The difficulty in Parshas Pinchas, in the verse “And they drew near,” is not the reason for the change in the order of their names, but the fact that they were listed again. On this Rashi explains that the novelty of their second listing is not a new point in relation to the first listing, but rather a new point connected to what is stated later in Parshas Masei, where there is a change in the order to teach that they were all equal.
Rashi states on the verse (36:11), “Machlah, Tirtzah, etc.”: “Here they are listed according to their age, each one older than the next, and they married according to the order of their birth. But throughout Scripture they are listed according to their wisdom, and this teaches that they were all equal.”
This requires explanation. Seemingly, the opposite would be more logical: the first time they are listed, in Parshas Pinchas (26:33), in connection with their birth — “Tzelafchad the son of Chefer had no sons, but only daughters” — they should be listed according to age. The change in Parshas Masei should then be understood as according to their wisdom.
Furthermore, the statement that “they were listed according to their wisdom” seems to contradict the statement that “they were all equal.” Indeed, in the Gemara there is a dispute between these two opinions.
There is another difficulty: Why does Rashi explain in Parshas Pinchas, on the verse (27:1), “And the daughters of Tzelafchad drew near: Machlah, Noa, etc.” — “Later it says, ‘And Machlah, Tirtzah, etc., became,’ teaching that they were all equal; therefore the order was changed”? Seemingly, the question does not arise until our parsha. Why, then, does Rashi explain it there?
The explanation is: the difficulty in Parshas Pinchas, in the verse “And they drew near,” is not the reason for the change in order, but why they were counted again altogether. On this Rashi explains that the novelty of their second listing is not a new point in relation to the first listing, but rather a new point connected to what is stated later in Parshas Masei, where there is a change in the order to teach that they were all equal.
One cannot say that we would have known that they were equal from the difference between the first listing (26:33) and the third listing, in our parsha (36:11). If so, the question would still remain: why did the Torah list them a second time in the verse “And they drew near” (27:1)?
For without that second listing, we would have explained the change differently: that the first listing was according to birth order, while the third listing was according to wisdom. Therefore, they are also mentioned in the verse “And they drew near,” to teach that they were all equal.
Accordingly, it is understood that “they were listed according to their wisdom” does not contradict “they were all equal.” “They were listed according to their wisdom” does not mean that there were differences in their wisdom. Rather, the first listing is connected with wisdom, since they presented a wise claim. The listing in Parshas Masei, where they are listed according to age, is also connected with wisdom, since “many years make wisdom known.” Therefore, from the fact that there is a change between two listings that are both connected with wisdom, we know that they were all equal.
There is also another explanation: within wisdom itself, there is wisdom that comes through toil and effort. This is what the order in the first listing in Parshas Pinchas refers to, where Noa is listed second even though she was the youngest. The extra listing in “And they drew near” teaches that they were all equal from the perspective of the wisdom that comes through many years. Thus, when combining the wisdom that comes through age with the wisdom that comes through effort, Noa and Tirtzah are shown to be equal.