posts so far for parshat Matot

2012

1. Matos sources -- now organized chronologically.

2. YUTorah on Matot

3. Hataras Nedarim, suspended in air

2011

1. The mercha kfula in parshas Shmini -- How shall we account for it? There is one in Matos as well.
   .
2. Matos sources -- further expanded. For instance, many more meforshei Rashi.
   .
3. Why is Moshe's death after the war against Midian? Last year, I presented one reason from Rav Yonasan Eibeshitz. Here is another one, having to do with the laws of ritual purity.
   .
4. YU Torah on parashat Matos.
   .
5. Is there any Targum Onkelos on Atarot v'Divon? Not according to Rashi and Tosafot. So why do we have it in our Mikraos Gedolos?
   .
6. Why is וְכִבַּסְתֶּם translated as וּתְחַוְּרוּן?  Onkelos strays from his usual path. Is this a violation of the rule laid down by Rashi in parshat Tazria?
   .
7. Matos / Masei as the last sidra in the Torah --  Yes, I know there is a whole sefer in front of us, sefer Devarim, but that is Mishneh Torah. We should still consider the first four sefarim as a unit, such that we should expect some closure to the Torah.
   
   That, I think, is peshat in the instruction to Moshe about fighting Midyan...

2010

1. Matos sources -- revamped,  with more than 100 meforshim, organized into categories.
   a
2. Pinchas took the aron to battle, to the exclusion of the tzitz -- What Ibn Ezra tells us by omission, when he says that they took the aron to war.
   a
3. What is the allegorical meaning of the midrash of Pinchas the flying kohen? This is one midrash I suspect was indeed intended allegorically, despite the thrilling details which we would like to picture happening on the peshat level.
   .
4. What was Bilaam doing in Midian? Bilaam shouldn't have been there, since he 'returned to his place'. So why was he killed in the battle against Midian? The midrash has an answer; Ibn Caspi does not, and is firm in not having an answer. Also, Rav Saadia Gaon, and another suggested resolution.

2009

1. Matot sources -- links by perek and aliyah to an online Mikraos Gedolos, plus many, many meforshim on the parsha and haftarah.
   
   
2. To whom did Moshe speak in the beginning of Matot? To the leaders, to the people, to the leaders of the people, etc. Different opinions, and how it may work into trup.
3. Rav Yonasan Eibeshutz considers why the war with Midian was to be specifically waged in Moshe's lifetime.

2008

1. The Trup on Vekamu nedareha -- and Shadal's suggestion that the revii should really be a zakef, analyzed.
   .
2. Yachel meaning Forgive, Profane, Or Delay? as per the discussion of various meforshim.
   .
3. Did Ibn Ezra have "chalutz" with a kametz? I doubt it.

2007

1. The Vengeance of the Lord -- Moshe takes immediate action, as opposed to what Yehoshua does. There is also a change from the vengeance of the Israelites, in Hashem's statement, to the vengeance of Hashem, in Moshe's statement. Perhaps this is Hashem's vengeance on behalf of the Israelites.

2006

• No Punishment For Cursing? And Excusing The Woman Who Vows -- A post on Emor, about the blasphemer, in which I digress to discuss the laws in Matot, and how a husband may nullify his wife's vows. I suggest that וְנָשָׂא אֶת-עֲו‍ֹנָהּ may be read not only as "he (=her husband) shall bear her sin," but also "He (=Hashem) shall bear her sin," or "her sin shall be borne." An analysis by considering the various sections in the parsha.

• Bilaam the Flying Soothsayer -- 
• the derivation of the midrash that Bilaam flew and that Pinchas used the tzitz to bring Bilaam back to earth.
• Pinchas the Flying Priest
• in which Pinchas also flies. the midrashic derivation of that, as well as the derivation of an extended Arami Oved Avi midrash in Tg Yonatan, where Bilaam's misdeeds are more numerous.

2005

• Did Pinchas Act On His Own Initiative? (related to parshat Balak and Pinchas as well)
• First, dismiss as anachronistic and silly the idea that the brit shalom that Pinchas received was a cure for fanaticism, and that Hashem disliked Pinchas' action, by noting that in this incident, Hashem killed 24,000 in a plague, that Moshe called for the execution of the leaders of those who had joined Baal Peor, and that in a subsequent episode, Pinchas is called upon to join battle with the Midianites.
  However, if one desires to mitigate the zealousness, one can point out that according to the traditional, midrashic interpretation (advanced by Rashi), Moshe and the judges were unsure of how to act in Zimri's case, Pinchas recalled the halacha, reminded Moshe, and Moshe told him to carry it out. And so, Pinchas executed a command from the leader of the Israelites, and did not simply act on his own (though the halacha he recalled was that zealots may act on their own in such a case.)
  From a pshat perspective, one might posit that Pinchas did not act on his own at all. The previous verse contains a command to kill the leaders of those who had joined Baal Peor, and we know from earlier and elsewhere that the harlotry led into joining Baal Peor, and so Zimri fit this command. Further, Pinchas' action stops Hashem's anger (manifested in the plague), and Hashem told Moshe the killing of those involved would turn aside His anger.
  
• Midianites or Moabites? (related to parshat Balak and Pinchas as well)
• Considers that the beginning of the Baal Peor episode involved daughters of Moab, while subsequently, Kozbi was a Midianite, they are told to take revenge on the Midianites, and in parshat Matot, they fight a war against Midianites, and Moshe is upset that they did not kill the Midianite women who enticed them in the first place.
  Notes the Midianite role in consulting with Bilaam in the first place, in parshat Balak; notes that Midian at points seemed to hold land of Moav; notes Balak himself may have been a prince of Moav. Suggests that the elite of the Israelites slept with the nobles of the area, who were Midianites, while commoners slept with the commoners, who were Moabites; that it was Moabite land under rule of Midian; that there were both Moabites and Midianites present; and that Moav was protected as the result of Divine command.
• First to the Leaders
• The first pasuk is taken midrashically to mean that first the leaders and then the general populace were informed of the command. Explains how this is evident in a particular parsing of the verse (advanced by Mizrachi): "And Moses spoke unto the heads of the tribes and to {rather than of} the children of Israel, saying..." and demonstrates how the trup is consistent with this reading, and not with the typical pshat reading.
• Haftarat Matot = Yirmiyahu 1:
• Yerushalmi Gittin #1: Jewish Geography?
• Which way is Bavel? The gemara says East, but Yirmiyahu appears to say North, an issue which bothered the meforshim. An attempted resolution - perhaps Yirmiyahu is talking about a failed attack which we know happened shortly after his prophecy, and his prophecy explicitly makes mention of the fact that it will fail.
• Yirmiyahu: Baby-Faced Prophet?
• In which I consider a possible neo-midrashic interpretation of הִנֵּה לֹא-יָדַעְתִּי, דַּבֵּר כִּי-נַעַר, אָנֹכִי as Yirmiyahu literally being unable to speak because he is an infant. Speculations that this was used as a basis for Jesus and, in turn, for Ben Sira and Merlin.

2004

• Tevilat Kelim
• A novel analysis of the psukim, the gemara, Ramban, and Rashi, on the subject of immersing certain acquired vessels. This post defies easy summary, so check it out inside!
• More On Tevilat Kelim
• Heh. Check out this post, which shows that not only Jews practice tevilat keilim.

2003

• Halachic Ramifications of the Number of Israelite Warriors
• A discussion in Eruvin about the minimum size of an encampment of Jewish soldiers, in which five normal halachic obligations are waived. One suggestion, 12,000, is based on the size of the force which attacked Midian in parshat Matot.

to be continued...

YUTorah on parashat Matot - Masei

Audio Shiurim on Matot-Masei Rabbi Hanan Balk: Women and Eretz Yisrael Rabbi Eli Belizon: Lifnei Iver On Mitzvos Asei Rabbi Chaim Brovender: Reuven and Gad Rabbi Ally Ehrman: Lessons Learned From Our Trek In The Desert Rabbi Joel Finkelstein: Who's on First? Rabbi Barry Gelman: On Materialism and Community Rabbi Beinish Ginsburg: The Power of Tefilah Rabbi Yehuda Goldschmidt: Being Mevater Rabbi Shmuel Hain: Altar Asylum, Blood Avengers and Cities of Refuge: An Analysis of the ABC's of Unintentional Killing Rabbi Shalom Hammer: Journey to Reconstruction Rabbi Nathaniel Helfgot: Does Place Matter? An Analysis of The Bnei Gad/Bnei Reuven Episode Rabbi Jesse Horn: Reuniting B'Yachad in Eretz Yisroel Rabbi Ari Kahn: Traveling Rabbi Akiva Koenigsberg: Annuling a Wife's Vow Through an Agent Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz: Why Is Everybody Driving the Wrong Way? Rabbi Eliezer Lerner: The Importance of the Journey Rabbi Shmuel Maybruch: Kedushas Yisrael Mrs Ilana Saks: Travel Logs Rabbi Dr. Jacob J Schacter: The Connection Between the Diaspora and Israel Rabbi Baruch Simon: Midah of Anavah Mrs. Shira Smiles: Midyan - The Final Act Rabbi Reuven Spolter: An Army of Chareidim Rabbi Moshe Stav: מלחמה היא טובה Mrs. Shani Taragin: Nedarim B'Tanach Rabbi Moshe Taragin: Pride and Proprietary Rabbi Michael Taubes: Observing minhagim Rabbi Yaacov Thaler: Human Sacrifice Rabbi Moshe Tzvi Weinberg: The (Unrealistic) Story of Our Lives Rabbi Ari Zahtz: The Request of Gad and Reuvein Articles on Matot-Masei Rabbi Asher Brander: It's the Thought Rabbi Ozer Glickman: Serious Texts For Serious Readers Rabbi Meir Goldwicht: Why is Arei Miklat the Last Mitzvah in Bamidbar? Rabbi Avraham Gordimer: The Lesson of Arei Miklat Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb: Our Brother’s Keepers Rabbi Maury Grebenau: Putting the Kids Before the Kids Rabbi Mordechai Greenberg: נקמת ה' ונקמת בני ישראל Rabbi Josh Hoffman: There's Something in the Air Rabbi David Horwitz: The Choice of the Tribe of Reuben Rabbi Avigdor Nebenzahl: The Sanctity of Human Life Rabbi Avraham Rivlin: תיסרך רעתך ומשובותיך תוכיחוך YU-Torah miTzion Toronto Beit Midrash: Toronto Torah Rabbi Jeremy Wieder: Laining for Parshat Matot-Masei See all shiurim on YUTorah for Parshat Matot-Masei

New This Week History of Spanish Jewry: Three Great Leaders Rabbi Reuven Brand The Heart of the Three Weeks Rabbi Chaim Eisenstein Tisha B'Av: The Secret to Jewish Survival Rabbi David Fohrman How to Feel Connected to the 3 Weeks Rabbi Jesse Horn Safeguarding Secrets in Shidduchim - The Dinim of Disclosure in Dating Rabbi Shmuel Maybruch Halachic and Hashkafic Guidelines for Attending a Funeral Rabbi Meir Orlian Inyonei Bein Hametzarim Rabbi Hershel Schachter Buying New Clothes During the Three Weeks Rabbi Michael Siev Mitzvos in the Time of Moshiach Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky Eicha: Sounds of Music Mrs. Shani Taragin Tefilat haDerech: Origin and Practical Questions Rabbi Mordechai Torczyner

Hataras Nedarim, suspended in air

The Mishna in Chagiga (10a) states (and see here):

מתני' היתר נדרים פורחין באויר ואין להם על מה שיסמכו

"The releasing of vows float in the air, and they do not have upon what to rely."

Yet, Hataras Nedarim works. That is, if one vows, we say that he can seek out a chacham and find a way for release from that vow.

The gemara proceeds to bring down a whole bunch of Scriptural derivations. Thus:

(a) (Beraisa) Heter Nedarim does have a verse to rely upon.
(b) (R. Eliezer) Heter Nedarim is learned from the repetition of "Ki Yafli" (Vayikra 27:2 and Bamidbar 6:2).
(c) (R. Yehoshua) Heter Nedarim is learned from "Asher Nishbati b'Api" (Tehilim 95:11).
(d) (R. Yitzchak) Heter Nedarim is learned from "Kol Nediv Libo" (Shemos 35:5).
(e) (Chananyah) Heter Nedarim is learned from "Nishbati v'Akaymah" (Tehilim 119:106).
(f) (Shmuel) Had I been there, I would have given a source better than all of theirs.

1. "Lo Yachel Devaro" ("he may not annul his word"; Bamidbar 30:3) -- he may not annul it, but others may annul it for him.

(g) (Rava) All of the sources, except for Shmuel's, have questions on them.

1. This is what people mean when they say, "More effective is a single sharp pepper than a basket full of gourds."

And so the typical derivation is that of Shmuel, from the pasuk local to Matos:

אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל אי הואי התם אמרי להו דידי עדיפא מדידכו שנאמר (במדבר ל, ג) לא יחל דברו הוא אינו מוחל אבל אחרים מוחלין

For something like this, one would expect comment by the Karaites. And they don't disappoint. Aharon ben Yosef the Karaite writes:

"And I am astounded at the baalei hakabbalah (=Pharisees) who reverse the language of chilul {profane} into a language of forgiveness {mechilah, annulment -- indeed, Shmuel says הוא אינו מוחל אבל אחרים מוחלין}. And had they not relied on Scriptures, it would have been better for them than switching out the matter of prophecy, for this appears as rebellion."


In Chazal's defense, the Mishna does state that it is poreach ba'avir; and so, all these verses may be taken as a remez. Indeed, Rashi there on the Mishna explains that hataras nedarim by a chacham is halacha leMoshe miSinai, but that there is but a bit of remez to it. I suspect that one can say the same despite the conclusion of the gemara. That is, the brayta is clearly responding to the challenge of the Mishna. And so too Shmuel takes up the challenge.


Shmuel knows the Sifrei, cited by Rashi on the pasuk:

3. If a man makes a vow to the Lord or makes an oath to prohibit himself, he shall not violate his word; according to whatever came out of his mouth, he shall do.

ג. אִישׁ כִּי יִדֹּר נֶדֶר לַה' אוֹ הִשָּׁבַע שְׁבֻעָה לֶאְסֹר אִסָּר עַל נַפְשׁוֹ לֹא יַחֵל דְּבָרוֹ כְּכָל הַיֹּצֵא מִפִּיו יַעֲשֶׂה:

he shall not violate his word: Heb. לֹא יַחֵל דְּבָרוֹ, like לֹא יְחַלֵּל דְּבָרוֹ“he shall not profane his word,” he shall not treat his word as being unholy. — [Sifrei Mattoth 8]

לא יחל דברו: כמו לא יחלל דברו, לא יעשה דבריו חולין:

and I would venture that he does not dispute this primary meaning.


Leaving aside any of these Scriptural hints, can we account for hataras nedarim, or does it really simply float in the air and appear to be open rebellion against the pasuk which stated לֹא יַחֵל דְּבָרוֹ?


I would try to support the matter of hataras nedarim as follows. 


1. First, someone who goes to a chacham to release his vow is not treating it as profane. He does not ignore it, or trod over it. That he seeks rabbinic release from it means that he treats it as a serious entity which requires release.


2. Despite this introduction that a vow cannot be violated, the Torah proceeds to list exceptions to this rule, in which a husband or father can annul a woman's vows. She is subject to their approval, or disapproval, of the vow. Well, while the Biblical attitude towards vows might be debatable, Chazal themselves generally looked at vows unfavorably. And rabbinic figures are appointed as leaders of the Jewish community. So, extrapolating from the woman, any person can bring notice of his vows to a chacham and get the vow cancelled under this disapproval. It is not explicitly in the pasuk, but it is an extension and extrapolation of what is already there.


3. The chacham does not simply wave his magic wand. He has to establish charata. Had you known X, would you have vowed? That it, he undermines the force of the initial vow, declaring that it was made in error and not with proper knowledge.


4. One pasuk implies that there is some sort of violation even where the father stopped her vow:

6. But if her father hinders her on the day he hears it, all her vows and her prohibitions that she has imposed upon herself shall not stand. The Lord will forgive her because her father hindered her.

ו. וְאִם הֵנִיא אָבִיהָ אֹתָהּ בְּיוֹם שָׁמְעוֹ כָּל נְדָרֶיהָ וֶאֱסָרֶיהָ אֲשֶׁר אָסְרָה עַל נַפְשָׁהּ לֹא יָקוּם וַה' יִסְלַח לָהּ כִּי הֵנִיא אָבִיהָ אֹתָהּ:

but that since her father hindered her, the Lord will forgive her. So too, in an environment in which vows were looked at by Chazal as an incredibly negative social phenomenon (used to bolster hatred between man and his fellow and between husband and wife), they stepped into the breach and encouraged people to nullify their vows via a chacham. And if it be a violation, so be it. vesalachta leavoneinu ki rav hu. Forgive us for our sins because it is the rabbis' fault. They have the broad shoulders, they prevented us, and the Lord will forgive the people for the technical Biblical violation.


5. Perhaps on the Biblical level, there is a difference between neder which is a promise of a korban, and a shevua which imposes a prohibition. According to Resh Lakish (Yerushalmi Nedarim 11:1), only a neder can be nullified, and not a shevua. It is unclear whether to understand this as Biblical or Rabbinic law. But perhaps there is no real Biblical neder to impose a prohibition, and it all operates on a rabbinic level; and so, hataras nedarim can readily work to undo such a vow.


6. Related, לֶאְסֹר אִסָּר עַל נַפְשׁוֹ may not mean 'prohibit'. It can mean bind oneself with an obligation. See Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan who renders it such based on (Yerushalmi, Nedarim 9:1; Septuagint). Assar in Hebrew. If so, all such issurim (or most of them, anyway) stemming from a neder are from Divrei Soferim, and they established it and so can readily take it away.


Perhaps some, or all, of these motivations (plus others) can be read into the prooftexts in the gemara.


See also the Ohr HaChaim on the beginning of Matos. I don't buy his suggestion, but won't explain here why not.

YUTorah on parashat Matot-Masei

Audio Shiurim on Matot-Masei Rabbi Eli Belizon: Lifnei Iver On Mitzvos Asei  Rabbi Chaim Brovender: Reuven and Gad Rabbi Ally Ehrman: The Awesome Magnitude Of Gratitude Rabbi Joel Finkelstein: Who's on First? Rabbi Barry Gelman: On Materialism and Community Rabbi Beinish Ginsburg: The mistake of Bnei Gad and Bnei Reuven Rabbi Shmuel Hain: Altar Asylum, Blood Avengers and Cities of Refuge: An Analysis of the ABC's of Unintentional Killing Rabbi Shalom Hammer: Yeshivat Hesder: Conquering Eretz Yisrael Rabbi Nathaniel Helfgot: Does Place Matter? An Analysis of The Bnei Gad/Bnei Reuven Episode Rabbi Ari Kahn: The war against Midian, and flying sorcerers Rabbi Akiva Koenigsberg: Using an Agent to Annul or Upend a Wife's Vow Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz: Sticks and Stones Can Break My Bones but Words Can Really Hurt Me Rabbi Shmuel Maybruch: Kedushas Yisrael Mrs Ilana Saks: Travel Logs Rabbi Dr. Jacob J Schacter: The Connection Between the Diaspora and Israel Rabbi Baruch Simon: Midah of Anavah Mrs. Shira Smiles: Midyan - The Final Act Rabbi Aaron Soloveichik: The Qualities of a Leader Rabbi Reuven Spolter: My Needs or Our Needs Mrs. Shani Taragin: Nedarim B'Tanach Rabbi Moshe Taragin: Changes in leadership Rabbi Michael Taubes: Observing minhagim Rabbi Yaacov Thaler: Human Sacrifice Rabbi Moshe Tzvi Weinberg: The (Unrealistic) Story of Our Lives Rabbi Ari Zahtz: Leiby, Where Are You? Articles on Matot-Masei Rabbi Asher Brander: It's the Thought Rabbi Ozer Glickman: The Burden of Leadership Rabbi Meir Goldwicht: Why is Arei Miklat the Last Mitzvah in Bamidbar? Rabbi Avraham Gordimer: Rising Above Human Nature Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb: Our Brother’s Keepers Rabbi Maury Grebenau: Putting the Kids Before the Kids Rabbi Josh Hoffman: There's Something in the Air Rabbi David Horwitz: The Choice of the Tribe of Reuben Rabbi Avigdor Nebenzahl: He Shall not Profane his Word Rabbis Stanley M Wagner and Israel Drazin: How Serious is the Mandate to Study the Parashah Weekly With the Onkelos Translation? Rabbi Jeremy Wieder: Laining for Parshat Matot-Masei See all shiurim on YUTorah for Parshat Matot-Masei The Arbesfeld Yom Rishon program is on Summer break. Enjoy these shiurim from our archives.Rabbi Kenneth Brander: Society's Hard Cell: Stem Cell Research; Condemned,Condoned, or encouraged by Jewish Law Ms. Anne Gordon: David and Batsheva - Reconciling Pshat and Drash Mrs. C.B. Neugroschl: Religious Zionism - A Difficult Challenge Rabbi Jeremy Wieder: Vigilante Justice To learn more, please visit www.kollelyomrishon.org andwww.midreshetyomrishon.org

New This Week Black Fire on White Fire Rabbi Shlomo Einhorn Autopsies: What's the Problem and are They Ever Allowed? Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb After the Destruction: Setting up for Life in Exile Rabbi Yonah Gross Halachah and Machshavah for the Nine Days Rabbi Eli Ozarowski Why Do You Laugh? On Rabbi Akiva and Redemption  Mrs Ilana Saks Cheating and Dishonesty Rabbi Ian Shaffer Five Minute Halacha - Music During the Three Weeks Rabbi Michael Siev Shavua Shechal Bo When Tisha Bav in on Sunday Rabbi Michael Taubes Practical Shabbos Kitchen Part I: Borer Rabbi Ari Zahtz

posts so far for parshat Matot

2012

1. Matos sources -- now organized chronologically.

2. YUTorah on Matot

3. Hataras Nedarim, suspended in air

2011

1. The mercha kfula in parshas Shmini -- How shall we account for it? There is one in Matos as well.
   .
2. Matos sources -- further expanded. For instance, many more meforshei Rashi.
   .
3. Why is Moshe's death after the war against Midian? Last year, I presented one reason from Rav Yonasan Eibeshitz. Here is another one, having to do with the laws of ritual purity.
   .
4. YU Torah on parashat Matos.
   .
5. Is there any Targum Onkelos on Atarot v'Divon? Not according to Rashi and Tosafot. So why do we have it in our Mikraos Gedolos?
   .
6. Why is וְכִבַּסְתֶּם translated as וּתְחַוְּרוּן?  Onkelos strays from his usual path. Is this a violation of the rule laid down by Rashi in parshat Tazria?
   .
7. Matos / Masei as the last sidra in the Torah --  Yes, I know there is a whole sefer in front of us, sefer Devarim, but that is Mishneh Torah. We should still consider the first four sefarim as a unit, such that we should expect some closure to the Torah.
   
   That, I think, is peshat in the instruction to Moshe about fighting Midyan...

2010

1. Matos sources -- revamped,  with more than 100 meforshim, organized into categories.
   a
2. Pinchas took the aron to battle, to the exclusion of the tzitz -- What Ibn Ezra tells us by omission, when he says that they took the aron to war.
   a
3. What is the allegorical meaning of the midrash of Pinchas the flying kohen? This is one midrash I suspect was indeed intended allegorically, despite the thrilling details which we would like to picture happening on the peshat level.
   .
4. What was Bilaam doing in Midian? Bilaam shouldn't have been there, since he 'returned to his place'. So why was he killed in the battle against Midian? The midrash has an answer; Ibn Caspi does not, and is firm in not having an answer. Also, Rav Saadia Gaon, and another suggested resolution.

2009

1. Matot sources -- links by perek and aliyah to an online Mikraos Gedolos, plus many, many meforshim on the parsha and haftarah.
   
   
2. To whom did Moshe speak in the beginning of Matot? To the leaders, to the people, to the leaders of the people, etc. Different opinions, and how it may work into trup.
3. Rav Yonasan Eibeshutz considers why the war with Midian was to be specifically waged in Moshe's lifetime.

2008

1. The Trup on Vekamu nedareha -- and Shadal's suggestion that the revii should really be a zakef, analyzed.
   .
2. Yachel meaning Forgive, Profane, Or Delay? as per the discussion of various meforshim.
   .
3. Did Ibn Ezra have "chalutz" with a kametz? I doubt it.

2007

1. The Vengeance of the Lord -- Moshe takes immediate action, as opposed to what Yehoshua does. There is also a change from the vengeance of the Israelites, in Hashem's statement, to the vengeance of Hashem, in Moshe's statement. Perhaps this is Hashem's vengeance on behalf of the Israelites.

2006

• No Punishment For Cursing? And Excusing The Woman Who Vows -- A post on Emor, about the blasphemer, in which I digress to discuss the laws in Matot, and how a husband may nullify his wife's vows. I suggest that וְנָשָׂא אֶת-עֲו‍ֹנָהּ may be read not only as "he (=her husband) shall bear her sin," but also "He (=Hashem) shall bear her sin," or "her sin shall be borne." An analysis by considering the various sections in the parsha.

• Bilaam the Flying Soothsayer -- 
• the derivation of the midrash that Bilaam flew and that Pinchas used the tzitz to bring Bilaam back to earth.
• Pinchas the Flying Priest
• in which Pinchas also flies. the midrashic derivation of that, as well as the derivation of an extended Arami Oved Avi midrash in Tg Yonatan, where Bilaam's misdeeds are more numerous.

2005

• Did Pinchas Act On His Own Initiative? (related to parshat Balak and Pinchas as well)
• First, dismiss as anachronistic and silly the idea that the brit shalom that Pinchas received was a cure for fanaticism, and that Hashem disliked Pinchas' action, by noting that in this incident, Hashem killed 24,000 in a plague, that Moshe called for the execution of the leaders of those who had joined Baal Peor, and that in a subsequent episode, Pinchas is called upon to join battle with the Midianites.
  However, if one desires to mitigate the zealousness, one can point out that according to the traditional, midrashic interpretation (advanced by Rashi), Moshe and the judges were unsure of how to act in Zimri's case, Pinchas recalled the halacha, reminded Moshe, and Moshe told him to carry it out. And so, Pinchas executed a command from the leader of the Israelites, and did not simply act on his own (though the halacha he recalled was that zealots may act on their own in such a case.)
  From a pshat perspective, one might posit that Pinchas did not act on his own at all. The previous verse contains a command to kill the leaders of those who had joined Baal Peor, and we know from earlier and elsewhere that the harlotry led into joining Baal Peor, and so Zimri fit this command. Further, Pinchas' action stops Hashem's anger (manifested in the plague), and Hashem told Moshe the killing of those involved would turn aside His anger.
  
• Midianites or Moabites? (related to parshat Balak and Pinchas as well)
• Considers that the beginning of the Baal Peor episode involved daughters of Moab, while subsequently, Kozbi was a Midianite, they are told to take revenge on the Midianites, and in parshat Matot, they fight a war against Midianites, and Moshe is upset that they did not kill the Midianite women who enticed them in the first place.
  Notes the Midianite role in consulting with Bilaam in the first place, in parshat Balak; notes that Midian at points seemed to hold land of Moav; notes Balak himself may have been a prince of Moav. Suggests that the elite of the Israelites slept with the nobles of the area, who were Midianites, while commoners slept with the commoners, who were Moabites; that it was Moabite land under rule of Midian; that there were both Moabites and Midianites present; and that Moav was protected as the result of Divine command.
• First to the Leaders
• The first pasuk is taken midrashically to mean that first the leaders and then the general populace were informed of the command. Explains how this is evident in a particular parsing of the verse (advanced by Mizrachi): "And Moses spoke unto the heads of the tribes and to {rather than of} the children of Israel, saying..." and demonstrates how the trup is consistent with this reading, and not with the typical pshat reading.
• Haftarat Matot = Yirmiyahu 1:
• Yerushalmi Gittin #1: Jewish Geography?
• Which way is Bavel? The gemara says East, but Yirmiyahu appears to say North, an issue which bothered the meforshim. An attempted resolution - perhaps Yirmiyahu is talking about a failed attack which we know happened shortly after his prophecy, and his prophecy explicitly makes mention of the fact that it will fail.
• Yirmiyahu: Baby-Faced Prophet?
• In which I consider a possible neo-midrashic interpretation of הִנֵּה לֹא-יָדַעְתִּי, דַּבֵּר כִּי-נַעַר, אָנֹכִי as Yirmiyahu literally being unable to speak because he is an infant. Speculations that this was used as a basis for Jesus and, in turn, for Ben Sira and Merlin.

2004

• Tevilat Kelim
• A novel analysis of the psukim, the gemara, Ramban, and Rashi, on the subject of immersing certain acquired vessels. This post defies easy summary, so check it out inside!
• More On Tevilat Kelim
• Heh. Check out this post, which shows that not only Jews practice tevilat keilim.

2003

• Halachic Ramifications of the Number of Israelite Warriors
• A discussion in Eruvin about the minimum size of an encampment of Jewish soldiers, in which five normal halachic obligations are waived. One suggestion, 12,000, is based on the size of the force which attacked Midian in parshat Matot.

to be continued...

Matos sources -- 2012 edition

by aliyah

rishon (Bemidbar 30:2)

sheni (31:1)

shelishi (31:13)

revii (31:25)

chamishi (31:42)

shishi (32:1)

shevii (32:20)

maftir (32:39)

haftara (Yirmeyahu 1:1), with Malbim and Mahari Kara

by perek

perek 31 ; perek 32

meforshim
Geonim (589-1038)

R' Saadia Gaon(882-942) -- see Wikipedia entry:

1. Arabic translation of Torah, here  at Temanim.org. This is a beautiful PDF, with the Chumash text, Rashi, Onkelos, and Rav Saadia's Tafsir. All of these have nikkud, which is a very nice feature. It also designates the Temani and standard aliyah breaks, and two commentaries, Shemen HaMor and Chelek HaDikduk, on the kriyah, trup, nikkud, and dikduk, on the basis of Yemenite manuscripts, which would be worthwhile even absent the other features. Quite excellent, overall.
2. The same Arabic translation, the Tafsir,  here at Google books. No nikkud, Chumash text, Rashi, or Onkelos. But there is a brief supercommentary by Yosef Direnburg at the bottom of each page. 
3. Collected commentary of Saadia Gaon on Torah, selected from the writings of various Rishonim and from his commentaries on other works.

Rabbi Yona Ibn Janach  (Spain, 990-1050) -- see Wikipedia 

Masei as the last sidra in the Torah

Matos / Masei is the last sidra in the Torah.

Yes, I know there is a whole sefer in front of us, sefer Devarim, but that is Mishneh Torah. We should still consider the first four sefarim as a unit, such that we should expect some closure to the Torah.

That, I think, is peshat in the instruction to Moshe about fighting Midyan, in parashat Matot:

ב  נְקֹם, נִקְמַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, מֵאֵת, הַמִּדְיָנִים; אַחַר, תֵּאָסֵף אֶל-עַמֶּיךָ.

2 'Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites; afterward shalt thou be gathered unto thy people.'

There are plenty of explanations, on the level of both peshat and derash, for the linkage. But one can regard this not just as Moshe's final act as leader, but as a closure to the Torah as well.

Given the confusing events, perhaps out of order, in sefer Shemos and sefer Bemidbar, it is useful to have an index or table of contents to mentally place them in order, and to give a brief overview. This, too, is an effective way of ending the sefer. Since we might think that this is the work of a separate author, who processed it for us, we have this introduction:

א  אֵלֶּה מַסְעֵי בְנֵי-יִשְׂרָאֵל, אֲשֶׁר יָצְאוּ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם--לְצִבְאֹתָם:  בְּיַד-מֹשֶׁה, וְאַהֲרֹן.	1 These are the stages of the children of Israel, by which they went forth out of the land of Egypt by their hosts under the hand of Moses and Aaron.
ב  וַיִּכְתֹּב מֹשֶׁה אֶת-מוֹצָאֵיהֶם, לְמַסְעֵיהֶם--עַל-פִּי יְהוָה; וְאֵלֶּה מַסְעֵיהֶם, לְמוֹצָאֵיהֶם.	2 And Moses wrote their goings forth, stage by stage, by the commandment of the LORD; and these are their stages at their goings forth.

Isn't everything in the Torah from Moshe Rabbenu by the commandment of Hashem? Why specifically here are we informed that Moshe wrote it by Hashem's command? Indeed, this is presumably what leads Ibn Ezra to suggest that the goings-forth are al pi Hashem, rather than the vayichtov being al pi Hashem. And what leads Ramban to cite Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim for a reason, specifically, for writing it based on Hashem's command.

But looking at it from the this perspective of closure of the sefer / of the Torah, this is telling us that this, too, was written by Moshe. Perhaps one could say it was a separate document which Yehoshua tacked on, with pesukim 1 and 2 written by Yehoshua by way of introduction (similar to the last 12 pesukim of the Torah, according to Ibn Ezra). Or perhaps these two introductory pesukim, as well, written by Moshe. Regardless, this demonstrates a belief / importance in the Torah in general being written by Moshe Rabbenu mipi Hashem, and that this is more than just an assumption by later generations. Yes, there is the pasuk in Devarim 31:9:

ט  וַיִּכְתֹּב מֹשֶׁה, אֶת-הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת, וַיִּתְּנָהּ אֶל-הַכֹּהֲנִים בְּנֵי לֵוִי, הַנֹּשְׂאִים אֶת-אֲרוֹן בְּרִית ה; וְאֶל-כָּל-זִקְנֵי, יִשְׂרָאֵל.

9 And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, that bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and unto all the elders of Israel.

but the extent of 'this law' is interpretable. But this pasuk in Masei, I think, shows that this was the expectation even as it was written.

Other aspects of Masei -- meaning the laws related in Arvot Moav from 33:50 until the end --  relating to driving out the current inhabitants of Canaan, inheritance, borders, which nasi from each shevet shall take possession of the land, cities for Leviim, cities of refuge, and practical rather than theoretical inheritance relating to the daughters of Tzelaphchad, all make for a nice closure to the sefer and the Torah in general, and it may pay to view them in this light.