Why does the Torah repeat the twelve identical offerings in Parashas Naso? This article explores a peshat answer, two midrashim, and their methodology.
Thanks for that 2nd footnote! I'm quite surprised by Gad. I would not have expected that shevet to be invested in Amram and his family and to choose that as the idea to express
I love the way you investigate the source the medrashim here, which can be applied to all manner of medrashim and aggados. It's reminiscent of the Maharatz Chiyus's Mevo HaTalmud, in the section where he explains aggadah..
That said, it would be hard for me to accept that the midrashim weren't trying to describe the leaders' intentions, or at least some deeper, true meaning behind these offerings. I am not sure I see any real difference between the two Rambams you cite- both are talking about chukim. I would agree that the medrashim are speculations, and are not necessarily precise historical fact- but they are the speculations of Chazal, with their deeper understanding of Torah, and so they get closer to the truth than we would if we tried to speculate on our own.
As for the midrashim, while I think it's entirely possible that the authors ARE trying to discern the leaders' intentions or find meaning within the korbanos, I don't think one MUST say that. I just wrote a chapter for an upcoming book in which I present this argument in full, with tons of sources. If you're interested, I can send you the chapter, but I don't want to post it publicly until the book is out.
Shavua Tov. I find most satisfying the analysis presented by R. Menachem Leibtag where he notes that the offerings of the Nesi'im need to be interpreted intertextually as part of the dedication of the Mishkan that is covered in each of Shmot, Vayikra and Bamidbar, with each narrative stemming from the thrust of each sefer in the aftermath of the return of the Divine Presence following the Sin of the Golden Calf (i.e., Shmot is from the vantage point of Moshe Rabeinu symbolized by the cloud covering the Tabernacle, Vayikra is from the vantage point of Aharon Hakohen symbolized by the fire consuming the offerings, and Bamidbar is from the vantage point of the tribes symbolized by the Nesi'im each bringing their own offering). You can both read and watch R. Leibtag's analysis here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJMMajd7rPc and here: https://www.etzion.org.il/en/tanakh/torah/sefer-bamidbar/parashat-naso/naso-nesiim-why-are-they-repeated.
Thanks for that 2nd footnote! I'm quite surprised by Gad. I would not have expected that shevet to be invested in Amram and his family and to choose that as the idea to express
I love the way you investigate the source the medrashim here, which can be applied to all manner of medrashim and aggados. It's reminiscent of the Maharatz Chiyus's Mevo HaTalmud, in the section where he explains aggadah..
That said, it would be hard for me to accept that the midrashim weren't trying to describe the leaders' intentions, or at least some deeper, true meaning behind these offerings. I am not sure I see any real difference between the two Rambams you cite- both are talking about chukim. I would agree that the medrashim are speculations, and are not necessarily precise historical fact- but they are the speculations of Chazal, with their deeper understanding of Torah, and so they get closer to the truth than we would if we tried to speculate on our own.
The point I'm drawing out from the Rambam is better expressed in this other article: https://rabbischneeweiss.substack.com/p/parashas-chukas-three-types-of-reasons
As for the midrashim, while I think it's entirely possible that the authors ARE trying to discern the leaders' intentions or find meaning within the korbanos, I don't think one MUST say that. I just wrote a chapter for an upcoming book in which I present this argument in full, with tons of sources. If you're interested, I can send you the chapter, but I don't want to post it publicly until the book is out.
Shavua Tov. I find most satisfying the analysis presented by R. Menachem Leibtag where he notes that the offerings of the Nesi'im need to be interpreted intertextually as part of the dedication of the Mishkan that is covered in each of Shmot, Vayikra and Bamidbar, with each narrative stemming from the thrust of each sefer in the aftermath of the return of the Divine Presence following the Sin of the Golden Calf (i.e., Shmot is from the vantage point of Moshe Rabeinu symbolized by the cloud covering the Tabernacle, Vayikra is from the vantage point of Aharon Hakohen symbolized by the fire consuming the offerings, and Bamidbar is from the vantage point of the tribes symbolized by the Nesi'im each bringing their own offering). You can both read and watch R. Leibtag's analysis here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJMMajd7rPc and here: https://www.etzion.org.il/en/tanakh/torah/sefer-bamidbar/parashat-naso/naso-nesiim-why-are-they-repeated.
For additional, unique insights, see Dr. Yosef Priel here: https://orot.ac.il/sites/default/files/shmaatin/166-1.pdf and Prof. Amos Frisch here: https://www.biu.ac.il/sites/default/files/inline-files/%D7%A0%D7%A9%D7%90%20%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%A9%20PDF.pdf
And here is the source sheet of the shiur on this topic I deliver this past Hannukah in Bet Shemesh: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CuzhUIeDuZuNKyd4m_Oj6ksLZHa2GpFH/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=104518705594270291773&rtpof=true&sd=true