Verse structure: 4 words, 18 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֖ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֖ה, 4 letters) and the longest is "and·he·spoke" (וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר, 5 letters). 4 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "saying" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "and·he·spoke" (root דבר, 149x in Numbers). First appearance of the root אל ("to·Moses") in Numbers. Full calculation: וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר [and·he·spoke] (222) + יְהֹוָ֖ה [Hashem] (26) + אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֥ה [to·Moses] (376) + לֵּאמֹֽר [saying] (271) = 895.
"Command the children of Israel, that they put out of the camp every person afflicted with tzara'at, and every one that has a discharge, and whoever is unclean by the dead;
verse value 2705
Insights
Verse structure: 10 words, 46 letters. The shortest word is "instruct!" (צַ֚ו, 2 letters) and the longest is "from·the·camp" (מִן־הַֽמַּחֲנֶ֔ה, 7 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "anyone·with·an·eruption" (כׇּל־צָר֖וּעַ), "and·anyone·with·a·discharge" (וְכׇל־זָ֑ב). 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "sons·of" (root בן, 499x in Numbers); "Israel" (root ישראל, 183x in Numbers); "and·anyone" (root כל, 98x in Numbers). First appearance of the root שלח ("and·they·shall·send·out") in Numbers. First appearance of the root צרע ("anyone·with·an·eruption") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·anyone·with·a·discharge', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 3 words. Full calculation: צַ֚ו [instruct!] (96) + אֶת־בְּנֵ֣י [sons·of] (463) + יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל [Israel] (541) + וִֽישַׁלְּחוּ֙ [and·they·shall·send·out] (360) + מִן־הַֽמַּחֲנֶ֔ה [from·the·camp] (198) + כׇּל־צָר֖וּעַ [anyone·with·an·eruption] (416) + וְכׇל־זָ֑ב [and·anyone·with·a·discharge] (65) + וְכֹ֖ל [and·anyone] (56) + טָמֵ֥א [defiled] (50) + לָנָֽפֶשׁ [by·a·corpse] (460) = 2705.
Onkelos
Command the children of Israel that they send out from the camp every one who is leprous, and every one who has a discharge, and every one who is unclean through contact with a human corpse.
Rashi
צו את בני ישראל וגו׳ COMMAND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL etc. — This section was spoken on the day when the Tabernacle was erected; there were eight sections spoken on that day, as is related in Treatise Gittin 60a, in the chapter beginning with the word הנזקין. וישלחו מן המחנה [COMMAND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL] THAT THEY SEND AWAY FROM THE CAMP [EVERY LEPER etc.] — There were three camps one within the other whenever they encamped: the area within the hangings was the “camp of the Shechinah”, the encampment of the Levites round about this, as is described in the Sedrah במדבר סיני (Numbers 1:53), was the “camp of the Levites”, and from there outward up to the end of the encampment of the divisions in all the four directions was the “camp of the Israelites”. The leper was sent out from all of them; the person suffering from a flux was allowed to stay in the “camp of the Israelites”, but was sent out from the two inner camps, whilst a person who had become unclean by reason of a corpse was allowed to stay in the “camp of the Levites” also, and was sent out only from that of the Shechinah. All this have our Rabbis deduced in Treatise Pesachim 67a from the verses of our text. טמא לנפש — Onkelos translates this by דמסאב לטמי נפשא דאנשא. I say that it (the word טמי in this rendering) is an expression in Aramaic for human bones, so that the Targum means: “whosoever is unclean by reason of the bones of a human being’’. There are many examples of the use of this word in Genesis Rabbah, as e.g. (Genesis Rabbah 78:1): Hadrian, שחיק טמיא, which means, “Hadrian may his bones be crushed!”
Ramban
AND THEY SHALL SEND AWAY FROM THE CAMP EVERY LEPER etc. After he [Moses] had erected the Tabernacle, He commanded that the impure should be sent away from the camp in order that the camp should be holy and fit for the Divine Presence to reside therein, this being a commandment which was applicable immediately and in [all subsequent] generations. And because He counted Israel after their families, by the house of their fathers, and separated from them the mixed multitude which was among them, He concluded with [the law of] the guilt-offering for robberies [which has to be brought] by one who robs a proselyte.
Ibn Ezra
"Every leper, and every one who has a discharge, and every one who is unclean through contact with a corpse." These are those who carry a seven-day impurity, and they in turn convey impurity to others. Therefore, one who has experienced a seminal emission does not go outside the camp; and in the camp there is no obligation to go outside — each man simply digs within his tent, as is the custom of all camps, since children are among them. As for the passage in [Deuteronomy,] "When you go out as a camp" — it speaks of a small camp in which there is no woman and in which the Ark is in their midst, and [the impure] do not circulate [freely], for in the camp of Israel the Divine Presence is in the center. I will explain this further in its place.
Or HaChaim
צו את בני ישראל וישלחו מן המחנה, "Command the Israelites to expel from the camp, etc." The reason the Torah wrote this paragraph immediately after the appointment of the Levites to their respective tasks was because G'd had commanded the Levites themselves to keep away from areas possessing a certain degree of sanctity, areas reserved for priests alone. This is why the Torah added that also the Israelites were forbidden to enter areas normally available to them if they had become afflicted with ritual impurity, for instance.
Chizkuni
וישלחו מן המחנה, “that they shall put outside the encampment, etc.” we have heard the commandment; where do we find the penalty for disregarding this commandment? Answer: this is to be found in Numbers 19,20: ואיש אשר יטמא ולא יתחטא וגו' ״, “and anyone who has become ritually defiled and does not purify himself, etc.” כל צרוע וכל זב וכל טמא לנפש, “anyone who has a leprous like eczema, or a semen related issue, or has been contaminated through contact with a dead body, etc.;” there are three different categories of ritual defilement and we have three verses dealing with them. The common denominator of these three categories of ritual defilement is that the process of purification takes seven days. They also require that the person afflicted with any of these defilements be banned from one or possibly all three camps of the Israelites. This is in contrast with a ritual defilement caused by seminal emission not caused by a disease, which can be purified by immersion in a ritual bath on the same day, so that by nightfall the afflicted person is ritually clean again.
Rabbeinu Bahya
וישלחו מן המחנה, “they shall expel from the camp, etc.” The reference is to the מחנה שכינה, “the camp of the Shechinah” i.e. the sacred domain of the Tabernacle and its courtyard. There were three categories of ritual impurity each of which required a minimum of seven days before it could be purified. They were the צרוע, the זב, and the טמא מת, “the person afflicted with the skin disorder known as tzoraat, the person suffering from semen-related emissions, and the person who contracted impurity through contact with a corpse. The first-named category is expelled from all three camps; the Torah spells this out in Leviticus 13,46 when it says: ”he shall dwell apart, his dwelling shall be outside the camp.” There the word “camp” means the camp of the Israelites. The person suffering from seminal emission needs to keep out of the inner two camps, the camp of the Levites, and, of course, the camp of the Shechinah. This is based on an interpretation by the Talmud Pessachim 68. Concerning someone who had nocturnal emissions (including deliberate marital intercourse) but whose emissions are not beyond his control, i.e. a disease, the relevant verse is found in Deut. 23,11: ”if anyone among you is rendered unclean by nocturnal emission, he must leave the camp, and he must not reenter the camp. Toward evening he shall immerse himself in a ritual bath and at sundown he may reenter the camp.” The camp such a person must leave is the camp of the Levites. Lastly, if someone has become ritually impure through contact with a dead person he must leave the camp of the Shechinah but may move freely in either of the other two camps.
Kli Yakar
And they shall send out of the camp all who have tzara’at, etc. After arranging all three camps, each person by his banner, therefore it immediately mentions the order of sanctity of these three camps: for the one with tzara’at is sent away from all three camps, the zav [one with a discharge] is outside of two, and one who is impure due to contact with the dead is outside the camp of the Divine Presence. And this order of sending away corresponds to the words of the Midrash (Naso 7:10) which says And they shall send out of the camp all who have tzara’at refers to idolatry, etc., and all who have a discharge refers to sexual immorality because it comes from emission of seed, and all who are impure due to the dead refers to bloodshed, etc. And it interprets this entire verse as referring to the exiles. This is difficult, for where are the exiles mentioned? Is it the opinion of this Midrash’s author to completely remove this verse from its plain meaning? It appears that the intent of the Midrash’s author is to explain why this section is placed here. For it was stated on the first of Nissan, otherwise why would the impure individuals have come to Moses on the 14th of Nissan saying, We are unclean because of a dead person; why should we be excluded, etc. (Numbers 9:7)? If so, why was this section established here? Rather, certainly after arranging the Tabernacle in its place and causing His Divine Presence to dwell among them, He came to warn them not to cause the removal of the Divine Presence through these three primary sins that cause destruction. Therefore, He commanded to send out from the camp every person with tzara’at, every person with a discharge, and everyone impure from contact with the dead, because these three are distinctive signs that within them is either a trace of heresy of idolatry, which brings tzara’at, as it says regarding the Golden Calf, Moses saw that the people were unrestrained (Exodus 32:25). And our Sages said (Bamidbar Rabbah 7:4) that they became leprous, as it is written about the leper, his head shall be unrestrained (Leviticus 13:45). Due to this sin, the First and Second Temples were destroyed, for although they did not worship idols during the Second Temple period, nevertheless, they were guilty of the sin of baseless hatred and evil speech, which is equivalent to idolatry, as our Sages learned (Yalkut Shimoni, Psalms 656) from the verse, With our tongue we will prevail; our lips are with us; who is Lord over us? (Psalms 12:5). One who speaks evil speech is considered as if he has denied a fundamental principle of faith. The reason for sending the leper outside all three camps is to distance any trace of idolatry from all three. And if it is due to the sin of evil speech, he must dwell in isolation, just as he caused separation between people, and if he were not distanced from all three camps, he would not be dwelling in isolation. And everyone with a discharge — for his discharge is a sign that he is unbridled in matters of sexual immorality, and therefore he develops a discharge. He is sent out of the holy Divine Presence camp and out of the Levite camp, which also possesses holiness, as any place of holiness cannot tolerate matters of sexual immorality, in contrast to the Israelite camp, which does not have as much holiness. And everyone impure from contact with the dead — for this also indicates a wayward spirit within him, and that he is not careful about becoming impure through contact with a human corpse, thereby affecting the image of God, so to speak. Therefore, it is appropriate that he distance himself from the camp of the Divine Presence, as he damages the honor of the Divine Presence. And since these three caused the destruction and removal of the Divine Presence, therefore He commanded to distance them from the camp so they would not defile their camps, because wherever they are present, the Holy One, blessed be He, removes His Divine Presence from there, as the place is “called impure, impure.” A hint to this matter is the letter tet [numerical value nine] in the word tamei [impure], which alludes to bloodshed [shefichut damim] of one who is born after nine months. For this reason there were six cities of refuge, and it is written you shall add three more cities (Deuteronomy 19:9). In total nine, no more, for the reason that has been explained. The letter mem [numerical value 40] in tamei alludes to sexual immorality [giluy arayot], as the flood waters were 40 days because they troubled their Creator to form bastards during the 40 days of fetal formation. The letter alef in tamei alludes to idolatry [avodah zarah], which affects the oneness of the blessed God that is hinted at in the letter alef. Therefore, King David called the evil inclination impure (Sukkah 52b) because it caused him to stumble in all three: sexual immorality with Bathsheba, bloodshed with Uriah the Hittite, and idolatry as they learned (in Sanhedrin 107a) from the verse When David reached the summit (Second Samuel 15:32) — he sought to worship idolatry, etc. And there is also impurity in them, because idolatry defiles like a menstruant woman, as it says You will cast them away like a menstruous cloth (Isaiah 30:22). Therefore, He alluded in the removal of these three impure people to the removal of these three cardinal sins that cause the removal of the Divine Presence. And He connected to this section a man or woman who commits any sin to indicate that the removal of the impure is also because of their sin, as mentioned.
Tur HaArokh
וישלחו מן המחנה , “they are to expel from the camp, etc.” After the Torah had organized the encampment of the Israelites around the Tabernacle, the instructions are now issued to remove people afflicted with varying degrees of ritual impurity from the camp in order to prevent the entire camp from becoming infected with ritual impurity which would drive away the Shechinah which rested above the encampment. Not only the ritually impure but also the mixed multitude that had joined the Jewish people at the Exodus were separated from the camp seeing that the latter did not belong to any of the twelve tribes. Seeing that the Torah had already touched on specific rules applicable to converts such as the mixed multitude who could not be part of the regular encampment due to their legal status, it also appends here the laws pertaining to proselytes who died without leaving behind legal heirs, and the kind of guilt offering someone had to bring if he had wronged a convert by stealing from him and the convert had died before restitution had been made. (Verses 6-8) כל צרוע וכל זב וכל טמא לנפש, “anyone who is afflicted with the skin disease known as tzoraat, or experiences a seminal emission defined as zav, or who is impure due to some kind of direct or indirect contact with the body of a deceased human being.” The three categories of ritual impurity listed here are capable to contaminating others, whereas a person experiencing a normal seminal emission while personally ritually impure does not confer his impurity on others. Hence he does not need to leave any of the tree camps constituting the encampment of the Israelites in the desert.
Rashbam
וישלחו מן המחנה, after the Torah had described the procedures of encamping, it had to tell us that ritually impure people had to be removed from the camp(s).
both male and female shall you put out, without the camp shall you put them; that they defile not their camp, in the midst of which I dwell."
verse value 4391
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 62 letters. The shortest word is "and·not" (וְלֹ֤א, 3 letters) and the longest is "their·camp" (אֶת־מַ֣חֲנֵיהֶ֔ם, 8 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "from·male" (מִזָּכָ֤ר), "to·female" (עַד־נְקֵבָה֙), "you·shall·send·them·away" (תְּשַׁלְּח֑וּם). The root שלח appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "whose" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers); "and·not" (root לא, 129x in Numbers); "the·camp" (root מחנה, 49x in Numbers). First appearance of the root חוץ ("to·outside") in Numbers. First appearance of the root שכן ("dwelling") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'you·shall·send·them·away', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 7 words. Full calculation: מִזָּכָ֤ר [from·male] (267) + עַד־נְקֵבָה֙ [to·female] (231) + תְּשַׁלֵּ֔חוּ [you·shall·send·away] (744) + אֶל־מִח֥וּץ [to·outside] (175) + לַֽמַּחֲנֶ֖ה [the·camp] (133) + תְּשַׁלְּח֑וּם [you·shall·send·them·away] (784) + וְלֹ֤א [and·not] (37) + יְטַמְּאוּ֙ [they·defile] (66) + אֶת־מַ֣חֲנֵיהֶ֔ם [their·camp] (554) + אֲשֶׁ֥ר [whose] (501) + אֲנִ֖י [I] (61) + שֹׁכֵ֥ן [dwelling] (370) + בְּתוֹכָֽם [in·their·midst] (468) = 4391.
Onkelos
Both male and female you shall send out; to the outside of the camp you shall send them, so that they do not defile their camp, in the midst of which My Shechinah dwells.
Ibn Ezra
"Female" — [meaning] a woman with a discharge [zavah], or a menstruant [niddah], or a woman with scale-disease [metzora'at], or one impure through contact with a corpse.
Or HaChaim
אשר אני שכן בתוכם, "that I dwell amongst." This rule applied only as long as G'd's presence was still in the Tabernacle. Once the Tabernacle had been dismantled so that the שכינה had moved, even people afflicted with צרעת were allowed in the camp (Menachot 95).
Chizkuni
מזכר עד נקבה תשלחו, “be such a person male or female he or she must be removed from the camps forbidden for their category of defilement.” The verse teaches that in respect of ritual defilement the Torah does not make a distinction between minors and adults, males or females. ולא יטמאו את מחניהם, “in order that their presence while in such a state does not confer ritual impurity on the entire camp.” They must also undergo a purification process for having committed robbery, or possibly indulged in forbidden sexual relations. Also a Nazarite who is in doubt about having violated the terms of his vow must undergo purification.
Cross-references: Leviticus 12:4; Numbers 19:20; Deuteronomy 23:13-14; II Kings 7:3
And the children of Israel did so, and put them out without the camp; as Hashem spoke to Moses, so did the children of Israel.
verse value 4358 — יְהֹוָה֙ = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 65 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָה֙) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "thus" (כֵּ֥ן, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·they·did·so" (וַיַּֽעֲשׂוּ־כֵן֙, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 541: Israel, Israel. 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·they·did·so" (וַיַּֽעֲשׂוּ־כֵן֙). The root עשה appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "sons·of" (root בן, 499x in Numbers); "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "as" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·camp', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 8 words.
Onkelos
And the children of Israel did so, and they sent them out to the outside of the camp — as Hashem spoke with Moses, so the children of Israel did.
Ibn Ezra
"And they did so" — immediately, before they set out. And when the camp traveled, the impure would travel between the banner of Ephraim and the banner of Dan — this is by way of reasoned inference, since it is not explicitly stated. The passage concerning a man or woman [who wrongs another] is placed here because scale-disease and the discharge come as a consequence of trespass [me'ilah]. The reason for mentioning this passage again here is to bring in the case of "and if the man has no kinsman-redeemer."
Chizkuni
ויעשו כן בני ישראל, וישלחו, “the Children of Israel did so, and they put outside, etc.” from the manner in which this is reported it is clear that this commandment was meant to be fulfilled without any delay .כן עשו בני ישראל, “the Israelites did so;” the apparent repetition indicates that the people affected by this did not object or argue about their status.
Verse structure: 4 words, 18 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֖ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֖ה, 4 letters) and the longest is "and·he·spoke" (וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר, 5 letters). 4 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "saying" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "and·he·spoke" (root דבר, 149x in Numbers). Full calculation: וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר [and·he·spoke] (222) + יְהֹוָ֖ה [Hashem] (26) + אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֥ה [to·Moses] (376) + לֵּאמֹֽר [saying] (271) = 895.
Speak to the children of Israel: When a man or woman shall commit any sin that men commit, to commit a trespass against Hashem, and that soul be guilty;
verse value 3580
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 63 letters. The shortest word is "when" (כִּ֤י, 2 letters) and the longest is "from·any·wrong" (מִכׇּל־חַטֹּ֣את, 7 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "from·any·wrong" (מִכׇּל־חַטֹּ֣את), "to·break·faith" (לִמְעֹ֥ל), "and·realizes·guilt" (וְאָֽשְׁמָ֖ה). 15 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "to·sons·of" (root בן, 499x in Numbers); "with·Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "Israel" (root ישראל, 183x in Numbers). First appearance of the root אשה ("or·woman") in Numbers. First appearance of the root חטאה ("from·any·wrong") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'with·Hashem', dividing the verse into phrases of 12 and 3 words.
Onkelos
Speak with the children of Israel: when a man or a woman commits any of the sins of mankind by acting treacherously, treachery before Hashem, that person becomes guilty.
Rashi
למעל מעל בה׳ [WHEN A MAN OR WOMAN SHALL DO ANY OF THE SINS AGAINST MAN,] TO ACT DECEITFULLY AGAINST THE LORD — Here, you see, Scripture writes down again the section dealing with a person who robs by violence from another, and swears falsely regarding it, — it is the same section that has already been stated in the Sedrah ויקרא (Lev 5:21), “[If a soul sin], and commits a trespass against the Lord, and deny unto his neighbour etc.” The reason why it is repeated here is because of two new points which are contained in it. The one is that it (Scripture) writes here, “and if they confess” which teaches that one is not liable to payment of the fifth (in addition to the capital; cf. Leviticus 5:24), nor to bring a guilt offering (cf. Leviticus 5:25) if he is convicted by the evidence of witnesses, but only when he himself confesses the matter (his guilt). The second new point is about something stolen from a proselyte (cf. Rashi on v. 8) — that it has to be handed over to the priests (cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 2).
Ramban
WHEN A MAN OR WOMAN SHALL DO ANY OF THE SINS OF MAN. [The sense of the verse] is as follows: “If a man does any of the sins by which one can transgress, of any sin which man commits against another man, and he deals falsely with his neighbor [—that soul shall be guilty].” He states [here] to commit a trespass against the Eternal, which means that he swears by His Name falsely and is thus guilty before Him [as well]. Now because this sin has already been mentioned, and here it only comes to introduce the new point concerning robbing a proselyte, He deals with it briefly. He stated here a man or woman because since it is not usual for a woman to rob, [we might think that] perhaps Scripture does not make her liable to pay the additional fifth or to bring a guilt-offering [when she confesses the sin] like a man, [therefore He stated here a man or woman, teaching that her liability is in all respects the same as that of a man]. He mentioned [here], And every heave-offering of all the holy things of the children of Israel, which they present unto the priest, shall be his, meaning to say that once they have given the heave-offering to the priest it becomes his [personal property], and he who robs it from him is to be dealt with in accordance with the law of the guilt-offering for robberies. That is the reason why He mentioned it here. Or it may be that [this verse] comes to complete the laws of the priests regarding the heave-offering, since till now He only mentioned them by way of allusion, [stating] Thou shalt not delay to offer of the fulness of thy harvest, and of the outflow of thy presses, and so also, they may eat of his bread, but He did not explain the law of the heave-offering at all, that it is to be given to the priest; and as for the tithe, He [only] mentioned at the end of Torath Kohanim [i.e., the Book of Leviticus] that it is holy unto the Eternal. Now, therefore, He came to command that the heave-offering and the holy gifts should belong to the priests by the grant of the owners, who may give them to them as they please, meaning to say that the benefit of satisfaction [of choosing to whom to give it] belongs to the owner [and the priest may not come and take it by force, since the owner may have the pleasure of giving it to any priest he chooses].The meal-offering of the sotah is not mentioned together with the other meal-offerings in Torath Kohanim [i.e., Leviticus Chapter 2] because it is a meal-offering of jealousy and does not come for atonement, therefore He completed the law thereof here [in the Book of Numbers]. Besides, since He traced the genealogy of the people by their fathers’ houses, He now gave them a law and judgment to ascertain who are the mamzerim who are not the children of their mothers’ husbands, when there arises a suspicion in a man’s heart concerning his wife. Similarly He completed here [the laws of] the offerings with the law of the Nazirite, for [only] after the Tabernacle was put up and the impure people ...
Sforno
'למעול מעל בה, our traditional sources already told us that the subject is robbery from a proselyte who dies intestate before the robber confessed and made restitution. The robber had committed an act of desecrating the name of G’d in the eyes of the proselyte who must be appalled that a natural born Jew could be guilty of such a deed. This is why the sin of the robber in this verse is described as a “transgression against something sacred.”
Or HaChaim
איש ..כי יעשו מכל חטאת האדם, "anyone committing any of the sins people are liable to commit, etc." The Torah uses the expression למעול instead of the customary ומעלו מעל, "and have committed a trespass;" this is explained in Baba Kama 110 where the sages say that the verse speaks about a case of someone who perjured himself after having denied being in possession of money belonging to his neighbour. Although the Torah had already dealt with such a situation in Parshat Vayikra it repeats it here as there are numerous details of this legislation which had not yet been revealed. Amongst other details, our verse informs us that the person in question is deemed to have committed his sin at the time when he first denied being in possession of that money, not at the time when he denied it on oath. The very denial is considered sinful as it leads to the person having to swear an oath if his accuser takes him to court. If the accused is not taken to court he is able to make amends for his denial at any time. The verse says: כי יעשו מכל חטאת האדם to inform us that the moment one does so one is considered as about to also trespass against G'd, i.e. to render a false oath. ואשמה הנפש ההיא, and that soul will be considered guilty. Inasmuch as that person is guilty of perjury he has caused damage to his very soul. The Torah suddenly switched to the use of the singular although previously it had spoken about people (pl) committing sins. Afterwards, when the Torah discusses the sinner confessing his sin it again uses the plural, i.e. והתודו. You will note that the Torah did not write that the soul of the sinner i.e. נפשו is guilty, but it writes הנפש ההיא. This is a reference to the collective soul of the Jewish people which has become tarnished through one of its members committing perjury. You may do well to read what we have written in our commentary on Leviticus 7,20-21 about similar constructions. Inasmuch as the word ההיא is superfluous this is a hint that the Torah speaks about a soul other than merely that of the sinner in question. It is worth reading what the Zohar on Parshat Acharey Mot 67 has to say about Isaiah 26,9.
Chizkuni
כי יעשו מכל חטאת האדם, “if they will commit any sin that people are in the habit of committing;” this paragraph concerns theft committed against the estate of a convert; the Rabbis derive this from the words 'מעל בה, “a trespass against the Lord;” seeing that the convert left behind no heirs, the thief or robber considered what he did as finder’s keeper. The Torah teaches that this is not so, but that the Lord is the One Who considers Himself as having been sinned against. A similar paragraph in Leviticus 5,21 has the words: וכחש בעמיתו, “and he denies having trespassed against his colleague,” as speaking of a natural born Jew. The reason why this paragraph follows that of the various types of ritual defilements described in the previous paragraph is to remind us that this very defilement and the subsequent ostracism for at least seven days was a punishment for one of the trespasses detailed in this paragraph. (Ibn Ezra) .ואשמה הנפש ההיא, והתודו, ”and that soul shall be guilty, and confess;” Rabbi Natan claims that this is a line that can be used universally for all such trespasses, that the first step in rehabilitation of the sinner must be his confession of having committed this trespass. (Sifri)
Tur HaArokh
איש או אשה, “man or woman, etc.” Nachmanides writes that the reason why the Torah mentions a woman here, although it is not usual for women to rob proselytes, is that we might have thought that if a woman had been guilty of this crime she would not have to do more than make restitution without adding the fifth mentioned here as a penalty; to make sure we do not err in this matter the Torah made sure that we understand that man and woman are subject to the same rules. [Nachmanides presumably is bothered that the Torah did not simply write אדם that would have included man and woman. Ed.] למעול מעל, “by committing treachery.” The Torah means that the guilty party not only stole, but swore an oath in the name of Hashem denying that he had done so. Seeing that the basic sin had already been discussed (Leviticus 5,15) and the only thing different here is the status of the victim, the Torah was very brief here. It goes on to mention:
Rashbam
חטאת האדם, This is also because of גזל הגר, robbery from a convert who left no children after death and to whom no restitution can be made, nor to any of his non existent heirs. This is the reason why this has been repeated here.
then they shall confess their sin which they have done; and he shall make restitution of the principal of his guilt and add one-fifth to it, and give it to him in respect of whom he has been guilty.
verse value 6193 — לֽוֹ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 14 words, 62 letters. Notable word values: "to·him" (לֽוֹ) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "to·him" (לֽוֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "their·wrong" (אֶֽת־חַטָּאתָם֮, 7 letters). 8 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·they·shall·confess" (וְהִתְוַדּ֗וּ), "their·wrong" (אֶֽת־חַטָּאתָם֮), "and·shall·make·restitution" (וְהֵשִׁ֤יב). The root אשר appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "that" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers); "to·it" (root על, 128x in Numbers); "they·have·done" (root עשה, 127x in Numbers). First appearance of the root חטא ("their·wrong") in Numbers. First appearance of the root שוב ("and·shall·make·restitution") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·it', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 4 words. Full calculation: וְהִתְוַדּ֗וּ [and·they·shall·confess] (427) + אֶֽת־חַטָּאתָם֮ [their·wrong] (859) + אֲשֶׁ֣ר [that] (501) + עָשׂוּ֒ [they·have·done] (376) + וְהֵשִׁ֤יב [and·shall·make·restitution] (323) + אֶת־אֲשָׁמוֹ֙ [his·restitution] (748) + בְּרֹאשׁ֔וֹ [in·its·principal] (509) + וַחֲמִישִׁת֖וֹ [and·its·fifth] (770) + יֹסֵ֣ף [he·shall·add] (150) + עָלָ֑יו [to·it] (116) + וְנָתַ֕ן [and·shall·give] (506) + לַאֲשֶׁ֖ר [to·the·one·whom] (531) + אָשַׁ֥ם [he·wronged] (341) + לֽוֹ [to·him] (36) = 6193.
Onkelos
They shall confess their sins which they committed, and he shall restore his penalty in full, and add one-fifth upon it, and give it to the one against whom he incurred the debt.
Rashi
את אשמו בראשו [HE SHALL RESTORE] THAT WHEREIN HE IS GUILTY, AS BEING THE CHIEF SUM — This means, he shall restore the principal about which he has sworn falsely (Bava Kamma 110a). לאשר אשם לו [AND HE SHALL RESTORE THE PRINCIPAL … AND GIVE UNTO HIM] TO WHOM HE IS GUILTY — i.e. unto him to whom he (the claimant) owes money (Ketubot 19a).
Ibn Ezra
"And they shall confess" — whichever of them it may be, man or woman. "In its principal amount" — as it stands, no less than that. "And he shall add its fifth part to it" — [this is] when he confesses of his own accord. But if there are witnesses against him, he adds two fifths. The transmitters of the tradition said [that this means] a fifth of the fifth, and their understanding is broader than ours.
Or HaChaim
והשיב את אשמו, and he shall make restitution for his guilt, etc. The Torah again switched to use of the singular although the verse had commenced by speaking about sinners in the plural confessing their guilt. The reason is that when it comes to having to confess one's guilt all sinners are in a similar situation. When it comes to making restitution, however, this is not so as the Torah makes allowances for poor people whose sin-offering consists of lower priced birds or even a meal-offering only. We have learned this in Leviticus 5,7-5,13.
Chizkuni
וחמישתו יוסיף עליו, “and he is to add a fifth of it” (the value of the stolen property); if his confession is not the result of witnesses having accused him of his guilt, but it is simply an expression of his remorse, then he pays only this extra 25%, but if witnesses testified about the theft he is required to add a second 25% as a penalty. We have already explained in our commentary on Leviticus 5,16 precisely what is meant by this. ונתן לאשר אשם לו, “he will give to the person against whom he trespassed etc.” this verse teaches that if someone had owed a certain person, Reuven, say 100 dollars, and he came to the court with the intent to pay Reuven that amount, but did not arrive until another creditor of Reuven had lodged a claim regarding an independent amount owed him by Reuven, the court will accept payment from the debtor and transfer it to the creditor, as the Torah specifically writes: “he will give it to the one against whom he had sinned by not paying it sooner.” (Sifri)[Malbim adds certain qualifications to the example quoted by Sifri. Ed]
Rashbam
והשיב את אשמו, the capital value minus the penalty.
But if the man have no kinsman to whom restitution may be made for the guilt, the restitution for guilt which is made shall be Hashem's, even the priest's; besides the ram of the atonement, whereby atonement shall be made for him.
verse value 3490
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 70 letters. The shortest word is "kin" (גֹּאֵ֗ל, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·if·there·is·no" (וְאִם־אֵ֨ין, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 346: the·restitution, the·restitution. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "to·make·restitution" (לְהָשִׁ֤יב), "the·repaid" (הַמּוּשָׁ֥ב), "shall·make·atonement·with·it" (יְכַפֶּר־בּ֖וֹ). The root שוב appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "to·Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "which" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers); "to·the·party" (root איש, 130x in Numbers). First appearance of the root אין ("and·if·there·is·no") in Numbers. First appearance of the root גאל ("kin") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'for·the·priest', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 6 words.
Onkelos
But if the man has no redeemer to whom the debt may be restored, the debt to be restored belongs before Hashem — it goes to the priest, apart from the ram of atonement by which he makes atonement for him.
Rashi
ואם אין לאיש גאל BUT IF THE MAN HAS NO KINSMAN — This means that the claimant who put him to the oath, died and has left no heirs, להשיב האשם אליו TO WHOM THAT WHEREIN HE IS GUILTY COULD BE RESTORED, when he decided at a later period to confess his sin. — Our Rabbis asked (Sifrei Bamidbar 4:1; Bava Kamma 109a): But can you find anyone in Israel who has no kinsman whatsoever, neither a son nor a brother nor other relative near akin to him from his father’s family, going back as far as Jacob? But this person referred to is a proselyte who died and has no heirs (his heathen relatives not being entitled to succeed to his property) (Sifrei Bamidbar 4:1; Bava Kamma 109a). האשם המושב THAT WHEREIN HE IS GUILTY AND WHICH HATH TO BE RESTORED — i.e. the principal (האשם) and the fifth thereof (המושב) (cf. Bava Kamma 110a), לה’ לכהן BELONGS TO THE LORD, FOR THE PRIEST — This means the Lord becomes its owner and gives it to the priest of that Mishmar (shift) (Bava Kamma 109b). מלבד איל הכפרים BESIDES THE RAM OF EXPIATION which is mentioned in the Sedrah ויקרא (Leviticus 5:25), as being incumbent upon him to offer.
Ibn Ezra
"The restitution to Hashem" — they returned it out of fear of Hashem.
Sforno
'המושב לה, when the original owner of the stolen property no longer exists, it is proper to make restitution to the “boss” of the person from whom it has been taken, his “boss” being none other than G’d. [The author considers any property owned by any one on earth as only “on loan” from the real owner, from G’d. Ed.] Our sages phrase this as “when the servant dies he has to return it to the master.” (Baba Batra 51)
Chizkuni
המושב לה, “it shall be viewed as returned to the Lord,” through being given to a priest who is the representative of G-d on earth. לה' לכהן, G-d is considered the Father of all converts and as such entitled to inherit him. It (the outstanding debt) will therefore be paid to G-d’s “heir” on earth, the priest.
Rashbam
מלבד איל, the eyl ha-asham mentioned in Leviticus 5,25, compare Rashi. האשם המושב, the capital value, this will be returned (paid back to the priests who act as the deceased convert’s redeemer.)
And every heave-offering of all the holy things of the children of Israel, which they present to the priest, shall be his.
verse value 2804 — ל֥וֹ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 7 words, 42 letters. Notable word values: "his" (ל֥וֹ) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "his" (ל֥וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "that·they·offer" (אֲשֶׁר־יַקְרִ֥יבוּ, 9 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·every·gift" (וְכׇל־תְּרוּמָ֞ה). 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "sons·of·Israel" (root בן, 499x in Numbers); "shall·be" (root היה, 180x in Numbers); "and·every·gift" (root כל, 98x in Numbers). Full calculation: וְכׇל־תְּרוּמָ֞ה [and·every·gift] (707) + לְכׇל־קׇדְשֵׁ֧י [of·all·sacred·things·of] (494) + בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל [sons·of·Israel] (603) + אֲשֶׁר־יַקְרִ֥יבוּ [that·they·offer] (829) + לַכֹּהֵ֖ן [to·the·priest] (105) + ל֥וֹ [his] (36) + יִהְיֶֽה [shall·be] (30) = 2804.
Onkelos
And every offering of all the holy things of the children of Israel that they bring to the priest shall belong to him.
Rashi
וכל תרומה וגו׳ AND EVERY HEAVE OFFERING … WHICH THEY BRING UNTO THE PRIEST] — R. Ishmael asked, “Do they then have to bring the heave-offering to the priest; does he not have to go around the granaries begging for it? What, then, is the meaning of ‘which they bring unto the priest’? It refers to the first fruits of which it is said, (Exodus 23:19) ‘[The first of the first fruits of thy ground] thou shalt bring into the house of the Lord they God’, but I do not know what is to be done with them, (i.e., this is nowhere stated). Scripture therefore states here, ‘[and every heave-offering, …which they bring] unto the priest, shall be his’ — Scripture comes and teaches you with respect to the first fruits that they must be given to the priest” (Sifrei Bamidbar 5).
Ramban
AND EVERY HEAVE-OFFERING OF ALL THE HOLY THINGS OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, WHICH THEY BRING UNTO THE PRIEST, SHALL BE HIS. Scripture is saying that the heave-offering which the children of Israel hallow, that is to say, which they set aside [of the produce] and declare holy, shall be the priest’s, for since there is no specific measure [required by law of the Torah when setting aside] the heave-offering, therefore Scripture said that however much they set aside of the produce [as the heave-offering] shall belong to the priest when the owners bring it and give it to him, but the priest may not take it by force. This is the plain meaning of the verse. And so the Rabbis have said in the Sifre: “Rabbi Akiba says: ‘Scripture comes [here] to teach you that if the owner wishes to declare his whole granary heave-offering, he may do so, provided that he leaves over a small amount’ [as ordinary food].”We have furthermore been taught there in the Sifre: “Which ‘yakrivu’ (they bring) unto the priest. Said Rabbi Yishmael: But do they bring the heave-offering to the priest? What then is the meaning of the expression, which ‘yakrivu’ (they bring) unto the priest, shall be his? [It is as follows:] Since He stated, The choicest first-fruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the House of the Eternal thy G-d, but we have not been informed yet what shall be done with them, therefore Scripture states [here], which ‘yakrivu’ (they bring) unto the priest, shall be his — Scripture comes and teaches you that the first-fruits are to be given to the priest.” Now Rashi [in citing here this text of the Sifre] explained [the question] “But do they bring the heave-offering to the priest?” in the following way: “Does not the priest have to go around the granaries asking for it?” But this is not clear. But the [correct] explanation is that in the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael [in the above text of the Sifre] the root hakravah in the Torah [“bringing” — as in yakrivu mentioned here] refers only to things which are offered up on the altar. Therefore he interpreted the expression ‘asher yakrivu’ (which they bring) as referring to the first-fruits, which require waving and bringing to the altar, Scripture thus stating [here] that all first-fruits which the owners bring to G-d shall belong to the officiating priest. And when Rabbi Yishmael said [in the Sifre above], “Since it is stated, The choicest first-fruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the House of the Eternal thy G-d, but I do not know what is to be done with them,” he means to say that we have not yet been taught at all that the first-fruits are amongst the gifts of the priests, and it is here that He taught us for the first time that they are to be given to the priest. But afterwards He taught it again in the section dealing with [the gifts of] the priests: The first ripe fruits of all that is in their Land, which they bring unto the Eternal, shall be thine, for there He also restated the [laws of the] heave-offering, and...
Sforno
וכל תרומה, according to Sifrey 5 the t’rumah of which the Torah speaks here are the first fruit which have to be offered to G’d, as it is customary for the owner of fields or orchards to present these first fruit of each year’s produce (seven species) and to recite the appropriate benediction when presenting same in the Temple. (compare Deuteronomy 26,3). Here the Torah tells us that just as property stolen from a proselyte who died intestate, which was described as “being returned to G’d,” winds up in the hands of the priest, i.e. G’d’s agent, so the bikkurim, the farmer’s gift to G’d has also been assigned by G’d to the priest of the respective roster on His behalf.
Or HaChaim
וכל תרומה…לו יהיה, "and every heave-offering…..shall be his." Why did the Torah repeat the same subject three times (verses 9 and 10)? Furthermore, why did the Torah repeat the same words, i.e. לו יהיה? Our sages in the Sifri explain that the apparently superfluous words "they shall be his" refer to the offering of the first ripe fruit which are normally called ראשית. They too are to be treated in the same way as the heave-offerings, תרומה. They become the priest's personal property. The second time the Torah repeats this expression it refers to priests who performed Temple service at a time which had not been allocated to them. If such a priest offered his own offering i.e. קדשיו, it remained his although his presence in the Temple at the time had not been authorised. The words אשר יתן לכהן לו יהיה refer to a situation when a father had given to the priest money to redeem his firstborn son and that baby had died after 30 days. The Torah legislates that the priest does not need to return this redemption money to the father. There are numerous other halachic Midrashim in this vein. All of this does not suffice to explain the plain meaning of these verses. I believe that we may approach these verses in accordance with the principle that when the Torah repeats something three times it is intended to show that we may not use the information contained in those statements exegetically by applying them to other commandments. The three statements teach us rules applying to the 24 types of gifts the Torah has allocated to the priests. In the first chapter of his treatise on the laws of בכורים, first ripe fruits, Maimonides writes that the 24 gifts G'd allocated to the priests were divided into five categories, which in reality are only three basic categories. 1) the portions of the sacrifices which they receive from animals which have been offered on the altar. These included: the meat of the sin-offering; the meat of the guilt-offering; the meat of the peace-offerings paid for by the public purse; the remainder of the Omer, i.e. the barley offering on the second day of the Passover festival; most of the meal-offerings except the fistful offered on the altar; the showbreads; the two loaves offered on Shavuot from the new wheat harvest; the oil of the person undergoing purification rites after having been afflicted with Tzoraat; the skins of any animal offered on the altar; the breast and right flank of all private peace-offerings; left-overs of the thanksgiving offerings; the part of the ram of the Nazirite not presented on the altar; the firstborn male of the pure animals. The first ripe fruit (of the seven species Israel is blessed with). These are 14 gifts allocated to the priests. The common denominateor of all the above is that the owner is obligated to offer them on the altar or bring them to the priest. They are all inherently sacred. The second category are such things as the Terumah, a tithe from the grain-harvest, olive trees or vineyard's pr...
Tur HaArokh
וכל תרומה לכל קדשי בני ישראל, “and every portion from any of the holies that the Children of Israel bring, etc.” The point of the verse is to inform us that the portions spoken of by the Torah are henceforth the private property of the priest who had received them, and anyone stealing it from them is treated as having robbed the priest. Alternately, the meaning of our verse is that at this point the Torah completes previous legislation about the rights and duties of the priests, seeing it had not yet discussed certain aspects except obliquely with words such as מלאתך, and דמעך (Exodus 22,28). Not only that, but mention of the tithes at the end of the Book of Leviticus 27,30 does not include the תרומה to be given to the priests at all. Therefore the Torah complements the legislation at this stage by speaking both about תרומה and other holy gifts of even higher degrees of sanctity, i.e. קדשי בני ישראל. Both revert to the priests to whom they have been allocated, and become their personal property. The מנחת סוטה, meal offering to be presented by the woman accused of but not proven guilty of marital infidelity, is not mentioned in Leviticus at all, seeing that it is a meal offering resulting from a husband’s jealousy, not a free will offering like other meal offerings. This offering does not contribute to the atonement of that woman at all. (Verse 15-17) At this point the legislation governing meal-offerings is completed. Similarly, the Torah uses this opportunity to fill us in about the offerings a Nazir has to bring at the end of the term he vowed to abstain from ritual impurity and any grape-related products. After the Tabernacle had been erected and laws about maintaining ritual purity had been introduced, the Nazir legislation also became something of an actual rather than something theoretical. During the term of abstinence the Nazirites used to throng around the entrance of the Tabernacle, hoping to be useful in its service in some manner. Moreover, the Torah thought it appropriate to deal with the subject of the Nazirite at this juncture as a female Nazirite serves as the model for the exact opposite of the Sotah, the wife who by her conduct aroused the suspicion in the mind of her husband that she had indulged in marital infidelity. וכל תרומה לכל קדשי בני ישראל, “and any portion from all the holies that the Children of Israel bring.” Nachmanides writes that the plain meaning of the verse is as if the Torah had written that seeing that there is no official minimum amount for such a gift set by the Torah [as opposed to the tithes. Ed.], the word כל may be understood as “any.” Such a gift is not one that may be demanded by the Levites or priests, but until it is offered as a totally voluntary offering the priest has no claim on it whatsoever. In the Sifrey our verse is interpreted as speaking of the bikkurim, the respective first fruit of each of his crops the farmer brings to Jerusalem, seeing that offering is on occasion referred to as תרומה. The words יקריבו אותה are also understood as the owner having the choice to which priest he wants to give these gifts.
Rashbam
וכל תרומה , the first tithe the Israelites set aside from their crops for the priests, as well as the ten per cent the Levites set aside for the priests from the tithe they had received from the ordinary Israelites as spelled out in Numbers chapter 18.
And every man's hallowed things shall be his: whatever any man gives the priest, it shall be his.
verse value 2648 — ל֣וֹ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 36 letters. Notable word values: "his" (ל֣וֹ) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "his" (ל֣וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "his·sacred·donations" (אֶת־קֳדָשָׁ֖יו, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 36: his, his. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "his·sacred·donations" (אֶת־קֳדָשָׁ֖יו), "whatever·one·gives" (אֲשֶׁר־יִתֵּ֥ן). The root איש appears 2 times in this verse. 6 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "shall·be" (root היה, 180x in Numbers); "and·each" (root איש, 130x in Numbers); "whatever·one·gives" (root נתן, 119x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'shall·be', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 5 words. Full calculation: וְאִ֥ישׁ [and·each] (317) + אֶת־קֳדָשָׁ֖יו [his·sacred·donations] (821) + ל֣וֹ [his] (36) + יִהְי֑וּ [shall·be] (31) + אִ֛ישׁ [each] (311) + אֲשֶׁר־יִתֵּ֥ן [whatever·one·gives] (961) + לַכֹּהֵ֖ן [to·the·priest] (105) + ל֥וֹ [his] (36) + יִהְיֶֽה [shall·be] (30) = 2648.
Onkelos
And each man's consecrated tithes shall be his own; whatever a man gives to the priest shall belong to him.
Rashi
ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו AND EVERY MAN’S HOLY THINGS SHALL BE HIS — Because the gifts due to the priests and the Levites are merely mentioned in the Torah (Deuteronomy 18:1—8) (without any statement as to how they are to come into possession of them), therefore one might think they may come and take them by force. On this account, it states here, ‘‘and every man’s holy things shall be his” — in some respect — thus it teaches us that the טובת הנאה, the gratification of using them in this respect as he wishes, belongs to the owner. — Many other Halachic rules have they (the Rabbis) deduced about it (this statement) in Sifrei Bamidbar 6:2. — An Agadic explanation of ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו is the following: Whosoever retains the tithes and does not give them to the Levite, only the tithes will be his, i.e., his field will ultimately yield no more than a tithe of what it was accustomed to yield (so that his whole possession will not exceed the gifts he should have given to the priests and the Levites; cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Re'eh 10). איש אשר יתן לכהן, A MAN, HOWEVER, WHO GIVES TO THE PRIEST the gifts that are due to him, לו יהיה HE SHALL HAVE great riches (Berakhot 63a).
Ramban
AND EVERY MAN’S HALLOWED THINGS SHALL BE HIS; WHATSOEVER ANY MAN GIVETH THE PRIEST, IT SHALL BE HIS. The correct interpretation of this verse is that Scripture is saying that all hallowed things of a man shall be his, meaning to say that all hallowed things about which He has not commanded that they be given to the priest, [such as the Second Tithe, fourth-year produce of trees and the tithe of the cattle] shall be the owners’ [entirely], and they may have the benefit of eating their meat, even though they are called “holy.” But whatsoever any man giveth the priest as I have commanded him, it shall be his [partially], for even in the hallowed things about which Scripture commanded that they be given to the priest, the owners have a certain right, for although they belong to the priest to whom the owner gives them, as his personal property [but the owners have the right in these hallowed things to choose to whom to give them]. Thus the Second Tithe and the fourth-year produce of trees about which Scripture stated that they be holy to the Eternal belong to the owner as his personal property, and likewise the tithe of cattle. But as for all other hallowed things concerning which He commanded in the section of Vayikach Korach that they should give them to the priest, they are to be given to him directly by the owners, and the priests cannot take them from them by force. From this we may deduce ourselves that the right of choosing to whom to give them [with the consequent satisfaction of so doing] is that of the owners. This is the correct interpretation in accordance with the plain meaning of the verse. It is also the opinion of Onkelos [who rendered the verse: “and every man’s hallowed ‘tithe’ shall be his,” thus in dicating that he understood the verse as referring to a tithe which is the owner’s, for instance the Second Tithe]. It is interpreted in a similar manner in the Sifre, where the Rabbis have said: “All hallowed things are included in the general verse stating, And every man’s hallowed things shall be his. Scripture took away all hallowed things and gave them to the priests, leaving only the thanks-offering, the peace-offering, and the Passover-offering, because they too belong to the owners” [and they are permitted to eat them]. However, this verse is not necessary at all for these matters [i.e., to teach us that the thanks-offering, peace-offering, and Passover-offering belong to their owners, since in each of these cases Scripture clearly states that the meat is eaten by the owners, hence the verse before us must refer, as indicated above, to the Second Tithe, and fourth-year produce of trees].
Ibn Ezra
"And each man's sacred donations shall be his." The meaning is that they remain at the disposal of the one who consecrated them — he may give them to whichever priest he wishes. This is stated here in connection with the priestly gifts.
Sforno
ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו, however other kinds of “holy” gifts, namely ordinary tithes and trumot, may be given by the owner to whichever Levite or priest he chooses, not necessarily the priest officiating in the Temple at the time the gift is presented. איש אשר יתן לכהן, once the owner has given “his” holy portion to the priest it becomes secular, mundane, not encumbered with any restrictions. Rather, לו יהיה, it is exclusively “his,” neither the previous owners nor other priests can legally deprive him of it.
Chizkuni
ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיה, “and every man’s hallowed things shall be his;” this somewhat enigmatic phrase, teaches that if a priest has sanctified some of his animals as sacrifices, he need not hand them over to the group of priests on duty at the time, but can proceed to offer such animals personally, although this particular time is not one during which he is on duty. (Sifri) איש אשר יתן לכהן לו יהיה, “whatsoever any man gives (prematurely) to a priest shall be (remain) his, the donor’s.” This verse or phrase, is understood to mean that if a father of a firstborn son had given a priest the money for his son’s redemption before said son was thirty days old, and in the interval that son had died before reaching the age of thirty days, (when it had become due) the priest is to return the money he has received to the deceased son’s father. (Sifri)
Tur HaArokh
ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו, “A man’s holies shall be his.” Nachmanides writes that the proper understanding of these somewhat enigmatic words is that all the holies someone has consecrated that were not obligatory are his to dispose of. The reason that the Torah had to write this was that we might have thought that as soon as something is described as קודש לה', “holy unto Hashem, it might have become the property of the Temple treasury or the priests administering same. Examples of this legislation are the second tithe, which the owners and his family consume in Jerusalem, or produce of a new orchard in the fourth year after it has been planted, known as נטע רבעי, which the owner may also consume in Jerusalem. Even the holies that have been given by the donor to the priest become the priest’s in the sense that anyone stealing them from the priest is not dealt with as if he had stolen from the Temple treasury, but is considered as having stolen the priest’s private property. Thus even other priests are not able to steal fro their colleagues claiming that it is all property of the Temple treasury.
Rashbam
איש אשר יתן לכהן, something donated voluntarily which is appropriate to become the priest’s such as charamim, personal possessions sanctified to become the property of the Temple treasury. לו יהיה, it will become the property of the priests officiating on that date. An aggadic Midrash (B’rachot 63) the words איש אשר יתן לכהן mean that he who meticulously gives to the priest his due, will eventually find himself becoming rich. The Talmud derives this exegesis from the apparent redundancy of the words in our verse.
Verse structure: 4 words, 18 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֖ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֖ה, 4 letters) and the longest is "and·he·spoke" (וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר, 5 letters). 4 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "saying" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "and·he·spoke" (root דבר, 149x in Numbers). Full calculation: וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר [and·he·spoke] (222) + יְהֹוָ֖ה [Hashem] (26) + אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֥ה [to·Moses] (376) + לֵּאמֹֽר [saying] (271) = 895.
Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: If any man's wife go aside, and act unfaithfully against him,
verse value 3935
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 48 letters. The shortest word is "with·him" (ב֖וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "when·goes·astray" (כִּֽי־תִשְׂטֶ֣ה, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 311: man, man. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "when·goes·astray" (כִּֽי־תִשְׂטֶ֣ה), "his·wife" (אִשְׁתּ֔וֹ). The root איש appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "to·sons·of" (root בן, 499x in Numbers); "and·you·shall·say" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "Israel" (root ישראל, 183x in Numbers). First appearance of the root שטה ("when·goes·astray") in Numbers. First appearance of the root בו ("with·him") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·them', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 7 words. Full calculation: דַּבֵּר֙ [speak!] (206) + אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י [to·sons·of] (93) + יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל [Israel] (541) + וְאָמַרְתָּ֖ [and·you·shall·say] (647) + אֲלֵהֶ֑ם [to·them] (76) + אִ֥ישׁ [man] (311) + אִישׁ֙ [man] (311) + כִּֽי־תִשְׂטֶ֣ה [when·goes·astray] (744) + אִשְׁתּ֔וֹ [his·wife] (707) + וּמָעֲלָ֥ה [and·breaks·faith] (151) + ב֖וֹ [with·him] (8) + מָֽעַל [a·trespass] (140) = 3935.
Onkelos
Speak with the children of Israel and say to them: any man whose wife goes astray and acts treacherously toward him —
Rashi
איש איש כי תשטה אשתו IF ANY MAN’S WIFE GO ASIDE [AND ACT DECEITFULLY AGAINST HIM] — What is stated above, immediately before this section? ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו: If you withhold the gifts due to the priest (cf. Rashi on v. 10), by your life, you will have to come to him in order to bring him your faithless wife for the ordeal by the waters (Berakhot 63a). (The translation therefore is: “A man who remains with his holy things, not giving them to the priest, לו יהיו they — the man and his wife — will become subject to him [require his services])”. איש איש — The double expression איש איש is employed to teach you that she (the faithless wife) deals treacherously in two respects — against Him above Who bears the appelation of איש, as in the text "[the Lord is] a Man of the war” (Exodus 15:3), and against her husband (אישה) here below (Midrash Tanchuma, Vaetchanan 5). כי תשטה — Our Rabbis have taught (Midrash Tanchuma, Nasso 5): “Adulterers do never sin until a spirit of madness enters into them”, as it written, of her כי תשטה “if she becomes mad” (taking תִשְׂטֶה in the sense of תִשְׂטֶה, i.e. to become a שׁוֹטֶה, and so, too, of him Scripture writes, (Proverbs 6:32) “Whoso committeth adultery with a woman lacketh understanding”. — But the plain sense of the verse is that כי תשטה means: if she deviates from the path of modesty and thereby becomes suspect in his eyes. The word is similar to, (Proverbs 4:15) “turn away (שְׂטֵה) from it, and pass by”; (Proverbs 7:25) “Let not your heart turn (יַשְׂטְ) to her ways”. ומעלה בו מעל AND SHE ACTS UNFAITHFULLY AGAINST HIM — Wherein consists this infidelity? ושכב איש אתה THAT A MAN LIETH WITH HER.
Ibn Ezra
The reason for [the word] "goes astray" [tishteh] is [the preceding phrase] "and commits a trespass against him" [u-ma'alah vo ma'al]. "Goes astray" — she turns aside from the straight path; similarly, "turn aside from him and pass on."
Sforno
כי תשטה אשתו, she deviates from the path of chastity. ומעלה בו מעל, she has profaned what is holy to G’d, that which He loves, marital union, by embracing and kissing someone other than her husband. (compare Maleachi 2,11)
Or HaChaim
דבר..ואמרת..איש איש, speak..and say.."any man whose wife is unfaithful, etc." Why did the Torah write both "speak," and "say"? Why did it use different words for the same thing, i.e. דבר, אמר? Why is the word איש repeated? A Sotah, a woman suspected of marital infidelity by her husband, may belong to either one of two categories. Either the suspicion is found to have been unjustified, or 2) she is found guilty either by her own admission or by having brazenly drunk the מים המאררים, the waters of bitterness. This accounts for the Torah employing two different words for "say!" The harsher דבור is intended for the woman who is guilty, whereas the softer אמרת is addressed to the woman who turns out to have been faithful though she gave cause for suspicion. The word איש is repeated for the same consideration. At the time her husband accuses her he does not know yet if his suspicions are justified. If the woman is innocent G'd will help her to prove her innocence. We find a popular proverb in Megillah 12 which suggests that the words ומעלה בו מעל could be interpreted to mean "if he (the husband) were guilty of a trespass" i.e. both husband and wife may be guilty of infidelity. As a result our sages stated that if the husband is certain that he has not sinned at all in his marital relations he is entitled to resume relations with his wife after she has undergone the procedure of the "bitter waters" and has been vindicated. The "bitter waters" actually examined the husband as well, i.e. the procedure did not work, the miracle would not take place if the husband himself were found guilty of marital trespass. The word איש is repeated to teach us that regardless of whether the husband knows himself to be pure or not, he still has to bring his wife to the priest. Perhaps our verse referred to this idea when writing both דבר and ואמרת. A husband who is himself not blameless may be afraid to have his wife examined by the priest and the bitter waters as his own shortcomings would be exposed both in the eyes of G'd and that of his peers. As a result, he might prefer not to publicise his suspicions of his wife. On the other hand, even if this husband feels certain that his own conduct was always completely blameless he may not wish to expose marital friction between himself and his wife in public. For these various reasons he might balk at the duty the Torah imposes upon him here. The Torah therefore uses a "carrot and stick" approach" i.e. with soft urgings and with tough talk so that he would comply with the legislation in our paragraph.
Chizkuni
כי תשטה אשתו, “any man whose wife goes astray;” the reason the following paragraph appears at this junction is that both paragraphs discuss the kind of trespass called מעילה by the Torah. (Compare verse 6)
Kli Yakar
“Any man whose wife goes astray, etc.” The connection of this section to the previous verse is explained by Rashi: “If you withhold the gifts of the priest, by your life, you will need to come to him to bring him your wayward wife.” An explanation for his interpretation: Because one who withholds gifts will come to poverty, as Rashi explained above (5:10), and the Sages said (Sotah 4b), “Anyone who has relations with a prostitute will eventually seek a loaf of bread and not find it, as it is said For on account of a harlot, one is brought to a loaf of bread (Proverbs 6:26).” And when the wife sees that her husband has come to poverty, she suspects him of becoming poor because he has been “shepherding prostitutes,” as it is written One who keeps company with harlots will lose wealth (Proverbs 29:3). Seeing that suddenly he loses his wealth in an unusual way, for this reason she too will stray from him, saying, “He [indulges] in immorality, and so will I” (Megillah 12a). Therefore it says, and she commits a trespass against him [bo, literally in him] — if his wife strays and commits a trespass, then in him — this trespass depends on him, because he caused her to want to act like him out of suspicion. And all this was caused by him trespassing regarding the priest’s holy things, by not giving the priest what is sacred, because through this he comes to poverty, and she suspects him of consorting with prostitutes which wastes wealth. And the truth will be clarified through the testing of the waters, for our Sages said (Sotah 28a), And the man shall be clear from iniquity — if he is clear from iniquity, the waters will test her, etc. That is, from an iniquity similar to hers — if he is innocent of what his wife suspected him of, then it is right that the waters should test her; but if he is not clear of this iniquity and her suspicion is true, it is not right that the waters should test her, since he himself was consorting with prostitutes and she has somewhat of an excuse. And regarding what is written, if she goes astray [tisteh] — a language of foolishness [shetut] — even though every sinner is called a fool, nevertheless it specifies to say that she is specifically clamorous and simple, and knows nothing (Proverbs 9:13), and did not know what caused his poverty, for she should have understood that withholding the gifts caused his poverty, as mentioned. And according to the Sages (ibid. 2), that anyone who sees a wayward woman in her disgrace should abstain from wine, the term tisteh [stray/be unfaithful] is used because wine confuses a person’s intellect, as it is written Promiscuity, wine, and new wine take away the heart (Hosea 4:11). And from the fact that they are placed adjacent to each other, we learn that wine accustoms one to immorality. Therefore, it is stated in Joel (4:18), The mountains shall drip with sweet wine, etc., and adjacent to it [is written], A spring shall issue from the House of the Lord and shall water the Valley of Shittim. This is because the Sages said (Bamidbar Rabbah 20:22) that the spring of Shittim grows adulterers, as it is said Israel settled in Shittim, and the people began to commit harlotry with the daughters of Moab (Numbers 25:1). Since it says the mountains shall drip with sweet wine, meaning an abundance of wine, it needed to assure them that the abundance of wine would not harm them and would not bring them to habitual sin, because a spring shall issue from the House of the Lord and shall water the Valley of Shittim. For wherever you find a fence against immorality, there you find holiness. Therefore, the spring comes out from a holy place and heals the Valley of Shittim so that it will not bring them to habitual sin — it and its partner, namely, wine. For the Valley of Shittim is the source of Samael [Satan], which is a partner to the letters of “anavim” [grapes] in the Aleph-Bet [the letters of the second come after each letter of the first]. If I were not afraid to say a novel idea that the early commentators did not envision, I would say that “tisteh” with a tet is like “tishteh” with a tav, because the tet can be substituted for a tav in the letters “dalet, tet, lamed, nun, tav” as Rashi explains at the end of Parshat Miketz (Genesis 44:16) on the verse and how shall we justify ourselves [umah nitztadak]. This tet is in place of a tav, and similarly the word for “going astray” throughout Scripture is with a tav, but in the language of our Sages it is “to’eh” with a tet. It’s as if the verse is saying “if his wife drinks” [tishteh] wine and intoxicating drink which lead to immorality. According to the one who says it’s a language of foolishness [shetut], this is because wine takes away one’s heart until one cannot distinguish between holy and profane, as it is written Do not drink wine or strong drink… that you may distinguish (Leviticus 10:9-10). And as it is written Lest he drink and forget what has been decreed (Proverbs 31:5). This refers to the Torah, which is called “mechokek” [decree-maker] because it has the same numerical value as “chemer” [wine]. And just as they said (Eruvin 65a) “Wine enters, secret goes out,” so too “chemer enters, mechokek goes out” — the numerical value of this is the same as that, and each one is pushed aside by its counterpart. Wine is called “chemer” because through it a person becomes like a “chamor” [donkey] without understanding. Therefore it says “ki tisteh” [if she strays] — that she becomes foolish like a donkey, to the point where even if a donkey solicits her in the marketplace, she would submit to it (Ketubot 65a).
Rashbam
כי תשטה, she deviates from “the straight and narrow.” The word and its spelling is used by Solomon in this sense in Proverbs 4,15 שטה מעליו, “pass it by!” Compare also Hoseah 5,2 ושחטה שטים העמיקו, “people who detoured to escape the guards, etc.”
and a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, she being defiled secretly, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken in the act;
verse value 4616 — וְהִ֖וא = 18 (chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 65 letters. Notable word values: "and·she" (וְהִ֖וא) = 18, chai, 'life'. The shortest word is "against·her" (בָּ֔הּ, 2 letters) and the longest is "carnal·relations" (שִׁכְבַת־זֶ֒רַע֒, 7 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·has·lain" (וְשָׁכַ֨ב), "carnal·relations" (שִׁכְבַת־זֶ֒רַע֒), "and·it·was·hidden" (וְנֶעְלַם֙). The root איש appears 2 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "man" (root איש, 130x in Numbers); "not" (root לא, 129x in Numbers); "and·she" (root הוא, 70x in Numbers). First appearance of the root שכב ("and·has·lain") in Numbers. First appearance of the root בה ("against·her") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'defiled·herself', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 6 words.
Onkelos
— and a man lies with her in a lying of seed, and it is concealed from the eyes of her husband and hidden, and she is defiled, and there is no witness against her, and she has not been seized —
Rashi
ושכב איש AND A MAN LIETH [WITH HER] — a man, thus excluding a minor and a being that does not come under the term איש (i. e., an animal) (Sifrei Bamidbar 7:2; Sotah 24a). אתה שכבת זרע [AND A MAN LIETH] WITH HER CARNALLY — This implies: that only her sexual intercourse with another man makes her unfit for continuing in marital relation with her husband, but the fact that her sister had sexual intercourse with him does not make her unfit for such (Yevamot 95a) [as was once the case with two sisters who greatly resembled each other (Tanchuma 5:2:6)] תעלם מעיני אשה AND IT BE HID FROM THE EYES OF HER HUSBAND — Since it speaks of the eyes of the husband, it excludes the case of a blind man (i.e., a blind man cannot subject his wife to the ordeal). On the other hand, it states: “if it be concealed from his eyes”; it follows therefore that if he sees her improper conduct and wilfully closes his eyes to it the waters cannot try her (i.e., she cannot be subjected to the ordeal) (Sifrei Bamidbar 7:3; Sotah 27a). ונסתרה AND SHE WAS ASIDE SECRETLY with him such a period of time wherein there was a possibility for her to become defiled by intercourse (Sotah 4a). ועד אין בה AND THERE BE NO WITNESS AGAINST HER — But if there was even only one witness against her who stated that she was defiled she did not drink the מים המאררים, but was henceforth forbidden to her husband (Sotah 2b). ועד אין בה AND THERE WAS NO WITNESS AGAINST HER, as regards defilement, but there were witnesses regarding her meeting with the man privily. ונתפשה [AND SHE WAS NOT] SEIZED — i.e. subjected to force (Sifrei Bamidbar 7:3). Similar is, (Deuteronomy 22:28) “And seizes her (ותפשה) and lieth with her”.
Ibn Ezra
"Lying with seed" — the well-known act of intercourse, which is fundamentally for the purpose of seed. "And it was hidden" — that she herself did not reveal the matter, and there is not even one witness against her to make her suspect on his account. "And she was not seized" — by male witnesses or by female witnesses, such that she would be suspected.
Sforno
ושכב איש אותה, and another man has lain with her It is characteristic of the evil urge to cause the sinner to proceed from a relatively mild sin to ever more serious sins. ונעלם מעיני אישה, even though there had been indications of mistrust, jealousy, etc., her latest indiscretion remained hidden from the eyes of her husband. It is as if his eyes had been too weak to see what was going on. Had her husband been aware of her infidelity, the waters would not even have the power to bring this to light. Our sages have made this quite clear (Sifrey 7). ונסתרה, she had subsequently hidden, and this fact had become known to her husband.
Chizkuni
ונסתרה והיא נטמאה, “and the fact that she had become defiled by having sexual relations with a man not her husband was concealed from him;” according to our Rabbis, this verse teaches that when there is a doubt about whether an object reposing in private property is ritually clean, the doubt is treated as if certainty of it being ritually unclean as doubt of this nature is by definition only possible in a privately owned property that the public has no access to. The Torah here describes the doubt about the woman’s actions as if fact, and she lost her previous status of being assumed to be ritually pure. והיא נטמאה “and she had become ritually defiled;” through the semen of the man she had carnal relations with;” the word והיא here is spelled with letter י. [The Torah emphasized her impurity, ignoring her partner’s. Ed.] ועד אין בה, “and there is no witness who could accuse her of infidelity;” the reason why there is no witness is because she had not been raped. (according to Rabbi Saadyah gaon, as well as Rash’bam) (This could have served as a defense.) Because there is a doubt about her conduct, she has to undergo an examination. ועד אין בה, Rashi comments on this phrase that we must contrast it with what the law would be if there had been a witness testifying against her. Even the testimony of a single witness would be enough not to let her drink the potentially disastrous waters. The line also means that whereas we do not have a witness that she had carnal relations with a man not her husband, we do have witnesses that she had hidden herself, so that she could have committed that sin easily. The grammatical construction here is similar to Leviticus 24,14: ורגמו אותו, “they will (all) stone him;” the extra word אותו instead of the pronoun ending, i.e. ורגמוהו, teaches that he will be stoned naked, his clothing will not be stoned. Here, the word אותה means the reverse, i.e. while she was clothed. (Talmud Sanhedrin, folio 45). There are numerous examples of such constructions in the Torah and the reason why extra letters were used to teach us certain halachot, legal rulings. The word אפילו, “even,” in Rashi’s commentary here, is clearly a printer’s error. The Talmud in tractate Sota, folio 3 has Rabbi Yishmael raise the question why in the case of this woman suspected of marital infidelity, the Torah chose to accept the testimony of a single witness at all? In answer it is suggested that there is some logic for such a procedure. This was a case where the husband had legitimate reason to suspect his wife of immoral conduct, and he had warned her not be alone with the person whom he suspects her of being too friendly with. His suspicions had been aroused because she had already once contravened his warnings and had been known to have been alone with the man in question after that warning. Moreover we have a statement in the Talmud tractate Ketuvot folio 9, according to which: a woman (wife) is not forbidden for a husband to continue to have marital relations with on the basis of the testimony of a single witness, until we have two valid witnesses that can accuse her of having been unfaithful to her husband, and her husband had already been jealous of her and she had subsequently secluded herself with the man against whom her husband had warned her not to seclude herself. In commenting on this statement in the Talmud, Rashi writes that the Talmud cites an example when there was no witness at all that accused her of having had carnal relations, but that there had been witnesses to the husband expressing his jealousy, and her secreting herself with the man in question nonetheless. If however, there was one witness accusing her of additional seclusion, after all this, such a witness is sufficient. He bases himself on the word: בה, ”against her,” in our verse. In Rashi’s opinion that word refers to testimony of carnal union, [although there had not been two witnesses. Ed.] We read the line as if it had said; “there were no two witnesses against her but only one.” In other words, the extent of the value of this one witness is for the accused woman not to have to drink the bitter waters in order to prove her innocence and the consequences if she had lied. והיא לא נתפשה, “she had not been caught in the act.” [alternate meaning of the word נתפשה.]
Rashbam
ועד אין בה, to testify that she had been guilty of adultery, והיא לא נתפשה, she had not been raped. If she had been taken to a secret hideout and raped she is considered as being in the clear.
and the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he became jealous of his wife, and she be defiled; or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he became jealous of his wife, and she be not defiled;
verse value 4340 — וְהִ֣וא = 18 (chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 71 letters. Notable word values: "and·she" (וְהִ֣וא) = 18, chai, 'life'. The shortest word is "not" (לֹ֥א, 2 letters) and the longest is "spirit·of·jealousy" (רֽוּחַ־קִנְאָ֛ה, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 1108: the·wife, his·wife. 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "or·has·come·over" (אוֹ־עָבַ֨ר). The root עבר appears 2 times in this verse. 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "not" (root לא, 129x in Numbers); "over·him" (root על, 128x in Numbers); "and·she" (root הוא, 70x in Numbers). First appearance of the root עבר ("and·has·come·over") in Numbers. First appearance of the root קנאה ("spirit·of·jealousy") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'has·defiled·herself', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 8 words.
Onkelos
— and a spirit of jealousy comes over him and he becomes jealous of his wife, and she is defiled; or a spirit of jealousy comes over him and he becomes jealous of his wife, and she is not defiled —
Rashi
ועבר עליו AND [THE SPIRIT OF JEALOUSY] COME UPON HIM — i.e., had come upon him before her seclusion with the man. רוח קנאה וקנא [AND] THE SPIRIT OF JEALOUSY [COME UPON HIM] וקנא — Our Rabbis said that it is an expression denoting warning — that he warns her: do not be aside privily with that man (Sotah 3a.) והוא נטמאה או עבר עליו וגו׳ AND SHE BE DEFILED, OR IF [THE SPIRIT OF JEALOUSY] COME UPON HIM [AND SHE WAS NOT DEFILED] — that is to say, he warned her but she disregarded his warning, and it is uncertain whether she has been defiled or not (Sifrei Bamidbar 8).
Ibn Ezra
"And it passed over him" — in the masculine form, as in "a great and very strong wind" [1 Kgs. 19:11]. The meaning of "passed over" is that it rose up in his mind [i.e., jealousy came over him as a thought].
Sforno
ועבר עליו רוח קנאה, a pure spirit, his wanting to reprimand her after he was aware that she had behaved unchastely. וקנא את אשתו, he warned her and told her not to seclude herself with the man who was suspected as her lover. Or, עבר עליו רוח קנאה, a foolish fit of jealousy, not based on any cause for suspecting her, והיא לא נטמאה, and she had not become defiled at all; nonetheless she disregarded her husband’s warning and secluded herself with another man. In spite of this, והביא האיש את אשתו, we do not say that seeing that her husband had sat by silently while his wife had behaved unchastely, accusing her in his heart without saying a word, that this is proof of the husband’s bad attitude and we should therefore ignore his jealousy seeing he had allowed matters to get to the point where she had slept with another man; neither do we ignore his jealousy if she had not given him cause as something not worth paying attention to. We still subject her to the destruction (erasing) of the name of G’d (in the procedure the Torah will presently describe) in order to reveal the truth.
Chizkuni
“she had not been defiled;” the word והיא is spelled with the letter י.
then shall the man bring his wife to the priest, and shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense on it; for it is a meal-offering of jealousy, a meal-offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance.
verse value 8407
Insights
Verse structure: 24 words, 111 letters. The shortest word is "flour" (קֶ֣מַח, 3 letters) and the longest is "an·offering·for·her" (אֶת־קׇרְבָּנָהּ֙, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 116: upon·it, on·it. 9 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "an·offering·for·her" (אֶת־קׇרְבָּנָהּ֙), "one-tenth·of" (עֲשִׂירִ֥ת), "flour" (קֶ֣מַח). The root על appears 3 times in this verse. 20 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·man" (root איש, 130x in Numbers); "for·her" (root על, 128x in Numbers); "and·shall·not·place" (root נתן, 119x in Numbers). First appearance of the root עשירי ("one-tenth·of") in Numbers. First appearance of the root לבנה ("frankincense") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'barley', dividing the verse into phrases of 11 and 13 words.
Onkelos
the man shall bring his wife to the priest, and he shall bring her offering on her behalf: one-tenth of three seahs of barley flour. He shall not pour oil upon it, and he shall not place frankincense upon it, for it is the meal-offering of jealousy, a meal-offering of remembrance that recalls sin.
Rashi
קמח implies that it shall not be of fine sifted flour. It must be שערים BARLEY, and not wheat; because she committed a bestial act, therefore shall her offering consist of that which is food for beasts (Sifrei Bamidbar 8; Sotah 14a). לא יצק עליו שמן HE SHALL POUR NO OIL UPON IT, so that her offering shall not be embellished (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 5:11) — and also because oil is called light (it is named יצהר from the root צהר, to give light; see Tanchuma) whilst she acted in darkness (Midrash Tanchuma, Nasso 3; cf. Sotah 15a). ולא יתן עליו לבנה NOR SHALL HE PUT FRANKINCENSE THEREON — Because the matriarchs are symbolically termed frankincense, as it is said, (Songs 4:6) “I will get me … to the hill of frankincense” (which is taken as an allusion to the matriarchs), whilst she deviated from their paths (Midrash Tanchuma, Nasso 3). כי מנחת קנאת הוא FOR IT IS A MEAL OFFERING OF JEALOUSY — i.e., this קמח is a meal offering of jealousy; for the word קמח is masculine and is therefore referred to by the masc. form. מנחת קנאת A MEAL OFFERING OF JEALOUSY — The plural קנאות is used because it arouses against her two outbreaks of jealousy — the jealousy of the Omnipresent and the jealousy of her husband (Tosefta Sotah 2; Sifrei Bamidbar 8; cf. Rashi’s second comment on איש איש v. 12).
Ramban
HE SHALL POUR NO OIL UPON IT — “so that her offering shall not be enriched, for oil is called light, whereas she acted in darkness. NOR SHALL HE PUT FRANKINCENSE THEREON, for the matriarchs are compared to frankincense, as it is said, to the hill of frankincense [an allegorical expression explained by the Midrash as an allusion to the matriarchs], but this woman turned aside from their [virtuous] ways (Midrash Tanhuma Nasso 3). FOR IT IS A MEAL-OFFERING OF JEALOUSIES. This flour arouses against her two jealousies — the jealousy of G-d, and the jealousy of her husband.” Thus far is Rashi’s language on the basis of the words of our Rabbis. But in the opinion of all the commentators [the meaning of the expression] for it is a meal-offering of jealousies is to say that because this meal-offering [of the sotah] is an offering which may bring her punishment [if the charge against her is true], therefore it is of a lesser quality [than all other meal-offerings and is to be brought of] barley without oil and frankincense. On the other hand, a meal-offering of which the memorial-part is brought to be acceptable before the Eternal, is to be brought from fine wheat-flour with oil and frankincense. But in my opinion the expression for it is a meal-offering of jealousies refers to the beginning of the verse, stating that the husband shall bring the offering for his wife, that is to say, instead of her, for it is a meal-offering of jealousies bringing her iniquity to remembrance. Thus it is not fitting that she should bring it of her own property, but it is he who is to bring the meal-offering to G-d so that He should take note of his suspicions of her, and punish her on his [the husband’s] behalf. And the reason [why this meal-offering comes from] se’orim (barley) is so that ‘sa’arath’ (a storm of) the Eternal is gone forth in fury, yea, a whirling storm; it shall whirl upon the head of wickedness, like the cake of barley bread mentioned in the story of Gideon, which [one of the Midianites who saw it in a dream] interpreted as referring to a storm (sa’ar) and great confusion [which would break forth upon the camp of the Midianites]. Similarly, the earthen vessel [in which the holy water is put] is a hint that she shall be broken like a potter’s vessel, and likewise the dust [which must be taken from the floor of the Tabernacle and put into the water indicates] that she is dust, and into dust shall she return [if she is guilty of adultery]. The meaning of the word hu [ki minchath kna’oth ‘hu’ — using the masculine form of “it” in the phrase “it is a meal-offering of jealousies,” when it should have used hi, the feminine form, since the word minchah (meal-offering) is feminine] is because it refers back to the word kemach (flour) [which is mentioned above in the same verse, and the word kemach is masculine]. But this [unusual usage of the masculine here] has a mystical explanation, for further on when the meal-offering is in the hands of the woman Scripture ...
Ibn Ezra
"And he shall bring her" — against her will. "Upon her" — [meaning] with her, or on her account. "Barley flour" — our Sages said: she acted as a beast acts, let her bring beast's food. As for the meal-offering of freewill gift, it is of fine wheat flour, and serves as a remembrance for good. This meal-offering, by contrast, is one that recalls iniquity if iniquity is there — and therefore it is inferior in being of barley, without oil and without frankincense.
Sforno
והביא האיש את אשתו, we do not say that seeing that her husband had sat by silently while his wife had behaved unchastely, accusing her in his heart without saying a word, that this is proof of the husband’s bad attitude and we should therefore ignore his jealousy seeing he had allowed matters to get to the point where she had slept with another man; neither do we ignore his jealousy if she had not given him cause as something not worth paying attention to. We still subject her to the destruction (erasing) of the name of G’d (in the procedure the Torah will presently describe) in order to reveal the truth.
Or HaChaim
והביא האיש את אשתו אל הכהן, and this man has to bring his wife to the priest, etc. There are several questions we need to answer in the course of this whole paragraph. What does the Torah mean by calling the offering of the Sotah מנחת זכרון מזכרת עון, "a meal-offering of memorial reminder of iniquity?" What did the Torah accomplish with the word זכרון? Why would the offering of a meal-offering consisting of barley as opposed to wheat be designed to be especially memorable, seeing that the Omer, an offering consisting of barley, is offered every year on the second day of Passover? We must also try to understand why the Torah refers to these bitter waters as "holy waters?" What precisely do the waters accomplish and why are they called "holy?" We are told in Sotah 15 that the term "holy" in this instance referred to the fact that the waters were sanctified in the copper basin, כיור. While this is all fine and good, why did they have to be drawn from that basin at all? Moreover, what precisely is the nature of the ספר, the book, in which the priest records the curses which he blots out by dissolving them in the bitter waters (verse 23)? Why does the Sotah have to drink the remains of that book? We can understand that Moses made the Israelites drink the water containing the residue of the golden calf as the kind of pennance described in Jeremiah 2,19, but this situation is hardly parallel. Also, why was it important to have ready loose earth from the Temple floor which had to be added to this water, and such earth could not be freshly dug (verse 17)? Our sages in Sotah 15 also quote a halachah according to which the earth had to be poured into the vessel after it was filled with water and had to float on the water. If the vessel had first been filled with earth the whole procedure was פסול, defective and useless. Why should such a minor detail disqualify the whole procedure and the name of G'd having been written in vain? I find it noteworthy that the Torah did not use the term חוקה in connection with this subject; had the Torah done so it would have prevented us from raising all these questions. I find it strange that the Torah calls the water in question מי המרים, why are they called "bitter?" Sifri claims that these waters were not bitter originally but turned bitter at the time they were used to perform the function described in our paragraph Another explanation is that they were called "bitter" because of the effect they had on the life of a Sotah who was guilty of what her husband suspected and was brazen enough to drink these waters instead of confessing her guilt. On folio 20 of the tractate Sotah the father of the famous teacher Samuel claims that some bitter material had to be added to the water in question. The reason was that since the waters were already called "bitter waters" something really bitter had to be added. This seems quite astounding. Why did the Torah fail to mention this detail? We may be able to explain the whole subject...
Chizkuni
והביא את קרבנה, “he will offer her sacrifice;” it is impossible to assume that this offering will bring her atonement, as we have a principle that offerings by confirmed sinners are an abomination. (Proverbs 21,27) What happens here is that the person who had observed the adulterous action originally, without reacting to it and bringing it to the attention of the appropriate authorities, brings an offering, in order to atone for his sin of omission. By having failed to do so, he was now the cause of the Holy Name of the Lord becoming dissolved in the waters that the woman denying the accusation is made to drink. קמח שעורים, “of barley flour.” This is a type of flour in which also the husks are mixed in with the kernels. This reflects on the nature of the sin it is to atone for, as it resembles fodder for animals, and the guilty party acted like an animal in its indiscriminate conduct. לא יצוק עליו שמן ולא יתן עליו לבונה, “he shall pour no oil on it, nor is he to put frankincense thereon.” Those ingredients when added to other gift offerings are usually referred to as אזכרה, “remembrance,” as they are to remind the recipient of the offering, the Lord, of the person who has presented it. In this instance it would remind Him of the guilt of the donor of this offering, seeing it is known as a מנחת קנאות, “a meal offering of jealousy,” i.e. instead of pleasant fragrance it exudes only the spirit of jealousy. מזכרת עון, it reminds G-d of the guilt of either of the two parties concerned, either the woman who had sinned or her husband who had suspected her unfairly. כי מנחת קנאות הוא, “for it is a meal offering originating from jealousy.” The word הוא, seeing that it is in the masculine mode, refers to the earlier noun קמח, which is a masculine noun. In verse 18, where the expression מנחת קנאות הוא occurs again, it refers to the offering which is from the noun מנחה, a feminine noun.
Kli Yakar
He shall not pour oil on it. Even though “minchah” [offering] is feminine, nonetheless it uses the masculine form “alav” [on it/him] because it refers to the flour which is masculine. And He commanded to take specifically flour because immediately after grinding it becomes flour, as it is written Grind flour (Isaiah 47:2). And we also find the language of grinding in this matter, as it is written And he was grinding in the prison house (Judges 16:21), and it is written Let my wife grind for another (Job 31:10). Therefore it says it is a meal-offering of jealousies — that is, the flour that comes after grinding, and this offering is a reminder of sin, meaning it reminds of the sin of the woman’s “grinding” [euphemism for infidelity]. And regarding what Ramban questioned about why it says here it/he is [masculine] a meal-offering of jealousies and afterward says it/she is [feminine] a meal-offering of jealousies, it seems there is no difficulty because here it speaks of the time when the offering is in the hand of the husband, as it says and he shall bring his offering, it writes “hu” [masculine] because in his hand is the rod of His anger (Isaiah 10:5). But afterward when it says “and place in her hands the meal-offering of remembrance,” it writes it/she is a meal-offering of jealousies because in her hand is the rod of her anger. And the simple explanation is that in this verse the flour is not mentioned, therefore it says “hi” [feminine] referring to the meal-offering.
Tur HaArokh
לא יצוק עליו שמן, “he shall not pour oil over it.” This is to prevent this offering from becoming something “enhanced” as luxury. Nachmanides adds that this is in line with the opinion of the commentators who consider this offering in the nature of a penalty, [although the woman’s status has not yet been determined. Ed.] Proof, according to these commentators, is the fact that the kind of cereal, i.e. barley, basically animal fodder, which is stipulated here is to remind us of the low rank in terms of their spiritual level, of the person offering this meal offering. [Note that although the husband tenders this offering, the Torah describes it as “her offering.” Ed.] By not having oil added to make it tasty, and being prepared from inferior type of cereal, the Torah makes the point that it is not too welcome, according to these commentators. Nachmanides, adds however, that in his own opinion, the expression מנחת קנאות, “a meal-offering of jealousies” refers to the beginning of the verse to remind us that the woman at this stage is presumed guilty, and it would not be appropriate for a guilty person such as she to possess the effrontery to approach G’d with a meal offering from her own funds. The husband offers the meal offering as kind of a mute appeal to Hashem to show that he had not falsely accused his wife, and was entitled to have been jealous of her as a result of her behaviour. The reason why this meal-offering consists basically of barley, i.e שעורים is a play on words, the conduct of that woman regardless of whether she actually committed infidelity, being one that is “hair-raising,” in the sense of שערת השם, provoking G’d’s anger. Seeing that the letter ש with the dot on the left side sounds like the letter ס, her conduct sets of a “storm,” סער of outrage in heaven. The author quotes Jeremiah 23,19 וסער מתחולל על ראש רשעים יחול, “a whirling storm shall whirl down upon the heads of the wicked,” to make his point. He also quotes Judges 7,13 where the צליל שעורים, the loaf of barley bread, in the dream of the Midianite soldier foreshadowed the defeat of his people at the hands of the Israelites. [Additional quotes are provided on the subject. Ed.]
Daat Zkenim
מזכרת עון, “as a reminder of an iniquity committed.” Other types of meal offerings are described as לכפר עון, “to atone for an iniquity committed.” We know of a מנחת חוטא “meal offering of a sinner;” מנחת נדבה “a voluntary meal offering;” these meal offerings are accompanied by oil and לבונה, frankincense, in order for that offering resulting in a pleasant fragrance, ריח ניחוח, in order to remind the Lord of the merits of the donor. Seeing that the mandatory offering discussed here is not intended to remind G–d of the donor’s merits but her husband brings his wife to the priest as an accuser, the offering only serves as a reminder of his sin. [It is not clear yet at this point if the wife was guilty of serious misconduct. Ed.] (Compare Talmud, tractate Sotah, folio 15)
Cross-references: Leviticus 7:10; Leviticus 23:17; Song of Songs 4:6
And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before Hashem.
verse value 1135 — יְהֹוָֽה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 6 words, 27 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָֽה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "her" (אֹתָ֖הּ, 3 letters) and the longest is "shall·bring·forward" (וְהִקְרִ֥יב, 6 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·have·her·stand" (וְהֶֽעֱמִדָ֖הּ). 6 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "before" (root פנים, 119x in Numbers); "the·priest" (root כהן, 71x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·priest', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 3 words. Full calculation: וְהִקְרִ֥יב [shall·bring·forward] (323) + אֹתָ֖הּ [her] (406) + הַכֹּהֵ֑ן [the·priest] (80) + וְהֶֽעֱמִדָ֖הּ [and·have·her·stand] (130) + לִפְנֵ֥י [before] (170) + יְהֹוָֽה [Hashem] (26) = 1135.
Onkelos
The priest shall bring her near and stand her before Hashem.
Ibn Ezra
"And he shall bring her near" — meaning the meal-offering. "And shall set her before Hashem" — before the altar.
Chizkuni
והעמידה, “he shall position her;” this means that she will be placed in a position from which she cannot escape. Compare Joshua 10,13: ויעמד השמש בחצי השמים, “the sun stood still when it was at its zenith.” והעמידה לפני ה, “he sets her before the Lord.” He said to her: ‘wait here for me until I enter the Temple and return in order to take some earth from there.’ She was not allowed to enter the Temple (in order to save the priest time and effort. Ed.]
And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water.
verse value 4037
Insights
Verse structure: 14 words, 64 letters. The shortest word is "water" (מַ֥יִם, 3 letters) and the longest is "in·an·earthen·vessel" (בִּכְלִי־חָ֑רֶשׂ, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 80: the·priest, the·priest. 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "in·an·earthen·vessel" (בִּכְלִי־חָ֑רֶשׂ), "and·some·of·the·earth" (וּמִן־הֶֽעָפָ֗ר), "on·the·floor·of" (בְּקַרְקַ֣ע). The root לקח appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "that" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers); "is" (root היה, 180x in Numbers); "and·put·it" (root נתן, 119x in Numbers). First appearance of the root מים ("water") in Numbers. First appearance of the root עפר ("and·some·of·the·earth") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'in·an·earthen·vessel', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 9 words. Full calculation: וְלָקַ֧ח [shall·take] (144) + הַכֹּהֵ֛ן [the·priest] (80) + מַ֥יִם [water] (90) + קְדֹשִׁ֖ים [holy] (454) + בִּכְלִי־חָ֑רֶשׂ [in·an·earthen·vessel] (570) + וּמִן־הֶֽעָפָ֗ר [and·some·of·the·earth] (451) + אֲשֶׁ֤ר [that] (501) + יִהְיֶה֙ [is] (30) + בְּקַרְקַ֣ע [on·the·floor·of] (472) + הַמִּשְׁכָּ֔ן [the·Tabernacle] (415) + יִקַּ֥ח [shall·take] (118) + הַכֹּהֵ֖ן [the·priest] (80) + וְנָתַ֥ן [and·put·it] (506) + אֶל־הַמָּֽיִם [into·the·water] (126) = 4037.
Onkelos
The priest shall take water from the laver in an earthen vessel, and from the dust that is at the base of the Tabernacle the priest shall take and put it into the water.
Rashi
מים קדשים HOLY WATER — i.e., water that has become holy through being in the laver. — The water was taken from the laver because that was made of the copper mirrors of the women who had gathered (Exodus 38:8) [at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting] and this woman deviated from their chaste ways. Because they had cherished their husbands’ love in Egypt (cf. Rashi on Exodus 38:8), while this woman depravedly gave herself over to another, she was to be examined through it (Bamidbar Rabbah 9 :14). בכלי חרש IN AN EARTHEN VESSEL — She gave the adulterer excellent wine to drink in valuable goblets, therefore she shall drink the bitter water in a common earthenware cup. (Sotah 9a.)
Ibn Ezra
"Holy water" — from the laver, since those [waters] have already been sanctified. "From the ground" — the well-known [substance], what is beneath the ground.
Chizkuni
ומן העפר אשר יהיה בקרקע המשכן, “and from the soil on the floor of the Tabernacle, etc.” we have learned in a Mishnah in tractate Sotah folio 15, that the priest when entering the Sanctuary would turn to his right, and that close by there was a spot one cubit by one cubit, to which a slab of marble would be permanently attached by means of rings, from which the priest by lifting that slab would take the earth to be mixed with the water that this woman would be made to drink from.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ולקח הכהן מים קדושים בכלי חרש ומן העפר אשר יהיה בקרקע המשכן, “the Priest is to take sacred water in an earthenware vessel, and he shall take from the earth that is at the floor of the Tabernacle, etc.” Why does he have to take water? Because water symbolises the Heaven (the “upper waters”) and from the floor of the Tabernacle, as this symbolises dust, Earth. We have been taught in Sotah 17 that Rava, commenting on the requirement of dust in connection with the procedure involving the Sotah, the woman suspected of marital infidelity, claims that in the event the woman is found innocent (as she claims) she will bear a son similar to Avraham who said of himself: “I am dust and ashes” (Genesis 18,27). If the woman in question was guilty, however, her fate, i.e. death, will be that she returns to “dust.” Thus far the Talmud. בכלי חרש, “in an earthenware vessel.” Rabbi Meir said in Sotah 8 that a person is “measured” (rewarded or receives retribution) by G’d applying similar yardsticks to him as the ones he had employed himself. He bases this on Isaiah 27,8: בסאסאה בשלחה תריבנה, “He will strive with her using her own סאה, “ (grain) measure.” We also have a statement by Rabbi Chiyah that although since the Temple was destroyed the judicial power of the Sanhedrin to administer death penalties was canceled, this does not mean that someone who is guilty of such a penalty will go free. G’d will arrange that a person guilty of the penalty of being stoned to death, for instance, will instead fall off a roof, or something similar. If someone would have been guilty of execution by burning he will instead become the victim of a fire, etc., etc. The same applies to the legislation concerning a Sotah, something that cannot be enacted in the absence of the Temple. At the time the Temple was standing the peripheral procedures of this legislation also reflected the principle of “measure for measure.” The guilty woman presumably enticed her lover by serving him fancy wine in a costly goblet, etc. This is why the Torah demands that the water be “served” her in an earthenware jug, and that the water itself contain dust (compare Sotah 9). She presumably waited for her lover at some secluded place; the Torah displays her and her shame at the entrance to the Temple, for all to see her embarrassment. She no doubt dressed up in her finery and wore a fancy coiffure when having an assignation with her lover; the Torah demands that she be disheveled and dressed in coarse-looking garments. If you take a close look at the words בכלי חרש you will find in them a hint that the woman if found guilty will not qualify for afterlife at the time of the resurrection but will remain like a חרש הנשבר, a broken shard of an earthenware vessel. (According to halachah such vessels cannot be repaired so that they will be purified. Source: Pessikta Zutrata). This too is part of the punishment being modeled after her sin. She loses her life both in this world and in the world to come as retribution for the fact that until found out she had served two masters, i.e. her husband and her lover. This is the reason the Torah insists on an earthenware jug rather than a glass jug, the latter being capable of purification after it was broken by being heated and blown up again. If a glass vessel which was created by man and destroyed by man is subject to “resurrection,” how much more so is man who was created by G’d and who died at the hands of G’d subject to resurrection! The reason that the woman is to respond with the word אמן twice (verse 22), is to confirm that she is innocent both in respect of her husband and in respect of the man with whom she is supposed to have sinned. If she was guilty, the words are her confirmation that neither man would be part of her assigned בן זוג, “soul-mate,” either in this world or in the world to come (compare Sotah 18).
Kli Yakar
“And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel.” At first glance, it seems to me that the matter of this examination is as follows: wherever you find a fence around sexual immorality, there you find holiness. Now, these waters that were sanctified in the basin, and in which the Name has been dissolved, certainly possess an extra measure of holiness. And since any liquid exits through the womb in urine, therefore, if she has been defiled and there was no fence of modesty there, it is not right that these holy waters should touch the place of nakedness that has been defiled. Therefore, her belly swells and her thigh falls away, for this is the natural course in all urinary diseases: when liquid is trapped inside a person and has no way to exit, it will cause one of two things, or both together. Namely, the belly swells because the excess remains in the belly with no way to exit, causing the belly to distend; or the liquid makes another path for itself by being absorbed into the flesh of the thigh, and since this is not its proper place, the flesh of the thigh necessarily falls away, and with the pieces of falling flesh, the liquid will also fall out that way. But if she is pure and that place has not been defiled, then the sexual organs are like the rest of the human organs, and they have no aspect of impurity at all. For before Adam sinned, it is written, And the man and his wife were naked and were not ashamed (Genesis 3:25). Because as long as they had no inclination toward sin, their sexual organs were to them like other organs, which cause no shame when exposed. Similarly here, when there is a fence of modesty, the liquid comes out normally and there is no concern. And because she sinned with the liquid of wine, she is therefore tested with the liquid of water. And what they take from the floor of the Tabernacle and put into it [the water], is explained according to what I wrote above in Parshat Acharei Mot (18:25) on the verse And the land became defiled, and I visited its iniquity upon it. That in every place where there is sexual immorality, the earth is visited with the first sin that it committed with the fruit-bearing tree rather than the tree of fruit by which it gave coarse and thick matter to all creatures. And because of this, it also gave to man thick and murky matter that causes him to be particularly inclined toward harlotry, as Ramban explained in Parshat Genesis (2:9) that eating from the tree caused him to desire sexual relations. And it is known that Adam was created from the place of his atonement, from the place about which it is said, An altar of earth you shall make for Me (Exodus 20:21), meaning from the dust of the Tabernacle, and this matter was placed in all his descendants whose origin is from the first matter. And if so, the dust which is on the floor of the Tabernacle is the craftsman who made that vessel, namely, the human, and woe to the dough when the baker testifies against it. For that dust is able to testify about the vessel [the person] whether it gave it coarse and thick matter that causes sexual promiscuity or not, and the craftsman will come and testify about the vessel that he made, what its nature is. And our Sages of blessed memory disagreed on whether these waters contained something bitter, because according to our Sages (Sotah 20) something bitter was placed in them, but Ramban’s opinion [differs] since it is not written and the bitter waters shall enter her to make her bitter. Rather, it is written the opposite: and the waters that cause bitterness shall become bitter. This implies that they did not contain anything bitter, but rather they became bitter in her mouth. Similarly, we find regarding the waters of Marah where it is said And they could not drink the waters of Marah for they were bitter (Exodus 15:23). It does not say “for they were bitter [in the past tense],” but rather that they were not [originally] bitter, but they became bitter in their mouths. Therefore it says for they are bitter meaning the Israelites [made them bitter]. And since the place was called Marah, suggesting that the waters there were always bitter, it therefore says therefore he called its name Marah. [It was named] after the incident that occurred there, where these waters became bitter in their mouths as a punishment. And what seems closest to me to say about this. That the waters of Marah, and the waters of the sotah [suspected adulteress], and the matter of the [Golden] Calf, they are all one and the same, since our Sages have already said (Mekhilta Yitro, Ch. 8:13) that the Ten Commandments were five opposite five, and the commandment You shall have no other gods corresponds to You shall not commit adultery. For one who worships idols is as if he commits adultery against God, as it is said The adulterous wife, etc. (Ezekiel 16:32). And at Marah they were immersed in idolatry, as is found in the Mekhilta (Beshalach [Vayisa] 1:22) and brought in the Yalkut on Parshat Beshalach (15:254) on the verse And Moses led Israel. For they said there: “Let us make an idol for ourselves and it will lead us,” and lest you think they said this but did not do it, Scripture teaches And they refused to listen, etc. (Nehemiah 9:17), see there. And according to this Midrash, they were like an adulterous woman for whom sweet waters become bitter in her mouth. So too here, the waters became bitter in their mouths, and the Lord showed him a tree — He taught them the way of Torah, which is a tree of life that distances one from idolatry, and through this the waters were sweetened. This is the matter of the [Golden] Calf, about which it is said And he ground it until it was fine… and made the children of Israel drink it (Exodus 32:20). And our Sages said (Avodah Zarah 44a) that he intended to test them like suspected adulteresses, etc., both because idol worshippers are judged like adulteresses and because they also transgressed sexual immorality at that time, as they learned (Tanchuma Ki Tisa 20) from the verse And they rose to make merry (Exodus 32:6). And perhaps for this reason it says and he ground it — to test the sin of grinding, that is, sexual immorality, as explained above. And the Calf itself was a bitter matter, and impurity clung to it — the impurity of idolatry and the impurity of sexual immorality. Therefore, it specifically harmed all those who worshipped it, because “like found like,” but to those who did not worship it, it did not cause harm, because nothing of the banned object clung to them, and the ground gold was for them just like ordinary gold. And according to our Sages (Sotah 20a), something bitter was placed in the waters of the sotah, because it is said For the lips of a strange woman drip honey, etc., but her end is bitter as wormwood (Proverbs 5:3-4). And putting the water in an earthenware vessel was because an earthenware vessel never loses [its absorbed impurity] forever. Similarly, one who has relations with a forbidden woman and fathers a mamzer [illegitimate child] with her, it is called a crooked thing that cannot be made straight (Chagigah 9a). And regarding what is written “The priest shall stand the woman before the Lord.” Even though it was already said that she was stood before the Lord, the commentators said regarding this that the first standing refers to the meal offering, and this is correct. And as for why sometimes the stomach is mentioned before the thigh and sometimes the thigh is mentioned first, it is because there was a miracle within a miracle here, for the cursed waters diminish the flesh, yet when her stomach swells it appears as if the flesh has increased. Therefore, in the two verses where the term cursed is mentioned, the swelling of the stomach is mentioned next to it. But in the first verse, where “cursed” is not mentioned, the thigh is mentioned first because it [the thigh] began with the sin.
Rashbam
מים קדושים, the waters from the basin in front of the sanctuary.
And the priest shall set the woman before Hashem, and uncover the head of the woman, and put the meal-offering of memorial in her hands, which is the meal-offering of jealousy; and the priest shall have in his hand the water of bitterness that causes the curse.
verse value 6635 — יְהֹוָה֒ = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 21 words, 96 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָה֒) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "the·water·of" (מֵ֥י, 2 letters) and the longest is "that·curse" (הַמְאָֽרְרִֽים, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 80: the·priest, the·priest. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·shall·uncover" (וּפָרַע֙), "upon·her·hands" (עַל־כַּפֶּ֗יהָ), "the·remembrance" (הַזִּכָּר֔וֹן). The root כהן appears 2 times in this verse. 18 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "shall·be" (root היה, 180x in Numbers); "before" (root פנים, 119x in Numbers). First appearance of the root היא ("it·is") in Numbers. First appearance of the root מי ("the·water·of") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'it·is', dividing the verse into phrases of 15 and 6 words.
Onkelos
The priest shall stand the woman before Hashem and uncover the woman's head, and he shall place upon her hands the meal-offering of remembrance — it is the meal-offering of jealousy — and in the hand of the priest shall be the bitter cursing waters.
Rashi
והעמיד הכהן וגו׳ AND THE PRIEST SHALL PRESENT [THE WOMAN BEFORE THE LORD] — But has it not already been stated, (v. 16) “and he shall present her before the Lord”? But they used to move her about from place to place (and thus, as it were, present her many times) in order to wear her out so that her thoughts should become confused and she be unable to invent explanations of her conduct and so she would confess her guilt (Sotah 8a). ופרע AND HE SHALL PUT IN DISORDER [THE WOMAN’S HAIR] — i.e. he pulls away her hair-plaits in order to make her look despicable. — We may learn from this that as regards married Jewish women an uncovered head is a disgrace to them (Sifrei Bamidbar 11). לפני ה׳ [AND THE PRIEST SHALL PRESENT THE WOMAN] BEFORE THE LORD — i.e. in the gateway of Nicanor (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 14:11 and Note thereon) which was the eastern gate of the court, the passage for all who entered the court [and where she was therefore most exposed to public view] (Sotah 7a). ונתן על כפיה AND HE SHALL PUT [THE MEAL-OFFERING OF MEMORIAL] IN HER HANDS — to wear her out even more (cf. Rashi on the beginning of the verse); — perhaps her thoughts would become confused now, so that she would confess her guilt and it would become unnecessary to blot out from the parchment the Divine Proper Name by the water (cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 11; Sotah 14a). המרים THE BITTER [WATERS] — They were called bitter waters because of their final effect, viz., that they proved bitter for her (Sifrei Bamidbar 11; Sotah 20a). המאררים means, the waters that make her disappear (pine away) from the world. It has the same meaning as, (Ezekiel. 28:24): “a removing (ממאיר) brier” (one that removed some of the flesh). It would not be correct to explain מים המאררים as מים ארורים, “cursed waters” for actually they are holy (cf. v. 17). Besides, even if the meaning has anything to do with “cursing”, Scripture does not write ארורים, “waters that are cursed”, but מאררים — “that bring a curse to others”; and Onkelos, too, does not render it by ליטיא — “cursed waters” but by מלטטיא — “waters that show a curse on the body of this woman”.
Ramban
AND THE PRIEST SHALL HAVE IN HIS HAND ‘MEI HAMARIM’ (THE WATER OF BITTERNESS) THAT CAUSETH THE CURSE. The commentators have written that Scripture describes it [i.e., the water of bitterness] in terms of its final effect, for there will be a bitterness in it, and G-d will deal very bitterly with her, and it will effect a curse upon her. So also have our Rabbis said in the Sifre: “the water is called water of bitterness because of its final effect, for it effects a curse on the body and brings to light the sin.” But in the Gemara [of Tractate Sotah] the Sages have said that the priest put a bitter substance in the water, in order to arouse her. If so, the verse stating, and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her and become bitter should rather have said: “and the bitter water shall enter into her to cause the curse,” [since the bitter substance was already present in the water before she drank it]. And in the Sifre it is further stated: “And he shall blot them out into the water of bitterness. The verse teaches you that it is the writing [on the scroll of the sotah which was blotted out into the water] which makes the water bitter.”The correct interpretation appears to me to be in accordance with its plain meaning, for when the woman drinks the water, it will taste to her just like any other water, and only afterwards when it enters into her, will it arouse her if she had become defiled [i.e., committed adultery], and then she will immediately feel the bitterness in her mouth and inside her. Therefore Scripture states, And when he hath made her drink the water, then it shall come to pass, if she be defiled, and have acted unfaithfully against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her and become bitter, for it is after drinking, when the water enters her belly, that it immediately becomes bitter in her mouth and inside her, as happens with all substances which make one nauseous and cause vomiting, that they seem very bitter to those that drink them. After that her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away. The water is called [in the verse before us] m’orerim [from the root arur — “cursed”] because of the curses [written on the scroll] which have been erased into the water, and which cause her to suffer their effects. Now the commentators have said that the word mei [‘mei’ hamarim] is like mayim hamarim [“the bitter water”], the word mei [literally: “the water of”] being stated here in a construct form in place of the absolute form, just as we find [an opposite verse]: mayim birkayim [literally: “the water the ankles,” where the word mayim occurs in the absolute form, but is really to be understood in the construct: mei birkayim — “the water ‘of’ the ankles,” i.e., water which reached as high as the ankles]. But Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote that “the word mei is [indeed] construct [meaning: the water ‘of’], but the word hamarim is an adjectival noun [meaning: ‘the bitter substances’ — thus mei ...
Ibn Ezra
"And he shall loosen the woman's head." He uncovers it; in my view, he lets loose the hair of her head that had been covered. "The bitter waters" [mei ha-marim] — in my view, the word mei is in the construct state, and the word ha-marim is an adjective describing the noun; if so, its meaning is well established. It is also possible that they are called by that name on account of their ultimate effect, as in "and strip the garments from the naked" [Job 22:6] — and the proof is the verse "And the cursing water shall enter her and become bitter [la-marim]," indicating that the curses called ha-me'arerim make the water bitter after it was sweet. The word ha-me'arerim is of the heavy binyan [the Pi'el], as in "whom Hashem has cursed."
Rabbeinu Bahya
מנחת קנאות ה'יא ו'ביד ה'כהן י'היו, “it is a meal-offering of jealousies, and in the hand of the Priest they shall be.” I have already explained on a number of occasions (Genesis 11,9 et al) that whenever the letters of the name of G’d appear in the reverse order this is an allusion to the attribute of Justice. It means that the subject matter under discussion by the Torah at that point is one in which the attribute of Justice is poised to strike against the guilty party concerned. I have also mentioned that there were a total of 54 words written on the parchment which is placed in the jug with the מים המאררים, “the potentially curse-laden waters,” mentioned in verse 22. (Maimonides Hilchot Sotah 3,7). The number 54 represents the middle two letters of the name א-ד-נ-י, the name of G’d with those letters in reverse order. In other words, the number 54 is the allusion to the attribute of Justice poised to take action against the woman drinking these waters. מי המרים המאררים, “the bitter waters carrying a curse.” They are already called “bitter;” this will be the effect if the party drinking them was guilty (compare Rashi). This is not the only time in the Bible that an adjective is applied to something which is only potentially so. Another example is Job 22,6 ובגדי ערומים תפשיט, “and strip the clothes off the naked.” Clearly, one cannot strip clothes off people who are already naked. The point is that the people are described as “naked” seeing that after they have been stripped of their clothing they will remain naked. Another example of the same kind of phraseology is found in Isaiah 47,2: קחי רחים וטחני קמח, “take the mill and grind meal!” Clearly, only the product of grinding grain is meal; the prophet calls the product “meal” even before it has been ground seeing that this is the purpose of the mill. The reason the Torah uses the term מאררים to describe this water is due to the words of curses which have been placed into this water on the parchment containing our passage. These words effectively put a curse on the water. The brilliant Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra mentioned a mystical aspect of the matter when he wrote that the word מי (as opposed to מים) is a genitive, a construct form; it has been placed by the Torah next to the word המרים, “the bitter ones.” This word is an adjective describing the noun, as if the Torah had written “the water of the bitter matters.” The mystical dimension of all this is well known. Thus far Ibn Ezra. I would add (author speaking) that he is quite correct. that the word המרים is not a noun but an adjective. Let me now explain the mystical element referred to by Ibn Ezra. Our verse refers to the celestial forces (which activate the effect of this water) as מרים. We know already from Job 3,5 that he called the day on which he had been born מרירי יום ואוררי יום, “a bitter day and a cursed day.” [Actually what Job said was that “if the day had been cursed he would not have been born; as it is was his misfortune that the day had not been cursed. Ed.] According to our author the letter כ in the words יבעתוהו כמרירי יום, (Job 3,5) is not to be understood as part of the root but as a prefix just as in Hoseah 5,10 כ-מסיגי גבול, “just as people who illegally move boundaries.” Job also said in verse 8 of that chapter יקבהו אוררי יום העתידים ערר לויתן, “may those who cast spells on the day damn it, those prepared to disable Leviathan.” Our sages (Baba Batra 75) have also predicted that the archangel Gavriel will instigate a hunt for Leviathan and were it not for G’d’s personal assistance to the archangel he would not be able to subdue this monster. They base this on Job 40,19: “He is the first of G’d’s works; only His Maker can draw the sword against him.” I would like you to appreciate the true meaning of the words מי המים המאררים. The meaning is that the (bitter) contents of that water are what put the curse upon it. When the Priest made the woman take the oath in the name of Hashem while he is holding the water in his hand, he had in mind two attributes of G’d, the attribute of Day and the attribute of Night; (representing the attributes of Mercy and the attribute of Justice respectively). He indicated that both attributes are in agreement that if the woman were guilty she was to suffer the full punishment. Alternatively, if the accusation would be proved unfounded she would become pregnant with child and be cleared of all suspicion for all to see. The intelligent reader will understand that these two attributes are contained in the word מרים. (the מר refers to the attribute “Day” from מר דרור, whereas the ים part of the word refers to the attribute “Night”, based on the verse in Kohelet כל הנחלים הולכים אל הים, that all the rivers stream towards the ים, (based on תורת חיים). These two attributes between them radiate major influence on what goes on in our terrestrial universe, hence Job referred to the “day” as he did. All of these considerations prompted Ibn Ezra to describe the word מרים as an adjective instead of as a noun. In brief: “the waters of the attributes which curse it.” If, in apparent contradiction to this view, the Torah writes in verse 24 ובאו בה המים המאררים למרים, these words mean that “the waters which contain the curses in them will enter her seeing that they have been afflicted by these attributes.” The word מרים refers to the power or attribute which orchestrated the effect of these waters.
Tur HaArokh
וביד הכהן יהיו מי המרים המאררים, “and the bitter waters shall be in the hand of the priest.” Nachmanides writes that numerous commentators describe these waters as bitter, מים מרים, as the Torah supposedly names these water so in light of the ultimate tragic results that are likely to occur after they have been drunk by the Sotah. The Talmud in Sotah 20 however, says that the priest adds something to this water that ensures that it will taste bitter. The purpose is to awaken the woman to her endangering herself by toying with her future by denying her guilt and ignoring the fact that G’d Himself will bring it to light. This would explain the line in verse 22 that describes graphically that the waters in question will have the power of bringing a curse upon those who drink it while guilty. As to the plain meaning of the text, Nachmanides continues, he believes that as soon as the woman in question drinks these waters they will prove to taste sweet to her just as ordinary drinking water. If she was guilty however, once these waters have entered her entrails, they will display the devastating effect described in our paragraph. She may even disgorge these waters, after their having turned bitter. The expression מאררים refers to the effect that these waters have upon the guilty woman drinking them, i.e. they act as a curse.
And the priest shall cause her to swear, and shall say to the woman: "If no man have lain with you, and if you have not gone aside to uncleanness, being under your husband, be you free from this water of bitterness that causes the curse;
verse value 5672
Insights
Verse structure: 19 words, 79 letters. The shortest word is "her" (אֹתָ֜הּ, 3 letters) and the longest is "that·curse" (הַֽמְאָרְרִ֖ים, 7 letters). 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "to·the·woman" (אֶל־הָֽאִשָּׁה֙), "in·defilement" (טֻמְאָ֖ה), "be·free" (הִנָּקִ֕י). The root לא appears 2 times in this verse. 17 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·shall·say" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "anyone" (root איש, 130x in Numbers); "if·no·one" (root לא, 129x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'your·husband', dividing the verse into phrases of 14 and 5 words.
Onkelos
The priest shall adjure her and say to the woman: 'If no man has lain with you, and if you have not gone astray to defile yourself with one other than your husband, be innocent of these bitter cursing waters.'
Rashi
והשביע אתה וגו׳ AND [THE PRIEST] SHALL ADJURE HER etc. — and wherein does this adjuration consist? In that he says to the woman, “if no man hath lain with thee … הנקי, be thou free”, which implies: “if, however, a man hath lain with thee, חנקי, thou deservest to be suffocated”, because from a negative statement you may deduce its converse, the positive statement. It is true that in an adjuration it would be more appropriate to make this threat of punishment if guilty, and to allow the converse to be derived from it, but here it mentions first what will happen if she has not sinned, since it intends to suggest that it is a duty in capital cases to begin the proceedings with the statement of something that bears upon the innocence of the accused (Sotah 17a; Shevuot 36a; Sanhedrin 33a).
Ramban
IF NO ‘ISH’ (MAN) HAVE LAIN WITH THEE, AND IF THOU HAST NOT GONE ASIDE TO UNCLEANNESS. These two conditions constitute [in reality] one. Thus the verse is stating: “If no man have lain with thee, and thus thou has not gone aside to uncleanness, be thou free from the water of bitterness; ” [for you cannot say that these are two separate conditions], since her husband lay with her and he is “a man” [thus the priest could not say to her, if no man have lain with thee; therefore both conditions must be one, as explained]. It is possible that the word ish (man) lacks the definite article [making it ha’ish — “the man”], and Scripture is stating: “If ‘the man’ has not lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness at all,” and he makes her swear specifically concerning the particular man about whom he [her husband] had warned her, and in general terms about others. And so have the Rabbis said: “And the woman shall say: ‘Amen, Amen. ’ [The double utterance of the word ‘Amen’ signifies:] ‘Amen [that I have not committed adultery] with this man, and Amen [that I have not committed adultery] with any other man.’”
Ibn Ezra
The grammatical form of shatit ["you went astray"] denotes an unclean act, following the pattern of lo tivneh othen gazit ["you shall not build them of hewn stone"]. "Acquitted" [ha-naqi] — you shall be acquitted, like "and die on the mountain" [Deut. 32:50]. It is also possible that the first adjuration [v. 19] is by the Name [of God] and the second [v. 21] is by the oath, as is explicitly stated.
Sforno
והשביע, the priest will tell her to accept the oath on condition that it (the procedure) will be the judge of her guilt or innocence. אם לא שכב, now, ואם לא שטית טומאה, and if you have not been guilty of defiling yourselves on other occasions of which your husband was totally unaware, and did not suspect you; הנקי, the reason why the Torah has to state something so obvious is that the Torah had already stated in Exodus 20,6 that no one causing the name of G’d to be mentioned needlessly will be completely innocent of that sin, and we might have thought that this woman, seeing she had sown doubt in the hearts of those who have to judge her had already become guilty of causing a needless oath, i.e. a needless mention of the holy name of G’d; the priest, i.e. the Torah, assures her that she has nothing to fear on that account.
Chizkuni
ממי המרים, “from this water of bitterness;” according to our sages, the priest had added herbs that would make the water taste bitter.
Tur HaArokh
אם לא שכב איש אותך ואם לא שטית טומאה תחת אישך, “if a man has not lain with you, and you have not strayed in defilement with someone other than your husband, etc.” Nachmanides writes that we are dealing here with what at first glance appear to be two conditions, whereas in reality they are one and the same condition. How so? 1) You did not have sexual relations with someone other than your husband. 2) In a manner that would make you defiled vis a vis your husband. The reason we have to explain the verse in this manner is that if it were not so, the word איש in the first part of the verse would include her husband, so that she could not possibly swear that she had never had sexual relations with her husband. The words:לא שטית טומאה תחת אישך, therefore must mean that by drinking these waters she swears that while married to her husband, i.e. תחת אישך, she had never done anything as a result of which she would have become defiled for her husband. It is possible that the fact that the word איש which lacks the prefix ה describing which man it refers to, is intended to mean that the woman is asked to swear that she had not lain with the man of whom she has been suspected and accused of having lain with. In that event, we would deal with two separate conditions, the first one speaking of a specific sexual misdemeanour with a specific person, whereas the second one broadens the area of her oath to include any other hitherto unsuspected sexual involvement that would make her defiled for her husband. Ibn Ezra explains the first condition as involving rape, sexual relations by her with another man against her will, whereas the second condition would speak of a sexual relationship with another man in which she had been a willing participant.
but if you have gone aside, being under your husband, and if you be defiled, and some man have lain with you besides your husband—
verse value 5246 — וְכִ֣י = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 50 letters. Notable word values: "and·have" (וְכִ֣י) = 36, double chai. Verse gematria: 5246 is divisible by 86, the value of Elohim. The shortest word is "with·you" (בָּךְ֙, 2 letters) and the longest is "carnal·relations" (אֶת־שְׁכׇבְתּ֔וֹ, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 331: your·husband, your·husband. 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "but·if·you" (וְאַ֗תְּ כִּ֥י), "defiled·yourself" (נִטְמֵ֑את), "with·you" (בָּךְ֙). The root איש appears 3 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "your·husband" (root איש, 130x in Numbers); "and·has·had" (root נתן, 119x in Numbers); "and·have" (root כי, 79x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'defiled·yourself', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 6 words. Full calculation: וְאַ֗תְּ כִּ֥י [but·if·you] (437) + שָׂטִ֛ית [have·gone·astray] (719) + תַּ֥חַת [while·committed·to] (808) + אִישֵׁ֖ךְ [your·husband] (331) + וְכִ֣י [and·have] (36) + נִטְמֵ֑את [defiled·yourself] (500) + וַיִּתֵּ֨ן [and·has·had] (466) + אִ֥ישׁ [anyone] (311) + בָּךְ֙ [with·you] (22) + אֶת־שְׁכׇבְתּ֔וֹ [carnal·relations] (1129) + מִֽבַּלְעֲדֵ֖י [other·than] (156) + אִישֵֽׁךְ [your·husband] (331) = 5246.
Onkelos
'But if you have gone astray from your husband, and if you have defiled yourself, and a man other than your husband has lain with you —'
Rashi
ואת כי שטית BUT IF THOU HAST BUT IF THOU HAST GONE ASIDE ASIDE — The word כי must here be employed in the meaning of “if” (cf. Rashi on Genesis 18:15).
Ramban
BUT IF THOU HAST GONE ASIDE. This is connected with [the expression in the following verse], the Eternal make thee, the verses stating: “But if thou hast gone aside to uncleanness, being under thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee besides thy husband — the Eternal make thee a curse, and an oath among thy people. ” But due to the length of the conditions [mentioned in Verses 19-20] Scripture restates [in the following Verse 21] and the priest shall cause the woman to swear [although that has already been said at the beginning of Verse 19; and accordingly the phrase before us in Verse 20, but if thou hast gone aside etc. is connected with the expression the Eternal make thee in Verse 21], in order to explain that [the Eternal make thee a curse etc.] constitutes the oath of cursing. And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that the first expression of swearing [and the priest shall cause her to swear, in Verse 19] means [that she must swear] by G-d’s Name, and the second one [in Verse 21] implies by means of the curse, as is clearly explained there [in Verse 21: and the priest shall cause the woman to swear with the oath of cursing]. But it is not correct, for the priest would not have caused her to swear by the Name of G-d using an expression of “if” [as in Verse 19: and the priest shall cause her to swear, and shall say unto the woman: ‘If’ no man have lain with thee etc.].Now there is nothing amongst all the ordinances of the Torah which depends upon a miracle, except for this matter, which is a permanent wonder and miracle that will happen in Israel, when the majority of the people live in accordance with the Will of G-d; for He was pleased for His righteousness’ sake to teach the women that they do not do after the lewdness of the other nations, and to purify Israel from adulterous offspring, so that they are worthy that the Divine Presence dwell among them. Therefore this matter [i.e., the effect of the water on the sotah] stopped from the time that the people became debauched with [sexual] sins, as the Rabbis have said: “When adulterers became frequent, the water of sotah ceased, for it is said, I will not punish your daughters when they commit harlotry, nor your daughters-in-law when they commit adultery; for they themselves consort with lewd women, and they sacrifice with harlots, and the people that is without understanding is distraught. Now this verse does not mean to say that adulterous women will be free from [punishment for their] sin, because their husbands [likewise] commit adultery; it [is only saying] that this great miracle will not be done for them, for it occurs as a sign of honor for them because of their being a holy people, but they do not understand this goodness, nor do they desire it. Therefore the verse states, and the people that is without understanding is ‘yilaveit’ (distraught), that is to say, trapped by its foolishness. Similarly, but a prating fool ‘yilaveit, ’ which the Jerusalem Ta...
Sforno
ואת, accept it also. כי שטית תחת אישך וכי נטמאת, that the curse will apply on account of your having defiled yourself and for no other reason at all. However, if the reason you have to drink this proves to be a false accusation you have nothing to fear from this curse.
Chizkuni
ואת כי שטית, “but since you have strayed, etc.” the priest did not say to her: “if you have strayed,” but he said to her that there was no question that she had strayed, the question was only to what extent she had strayed. She definitely deserved to have been shamed. Having caused her husband to suspect her, and having subsequently secreted herself with a man that her husband had specifically told her not to do, was disgraceful behaviour, even if no intimacy had occurred. וכי נטמאת, “the priest left the end of the sentence unsaid, i.e. “you will be punished through drinking these waters.” And in the event you have become ritually defiled;” he also implied that if she had not had carnal relations with someone other than her husband the waters would not harm her. מבלעדי אישך, the wording means that only if she had engaged in carnal relations with another man after her husband had been her husband in the full sense of the word, not during the period when she was merely betrothed, would she be forced to drink these waters if she wanted to clear her name. (B’chor shor)
Tur HaArokh
ואת כי שטית, “but you who have strayed, etc.” According to Nachmanides the words above relate to the words יתן ה' אותך לאלה וגו', “may Hashem render you as a curse, etc.” in verse 21, so that we may understand the sequence as follows: “may you who have strayed and lain with someone other than your husband become a curse, etc.” The reason why the Torah repeated the introductory words והשביע הכן once more in verse 21 is not that the priest adjures the woman a second time, but seeing that so many words had intervened since the words above in verse 10, the reader might have lost track of the proper meaning. Ibn Ezra explains that the first time we encounter the words והשביע הכהן the priest adjures her in the name of Hashem, but not spelling out the nature of the curse, whereas the second time in verse 21 he adjures her on pain of a curse spelling out precisely what would happen to her. This, according to Nachmanides, cannot be right, as an oath in the name of the Tetragram cannot possibly be linked to a conditional word such as אם. This would be tantamount to using the name of the Lord in vain. Our author draws attention to another anomaly in these verses, In verse 19, where the priest allows for the possibility that the woman is in fact not guilty of what she has been accused of, the possibility that she might have defiled herself is mentioned only after the possibility that she is innocent, and the words תחת אישך appear at the end of that phrase, whereas in verse 20 the words תחת אישך, “other than your husband,” appear before the priest spelled out that she had thereby defiled herself. Also, while in verse 19 where the possibility of the woman being innocent of the accusations leveled against her is mentioned first, the priest speaks to her directly, i.e. “you have done, you will be found pure, etc.,” in verse 21, where she is presumed guilty, priest phrases her sin in such a manner that even coitus interruptus would make her liable to the same punishment as if the act had been completed. This is implied in the words ויתן איש בך את שכבתו, “another man has lain with you,” (verse 20). The words יתן ה' are spoken by the priest when he turns his face away from her already, signaling his disgust. This is why the Torah did not add the words אל האשה, i.e. “to the woman directly.”
then the priest shall cause the woman to swear with the oath of cursing, and the priest shall say to the woman—Hashem make you a curse and an oath among your people, when Hashem does make your thigh to fall away, and your belly to swell;
verse value 7237 — יְהֹוָ֥ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 21 words, 92 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֥ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "make" (יִתֵּ֨ן, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·your·belly" (וְאֶת־בִּטְנֵ֖ךְ, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 80: the·priest, the·priest. 8 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "with·the·oath·of" (בִּשְׁבֻעַ֣ת), "you" (אוֹתָ֛ךְ), "and·an·oath" (וְלִשְׁבֻעָ֖ה). The root שבע appears 3 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "and·shall·say" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "make" (root נתן, 119x in Numbers). First appearance of the root עם ("your·people") in Numbers. First appearance of the root נפל ("falling") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'your·people', dividing the verse into phrases of 15 and 6 words.
Onkelos
— the priest shall adjure the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say to the woman: 'May Hashem make you a curse and an oath among your people, when Hashem causes your thigh to waste away and your belly to swell.'
Rashi
בשבעת האלה [AND THE PRIEST SHALL ADJURE THE WOMAN] WITH AN ADJURATION OF CURSING — i.e., an oath which contains the curse. יתן ה’ אותך לאלה THE LORD MAKE THEE AN EXECRATION — i.e. that everybody will curse through thee (i.e., by mention of thy name), saying, “May misfortune come upon you just as it came upon Mrs. so-and-so!” ולשבעה [THE LORD MAKE THEE AN EXECRATION] AND AN OATH — This means, that everybody will swear through thee (i.e., by mention of thy name) — “If not (i.e., if I am not speaking the truth) may misfortune happen to me just as it happened to Mrs. So-and-so!” In a similar sense it states, (Isaiah 65:15) “and ye shall leave your name as an oath unto my chosen” which means that the righteous take an oath by mention of the punishment that came upon evil-doers. So, too, in reference to the blessing, does it state, (Genesis 12:3) “and through thee (i.e., by mention of thy name) shall bless themselves [all the families of the earth]”; (Genesis 48:20) “By thee shall Israel bless, saying, [God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh]” (Sifrei Bamidbar 14). את ירכך [WHEN THE LORD DOTH MAKE] THY THIGH [TO FALL, AND THY BELLY TO SWELL] — In uttering the curse that will befall her because of her sin he mentions the thigh before the belly (whilst in v. 22 the belly is stated to be affected first), because with it (the thigh) she began to sin (cf. Sotah 8b, 9b). צבה — Understand this as the Targum does: SWOLLEN.
Ibn Ezra
"Thigh and belly" — they are neighbors [adjacent organs]. "Swollen" [tzavah] — like inflated [nafuah]; it has no parallel outside of this passage.
Chizkuni
והשביע הכהן את האשה, “then the priest shall cause the woman to accept a curse as a form of an oath;” this took the form of the woman confirming the curses uttered by the priest with answering: “Amen.” ירכך, “your thigh;” this is a synonym for “your womb.” Compare Genesis 24,2 where Avraham asks his servant to select a suitable wife for his son Yitzchok, by placing his hand under his thigh, i.e. תחת ירכי; then we have the expression: יוצאי ירך יעקב, “the descendants of Yaakov stemming from his thigh,” in Exodus 1,5. In the Talmud Megillah, folio 13, we hear that a woman’s jealousy is usually concerned with the offspring of other women, where the word for “offspring” used is the word .ירך נופלת, “falling,” an expression describing the loss of something. Compare Job 12,3: לא נופל אנכי מכם, “I am no less than you.” Applied to our situation this means: “you are no longer capable of engaging in carnal relations as the waters will damage the organs designed for this. Your womb will be ruined.”
Rashbam
לאלה ולשבועה, as a curse and as an oath. When a person demands that someone confirms a statement he had made to him by an oath, he tells that person “swear to me that if what you have told me is false that you will become an accursed person.” The swelling of the Sotah’s belly and the collapse of her hips are signs of such a curse.
and this water that causes the curse shall go into your bowels, and make your belly to swell, and your thigh to fall away"; and the woman shall say: "Amen, Amen."
verse value 2549
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 55 letters. The shortest word is "the·belly" (בֶּ֖טֶן, 3 letters) and the longest is "that·curse" (הַמְאָרְרִ֤ים, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 91: Amen, Amen. 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "into·your·bowels" (בְּֽמֵעַ֔יִךְ), "to·swell" (לַצְבּ֥וֹת), "the·belly" (בֶּ֖טֶן). The root אמן appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·shall·say" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "may·enter" (root בוא, 89x in Numbers); "these" (root אלה, 76x in Numbers). First appearance of the root אמן ("Amen") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·thigh', dividing the verse into phrases of 9 and 4 words. Full calculation: וּ֠בָ֠אוּ [may·enter] (15) + הַמַּ֨יִם [the·water] (95) + הַמְאָרְרִ֤ים [that·curse] (496) + הָאֵ֙לֶּה֙ [these] (41) + בְּֽמֵעַ֔יִךְ [into·your·bowels] (142) + לַצְבּ֥וֹת [to·swell] (528) + בֶּ֖טֶן [the·belly] (61) + וְלַנְפִּ֣ל [and·to·fall·away] (196) + יָרֵ֑ךְ [the·thigh] (230) + וְאָמְרָ֥ה [and·shall·say] (252) + הָאִשָּׁ֖ה [the·woman] (311) + אָמֵ֥ן [Amen] (91) + אָמֵֽן [Amen] (91) = 2549.
Onkelos
'And these cursing waters shall enter your belly to cause the belly to swell and the thigh to waste away.' And the woman shall say: 'Amen, amen.'
Rashi
לצבות בטן is the same as לְהַצְבּוֹת בטן (the verb being the Hiphil infinitive). This is the usage of the Patach: that the “lamed” has it as its vowel instead of the ה having it (viz., that it is a contraction of לה). Similar is (Exodus 13:21) לַרְאתכם הדרך and (Deuteronomy 1:33) לַנְחֹתָם בדרך אשר הלכו בה (which are equivalent to לְהַרְאֹתְכֶם and לְהַנְחֹתָם). And so, too, in this verse, לַנְפִּל ירך, which is the same as לְהַנְפִּיל ירך. The meaning is: that the waters cause the belly to swell, and cause the thigh to fall. לצבות בטן ולנפל ירך [AND THIS WATER THAT CAUSETH THE CURSE SHALL GO INTO THY BOWELS] TO MAKE THE BELLY TO SWELL AND THE THIGH TO WASTE — i.e. the belly and the thigh of the adulterer (Note that Scripture does not state here, as in the preceding verse, “thy thigh”, “thy belly”). Or perhaps this is not so, but it means those of the adulteress? But when it states, (v. 21) “[when the Lord doth make] thy thigh to waste and thy belly to swell”, you see, that those of the adulteress are mentioned already (Sotah 28a; cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 15:1). אמן אמן [AND THE WOMAN SHALL SAY] AMEN, AMEN — The utterance of the word אמן by a person implies the acceptance of an oath which has been recited by another with reference to him. — The two words אמן (which may mean “It is so”, or, “May it be so”) respectively signify, “Amen” with reference to the curse invoked, and “Amen” with reference to the oath recited. Accordingly she declares: “Amen” (“may it be so” i. e., may the אלה “the curse” befall me) if I have received defilement from this man, and “Amen” if I have received defilement from any other man; “Amen” (“It is so” — the terms of the oath are true) that I have not gone astray either when I was betrothed to my husband or since I have been married to him; (or in the case of a woman who has married her deceased husband’s brother; cf. Deuteronomy 25:7, it implies), “either when I was awaiting marriage with my brother-in-law or after I was married to him” (Sotah 18a).
Ibn Ezra
"And to cause to fall" [ve-lanpil] — the lamed is vowelized with a patah to indicate the absence of the heh of the binyan; similarly, "to destroy" [le-shamid]. "Amen" — said twice, as a reinforcement.
Sforno
אמן אמן. The reason she has to repeat the word אמן is that she thereby acknowledges that she accepts the verdict both if it is in her favour and if it would incriminate her.
Chizkuni
ואמרה האשה: אמן, “the woman will respond by saying: “Amen.” In other words, she will agree that this will happen to her and deservedly, if she lied and was guilty of the accusations. According to the Jerusalem Targum, the word “Amen” here includes the following: “I agree that if I have defiled myself, or even if I will defile myself in the future.”According to our sages in the Sifri, the word: “Amen” here, means that she agrees that if she was guilty of having carnal relations with the particular man under discussion, or even with any other man not under discussion (after her marriage) she agrees that she deserves the penalty announced to her by the priest (the Torah). They explain further that seeing that the oaths are expressed in the plural mode, although only one single example of what they applied to was mentioned, (carnal relations (verse 20) any earlier violations of the laws of chastity in marriage would also now result in her being punished for them. They use logic to derive this: if a woman who had strayed but had never been accused previously is now being punished, any earlier acts of robbery [marital infidelity is an act of robbing one’s husband of his legitimate and exclusive rights, Ed.] in which the accusation could not be made to result in her being penalized, would now also be taken into consideration by G-d and used against her.
And the priest shall write these curses in a scroll, and he shall blot them out into the water of bitterness.
verse value 2163
Insights
Verse structure: 8 words, 35 letters. The shortest word is "and·he·shall·write" (וְ֠כָתַ֠ב, 4 letters) and the longest is "the·curses" (אֶת־הָאָלֹ֥ת, 6 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·he·shall·write" (וְ֠כָתַ֠ב), "the·curses" (אֶת־הָאָלֹ֥ת), "into·the·water·of" (אֶל־מֵ֥י). The root אלה appears 2 times in this verse. 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·curses" (root אלה, 76x in Numbers); "the·priest" (root כהן, 71x in Numbers); "into·the·water·of" (root מים, 35x in Numbers). First appearance of the root כתב ("and·he·shall·write") in Numbers. First appearance of the root ספר ("in·the·scroll") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'in·the·scroll', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 3 words. Full calculation: וְ֠כָתַ֠ב [and·he·shall·write] (428) + אֶת־הָאָלֹ֥ת [the·curses] (837) + הָאֵ֛לֶּה [these] (41) + הַכֹּהֵ֖ן [the·priest] (80) + בַּסֵּ֑פֶר [in·the·scroll] (342) + וּמָחָ֖ה [and·he·shall·blot·out] (59) + אֶל־מֵ֥י [into·the·water·of] (81) + הַמָּרִֽים [bitterness] (295) = 2163.
Onkelos
The priest shall write these curses in a scroll and blot them into the bitter waters.
Ibn Ezra
The meaning of "in a book" is that they had a designated book containing the curses.
Chizkuni
וכתב, “he will write;” using ink dissoluble in water. This is clear from the word: ומחה, ”he will erase;” את האלות האלה, “these curses;” the ones recorded on the scrolls mentioned here.
Tur HaArokh
וכתב את האלות האלה הכהן בספר, “The priest shall inscribe these curses on a scroll, etc.” The Jerusalem Talmud (Sotah chapter 2) explains the reason for these various elements in the procedure. מים, water, represents the origin of life, return to one’s origin. עפר, dust represents man’s ultimate destination. כתב, the scroll, symbolizes that all man’s actions are being recorded in anticipation of his giving an account of himself after his soul has departed from him. Nachmanides writes that it is remarkable that this is the only legislation in the Torah that relies on Divine intervention to establish a truth we were not able to establish on our own. This was a נס קבוע, a predictable miracle available for the rare instances described in our chapter. This legislation, i.e. its application, was predicated on the fact that the vast majority of the Jewish people would be Torah observant, so that the case of a woman being suspected of infidelity was an exception. As soon as the moral standards of the Jewish people deteriorated so that marital infidelity became more frequent, Divine intervention of this nature came to an abrupt halt. While marital infidelity had been a rare exception this very Divine intervention to determine if the accusation was true was liable to act as a deterrent to straying wives. As soon as the mores of the people changed, such an intervention would no longer have been a deterrent, on the contrary G’d’s effort to restore harmony between man and his wife would have been wasted. The prophet Hoseah 4,14 speaks about this when he says: לא אפקוד על בנותיכם כי תזנינה ועל כלותיכם כי תנאפנה כי הם עם זונות יפרדו ועם הקדשות יזבחו, “I will not punish your daughters for fornicating, nor your daughters-in-law for committing adultery; for they (the husbands or fathers) themselves turn aside with whores and sacrifice with the prostitutes.” The meaning of Hoseah’s statement is not that those guilty of such sins will escape retribution seeing that their husbands are not better than they are, but it means that their husbands cannot invoke the legislation discussed in our chapter seeing that they themselves are no better. The waters described in our paragraph are effective only if the jealous husband is himself free from any extra marital indiscretion.
And he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that causes the curse; and the water that causes the curse shall enter into her and become bitter.
verse value 3303
Insights
Verse structure: 10 words, 49 letters. The shortest word is "into·her" (בָ֛הּ, 2 letters) and the longest is "the·curse-inducing" (הַמְאָֽרְרִ֑ים, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 496: the·curse-inducing, curse-inducing. 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "the·water·of" (אֶת־מֵ֥י). The root מים appears 2 times in this verse. 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·shall·enter" (root בוא, 89x in Numbers); "the·woman" (root אשה, 57x in Numbers); "the·water·of" (root מים, 35x in Numbers). First appearance of the root שקה ("and·he·shall·make·drink") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·curse-inducing', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 5 words. Full calculation: וְהִשְׁקָה֙ [and·he·shall·make·drink] (416) + אֶת־הָ֣אִשָּׁ֔ה [the·woman] (712) + אֶת־מֵ֥י [the·water·of] (451) + הַמָּרִ֖ים [bitterness] (295) + הַמְאָֽרְרִ֑ים [the·curse-inducing] (496) + וּבָ֥אוּ [and·shall·enter] (15) + בָ֛הּ [into·her] (7) + הַמַּ֥יִם [the·water] (95) + הַֽמְאָרְרִ֖ים [curse-inducing] (496) + לְמָרִֽים [to·bitterness] (320) = 3303.
Onkelos
He shall give the woman the bitter cursing waters to drink, and the cursing waters shall enter her to bitterness.
Rashi
והשקה את האשה AND HE SHALL CAUSE THE WOMAN TO DRINK [THE BITTER WATER] — This was not the actual order of the proceedings, because really he offered her meal-offering first (before giving her the water to drink; cf. v. 26, 27), but Scripture here merely informs you that when he afterwards gives her the water to drink it will become bitter in her belly (cf. Sotah 19a). — Since only the thigh and the belly are mentioned (vv. 21. 22), I might conclude that only these are affected (see Sifrei Bamidbar 18); whence do we know that this applies also to the rest of the body? Because Scripture states here, “[and the water … shall come] into her [and become bitter]” — into all of her body! But if so, why does Scripture explicitly mention only the thigh and the belly? Because they (these two) were the first to begin the sin, therefore it (Scripture) makes the punishment begin with them (and for this reason Scripture mentions them explicitly, but, as a matter of fact, it extends to the whole body as is implied in the word בה (Sifrei Bamidbar 18). למרים (The text is more lit., “and the waters shall enter into her as bitter”) — i.e. to become bad and bitter for her.
Chizkuni
והשקה את האשה, “he shall make the woman drink;” the letter ה at the end of the word האשה, does not have a dot in it, as opposed to the same word in verse 27, where that dot is a pronoun.
And the priest shall take the meal-offering of jealousy out of the woman's hand, and shall wave the meal-offering before Hashem, and bring it to the altar.
verse value 3722 — יְהֹוָ֔ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 62 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֔ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "from·hand·of" (מִיַּ֣ד, 3 letters) and the longest is "the·grain·offering" (אֶת־הַמִּנְחָה֙, 7 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "the·grain·offering" (אֶת־הַמִּנְחָה֙), "on·the·altar" (אֶל־הַמִּזְבֵּֽחַ). The root מנחה appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "before" (root פנים, 119x in Numbers); "and·he·shall·take" (root לקח, 72x in Numbers). First appearance of the root נוף ("and·he·shall·wave") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'jealousy', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 7 words. Full calculation: וְלָקַ֤ח [and·he·shall·take] (144) + הַכֹּהֵן֙ [the·priest] (80) + מִיַּ֣ד [from·hand·of] (54) + הָֽאִשָּׁ֔ה [the·woman] (311) + אֵ֖ת מִנְחַ֣ת [grain·offering·of] (899) + הַקְּנָאֹ֑ת [jealousy] (556) + וְהֵנִ֤יף [and·he·shall·wave] (151) + אֶת־הַמִּנְחָה֙ [the·grain·offering] (509) + לִפְנֵ֣י [before] (170) + יְהֹוָ֔ה [Hashem] (26) + וְהִקְרִ֥יב [and·he·shall·present] (323) + אֹתָ֖הּ [it] (406) + אֶל־הַמִּזְבֵּֽחַ [on·the·altar] (93) = 3722.
Onkelos
The priest shall take from the hand of the woman the meal-offering of jealousy and elevate the meal-offering before Hashem, and bring it near to the altar.
Rashi
והניף THEN [THE PRIEST] SHALL WAVE [THE MEAL-OFFERING] — He moves it about horizontally and vertically, and she, too, waves it together with him, because her hand has to be above the hand of the priest (Sotah 19a). והקריב אתה — This refers to what is known as the הגשה — bringing it to the south-west corner of the altar before the קמיצה, “the taking off of the handful of flour”, just as is the case with all other meal-offerings (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 7:7 and Sotah 14b).
And the priest shall take a handful of the meal-offering, as the memorial-part of it, and make it smoke upon the altar, and afterward shall make the woman drink the water.
verse value 3783
Insights
Verse structure: 10 words, 55 letters. Verse gematria: 3783 is divisible by 13, the value of echad ('one') and ahavah ('love'). The shortest word is "and·he·shall·take·a·handful" (וְקָמַ֨ץ, 4 letters) and the longest is "a·token·part·of·it" (אֶת־אַזְכָּ֣רָתָ֔הּ, 8 letters). 6 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·he·shall·take·a·handful" (וְקָמַ֨ץ), "from·the·grain·offering" (מִן־הַמִּנְחָה֙), "a·token·part·of·it" (אֶת־אַזְכָּ֣רָתָ֔הּ). 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·priest" (root כהן, 71x in Numbers); "from·the·grain·offering" (root מנחה, 62x in Numbers); "the·woman" (root אשה, 57x in Numbers). First appearance of the root קטר ("and·he·shall·turn·into·smoke") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'on·the·altar', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 4 words. Full calculation: וְקָמַ֨ץ [and·he·shall·take·a·handful] (236) + הַכֹּהֵ֤ן [the·priest] (80) + מִן־הַמִּנְחָה֙ [from·the·grain·offering] (198) + אֶת־אַזְכָּ֣רָתָ֔הּ [a·token·part·of·it] (1034) + וְהִקְטִ֖יר [and·he·shall·turn·into·smoke] (330) + הַמִּזְבֵּ֑חָה [on·the·altar] (67) + וְאַחַ֛ר [and·afterward] (215) + יַשְׁקֶ֥ה [he·shall·make·drink] (415) + אֶת־הָאִשָּׁ֖ה [the·woman] (712) + אֶת־הַמָּֽיִם [the·water] (496) = 3783.
Onkelos
The priest shall scoop from the meal-offering its memorial portion and offer it up on the altar, and afterward he shall give the woman the waters to drink.
Rashi
אזכרתה THE MEMORIAL PART THEREOF — i.e. the handful, and it is so called because through its being burnt the meal-offering is brought to remembrance before the Most High God (Sifrei Bamidbar 17; cf. Rashi on Leviticus 2:2 and 24:7).
Ibn Ezra
"Its memorial portion" — whatever will serve as a memorial for her, for good or for ill, according to her deeds.
And when he has made her drink the water, then it shall come to pass, if she be defiled, and have acted unfaithfully against her husband, that the water that causes the curse shall enter into her and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away; and the woman shall be a curse among her people.
verse value 5618
Insights
Verse structure: 21 words, 96 letters. The shortest word is "into·her" (בָ֜הּ, 2 letters) and the longest is "if·she·has·defiled·herself" (אִֽם־נִטְמְאָה֮, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 496: the·water, curse-inducing. 7 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "if·she·has·defiled·herself" (אִֽם־נִטְמְאָה֮), "and·she·broke·faith" (וַתִּמְעֹ֣ל), "with·her·husband" (בְּאִישָׁהּ֒). The root מים appears 2 times in this verse. 19 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·it·shall·be" (root היה, 180x in Numbers); "with·her·husband" (root איש, 130x in Numbers); "unfaithfulness" (root על, 128x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'her·thigh', dividing the verse into phrases of 16 and 5 words.
Onkelos
He shall give her the waters to drink, and if she has defiled herself and acted treacherously toward her husband, the cursing waters shall enter her to bitterness, and her belly shall swell and her thigh shall waste away, and the woman shall become a curse among her people.
Rashi
והשקה את המים AND HE SHALL MAKE HER DRINK THE WATER — This statement made after Scripture has just said (v. 26) “and afterwards he shall make the woman drink the waters” (see Siphre) is intended to include the case that if she says, “I will not drink” after the scroll on which the Holy Name was written had been blotted out, they pour it into her and make her drink the water against her will — except if she adds: “I have been defiled” [when, of course, no further test is necessary] (Sotah 19b). וצבתה בטנה AND HER BELLY SHALL SWELL, [AND HER THIGH SHALL WASTE] — Although when uttering the curse (v. 21) he (the priest) mentioned the thigh first, for the reason given by Rashi in his comment there, the water tested her (i.e., affected her) only according to the manner it passed into her body (i.e., it affected the belly first since it first entered that part of her body and then the thigh) (Sotah 9b). והיתה האשה לאלה AND THE WOMAN SHALL BE AN EXECRATION — This means, as I have already explained (v. 21), that everyone shall curse by mention of her name. בקרב עמה [AND THE WOMAN SHALL BE AN EXECRATION] AMONG HER PEOPLE — This is stressed: "among her people” — because there is a difference between a person who is brought to disgrace in a place where he is well known and a person who is brought to disgrace in a place where he is unknown.
Ibn Ezra
"And she has committed a trespass" — as I explained, a hidden matter.
Chizkuni
ונפלה ירכה, “and her womb will fall;” it will no longer be able to fulfill the functions for which it had been designed. The punishment matches the crime.
And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be cleared, and shall conceive seed.
verse value 1907
Insights
Verse structure: 8 words, 36 letters. The shortest word is "she" (הִ֑וא, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·she·shall·conceive" (וְנִזְרְעָ֥ה, 6 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·is·pure" (וּטְהֹרָ֖ה), "and·she·shall·be·cleared" (וְנִקְּתָ֖ה), "and·she·shall·conceive" (וְנִזְרְעָ֥ה). The root זרע appears 2 times in this verse. 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·if·not" (root לא, 129x in Numbers); "the·woman" (root אשה, 57x in Numbers); "she·has·defiled·herself" (root טמא, 35x in Numbers). First appearance of the root טהר ("and·is·pure") in Numbers. First appearance of the root זרע ("and·she·shall·conceive") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'she', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 3 words. Full calculation: וְאִם־לֹ֤א [and·if·not] (78) + נִטְמְאָה֙ [she·has·defiled·herself] (105) + הָֽאִשָּׁ֔ה [the·woman] (311) + וּטְהֹרָ֖ה [and·is·pure] (225) + הִ֑וא [she] (12) + וְנִקְּתָ֖ה [and·she·shall·be·cleared] (561) + וְנִזְרְעָ֥ה [and·she·shall·conceive] (338) + זָֽרַע [seed] (277) = 1907.
Onkelos
But if the woman has not defiled herself and she is clean, she shall go out innocent and shall conceive.
Rashi
ואם לא נטמאה האשה AND IF THE WOMAN WAS NOT DEFILED on the occasion of this secluding herself with this man, וטהרה הוא AND BE CLEAN (guiltless) as regards any other place, ונקתה THEN SHE SHALL BE FREE from the effect of the water that waste the body and not only this, but ונזרעה זרע SHE SHALL CONCEIVE SEED — i.e. if until now she used to bear children in pain, she will from now bear with ease (free from pain), if up to now she used to bear black (ugly) children, from now on she will bear white (beautiful) children (Sifrei Bamidbar 19; Sotah 26a).
Ibn Ezra
"And she shall be sown with seed" — Hashem shall grant her seed as a reward for the disgrace that befell her.
Sforno
ונקתה, from the penalty that would apply for causing a needless oath. In this instance, G’d, Who knows the true circumstances, will certainly not consider this oath as having been a frivolous one.
Or HaChaim
לא נטמאה האשה וטהורה היא ואם, And if the woman had not been defiled and remained pure, etc. The reason the Torah repeats that the woman had remained pure is that the Torah wishes to tell us that not only has she become exonerated so that the waters will not harm her, but she shall even conceive seed. The additional word וטהורה also indicates that not only had the woman in question not been guilty of intercourse with someone other than her husband, but she had not indulged in any of the caressing and fondling which usually precedes sexual intimacy. When both these conditions exist she will be blessed by becoming pregnant in accordance with what the Torah writes. If, on the other hand, לא נטמאה, she had not become defiled through actual intercourse but could not claim to be "pure" by not having indulged in foreplay, she will not be blessed with child although she will escape punishment for her conduct. You will note that the priest who made her take the oath (verse 19-20) employed somewhat peculiar language. What did the Torah mean with the words כי שטית? If it means becoming defiled why does the Torah write וכי נטמאת, "and you have become defiled with the conjunctive letter ו? Clearly the word refers to something which precedes the actual defilement of a woman through intimacy. The priest cautioned: "if you have actually become defiled, then you qualify for the punishment provided by the Torah." When speaking about the reverse situation, i.e. אם לא שכב איש אתך, "if no man other than your husband has slept with you, etc.," then there are two possibilities. 1) You are exempt from the damaging effect of these bitter waters; 2) you may be totally exonerated and benefit by the blessing of becoming pregnant as promised by the Torah. The third possibility ("she is pure" as distinct from "she has not been defiled") can be understood as our sages say in Sotah 18 וטהורה היא מאיש אחר, that she is pure "as far as having slept with another man" (not the one her husband suspected her of) is concerned. According to our approach, "the other man" is already included in the statement that she has not been defiled which includes the man with whom her husband suspected her as well as any other man who is not her husband.
Chizkuni
ונקתה, “she will be cleared” (of the accusation). ונזרעה זרע, “and will conceive seed.” Her womb will not have suffered damage, and in future marital relations with her husband she will conceive [and presumably give successful birth. Ed.] A different interpretation of the last two words in our verse. From this point on when her husband resumes marital relations with her he will do so with halachic permission.
This is the law of jealousy, when a wife, being under her husband, goes aside, and is defiled;
verse value 4726
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 35 letters. The shortest word is "this" (זֹ֥את, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·defiles·herself" (וְנִטְמָֽאָה, 6 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "goes·astray" (תִּשְׂטֶ֥ה), "and·defiles·herself" (וְנִטְמָֽאָה). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "when" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers); "her·husband" (root איש, 130x in Numbers); "a·woman" (root אשה, 57x in Numbers). First appearance of the root תורה ("the·law·of") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'jealousy', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 6 words. Full calculation: זֹ֥את [this] (408) + תּוֹרַ֖ת [the·law·of] (1006) + הַקְּנָאֹ֑ת [jealousy] (556) + אֲשֶׁ֨ר [when] (501) + תִּשְׂטֶ֥ה [goes·astray] (714) + אִשָּׁ֛ה [a·woman] (306) + תַּ֥חַת [under] (808) + אִישָׁ֖הּ [her·husband] (316) + וְנִטְמָֽאָה [and·defiles·herself] (111) = 4726.
Onkelos
This is the law of jealousy — when a woman goes astray from her husband and defiles herself;
Sforno
זאת תורת הקנאות; jealousy which is legally approved on the one hand, and jealousy which is legally not approved. This becomes clear from the words אשר תשטה אשה תחת אישה ונטמאה, this is the example of the legally justified jealousy. The Torah goes on to write או איש אשר תעבור עליו רוח קנאה, as an example of legally unjustified jealousy.
or when the spirit of jealousy comes upon a man, and he be jealous over his wife; then shall he set the woman before Hashem, and the priest shall execute upon her all this law.
verse value 6261 — יְהֹוָ֔ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 18 words, 76 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֔ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "or" (א֣וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "all·the·ritual" (אֵ֥ת כׇּל־הַתּוֹרָ֖ה, 9 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "jealousy" (קִנְאָ֖ה), "all·the·ritual" (אֵ֥ת כׇּל־הַתּוֹרָ֖ה). The root אשה appears 2 times in this verse. 17 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "that" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers); "man" (root איש, 130x in Numbers). First appearance of the root או ("or") in Numbers. First appearance of the root רוח ("spirit·of") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'his·wife', dividing the verse into phrases of 9 and 9 words.
Onkelos
or a man over whom a spirit of jealousy passes and he becomes jealous of his wife — he shall stand the woman before Hashem, and the priest shall perform for her all of this law.
Rashi
או איש — The word או here has the same meaning as in the phrase (Exodus 21:36): או נודע, “If it be known” (cf. Rashi on that verse and our Note thereon) — that is to say: if the man is a jealous man, then just on account of this, he shall present the woman [before the Lord and then the priest shall execute upon her all this law].”
Sforno
וקנא את אשתו, warning her not to seclude herself with any man anywhere. ועשה לה הכהן את כל התורה הזאת, and he is not concerned with erasing the holy name of G’d on the scroll placed in the water.
And the man shall be clear from iniquity, and that woman shall bear her iniquity.
verse value 2210
Insights
Verse structure: 7 words, 30 letters. Verse gematria: 2210 is divisible by 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "shall·bear" (תִּשָּׂ֖א, 3 letters) and the longest is "her·guilt" (אֶת־עֲוֺנָֽהּ, 6 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "but·the·woman" (וְהָאִשָּׁ֣ה). The root עון appears 2 times in this verse. 6 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·man" (root איש, 130x in Numbers); "that" (root הוא, 70x in Numbers); "but·the·woman" (root אשה, 57x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'of·guilt', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 4 words. Full calculation: וְנִקָּ֥ה [and·shall·be·clear] (161) + הָאִ֖ישׁ [the·man] (316) + מֵעָוֺ֑ן [of·guilt] (166) + וְהָאִשָּׁ֣ה [but·the·woman] (317) + הַהִ֔וא [that] (17) + תִּשָּׂ֖א [shall·bear] (701) + אֶת־עֲוֺנָֽהּ [her·guilt] (532) = 2210.
Onkelos
The man shall be clear of iniquity, and that woman shall bear her iniquity.
Rashi
ונקה האיש מעון THEN SHALL THE MAN BE GUILTLESS FROM INIQUITY — This means, if the waters try her (have effect on her), he should not worry and say: “I have incurred guilt through her death!” — No, he is free from punishment. Another explanation is: As soon as he has made her drink the water and she is proved innocent she may lawfully remain with him as his wife, and he is free from sin in permitting this, but if he lives with her before this, he is not free, for a סוטה (a wife suspected of infidelity) is forbidden to her husband pending her trial (cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 21).
Ibn Ezra
"She shall bear her iniquity" — if she was indeed defiled. The meaning of "and the man shall be clear of iniquity" — for if a spirit of jealousy came upon him, she is forbidden to him for him to lie with her, and one who does lie with her bears iniquity. Some say that the reason the passage of the Nazirite is placed adjacent to the passage of the sotah is so that she should have a Nazirite son if she was not defiled. But in my view it is placed here on account of the Nazirite vow of a woman, which is the opposite of the one who has transgressed: for the cause of most transgressions is wine, and a woman who does not adorn the hair of her head is not seeking to be approached.
Sforno
ונקה האיש מעון, even though he had suspected his wife’s fidelity. The reason is that by her conduct she had given him just cause for such suspicions. Had she not ignored his warnings things would not have come to such a pass. We have our sages in Shabbat 56 on record that David did not accept badmouthing which was designed to make Mephiboshet appear as having been disloyal to him. He rather based himself on visual evidence. [This was Sh’muel’s interpretation of what had occurred. Rav disagrees with his assessment. Ed.] והאשה ההיא תשא את עונה, that if she had been guilty of adultery she would die, and if not, her public embarrassment at undergoing the procedure as a punishment for having had the effrontery to ignore her husband’s warning would be her punishment.
Chizkuni
ונקה האיש מעון, “and the man will be free from guilt,” the guilt of allowing his wife to indulge in infidelity while married to her without divorcing her. את עונה, “her guilt.” The meaning of the word: עון here is the same as the same word in Samuel I 28,10: אם יקרך עון בדבר הזה, “if in this matter you would become guilty of something, etc.;” King Saul absolves the witch of Endor in advance of her complying with his request. Once the moral standards of the Jewish people had declined so that the incidence of infidelity, adultery, was no longer a rare event, the practice of subjecting women accused of such to Divine intervention in order drink the bitter waters to clear her name was discontinued. This discontinuation was based on when the prophet Hoseah, 4,14 wrote (quoting G-d) לא אפקוד על בנותיכם כי תזנינה, “I will not punish your daughters for engaging in adultery.” The Targum on this line translates the words לא אפקוד, as if the prophet had said: לא אבדוק, “I will not examine if the accusation is justified” by letting My Holy Name be dissolved in water.) (Compare Talmud Sotah, folio 47).
Rabbeinu Bahya
ונקה האיש מעון, “if the man is free from guilt.” Our sages in Sotah 47 interpret this phrase to mean that the divinely-assisted proof of the woman’s guilt will be effective only if her husband’s conduct in matters relating to marital fidelity had been blameless. The specific “innocence” of the husband is that ever since he suspected her of infidelity he had ceased having marital relations with her. Others hold that if the husband ever in his life had indulged in illicit sex, he is in no position to call upon heavenly intervention to prove his wife’s guilt, and the whole procedure will become ineffective. Even if the husband had only slept with his wife after she was betrothed to him but still lived in her father’s house, (a Rabbinic prohibition only) he would have forfeited the right to rely on the procedure of Sotah for the rest of his life. The sages holding this view base it on the wording in our verse where they read the following words as forming a single sequence and meaning that “only when the husband is free from guilt concerning his own wife will the wife have to bear her guilt.” Therefore, if aware of this, the woman had indulged in questionable conduct giving rise to her husband seriously suspecting her of infidelity, she is not asked to drink these waters but is divorced without receiving the כתובה, the financial settlement a woman who has not been proven at fault in a divorce is entitled to. There is, however, also an historical development to the enactment of the legislation discussed in our chapter. We are told in Sotah 47 that due to the increased number of instances of marital infidelity the effectiveness of the מי המאררים declined. We have a verse in Hoseah 4,14 drawing attention to the deterioration of the morals in Jewish society. The prophet writes: “I will not punish their daughters [by making them drink these waters Ed.] for fornicating nor their daughters-in-law for committing adultery; for they themselves consort with whores (the husbands) and sacrifice with prostitutes, and a people that is without sense (of honour) must stumble (be afflicted).” What the prophet is saying is simply that there was no longer a justification for G’d involving Himself in restoring domestic peace between husband and wife when both parties had already deliberately destroyed that relationship which should be built on mutual trust. As long as by and large, the Israelites conducted themselves as true to their destiny of being a holy nation, G’d did His part in healing the occasional breach of trust which occurred. Once lack of fidelity had become a way of life there was no point in that. When G’d used to perform the miracle of the מי המאררים, the legal objective was to avoid the birth of bastards or children perceived to be bastards and the negative social fallout of such phenomena. Seeing a time had come when the parents did not seem to mind begetting bastards, why would G’d interfere by peforming miracles to preserve individual families’ cohesion? Sexual intercourse had ceased to be an instrument for producing children and had become a tool for satisfying the respective lust of the participants. The wording of the last words we quoted from Hoseah mean that “a nation which is unwilling to understand what is good for its development will suffer the consequences of its own foolishness.” The word ילבט occurs in that context also in Proverbs 10,8 where Solomon says ואויל שפתים ילבט, “the one whose lips speak foolishly will be afflicted.”
Rashbam
ונקה האיש מעון, even though he had been responsible for his wife coming to such a tragic end due to his having been jealous of her. Personally, I think the Torah tries to tell us that if her husband had remained silent about his suspicions, he would have been guilty, whereas now he is not. Seeing that once he was suspicious of her fidelity he was forbidden to cohabit with her, he had no other option. Instead, היא תשא את עוונה, she will have to bear the burden of her guilt. Seeing that she had committed adultery she has to accept the consequences.
Onkelos