The table below presents an aligned extract of verses or verselets
in
Nu18-20a
Both verses/verselets
discuss
the lack of Levite portion in Israel.
The alignment justifies the Rashi assertion that
Levites did not a) inherit the land upon entry
nor b) take apportionments in conquests
Verse
|
Text of Verse
|
Rashi comment
|
Nu18-20a
|
And the Lord spoke to Aaron,
- You shall have no inheritance in their land,
- neither shall you have any apportionment among them;
I am your part and your inheritance among the people of Israel.
|
Levites did not a) inherit the land upon entry
nor b) take apportionments in conquests
|
Nu18-20a
|
And the Lord spoke to Aaron,
- You shall have no inheritance in their land,
- neither shall you have any apportionment among them;
I am your part and your inheritance among the people of Israel.
|
Advanced Rashi:
Everyone agrees that there is an alignment with an emphasis on two nuances,
inheritance and apportionment. Rashi and Raavad explain as we have presented
above - no inheritance on initial inheritance and no apportionment on
conquests.
But the Rambam states
There is no inheritance on initial conquest nor apportionment
in the three lands annexed to Israel at the time of the coming of the Messiah. But
Levites do take apportionment in conquests!
Remarkable! The Raavad demurs: But the Bible explicitly states that the Levite
10% is in exchange for inheritance. So this would apply to conquests.
The Rambam can be defended by the extra underlined word in this verse, Nu18-21:
And, behold, I have given the sons of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an inheritance, an exchange for their service which they serve, the service of the Tent of Meeting.
So, the Rambam argues, the Levite 10% is only in exchange for inheritances. The Rambam
does accept the double nuances of the alignment. However the Rambam argues that
the two nuances refer to the initial inheritance and the future inheritance at the time of
King Messiah (Both of these inheritances were promised to the Patriarch Abraham). Since however
the verse explicitly delimits the 10% tithe exchange to inheritances it logically follows
that Levites can apportion conquests.
The above explanation of the controversy of the early authorities is a peach of an example
of how to apply the methods of this list to the resolution of controversies. Notice how all
authorities agree on the fact of alignment and the resolution by two nuances.
However Rambam adds an additional textual exegesis which delimits the two nuances to
inheritances while Rashi and Raavad do not.
|