Difference between revisions of "Censuses in the Wilderness/2"
(Original Author: Neima Novetsky, Rabbi Hillel Novetsky) |
(Original Author: Neima Novetsky, Rabbi Hillel Novetsky) |
||
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
<point><b>Above the age of twenty</b> – The census of Bemidbar included only those who were old enough to wage war.</point> | <point><b>Above the age of twenty</b> – The census of Bemidbar included only those who were old enough to wage war.</point> | ||
<point><b>"כָּל יֹצֵא צָבָא"</b> – This phrase, too, supports the notion that the census was military in nature.</point> | <point><b>"כָּל יֹצֵא צָבָא"</b> – This phrase, too, supports the notion that the census was military in nature.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>When was the census of Shemot 30?</b> While | + | <point><b>When was the census of Shemot 30?</b> While most of these commentators suggest that the census of Shemot 30 is in its proper place and took place before the sin of the Golden Calf, the Hoil Moshe maintains that it occurred afterwards.</point> |
− | <point><b>Were the Levites included in the original census?</b> According to | + | <point><b>Were the Levites included in the original census?</b> According to most of these commentators, the Levites were included in the earlier census of Shemot 30, since at that point they had not yet been singled out for any special role. Hoil Moshe, though, asserts that they were not included since, according to his chronological reconstruction, they had already been consecrated to serve in the Tabernacle.<fn>The various commentators are all consistent with their understanding of the chronology of the chapters, as discused in the above point.</fn></point> |
<point><b>Identical tallies</b> | <point><b>Identical tallies</b> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li><b>Intentional</b> – The Netziv suggests that after the first census, the total of 603,550 was set as the necessary number for the army, and for God's presence to dwell amongst the nation. Thus, during the second census, the people were not counted to see how many they were, but to ensure that they met the proper quota.<fn>Since people had died in the interim (especially during the plague after the sin of the Golden Calf), new men had to replace the fallen ones. According to the Netziv, then, it is possible that in reality there were more than 603,550 men aged twenty and over, but once the quota was reached, they were not included in the count.<p>One might question the Netziv on several points. Normally one would assume that a general sets the number of his soldiers based on strategic concerns, not an arbitrary result of an initial census. Second, according to the Netziv, the later census of Bemidbar 26 should have also resulted in the same number, while its total is over a thousand people less. The Netziv could | + | <li><b>Intentional</b> – The Netziv suggests that after the first census, the total of 603,550 was set as the necessary number for the army, and for God's presence to dwell amongst the nation. Thus, during the second census, the people were not counted to see how many they were, but to ensure that they met the proper quota.<fn>Since people had died in the interim (especially during the plague after the sin of the Golden Calf), new men had to replace the fallen ones. According to the Netziv, then, it is possible that in reality there were more than 603,550 men aged twenty and over, but once the quota was reached, they were not included in the count.<p>One might question the Netziv on several points. Normally one would assume that a general sets the number of his soldiers based on strategic concerns, not an arbitrary result of an initial census. Second, according to the Netziv, the later census of Bemidbar 26 should have also resulted in the same number, while its total is over a thousand people less. The Netziv could perhaps answer that due to the many deaths in the desert, there simply were not enough people to fill the quota. Alternatively, as he views that later census as mainly for the purpose of the division of the land, it might have been unconnected to the military quota.</p></fn></li> |
<li><b>Coincidence</b> – The other commentators suggest that the identical numbers were a coincidence, but they differ in their understandings of the details of how this worked: | <li><b>Coincidence</b> – The other commentators suggest that the identical numbers were a coincidence, but they differ in their understandings of the details of how this worked: | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
<point><b>Half-shekels?</b> Ramban maintains that both censuses took place via a half-shekel donation, while the other exegetes<fn>Shadal, in his commentary on the Torah, views the commandment to bring half-shekels as a one time commandment, and he thus explains why there is no mention of such a collection in Bemidbar. In his HaMishtadel, though, he asserts that this was necessary at every census, and he would presumably say that it was collected during the census of Bemidbar 1 as well. See <aht page="Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle">Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle</aht> for more details.</fn> assert that this was a requirement only for the census of Shemot 30.<fn>Abarbanel explains that any count that was ordained by Hashem (as opposed to the first count which came because of Moshe's own volition) did not require a half-shekel redemption to prevent a plague.</fn></point> | <point><b>Half-shekels?</b> Ramban maintains that both censuses took place via a half-shekel donation, while the other exegetes<fn>Shadal, in his commentary on the Torah, views the commandment to bring half-shekels as a one time commandment, and he thus explains why there is no mention of such a collection in Bemidbar. In his HaMishtadel, though, he asserts that this was necessary at every census, and he would presumably say that it was collected during the census of Bemidbar 1 as well. See <aht page="Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle">Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle</aht> for more details.</fn> assert that this was a requirement only for the census of Shemot 30.<fn>Abarbanel explains that any count that was ordained by Hashem (as opposed to the first count which came because of Moshe's own volition) did not require a half-shekel redemption to prevent a plague.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>"כְּשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת אֶלֶף רַגְלִי"</b> – Ramban emphasizes that this number is an estimate rather than an exact count. He also suggests that, unlike the later censuses, it might include all males above the age of thirteen.</point> | <point><b>"כְּשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת אֶלֶף רַגְלִי"</b> – Ramban emphasizes that this number is an estimate rather than an exact count. He also suggests that, unlike the later censuses, it might include all males above the age of thirteen.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Census of Bemidbar 26 in the fortieth year</b> – Ramban and | + | <point><b>Census of Bemidbar 26 in the fortieth year</b> – Ramban, Abarbanel, and the Netziv connect this census to the conquest and division of the land as well.<fn>The Netziv emphasizes the need for a census for purposes of the division of the land rather than the actual fighting of the battles.</fn> Ramban notes that in this count, there is a division by families, and not by heads, as that was what was necessary to determine the tribal inheritances.</point> |
<!-- | <!-- | ||
<point><b>Crux of the position</b> – </point> | <point><b>Crux of the position</b> – </point> |
Version as of 02:18, 23 May 2014
Censuses in the Wilderness
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
(in progress...)
Multiple Censuses
There were two or more distinct censuses during the first two years of the Israelites' sojourn through the wilderness.
- For the purpose of both the census in the first year of the wilderness and the one in the second year, people's ages were calculated not by their biological age, but rather by how old they were on the first day of the new year,8 which for this purpose (only) was counted from Tishrei.9 As such, no one turned twenty in the period between the census of Shemot 30 (which, according to Rashi, took place in Tishrei after Yom HaKippurim – see above) and that of Bemidbar 1-4 (which took place seven months later in Iyyar).
- The Levites were not included in either census – see above.
- There were no deaths during the period between the censuses.10
One Full and One Partial Census
The census in Shemot 30 was a general census which merely provided the total number of Israelites, while the census of Bemidbar 1 was a far more comprehensive one, which collected data about individuals, their families, and tribal affiliations.
- Intentional – The Netziv suggests that after the first census, the total of 603,550 was set as the necessary number for the army, and for God's presence to dwell amongst the nation. Thus, during the second census, the people were not counted to see how many they were, but to ensure that they met the proper quota.17
- Coincidence – The other commentators suggest that the identical numbers were a coincidence, but they differ in their understandings of the details of how this worked:
- Deaths match those coming of age – Ramban (first explanation) proposes that by happenstance the number of men who turned twenty equaled the number of men who had died.18
- Levites included or omitted – Ramban (second proposal) and Abarbanel explain that the coincidence was possible because the Levites were included in the first census, but not the second. This would allow for approximately 22,000 people to turn twenty in the intervening months.19
- Levites replace firstborns – According to Shadal, the Levites were included in the first census, but the firstborns were not.20 As these two groups were close in number, the omission of the Levites from the second count did not have any significant affect on the census21 and by complete chance it turned out that with the small discrepancy between Levites and firstborns, the number of deaths equaled the number of men turning twenty.
Only One Census
There was only a single census during the first two years in the wilderness. This approach subdivides as to when this census transpired:
In the Second Year
Shemot 30 did not constitute a command to immediately count the nation, and there was only a single census which took place in the second year and is described in Bemidbar 1.
- Prevention of plague – Chizkuni asserts that the shekel donations were a necessary contribution to prevent plagues in future censuses, but their collection did not constitute a census on their own.
- Contribution to Mishkan – According to R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and the GR"A the command to give half-shekels was totally unconnected to the census and solely for the building of/service to the Mishkan. R. Yosef Bekhor Shor suggests that the shekalim were not even counted; the number of half-shekels totaled in Shemot 38 is Tanakh's omniscient parenthetical statement, but not the result of an active count.
Spanning both the First and Second Years
The censuses described in Shemot 30 and Bemidbar 1 were both part of a single extended process which began when the Tabernacle was being constructed and continued through the second month of the second year.