English translation — פנחס ב

A.

At the conclusion of the parshah — after the parshah enumerates the offerings: the daily offering,

the additional offerings of Shabbos,

Rosh Chodesh and of every festival — it states: And Moshe spoke to the children of Israel according to all that Hashem had commanded Moshe.

Why does the verse need to say that Moshe conveyed all this to the children of Israel — is it necessary to let it be known,

that Moshe fulfilled the command of the Most High¹

to him: “Command the children of Israel and say to them: My offering, etc.”?

And as we indeed find in several places²

that only the command of Hashem to Moshe is written,

and not how Moshe subsequently transmitted it to Yisrael,

that since the Almighty said it to Moshe in order that he should transmit it to Yisrael,

Moshe certainly did so

(and it is so simple,

that we do not find that Rashi safeguards this in his commentary³)]

Today why does it need here the verse to tell?

So Rashi on this explains: to interrupt the topic,

the words of Rabbi Yishmael⁴,

because until here are the words of the Place and the section of vows begins with the speech of Moshe,

it was necessary to interrupt first and say that Moshe repeated and said this section to Israel,

for if not so, it would imply that he did not say this to them except that with the section of vows he began his words.

One must however understand: truly indeed that if the verse had not stood

("And Moshe said to Bnei Yisrael etc.")

the implication of the verses would have been

(since that only afterward - Parshat Nedarim "begins with the speech of Moshe")

that the previous parsha Moshe did not repeat to Jews - but how can it nevertheless be even a kashe,

that Moshe did not fulfill the Almighty's command "to Bnei Yisrael and say to them"<sup>5</sup>?

B.

The Ramban explains the plain meaning in R' Yishmael's words<sup>6</sup>

"to interrupt the topic": if the verse "And Moshe said etc." had not stood, one would not have known to which parsha the verse refers<sup>7</sup>

"And Moshe spoke to the heads of the tribes etc.": whether to after it - to the laws of P' Matot,

or to before it - to the laws of our parsha; therefore it stands at the conclusion of our parsha "And Moshe said to Bnei Yisrael etc." in order "to interrupt the topic",

that one should know that with "And Moshe spoke to the heads of the tribes etc." begins a new topic - the P' Nedarim.

as the Ramban says,

and as he adds further,

that Rashi himself says⁸

on the verse

(further in Parshat Matot⁹)

"And now kill etc. and every woman etc. kill",

that the second "kill" stands "to interrupt the matter",

and he explains,

that if after "and every woman etc." there had not stood again "kill",

one would not have known whether "and every woman etc." belongs to the preceding subject of "kill every male etc.",

or to the following¹⁰

- "and all the children etc. keep alive for yourselves"].

In Rashi's commentary here - one cannot, however, learn thus.

Because Rashi

(changes from the language of the Sifre¹¹

("I do not know of what the matter speaks")

and)

writes explicitly,

that were it not for the verse "And Moses said etc." one would have had an error

(not that the later verse "And Moses spoke to the heads of the tribes etc." refers to earlier,

as per the explanation of the Ramban,

but)

that "he did not say this to them

(but in the portion of vows he began his words)

3.

Also one must understand

(as the Ramban asks)

: also in Parshat Emor,

at the end of the section of the appointed times,

the verse says¹³

"And Moses spoke the appointed times of the Lord to the children of Israel"; and we indeed find in the midrashim of our Sages, may their memory be blessed,¹⁴

several explanations why this verse must stand.

Rashi, however, does not dwell on this.

It is not understood: if in simple meaning of the verse an explanation is required — why the verse relates that Moses conveyed the command of the Lord regarding the appointed times to the Jews — should Rashi have explained it there where we find it in the verse for the first time¹⁵

(earlier in Parshat Emor)

and not wait until our verse?

Further: the explanation that Rashi says here - because only "until here are the words of the Place etc." - one cannot say in Parshat Emor,

because there the parshah of Sh'lach begins with "words of the Place" - "And the Lord spoke to Moses saying."

D.

The reason why this question - why must it stand that Moses conveyed the command to Bnei Yisrael - specifically here and not in Parshat Emor,

one can say quite simply:

The section of the appointed times from the section of Emor was said in proximity to the erection of the Mishkan

(After the counting of Bnei Yisrael — “on the first of the second month” — about which it is told in Chumash Bamidbar)

; and among the commandments and laws there,

there are such whose fulfillment applies specifically in Eretz Yisrael

(For example: Omer,

Chadash,

Shtei HaLechem)

One could therefore think: Indeed it is true that Moshe certainly transmitted all the commands of Hashem to the Jews — and moreover: in general he did so immediately after hearing the command from the Above,

as is understood from Rashi’s commentary

(at Matan Torah

“that Moshe did not turn to his affairs except from the mountain to the people” — but in this case he did not

(all the detailed laws)

transmit immediately,

since they were not relevant to practice right away

at that time

- at a time when,

he,

Moshe was occupied

with answering “the difficult matter” that “they would bring to Moshe”,

with “and make known to them the way they shall go and the deed they shall do”

in daily life.

And in particular according to the opinion of the Mishnah

(in Rashi on Emor<sup>27</sup>)

which implies that the section of the Festivals there was said after the section of the Banners — there were many<sup>28</sup>

other sections that were then relevant to practice

(for example: the counting of the Children of Israel,

the Banners,

the Journeys,

the Second Passover, etc.).

Therefore the verse there adds at the end "And Moses spoke the appointed times of the Lord to the Children of Israel" — that he immediately transmitted all the details of the laws of the section to the Jews

(and this itself teaches us,

that the command to Moses "Speak to the Children of Israel and say to them: The appointed times of the Lord, etc." meant that he should immediately transmit to them all these laws)

But not so in our parshah,

where there is no reason to delay,

it is understood of itself,

as above,

that after the command of the Most High "Command Bnei Yisrael and say to them etc." Moshe immediately transmitted all these laws; especially since it concerns the end of forty years,

for if not now, when*²⁸?

Therefore it becomes difficult: what does the verse "And Moshe said to Bnei Yisrael etc." tell us — what does this teach us?

On this Rashi answers "to interrupt the topic ..

that if not so it would be understood that he did not say this to them except in the portion of vows he began his words",

as below section 7.

5.

Based on this it is also understood why Rashi copies the name of the author of the maamar - "words of Rabbi Yishmael"²⁹

The explanation above why it must stand in Parshas Emor "Vayidaber Moshe etc. el Bnei Yisrael" - because if not, one would think that he put it off for later

(According to which explanation one must seek a resolution for the verse in our parshah)

- is fitting only according to the view of Rabbi Yishmael³⁰,

that "Klalos were said at Sinai and Peratos in the Ohel Moed"³¹,

and consequently there is also room to say,

as above,

that Moshe waited with the transmission of the particular laws of the Mo'adim;

But according to his disputant - Rabbi Akiva - who holds that "Klalos and Peratos were said at Sinai and repeated in the Ohel Moed and repeated a third time in the Plains of Moav"³¹,

it turns out,

that all the particular mitzvos were said even when it was not relevant to practice; now why should one say that here he waited with the transmission of the laws until later?

And consequently one must say,

that according to Reish Lakish it is from the outset no question — because

(he holds that)

thus is the way of the Scriptural text³²,

that sometimes the word of Hashem to Moses stands,

sometimes — the word of Moses to Bnei Yisrael,

and sometimes — both.

So consequently also no question on the verse in our portion.

And one cannot ask: Why can one not say the answer — that the verse stands

(not in order to negate an error in the content of the portion,

but)

merely from the side of the way of the Scriptural text etc. — also according to Rabbi Yishmael?

- Because one must say,

that in this very thing is dependent the aforementioned dispute of Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yishmael:

According to Rabbi Akiva that "General principles and particulars were said at Sinai, repeated in the Tent of Meeting, and stated a third time in the plains of Moab",

one must say,

that although all the commandments in general and in particular were said three times,

at Sinai, in the Tent of Meeting, and in the plains of Moab,

nevertheless the Torah does not detail and explain in three places all the commandments and their particulars,

and only a part of them in two places,

And regarding this in our matter: sometimes the Torah specifies

(also)

the speech of Moshe to Bnei Yisrael and sometimes not<sup>33</sup>.

The reason of R. Y. that "the generalities were said at Sinai and the particulars in the Tent of Meeting" one can say<sup>34</sup>

: he holds,

that in general one must accept,

that every particular and matter as it is written in the Torah is as it was in actuality

(unless there is a necessity for it not to be so)

; and therefore he holds,

that the details of the commandments were said there where it states so explicitly in the Torah

(and not three times - at Sinai, in the Tent of Meeting, and in the plains of Moav<sup>35</sup>)

And this applies to our matter: since the Torah explains and specifies specifically here "And Moshe spoke etc. to Bnei Yisrael",

one must say,

that this is because there is a novelty in this which relates to the parshah.

6.

The reason,

that the generalities of the matters of the festivals are divided into two parshahs

(a)

In Parshas Emor,

where the main emphasis is on the prohibition of work

(and on the commandments of each Yom Tov),

there is however also spoken there

(and in general)

about the offerings of each Yom Tov;

(b)

In our parshah,

where the main emphasis is on the details of the offerings that one brings each

(day,

Shabbos,

Rosh Chodesh and)

Yom Tov,

but there is also mentioned there about the prohibition of work of Yom Tov -

One can explain in two ways:

a)

They were said to Moshe as two separate sections at separate times: Parshas Emor — adjacent to the establishment of the Mishkan,

our parshah — at the end of the forty years.

(although simply one can say that they brought all the korbanos also in the wilderness³⁶

— except those that are explicit “when you come to the land”),

one can say:

The beginning of our parshah is: "Command the children of Israel and say to them etc." - the charge to all Jews<sup>37</sup>

that the communal offerings should be brought at their appointed times; but the details of the offerings themselves had already been told to Moses earlier,

and he transmitted them to the individuals who were occupied with the offering of the sacrifices - Aaron and his sons the priests].

b)

Both parshahs were said to Moses together<sup>38</sup>

-and on the contrary: the parshah of the offerings

(our parshah)

was said before the parshah of the appointed times

(from Emor)

"And you shall offer a fire-offering etc." without specification

(not specifying what kind of offering one must bring)

because the details of the offerings had already been told to Moses earlier],

But nevertheless

(Because of a reason)

the Torah inserted the section of sacrifices here in our section

(At the end of forty years),

as the principle

(Which Rashi brings down in several places in his commentary⁴⁰)

"There is no earlier and later in the Torah."

And according to this manner - that both sections

(Emor and our section)

were said to Moses at one time - it would be logical,

that the statement at the beginning of the section of the appointed times

(In Emor⁴¹)

"Speak to the children of Israel and say to them: The appointed times of the Lord etc." means to allocate the subsequent details of all the laws of the appointed times that the Omnipresent had already previously said to Moses

(The details of the laws that are in our section),

that specifically them he must convey to all Jews - and not the laws that are in our section

(Because they are not relevant to all Jews⁴²,

as above).

(Parshas Emor)

and the section of the offerings

(our parshah)

- there each appointed time begins⁴³

with a new utterance

("And Hashem spoke to Moshe saying: Speak to Bnei Yisrael etc.")⁴⁴

; in contrast, in our parshah it stands only at the beginning of the parshah a general command - "Command Bnei Yisrael and say to them":

The introduction "Command Bnei Yisrael etc." in our parshah is a general introduction to the entirety of the section of the appointed times and offerings

(from our parshah and from Parshas Emor)

; afterwards was the second command "Speak to Bnei Yisrael and say to them" - the message which specific laws he must convey to all Jews

(- those that stand in Parshas Emor,

as above).

And therefore,

in order to emphasize this further,

did the Omnipresent specify by each appointed time⁴³

separately "Speak to Bnei Yisrael"].

7.

Since the principle "there is no earlier and later in the Torah" is said

(according to the simple meaning of the verses)

specifically in a case where one must assume that the sections are not in chronological order⁴⁵

(as has been discussed many times⁴⁶)

- it is understood,

that according to the simple meaning of the verses, the section of the offerings

(of our section)

was said at the end of forty years,

and as Rashi infers from the verse¹

"Command the children of Israel

(and say to them: My offering, My bread, etc.)

": "What is stated above, etc." - not "Why is the section of 'May the Lord appoint' juxtaposed to the section of the offerings, etc."⁴⁷

- because simply, one must assume that the section of the offerings is

(not only "juxtaposed" here - i.e.,

that it was only written in proximity here but was said earlier - rather it is)

that it was only written in proximity here but was said earlier - rather it is)

was said here.

If, however, at the end of the section of the offerings it would not have stood here "And Moses said to the children of Israel etc." — so that then "it is implied" that "in the section of vows he began his words" and "he did not say this to them" — this would have compelled [us] to say,

that the section stands not in its place: it was said to Moses together with

(and before)

the section of the appointed times in Parshat Emor

and consequently,

— "he did not say this to them"

(the detailed laws of our section).

To all Jews he said only the laws of Parshat Emor,

as above section 6.

And therefore the verse "And Moses said to the children of Israel etc." must stand at the end of our section — to clarify,

that Moses transmitted also the section to all Jews; and from this it is understood that the section was said here,

and as the simple meaning of the verses that the sections come in order.

8.

Another difference between Parshat HaMoadim

(of Emor)

and Parshat HaKorbanot

(our parshah)

: There it says at the end of the parshah "Vayedaber Moshe etc." and here — "Vayomer Moshe etc."

And it can be said the explanation in this

(in the manner of halachah)⁴⁹

In Parshat Emor,

where it deals

with laws that pertain to all times equally — the prohibition of work on Yom Tov,

the commandments of each Yom Tov etc. — it is said in the language of "Vayedaber",

which indicates a thing that is "continuous and not interrupted"⁵⁰

But not in our parshah where it speaks

(mainly)

(mainly)

about sacrifices,

which are not

(literally)

in the time of the exile - there is only the principle "one who occupies himself with the Torah of the burnt-offering, etc., is considered as if he offered it, etc."⁵¹

- the term "saying"⁵² is stated.

Furthermore:

The laws of the festivals that are present in all times equally, by them it says "Vayidaber" which is a harsh language

: The Almighty demands forcefully

that Jews fulfill the commandments

(without distinction whether in the time of the Holy Temple,

or in the time of the exile).

However, this that a Jew must engage in the study of the burnt-offering etc. in the time of the exile

it is not a command and obligation and absolute necessity - they do not demand it in a harsh language.

And on the contrary - Jews demand

: May it be Your will before You etc. that You return etc. and rebuild it

(the Holy Temple)

speedily etc. and there we will perform before You our obligatory sacrifices etc. according to the commandment of Your will as You have written upon us in Your Torah

(meaning - our portion)

- not only engaging in the study of etc. as if he sacrificed.

Therefore it says in our parshah "Vayomer" - a soft language⁵⁷

: The Almighty asks of Jews that they should engage in the "order of sacrifices"

(including in particular - from our parshah⁵⁸),

say the verses in the prayers of the day

And in general to engage in the study of the burnt-offering etc.

(whereby it is as if he offered etc.)

- and this will bring about the offering of the burnt-offering etc. literally

- The King Moshiach etc. builds the Temple etc. and they return etc. they offer sacrifices etc. according to all its commandments as stated in the Torah<sup>59</sup>

Speedily in our days, literally,

And as above - and there we will perform before You the sacrifices of our obligations etc. according to the commandment of Your will.

(From the sicha of Shabbos Parshas Pinchas 5725)