(א) וַיִּשְׁמַ֞ע הַכְּנַעֲנִ֤י מֶֽלֶךְ־עֲרָד֙ יֹשֵׁ֣ב הַנֶּ֔גֶב כִּ֚י בָּ֣א יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל דֶּ֖רֶךְ הָאֲתָרִ֑ים וַיִּלָּ֙חֶם֙ בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וַיִּ֥שְׁבְּ ׀ מִמֶּ֖נּוּ שֶֽׁבִי׃ (ב) וַיִּדַּ֨ר יִשְׂרָאֵ֥ל נֶ֛דֶר לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה וַיֹּאמַ֑ר אִם־נָתֹ֨ן תִּתֵּ֜ן אֶת־הָעָ֤ם הַזֶּה֙ בְּיָדִ֔י וְהַֽחֲרַמְתִּ֖י אֶת־עָרֵיהֶֽם׃ (ג) וַיִּשְׁמַ֨ע יְהֹוָ֜ה בְּק֣וֹל יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וַיִּתֵּן֙ אֶת־הַֽכְּנַעֲנִ֔י וַיַּחֲרֵ֥ם אֶתְהֶ֖ם וְאֶת־עָרֵיהֶ֑ם וַיִּקְרָ֥א שֵׁם־הַמָּק֖וֹם חׇרְמָֽה׃ {פ}
(1) When the Canaanite, king of Arad, who dwelt in the Negeb, learned that Israel was coming by the way of Atharim,*Atharim Meaning of Heb. ha-’atharim uncertain. Targum and other ancient versions render “the way [taken by] the scouts.” he engaged Israel in battle and took some of them captive. (2) Then Israel made a vow to יהוה and said, “If You deliver this people into our hand, we will proscribe*proscribe I.e., utterly destroy, reserving no booty except what is deposited in the Sanctuary; see Josh. 6.24. their towns.” (3) יהוה heeded Israel’s plea and delivered up the Canaanites; and they and their cities were proscribed. So that place was named Hormah.*Hormah Connected with heḥerim “to proscribe.” (4) They set out from Mount Hor by way of the Sea of Reeds*Sea of Reeds Traditionally, but incorrectly, “Red Sea.” to skirt the land of Edom. But the people grew restive on the journey, (5) and the people spoke against God and against Moses, “Why did you make us leave Egypt to die in the wilderness? There is no bread and no water, and we have come to loathe this miserable food.” (6) יהוה sent seraph*seraph Cf. Isa. 14.29; 30.6. Others “fiery”; exact meaning of Heb. saraph uncertain. Cf. Deut. 8.15. serpents against the people. They bit the people and many of the Israelites died. (7) The people came to Moses and said, “We sinned by speaking against יהוה and against you. Intercede with יהוה to take away the serpents from us!” And Moses interceded for the people. (8) Then יהוה said to Moses, “Make a seraph*seraph See note at v. 6. figure and mount it on a standard. And anyone who was bitten who then looks at it shall recover.” (9) Moses made a copper serpent and mounted it on a standard; and when bitten by a serpent, anyone who looked at the copper serpent would recover. (10) The Israelites marched on and encamped at Oboth. (11) They set out from Oboth and encamped at Iye-abarim, in the wilderness bordering on Moab to the east. (12) From there they set out and encamped at the wadi Zered. (13) From there they set out and encamped beyond the Arnon, that is, in the wilderness that extends from the territory of the Amorites. For the Arnon is the boundary of Moab, between Moab and the Amorites. (14) Therefore the Book of the Wars of יהוה speaks of*The quotation that follows is a fragment; its text and meaning are uncertain. “…Waheb in Suphah, and the wadis: the Arnon (15) with its tributary wadis, stretched along the settled country of Ar, hugging the territory of Moab…” (16) And from there to Beer,*Beer Lit. “well.” which is the well where יהוה said to Moses, “Assemble the people that I may give them water.” (17) Then Israel sang this song:
Spring up, O well—sing to it—
(18) The well which the chieftains dug,
Which the nobles of the people started
With maces, with their own staffs. And from Midbar*Midbar Septuagint “the well” (= Beer); cf. v. 16. to Mattanah, (19) and from Mattanah to Nahaliel, and from Nahaliel to Bamoth, (20) and from Bamoth to the valley that is in the country of Moab, at the peak of Pisgah, overlooking the wasteland.*wasteland Or “Jeshimon.” (21) Israel now sent messengers to Sihon king of the Amorites, saying, (22) “Let me pass through your country. We will not turn off into fields or vineyards, and we will not drink water from wells. We will follow the king’s highway until we have crossed your territory.” (23) But Sihon would not let Israel pass through his territory. Sihon gathered all his troops and went out against Israel in the wilderness. He came to Jahaz and engaged Israel in battle. (24) But Israel put them to the sword, and took possession of their land, from the Arnon to the Jabbok, as far as [Az] of the Ammonites, for Az*Az Septuagint “Jazer,” cf. v. 32. Others “for the boundary of the Ammonites was strong.” marked the boundary of the Ammonites. (25) Israel took all those towns. And Israel settled in all the towns of the Amorites, in Heshbon and all its dependencies. (26) Now Heshbon was the city of Sihon king of the Amorites, who had fought against a former king of Moab and taken all his land from him as far as the Arnon. (27) Therefore the bards would recite:
*The meaning of several parts of this ancient poem is no longer certain. “Come to Heshbon; firmly built
And well founded is Sihon’s city.
(28) For fire went forth from Heshbon,
Flame from Sihon’s city,
Consuming Ar of Moab,
The lords of Bamoth*Bamoth Cf. vv. 19 and 20 and Num. 22.21. by the Arnon.
(29) Woe to you, O Moab!
You are undone, O people of Chemosh!
His sons are rendered fugitive
And his daughters captive
By an Amorite king, Sihon.”
(30) *Meaning of verse uncertain. Alternatively: “Their dominion is at an end / From Heshbon to Dibon / And from Nashim to Nophah, / Which is hard by Medeba.” Yet we have cast them down utterly,
Heshbon along with Dibon;
We have wrought desolation at Nophah,
Which is hard by Medeba. (31) So Israel occupied the land of the Amorites. (32) Then Moses sent to spy out Jazer, and they captured its dependencies and dispossessed the Amorites who were there. (33) They marched on and went up the road to Bashan, and King Og of Bashan, with all his troops, came out to Edrei to engage them in battle. (34) But יהוה said to Moses, “Do not fear him, for I give him and all his troops and his land into your hand. You shall do to him as you did to Sihon king of the Amorites who dwelt in Heshbon.” (35) They defeated him and his sons and all his troops, until no remnant was left him; and they took possession of his country.
Spring up, O well—sing to it—
(18) The well which the chieftains dug,
Which the nobles of the people started
With maces, with their own staffs. And from Midbar*Midbar Septuagint “the well” (= Beer); cf. v. 16. to Mattanah, (19) and from Mattanah to Nahaliel, and from Nahaliel to Bamoth, (20) and from Bamoth to the valley that is in the country of Moab, at the peak of Pisgah, overlooking the wasteland.*wasteland Or “Jeshimon.” (21) Israel now sent messengers to Sihon king of the Amorites, saying, (22) “Let me pass through your country. We will not turn off into fields or vineyards, and we will not drink water from wells. We will follow the king’s highway until we have crossed your territory.” (23) But Sihon would not let Israel pass through his territory. Sihon gathered all his troops and went out against Israel in the wilderness. He came to Jahaz and engaged Israel in battle. (24) But Israel put them to the sword, and took possession of their land, from the Arnon to the Jabbok, as far as [Az] of the Ammonites, for Az*Az Septuagint “Jazer,” cf. v. 32. Others “for the boundary of the Ammonites was strong.” marked the boundary of the Ammonites. (25) Israel took all those towns. And Israel settled in all the towns of the Amorites, in Heshbon and all its dependencies. (26) Now Heshbon was the city of Sihon king of the Amorites, who had fought against a former king of Moab and taken all his land from him as far as the Arnon. (27) Therefore the bards would recite:
*The meaning of several parts of this ancient poem is no longer certain. “Come to Heshbon; firmly built
And well founded is Sihon’s city.
(28) For fire went forth from Heshbon,
Flame from Sihon’s city,
Consuming Ar of Moab,
The lords of Bamoth*Bamoth Cf. vv. 19 and 20 and Num. 22.21. by the Arnon.
(29) Woe to you, O Moab!
You are undone, O people of Chemosh!
His sons are rendered fugitive
And his daughters captive
By an Amorite king, Sihon.”
(30) *Meaning of verse uncertain. Alternatively: “Their dominion is at an end / From Heshbon to Dibon / And from Nashim to Nophah, / Which is hard by Medeba.” Yet we have cast them down utterly,
Heshbon along with Dibon;
We have wrought desolation at Nophah,
Which is hard by Medeba. (31) So Israel occupied the land of the Amorites. (32) Then Moses sent to spy out Jazer, and they captured its dependencies and dispossessed the Amorites who were there. (33) They marched on and went up the road to Bashan, and King Og of Bashan, with all his troops, came out to Edrei to engage them in battle. (34) But יהוה said to Moses, “Do not fear him, for I give him and all his troops and his land into your hand. You shall do to him as you did to Sihon king of the Amorites who dwelt in Heshbon.” (35) They defeated him and his sons and all his troops, until no remnant was left him; and they took possession of his country.
את מי שבו?
(ד) וישב ממנו שבי. אֵינָהּ אֶלָּא שִׁפְחָה אַחַת (ילקוט שמעוני רמז תשסד):
(1) וישמע הכנעני AND THE CANAANITE HEARD — He heard that Aaron had died and that the clouds of glory had disappeared and he believed that now he was at liberty to wage war against Israel, as it is related in Rosh Hashana 3a; Amalek was from olden times a whip for chastising Israel — always held in readiness to be God's agent for Israels punishment (Midrash Tanchuma, Chukat 18). (2) ישב הנגב THE INHABITANT OF THE SOUTH COUNTRY — This was Amalek,as it is said, (Numbers 13:29), “Amalek was the inhabitant of the south country”. But he purposely changed his speech, talking in the “Canaanite” tongue, so that Israel might thereby be misled and would pray to the Holy One, blessed be He, that he should give the Canaanites into their power, whilst really they were not Canaanites, and their prayer would be ineffectual against the Amalakites. But Israel perceived that their clothing was as the clothing of Amalakites whilst their language was the language of Canaan; they thereupon said, “Let us pray against our enemies in general terms (without mention of any name), as it is stated (v. 2) that they said, “if Thou wilt indeed give this people into my hand”. (3) דרך האתרים BY WAY OF ATHARIM — by way of the south country by which the spies (תרים) had gone, as it is said, (Numbers 13:22) “and they went up by the south country”. Another explanation of דרך האתרים is: By the way of the Great Searcher (the Ark) which used to journey in front of them, as it is said, (Numbers 10:33) “[and the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord went before them] in the three days’ journey to search out (לתור) a resting-place for them” (Midrash Tanchuma, Chukat 14). (4) וישב ממנו שבי (more lit.,) AND CAPTURED FROM THEM A CAPTIVE — it was only one maid servant (Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 764).
ועל דרך הפשט ענין הכתוב כי לא הרג מהם הכנעני הזה שום אדם אבל שבה מהם מעטים וכאשר נתן השם אותו בידם השיבו את הכל ולא נפקד מהם איש.
(1) AND THE CANAANITE, THE KING OF ARAD, HEARD. We find [mentioned] amongst the conquests of Joshua: the king of Arad, one.217Joshua 12:14. Ramban is to ask: since the verse in Joshua clearly indicates that Arad was in Canaan proper, to the west of the river Jordan: so how — as indicated in this section — could its king fight against Israel whilst they were still on the eastern bank of the Jordan: Moreover, in the section dealing with the [stages of the Israelites’] journeyings [in the wilderness], it is written, And the Canaanite, the king of Arad, who dwelt in the south in the land of Canaan,218Further, 33:40. and Scripture does not refer to [that land which is] on the eastern side of the Jordan as “the land of Canaan” without qualification, just as He said, the land of Canaan according to the borders thereof.219Ibid., 34:2. Verses 10-12 ibid., define the eastern boundary of Canaan as the Jordan: hence we see that the word “Canaan” does not include land east of the Jordan. So the question reappears: how come that the king of Arad, a land west of the Jordan, came to fight the children of Israel who were now encamped east of the Jordan? Furthermore, [if Arad was to the east of the river Jordan], Moses should have given the land of the king of Arad to one of the tribes of Israel [as their inheritance, in the same way that he divided up the other lands which he conquered]; but Scripture always tells220Ibid., Verses 13-15; Joshua 12:6, etc. that it was the land of Sihon and Og, the two Amorite kings, which Moses gave to the two tribes [Reuben and Gad] and to the half-tribe [of Menasheh], whereas the nine tribes and the [other] half-tribe [of Menasheh] received their inheritance after they crossed the Jordan into the land of Canaan. Perhaps we may explain [that the reason for this is] that Israel utterly destroyed their land, and did not settle therein at all. But that is not [the] correct [explanation of the word v’hacharamti in Verse 2]. Similarly Rashi explains [that the expression: And Israel vowed a vow unto the Eternal, and said, If Thou wilt indeed deliver this people into my hand,] then ‘v’hacharamti’ their cities221Further, verse 2. means that Israel would dedicate the spoils [of those cities] to the Most High [and not that they would destroy the cities themselves].222Hence the question would be: If Arad was on the eastern side of the Jordan, why did Moses not give it to any of the tribes?
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that this king of Arad dwelt in the south218Further, 33:40. on the western side of the Jordan, in the land of Canaan near the Jordan, bordering onto the land of the children of Judah, near Hebron which is in the south;223Above, 13:22: And they went up into the south, and came unto Hebron. and he heard from afar of the coming of the children of Israel,218Further, 33:40. so he [the king] came by the way of Atharim224Here in Verse 1. to the plains of Moab to fight there against Israel. This is the meaning of the word ‘vayishma’ (and he heard) [i.e., he heard from a distance]. Therefore Scripture relates that he dwelt in the south in the land of Canaan,218Further, 33:40. [to point out] that he came from another land, to the place where Israel was [encamped]. Then Israel vowed a vow unto the Eternal221Further, verse 2. that if He would deliver him [the king of Arad] into their hand, they would dedicate all that they had to G-d. And Scripture [further] relates225Further, Verse 3. that G-d heard their prayer, and the vow that they had vowed unto G-d, they fulfilled,226See Isaiah 19:21: and they shall vow a vow unto the Eternal, and shall perform it. for they killed them now in the days of Moses, as He had commanded, None devoted, that may be devoted of men, shall be ransomed; he shall surely be put to death,227Leviticus 27:29. See Ramban ibid. and they gave all their spoils into the treasury of the House of the Eternal.228Joshua 6:24. Scripture continued by relating here225Further, Verse 3. that Israel also laid their cities waste when they came into the land of Canaan, after the death of Joshua, in order to fulfill the vow which they had made, and they called the name of the cities Hormah [Utter Destruction].229Ramban is thus saying that the account in Verse 3 of the destruction of the cities refers to an event which took place after Joshua’s death, and which is recorded in detail in the Book of Judges, as will be explained further on. Thus we must say that this future event was told by G-d to Moses, who wrote it down — like the rest of the Torah — at the command and dictation of G-d. Compare Ramban’s remarks in his introduction to the Commentary on the Torah, (Vol. I p. 9): “However, it is true and clear that the entire Torah — from the beginning of Genesis to in the sight of all Israel [the last words in Deuteronomy] — reached the ear of Moses from the mouth of the Holy One, blessed be He”. Since there is no difference in time for G-d, it is written in the past tense, for past, present, and future are all the same to Him. See also Ramban Vol. II, p. 192, for the reason why the tenses are often used interchangeably in prophetic statements. It is with reference to this that it is stated in the Book of Judges, And the children of the Kenite, Moses’ father-in-law, went up out of the city of palm-trees with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah, which is in the south of Arad,230Judges 1:16. and it is [further] written, And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they smote the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And he called the name of the city Hormah.231Ibid., Verse 17. It was then that this vow [recorded here] was fulfilled, but Scripture, however, completed the account of the matter here, just as it did in the section speaking of the descending of the manna, [where it states]: and Aaron laid it up before the Testimony, to be kept. And the children of Israel did eat the manna forty years, until they came to a land inhabited; they did eat the manna, until they came unto the borders of the land of Canaan,232Exodus 16:34-35. [an event which occurred] after the death of Moses, until the morrow after the Passover.233Joshua 5:11. Similarly, These are the names of the men that shall take possession of the Land for you etc.234Further, 34:17. constitutes a prophecy that these men will [still] live and function [at that time]; for it is impossible [to say] that G-d would specify for them men about whom there was a doubt [as to whether they would still be living; for if so], He should rather have commanded Joshua [about them] at the time of the division of the Land. [But since the command was already given to Moses, we see that the Torah speaks of future events, and that this constitutes a Divine promise that these specified men would live until the time of the division of the Land.]
It is also correct to say that already now in the days of Moses the Israelites destroyed this king [of Arad] and his people with the edge of the sword,235Exodus 17:13. and called the place of the battle Hormah, and after they crossed the Jordan, Joshua also killed the [then] king of Arad217Joshua 12:14. Ramban is to ask: since the verse in Joshua clearly indicates that Arad was in Canaan proper, to the west of the river Jordan: so how — as indicated in this section — could its king fight against Israel whilst they were still on the eastern bank of the Jordan: who ruled after [the one in the days of Moses], together with the [other] Canaanite kings who ruled at that time. When the children of Judah came into their cities, they destroyed them as well, and called the name of the cities Hormah,231Ibid., Verse 17. because [by destroying them] they fulfilled the vow which their fathers had made, and I will utterly destroy their cities.221Further, verse 2. Therefore He stated here, and he called the name of ‘the place’ Hormah,225Further, Verse 3. but there [in the Book of Judges] it is written, and he called the name of ‘the city’ Hormah,231Ibid., Verse 17. meaning the name of every city which belonged to the king of Arad, as they fulfilled their vow, and their spoils were dedicated to the Sanctuary. Thus [according to this interpretation] everything mentioned here happened at the same time [in the days of Moses], except that He mentioned, and their cities,225Further, Verse 3. [the destruction of which] occurred at a later time, when they came into their cities. It is for this reason that it says [here], and I will utterly destroy their cities,221Further, verse 2. and does not say “[I will destroy] them and their cities,” because the verse [only] mentions their vow concerning the future, but they themselves [the people] died in the battle [at the time of Moses] and were destroyed there. And the language of the verse fits in well with this explanation of ours, for it should have said: “and He delivered up the Canaanites ‘into their hand,’ and ‘they’ utterly destroyed them and their cities, and ‘they’ called the name of the place Hormah.” But Scripture omitted the pronouns236Thus it does not say that He gave the Canaanites “into their hand” [which would refer exclusively to the hand of the Israelites of the days of Moses]. Nor does it say vayacharimu (and “they” destroyed), but instead says: ‘vayachareim’ [literally: “and ‘he’ destroyed” — i.e., the one who destroyed them — now, or later on in the days of Joshua]. Similarly it does not say vayikr’u (“and ‘they’ called”), the name of the place Hormah [in the days of Moses] but ‘vayikra’ [“and ‘he’ called” — the one who called — now or later on]. in order to indicate that He delivered the Canaanites into the hand of whoever of the Israelites He delivered them, some of them now and some of them at a later time, for G-d hearkened to their prayer, and they fulfilled their vow. (2) THAT ISRAEL CAME BY WAY OF ‘ATHARIM.’ According to the opinion of Onkelos [who rendered the verse: “that Israel came by the way which ‘the spies’ had gone”], the meaning is that when the spies came and went up from the south237Above, 13:22. and returned, the inhabitants of the Land noticed them, and this Canaanite who dwelt in the south heard about them, and so he followed the same route which they had taken, until he reached the camp of the Israelites. Onkelos has interpreted it well. And our Rabbis have said:238Rosh Hashanah 3a. “What was the report which he [the Canaanite] heard?” — because they found difficulty with the verse in the section [dealing with the stages] of the [Israelites’] journeyings,239Ramban by implication differs here from Rashi, who quoted this text of the Rabbis on the verse before us. According to Ramban, the Rabbis made their remark with reference to the verse mentioned further on. Ramban’s reason for disagreeing is apparent, because in our verse it states quite clearly the reason why the Canaanite came, namely because he had heard of the sending of the spies, as explained, and therefore he went to fight against Israel. But further on no reason is given and no war mentioned. Therefore Ramban says, the Rabbis found it necessary to give their interpretation. which states, And the Canaanite, the king of Arad, who dwelt in the south in the land of Canaan, heard of the coming of the children of Israel,240Further, 33:40. since it does not mention there any war, or any other event whatsoever. Therefore they said that the report was about the death of Aaron which is mentioned there,241Ibid., Verses 38-39. and Scripture thus states that Israel’s enemies heard of the death of the righteous one, and they were consequently encouraged by that event to fight against Israel. Likewise the Rabbis have said242Tanchuma, Chukath 18. that this Canaanite was Amalek, and [therefore the Israelites] did not conquer his land, nor take any part of it; but they completely destroyed their cities. (3) AND HE TOOK SOME OF THEM CAPTIVE. “It was only one maidservant [of the Israelites that was taken captive].” This is Rashi’s language, based upon the words of our Rabbis.243Yalkut Shimoni, Chukath on this verse. The Sages were induced to make this comment because they were of the opinion that Israel never suffered defeat at the hands of any enemy except at times when they sinned; such as at the first war with Amalek, because they had said, Is the Eternal among us, or not?244Exodus 17:7. and at the second [war with Amalek]245Above, 14:45: Then the Amalekite … came down and smote them. on account of their sin in the [matter of the] spies, when Moses had warned them not to wage war.246Ibid., Verses 41-42. But in all wars which were by [Divine] command, not one man of them was missing247See further, 31:49. throughout the days of Moses. Therefore the Sages explained this verse as meaning that they [the enemy] took captive from Israel that captive whom they had in their possession, namely this maidservant whom the Israelites had [previously] captured from them. [The usage here of the term shevi (captive) in the sense of “servant” is] similar to the expression ‘b’chor hashvi’ (the firstborn of the captive)248Exodus 12:29. which means the firstborn of ‘the maidservant’249Ibid., 11:5. [and so here too the word shevi denotes a maidservant], since Scripture here does not say: “and he captured men from him,” or “[he captured] women and children.”
According to the plain meaning of Scripture, the sense of the verse is that these Canaanites did not kill any of the Israelites, but took a few of them captive, and when G-d [later on] delivered them into their hands, they brought them all back, and not a single one of them was missing. Scripture mentioned this in order to inform us that since the Israelites saw at first that the Canaanites were winning [the war], they made this vow to dedicate all spoil which they would take to G-d, and G-d hearkened to their voice. It is possible also that we explain that G-d was angry with these Canaanites because they came from a distant land to fight against Israel, and feared not G-d;250Deuteronomy 25:19. therefore He wanted that they should be utterly destroyed, and caused them to prevail at first so that the Israelites would vow to destroy them [and dedicate the spoils] to G-d.
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that this king of Arad dwelt in the south218Further, 33:40. on the western side of the Jordan, in the land of Canaan near the Jordan, bordering onto the land of the children of Judah, near Hebron which is in the south;223Above, 13:22: And they went up into the south, and came unto Hebron. and he heard from afar of the coming of the children of Israel,218Further, 33:40. so he [the king] came by the way of Atharim224Here in Verse 1. to the plains of Moab to fight there against Israel. This is the meaning of the word ‘vayishma’ (and he heard) [i.e., he heard from a distance]. Therefore Scripture relates that he dwelt in the south in the land of Canaan,218Further, 33:40. [to point out] that he came from another land, to the place where Israel was [encamped]. Then Israel vowed a vow unto the Eternal221Further, verse 2. that if He would deliver him [the king of Arad] into their hand, they would dedicate all that they had to G-d. And Scripture [further] relates225Further, Verse 3. that G-d heard their prayer, and the vow that they had vowed unto G-d, they fulfilled,226See Isaiah 19:21: and they shall vow a vow unto the Eternal, and shall perform it. for they killed them now in the days of Moses, as He had commanded, None devoted, that may be devoted of men, shall be ransomed; he shall surely be put to death,227Leviticus 27:29. See Ramban ibid. and they gave all their spoils into the treasury of the House of the Eternal.228Joshua 6:24. Scripture continued by relating here225Further, Verse 3. that Israel also laid their cities waste when they came into the land of Canaan, after the death of Joshua, in order to fulfill the vow which they had made, and they called the name of the cities Hormah [Utter Destruction].229Ramban is thus saying that the account in Verse 3 of the destruction of the cities refers to an event which took place after Joshua’s death, and which is recorded in detail in the Book of Judges, as will be explained further on. Thus we must say that this future event was told by G-d to Moses, who wrote it down — like the rest of the Torah — at the command and dictation of G-d. Compare Ramban’s remarks in his introduction to the Commentary on the Torah, (Vol. I p. 9): “However, it is true and clear that the entire Torah — from the beginning of Genesis to in the sight of all Israel [the last words in Deuteronomy] — reached the ear of Moses from the mouth of the Holy One, blessed be He”. Since there is no difference in time for G-d, it is written in the past tense, for past, present, and future are all the same to Him. See also Ramban Vol. II, p. 192, for the reason why the tenses are often used interchangeably in prophetic statements. It is with reference to this that it is stated in the Book of Judges, And the children of the Kenite, Moses’ father-in-law, went up out of the city of palm-trees with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah, which is in the south of Arad,230Judges 1:16. and it is [further] written, And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they smote the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And he called the name of the city Hormah.231Ibid., Verse 17. It was then that this vow [recorded here] was fulfilled, but Scripture, however, completed the account of the matter here, just as it did in the section speaking of the descending of the manna, [where it states]: and Aaron laid it up before the Testimony, to be kept. And the children of Israel did eat the manna forty years, until they came to a land inhabited; they did eat the manna, until they came unto the borders of the land of Canaan,232Exodus 16:34-35. [an event which occurred] after the death of Moses, until the morrow after the Passover.233Joshua 5:11. Similarly, These are the names of the men that shall take possession of the Land for you etc.234Further, 34:17. constitutes a prophecy that these men will [still] live and function [at that time]; for it is impossible [to say] that G-d would specify for them men about whom there was a doubt [as to whether they would still be living; for if so], He should rather have commanded Joshua [about them] at the time of the division of the Land. [But since the command was already given to Moses, we see that the Torah speaks of future events, and that this constitutes a Divine promise that these specified men would live until the time of the division of the Land.]
It is also correct to say that already now in the days of Moses the Israelites destroyed this king [of Arad] and his people with the edge of the sword,235Exodus 17:13. and called the place of the battle Hormah, and after they crossed the Jordan, Joshua also killed the [then] king of Arad217Joshua 12:14. Ramban is to ask: since the verse in Joshua clearly indicates that Arad was in Canaan proper, to the west of the river Jordan: so how — as indicated in this section — could its king fight against Israel whilst they were still on the eastern bank of the Jordan: who ruled after [the one in the days of Moses], together with the [other] Canaanite kings who ruled at that time. When the children of Judah came into their cities, they destroyed them as well, and called the name of the cities Hormah,231Ibid., Verse 17. because [by destroying them] they fulfilled the vow which their fathers had made, and I will utterly destroy their cities.221Further, verse 2. Therefore He stated here, and he called the name of ‘the place’ Hormah,225Further, Verse 3. but there [in the Book of Judges] it is written, and he called the name of ‘the city’ Hormah,231Ibid., Verse 17. meaning the name of every city which belonged to the king of Arad, as they fulfilled their vow, and their spoils were dedicated to the Sanctuary. Thus [according to this interpretation] everything mentioned here happened at the same time [in the days of Moses], except that He mentioned, and their cities,225Further, Verse 3. [the destruction of which] occurred at a later time, when they came into their cities. It is for this reason that it says [here], and I will utterly destroy their cities,221Further, verse 2. and does not say “[I will destroy] them and their cities,” because the verse [only] mentions their vow concerning the future, but they themselves [the people] died in the battle [at the time of Moses] and were destroyed there. And the language of the verse fits in well with this explanation of ours, for it should have said: “and He delivered up the Canaanites ‘into their hand,’ and ‘they’ utterly destroyed them and their cities, and ‘they’ called the name of the place Hormah.” But Scripture omitted the pronouns236Thus it does not say that He gave the Canaanites “into their hand” [which would refer exclusively to the hand of the Israelites of the days of Moses]. Nor does it say vayacharimu (and “they” destroyed), but instead says: ‘vayachareim’ [literally: “and ‘he’ destroyed” — i.e., the one who destroyed them — now, or later on in the days of Joshua]. Similarly it does not say vayikr’u (“and ‘they’ called”), the name of the place Hormah [in the days of Moses] but ‘vayikra’ [“and ‘he’ called” — the one who called — now or later on]. in order to indicate that He delivered the Canaanites into the hand of whoever of the Israelites He delivered them, some of them now and some of them at a later time, for G-d hearkened to their prayer, and they fulfilled their vow. (2) THAT ISRAEL CAME BY WAY OF ‘ATHARIM.’ According to the opinion of Onkelos [who rendered the verse: “that Israel came by the way which ‘the spies’ had gone”], the meaning is that when the spies came and went up from the south237Above, 13:22. and returned, the inhabitants of the Land noticed them, and this Canaanite who dwelt in the south heard about them, and so he followed the same route which they had taken, until he reached the camp of the Israelites. Onkelos has interpreted it well. And our Rabbis have said:238Rosh Hashanah 3a. “What was the report which he [the Canaanite] heard?” — because they found difficulty with the verse in the section [dealing with the stages] of the [Israelites’] journeyings,239Ramban by implication differs here from Rashi, who quoted this text of the Rabbis on the verse before us. According to Ramban, the Rabbis made their remark with reference to the verse mentioned further on. Ramban’s reason for disagreeing is apparent, because in our verse it states quite clearly the reason why the Canaanite came, namely because he had heard of the sending of the spies, as explained, and therefore he went to fight against Israel. But further on no reason is given and no war mentioned. Therefore Ramban says, the Rabbis found it necessary to give their interpretation. which states, And the Canaanite, the king of Arad, who dwelt in the south in the land of Canaan, heard of the coming of the children of Israel,240Further, 33:40. since it does not mention there any war, or any other event whatsoever. Therefore they said that the report was about the death of Aaron which is mentioned there,241Ibid., Verses 38-39. and Scripture thus states that Israel’s enemies heard of the death of the righteous one, and they were consequently encouraged by that event to fight against Israel. Likewise the Rabbis have said242Tanchuma, Chukath 18. that this Canaanite was Amalek, and [therefore the Israelites] did not conquer his land, nor take any part of it; but they completely destroyed their cities. (3) AND HE TOOK SOME OF THEM CAPTIVE. “It was only one maidservant [of the Israelites that was taken captive].” This is Rashi’s language, based upon the words of our Rabbis.243Yalkut Shimoni, Chukath on this verse. The Sages were induced to make this comment because they were of the opinion that Israel never suffered defeat at the hands of any enemy except at times when they sinned; such as at the first war with Amalek, because they had said, Is the Eternal among us, or not?244Exodus 17:7. and at the second [war with Amalek]245Above, 14:45: Then the Amalekite … came down and smote them. on account of their sin in the [matter of the] spies, when Moses had warned them not to wage war.246Ibid., Verses 41-42. But in all wars which were by [Divine] command, not one man of them was missing247See further, 31:49. throughout the days of Moses. Therefore the Sages explained this verse as meaning that they [the enemy] took captive from Israel that captive whom they had in their possession, namely this maidservant whom the Israelites had [previously] captured from them. [The usage here of the term shevi (captive) in the sense of “servant” is] similar to the expression ‘b’chor hashvi’ (the firstborn of the captive)248Exodus 12:29. which means the firstborn of ‘the maidservant’249Ibid., 11:5. [and so here too the word shevi denotes a maidservant], since Scripture here does not say: “and he captured men from him,” or “[he captured] women and children.”
According to the plain meaning of Scripture, the sense of the verse is that these Canaanites did not kill any of the Israelites, but took a few of them captive, and when G-d [later on] delivered them into their hands, they brought them all back, and not a single one of them was missing. Scripture mentioned this in order to inform us that since the Israelites saw at first that the Canaanites were winning [the war], they made this vow to dedicate all spoil which they would take to G-d, and G-d hearkened to their voice. It is possible also that we explain that G-d was angry with these Canaanites because they came from a distant land to fight against Israel, and feared not G-d;250Deuteronomy 25:19. therefore He wanted that they should be utterly destroyed, and caused them to prevail at first so that the Israelites would vow to destroy them [and dedicate the spoils] to G-d.
(א) וישב ממנו. ולא המית איש:
(1) וישב ממנו, without killing a single Israelite.
בני ישראל נחלו תבוסה קטנה כנגד הכנעני מלך ערד - ללא פגיעות בנפש ורק שפחה אחת נשבתה (או כמה בודדים ע"פ הרמב"ן), ואף על פי כן ישראל יוצאים למלחמת חרמה כנגד הכנעני כדי להחזיר את השבויים.