יהושע, פרק כ״ב, פסוק ל״א

Joshua 22:31Sefaria

וַיֹּ֣אמֶר פִּֽינְחָ֣ס בֶּן־אֶלְעָזָ֣ר הַכֹּהֵ֡ן אֶל־בְּנֵֽי־רְאוּבֵ֨ן וְאֶל־בְּנֵי־גָ֜ד וְאֶל־בְּנֵ֣י מְנַשֶּׁ֗ה הַיּ֤וֹם ׀ יָדַ֙עְנוּ֙ כִּֽי־בְתוֹכֵ֣נוּ יְהֹוָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֛ר לֹא־מְעַלְתֶּ֥ם בַּיהֹוָ֖ה הַמַּ֣עַל הַזֶּ֑ה אָ֗ז הִצַּלְתֶּ֛ם אֶת־בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מִיַּ֥ד יְהֹוָֽה׃

A moment of peak tension between the tribes transforms into a deep recognition of unity and pure intentions. The fear of a national rift and rebellion is completely put to rest. Phinehas expresses a multi-layered insight when he realizes that God is truly among the people. The very fact that God guided the nation to avoid bloodshed and instead resolve their differences face-to-face proves His active presence [מצודת דוד]. Logically, observing that God's providence remains over the nation and that He continues to dwell among them collectively serves as absolute proof that no sin occurred [ביאור שטיינזלץ]. In truth, Phinehas never genuinely doubted their innocence; his investigation was simply a necessary step to prevent future generations from making a grave mistake [מלבי״ם]. Furthermore, this realization clears any lingering suspicion that the builders originally intended to rebel and only made up an excuse out of fear of the approaching army. God, who sees directly into people's hearts, testifies that their motives were entirely pure from the very beginning [אלשיך].

Phinehas then acknowledges that the actions taken at the exact moment the altar was built actually protected the nation. The primary approach among commentators is that by constructing the altar, the tribes across the Jordan River were not sinning at all. Instead, they were taking proactive steps to save the rest of the Israelites from future punishment. Had future generations of Israelites prevented the descendants of these tribes from worshipping God, they would have faced severe divine retribution. The altar was designed to stand as an eternal witness, preventing this future sin and ultimately saving the nation from God's punishment [מצודת דוד, אלשיך, ביאור שטיינזלץ]. Conversely, another perspective understands the concept of saving not as a rescue from danger, but as an act of separation. According to this view, Phinehas explains that had the tribes actually betrayed God, they would have separated and distanced the entire nation from His providence. Because it is clear that such a separation did not occur, it is equally clear that no betrayal took place [מלבי״ם].

נעזרתם בפירוש שלנו ומצאתם בו ערך?

עזרו לנו להגדיל תורה ולהאדירה. תחזוקת האתר והשבחת התוכן כרוכות בהוצאות מרובות. תרומה קטנה שלכם תסייע לנו להחזיק את הפלטפורמה ותהפוך אתכם לשותפים מלאים בהנגשת חוכמת המקרא.

תרמו עכשיו

מה דעתכם על הפירוש?

התחברתם? יש לכם חידוש או הארה על הפסוק שלמדתם כאן? נשמח לשמוע!

ההערות שלכם חשובות לנו ועוזרות לשפר את הפירוש.