Petition of the Two and a Half Tribes/2

Petition of the Two and a Half Tribes

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Moshe Had it Right!

The two Tribes’ original request had two components: one explicit, to receive their portion on the eastern side of the Jordan and one implied, that they would not be participating in the conquest. According to several sources, Moshe correctly inferred that R&G did not intend to join the campaign and saw this as an immediate threat to the success of the Conquest. By comparing their request to the Spies, Moshe is expressing his indignation that they would prefer to settle outside the borders that G-d had chosen for them. Therefore, his harsh response was justified.

Sources: PhiloOn the Life of Moses I 320-328On the Life of Moses I 329On the Life of Moses I 330On the Life of Moses I 332About Philo, Bemidbar Rabbah7:822:622About Bemidbar Rabbah , RashiBemidbar 32:7Bemidbar 32:16Bemidbar 32:17Bemidbar 32:19Bemidbar 32:24About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, Tzeror HaMorAbout Tzeror HaMor, Akeidat Yitzchak85About R. Yitzchak Arama, MalbimBemidbar 32:6-7Bemidbar 32:14,16Bemidbar 32:31-32About R. Meir Leibush Weiser, NetzivBemidbar 20:10Bemidbar 32:1Bemidbar 32:6Bemidbar 32:7Bemidbar 32:7Bemidbar 32:11Bemidbar 32:13Devarim 3:16About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin, Samet Bemidbar 32:6-7Bemidbar 32:14,16Bemidbar 32:31-32About R. Meir Leibush Weiser

Dangers in Not Participating in the Conquest

• Moshe's indignant exclamation "ה‎‏,¹"הַאַחֵיכֶם יָבֹאוּ לַמִּלְחָמָה וְאַתֶּם תֵּשְׁבוּ פֹ and his comparison to the Spies, implies and warns of the damaging psychological effect upon the other tribes, seeing their brothers already settled safe and sound while they yet faced long and dangerous struggles. This is elaborated by PhiloOn the Life of Moses I 323On the Life of Moses I 324About Philo. Following Bemidbar Rabbah22:6About Bemidbar Rabbah, that likens R&G to the rebellious Korach², commentaries, such as, Rashi, Bemidbar 32:7About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki and the MalbimBemidbar 32:6-7About R. Meir Leibush Weiser, note that this situation, would weaken their morale and create jealousy and divisiveness³.
• The NetzivBemidbar 32:6About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin points out that given how the lands of Sichon and Og had been conquered by the united effort of all the tribes, for two of the tribes to now claim for themselves the fruits of that combined effort and to leave to the others, alone, the burden of conquering Canaan was presumptuous and immoral.

Dangers in Receiving Land Outside of Canaan

• By their preference for land outside the boundaries of Canaan, About R. Avraham Saba (Tzeror HaMor)Tzeror HaMor and Akeidat Yitzchak 85:2 accuse R&G of being guilty of,וימאסו בארץ חמדה⁴ , that will further demoralize the rest of the Tribes.The promise of the Land is a central element of every revelation by G-d to all the Avot and is a component of the Birkat Avraham that accompanies and guides the Bnei Yisrael through their bondage and exodus from Egypt, and their wandering through the Wilderness. All the references to the Land, beginning with the promises to the Avot, speak of “the land of Canaan” which in the days of Moshe had a particular geographic referent. While its north-south borders were never considered definitive "מִנְּהַר מִצְרַיִם עַד הַנָּהָר הַגָּדֹל נְהַר פְּרָת",‎⁵ the natural borders of the Mediteranean Sea and Jordan River, determined its east-west limits. It did not include the lands east of the Jordan. For those situated on the east side of the Jordan, it was always, “when you will cross the Jordan”. And so, G-d said to Moshe while he was on the east side of the Jordan, "וְהָיָה בַּיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר תַּעַבְרוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר י"י אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לָךְ"‎⁶ that is, the Land that G-d gives you as an inheritance is on the west side.⁷

• Moshe fears that settlement of R&G outside of Canaan would be considered by G-d as a grievous sin, resulting in some sort of collective punishment just as it was in the case of the Spies,or perhaps as the NetzivBemidbar 32:13About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin suggests, an extension of the Spies' punishment of wandering the desert.

Failed Moral Compass

• Bemidbar Rabbah22:8About Bemidbar Rabbah followed by RashiBemidbar 32:16About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, Tzeror HaMor , and the Akeidat Yitzchak85:3About R. Yitzchak Arama, interpret the emphasis by the text of the abundance of cattle owned by R&G as a demonstration of their wrongly placed greater value on their material wealth than the spiritual importance of living in the sanctity and under the special providence of Eretz Yisrael. Bemidbar Rabbah22:6About Bemidbar Rabbah condemns their misplaced priorities and see that as the reason they were first to be exiled.

• The Tribes' wealth⁸ and military victories over Sichon, Og and Midian may have had generated a sense of over confidence. The fact that this generation were not newly liberated slaves, but rather, had attained a certain degree of independence and self-sufficiency during their stay in the wilderness, may have further strengthened their self confidence. According to Akeidat Yitzchak85:4About R. Yitzchak Arama, this situation might have lead to a sense of ‎‏כֹּחִי וְעֹצֶם יָדִי and a lack of trust in G-d. This might explain their willingness to live alone in territories that were exposed to incursions and that lacked the natural defenses of Canaan⁹.

Moshe Acquiesces

• In response to Moshe’s outrage, R&G now propose to send a military force, "נֵחָלֵץ חֻשִׁים" to serve as a vanguard to help the tribes conquer Canaan, and not to return to their families until each of the tribes have received their portion in Canaan, עַד אֲשֶׁר אִם הֲבִיאֹנֻם אֶל מְקוֹמָם...עַד הִתְנַחֵל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אִישׁ נַחֲלָתוֹ" ¹⁰". SefornoBemidbar 32:33About R. Ovadyah Seforno and Spero¹¹ suggest, that while strict authoritarianism would require that Moshe stick to the Divine plan and insist that the R&G settle in Canaan, Moshe had to weigh the possibility of popular rebellion, as was the case of Korach¹² and the Ma’apilim¹³, if he refuses their request. As a sort of “lame duck” leader at this time, it would have been much more difficult to assert his authority. The immediate, positive gain of R&G’s willingness to send their men as a vanguard force, outweighed the possible negative.
• In regard to the question of: Did Moshe consult with G-d before he accepted their proposal? From the wordsאֵת אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר י"י "‏" ‎‏¹⁴, it would appear that Moshe did receive Divine sanction for the agreement, affirmed by Moshe in Arvot Moav, י"י אֱלֹהֵיכֶם נָתַן לָכֶם אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת לְרִשְׁתָּהּ, and later by Yehoshua, יָּשֻׁבוּ וַיֵּלְכוּ בְּנֵי רְאוּבֵן וּבְנֵי גָד וַחֲצִי שֵׁבֶט הַמְנַשֶּׁה מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִשִּׁלֹה אֲשֶׁר בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן לָלֶכֶת אֶל אֶרֶץ הַגִּלְעָד אֶל אֶרֶץ אֲחֻזָּתָם אֲשֶׁר נֹאחֲזוּ בָהּ עַל פִּי י"י בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה.¹⁵

Moshe as Leader

• Moshe’s critical, yet calculated response is an example of crisis management and damage control aimed to educate and ensure for smooth implementation of the agreement under Yehoshua, as described by PhiloOn the Life of Moses I 328On the Life of Moses I 329About Philo, Akeidat Yitzchak85: (5)85: (7)About R. Yitzchak Arama, MalbimBemidbar 32:14,16About R. Meir Leibush Weiser and Samet¹⁶. These commentaries explain how only after Moshe's passionate and critical reaction, do the two Tribes take council with each other, modify their request with a generous counter proposal and the tension is diffused. Here, Moshe demonstrated seasoned leadership and good judgment.
• In order to further strengthen the legality of the agreement, Moshe spells out the terms of the condition: If you will do this thing…..and if you will not do so….. This is referred to in the Talmudic literature as תנאי בני גד ובני ראובן"¹⁷, which is the prototype for a condition to have legal standing. According to Chanina ben Gamliel¹⁸, the double condition is necessary to clarifiy that the Tribes' will not loose their right to a portion in Canaan, in the situation that they do not keep their side of the bargain.

• It would appear that the agreement was solemnized by the Tribes taking an oath, as it says, וִהְיִיתֶם נְקִיִּם מֵי"י וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל ¹⁹. Moshe then, brings the agreement before Elazar HaCohen, Yehoshua and the heads of the Matot, the same judicial bodies that will supervise the Conquest and portioning of the land in Canaan. The successful completion of the Tribe's mission and the fulfillment of the agreement will take place 14 years later, as described in Yehoshua 22.

Sudden Appearance of Menashe

• According to this approach, that the very request of R&G was offensive and which triggered Moshe’s harsh response, how do we understand what seems to be Moshe’s unsolicited offer to settle clans from Menashe in Eiver Hayarden? In addition, assuming that מכיר, does not refer to the family of or descendants of מכיר, as the RambanBemidbar 32:41About R. Moshe b. Nachman ²⁰explains, then, based on the chronology of the Tribe of Menashe²¹, Machir, the grandson of Yosef, was probably not alive when the Bnei Yisrael were about to enter Canaan! A commentary on Chronicles, attributed to a student of Saadia Gaon, claims that the sons of Menashe had temporarily conquered some territories on Eiver Hayarden much earlier, while their father, Yosef,was still a vizier in Egypt. Now that these lands had been “liberated”, Moshe honored their claims to the land and their right to settle there.²²

Textual Points

• וּמִקְנֶה רַב הָיָה לִבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן וְלִבְנֵי גָד עָצוּם מְאֹד וַיִּרְאוּ אֶת אֶרֶץ יַעְזֵר וְאֶת אֶרֶץ גִּלְעָד וְהִנֵּה הַמָּקוֹם מְקוֹם מִקְנֶה -The introductory words of the chapter that begin with the subject (and not a verb),already set the tone and direct the reader’s attention to the Tribes’ accumulated wealth. Samet ²³points out that the root קנ"ה that is mentioned twice in the introduction and twice in the Tribes’ first conversation²⁴ -focuses on the quality of possession/aquisition. Moshe avoids that subject-except when he uses a substitute word צנאכם²⁵.
• עֲטָרוֹת וְדִיבֹן וְיַעְזֵר וְנִמְרָה וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן וְאֶלְעָלֵה וּשְׂבָם וּנְבוֹ וּבְעֹן.-Rosenson²⁶ suggests that the unconventional manner that R&G present their request by listing the names of the cities without providing their general context, and the hesitant, hinting manner of verses 4,5-as if “beating around the bush", suggests that they themselves sense that their request is problematic.
• הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הִכָּה י"י –Akeidat Yitzchak85:6About R. Yitzchak Arama contends that the only mention of G-d by R&G in their initial request was perhaps an attempt to neutralize any accusation that they were acting immorally by taking for themselves, land conquered by a joint effort of all Bnei Yisrael. Their implicit argument is that these lands were primarily conquered through the help of G-d..and so, too, will Canaan be conquered with Divine intervention.
• The repetition of the word ויאמרו while in the middle of an uninterrupted conversation, that began in verse 2, is a textual phenomenon that might indicate a break in the continuity of the conversation that will have an impact on the 2nd half of the conversation. Samet²⁷ suggests how Moshe’s lack of a response- his “deafening silence” (symbolized by the פרשה סתומה) is the break that will cause the Tribes to present their request in a straightforward way, יֻתַּן אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת לַעֲבָדֶיךָ לַאֲחֻזָּה אַל תַּעֲבִרֵנוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן".²⁸."
• להניע-להניא-להניח²⁹ - Samet³⁰ shows how Moshe’s play on verbs further connects the two Tribes’ and the Spies’ respective sins and punishments with each other.³¹
• וַיִּרְאוּ אֶת אֶרֶץ - refers to R&G’s laying eyes on Eiver Hayarden, reminds us of Moshe’s instructions to the Spies וראיתם את הארץ³². People see the same scene through different lens’. R&G saw Eiver Hayarden through the lens of self-interest, while the Spies were told by Moshe to see it in all its promising possibilities.
• אל הארץ אשר נתן להם ה and...את האדמה אשר נשבעתי לאברהם ליצחק וליעקב-By referring to Canaan as the Promised land, three times in his first response, Moshe is insinuating that the Tribes’ preference for Eiver Hayarden is misplaced.
• לבני ראובן ולבני גד...בני גד ובני ראובן.. According to ChizkuniBemidbar 32:2About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach, Ibn EzraBemidbar 32:1Bemidbar 32:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra and RambanBemidbar 32:1About R. Moshe b. Nachman, because of their greater wealth and military prowess,the tribe of Gad, were the initiators of the plan and therefore, are listed first throughout the chapter, except for the introductory verse-out of respect for Reuven, the biological Bechor. The NetzivBemidbar 32:1About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin supports this claim from the text that describes Reuven's holdings as רב, whereas, Gad's were עצום מאד.
• כִּי בָאָה נַחֲלָתֵנוּ אֵלֵינוּ -According to RashBemidbar 32:19About R. Shelomo Yitzchakii (as understood by the RambanBemidbar 32:19About R. Moshe b. Nachman), this sounds somewhat arrogant, as if to say that it was a “done deal”, before the negotiation was over.
• וַיִּגְּשׁוּ אֵלָיו- Akeidat Yitzchak85:7About R. Yitzchak Arama and the MalbimBemidbar 32:14,16About R. Meir Leibush Weiser understand that Moshe’s harsh response, surprised R&G. They now drew closer to Moshe, and primarily to him, offered their modified proposal,perhaps out of a sense of embarrassment ( symbolized by the פרשה סתומה).
• עבדיך...אדני...עבדיך...אדני- The multiple expressions of humility reflect their attempt to ease the tension.
• גִּדְרֹת צֹאן נִבְנֶה לְמִקְנֵנוּ פֹּה וְעָרִים לְטַפֵּנוּ. -In their revised version, R&G suggest that they will settle the Eastern Jordan, where they will build fences for their livestock and then, cities for their children, to which Bemidbar Rabbah22:622:8About Bemidbar Rabbah comments, שעשו את העיקר טפל ואת הטפל עיקר. Following the midrash, RashiBemidbar 32:16About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki points out that Moshe’s 2nd response will correct their faulty order of priorities,בנו לכם ערים לטפכם וגדרת לצנאכם. By their third response, R&G will integrate this lesson, טפנו נשינו מקננו וכל בהמתנו יהיו שם בערי הגלעד.
• לפני הי- In contrast to R&Gs’ counter proposal which did not mention G-d, Moshe invokes G-d’s name 7 times in his response to their counter proposal (20-23). The Akeidat Yitzchak85:8About R. Yitzchak Arama point outs that Moshe is using this opportunity to educate the Tribes, that their actions be לשם שמים, that is, that they are fighting not only in the name of G-d, but by doing so they may be assured of the help of G-d.
• הְיִיתֶם נְקִיִּם מֵי"י וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל... וְאִם לֹא תַעֲשׂוּן כֵּן הִנֵּה חֲטָאתֶם לַי"י- From these words we can infer that the Tribes took a solemn oath before G-d to keep their promise³³.
• וַיִּתֵּן לָהֶם מֹשֶׁה לִבְנֵי גָד וְלִבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן וְלַחֲצִי שֵׁבֶט מְנַשֶּׁה בֶן יוֹסֵף -Menashe’s lineage is mentioned here t o legitimize their claim to lands in Eiver Hayarden, which according to the Book of Chronicles, took place during the life of Yosef³⁴.

Moshe Misjudges

According to this approach, R&G had every intention of participating with all Bnei Yisrael in the Conquest. The only meaning of "אַל תַּעֲבִרֵנוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן", bring us not over the Jordan”³⁵, was in regard to settlement and inheritance. However, fueled by memories of the traumatic episode of the Spies, and all the damaging effects that it had on the morale of the Bnei Yisrael, Moshe concluded that they are refusing to participate in the Conquest, as he exclaims,"הַאַחֵיכֶם יָבֹאוּ לַמִּלְחָמָה וְאַתֶּם תֵּשְׁבוּ פֹה ‏³⁶ "! Only after they are given the opportunity to clarify their original proposal, does Moshe reconsider and acquiesce. According to this view, the central problem of this chapter is with Moshe’s hasty, over reaction which leads to his misunderstanding the Tribes' request which may indicate a flaw in his leadership.

Sources: Josephus,4 7:3About Josephus Antiquities of the Jews R. Yosef Bekhor ShorBemidbar 32:14About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, RambanBemidbar 21:21Bemidbar 32:19Bemidbar 32:41About R. Moshe b. Nachman, AbarbanelBemidbar 32About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, Samet

Moshe's Indifference to their Request to take their Inheritance in Eiver Hayarden – Since Moshe makes no explicit reference to their preference to settle in Eiver Hayarden over the Promised Land, neither in his initial outburst nor even in his acquiescence to their clarified position, it would seem that this was not a problem. Perhaps this was because at some point he consulted with G-d and received Divine approval³⁷. According to RashiDevarim 1:4About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki ³⁸ RambanBemidbar 21:21About R. Moshe b. Nachman,and the AbarbanelBemidbar 32: (2)About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel it is also possible that Moshe ( as perhaps did R&G), saw the miraculous military victory of the Lands of Sichon and Og as the beginning of the Conquest and included in the commandהָחֵל רָשׁ לָרֶשֶׁת אֶת אַרְצוֹ...וַיִּתְּנֵהוּ י"י אֱלֹהֵינוּ לְפָנֵינוּ "³⁹," and, as such, subject to the laws of inheritance⁴⁰.

Was the Request of R&G Motivated only by Self -Interest? The request of R&G to settle in Eiver Hayarden may not have been motivated solely by personal interest but by the following concerns. Samet⁴¹ points out that had these recently conquered lands been permitted to remain unoccupied, they would have been soon inhabited by enemy populations on Canaan’s doorstep. By settling these lands and cities, the two Tribes can serve as a ring of defense for the Israelites on the western side of the Jordan, against incursions from the Arabian Desert. In addition, by not taking their inheritance in Canaan, this enabled all the other tribes to each receive a larger portion⁴². Economic prosperity for the two Tribes would also be an asset for the rest of Bnei Yisrael.
These wider concerns of R&G can be seen in the way they order the aspects of their clarified proposal. They first specify their intentions 1) to build fences for their livestock and cities for their children,2) to go first into battle as an expeditionary force and 3) to remain in Canaan until the land is apportioned among all the Tribes. As Josephus 4 7:3About Josephus Antiquities of the Jews, Yosef Bekhor ShorBemidbar 32:14About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and ChizkuniBemidbar 32:17About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach point out, this can be seen as an argument that their ability to fight effectively and remain in Canaan for an indefinite period, will be enhanced by their knowledge that their families and livestock are safely settled.

Moshe as Leader – Moshe’s hasty, over-reaction to the request of R&G can be seen as another indication of the infirmities of age, as in the episode of the Mei Meriva, according to the NetzivBemidbar 20:10About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin. Although the Torah says about Moshe: "בֶּן מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה בְּמֹתוֹ לֹא כָהֲתָה עֵינוֹ וְלֹא נָס לֵחֹה ⁴³". Moshe admits about himself, "בֶּן מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה אָנֹכִי הַיּוֹם לֹא אוּכַל עוֹד לָצֵאת וְלָבוֹא ⁴⁴". In spite of unusual strength of body and spirit, Moshe may have been undergoing the painful experiences of “burnout” and déjà vu. It could be that Moshe is not permitted to go with his people into the Promised Land because his talents as a leader were no longer suitable to the new reality, and so we read," יַעַן לֹא הֶאֱמַנְתֶּם בִּי לְהַקְדִּישֵׁנִי לְעֵינֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לָכֵן לֹא תָבִיאוּ אֶת הַקָּהָל הַזֶּה אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נָתַתִּי לָהֶם⁴⁵".

The Sudden Appearance of Menashe – Once Moshe receives G-d’s approval to settle R&G in Eiver Hayarden, he can feel comfortable in offering other territory in Eiver Hayarden to the clans from Menashe. Especially since, as we indicated (approach 1)⁴⁶, Moshe was merely handing over lands that they had previous claims to, that were now “liberated”.
It may also be that Moshe was concerned about the possible dangers of the growing alienation between the tribes of the east and west of the Jordan. By positioning certain clans of the tribe of Menashe on Eiver Hayarden, this would enlist family and tribal ties that would connect the two communities separated by the Jordan⁴⁷. The fact that their portion in Canaan was contiguous with their portion on the other side of the Jordan, would make them a good candidate for this task. The Moshav ZekeinimBemidbar 32:33About Moshav Zekeinim suggests that Moshe saw that the land in Eiver Hayarden was too vast for only Reuven and Gad to settle, and so for security reasons, offered a few clans from Menashe to join them. The NetzivDevarim 3:16About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin points out that the tribe of Menashe was knowledgeable in the Torah tradition and would make them a valuable asset to the isolated communities in Eiver Hayarden. According to this approach, conquests by Machir son of Menashe in Gilead, Bamidbar 32:39, took place as described, after being invited by Moshe to join R&G in Eiver Hayarden. However, the text in Devarim 3:12-14 seems to imply that the conquests by the Machir clans of portions of Gilead took place during the campaign of Sichon and Og. The RambanBemidbar 32:33About R. Moshe b. Nachman suggests that the Menashe clans had hesitated to make any requests for settlement, however, once the tribes of Reuven and Gad took that bold step, the clans of Machir followed suit.

Textual Points –

• וּמִקְנֶה רַב הָיָה לִבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן וְלִבְנֵי גָד עָצוּם מְאֹד וַיִּרְאוּ אֶת אֶרֶץ יַעְזֵר וְאֶת אֶרֶץ גִּלְעָד וְהִנֵּה הַמָּקוֹם מְקוֹם מִקְנֶה... וַיָּבֹאוּ בְנֵי גָד וּבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן- The Or HaChayyimBemidbar 32:1About R. Chayyim b. Atar understands that this introductory verse with its focus on the word "מקנה", presents the facts and the context, in a very matter of fact way, and not meant as a value judgement. The Tribes’ accumulated wealth, was a function of the military prowess of Reuven and especially Gad, whose reputation –accounts for his name listed first, in most of the chapter.
• עֲטָרוֹת וְדִיבֹן וְיַעְזֵר וְנִמְרָה וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן וְאֶלְעָלֵה וּשְׂבָם וּנְבוֹ וּבְעֹן. - Convention would have dictated first to give the general context before listing the names of cities. Samet⁴⁸ points out that the verse’s strange sequence and the listing of all the cities, brings to focus the potential danger of many uninhabited cities on the border of Canaan⁴⁹.
• הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הִכָּה י"י-The AbarbanelBemidbar 32: (3)About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel and Or HaChayyimBemidbar 32:3About R. Chayyim b. Atar claim that by referring to G-d’s help in the conquest of the lands of Sichon and Og, R&G are claiming that these lands of Eiver Hayarden have a special status- that they are looked upon favorably by G-d and are extension of the Promised Land.
• ויאמרו אל משה...ויאמרו אם מצאנו חן-The repetition of the word " ויאמרו"while in the middle of an uninterrupted conversation that began in verse 2, is a textual phenomenon that might indicate a break in the continuity of the conversation that will have an impact on the 2nd half of the conversation. AbarbanelBemidbar 32: (4)About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel suggests that Moshe’s lack of a response- his “deafening silence”-(symbolized by the פרשה סתומה) is the break that will cause the Tribes to present their request in a straightforward way, יֻתַּן אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת לַעֲבָדֶיךָ לַאֲחֻזָּה אַל תַּעֲבִרֵנוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן.⁵⁰.
• וַיִּגְּשׁוּ אֵלָיו- The AbarbanelBemidbar 32:(5)About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel describes how they came closer to Moshe, as if to whisper in his ear, "במחילות כבודו”, as if to say, “pardon me, sir, but we have a misunderstanding, let’s clarify “ – as does Yehuda to Paro⁵¹.
• כִּי בָאָה נַחֲלָתֵנוּ אֵלֵינוּ - The RambanBemidbar 32:19About R. Moshe b. Nachman implies that this is manner of speaking and not meant to be haughty.
• גדרות צאן נבנה למקננו פה וערים לטפנו....טפנו נשינו מקננוו וכל בהמתנו יהיו שם-The difference in the order of activities need not be a reflection of the Tribes’ misplaced priorities, but rather they represent different settlement strategies- according to the Kli Yakar⁵², to first build fences for the animals on the frontier, as a buffer,while according to the ChizkuniBemidbar 32:17About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach, to first secure the families.
• לִבְנֵי גָד וְלִבְנֵי רְאוּבֵן וְלַחֲצִי שֵׁבֶט מְנַשֶּׁה בֶן יוֹסֵף -Not being the sons of Yaakov, their tribal affiliation goes back to Yosef.

Addendum – Fourteen years later, the mission of the Two and half Tribes’ expeditionary force is successfully fulfilled as recorded in Yehoshua 22. The relief and sense of accomplishment, now, that the Land has been conquered and partitioned, finds expression in the text’s almost poetic use of the adverb," אָז יִקְרָא יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לָראוּבֵנִי וְלַגָּדִי וְלַחֲצִי מַטֵּה מְנַשֶּׁה "⁵³. Ironically, the rest of their story also (approach II) leads to a misunderstanding because their intentions are not made clear, and are misperceived! In Yehoshua 22, the text describes how after fulfilling their mission, the two and half Tribes are returning home, and pause at the crossing of the Jordan where it states, וַיִּבְנוּ בְנֵי רְאוּבֵן וּבְנֵי גָד וַחֲצִי שֵׁבֶט הַמְנַשֶּׁה שָׁם מִזְבֵּחַ עַל הַיַּרְדֵּן מִזְבֵּחַ גָּדוֹל לְמַרְאֶה ",-“they built there an altar by the Jordan, a great altar to look upon.” ⁵⁴This caused great consternation among the Bnei Yisrael, who accuse them of "מעל"⁵⁵, treachery, for bringing unauthorized offerings. The serious confrontation is resolved only after the Two and half Tribes, clarify their intention that the alter was not meant for offerings but rather, only for a monument to show future generations their role in the Conquest of the Land. Among the booty given to the Two and half Tribes as their share for their part in the Conquest, there included "וּבְמִקְנֶה רַב מְאֹד " ⁵⁶. This, of course, coincides with their chief economic activity, as described in Bamidbar 32. While the accusation of " מעל" turns out to be mistaken in Yehoshua 22, in Divrei Hayamim I ⁵⁷, that "מעל" is the serious cause of their being deported by Assyria.

¹ Bamidbar 32.6.

² Bamidbar 16:1-35.

³ Earlier (Bamidbar 16:1-3),Datan and Aviram, from the tribe of Reuven, created dissent among the people and challenged Moshe's leadership. This tendency by the tribe of Reuven to separate themselves from the rest of Bnei Yisrael, appears again in the Song of Devora (Shoftim 3:15-16), where she criticizes them for not participating in the national effort. Bereshit Rabbah84:20About Bereshit Rabbah incorporates earlier family relationships to illustrate some of the inter- tribal dynamics. He remarks that since Reuven lost his Bechor status to Yosef, and kingship to Yehuda-now, as a tribe, they preferred not to settle with them for it was embarrassing that their younger brothers should rule over him, and so they joined the tribe of Gad in Eiver Hayarden. Gad was the son of Zilpa, the maid of Leah, and so Reuven, the son of Leah, would feel perhaps, less threatened living with them.

⁴ Tehilim 106:24.

⁵ Bereshit 15:18.

⁶ Devarim 27:2.

⁷ Elitzur, Y. and Kil, Y., in Atlas Daat Mikra, Mosad HaRav Kook,Jerusalem, 1993, pp.50-55.

⁸ Moshkowitz, Daat Mikra Bamidbar 32:1, claims that in addition to their portions of spoils of war, R&G had acquired an expertise in raising livestock and offered to buy the livestock from those tribes who were less successful.

⁹ The Ramban on Bamidbar 32:2, comments on the military prowess of the tribe of Gad. This is reflected in Moshe's blessing to them, ולגד אמר ברוך מרחיב גד כלביא שכן וטרף זרוע אף קדקד (Devarim 33:20), and in Divrei Hayamim I 5:18, בני ראובן וגדי וחצי שבט מנשה מן בני חיל אנשים נשאי מגן וחרב ודרכי קשת ולמודי מלחמה. The Tribes' promise to commit an expeditionary force,that is, to be away from their families and engage in warfare for an unlimited period, may seem somewhat reckless.This might explain why Moshe does not include it as one of the conditions of the agreement, rather it is R&G's private commitment.The fact that Moshe assigns three ערי מקלט to the Eiver Hayarden, equal in number to the amount assigned to the entire west side, seems to indicate, according to Rashi on Bamidbar 35:14, a kind of contentiousness to the tribes in Eiver Hayarden. Given all these direct and indirect references to the Tribes' military prowess, it is surprising that Josephus 4 7:3About Josephus Antiquities of the Jews and the Ramban( 32:21), for example, claim that Moshe suspected R&G of faint-heartedness!

¹⁰ Bamidbar 32:17.

¹¹ Spero, S., Who Authorized Israelite Settlement East of the Jordan?.JQR, vol. 35, No.1, 2007, pp. 14-15.

¹² Bamidbar 16, 17.

¹³ Bamidbar 14:40-45.

¹⁴ Bamidbar 32:31

¹⁵ Yehoshua 1:12-18, 22:9

¹⁶ Samet,pp. 7-11. 
                                                                              , אלחנן סמט     
"?דברי משה לבני גד ולבני ראובן-ביקורת צודקת או תוצאת אי הבנה" 
ישיבת הר עציון -בית המדרש האלקטרוני-פרשת השבוע/ מטות -מסעי

¹⁷ Kiddushin 3:4, B. Kiddushin 61;On the four components of תנאי כפול see, Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Sefer Nashim, Hilchot Ishut, chapter 6, halacha 1

¹⁸ Bavli Kiddushin 61

¹⁹ Bamidbar 32:22.

²⁰ Although the Ramban (32:41) does entertain the idea, that Machir might have still been alive.

²¹ Divrei Hayamim I 2:21-23; 7:14-27.

²² Moshkovitz, Daat Mikra Bamidbar, note 32ג, page שצ, brings the commentary on Chronicles attributed to a student of Saadia Gaon, published by R.Kirchheim, Frankfurt on Mein, תרלד, page 12 and the Perush HaTora of Yehuda HaChasid, published by רי"ש לנגה, Jerusalem, תשלה. The AbarbanelBemidbar 32About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel suggests that perhaps these lands were originally purchased by Yosef during the years of famine or perhaps they were an inheritance from Machir's Amorite mother.

²³ Samet, pp. 5-6.

²⁴ Bamidbar 32:4.

²⁵ Bamidbar 32:25.

²⁶ .'397רוזנסון, ישראל, עיונים בפרשניים בספר במדבר,תשסד, מכללת אפרתה ע

²⁷ Samet, p. 5.

²⁸ Bamidbar 32:5.

²⁹ 32:7,8,9,13,15.

³⁰ Samet, pp. 7-9.

³¹ Samet, pg 7-9.

³² Bamidbar 13:18,26,32,33.

³³ Smilar use of the term can be found Bereshit 24:41, Yehoshua 2:17,20.

³⁴ See footnote 24.

³⁵ Bamidbar 32:5. Samet pg. 5, argues that had the Tribes originally intended to participate in the Conquest, they would have requested, "אל תנחילנו" ,which is associated with land/inheritance and not "אל תעברנו" ,which is associated with persons.

³⁶ Bamidbar 32:6.

³⁷ Bamidbar 32:31.

³⁸ Rashi suggests that Moshe begins his final speech to Bnei Yisrael only after the victory over Sichon and Og, "שיכנס לקצת הארץ", that its, "by entering into a least a part of the Land", Moshe shows that he has the potential to fulfill his mission and bring the people in the Land and therefore, the right to reprove them before they cross the Jordan. In addition, a military victory for Israel against the kingdoms of Sichon and Og will still fear in the Nations, who saw how, up until now, the Bnei Yisrael avoided combat and steered clear of the kingdoms of Adom, Moav and Amon.

³⁹ Devarim 2:31,33.

⁴⁰ Although Eiver Hayarden does not fall into the definition of Canaan and its lands were actually forbidden to conquer because of family ties with Amon and Moav, once those lands were conquered by Sichon and Og, their status changes and become permissible for settlement, and so we read that after the conquest, " ויקח ישראל את כל הערים האלהו וישב ישראל בכל ערי האמרי" (Bamidbar 7:822:622:8About Bemidbar Rabbah21:25). This explains the words of Rav Papa, עמון ומואב טהרו בסיחון (Gittin 38:1). By virtue of their being conquered, these lands, according to some authorities (Sifri Devarim 11:12, Rambam Hilchot Terumot,1:1-2), enjoy a special status, and are obligatory מדרבנן in most מצוות התלויות בארץ. Not to mention the significance of sites in Eiver Hayarden where the Avot recieved Divine revelations, such as Penuel (Bereshit 32:29-31), Machanayim (32:2-3), and Sukkot (33:17). On the Other hand, the lands of Eiver Hayarden are referred to as ארץ טומאה (Yehoshua 22:18). Bemidbar Rabbah7:8About Bemidbar Rabbah 7:8, ranks the lands of Eiver Hayarden as not worthy of the presence of the Shechina. According to the MalbimBemidbar 32:2About R. Meir Leibush Weiser on Bamidbar 32:2 and Devarim 2:4, Eiver Hayarden was meant to be part of the original Promised Land, but was "detached" as a result of the Sin of the Spies. The Netziv Bemidbar 32:22Devarim 3:12About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlinon Bamidbar 32:22 and Devarim 3:12, understands that Eiver Hayarden was meant to eventually, be part of the Land, but only after the conquest of Canaan.

⁴¹ Samet pp 5-6.

⁴² MalbimBemidbar 32:19About R. Meir Leibush Weiser Bamidbar 32:19 and AbarbanelBemidbar 32: (6)About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel 32 (6).

⁴³ Devarim 34:7.

⁴⁴ Devarim 31:2.

⁴⁵ Bamidbar 20:12.

⁴⁶ see footnote #24.

⁴⁷ Spero, pg 13.

⁴⁸ Samet, page 6.

⁴⁹ Alsheich 32:1 suggests that their mention of the city of נבו as part of their request-the site of Moshe's death-was deliberate to hint that it would not be proper for this site to remain outside the inheritance-it even gets mention in Moshe's blessing to Gad...וירא ראשית לו כי שם חלקת ספון (Devarim 33:21).

⁵⁰ Bamidbar 32:5.

⁵¹ Bereshit 32:18.

⁵² Bamidbar 32:1.

⁵³ Yehoshua 22:1.

⁵⁴ Yehoshua 22:10.

⁵⁵ Yehoshua 22:16

⁵⁶ Yehoshua 22:8.

⁵⁷ Divrei Hayamim I 5:25.