Ramban, Ki Sisa

צוה הקדוש ברוך הוא את משה כאשר תשא את ראש בני ישראל לפקדיהם ונתנו איש כפר נפשו

machatzit hashekel. v'omrei,

ולקחת את כסף הכפורים הנזכר ונתתה אתו על עבודת אהל מועד. ומזה ילמד משה שימנה אותם עתה

v'chein asah,

כמו שאמר וכסף פקודי העדה מאת ככר. ולא הוצרך להאריך ולומר ואתה תשא ראשם ונתתה הכסף על עבודת אהל מועד כי הדבר מובן מעצמו שימנה עתה. לפיכך כל המצוה כאשר תשא ראשם תעשה כן שיכנס בכל כל פעם שימנה.

Even though we don't find a pasuk, a phrase that issues an imperative to Moshe Rabbeinu to count them now, but the combination of A, the timing of the mitzvah, that punkt now HaKadosh Baruch Hu is telling him, oh by the way, whenever you conduct a census, so make sure that you don't do it directly. Make sure that you count indirectly. And then HaKadosh Baruch Hu concludes: And you'll take the money and you'll direct the money for avodat ohel mo’ed. So that combination makes clear that Moshe Rabbeinu is being told to conduct a census now. In general, by Talmud Torah, the standard of אלה המשפטים אשר תשים לפניהם that Rashi quotes k’shulchan aruach, and the lengths to which the Rebbi is supposed to go to explain things and clarify things,

לא תעלה על דעתך לומר אשנה להם הפרק וההלכה באיזה ג פעמים עד שתהא סדורה בפיהם כמשנתה ואיני מטריח עצמי להבינם טעמי הדבר ופירושו כך נאמר אשר תשים לפניהם כשולחן הערוך ומוכן לאכול לפני האדם.

But all that notwithstanding, there's an expectation on our end that we're not passive. Understanding is not something passive. Even when one is a talmid in the Rebbi-talmid relationship, and Moshe Rabbeinu is that vis-à-vis HaKadosh Baruch Hu obviously, understanding is something active. It's something active in two ways. It's active in the sense that the truth is to, whatever you understand, the Rebbi can walk us through the thought process, but to understand, you have to think it for yourself. It's never... Again the Rebbe can walk a talmid through a thought process but to really understand the talmid then has to think it through himself. And and you can tell when talmidim do that when they don't do that. Sometimes the words are parodied and sometimes you see a light bulb goes on. So understanding can never be passive. That's A and B understanding is never passive in the sense that there's an expectation that one draws inferences as appropriate draws conclusions as appropriate. And and that tzuras halimud is is clear what the Ramban is talking about. Hakadosh Baruch Hu never directly tells Moshe Rabbeinu maneh pekod here in in Parshas Ki Sisa and yet הדבר מובן מאצמו שימנה מטה. And and that's the tzuras halimud. The role of chazara at least the first time it it really should have a different description should have a different word the first time than it does the other times. The first time is not techazer the first time is to think it through actively as opposed to just having sort of written down the words which is which is a passive mode. After that chazara is to to reinforce to to try to prevent shichcha.

והנראה בעיני כי היה צריך אותם לבוא באהליהם ולמנותם כאשר יעשה בחומש הפקודים רק שיעשה כאשר יאמרו רבותינו בשקלי הקרבנות דהיינו צוה עליהם שכל היודע בעצמו שהוא מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה יתן הסך הזה

of the machatzis hashekel

והם הביאו אליו הכופר נדבה עם כל שאר הנדבה בבוקר בבוקר.

So the way this minyan was conducted was that they were supposed to come forward with the machatzis hashekel and then since there was a direct correspondence by counting the machatzis hashekel so that accomplished the minyan.

ולכן לא אמר רק ונתת את כסף הכפורים כי הנה צויתיך כאשר תמנה שיתנו כופר ועתה יתנו מעצמם הכופר ונתת אותו על עבודת אהל מועד ולכן לא הוצרך אתה לאהרון ונשיאים שיהיו עמו ואין טענה מכל העובר על הפקודים

meaning the people are not presenting themselves that's not what כל העובר על הפקודים means in this context it doesn't mean that the way you the the the census is being conducted is that they're they're passing before you

כי פירושו הבא לצבא. ומפני שלא נתפרש כאן אם היא מצות דורות או לשעה למשה במדבר טעה דוד ומנה אותם בלא שקלים.

Meaning even though the Ramban said in the opening words here that the ki sisa is right whenever but אף על פי כן it's still not clear is it whenever you Moshe Rabbeinu in the midbar count them this is the way the census has to be conducted meaning clearly it's more than this what the Ramban said initially is that that that Hakadosh Baruch Hu spoke in in sweeping terms meaning that the sweeping... sweeping terms may have been whenever in the Midbar a census is going to be conducted

ומפני שלא נתפרש כאן אם היא מצוה לדורות או לשעה למשה לבד במדבר טעה דוד ומנה אותם בלא שקלים

vehaya hanagef bahem venisvada alav ויאמר דוד אל השם חטאתי מאוד אשר עשיתי. Ramban doesn't, doesn't spell out for us so, so why was it, why is David so at fault? Chatasi me’od is an interesting, interesting phrase. Right? I've sinned exceedingly, I've sinned greatly. Me'od is al derech hahaflaga. I don't know if it's really ambiguous here. So why is it such a cheit me'od for, you know, for not succeeding in deciphering that ambiguity? So we do find that there was at least, I don't know, there are others that are mentioned in the Rishonim, but there's at least one minyan after Moshe bamidbar before David's minyan, which is conducted by Shaul, where the pasuk says vayifkedem batla'im. And that Shaul also refrained from counting directly. But vayifkedem batla'im. Through sheep. So maybe, maybe that's a, maybe that's one possible answer, that Dovid Hamelech should have known from that precedent, even if, even if it's not clear to him from the pesukim on his own what the pshat is. But there was a mesorah that he could have tapped into. Because Shaul Hamelech, the pasuk describes וישמע שאול את העם here in Shmuel Aleph perek tes-vav: וישמע שאול את העם ויפקדם בטלאים. So, so Shaul refrained. The Rambam has a lashon. The Rambam in Perek Yud of Hilchos Shmita Ve'yovel is talking about how you count Shmita years when there's, when yovel is not noheig. And he presents two different ways of calculating where in his day, where they were holding in the Shmita year. And he says, he presents one view, and then says

אלא כל הגאונים אמרו שהמסורת. אלא כל הגאונים אמרו שמסורת היא בידיהם איש מפי איש שלמדו באותן השבעים שנה שבין חורבן בית ראשון ובניין בית שני אלא שמיטות בלבד בלא יובל.

Question is when you got to year 49, hagam that yovel wasn't noheig, so when yovel is noheig, so yovel doesn't count towards the next shmitta cycle, right? You count 49 years, then the 50th year is not year one of the next shmitta cycle, it's yovel, and then year 51 is the next year of yovel cycle. So what do they do during golus?

אלא כל הגאונים אמרו שמסורת היא בידיהם איש מפי איש פרק י' הלכה ה' שלמדו באותן השבעים שנה שבין חורבן בית ראשון ובניין בית שני אלא שמיטות בלבד בלא יובל.

And similarly v'chein the same question v'chein

משחרב באחרונה לא מנו שנת חמישים אלא שבע שבע בלבד מתחילת שנת החורבן.

U'l'fi cheshbon zeh and this is this halacha is how we know when the Rambam wrote Mishneh Torah because the Rambam tells you what year it is.

ולפי חשבון זה תהא שנה זו שהיא שנת שבע ומאה ואלף לחורבן מוצאי שביעית ועל זה אנו סומכים וכפי חשבון זה אנו מורים לעניין מעשרות ושביעית והשמטת כספים שהקבלה והמעשה עמודים גדולים בהוראה ובהם ראוי להיתלות.

If svara tells you one thing, but then there's a kabbala, tradition, that tells you something else, so you're supposed to rely halacha l'maaseh you're supposed to rely on on on the kabbala, you're supposed to rely on on the on the maaseh rav. So I don't know, maybe that maybe that's a taina on David HaMelech. He should have he should have deferred to the maaseh rav of how Shaul had conducted the census. Ramban in Parshas Korach explains that the negeff which resulted when David conducted the census directly was not purely in response to his cheit. That that Hakadosh Baruch Hu didn't punish Bnei Yisrael for David HaMelech's cheit or at least that's one tzad Ramban has. He says that rather the haktpada on on on Bnei Yisrael at the time was that they weren't nisorrer to build the Beis HaMikdash. So that's why there was a tviya on them and then when David HaMelech was chotei in counting them directly, so as it were, כאן מצא בעל חוב מקום לגבות חובו. So then those two converge. David HaMelech sinned in in counting directly as in ולא יהיה בהם נגף בפקוד אותם and they were rauy l'onesh mitzad the fact that they had been misrashel in in not taking initiative to build the Beis HaMikdash. That's how Ramban has in Parshas Korach. Okay. רבותינו דרשו מכאן שלוש תרומות מריבוי המקראות. Now if you skip to where the Ramban says וכתב רש"י לפי שרמז כאן שלוש תרומות, you see that? Skipping a bit. וכתב רש"י לפי שרמז כאן שלוש תרומות achas trumas ha'adonim שמנאון כשהתחילו בנדבת המשכן אחר יום הכיפורים בשנה ראשונה. So of the three trumos to which the Torah is alluding here, so one was the collection which they used the silver for the adonim

שמנאון כשהתחילו בנדבת המשכן אחר יום הכיפורים בשנה ראשונה ונתן כל אחד מחצית השקל ועלה למאת כיכר.

V'hashniya, the second trumah, the second collection, אף היא על ידי מנין, also the nedavahs were attained through a census, שמנאן משהוקם המשכן הוא מנין האמור בחומש הפקודים. That's the census described in Parshas Bamidbar, באחד לחדש השני בשנה השנית. V'nasnu kol echad, what was done with that money? ונתנו כל אחד מחצית השקל לקנות בהם קרבנות ציבור. The money, the funds from the second census, the one that's described in Parshas Bamidbar, were used for korbanos tzibur. So what emerges according to that, the Ramban says later,

וכן נראה לי כי שלוש תרומות שהפסוק מדבר כאן האחת לקרבנות הציבור איננה על ידי המנין האמור בחומש הפקודים כדברי הרב.

The trumah here to which the Torah alludes, which was for the Trumas Halishkah to buy the korbanos tzibur, those funds were not acquired through the census. Why? First of all,

כי שם נאמר בפרשת במדבר אך את מטה לוי לא תפקד,

but

והשקלים של קרבנות מחצית השקל לויים חייבים לדברי הכל. וכדברי חכמים אף הכהנים וכן הלכה כמו שמפורש במסכת שקלים. ועוד כי השקלים לקרבנות אינם מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה אלא משהביא שתי שערות חייב לשקול וכן מפורש שם. אבל צוה הכתוב שיביאו למלאכת המשכן תרומת מחצית השקל וכל העובר על הפקודים מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה.

The money from the second census wasn't used for the Trumas Halishkah. That was used for the mishkan, for whatever they needed silver in the mishkan.

ורמז העשיר לא ירבה והדל לא ימעיט ממחצית השקל לכפר על נפשתיכם,

that in addition to the machtzis hashekel that they gave twice for two minyanim for the census that was conducted, that in addition they would also give a machtzis hashekel for korbanos, but the machtzis hashekel for korbanos was not miben esrim. So what emerges here is that the way Rashi understands ושלוש תרומות הפסוק מדבר, so Rashi implicitly indicates that the mitzvah of machtzis hashekel is only miben esrim shanah. And Ramban says that's meheichah teisei? It's a mitzvah like all other mitzvos, it's miben yud-gimmel. And the money of מבן עשרים שנה ומעלה was not used for the Trumas Halishkah. That was used for the meleches hamishkan. And there was a separate collection for the Trumas Halishkah, which is not one of the shalosh trumos of which the Torah is speaking. The shalosh trumos was for the construction of the mishkan. It wasn't for the korbanos. You have the same machlokes. The Sefer HaChinuch also writes that the mitzvah of machtzis hashekel is only miben esrim shanah. Not miben yud-gimmel. Also the same mahalach as Rashi. Rabbi Akiva Eiger in Shulchan Aruch quotes there is a work that today is widely assumed to be a forgery, called the Teshuvos Besamim Rosh, which was attributed to the Rosh. But Rabbi Akiva Eiger apparently was the evidence of that hadn't yet been unearthed. So Rabbi Akiva Eiger... And in the Hagasos Shulchan Aruch, so in the Besamim Rosh it says that the shliach tzibur for Musaf should be at least twenty years old. That you shouldn't take someone between age 13 and 20 who can be shliach tzibur for the other tefilos, but not for Musaf. And the cheshbon is based on this, it's based on this shitta of Rashi of the Sefer HaChinuch that in order that the chiyuv of Machatzis HaShekel to contribute to the Trumas HaLishka from which the Korbanos Tzibur were purchased was only mi-ben esrim. I don't know, Rav Akiva Eiger quotes it. It's hard to... So clearly what that, again, that, that, that view reflects is that there's a fundamental difference between tefilas Musaf and the other tefilos. The other tefilos agam that they're keneged temidim, they're correlated with the temidim in terms of the zmanei tefila, in terms of the minyan hatefilos, but the tefila itself is not unishalma parim sefaseinu. The tefila itself is not in lieu of the korban. Now, when Chazal were kovea zmanei tefila, minyan hatefilos, so they were kovea keneged temidim, but the tefila is not in lieu of the korban. Ma she'ein kein, tefilas Musaf is a replacement for the korban Musaf. Tosfos has such a, Tosfos has such a svara. Tosfos has why don't you find tashlumin for tefilas Musaf the same way you have tashlumin for Arvis, Shacharis, and Mincha? So Tosfos says no, because tefilas Musaf is unishalma parim sefaseinu. So since עבר זמנו בטל קרבנו, so you can't have tashlumin for for Musaf. But that, there is no analogous consideration by having tashlumin for Arvis, for Shacharis, for Mincha. Again, there's a correlation with temidim, but not... notwithstanding. There's one view in, in the mishna, in the Tanna'im, that tefilas Musaf is only betzibur, only bechever ir. That a yachid doesn't, if for some reason a person can't be in shul, Shabbos, Rosh Chodesh, Yom Tov, whatever the case may be, that a yachid doesn't daven Musaf. Obviously, we don't pasken that way. But... so eich shehu, the Besamim Rosh then thinks that hayos that the tefila is bemakom korban, so the shliach tzibur has to be one who who was machuyav lishkol to to buy the korban, and the Besamim Rosh was reflecting this view of Rashi and the Chinuch. And let's see the next Ramban.

מחצית השקל בשקל הקודש. קבלו למשה רבינו מטבע כסף בישראל כי מלך גדול היה.

So what do these lines mean? Moshe Rabbeinu was a melech gadol. What's that got to do with Machatzis HaShekel? So let's see, in halacha, we talked about kesef and shaveh kesef. In that context, obviously kesef doesn't mean only silver, as it does when you're talking about a metal, where zahav means gold and kesef means silver. But kesef means it's money, it's cash, and shaveh kesef means it's not. So we have a... so what's considered money and what's considered shaveh kesef? So the definition of money is whatever the government accepts as currency. That, that, that, that's money. So that's what the Ramban is saying. קבלו למשה רבינו מטבע כסף בישראל. That has a din of of of kessef. That's why in Hilchos Ribbis, let's say when you have let's say, I don't know whether it's Canadian, Canadian money here or whether you, I don't know, a person comes back from Eretz Yisrael and has shekalim from Eretz Yisrael. So in here, so that's shaveh kessef. It's not kessef because it's not the it's not the currency which the which the government which the government recognizes.

קבלו שמשה רבינו מטבע כסף בישראל כי מלך גדול היה וקרא למטבע הוא שקל בעבור שכל המטבע.

So why why that that coinage, that that cash, why is it called shekel? Shekel is lashon mishkal, weight.

בעבור שכל המטבע במשקל שלם, אין בו פחת ולא כסף סיגים.

It's pure silver. The the what was established as the currency is something which is a pure weight in the sense that that it's pure silver. Uva'avor shemishkalo ha'erachin when when a person parshas Bechukosai says erko alay, so what he pays is defined in terms of shekalim. Upidyon habechor, also the Torah designates, defines that amount in terms of

במטבע ההוא שהם קודש וכן כל שקלי המשכן וכן כל כסף קצוב האמור בתורה יקרא לו הכתוב שקל הקודש.

So why is the shekel referred to as a shekel hakodesh? Because it's the shekel that's used for inyanei kedusha. It's the shekel which is the unit for mitzvos haTorah. All mitzvos haTorah are not defined in terms of dollars, are not defined in terms of pounds, in terms of lira, they're defined in terms of shekel. So the shekel is the is the currency of kedusha, of mitzvos, of kedusha, of the Torah.

וכן הטעם אצלי במה שרבותינו קוראים לשון התורה לשון הקודש.

Why do we refer to Hebrew as lashon hakodesh? Why do we refer to lashon haTorah as lashon hakodesh?

שזהו מפני שדברי התורה והנבואות וכל דברי קדושה כולם בלשון ההוא נאמרו.

Again, it's the lashon of kedusha. It's the lashon through which kedusha is communicated. The same way the shekel is the unit for mitzvos, for kedusha, so so too the language, this is the language through which it's the language of kedusha through which kedusha is expressed, is communicated.

והנה הוא הלשון שהקדוש ברוך הוא יתעלה שמו מדבר בו עם נביאיו ועם עדתו אנכי ולא יהיה ושאר הדברות התורה והנבואה ובו בלשון הקודש נקרא בשמותיו הקדושים השבעה שמות שאינם נמחקים

are all are all from this language. So this is the language of kedusha. It's the language through which kedusha is expressed. It's the language through which kedusha is communicated.

קל אלהים צבאות שדי ויהוה והשם הגדול המיוחד ובו ברא עולמו.

Why why did the Ramban only list six of the השבעה שמות שאינם נמחקים? Keil... Kel, Elokim, Tzvaot, Shakai, Yud-Key, and Hashem HaGadol HaMeyuchad, Yud-Key-Vav-Key. I don't remember that. I have to look in the Gemara in Shavuot. I don't remember. I'll have to look it up before I say.

וקרא שמות שמים וארץ וכל אשר בהם ומלאכיו וכל צבאיו וכולם בשם יקרא מכל גבוה וכל שמות הקדושים אשר בארץ אברהם יצחק ויעקב ושלמה זולתם.

So kedusha is communicated in this language. So mimaila, this is Lashon HaKodesh, it's the language of kedusha. והרמב"ם אמר במורה נבוכים, the Rambam gives a different explanation for why we refer to it as Lashon HaKodesh. אל תחשוב שנקרא לשוננו לשון הקודש לגאוותנו או לטעותנו. But aval hu bedin,

כי זה הלשון קודש לא ימצאו בו שמות לאיבר הביאה בזכר או בנקבה ולא לטיפה ולא לשתן ולא לצואה רק בכינוי.

In Lashon HaKodesh, there's no explicit vocabulary either for the reproductive system or for the excretory system, no explicit words. Meaning that obviously there's need at times to speak of these inyanim, but whereas in other languages you have words whose primary meaning refers to the reproductive organs and refers to the parts of the body involved in the excretory system or waste, in Lashon HaKodesh, you don't have any words where that's the primary meaning. There's something, it's always something indirect or euphemistic about the vocabulary.

ואל יטעה אותך שגל כי הוא שם אשה המזומנת למשכב ואמר ישגלנה,

that's the ksiv, we don't read it,

על פי מה שנכתב עליו ופירושו יקח אשה לפילגש. והנה אין צורך לטעם הזה.

So initially the Ramban, I mean he's going to the questions against the Rambam escalate, but initially the Ramban just says this is superfluous. כי הדבר ברור שהלשון קודש קדשים הוא כמו שפירשתי. What is the Rambam, what's the a little bit of the omek of the Rambam in terms of understanding Lashon HaKodesh? The vocabulary of cultures reflect the preoccupations of of that culture. If a culture is more interested in flowers, for instance, so then you're going to have a much richer vocabulary to identify flowers. You won't lump together whole groups of flowers, but you'll you'll have very fine and and subtle distinctions will be reflected. So language mirrors preoccupation. That's what the Rambam is saying. The significance of Lashon Hakodesh is that a person recognizes that even though these are areas of human life that that need to be dealt with appropriately, but in terms of what a person's calling in life, what a person's focus in life, what a person's goal in life is, so these don't come into play at all. Lashon Hakodesh reflects a preoccupation with Kedusha. For the Ramban, Lashon Hakodesh it is that it's the Lashon through which Hakadosh Baruch Hu expressed Kedusha. For the for the Rambam, Lashon Hakodesh is, it's the Lashon which reflects our preoccupation with Kedusha, and and that's why as it were our vocabulary, our language is so impoverished when it comes to talking about devarim gufanim. Again, even though we are hybrid, so we're spiritual but we're also physical, and in that sense they they are a part of of human reality, but the davka our language is impoverished that we don't have any any words whose primary meaning is is assigned again either to reproductive system or excretory matters. Maybe just to leave off with a question and and so maybe we'll we'll think about it and perhaps bli neder revisit it. When the Ramban refers back to to what he said, and and when he says that the Rambam's reason is unnecessary,

הנה אין צורך לטעם הזה כי הדבר באר שהלשון קודש קדשים הוא כמו שפירשתי,

it seems like he's saying more than he said initially. Initially the Ramban, I mean, how did the Ramban segue to talking inyanei kedushah are defined. And ve-khen ha-ta'am, this segue to Lashon ha-Kodesh, again suggests as we said that the pshat in Lashon ha-Kodesh is that it's the language through which inyanei kedushah are communicated, are expressed. But here, והנה אין צורך לטעם הזה, the Ramban seems to be saying more than that. He seems to be saying that there's something inherent or intrinsic, she-ha-lashon kodesh kodashim, right? So it's agam that he segued from the phrase shekel ha-kodesh, but there obviously isn't anything inherently or intrinsically kadosh about the about a piece of silver, of pure silver. He certainly didn't mean that by the shekel ha-kodesh. So the ve-khen notwithstanding, the pshat is that the Ramban is going further by his understanding of Lashon ha-Kodesh. And that it's not only sort of that the lashon attains the status of Lashon ha-Kodesh because it's the language through which inyanei kedushah are expressed. No, but that's somewhat inverted. It's because the lashon is kodesh kodashim, something that inheres, that ha-Kadosh Barukh Hu first, first infused into the language, and then the lashon becomes that which is the natural means of communication in the nevi'im and with Mattan Torah. So that seems to be clearly indicated here. So why initially is it with a ve-khen? So maybe we'll leave that now with a tzarukh iyun. Okay, we'll stop here.