כיבוש סיחון ועוג, חלוקת הארץ, ופירוש רש"י

HaShem said to me, 'See, I have begun to give before you Sichon and his land. Begin to inherit his land.' Moshe Rabbeinu continues the narrative, noting the change in language from 'Vayomer' to 'Vayedaber' after the 38 years when the Shechinah was not speaking directly, and now it returns to 'Vayomer HaShem Eilai.' The verse says, 'Re'ei haChilosi teis lefonecha'—I have begun to give before you. The teacher asks, what does it mean to give before you? Rashi will explain that this is literal: 'teis lefonecha' means HaShem has bent the spiritual officer of the Amorites above, placing him under Moshe's feet, and Moshe steps on his neck. This is the meaning of 'I have begun to give before you'—HaShem has subdued their spiritual power and placed it under Moshe's authority, signaling that the conquest is now possible and Moshe should begin to inherit the land.

Rashi explains the phrase 'haChilosi teis lefonecha' by saying that HaShem bent the spiritual officer of the Amorites above and placed him under Moshe's feet, and Moshe stepped on his neck. This means that the spiritual force behind the Amorites was subdued and placed under Moshe's control, which is the deeper meaning of 'I have begun to give before you.' The victory was not just physical, but also spiritual, as the heavenly protector of the Amorites was defeated first.

Sichon came out towards us—he and all his people—to war at Yahatz. The teacher reads the verse and then brings Rashi: Sichon did not send for Og to help him. This teaches us that Sichon and Og did not need each other's help; each was confident in his own strength and did not feel the need to call for reinforcements. This highlights the self-assurance and perhaps arrogance of Sichon, who went out to battle alone with his people, without seeking assistance from Og, the king of Bashan.

Rashi comments on 'Vayeitzei Sichon'—Sichon did not send for Og to help him. This teaches us that they did not need each other; each was strong enough on his own and confident in his own power. They were certain in their strength and did not feel the need to join forces, which is why Sichon went out to battle alone.

HaShem our God gave him before us, and we struck him, his sons, and all his people. The teacher notes that the Torah says 'his sons,' which could be understood as a general reference to his people, but Rashi points out that it is written in the singular—'his son.' This is because Sichon had a son who was as strong as he was, and therefore the Torah hints at this by mentioning him separately. The victory included not only Sichon but also his powerful son, emphasizing the completeness of the defeat.

Rashi explains that although the verse says 'his sons,' it is written in the singular—'his son.' This is because Sichon had a son who was a mighty warrior, just like Sichon himself. The Torah singles him out to show that even this powerful son was defeated along with Sichon, highlighting the thoroughness of the victory.

We captured all his cities at that time and destroyed every city—men, women, and children. We did not leave any survivors. The teacher explains that 'kol ir mesim' means all the cities with inhabitants—'mesim' refers to the men. Rashi says that in the spoils of Sichon, the Torah uses the phrase 'bazaznu lanu'—we took the spoil for ourselves—because the spoils were precious to them. Each person would take for himself and hold onto the spoils. However, when it came to the spoils of Og, after they had already taken so much from Sichon, the people were already satisfied and the new spoils were considered degraded in their eyes. They would even throw away animals and garments, keeping only silver and gold. This is why, later in the Torah, it does not use the term 'bazaznu lanu' for the spoils of Og—it was no longer precious to them. This is also explained in the Sifrei, which says that the phrase 'bazaznu lanu' is used when the spoils are dear, but after the victory over Og, the people were already full and the spoils were an embarrassment, only taking what was truly valuable.

Rashi explains the word Misim as meaning men. He then elaborates on the difference in language between the spoils taken from Sichon and those from Og. When it came to the spoils of Sichon, the Torah says Bazaznu lanu—we took the spoils for ourselves—using the language of beizah, which means spoil. Rashi says this is because the spoils were precious to them; each person would take for himself, and they were eager for it. However, when it came to the spoils of Og, by that time the people were already satisfied and full from the previous spoils, so the new spoils were considered cheap and degraded in their eyes. They would rip and throw away the animals and garments, only taking the silver and gold. That is why, later, the Torah uses the language bazonu lanu, which means disgrace or embarrassment, to describe the spoils of Og. Rashi brings this explanation from the Sifrei in Parshas Vayeshev Yisroel Bashitim.

This verse says, 'Only the animals we took as spoil for ourselves, and the plunder of the cities that we captured.' The teacher explains that after killing all the people, the only things left to take were the animals and the spoils from the cities. This is a continuation of the narrative describing what was done with the conquered cities: all the inhabitants were killed, and only the animals and the material goods were taken as spoils.

This verse describes the extent of the conquest: 'From Me'aroyer, which is on the edge of the valley of Nachal Arnon, and the city that is in the valley, up to the Gilod—there was no city too high for us; Hashem our God gave everything before us.' The teacher explains that this means from Me'aroyer, which is at the edge of the valley of Nachal Arnon, and also the city inside the valley, up to the Gilod. There was no place, land, or area that was too high or inaccessible for the Israelites; nothing was beyond their reach. Everything was given to them by Hashem.

This verse says, 'Only to the land of the children of Ammon you did not come close, all the side of the valley of Yabok, and the cities of the mountain, and everything that Hashem our God commanded.' The teacher explains that they did not approach the land of Bnei Ammon, as Hashem had commanded them not to. Although Ammon was next to Sichon, the Israelites did not come close to their territory. The phrase Kol yad Nachal Yabok means everything next to the valley of Yabok, and the cities of the mountains were also left untouched, as these were part of Ammon's territory. Everything that Hashem commanded them not to conquer, they did not touch.

Rashi explains the phrase Kol yad Nachal Yabok as meaning 'everything next to the valley of Yabok.' In other words, all the areas adjacent to the valley of Yabok were not approached or conquered by the Israelites, in accordance with Hashem's command.

This verse says, 'Everything that Hashem our God commanded—not to conquer—we left alone.' The teacher explains that whatever Hashem told them not to conquer, they refrained from taking. They left those areas as instructed, demonstrating their obedience to Hashem's command.

This verse begins the next chapter: 'We turned and went up the way of the Bashan, and Og, king of Bashan, came out toward us—he and all his people—to war at Edrei.' The teacher explains that the Israelites turned and went further north, which is described as 'going up.' This is because, geographically, traveling north in Eretz Yisroel is considered going up. They were moving from the south and east, now turning northward. Og, the king of Bashan, came out with all his people to wage war at Edrei. The teacher notes that, unlike with Sichon, the Torah does not mention Og's son here, possibly because only Sichon had a son as strong as himself, which was significant enough to mention separately. Here, it simply states that Og and all his people came out to fight at Edrei.

On the phrase "Vanefen Vanao," Rashi says that every direction to the north is considered an ascent. The teacher explains that when the Torah says they turned and went up, it doesn't mean they turned again, but rather that going further north is called turning, perhaps because they were now heading towards Eretz Yisroel. All the time, when it says to go up from the Negev, from the south, it's always called going up, and now, as they head north, it's also considered an ascent. So, according to Rashi, any movement northward is described as going up.

This verse says, "And Hashem said to me, do not fear him, for I have given him into your hand, and all his people, and his land, and you shall do to him as you did to Sichon, king of the Emori, who dwelled in Cheshbon." The teacher explains that Hashem tells Moshe not to be afraid of Og, the king of Bashan, and reassures him that Og, his people, and his land have already been given into Moshe's hand. Hashem instructs Moshe to do to Og just as he did to Sichon, king of the Emori. The teacher notes that Hashem specifically tells Moshe not to be afraid here, whereas with Sichon, Hashem did not say this. The reason for this, as explained later, is that Moshe was worried that Og might have a special merit because he had served Avraham, and therefore Moshe needed extra reassurance from Hashem not to fear Og.

On the words "Al Tira Oso" (do not fear him), Rashi asks why, with Sichon, Hashem did not need to say "do not fear him," but here, with Og, He does. The teacher explains that Moshe was afraid that Og might have a special merit because he had served Avraham. The Torah says, "Vayavo HaPalit"—the refugee came and told Avraham about Lot's capture, and that refugee was Og. The concern was that Og's act of helping Avraham would stand as a merit for him, so Moshe was worried. Therefore, Hashem reassures Moshe, telling him not to be afraid of Og, despite this merit. The teacher elaborates that this idea of Og's long life and his connection to Avraham is mentioned in various places in the Chumash and by Rashi, and that Og was the one who informed Avraham about Lot's capture during the war of the kings. The phrase "Shemesh Avraham" means that Og served Avraham in some way, which is why Moshe was concerned about his merit.

This verse says, "And Hashem our God gave into our hands also Og, king of Bashan, and all his people, and we smote him until there was no survivor left to him." The teacher explains that Hashem gave Og and all his people into the hands of the Jewish people, and they did not leave any survivors. The teacher notes that, unlike with Sichon, where the Torah mentions his son (who was as strong as him), here with Og, it only mentions Og and his people, not his son. The teacher points out that this difference is significant, and perhaps that's why Rashi explains it in the earlier verse about Sichon. The teacher emphasizes that all of Og's people were smitten, and there were no survivors left.

This verse says, "And we captured all his cities at that time; there was not a city that we did not take from them—sixty cities, all the region of Argov, the kingdom of Og in Bashan." The teacher explains that they captured all of Og's cities, sixty in total, in the region called Chevel Argov, which was part of Og's kingdom in Bashan. The teacher then refers to Rashi, who will explain the meaning of Chevel Argov in detail. The teacher also notes that all the cities were taken, and none were left unconquered.

On the words "Chevel Argov," Rashi explains that the translation is "Beis Pelach Tarkhuna," meaning the province of Tarkhuna. The teacher elaborates that Rashi saw in the Targum Yerushalmi on Megillas Esther that the word for palace is "Tarkhunim." From this, Rashi learned that Chevel Argov refers to a province named after the palace or the king's domain. The government or province is called by the name of the palace, and similarly, in the verse in Melachim, "Es Argov," it refers to the palace of the king. The teacher clarifies that Chevel Argov means the province of the palace, the area associated with the king's palace. He also corrects himself, noting that "Pelach" means province, not worship, and that the term refers to the governmental region or the king's domain. The teacher admits that the exact translation is complex but emphasizes that Chevel Argov is the province or region of the palace, the king's area.

This verse says, "All these were fortified cities with high walls, gates, and bars, besides a great many unwalled towns." The teacher explains that all these cities were fortified with high walls, doors, and bars (locks or bolts). In addition to these, there were many open cities without walls. The teacher notes that Rashi explains that these open cities are called arei haprazi, meaning unwalled and open cities. The teacher also references the verse in Zechariah, which says that Yerushalayim will be an open city, using the same term.

On the words "mei'arei haprazi," Rashi explains that these are unwalled and open cities, without any fortification. The teacher adds that, similarly, in Zechariah, it says "prazois teshev Yerushalayim"—Yerushalayim will dwell as an open city, using the same language to describe cities without walls.

And we captured all of their cities at that time, and we destroyed every city, all the men, the women, and the children. The teacher explains that the word "Misim" means the men, so "Kol Ir, Misim" refers to all the cities with their inhabitants, specifically the men, and then it says "Vahanoshim, Vahatav"—the women and the children. He emphasizes that nothing was left over; everything was destroyed.

On the word Hacharem, the teacher explains that Rashi says this is a present tense expression, meaning to go on and destroy. The language used here is ongoing, indicating the act of destruction was continuous.

All the animals and the spoil of the cities, we took for ourselves. The teacher notes that the phrase Bazaznu Lonu means we took the spoil for ourselves. He elaborates, referencing Rashi's earlier comment that by the spoil of Sichon, it was precious to them—they each grabbed and held onto their share. However, when it came to the spoil of Og, later on, they were already satisfied from what they had taken from Sichon, so the spoil from Og was considered degraded and not valuable in their eyes. They would even throw away animals and garments, only taking silver and gold. This is why, in the later verse about Og, it doesn't say Bazaznu Lonu, because it was no longer considered significant. The teacher brings in the Sifrei, which says that by the time they reached Og, the spoil was an embarrassment, not worth anything to them.

At that time, we took the land from the two kings of the Emorites who were on the other side of the Jordan, from the Arnon Valley up to Mount Hermon. The teacher explains that "from the hand" here does not mean literally from their hand, but rather from their possession—we took it away from them. He notes that both Sichon and Og were called kings of the Emorites, and this territory stretched from the south, at the Arnon Valley, northward up to Mount Hermon.

On the word MiYad, the teacher explains that Rashi says it means "from the possession"—not literally from their hand, but from their control or ownership.

The Sidonians call Hermon Siryoyn, and the Emorites call it Senir. The teacher explains that the verse is telling us that different nations had different names for Mount Hermon. The Sidonians called it Siryoyn, and the Emorites called it Senir. He notes that the Torah itself calls it Hermon, and elsewhere it is called Har Siyon, which is also Hermon. So, there are four names in total: Hermon, Siryoyn, Senir, and Har Siyon.

On Rashi for this verse, the teacher explains that in another place, the Torah says "Ad Har Siyon, Hu Hermon"—so we see that Hermon has four names. Rashi says this is to teach the praise of Eretz Yisroel, that four kingdoms would boast about it, each wanting the mountain called by their own name. Each one would say, "It will be called by my name." The teacher further explains that Senir means snow in the language of Ashkenaz (German) and in the language of Canaan, so the Hermon was called Senir because of the snow there. He notes that the four names reflect the desire of different kingdoms to claim the mountain as their own, and that the presence of snow is the reason for the name Senir.

All the cities of the plain, all the Gilad, and all the Bashan up to Salchah and Edrei, cities of the kingdom of Og in the Bashan. The teacher explains that these were the cities in the kingdom of Og, and that this area—Gilad and Bashan—was the land that the tribes of Reuven and Gad wanted for their inheritance, as mentioned elsewhere in the Torah. These were the cities that belonged to Og's kingdom in the Bashan.

Only Oeg, the king of Boshon, was left from the rest of the Refoim, the giants. The Torah tells us that his bed was a bed of iron, and it is found in Rabas Bnei Amon, among the people of Amon. The bed was nine amos long and four amos wide, measured by the amah of a man. The teacher explains that this is not an ordinary amah, but the amah of Oeg himself, which was much larger than a regular person's amah. The Torah is describing the size of his bed to give us a sense of how large Oeg was. The bed being in Rabas Bnei Amon means that the people of Amon had possession of it, even though Oeg was further north. The teacher notes that the Torah is emphasizing the extraordinary size of Oeg by specifying the measurements in his own amah, not a standard one.

Rashi explains that Oeg was left from the rest of the Refoim because he survived when Amrafel and his allies killed the Refoim in Ashtaros Karnayim. Oeg escaped from that war, as it says in Bereishis, 'Vayavo HaPalit'—the refugee came, and that was Oeg. Regarding the phrase 'Be'amas Ish,' Rashi says this means it was measured by Oeg's own amah, not an ordinary person's amah. So when the Torah gives the dimensions of the bed, it's using Oeg's own large measurements.

This verse describes how at that time, they inherited the land from Arroyer, which is on the valley of Arnon, and half of Har HaGilod and its cities were given to the tribe of Reuven and the tribe of Gad. The teacher explains that this is describing the division of the land: from Arroyer by Nachal Arnon, and half of Har HaGilod, that area was given to Reuven and Gad. The Torah is recounting how the land was split up after the conquest.

Rashi explains that the land mentioned here is the same land discussed above, in verse 8: 'from Nachal Arnon to Har Chermon.' So when the verse says 'Ve'es Ha'aretz HaZois Yorashnu Ba'eis HaHi,' it is referring back to that earlier description of the territory.

Rashi clarifies that the phrase 'Me'arroyer Asher Al Nachal Arnon' is not connected to the beginning of the verse, but rather to the end, to 'Nosati LaReuveni VeLagadi'—that I gave to Reuven and Gad. However, regarding the inheritance, it extended all the way to Har Chermon. So 'Me'arroyer Asher Al Nachal Arnon' and 'Chetzi Har HaGilod Ve'orov' were given to Reuven and Gad, but the inheritance itself went up to Har Chermon.

The rest of the Gilod and all of the Boshon, which was the kingdom of Oeg, was given to half the tribe of Menashe. The verse says 'Kol Chevel HaArgov Lechol HaBoshon HaHu Yikorei Eretz Refoim'—all the region of Argov, all that Boshon area, is called the land of the Refoim. The teacher explains that 'Chevel Argov' refers to the province of the palace, the area of the king's palace. Rashi brings that the translation of 'Chevel Argov' is 'Beis Pelach Tarkhuna,' meaning the province of Tarkhuna, which is the palace. The teacher discusses that the government or the palace is called by this name, and that 'Argov' means by the palace of the king. The verse is telling us that this whole area, which was given to half the tribe of Menashe, is called the land of the Refoim, and this is the land that was promised to Avraham.

On the words, "HaHu Yikore Eretz Refoim"—that land is called the land of the Refoim—Rashi explains that this is the very land that Hashem promised to Avraham. When the Torah refers to the land as "Eretz Refoim," it is identifying it as the territory that was given to Avraham Avinu as part of the promise of the seven nations. So, when it says "HaHu Yikore Eretz Refoim," it means, this is the one that I gave to Avraham. The teacher notes that this is the fulfillment of Hashem's promise to Avraham, and that the land of the Refoim includes the area on the eastern side of the Yarden, which was conquered from Sichon and Og. This is the land that was promised to Avraham, and now it is being given to the Jewish people.

The verse says, "Yair ben Menashe took all the region of Argov, up to the border of the Geshuri and the Ma'achasi, and he called them after his own name, the Bashan Chavos Yair, until this day." The teacher explains that Yair, the son of Menashe, took the entire area called Chevel Argov, which is the province of Argov, all the way up to the boundaries of the Geshuri and the Ma'achasi. He named these places after himself, calling them the Bashan Chavos Yair, meaning the villages or settlements of Yair in the Bashan, and this name remained until the time of the writing of the Torah—"ad hayom hazeh," until this day.

The teacher elaborates on the meaning of "Chevel Argov." He discusses Rashi's explanation that "Chevel Argov" refers to a province, and that the word "Pelach" means a province, not a place of worship as he initially thought. Rashi brings from the Targum Yerushalmi and from Megillas Esther that "Tarkhuna" refers to a palace, so "Beis Pelach Tarkhuna" means the province of the palace. Therefore, "Chevel Argov" is the province of the palace, or the royal province. The teacher notes that Rashi says he learned from this that "Chevel Argov" is "Heichal Melech," the palace of the king, and that the government or the area is called by the name of the palace. The teacher also mentions that the same is true for "Es-Argov," which means by the palace of the king, and gives an example from the story of Pekach ben Remalyahu, who killed Pekachayot "Es-Argov," by the palace of the king.

He clarifies that the area was heavily fortified, with sixty cities, all with high walls, gates, and bars, and that these were the cities that Yair ben Menashe took and named after himself. The name "Chavos Yair" refers to these settlements, and the teacher points out that this name lasted until the time of the Torah's writing. The teacher also notes that the verse is emphasizing the extent of the conquest and the lasting legacy of Yair ben Menashe in that region.