English translation — במדבר א

1.

On the verse¹

"Every man by his banner, with signs of their fathers' houses, the children of Israel shall encamp; opposite, around the Tent of Meeting they shall encamp,"

Rashi cites the word "opposite" and explains: "from a distance of a mil,

as it is stated in Joshua²

But there shall be a distance between you and it of about two thousand cubits,

so that they could come on Shabbat.

Moses³

and Aaron and his sons and the Levites encamp near him."

And it needs to be understood:

1)

From this that Rashi adds at the beginning of his commentary the word "from afar"

(And does not write "from opposite - a mile as it is written etc.")

It implies⁴

that his intention is not only to explain the measure of distance,

but to say that "from opposite" means "from afar" - and it is not explained: on the verse⁵

"And your life shall be hanging in doubt before you from opposite" - Rashi did not comment at all.

And it must be said that it is because the explanation is understood by itself*⁵

or that he relies on this that he already explained here - and thus also in our portion there is no need for explanation or that he relies on this that he already explained on the verse⁶

"And she went and sat herself from opposite him - from opposite from afar",

And why did he explain it

here on the verse⁷?

(And likewise it is difficult in Rashi on the verse⁸

"For from opposite you shall see the land etc." that there too he explained "from opposite - from afar").

b)

What is lacking in the simple meaning of the verses - that Rashi explains the measure of the distance

(a mil)

between the Ohel Moed and the camp of Israel

(and consequently must also bring the reason for this)?

And especially in "and she went and sat herself at a distance etc." he does not explain the measure

(although in the Midrash⁹

it is explained that there too it was - a mil¹⁰)

- thus,

that not everywhere that the Torah writes "at a distance" does it pertain to the simple meaning to know its measure¹¹.

c)

What does it matter¹²

for understanding the explanation of the verse here that "Moses and Aaron and his sons and the Levites encamp near him¹³?

"And the Levites shall encamp around the Tabernacle of Testimony",

that simply the intent of the verse is to say that they were close

("around")

to the Tabernacle,

and here it is written "opposite, around the Tent of Meeting they shall encamp",

whose explanation is that this "around" would be from a distance - and on this Rashi explains,

that from a distance of a mile were the rest of the Children of Israel,

as opposed to "Moses and Aaron and his sons and the Levites encamp near him".

But it is impossible to say so,

because:

(a)

In the verse before us it is explained "And the Levites shall encamp around the Tabernacle etc."¹⁵,

And in this verse it is explained "The children of Israel shall encamp etc." -

And there is no need for an answer to this.

(b)

According to this, the contradiction is in the word "around" that before this its meaning is literally "around",

and here its meaning is "from opposite

(from a distance)

around" - and thus Rashi should have copied from the verse also the word "around"?

(c)

The contradiction in the interpretation of "around" Rashi does not resolve.

According to the above, this matter does not come in continuation to what Rashi said before — and as discussed many times¹⁶

In a place where Rashi explains two separate matters in the interpretation of one word

(or a few words)

of the verse,

he repeats this word,

before each matter individually; and in our case Rashi does not repeat "from opposite"

(around)

(4)

4)

The reason for the distance of a mil "so that they could come on Shabbos" — is the reason why it was not more than a mil.

From this it is understood that essentially the camp of Israel should have been farther¹⁷

(but in order that they could come on Shabbos they were only a mil away)

— and with help from Heaven: What would have entered our minds initially that the camp

Israel, it should be said, is farther away¹⁸?

h)

Why did Rashi specify "Moshe and Aharon and his sons",

and it should have said briefly "and the Levites" - which implies all the members of the tribe of Levi?

And especially since the plain sense of the verse implies that what was said previously "and the Levites shall encamp around the Tabernacle of Testimony" also applies to Moshe and Aharon and his sons,

for they too are included in what is stated "around the Tabernacle of Testimony etc. and the Levites shall keep the charge of the Tabernacle of Testimony"

(and as is explicit later¹⁹

"and those who encamp before the Tabernacle etc. Moshe and Aharon and his sons keeping the charge of the Sanctuary etc."),

except that their specific place had not yet been detailed,

and later the verse detailed that Moshe and Aharon and his sons would have their place

(which is generally "around the Tabernacle of Testimony")

"before the Tabernacle, eastward, before the Tent of Meeting, eastward"; and thus Rashi should have said "and the Levites"

(and his intention would be to what was said previously "and the Levites shall encamp etc.")

and "Moshe and Aharon and his sons" would also be included in this - so why does he specify them?

2.

The explanation in this regard:

It is understood from many verses in the Torah²⁰

that the meaning of the word "neged" is: "nochach"

("befani",

"lifnei" and the like).

From this it is also understood when it is written "keneged",

"mineged" and the like,

the meaning is in this manner,

that it is*²⁰

the same word with the addition of one of the service letters kaf,

mem etc.

And although sometimes we find a meaning

another meaning to the word,

as follows - the intention is not that the explanation of the word changes,

but rather that an additional meaning is added to this

(in addition to the explanation "opposite"²¹),

corresponding to the content discussed in this verse - namely that the "opposite" in this verse is in a special manner.

In another style: "opposite" - is a general concept,

possibly: far,

around or from one side and more,

and in every place - the meaning of the verse determines that in our case it is only in one of the aforementioned manners.

And as in the verse²²

"a help opposite him",

and Rashi explains: "if he merits, a help; if not, opposite him to fight",

namely that also here the explanation of "opposite" is "opposite"²³,

except that in our case it is understood from the verse²⁴

(and especially by the addition of the letter kaf)

that this "opposite" is in a manner of "to fight".

Similarly, what is said²⁵

"opposite the mountain" and Rashi explains: "to its east,

and every place you find 'opposite' means facing east",

his intention is that if the discussion is about a specific side,

then the "opposite"

(the "opposite")

this is east²⁶

specifically²⁷.

From this it is understood regarding "מנגד" - which means "from before me"²⁸.

However, sometimes the meaning of the verse is that this "from before me" is at a distance,

and then its meaning will be

(in addition to

the concept of presence in general,

also²⁹)

And as with Hagar - from what is written "and she sat opposite him at a distance, about a bowshot away",

it is proven that in this verse its meaning is "from afar"

(for then the continuation is understood - explanation: and how far?

far, about a bowshot away).

And thus the meaning of the verse afterwards "and she sat opposite" that "she moved further away"³⁰.

Thus it is understood in our topic: The meaning of the word "mineged" is "before",

as in all places.

However, if we interpret it in a general way, then this word is superfluous, because immediately it says "around the Tent of Meeting they shall encamp",

that is - before the Tent of Meeting³¹.

Therefore it is necessary to say that the "from before" here is

(informs that this is)

"from afar".

"from afar".

Based on this it is understood that Rashi needs to explain "from afar" in our verse,

even though this interpretation was already given earlier in the Hagar,

because "from afar" is not the meaning of the word,

but rather it is that in the place that it is

It must be from the verse that there is in this "from opposite" - an additional detail³².

And everywhere that there is an additional detail in and of itself - Rashi explains it.

for from the meaning of the verse there it is proven that the intention of "from opposite" is not simply "from before",

for this does not correspond to the conclusion of the verse "and there you shall not come etc.'" - therefore it must be said

(and consequently Rashi must explain it)

that its intention is "from a distance",

and then the intention of the verse is understood: from a distance you shall see the land but "and there

(close up)

you shall not come"]³³.

3.

However, the word "from opposite" in our verse is still not fully understood: even if we say that its meaning is "from afar,"

it is superfluous,

for it is also obvious that the camp of Israel was far from the Tabernacle,

since it is explicitly stated before this "and the Levites shall encamp around the Tabernacle of Testimony,"

and if so, it is impossible that the Children of Israel would be close to the Tabernacle, for the Levites intervene?

Therefore, one must say that the intent of the verse is that they should distance themselves greatly,

more than they were already distant

(through the encampment of the Levites).

And the reason for this is understood simply

: Since it is written before this "And there will be no wrath upon the congregation of the children of Israel etc." and Rashi explains: "And if not, that strangers will enter into their service, there will be wrath etc.,"

therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded that they distance the camp of Israel from the Sanctuary greatly,

to further remove the possibilities that strangers will stumble in entering etc.

- therefore Rashi explains that the distance was a mil,

that in this he emphasizes two matters:

a)

That the intention of the verse in writing "from opposite" is that they should be farther than the distance from the side of the encampment of the Levites - because the tribe of Levi camped only on three sides of the Tabernacle,

and also they were few in population and did not occupy a large area.

And the camp of Israel is a mil from the Tabernacle, this is more than the distance from the side of the camp of Levi.

b)

They should not be farther than a mil.

And Rashi explains that its source is that the distance was

(only)

a mil is from that which in Joshua it is written "But there shall be a distance between you and it of about two thousand cubits."

But at first glance, what proof is there that in the desert they were a mil away from that which in Joshua it was so?

Therefore Rashi continues,

that regarding Joshua they were a mil away so that "they could come on Shabbat",

and this reason is certainly in force also in the desert,

and therefore it is understood that also in the desert they were a mil away.

D.

However, tz”l.h”b:

Why were Bnei Yisrael not able to come to the Mishkan even if they were farther than two thousand cubits,

since the camp of Israel was on all four sides,

as explained in our parshah,

and thus it is considered entirely as one city³⁵

and also in the simple understanding of the matter - and within the city itself, is there not the prohibition of techumin³⁶?

And the explanation of this:

It has already been emphasized many times,

that Rashi in his commentary on the Torah explains the verses only according to the plain meaning,

and he does not bring the laws derived through hint and homily etc.

And from this it is understood,

that also when he brings a specific law,

it is because it is necessary in the plain meaning of the verse.

And furthermore: the details of the law as they are according to the plain meaning do not necessarily have to correspond to how they are in the legal part of the Torah.

And likewise regarding the prohibition of techumin,

whose prohibition is explained in the plain meaning of the verse,

as Rashi explains on the verse³⁷

"Let no man go out from his place — these are the two thousand cubits of the Shabbat boundary etc."³⁸

Despite that the meaning of “

(A man shall not go out from)

his place” is

(not only the private place of the man,

but)

his city³⁹,

nevertheless it should be said

as the simple meaning of the verse “his place” of “a man”,

that is, the place of residence of people.

But if there is a large area not as usual in the middle of a city that is not a place of residence of people,

then upon that area applies the prohibition of “A man shall not go out from his place”,

and it is forbidden to walk in it more than two thousand cubits.

And this in the matter: although the entire camp

(Israel, Levi, and the Tabernacle)

is considered as one city

(since the banners of Israel were on all four sides),

nevertheless, if there were more than two thousand cubits between the banners and the Tabernacle, it would be prohibited⁴⁰

to come from the camp of Israel to the Tabernacle⁴¹.

5.

But according to this

(that according to the simple meaning of the verse⁴²

the definition of "his place" is the place of residence of a person)

it is not understood on the other hand: why was it necessary that there be no more than two thousand cubits between the camp of Israel and the Tabernacle so that they could come on Shabbat,

and behold, since the camp of Levi was around the Tabernacle,

and it is simple that also the camp of Levi is included in "his place" of

(a person)

of the Children of Israel,

then behold they could come on Shabbat even if the camp of Israel were two thousand cubits from the camp of Levi,

that is, more than two thousand cubits from the Tabernacle.

And according to the above, behold, logic dictates that one should distance the camp of Israel as much as possible?

To this Rashi concludes "Moshe and Aharon and his sons and the Levites encamp near him",

namely that not only the Levites

(the entirety of the tribe)

encamped near the Mishkan,

but also "Moshe and Aharon and his sons".

And regarding them it is explicitly stated immediately later that they

(and only they)

encamped on the east side of the Mishkan,

and all the rest of the Levites encamped on the other three sides,

And thus on the east side there was no possibility of the camp of Israel being farther from the Mishkan than two thousand cubits

(except for a small amount that the tents of Moshe and Aharon and his sons occupied),

and since on the east side it had to be so,

they did not differentiate among the tribes and all were at an equal distance,

two thousand cubits,

from the Mishkan on every side⁴³.

6.

The instruction to each one in our Parshas: They demand from each one of Bnei Yisrael that upon him not only to fulfill all the mitzvos of the Torah and of the Rabbis and the fences etc.,

but also that "all your deeds be for the sake of Heaven"⁴⁴,

and even more⁴⁵

"In all your ways know Him"⁴⁶,

namely

that also all the matters of permission that he does at all times should be permeated with the service of Hashem.

However, there are those who argue that the matter is very difficult: Granted, on Shabbat and Yom Tov,

and also during the times of Torah and prayer on weekdays

(which are analogous to Shabbat and Yom Tov),

when they are then free from material matters,

it can be said that its interior is lined with love and he engages in the service of G‑d,

but when they are occupied with material matters,

how is it possible to fulfill this?⁴⁷

To this comes the hint in Rashi’s commentary: Why was the camp distant from the Sanctuary only two thousand cubits — so that “they would be able to come on Shabbat.”

For this reason it was so always,

even though this applies only to Shabbat

(and Yom Tov)

— from this hint,

that the state as it is on Shabbat

(and Yom Tov)

— is drawn

(influences)

also during the rest of the year; and the intention in this,

that the level of holiness in which a person stands on Shabbat and Yom Tov is drawn and gives

power in the weekday matters of the entire year,

that also then he should be permeated with the service of G-d.

And the hint comes in Rashi regarding the measure of the proximity and closeness of the camp of Israel to the Mishkan,

for the Mishkan, which is a place prepared to offer the sacrifices in it and in which the Shechinah dwells,

it hints to the service of G-d,

and behold, through every mitzvah⁴⁸

and a good and holy thing, man becomes close and united with G-d — and Rashi hints that the manner of closeness etc. that exists for man

(the camp of Israel)

to the Holy One, blessed be He,

(the Mishkan)

on the day of Shabbat,

that closeness is drawn also on the weekdays,

that always he should be drawing close, drawing close to Hashem⁴⁹.

(From the talk of Shabbat Parshat Bamidbar 1970)