Numbers 4:21 – 7:89
"Subject matter in the Bible is
often arranged and linked together by a process of thought and, in particular,
word association, probably originally designed as an aid to memory".1 This
principle is well illustrated in Parashat Nasso. There is no need to look far
and wide in the Parasha's three and a half chapters for a unifying theme. It is
apparent. Despite the assortment of seemingly unrelated subjects that the Parasha presents, the root of "nasso" appears in several places with different connotations.
Bamidbar 4:22 says: "Lift the
heads of the sons of Gershon…" (literal translation). "Lift"
here is "nasso", of the root n.s.a (noon, sin, alef), which we
have already encountered in previous portions, and several times in the same
context of taking a census in last week’s Parasha (of the leaders of the sons
of Israel 1:2, and of the Kohathites 4:2)2. Although the English translations
use the imperative form ("take" or "lift"), in actual fact, this is not what the Hebrew text says. The form “nasso,” which is used here as
a charge, is more like the English present progressive, rendering “nasso”
almost as a "lifting up". This unusual usage in an address form
(cf. 3:40 in last week's Parasha, where the usual imperative form
"sa" was used) serves to call attention to this verb and lends it the
character of a noun.
Let us follow "nasso"
throughout our Parasha and examine its usage in the context of the
different topics presented. The reason for the census as it applies
to the Gershonites is given as: "This is the service of the families of
the Gershonites, in serving and in bearing burdens ["masa"]… they shall bear ["venas'ou"]
the curtains of the tabernacle, and the tent of meeting, its covering, and the
covering of sealskin that is above upon it, and the screen for the door of the
tent of meeting… At the commandment of Aaron and his sons shall be all the
service of the sons of the Gershonites, in all their burden ["masa'am"],
and in all their service; and you shall appoint unto them the charge of
all their burden ["masa'am"]” (4:24,25,27 italics
added).
"Lifting" and
"bearing a burden" or a “charge” are
all rooted in n.s.a, which describes the essence of the Gershonites' service in
the Mishkan. The Meraris' census, on the other hand, is not qualified by the
verb n.s.a, but rather by “pakod”, which is translated as "number"
but basically means to “attend or visit" (it was
also used in this form in last week’s Parasha in relationship to the census of
the army, ch. 2). Yet the Meraris’ work is also described as "a charge of
their burden" (v. 31), which is, once again, "masa". Altogether
the essence of the Levites' service may, therefore, be summarized as: "All
those that were numbered of the Levites… everyone that entered
in to do the work of service, and the work of bearing burdens ["masa"]
in the tent of meeting… every one that entered in to do his work of service,
and the work of his burden ["masa'o"] in the tent of
meeting… they were numbered by the hand of Moses, each according to his service
and his burden…" (4: 46, 47,49 italics added). The ultimate
purpose of "bearing" these "burdens" (literally “carrying”
or “lifting”) was to "lift high” or “elevate” (same root – n.s.a) the One
to Whom the Levites were rendering these rites.
The next section where the root
n.s.a makes an appearance is at the very end of the "law of jealousy"
(5:11-31), as it is called (or “Sota” – ‘sinning woman’), which is the
inspection of possible adultery on the part of a married woman. If, and when
proven, that the wife has transgressed in such a manner, and after having gone
through the various rites enumerated, she was to "bear ["tisa"]
her iniquity" (v. 31, italics added). Whereas the priests’ duties in
"bearing the burdens" of the Mishkan were of the more 'uplifting'
kind, here "nasso" connotes 'carrying' a heavy burden of guilt.
The issue of "lifting"
comes up again in the famous priestly, or Aaronic, blessing, or benediction, which
seals chapter 6. Toward the end of the blessing, we read: "YHVH lift
up ["yisa"] His face upon you and give you peace" (v.
26, italics added), which is an altogether different application of the root
n.s.a, touching Elohim and His relationship with His People. Notice that the
whole benediction is written in second-person singular, implying that each
individual within the Nation is being addressed. "Yisa YHVH panav",
the lifting of YHVH's face, or countenance, toward you, or "upon
you," indicates favor, acceptance, and turning toward the object of the
benediction (as we have already seen in the past, regarding the meaning of
"face" - "panim"), thus instilling hope in one’s
heart.
Finally, chapter 7 is dedicated in
its entirety to the offerings brought for the dedication of the Mishkan (or
"Ohel Mo'ed") by the "princes" or "leaders", the
"nesi'im", those who are "lifted up" (verses
2,3). Each of those “leaders” is called “nassi” - “one who is
elevated”. Because of the specific conjugation that is used for this noun,
its literal translation should be, “one who is elevate-able”. In
other words, the leaders were not merely the heads of their tribes by virtue of
birth. Not at all! In order to be in their lofty positions, they had to be
equal to these positions, proving their faithfulness and leadership
capabilities.
“Nesi’im” is also plural for
“cloud”. In Proverbs, we find this word used metaphorically: “Whoever falsely
boasts of giving is like clouds and wind without rain”
(Proverbs 25:14, italics added). In 1st Peter, the same imagery
is used regarding those “who walk according to the flesh in the lust of
uncleanness and despise authority…. These are wells without water, clouds
carried by a tempest, for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness
forever” (2:10, 17 italics added).
Let us return now to Umberto
Cassuto, who makes the following point: "The book of Bamidbar is arranged
chiefly after such a fashion… with various items being included because of a
similarity of thought, or phrases recurring in the chapters concerned…"4,
as, indeed, is the case with the root n.s.a. Cassuto incorporates other
examples from our Parasha: "The laws applying to the suspected adulteress
(5:11-31) are succeeded by those treating the Nazirite (6:1-21), after which is
appended the formula for the priestly blessing (6:22-27)". Preceding
the law of the suspected adulteress, which focuses on a "man's wife
[who] trespasses a trespass [“uma'ala bo ma'al”],
are the laws of the guilt offering, where we encounter the phrase "to do
a trespass/commit unfaithfulness ["li'm'ol ma'al"]
against YHVH" (5:6 italics added). Before we continue to follow our
‘chain’, let us pause to look at the verb “ma’al”. A common noun that stems
from the same root is “m’eel”, which simply means a “robe”. Thus, it infers
that “trespass” is a form of deception, as it is rooted an attempt to cover up
one’s actions. By contrast, we read in Yishayahu (Isaiah) 61:10: “…For He
[YHVH] has clothed me with the garments of salvation; He has covered me with
the robe – m’eel - of righteousness…”
Back to Bamidbar 5:18, where it says
about the alleged adulteress: "And the priest shall set the woman before
YHVH, and let the hair of the woman's head go loose -
u'fara" (italics added). In 6:5 it says concerning the Nazirite: "He
shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow long -
"pera". Both u'fara and pera share the root p/f.r.a (pey/fey, resh,
ayin). Surprisingly, this edict conveys a similarity between the Nazarite and
the alleged adulteress. However, there are also similarities shared by the
Nazarite and the high priest. Neither of them is to touch the dead (cf. Num.
6:6 to Lev. 21:11), which is why the Priestly Blessing is appended to this
chapter that deals with the Nazirite's laws. Another connection is found in
6:3: "he shall separate himself from wine and similar drink;
he shall drink neither vinegar made from wine nor vinegar made
from similar drink; neither shall he drink any grape juice,
nor eat fresh grapes or raisins". Immediately after Aaron's sons, Nadav
and Avihu, kindled the strange fire which brought about their demise, Aaron and
his other sons were charged in Leviticus 10:9: "Do not
drink wine or intoxicating drink, you, nor your sons with you, when you go into
the tabernacle of meeting, lest you die. It shall be a
statute forever throughout your generations".
Within the specifications of the
laws of guilt offering and compensation, mentioned in 5:5-10, the topic of
confession - "viduy" - comes up (v. 7). This is not the first time we
encounter this topic. In fact, we have already examined the term in Parashat
Vayikra (Lev. 1-5, e.g., 5:5). Sefer Ha-hinukh sheds further light on this
issue: "The verbal confession of guilt provides an indication that the
sinner truly believes that all his deeds are revealed and known to the Lord,
blessed be He, and he will not deny the omnipresence of the All-seeing. Again,
by verbally specifying the sin and regretting it, he will be more careful in
the future not to stumble thereon. After he has said with his mouth… he will,
as a result, become reconciled with His maker. The good God who desires the
welfare of His creatures guided them in this path through which they would gain
merit".5 Similarly, we read in 1st John: "If we
confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to
cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1:9). Hirsh notes that the form of
the Hebrew verb "to confess," "hitvadeh", conjugated as it
is (in the "hitpa'el" form) “…indicates that the confession consists
of man speaking to himself, admonishing his [own] conscience".6
In Vayikra 27:1 (Parashat
B'chu'kotai), the taking of oaths drew our attention because of the unique
Hebrew term, "taking a vow." Here, this term is used again: "Speak
to the children of Israel, and say to them: 'When either a man or woman
consecrates an offering to take the vow of a Nazirite, to separate himself to
YHVH". "Consecrates" here is "yaflee" – of the root
p.l.a (pey, lamed, alef (the same root in a slightly different form is used in
Bamidbar 15:3 for the same action. There it is "paleh"). This root,
as we noted recently, means "wonder" or "to do wonders".
Hence, what is "wonderous" about taking an oath? This week's Haftara
deals with the annunciation of Shimshon's birth, who was called to be a
Nazarite from birth. There, this root is used twice, although not directly in
connection with the Nazarite vow. When Shimshon's father, Mano'ach, asks the
angel/messenger who appeared (originally) to his wife, as to his name the
latter responded with a question: "Why do you ask My name, seeing it is wonderful
– pel'ee?" (Judges 18:13). In the next verse, we read: "So Manoah
took the young goat with the grain offering, and offered it upon the rock to
YHVH. And He did a wondrous thing – hiflee - while Manoah and his wife looked
on". The "wonderful" name of the messenger, who acted
"wondrously", may divulge His identity as being the One who later on
was known as the "Wonderful Counselor" of Yisha'ya'hu 9:6. "Is anything too hard for YHVH?" of B'resheet
18:14, reads in the original, "is anything too wonderful – hayipa'le – for
YHVH". These words were spoken after Sarah laughed when she heard the promise that she would give birth to a son. This chain of words,
rooted in p.l.a., may not throw more light on what is said at the opening of
chapter 6 of Bamidbar. Still, it certainly confirms Prof. Cassuto's assertion,
regarding "similarity of thought, or phrases recurring in the chapters
concerned", and in fact in the entire Scriptures. Thus, it is another
device that illustrates the connectedness of the various parts of Elohim's
Word, making it an ongoing organic aggregate.
Let us conclude by reviewing once
again the case of the jealous husband from another angle. When Yeshua came up
out of the grave on the first of the week (see John 20:1) He was acting as the
fulfillment of the first [beginning) of the Omer, which was “waved for our
acceptance” (see Lev. 23:11). An omer of barley (i.e., one-tenth of
an ephah, see Ex. 16:36), was also to be used as an offering by the husband who
was overcome by a spirit of jealousy, and so we read in 5:15 “… the man shall
bring his wife to the priest. He shall bring the offering required for
her, one-tenth of an ephah [i.e., an omer] of barley
meal…” (emphasis added). The priest was then to
make the woman drink bitter water to determine whether she was innocent or not (ref. 5:17,18, 22-24, 27), so that the drink's effect on her body would disclose her true state. When on the stake,
Yeshua was also given a bitter drink (gall mixed with wine), which although He
did not actually drink, He did taste (see Matt. 27:34). Thus, Yeshua as
the jealous husband – or representing Him (see 34:14; Deut. 6:12-16, etc.), whose
wife Yisrael has gone astray (e.g., Jer. 3:6) has also become the very
offering for her sin, the Priest who makes the offering (e.g., Heb. 5:10), and
the One who takes upon Himself her transgression, drinking, as it were, the
bitter drink in her place (see. Mat. 26:42; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42; John
18:11). Without Yeshua's all-encompassing
intervention, if the woman was found guilty, she would forever carry her guilt
in a form of the curse that she brought upon herself. However, in Vayikra
20:10, it states very clearly that an adulterer and an adulteress are both to
be put to death. What is the difference, then, between the treatment of the
adulteress that we had just read about, who was not to be put to death, and the
one that was? If viewed from a more global perspective, as we did above, seeing
the Husband and the wife being Elohim/Messiah and Yisrael, we may conclude that
this portrays YHVH's treatment of Yisrael versus His approach to Yehuda. The
former had, to all intents and purposes, "died" for her adulterous
behavior, while the latter was not put to death but had to carry the burden of
her sin and curse for many generations. The coming of Yisrael and Yehuda's
Redeemer has, of course, completely changed this situation.
In a response letter to the above,
Garret Lukas says the following: This past week, I saw similarities between the
Bitter Waters test and Isaiah 53 that I haven't seen before. In
Numbers 5, a guilty woman "bears (tisa, carries) her
iniquity", as you pointed out. If she is guilty, the presumption is
that she'll be barren from then on. If she is innocent, the scripture
says, "She will conceive seed”.
Israel was the Wife of
YHWH. There were plenty of witnesses against her, testifying that she was
unfaithful to her husband. If she had been forced to drink the bitter
waters, it was known what the outcome would be.
But Messiah Yeshua stepped in for
her: Isaiah 53:4: "Surely our sicknesses he carried (nasa) and
our pains he bore (s'valam - synonym to nasa)." 53:11 "...and their
iniquity he bore (yisbol)." 53:12 "and he carried (nasa) the sins of
the many".
He bore her iniquity for her.
You mentioned the cup of gall mixed with wine that Yeshua tasted. In
Delitzch's Hebrew translation of Matthew 27:34, he translates gall as
"m'rorot", from maror, meaning "bitter". (What a
picture of Pesach as well; just as we are commanded to eat maror at Pesach and
taste the bitterness of suffering, so did he.)
One passage in Isaiah 53 that always
puzzled me was verse 10. Even though Messiah would be crushed as a
trespass offering, "he will see seed (descendants)."
But reading it in light of Numbers
5, I see now that if Israel had been forced to drink the bitter
waters, she would surely have been left barren. How could Messiah hope to
inherit future generations of faithful followers with a barren, forsaken
wife? So, he drank the cup in her place, a Righteous One who didn't do
anything wrong.
And after the suffering of Isaiah 53
is accomplished, what is spoken in Isaiah 54:1? "Sing Barren One who did
not bear! Burst forth with song, you who were not in labor! For
more are the children of the desolate wife than the sons of the married, says
YHWH".
The Barren One is free to conceive
seed because her husband has borne her sins and atoned for them himself.
"If it be Your desire, let this
cup pass from me. Nevertheless, not my desire, but Yours be done".
"And YHWH desired to crush him
with sickness, in order to make his soul a trespass offering..."
Psalm 32:1-2 makes for an
appropriate conclusion to what we have just read: Psalm 32:1-2: “Blessed is
he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the
man to whom YHVH does not impute iniquity, and in whose spirit there is
no deceit”.
