Why does it say "l'matteh" for the tribes of Y'hudah and Binyamin, but "l'matteh B'NEI..." for the other tribes? What is the significance of this? |
||
|
Rabbi Daniel |
|||
|
Posts: 2851 (12/04/09 15:19:19) Moderator |
You know we're just in Bereishis right now.
It'll be at least half a year before I can answer that. :)) Over Shabbos I'll try to remember to think of looking it up when I happen to be at the right place and the right time and there is a library of books possibly available.
Please donate to the following ENDANGERED SPECIES!
Preciousness of life.
Family structure.
Family values.
G-dly values.
Disarm a liberal. Vote for values.
Call your state senators and tell them to vote "NO" regarding redefining marriage, Senate bill S4401. New Yorkers call 518-455-2800 and tell your representative what you want done! Opinions of this signature are not necessarily those of MessiahTruth.com, yuku.com or or any of their affiliates. |
||
|
ProfBenTziyyon |
|||
|
Posts: 2687 (12/05/09 15:17:46) |
Also, is there any reason why the word נָשִׂיא nasi is not used in connection with Y'hudah (v.19), Shim'on (v.20) and Binyamin (v.21), when it occurs in connection with all the other nine sh'vatim: Dan (v.22), M'nasheh (v.23), Efrayim (v.24), Z'vulun (v.25), Yissachar (v.26), Ashér (v.27) and Naftali (v.28)? http://mordochai.tripod.com - פרופ' מָרְדֳּכַי בֶּן-צִיּוֹן, יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל |
||
|
Rabbi Daniel |
|||
|
Posts: 2852 (12/05/09 19:23:20) Moderator |
Both question were answered at the same time.
Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch offers that the different terminology used by Yehudah and Binyomin was because the Temple was going to be built in their domains. These two tribes have a greater national purpose. So while the other tribes were called in a more limiting, personal way, i.e., "the sons of," Yehudah and Binyomin were called upon by just their tribal names, connoting their greater role. It was also explained by others that when all Israel were going to make their pilgrimage to Jerusalem, they were all encouraged with the additional hardship of bringing their small children along. This is alluded to in the additional words "the sons of" by each tribe except... for Yehudah and Binyomin, in whose territory the Temple stood so for them, bringing the kids along was not difficult. Along the lines of the first answer, since the Temple of G-d stood in the territory of Yehudah and Binyomin, using the title, "Prince" in the presence of G-d was not appropriate. It is felt that Simon was also included in this exclusion since his territory is circumscribed by Yehudah's.
Please donate to the following ENDANGERED SPECIES!
Preciousness of life.
Family structure.
Family values.
G-dly values.
Disarm a liberal. Vote for values.
Call your state senators and tell them to vote "NO" regarding redefining marriage, Senate bill S4401. New Yorkers call 518-455-2800 and tell your representative what you want done! Opinions of this signature are not necessarily those of MessiahTruth.com, yuku.com or or any of their affiliates. |
||
|
UriYosef |
|||
|
Posts: 2101 (12/05/09 21:02:10) Director of Education |
I found other opinions regarding the omission of the title nasi for Y'hudah, Binyamin, and
Shim'on...
Or ha'Hayyim provides three possible explanations: The first one, which he attributes to Rabbeinu Nissim Ga'on, is that, for Y'hudah, it was not necessary to give Kalev the title of nasi since he was already known as nasi. Regarding Binyamin, Elidad, who is identified as being the same person as Eldad, he was already called navi (a prophet), so calling him nasi would have been a "demotion". And for Shim'on, that tribe didn't deserve a nasi because of the incident with Zimri. Or haHayyim's second explanation is that Kalev did not get the title nasi because the eventual kingships was to be coming out of Y'hudah. Likewise with Binyamin, since the first kingship of Yisra'el would emerge from this tribe. Regarding Shim'on, the reason is the same as stated above. Or haHayyim's third explanation is that the first three were not titled with nasi since they were still close to the previous naming of the respective n'si'im and it was understood that those individuals were n'si'im. However, after the third one, it was again necessary to use the title. From Or haHayyim's second explanation I would personally deduce that, because Binyamin and Y'hudah were destined to give rise to the kings of Yisra'el prior to the schism, and the kings Y'hudah following the schism, these two tribes were referred to directly in having their leaders named, while the rest of the tribes were referred to via the b'nei (the descendants of ...). UriYosef
Our raison d'être:
WHOSOEVER DESTROYS A SINGLE SOUL OF ISRAEL, SCRIPTURE IMPUTES [GUILT] TO HIM AS THOUGH HE HAD DESTROYED A COMPLETE WORLD; AND WHOSOEVER PRESERVES A SINGLE SOUL OF ISRAEL, SCRIPTURE ASCRIBES [MERIT] TO HIM AS THOUGH HE HAD PRESERVED A COMPLETE WORLD. (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin, 37a) The fruits of our effort: The battle against spiritual terrorism is being won, one soul at a time!!!
Last Edited By: UriYosef
12/06/09 00:23:00.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
