Shabbat Parashat Bamidbar - 5781

Shabbat Parashat Bamidbar - 5781

Rabbi Hal Miller

These are the descendants of Aharon and Moshe on the day God spoke with Moshe at

Mt. Sinai. [Bamidbar 3:1]

Our verse appears to be an introduction to a listing of the generations of Aharon and

Moshe, but then the Torah only tells us of Aharon's four sons. We know that Nadav

and Avihu died childless, so Aharon had descendants only through Elazar and Itamar.

And where are Moshe's sons, Gershom and Eliezer? How does the phrase "on the day

God spoke" fit in?

As always, Rashi gives us the simple meaning. He writes that the verse "mentions only

the sons of Aharon, yet they are called offspring of Moshe because he taught them Torah."

The Gemora Sanhedrin backs this up, that to teach someone Torah puts that student in a

position of, for nearly all purposes, being like the child of the teacher. It is certainly a most

honorable thing to do and valuable lesson, but why did the Torah limit this to Moshe's

teaching the sons of his brother. Did Moshe not also teach Aharon? The elders? In fact,

all of Israel? For that matter, didn't he teach his own sons too? There must be more here.

Malbim points out that Moshe (and Aharon) just finished counting all the other tribes, and

are now about to count Levi. First, the Torah begins with the Kohanim. At that time, there

were six primary Kohanim, Aharon, his four sons, and Moshe himself who had served in

the role prior to anointing Aharon. Moshe's sons were never Kohanim, so were not listed

here, but later when counting the rest of Levi, we see the family of Amram listed. Amram

had two sons, Aharon and Moshe, who we've just counted. Who else would there be to

count under Amram but Moshe's sons? Ramban and Rashbam agree with this approach.

So what does the phrase "on the day God spoke" do here? It serves as a limitation, meaning

that this count refers to the day Moshe was on top of Sinai receiving the Torah. On that day,

Nadav and Avihu were still alive, and Pinchas was not yet granted the kehuna. That matches

up with what these verses say. But was there ever a time when both Moshe and the Aharon

family were Kohanim together? Before the anointing of Aharon and his sons, it was Moshe

alone, and after the anointing, Moshe was out of the picture. Our verse must be counting

anyone who was ever a Kohen up to that point, but that seems to contradict this phrase.

Rav Soloveitchik has a completely different approach to the verse. He says that it shows

something more about Moshe. First he mentions the akeidah where Avraham brings his

son Yitzchak to sacrifice him. After the offering, both Avraham and Yitzchak went back

together in joy. Here, Moshe was directed to perform an akeidah as well, cutting out his

sons, and in fact his wife also. In Moshe's case, he did not get his sons back. When he

died, Moshe was not surrounded by his family, rather was alone on a mountain top. In

our verse, Moshe's children are excluded from his legacy. In fact, in Shoftim [18:30]

Moshe's son Gershom was not designated as ben Moshe, but ben Menashe. He does

not explain why this was, although perhaps, based on Rashi, we can assume that the

sons had a teacher named Menashe, and that Moshe did not actually teach them.

A difficult verse, much food for thought.