Weekly Torah portion: Mattot Masei
Just last week we read: “The plea of Zelophehad's daughters is just: you should give them a hereditary holding among their father's kinsmen; transfer their father's share to them. Further, speak to the Israelite people as follows: If a man dies without leaving a son, you shall transfer his property to his daughter. If he has no daughter, you shall assign his property to his brothers” (Numbers 27:7-9). Now, this week we read of the repercussions of that decision: “They said, The Lord commanded my lord to assign the land to the Israelites as shares by lot, and my lord was further commanded by the Lord to assign the share of our kinsman Zelophehad to his daughters. Now, if they marry persons from another Israelite tribe, their share will be cut off from our ancestral portion and be added to the portion of the tribe into which they marry; thus our allotted portion will be diminished” (36:2-3). Beginning with the same words he used in rendering his original decision, Moses replies: “"The plea of the Josephite tribe is just. 6 This is what the Lord has commanded concerning the daughters of Zelophehad: They may marry anyone they wish, only into a clan of their father's tribe shall they marry”(5-6).
Moses’ reply seems to contradisct itself. On the one hand, he recognizes the right of the daughters of Zelophehad to marry whomever they wish, while on the other hand, he obliges them to marry within their tribe. The Talmud notes this contradiction, and suggests:
R. Judah said in the name of R. Samuel: The daughters of Zelophehad were given permission to be married to any of the tribes, for it is said, They may marry anyone they wish. How, then, may one explain “only into a clan of their father's tribe shall they marry? Scripture gave them good advice, that they should he married only to such as are worthy of them (Bava Batra 120a).
The Talmud continues to discuss the issue, and suggests that the principle is, indeed, that a daughter who inherits her father’s estate is free to marry whom she pleases, however that rule did not apply to the daughters of Zelophehad and the women of their generation.
This problem of transferring ancestral land from one tribe to another arises in another context, as well, in regard the surviving Benjaminites who are wedded to women from Jabesh Gilead following the story of the concubine in Gibeah. In that regard, the Talmud says: “And they said: ‘They that are escaped must be as an inheritance for Benjamin, that a tribe be not blotted out from Israel’. R. Isaac of the school of R. Ammi said: This teaches that a stipulation was made concerning the tribe of Benjamin that a son’s daughter is not to be heir together with his brothers” (Bava Batra 116a). Here, rather than limiting her choice of spouse, the daughter is deprived of her right to inherit.
1. As we see, recognizing the rights of the daughters of Zelophehad bore consequences beyond the laws of inheritance. How did Moses try to strike a balance between individual rights and the public interest?
2. Why did R. Samuel prefer to explain that the instruction to marry within their tribe was intended merely as ‘good advice’?
3. The second solution offered by the Talmud, limiting the rule to one specific generation, seems to assume that apportioning the land was of particular importance in that generation. What were the special considerations that justified deviating from the general rule?
4. In the end, the daughters of Zelophehad married their cousins, who would have inherited the land if the laws of succession had not been changed, so that, in effect, the daughters of Zelophehad did not inherit their father’s estate. What is the difference between the towo Talmudic approaches in terms of the values we can learn from the conduct of the daughters of Zelophehad?
5. In the case of the Benjaminites, the Talmud again places particular importance upon preventing the transfer of ancestral land at a specific time. What justified deviating from the rule established in regard to the daughters of Zelophehad in this case? Why did this case require a change in the laws of succession rather than a limitation upon marriage?
Iyunei Shabbat is published weekly by the Schechter Rabbinical Seminary, The Masorti Movement and The Rabbinical Assembly of Israel in conjunction with the Masorti Movement in Israel and Masorti Olami-World Council of Conservative Synagogues.
Chief Editor: Rabbi Avinoam Sharon
