Chapter six discusses the aesthetic lifestyle of the Nazir. The word nazir means to remove oneself (Rashi). The most famous Nazir is Shimshon, but Shimshon was more of the exception than the rule for a Nazir. the Nazir could be anyone as the this chapter details. Men, women, anyone who accepted this lifestyle upon themselves for a certain period of time. There are two types of Nazirs- there is a temporary one. Someone can set a length of time for their Nazir term to be. Shimshon was an eternal Nazir. That type of nazir must remain one forever. This chapter deals with the end of the term process. The Nazir must bring a sin offering. Why should they bring a sin offering? The answer depends on how one looks at the Nazir commitment. If the Nazir is looked at as the ultimate expression and connection to God, then the sin offering is brought because the individual could not stay a nazir for long. God may also not like the concept of a Nazir. God wants his people to be fully engaged in life, not removed from it. But, just like korbanot are linked to a contemporary need for animal sacrifice, God also wanted to give expression to those who wanted to take on an aesthetic lifestyle. Because this is not ideal, the person must bring a sin offering. At the same time, they person brings a shlamim offering of thanksgiving. In both cases the nazir brings this offering as a thank you to God for giving them the opportunity to live an aesthetic life. If the Nazir is the ideal situation, the Nazir is thanking God for the opportunity for having experienced such an ideal. If it is frowned upon, then the Nazir is thanking God for the opportunity to express themselves in a way that may not be the way God wants, but is the religious expression that the individual wants.

Sotah is a unique ceremony. No other law includes outright divine intervention. When a man suspects his wife and warns her not to be alone with a certain man and she defies him, the man brings her to the priest. The priest then performs a special ritual that involves making the woman swear innocence, read a paragraph that is written on a tablet and then dissolved in water. A mincha offering is brought and the woman drinks from the water. If she was truthful, then the Gemara says that she becomes pregnant. If she was lying, her stomach and thighs become distended and sag. Normally, any sort of punishment, even for adultery, requires two witnesses and court adjudication. Not in this case. During the ceremony, God’s name is erased in the bitter waters something that is not done anywhere else. The tractate of Sotah dissects every single word in the twenty verses of this chapter. A few examples: In verse 11, the Torah introduces the section with “Speak to the Israelite people and say to them.” The Gemara explains that the additional “and say to them” is added to include not just married women, but women who are awaiting levirate marriage and an engaged woman. These women can be warned, although they do not drink from the Sotah water. In verse 15 the Torah explains that “the man shall bring his wife to the priest.” The Gemara explains that the ceremony can only begin if the husband himself brings the wife to the temple. No one else is allowed to bring her, not even the court. In verse 18, the priest stands the woman up and places the mincha offering in her hands. The Gemara explains that if the woman was unable to stand on her own, or she did not have hands to hold the mincha, she cannot be given the bitter waters. In verse 21, the priest reads off the curse. The curse states that her thigh will droop, and her stomach will become distended. The Gemara explains that the thigh is mentioned first followed by the stomach because this is the order of the physical contact of the body parts during intercourse. When she is punished though, in verse 27, the stomach is distended first and then the thigh droops. The Gemara explains that the actual punishments happens in the order of when the waters touch her body parts- the stomach followed by the legs. Why does God intervene in this case specifically? It cannot merely be to protect the sanctity of marriage because this ceremony is not for all sexual transgressions. The key difference here is the jealousy itself. Jealousy is a powerful emotion. Left unchecked, the husband will do horrible things to his wife and the suspect. This detailed ceremony provides many opportunities for both the husband (by calming down when seeing his wife go through this ceremony) and the wife (by admitting guilt at any stage) to tap out. That could be the ultimate goal.

Numbers 4 begins the discussion of the jobs of the Levites when the Mishkan would travel from place to place. Each of the three families– Gershon, Kehat, and Merari were responsible for a different part of the Mishkan. The chapter first discusses the family of Kehat. They were responsible for carrying the vessels in the Mishkan. There was something unique about their job. While Gershon and Merari could take apart the Mishkan and the curtains themselves, Kehat needed help from the Kohanim. The Kohanim would first have to enter the sanctuary and cover up all the vessels properly and then Kehat would come in and set them up to travel.

“When Aaron and his sons have finished covering the sacred objects and all the furnishings of the sacred objects at the breaking of camp, only then shall the Kohathites come and lift them, so that they do not come in contact with the sacred objects and die. These things in the Tent of Meeting shall be the porterage of the Kohathites” (verse 15).

וְכִלּוּ אַהֲרֹן וּבָנָיו לְכַסּוֹת אֶת־הַקֹּדֶשׁ וְאֵת כָּל־כְּלֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ בִּנְסֹעַ הַמַּחֲנֶה וְאַחֲרֵי־כֵן יָבֹאוּ בְנֵי קְהָת לָשֵׂת וְלֹא יִגְּעוּ אֶל־הַקֹּדֶשׁ וָמֵתוּ אֵלֶּה מַשָּׂא בְנֵי־קְהָת בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד.

At first this seems like a nice partnership. Because the Kohanim would have daily contact with the vessels and the Levites did not, the Kohanim should protect the Levites from coming into contact with the holy vessels. At the same time, however, the job of the Levites was to carry and transfer the Mishkan. Ancient Near Eastern cultures often had priestly hierarchies as well: in Ancient Egypt, only the highest priests could enter the inner sanctuaries while lower priests and temple workers served in graded roles beneath them; in Mesopotamia, chief priests oversaw ritual priests while lower-ranking personnel handled support and administrative duties; in Hittite religion, elite or royal priests stood at the top of a system supported by specialized ritual staff; and in Ugarit, senior priests performed offerings with junior personnel assisting in preparation and maintenance. But the manual labor of the Kohanim is unique. Why would the Kohanim, who had a higher job responsibility be troubled with the manual labor of packing up the Mishkin? Perhaps this set up had more to do with an incident in the past. Verse 15 specifically mentions that the kohanim had to cover up the sacred objects. When else did something else get covered up and then members of the Kehat family carry them out? The answer to that is in the beginning of last chapter.

“But Nadab and Abihu died by the will of Hashem for bringing a foreign fire” (Numbers 3:4).

וַיָּמָתוּ נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא לִפְנֵי י־הוָה בְּהַקְרִבָם אֵשׁ זָרָה לִפְנֵי י־הוָה (with “Hashem” read in place of the Name).

After Nadab and Abihu died, Moshe asked Mishael and Elzaphan his Kehati cousins to take the bodies out.

“They came forward and carried them out of the camp covered in their tunics, as Moses had ordered” (Leviticus 10:5).

וַיִּקְרְבוּ וַיִּשָּׂאֻם בְּכֻתֳּנֹתָם אֶל־מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר מֹשֶׁה.

This act of chesed done by the Kehati relatives of Aaron is later repaid by Hashem instructing the Kohanim to cover up all the sacred vessels for the Kehati family to carry out of the camp.

“This is the line of Aaron and Moses at the time that God spoke to Moshe on Har Sinai / וְאֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדֹת אַהֲרֹן וּמֹשֶׁה בְּיוֹם דִּבֶּר הַשֵּׁם אֶת־מֹשֶׁה בְּהַר סִינָי / These were the names of Aaron’s sons Nadab the first born, Avihu, Elazar, Itamar / וְאֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹת בְּנֵי־אַהֲרֹן הַבְּכֹר נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא אֶלְעָזָר וְאִיתָמָר” (verses 1-2). Why does the introductory verse mention these are lines of Moshe and Aaron, but then go on and just mention the line of Aaron? Rashi explains that they were called the sons of Moshe because Moshe taught them Torah. This introduces a principle that anyone who teaches Torah is like they are a parent. The Gur Aryeh explains that the Kohanim are given this distinction and not all of Israel because Moshe taught the kohanim more. Another explanation is that later on the chapter will discuss the Leviim, and Moshe is representative of the non-kohen part of the tribe of Levi. Ibn Ezra focuses on the “on Har Sinai” part of the verse. The reason Moshe and Aaron are listed here is because the number of their offspring did not change from the time of the giving of the torah until now, in the second year. It was at that time that Hashem decided to give over the job of the priestly and administrative jobs from the first born to the tribe of Levi and the kohanim. Another possibility is that this verse is meant to connect to a verse back in Exodus. Back in Chapter 16 in the midst of the exodus story, there is a brief interlude in chapter 6 that discusses the lineage of the tribe of Levi. “These are the names of Levi’s sons by their lineage: Gershon, Kohath, and Merari; and the span of Levi’s life was 137 years. / וְאֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹת בְּנֵי־לֵוִי לְתֹלְדֹתָם גֵּרְשׁוֹן וּקְהָת וּמְרָרִי… וּשְׁנֵי חַיֵּי לֵוִי שֶׁבַע וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וּמְאַת שָׁנָה” (Exodus 6:16). What’s interesting there is that the lineage is not complete. It is simply a vehicle to get to Moshe and Aaron. “It is the same Aaron and Moses to whom God said, “Bring forth the Israelites from the land of Egypt, troop by troop” / הוּא אַהֲרֹן וּמֹשֶׁה אֲשֶׁר אָמַר הַשֵּׁם לָהֶם הוֹצִיאוּ אֶת־בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם עַל־צִבְאֹתָם” (Exodus 6:16). Chapter 3 of Numbers then picks up from where that story left off. Again this another example of the transition between the exodus story and the upcoming entrance into the land of Canaan. The exodus story began with the lineage of Levi leading up to Moshe and Aaron, and now the entrance to the land continues that lineage link.

After counting the people in the first chapter, God sets out the organization of the camp. The encampment was set up like a giant plus sign. The Mishkan was in the middle surrounded by the Leviim. To the north of the Mishkan were the tribes of Dan, Asher, and Naphtali. To the east was Judah, Issaschar, and Zevulun. To the south was Reuven, Shimon, and Gad. To the west was Ephrayim, Binyamin and Menashe. The breakdown of the tribes seems a little off. The sons of Leah were Reuven, Shimon, Levi, Yehudah, Yissaschar and Zevulun. Zilpah had Gad and Asher, Bilhah had Dan and Naphtali, and Rachel had Yosef and Binyamin. Splitting up the tribes is like setting up tables at a wedding. It is complicateThe breakdown needed to be split into four groups of three to reach twelve. The grouping of Rachel was easy as she had three tribes- Benjamin, and Yosef’s two sons Ephrayim and Menashe. The other groupings were a little more complicated with Leah having five kids and the two concubines with two each. Reuven as the initial first born could not be mixed with Yehudah, the eventual leader of the people. They are split up. Levi is not included in the count, so he is left out. So, the first group starts in age order with Reuven and Shimon, skips Levi and cannot have Yehudah. It would be odd to leave Yehudah with sons of a different mother, so he gets to be with his younger brothers Yissaschar and Zevulun. Reuven still needs one more, so Gad, the first born of Zilpah goes to his group and Asher is split off with his other two brothers from Bilhah. Why do Bilhah’s children stay together, and Zilpah’s are the ones that are split? There are two possible answers. The first is that Zilpah was Leah’s maidservant, so it makes sense that one of her sons goes with a group of Leah’s children. Her other son then matches with the other maidservant children. Another possible answer is that Bilhah is Rachel’s maidservant. Because Rachel was Yaacov’s favorite, her maidservant’s children are given the honor of being kept together.

It is clear from the first chapter where Bamidbar got the English name Numbers. The book starts off with a census of the Jewish people in the second year after they left Egypt. The Hebrew name- Bamidbar is more of a thematic name as the book details the stories of the time period of the Israelites in the midbar. In this instance, the English name really connects to the first few chapters and the Hebrew name is thematic. This is the opposite of the book of Shmot or Exodus. In that case, the Hebrew name refers to the very first chapter and the English name is thematic. There are other important connections between the names of the two books and the opening chapters. The book of Shmot opens with the names of the sons of Yaacov that went down to Egypt. They numbered seventy people, but the Torah only lists the twelve sons of Yaacov. Bamidbar opens with a census as well. This time, the tribes are listed again, but the names belong to the leaders of each tribe. Instead of seventy, there are now more than 600,000 men over twenty years old. Another difference is that the list of names in Shmot incudes Levi and Yosef, while Bamidbar includes Ephraim and Menashe and excludes Levi. At the time the brothers went to down to Egypt, Levi had not yet assumed its place as the stewards of the Mishkan, and Ephrayim and Menashe were just two sons of Yosef. By opening the two books in similar way, the Torah is providing a quick reference point as to the evolution of the Israelites from one family to an entire organized nation with encampments and tribal leaders and a massive amount of people. This comparison reminds me of the triumphant pictures of a Holocaust survivor sitting with their children, grandchildren and sometimes great grandchildren. To emphasize this, compare the verse right after the census in Exodus to the one in Bamidbar. “וַיָּקָם מֶלֶךְ־חָדָשׁ עַל־מִצְרָיִם אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יָדַע אֶת־יוֹסֵף. וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל־עַמּוֹ הֵן עַם בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל רַב וְעָצוּם מִמֶּנּוּ. הָבָה נִתְחַכְּמָה לוֹ פֶּן־יִרְבֶּה וְהָיָה כִּי תִקְרֶאנָה מִלְחָמָה וְנוֹסַף גַּם־הוּא עַל־שֹׂנְאֵינוּ וְנִלְחַם־בָּנוּ וְעָלָה מִן־הָאָרֶץ.” (שמות א׳:ח–י) “A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph/And he said to his people, ‘Look, the Israelite people are much too numerous for us/Let us deal shrewdly with them, so that they may not increase; otherwise in the event of war they may join our enemies in fighting against us and rise from the ground’” (Exodus 1:8-10). “וַיַּעֲשׂוּ בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה לַי יָ אֶת־מֹשֶׁה כֵּן עָשׂוּ.” (במדבר א׳:נ״ד) “The Israelites did accordingly; just as God had commanded Moses, so they did” (Numbers 1:54). This nation is no longer under the control of a foreign power that wants to control them. They now are protected by and follow God. The start of Bamidbar is truly a photograph of triumph.

After the curses and blessings, the book of Leviticus ends with what seems like a pretty technical chapter. Chapter 27 discusses different cases when someone promises to donate something to the Mishkan or Temple. After chapter 25, it seemed like the book had moved beyond the Mishkan and shifted back to general topics and shifting towards the next step of entering the land. Why is this the last chapter of the book? If anything, this chapter should have appeared earlier on after the discussion of the korbanot. To answer this question, we must return to the very beginning of the book. Leviticus opens with the specific rules regarding bringing a korban. One must select from a specific animal that is a specific number of years old etc. Each korban had its own rules and regulations. But what if someone did not want to follow those rules? What if someone wanted to give their own korban? God answered that question with the death of Aaron’s two eldest sons in the middle of the book. As strict as these rules are, God knows that sometimes one cannot help but want to contribute in their own way. That is what this last chapter is about. After all of the rules set out in the entire book, God ultimately allows for any type of gift. No matter what that gift is, it has value to God. One could even offer to donate their self-worth to the temple and there is a formula for that. God wants the people to contribute in any way they can. They may want to give a specific rule-based korban, but they also may want to give freely of what they have. Everything has worth. Everything has value to God. At the same time, this chapter is informed by the deaths of Ahron’s sons and of the strict rules of the Korbanot. In essence God is balancing the desire of people to give freely with a desire to maintain the rules based worship system that Vayikra outlines. That message is highlighted by the last two verses. “לֹא יְבַקֵּר בֵּין טוֹב לָרַע וְלֹא יְמִירֶנּוּ; וְאִם הָמֵר יָמִיר אֶתּוֹ—וְהָיָה הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ יִהְיֶה־קֹדֶשׁ, לֹא יִגָּאֵל.… אֵלֶּה הַמִּצְוֹת אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה לַי יָ אֶת־מֹשֶׁה אֶל־בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּהַר סִינָי.” (ויקרא כ״ז:י׳, ל״ד) “One must not look out for good as against bad, or make substitution for it. If one does make substitution for it, then it and its substitute shall both be holy: it cannot be redeemed/ These are the mitzvot that God gave Moses for the Israelite people on Mount Sinai.” God does not need the people to go searching for the best of the best. God is happy to accept the gift as it is designated. The end of chapter 26 was more specific “These are the laws, rules, and instructions that God commanded…” (26:46), but this final chapter is simply about the “mitzvot.” The mizvot that allow the people to express their love for God in their own way.

“These are the chukim, mishpatim, and torahs that God gave between Himself and between the people of Israel on Mt. Sinai by the hand of Moshe” (verse 46).

“אֵלֶּה הַחֻקִּים וְהַמִּשְׁפָּטִים וְהַתּוֹרֹת אֲשֶׁר נָתַן לַי יָ בֵּינוֹ וּבֵין בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּהַר סִינַי בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה.” (ויקרא כ״ו:מו)

After the lengthy list of blessings and curses, the chapter ends with this verse. Scattered throughout these last few chapters of Leviticus, the Torah has mentioned chukim and mishpatim (e.g. Leviticus 18, 20, 24). There have also been references to Moshe receiving the rules on Mt. Sinai (e.g., Levitocus 7 and 25). This is the first time, however, that “torahs” are added to the list. What are these “torahs”? Most commentators explain that the plural of Torah here is meant to include both the written Torah and the oral law to explain that both were given on Mt. Sinai. A less Midrashic explanation is that these “torahs” refer to the lists of korbanot that were a feature of the early part of the book. The word “torah” is used to introduce most of the sections of korbanot (e.g. Leviticus 6:18, 7:1, 7:11, 11:46, etc.) This verse acts as a summary of the entire book and therefore includes references to all these types of ordinances listed in Leviticus. There is another important difference between this verse and the others. All the other instances are one directional. God decrees the mishpatim, the chukim, and the torahs. It is a one-way lesson from God through Moshe to the people. But in this verse God explains that these are all given between God and the people. Why the shift here? Perhaps God is trying to explain to the people that the list of curses and blessings is not a top-down ordinance. Instead, it is a pact between God and the people. If the people fail to follow these ordinances, God is bound to punish them. More importantly, though, if the people follow the mishpatim, chukim, and torahs, then God is bound to provide them with the blessings. This verse is meant to reassure the people that all they have to do is follow their side of the bargain and God will be bound to reward them.

“Hashem spoke to Moses on Mt. Sinai saying: Speak to the Israelite people and say to them: When you enter the land that I assign to you, the land shall observe a sabbath of God” (verses 1-2). וַיְדַבֵּר ה׳ אֶל־מֹשֶׁה בְּהַר סִינַי לֵאמֹר׃ דַּבֵּר אֶל־בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם כִּי תָבֹאוּ אֶל־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי נֹתֵן לָכֶם וְשָׁבְתָה הָאָרֶץ שַׁבָּת לַה׳. Rashi famously asks- what is the connection between Smita and Har Sinai? This question has turned into the Jewish version of the maxim “what does this have to do with the price of tea in China?” Rashi answers that just as this chapter is full of the details of the laws of Shmita- the Sabbatical year- all the details of other laws were also given on Har Sinai even if they were not explicitly listed. Ibn Ezra offers a different answer. The Sabbatical year rule is only relevant when the people enter the land of Canaan. He explains that this section really should have appeared back in Exodus around the giving of the Torah. It was placed here because it is thematically linked to the previous discussions about not following the actions of the nations in Canaan and the upcoming blessings and curses. In Ibn Ezra’s reading, this section is the thematic bridge between Exodus and Numbers after the interlude of the first 24 chapters of Leviticus. The Abarbanel has a slightly different take. He explains that this chapter is not out of place, like Ibn Ezra believes, but is just a return to the general rules that Moshe received on Har Sinai. Following the sin of the Golden Calf, Moshe needed to focus on the building of the Mishkan. The Mishkan necessitated discussions over the korbanot, the concepts of purity and impurity, what animals could be eaten and sacrificed, prohibitions of forbidden relationships and everything else that was listed in Leviticus until this point. Once these “Mishkan” related laws were complete, Moshe returned to discuss the general laws he was given on Har Sinai starting with the Sabbatical year. The implication of Abarbanel’s opinion is that all of these laws in Leviticus are all a result of the Mishkan and the sin of the Golden Calf! Perhaps the Torah connected Shmitah to Har Sinai to link this law that is only relevant in the land and the time period of the giving of the Torah. Shmitah could not be observed in the wilderness. It is also a cyclical law that applies to the land. Every seven years the people are forced to remember that they are only visitors in the land. God gave them the land as a gift and every seventh year they must stop their daily toil and fully put their faith in God. The seventh year of the Shmita cycle is therefore a reenactment of the time of Har Sinai and the wilderness when the people fully relied on God. In the wilderness it was easy to take God’s help for granted, and in the land it will be easy to forget that God is helping. A farmer may worry more about how the price of tea in China would change the price of his crop than how God is the one behind the scenes helping his crop grow.

“There came out among the Israelites a man whose mother was Israelite and whose father was Egyptian. And a fight broke out in the camp between that son of an Israelite woman and a certain Israelite” (verse 10).

וַיֵּצֵא בֶּן־אִשָּׁה יִשְׂרְאֵלִית וְהוּא בֶן־אִישׁ מִצְרִי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּנָּצוּ בַּמַּחֲנֶה בֶּן הָאִשָּׁה הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִית וְאִישׁ הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִי.

This story comes out of nowhere and poses a lot of questions. Who is this person? Why is it important that he was the son of an Egyptian and an Israelite woman? What fight broke out? Why do we need to know his mother’s name? Why does everyone have to put their hands on his head? Rashi explains that the individual tried to set his tent in the tribe of Dan, his mother’s tribe, and the people rejected him because he was the son of an Egyptian. Then a fight broke out between the individual and the people. In his frustration with the perceived injustice, he cursed the name of ה׳. According to Rashi, his mother’s name is mentioned because she was a gossip and a prostitute who slept around while in Egypt. Rashi’s reading of this story paints a very negative picture of the blasphemer and his circumstance. He was the son of an illicit relationship and he was a troublemaker who tried to buck legal norms and then lashed out when he did not get his way.

The Midrash paints a slightly different picture. This person was the offspring of a rape committed by the Egyptian task master that Moshe killed in the beginning of Exodus. The taskmaster was beating him to try to keep him quiet after the Egyptian raped his wife. The Midrash take on the story is one of trauma and the feeling of being an outsider. The cursing in this version is not the same “bad apple” of Rashi, but more of an outsider who is constantly rejected until he lashes out. The Midrash version helps inform the last question- why the leaders have to place their hands on his head. The Rav explains that “let all who were within hearing lay their hands upon his head” comes to teach that during the court proceeding for a blasphemer the judges themselves must hear the exact words of the curse. Everyone else in the courtroom is asked to leave. Because the judges hear the exact wording, they are complicit in the tragedy. This ending is similar to the case of an unidentified body found between two towns, discussed in Devrarim 21. In that case, the leaders of the nearby towns place their hands on a cow that is killed. The leaders had a collective responsibility to look out for the stranger, and their failure to do so led to the unsolved murder. Here as well, the leaders must place their hands on the accused because it was their failure as leaders that allowed for someone to reach such depths of despair that their only recourse was to curse out the name of ה׳.