Biblical Commentary on 10:35-36
(לג) וַיִּסְעוּ֙ מֵהַ֣ר יְהוָ֔ה דֶּ֖רֶךְ שְׁלֹ֣שֶׁת יָמִ֑ים וַאֲר֨וֹן בְּרִית־יְהוָ֜ה נֹסֵ֣עַ לִפְנֵיהֶ֗ם דֶּ֚רֶךְ שְׁלֹ֣שֶׁת יָמִ֔ים לָת֥וּר לָהֶ֖ם מְנוּחָֽה׃ (לד) וַעֲנַ֧ן יְהוָ֛ה עֲלֵיהֶ֖ם יוֹמָ֑ם בְּנָסְעָ֖ם מִן־הַֽמַּחֲנֶֽה׃ (׆) (ס) (לה) וַיְהִ֛י בִּנְסֹ֥עַ הָאָרֹ֖ן וַיֹּ֣אמֶר מֹשֶׁ֑ה קוּמָ֣ה ׀ יְהוָ֗ה וְיָפֻ֙צוּ֙ אֹֽיְבֶ֔יךָ וְיָנֻ֥סוּ מְשַׂנְאֶ֖יךָ מִפָּנֶֽיךָ׃ (לו) וּבְנֻחֹ֖ה יֹאמַ֑ר שׁוּבָ֣ה יְהוָ֔ה רִֽבְב֖וֹת אַלְפֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (׆) (ס)
(33) They marched from the mountain of the LORD a distance of three days. The Ark of the Covenant of the LORD traveled in front of them on that three days’ journey to seek out a resting place for them; (34) and the LORD’s cloud kept above them by day, as they moved on from camp. (35) When the Ark was to set out, Moses would say: Advance, O LORD! May Your enemies be scattered, And may Your foes flee before You! (36) And when it halted, he would say: Return, O LORD, You who are Israel’s myriads of thousands!
Torah Scroll, 20th Century, Numbers 10 "the inverted nuns"
Torah Scroll, 18th Century, Numbers 10 "the inverted nuns"
(א) ויהי בנסע הארן. עָשָֹה לוֹ סִימָנִיּוֹת מִלְּפָנָיו וּמִלְּאַחֲרָיו לוֹמַר שֶׁאֵין זֶה מְקוֹמוֹ, וְלָמָּה נִכְתַּב כַּאן? כְּדֵי לְהַפְסִיק בֵּין פֻּרְעָנוּת לְפֻרְעָנוּת וְכוּ', כִּדְאִיתָא בְּכָל כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ (שבת קט"ו):
(1) ויהי בנסע הארן AND IT CAME TO PASS WHEN THE ARK PROCEEDED [THAT MOSES SAID etc.] — Scripture makes signs for this section before and after it, to say that this is not its proper place. But why, then, is it written here? In order to make a break between one punishment and another punishment, etc., as is stated in the Talmudic chapter commencing with כל כתבי (Shabbat 115b).
(ב) קומה ה'. לְפִי שֶׁהָיָה מַקְדִּים לִפְנֵיהֶם מַהֲלַךְ שְׁלֹשָׁה יָמִים, הָיָה מֹשֶׁה אוֹמֵר עֲמוֹד וְהַמְתֵּן לָנוּ וְאַל תִּתְרַחֵק יוֹתֵר. תַּנְחוּמָא בְּוַיַקְהֵל:
(2) ‘קומה ה RISE UP O LORD — Because it (the Ark) was in front of them a distance of three days’ march, Moses exclaimed, “Stay and wait for us, and do not travel further away from us; this is to be found in Tanchuma 2:10:7 on parashat Vayakhel.
(ג) ויפצו איביך. הַמְכֻנָּסִין:
(3) ויפצו איביך [RISE UP, O LORD] AND LET THINE ENEMIES BE SCATTERED — i.e. those who massed for battle.
(ד) וינסו משנאיך. אֵלּוּ הָרוֹדְפִים:
(4) וינסו משנאיך AND LET THOSE THAT HATE YOU FLEE BEFORE YOU, — these are the one that flee.
(ה) משנאיך. אֵלּוּ שׂוֹנְאֵי יִשְׂרָאל, שֶׁכָּל הַשּׂוֹנֵא אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל שׂוֹנֵא אֶת מִי שֶׁאָמַר וְהָיָה הָעוֹלָם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "וּמְשַׂנְאֶיךָ נָשְׂאוּ רֹאשׁ" (תהלים פ"ג), וּמִי הֵם? "עַל עַמְּךָ יַעֲרִימוּ סוֹד":
(5) משנאיך THOSE THAT HATE THEE — These are those who hate Israel, because whoever hates Israel, hates the “One who spoke and the world came into existence”, as it is said, (Psalms 83:3, 4) “[Your enemies stand defiantly]” — and who are those who hate you? The ones who plot craftily against Your people.
(א) שובה ה'. מְנַחֵם תִּרְגְּמוֹ לְשׁוֹן מַרְגּוֹעַ, וְכֵן "בְּשׁוּבָה וָנַחַת תִּוָּשֵׁעוּן" (ישעיהו ל'):
(1) ‘שובה ה [AND WHEN IT RESTED HE SAID] שובה O LORD — Menachem ben Seruk translates it (the word שובה) by an expression denoting “rest”. Similar is (Isaiah 30:15) “You shall triumph through stillness and quiet...."
(ב) רבבות אלפי ישראל. מַגִּיד שֶׁאֵין הַשְּׁכִינָה שׁוֹרָה בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל פְּחוּתִים מִשְּׁנֵי אֲלָפִים וּשְׁתֵּי רְבָבוֹת (יבמות ס"ד):
(2) רבבות אלפי ישראל [GIVE REST O LORD UNTO] THE MYRIADS OF THOUSANDS OF ISRAEL — This says that the Shechinah does not rest upon Israel if they number less than twenty-two thousand.
(א) ויהי בנסוע הארון עשה לו סימן מלפניו ומלאחריו לומר שאין זה מקומו ולמה כתב כאן כדי להפסיק בין פורענות לפורענות כדאיתא בכל כתבי הקדש (שבת קטז) לשון רש"י ולא פירש לנו הרב מה הפורענות הזו שהוצרך להפסיק בה כי לא נזכר כאן בכתוב פורענות קודם ויהי בנסוע הארון ולשון הגמרא שם פורענות שנייה ויהי העם כמתאוננים (להלן יא א) פורענות ראשונה דכתיב ויסעו מהר ה' (פסוק לג) ואמר רבי חנינא מלמד שסרו מאחרי ה' וכתב הרב בפירושיו שם בתוך שלשת ימים למסעם התאוו תאוה האספסוף להתרעם על הבשר כדי למרוד בה' ואלו דברי תימה שהרי פורענות ויהי העם כמתאוננים כתובה ראשונה ושל תאוה שניה ושתיהן סמוכות אולי סבר הרב שנכתבו שלא כסדרן רמז על הראשונה באמרו "מהר ה'" כי שמא מעת נסעם חשבו לעשות כן והפסיק וכתב את השניה ואחר כך חזר לראשונה ואין בזה טעם או ריח אבל ענין המדרש הזה מצאו אותו באגדה שנסעו מהר סיני בשמחה כתינוק הבורח מבית הספר אמרו שמא ירבה ויתן לנו מצות וזהו ויסעו מהר ה' שהיה מחשבתם להסיע עצמן משם מפני שהוא הר ה' וזהו פורענות ראשונה והפסיק שלא יהיו שלש פורעניות סמוכות זו לזו ונמצאו מוחזקים בפורענות וקרא החטא "פורענות" אע"פ שלא אירע להם ממנו פורענות ושמא אלמלא חטאם זה היה מכניסם לארץ מיד
Scripture make a sign for it before and after it in order to indicate that this is not its proper place. Why, then, is it written here? In order to make a break between the narrative of one punishment and that of another punishment etc., as is stated in the Talmudic chapter commencing with כל כתבי (Shabbat 115b)" The commentary of Rashi. The Rabbi, however, did not explain to us what this punishment is for which Scripture needed to make a division, for no punishment has been mentioned here in Scripture before this passage. When the Ark would journey...the Gemara comments that the second punishment is "[t]he people took to complaining bitterly before Adonai" (Num. 11:1). The first punishment is "[t]hey marched from the mountain of Adonai a distance of three days" (Num. 10:33). Rabbi Chanina said that this teaches that the Israelites turned away from Adonai. The Rabbi wrote in his commentary there that the riffraff "craved a craving" to murmur about meat within 3 days of their journeying in order to rebel against Adonai. These are puzzling words. For the punishment of "The people took to complaining bitterly before Adonai (Num. 11:1)." is written first, and "the craving" is written after it. What's more, the two of them are next to each other. Perhaps the Rabbi holds that they are not written according to their proper order, and Scripture hints at the first by saying "from the mountain of Adonai" for perhaps they thought to do so from the moment they began their journey and then Scripture makes a break and writes the second and, after that, returns to the first. This makes no sense. Rather, the lesson of this Midrash, we have discovered in Aggadah which states that "they journeyed joyously from the mountain of Adonai, like a young child who runs away from school saying, perhaps God will give us even more commandments." This is what is meant by "They marched from the mountain of Adonai a distance of three days (Num. 10:33)" that their thought was to remove themselves from there because it was the 'Mountain of Adonai.' This is the first punishment. Scripture then makes a break so that there will not be three punishments next to one another which would establish a pattern of punishments. The Gemara refers to the sin as a punishment even thought no calamity resulted as a result. Perhaps, if not for their sin, they might have entered into the Land immediately.
(א) ויהי בנסע הארן תניא רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר עתידה פרשה זו שתעקר מכאן ותכתב במקומה ולמה נכתבה כאן כדי להפסיק בין ויהי העם כמתאוננים לויסעו מהר ה׳ ששניהם פורעניות. והיכן מקומה אמר ר׳ יוסי בדגלים, כלומר תכף אחר ונסעו הקהתים נושאי המקדש וגו׳ ויהי בנסוע הארון וגו' (ב) ויאמר משה קומה ה' על שם שהענן היה מסתלק מעל המשכן בשעת המסעות.
(1) ויהי בנסוע הארון, “It would be that whenever the Ark was moving forward, etc.” According to the Talmud in tractate Shabbat folio 116, quoting the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel, this short paragraph in the Torah (which is bracketed) will be removed from the Torah scrolls at some time in the future and it will be rewritten in the appropriate place. If so, why was it not written in the proper place to begin with? It was meant to separate positive occurrences that the people experienced from negative ones, such as the ones we will shortly be reading about. What is the “appropriate” place that it should have appeared in? According to Rabbi Yossi, on the folio of the Talmud in Shabbat 116, it should have appeared when we read about the flags, immediately after verse 21 in our chapter, where the Torah describes the Kehatites as carrying the Holy Ark.' (2) ויאמר משה קומה ה, “Moses said:” arise O Lord, etc.” He said so as the cloud appeared to have disappeared at the time when the people were on the march.
Rabbinic Sources on Numbers 10:35-36
(ה) סֵפֶר שֶׁנִּמְחַק וְנִשְׁתַּיֵּר בּוֹ שְׁמוֹנִים וְחָמֵשׁ אוֹתִיּוֹת, כְּפָרָשַׁת וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָאָרֹן, מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. מְגִלָּה שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהּ שְׁמוֹנִים וְחָמֵשׁ אוֹתִיּוֹת כְּפָרָשַׁת וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָאָרֹן, מְטַמָּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. כָּל כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדַיִם.
(5) A book [i.e. a Torah scroll] which was erased leaving only eighty-five letters in it, like the portion of (Numbers 10:35-36), "And when the Ark would journey...," renders the hands impure. A scroll on which are written eighty-five letters, like the portion of, "And it was when the Ark was raised...," renders the hands impure. All sacred scriptures render the hands impure.
תנו רבנן ויהי בנסוע הארון ויאמר משה פרשה זו עשה לה הקדוש ברוך הוא סימניות מלמעלה ולמטה לומר
Apropos the portion: “And when the Ark traveled,” the Gemara cites that which the Sages taught in a baraita. It is stated: “And when the Ark traveled and Moses proclaimed: Rise up, God, and Your enemies will scatter and those who hate You will flee from before You.” And The Holy One, Blessed be He, made signs in the Torah for this portion, above and below, i.e., before and after it, in order to say
שאין זה מקומה רבי אומר לא מן השם הוא זה אלא מפני שספר חשוב הוא בפני עצמו
that this is not its place, as the previous portion does not discuss the nation’s travels. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is not for that reason that signs were inserted. Rather, the signs are there because this portion is considered a book unto itself.
כמאן אזלא הא דאמר רבי שמואל בר נחמן אמר רבי יונתן חצבה עמודיה שבעה אלו שבעה ספרי תורה כמאן כרבי
The Gemara asks: According to whose opinion is that which Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said that Rabbi Yonatan said, that with regard to the verse: “With wisdom she built her house, she carved its seven pillars” (Proverbs 9:1), these are the seven books of the Torah? According to whose opinion? It is according to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, as by his count there are seven books of the Torah: Genesis; Exodus; Leviticus; Numbers until: “And when the Ark traveled”; the portion: “And when the Ark traveled,” which is considered its own book; the remainder of Numbers; and Deuteronomy.
מאן תנא דפליג עליה דרבי רבן שמעון בן גמליאל הוא דתניא רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר עתידה פרשה זו שתיעקר מכאן ותכתב במקומה ולמה כתבה כאן כדי להפסיק בין פורענות ראשונה לפורענות שנייה פורענות שנייה מאי היא ויהי העם כמתאוננים פורענות ראשונה ויסעו מהר ה׳ ואמר רבי חמא ברבי חנינא שסרו מאחרי ה׳ והיכן מקומה אמר רב אשי בדגלים
Who is the tanna who disagrees with Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi? It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. As it was taught in a baraita that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: In the future, this portion will be uprooted from here, where it appears, and will be written in its proper place. And why was it written here, even though it discusses the travels of the children of Israel, and the portion before it does not? It is in order to demarcate between the first punishment and the second punishment. What is the second punishment that appears immediately afterward? It is the verse: “And the people complained wickedly in God’s ears, and God heard and became angry, and the fire of God burned in them and it consumed the edge of the camp” (Numbers 11:1). What is the first punishment? It is the verse: “And they traveled from the mountain of God [mehar Hashem] for three days” (Numbers 10:33), and Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: That they turned from after God [me’aḥarei Hashem] and hurriedly fled Mount Sinai. The Gemara asks: And if so, where is the proper place for this paragraph? Rav Ashi said: In the portion of the flags, where there is a description of the manner in which the Jewish people traveled through the desert.
(ח) וַיָּשָׁב יִצְחָק וַיַּחְפֹּר וגו' (בראשית כו, יח), כַּמָּה בְּאֵרוֹת חָפַר אָבִינוּ יִצְחָק בִּבְאֵר שָׁבַע, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אָמַר אַרְבַּע, כְּנֶגֶד כֵּן נַעֲשׂוּ בָנָיו אַרְבָּעָה דְגָלִים בַּמִּדְבָּר. וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי חָמֵשׁ, כְּנֶגֶד חֲמִשָּׁה סִפְרֵי תוֹרָה. (בראשית כו, כ): וַיִּקְרָא שֵׁם הַבְּאֵר עֵשֶׂק, כְּנֶגֶד סֵפֶר בְּרֵאשִׁית, שֶׁבּוֹ נִתְעַסֵּק הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וּבָרָא אֶת הָעוֹלָם. (בראשית כו, כא): וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמָהּ שִׂטְנָה, כְּנֶגֶד סֵפֶר וְאֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹת, עַל שֵׁם (שמות א, יד): וַיְמָרֲרוּ אֶת חַיֵּיהֶם בַּעֲבֹדָה קָשָׁה. (בראשית כו, יט): וַיִּמְצְאוּ שָׁם בְּאֵר מַיִם חַיִּים, כְּנֶגֶד סֵפֶר וַיִּקְרָא, שֶׁהוּא מָלֵא הֲלָכוֹת רַבּוֹת. (בראשית כו, לג): וַיִּקְרָא אוֹתָהּ שִׁבְעָה, כְּנֶגֶד סֵפֶר וַיְדַבֵּר, שֶׁהוּא מַשְׁלִים שִׁבְעָה סִפְרֵי תוֹרָה. וַהֲלוֹא חֲמִשָּׁה הֵן, אֶלָּא בֶּן קַפָּרָא עָבֵיד וַיְדַבֵּר תְּלָתָא סְפָרִים, מִן וַיְדַבֵּר עַד (במדבר י, לה): וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָאָרֹן סֵפֶר בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ, מִן וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ וּדְבַתְרֵיהּ סֵפֶר בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ, וּמִן סוֹפֵיהּ דְּפִסְקָא וְעַד סוֹפֵיהּ דְּסִפְרָא סֵפֶר בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ. (בראשית כו, כב): וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמָהּ רְחֹבוֹת, כְּנֶגֶד מִשְׁנֵה תוֹרָה, עַל שֵׁם (דברים יב, כ): כִּי יַרְחִיב, (בראשית כו, כח): כִּי עַתָּה הִרְחִיב ה' לָנוּ וּפָרִינוּ בָאָרֶץ.
"Isaac dug anew the wells which had been dug in the days of his father Abraham... (Gen. 26:18). How many wells did our father Isaac dig in Beer-Sheva? Rabbi Yehuda said: "Four, corresponding to the four standards his children were set under in the desert." The Rabbis said: "Five, corresponding to the numbers of books in the Torah. "He called the name of the well '"Esek' (Genesis 26:20)", corresponding to the Book of Beresheit, in which the Holy Blessed One devoted to the creation of the world. "He called it by the name of Sitnah ('accusation')." This corresponds to the Book of Shemot, where it is written "Ruthlessly they made life bitter for them with harsh labor (Exod. 1:14)". "They found there a well of living water (Beresheit 26:19)." This corresponds to the Book of Leviticus, which is filled with many Halachot. "He called it 'Shivah,' 'Seven' (Gen. 26:33)." This corresponds to the Book of Numbers which completes the seven books of Torah. But are there not five? To the contrary, Ben Kappara counted and said seven books, from the beginning of the book until "When the Ark was to set out, (Num. 10:35)," this was a book in itself. From "When the Ark was to set out, (Num. 10:35) and the following verse as a book in itself, and from the end of that section to the end of that Book, as a book in itself. "He called its name 'Rechovot' "roomy"." This corresponds to the teaching of Torah: "When Adonai enlarges your territory, (Deut. 12:20) and "Now at last Adonai has granted us ample space to increase in the land (Gen. 26:22)."
(ג) בַּר קַפָּרָא פָּתַר קְרָיָא בַּתּוֹרָה, חָכְמוֹת בָּנְתָה בֵיתָהּ, זוֹ תּוֹרָה, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (משלי ב, ו): כִּי ה' יִתֵּן חָכְמָה (משלי ח, כב): ה' קָנָנִי רֵאשִׁית דַּרְכּוֹ. חָצְבָה עַמּוּדֶיהָ שִׁבְעָה, אֵלּוּ שִׁבְעָה סִפְרֵי תּוֹרָה. וְלֹא חֲמִשָּׁה הֵן, בַּר קַפָּרָא עָבֵיד מֵרֵישֵׁיהּ דְּוַיְדַבֵּר (במדבר א, א): עַד (במדבר י, לה): וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָאָרֹן חַד. מִן וַיְהִי עַד (במדבר י, לו): וּבְנֻחֹה חַד. וְעַד סֵיפֵיהּ, חַד, הֲרֵי שִׁבְעָה.
Bar Kappara expounded the verses in the Torah, "Wisdom has built her house, She has hewn her seven pillars. (Prov. 9:1)," this is the Torah, as it is written, "For Adonai grants wisdom; knowledge and discernment are by decree (Prov. 2:6)." "Adonai created me at the beginning of the course as the first of the works of old (Prov. 8:22)." " She has hewn her seven pillars (Prov. 9:1)," these are the seven books of Torah. But are there not 5 books? Bar Kappara considered the portion from the beginning of the Book of Numbers up to "When the Ark was to set out, (Num. 10:35)," one book. And from When the Ark was to set out, (Num. 10:35)," up to "and when it halted," as one book, and from there to the end, one book, behold, this is seven books!
(במדבר י לה): "ויהי בנסוע הארון" - בין למעלה בין למטה נקוד, רבי אמר: ספר היה בפני עצמו ונגנז.
"When the Ark was to set out, (Num. 10:35)," Before and after this passage, marks. Rabbi said: "It was a separate book that was suppressed."
(א) ויהי בנסוע הארון. נקוד עליו מלמעלה ומלמטה, מפני שלא היה זה ממקומו. רבי אומר: מפני שהוא ספר בעצמו. מכאן אמרו "ספר שנמחק ונשתייר בו פ"ה אותיות כפרשת ויהי בנסוע הארון מטמא את הידים". ר' שמעון אומר: נקוד עליו מלמעלה ומלמטה, מפני שלא היה זה מקומו. ומה היה ראוי לכתוב? - "ויהי העם כמתאוננים". משל למה הדבר דומה? לבני אדם שאמרו למלך: הנראה שתגיע עמנו, אצל מושל עכו! הגיע לעכו - הלך לו לצור. הגיע לצור - הלך לו לצידון. הגיע לצידון - הלך לו לאנטוכיה. הגיע לאנטוכיה - התחילו בני אדם מתרעמים על המלך, שנתלבטו על דרך זו. המלך צריך להתרעם עליהם, שבשבילם נתלבט על דרך זו! כך הלכה שכינה בו ביום ל"ו מיל, כדי שיכנסו ישראל לארץ; התחילו ישראל מתרעמים לפני המקום שנתלבטו על דרך זו. המקום צריך להתרעם עליהם, שבשבילם הלכה שכינה ל"ו מיל, כדי שיכנסו ישראל לארץ!
(1) (Bamidbar 10:35) "And it was, when the ark traveled": There are marks bracketing it before and after, in order to show that it is not in its proper place. Rabbi says: In order to show that it is itself a book— whence they ruled: A (Torah) scroll which was erased, and there remained eighty-five letters, as in the section "And it was, when the ark traveled" imparts tumah to the hands. R. Shimon says: There are marks before and after because this is not its place. What should have been written? "The people took to complaining bitterly before Adonai (Num. 11:1)." What does this resemble? Some men say to the king: Would you please accompany us to the governor of Acco? They arrive at Acco — he has gone to Tyre. They arrive at Tyre — he has gone to Sidon. They arrive at Sidon — he has gone to Antioch. They arrive at Antioch — some of them start complaining against the king for having put them to all of this trouble! It is the king who should complain, for having been put to all of this trouble for their sakes! Similarly, on that day the Shechinah traveled a three-days journey, so that they could (immediately) enter Eretz Yisrael — and they began to complain before the Eternal for having been put to all of that trouble! It is the Eternal who should have complained about them! For it was for their sakes that the Shechinah was thus constrained!
Medieval Commentary
The Zohar, Daniel Matt (trans.), Vol VIIII, at 535-7: "Rabbi El'azar said, "Here one should examine: נ (Nun) that is inverted, facing backward--why in two places here?1 If you say, 'A bent נ (Nun)---well, it is known that a bent nun is female; and a straight one, totality of male and female. They have already established, regarding this place: 'As the ark journeyed.' But why is it turned backward like this?'"2...."But what is written previously? The ark of [Adonai]'s covenant journeyed before them a three days' distance to scout out a resting place for them (Numbers 10:33). As soon as the ark journeyed, nun journeyed above it---surely, Shekinah rests upon the ark. "Come and see: The love of the blessed Holy One is toward Israel; for even though they stray from the straight path, the blessed Holy One does not wish to abandon them, and He constantly turns His face toward them. Otherwise, they could not endure in the world. "Go and see: The ark journeyed before them a distance of three days, and nun remained inseparable from it, accompanying it. Due to the love of Israel, it turned its face toward them, turning away from the ark--like a gazelle who, when going, turns its face back to the place it has left. So, as the ark journeyed, nun turned its face toward Israel and its shoulders toward the ark."
1. According to Masoretic tradition, an irregularly shaped נ (Nun) is placed both before and after Numbers 10:35-36. Various traditions exist about the exact form of this nun, but here the Zohar intends a rightside-up nun, facing backward (as depicted in numerous Zohar manuscripts): These bracketing signs are based on a Hellenistic scribal device, and their original purpose here was either to designate this poetic couplet as a separate unit or to indicate that it is out of place. If the latter, then the couplet's proper place may have been immediately following the description of the journeying of the Tent of Meeting in Numbers 2:17.
2. One might also wonder why this sign consists of a bent נ (nun) rather than a straight (or final) ן (nun). Rabbi El'azar explains that the former symbolizes Shekhinah, whereas the latter symbolizes the union of Tif'eret and Shekhinah. The journeying of the ark represents the exile of Shekinah when she is separated from Tif'eret, so the bent nun appears here appropriately.
Significance of the Letter נ in Numbers 10:35-36: Modern Commentary
Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah, Israel Yeivin, E.J. Revell, (trans. & ed.) at (section) 81:
In two places in the Bible, a symbol like an inverted nun is used--a total of nine times in all. In the sources this is referred to as נון מנוזרת nun menussert, נקוד naqud , סימניות simaniyyot, שיפור, shippur, etc. In Num. 10:35-6, this sign is used at the beginning and end of the pisqah starting וַיְהִ֛י בִּנְסֹ֥עַ הָאָרֹ֖ן. This it is stated in Sifre on Numbers (Section 84) "The section וַיְהִ֛י בִּנְסֹ֥עַ הָאָרֹ֖ן is naqud (dotted) before it and after it because this is not in its place. The opinion of Rabbi is that it forms a book by itself.." The second passage is Ps. 107:23-8, 40, where the sign is used seven times. Printed editions and manuscripts--including Babylonian manuscripts--agree on the marking of this sign in the Torah, but not in Psalms....Krasuse and Lieberman explain the inverted nun as corresponding to a sign used by the Greek textual critics to indicate that a space should be left between two passages, or to mark passages included in the wrong place--exactly the two reasons for the use of inverted nun suggested in Sifre. These suggestions suit the passage in Numbers, but it is difficult to see how they would apply to the Psalms verses, and not satisfactory explanation for their use here has yet been offered. The inverted nun sign is similar in form to the Babylonian accent "half thet" which represents a major disjunctive accent. In a few Geniza fragments signs like these are used at the ends of sentences. Possibly the form of these signs was influenced by the simaniyyot. Butin, 1906, Lieberman, 1962, pp. 38-46
The Masorah of Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, Page H. Kelley, Daniel S. Mynatt, Timothy G. Crawford, at 34-5: "Inverted Nun or Isolated Nunim (Nunim haphukah or Nunim m'nuzarot). This phenomenon is designated by either of the above names. The sign assumed various forms. In some traditions it is described as כ and in Greek (especially Alexandrine) sources it is described as reversed sigma (antisigma). In Greek texts the meaning of these signs was that the information enclosed between sigma and antsigma did not fit in its current place in the text. It was a subtle means of removing material from the larger text. Sources agree on the placement of the first two inverted נ's. They appear after Num. 10:34 and 10:36. Apparently, they were intended to bracket out the closed paragraph composed by Numbers 10:35-36 ...Although ancient sources were replete with information regarding inverted נ, the situation is marked by disparity. They are frequently called "signs" (סימניות) rather than letters, indicating that these passages were not always marked by a Hebrew letter. The Jewish halachic commentary, Sifre on Numbers, section 84, relates that Num. 10:35-36 "is dotted (נקוד) before it and after it because this is not in its place." This quotation implies that the passages in question were designated by dots, not letters. ....Why did the נ sign develop out of this diverse history and plethora of sigla? It has been suggested that נ is an abbreviation for נקוד, "dotted." The persons responsible for נ knew of the tradition that these passages were once distinguished by dots.
Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (2nd Rev. Ed.), Emanuel Tov at 54-55: In the printed editions one finds inverted nunim (also named nunim menuzarot, "separated" or "isolated" numim) before and after Num 10:35-36, as well as in Ps 107:23-28 (citation omitted). The sign found in the manuscripts resembles an inverted nun, thought tradition also describes it as a kaph. Actually it does not represent a letter, but a misunderstood scribal sign that was also used by other scribes in antiquity. In Greek sources, especially Alexandrian, that sign is know as (Greek omitted), that is, the reversed letter sigma. (citation omitted) Indeed, in b.Shabbat 115b the nunim are called סימניות, "signs." The original meaning of these signs in Greek sources was that the section enclosed by the sigma and antisigma did not suit its present place in the text. In other words, these signs represented a subtle means of removing an element or section from the text.
Heavenly Torah as Refracted Through the Generations, Abraham Joshua Heschel (Gordon Tucker, ed. & trans.). "Now, two verses in Numbers (10:35-36) are written as a separate unit, bracketed by inverted nuns....A source from the eleventh century comments: "Some midrashim explained the reason for the inverted nuns as follows: The whole Torah is devoted to the prophecy of Moses, except for these two verses, which are the prophecy of Eldad and Medad." And Midrash Proverbs repeats the "separate book" view with a twist: "Rabbi says, 'It was a separate book that was suppressed.'" This hints that the two verses are the remnant of a larger work of prophecy of Eldad and Medad, that was suppressed. This view, that the prophecy of Eldad and Medad was written in a separate book, will explain the mysterious phrase in the Torah: "The spirit rested upon them [Eldad and Medad], and they were among those that were written" (Numbers 11:26)....In my humble opinion, there are grounds for surmising that another fragment of the "book of Eldad and Medad" is preserved in the Babylonian Talmud and Genesis Rabbah. According to one of the great masters of Aggadah, Rabbi Isaac Nappaha, a second-generation Amora of the Land of Israel, at the time of breaking camp, when Moses would say, "Arise O Adonai" (Numbers 10:35), the Israelites would respond as follows:
Raise yourself up, O acacia wood,
carry your splendor like a banner,
You who are decorated with gold,
And are enshrined in the royal palace,
(Shrouded between the cherubim,)
and adorned with the most precious of ornaments.
(BT Avodah Zarah 24b; Genesis Rabbah 54:4)
This poem is a pearl without price. It bears the stamp of antiquity. "Without a doubt,Rabbi Isaac Nappaha did not say this out of his own head, but on the basis of tradition." But from what source did he get it? Perhaps the editor of Genesis Rabbah had the "Book of Eldad and Medad" before him.
Hellenism in Jewish Palestine, Saul Lieberman at 38-43. "[It is written] 'When the ark set forward' [etc. These two verses] are marked at the beginning and at the end to show that this is not their proper place. Rabbi said: [They are marked] to indicate that they form a separate book....R. Simeon said they are marked to betoken that it is not their proper place; what should have been written in their place? 'And the people were as murmurers'....Let us examine the first rabbinic source, the Sifre. Two opinions are expressed there. The one, by an anonymous Rabb, maintains that the purpose of the marks is to show that the section in question is not in its proper place. According to the explanation of Rab Ashi its proper place is in [the section of] the Standards. Medieval Jewish scholars suggested two divergent places for our section. According to חזקוני [Hizkuni)] it should follow verse 21 in Num. X. However, רבינו בחיי and בעל הטורים point to Num. II verse 17, after which our secttion properly belongs. Rabbi Simeon likewise contends that the marks designate a dislocation of the verses....On the other hand, according to Rabbi [Judah the Prince] the marks indicate that our small section is a separate book. The legal sign for the beginning of a new book was a blank space of four lines. Owing to the brevity of our book this procedure was abandoned and signs were provided in its stead. The marks for division in antiquity had many and various forms as can now be ascertained from the papyri; some of them clearly resemble the signs attached to the section under discussion. Our Rabbi had good reasons to explain the inverted Nuns as an indication that the section constitutes a separate unit."
JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers, Jacob Milgrom, at 375-6: "There is an interesting medieval tradition, attested in an eleventh century manuscript from Cairo, that these verses are excerpted from a source known as "The Prophecy of Eldad and Medad" (Ginzei Mitsraim) which, according to Lieberman, may underline the paraphrase of Rabbi Judah the Prince found in an earlier source: "These two verses stem from an independent book that existed but was nignaz, "surppressed" (Mid. Prov.; cf, also Mid. Haserot ve-Yeterot). The attribution of these verses to Eldad and Medad (cf.11:27) not only represents a rare medieval instance of the denial of Mosiac authorship to a part of the Torah but also indicates that there was continuous awareness in traditional sources that the process of the canonization of Scripture was a highly selective one. Much was "suppressed," that is, rejected.
"The Inverted Nuns at Numbers 10:35-36 and the Book of Eldad and Medad," Sid Z. Leiman, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 93, No. 3 (Sep., 1974), pp. 348-355:
Stray passages, such as the one just cited, are sometimes assigned scholars to apocryphal and pseudepigraphical books-some extant, some longer extant - whose quasi-canonical status in the Tannaitic or is then assumed. An exaggerated instance of this procedure is the suggestion advanced independently in recent years by S. Lieberman, A. J. Heschel, and M. Kasher that according to some midrashic and medieval rabbinic sources Num 10:35-36 was borrowed from a pseudepigraphical book of Eldad and Medad and inserted into the Torah....Our intention here is to examine the sources which gave rise to this somewhat unorthodox suggestion and, hopefully, to lay to rest any lingering suspicions that the suggestion need be taken seriously.
[I]n 1897...Elkan Adler published an eleventh-century MS which he had discovered a year earlier in the Cairo Genizah. It contained the following passage:
"Some Midrashim expound this differently. They state: Why did the sages place inverted nuns before the verse: The people took to complaining (Num.11:1)? The sages thereby declared: The entire Torah consists of the prophecy of Moses except for these two verses (i.e., Num 10:35-36) which are from the prophecy of Eldad and Medad. Therefore they were enclosed with a curved nun and inserted into the Torah."
It would appear that the two medieval midrashim, the eleventh-century Adler MS and the Midrash Chaserot vi-Y'terot, both misread the Midrash Misle passage, (Hebrew omitted). The erroneous vocalization led the medieval sources to conclude that Num 10:35-36 formed part of a "hidden" book whose identity was not immediately apparent. Ingeniously, the medieval sources combined their misreading with a talmudic discussion at b. Sanhedrin 17a-where the rabbis attempt to identify the content of the prophecy of Eldad and Medad alluded to at Num 11:26, the upshot of which was the ascription of Num 10: 35- 36 to Eldad and Medad. In turn, Lieberman, Kasher, and Heschel were misled by the medieval sources in their interpretation of the Midrash Misle passage. While it is true that the rabbis at b. Sanhedrin 17a disagreed concerning the content of the prophecy of Eldad and Medad mentioned at Num 11:26, none suspected, nor is there any reason to suspect, that anything so unprophetic as Num 10:35-36-which, after all, is little more than a descriptive account of what Moses is supposed to have said whenever the ark was removed from, or returned to, the camp - formed part of Eldad and Medad's "prophecy in the camp." In sum, then, the notion that Num 10:35-36 was borrowed from an apocryphal or pseudepigraphical book of Eldad and Medad is rooted neither in biblical sources (as Heschel would have it), nor in midrashic sources (as Lieberman and Kasher would have it), but first appears in medieval sources which no longer understood the earlier midrashic materials (viz., the Midrash Misle passage), and which offer no testimony of independent value regarding the history of the biblical text at Num 10:35-36.
More on the Inverted Nuns of Num 10:35-36, Baruch A. Levine, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 95, No. 1 (Mar., 1976), pp. 122-124.The status of Num 10:35-36 as sacred writ is not in question, but given the syntax of medieval Hebrew, and of rabbinic Hebrew, for that matter, Leiman's translation cannot be sustained....There is a clear reference here to a text that was lost, or declared apocryphal, and that reference cannot legitimately be disclaimed.