Numbers 36 concludes the fourth Book of Moses. Abravanel links this chapter to the preceding ones,
chapters that capture Moses’ energetically wrapping up the affairs of his nation. Here, the focus is on
the third commandment (of five) that God asked the prophet to perform before he passed away:
apportionment of territory in Canaan to the twelve tribes. In that vein, our verse introduces an exchange
between Moses and Joseph’s tribal heads.

“And the patriarchal heads of the sons of Gilead son of Mahir son of
Manasseh descendants of Joseph approached. And they spoke before
Moses and before the princes – patriarchal heads of the Children of
Israel.”

It had not been lost on Joseph’s tribal leaders that Moses issued a raft of commandments as his death
loomed. The tenor of these directives followed a single thread: dividing Canaan as the first step toward
deeding it to the tribes. In truth, Moses’ behavior resembled the flurry of activity in which an aging
father engages when on his death bed.

This is the background, then, when Joseph’s descendants came before Moses. They were eager to revisit
the Daughters of Zelophehad Accords—and revise them. What was the problem with the agreement? In
a word, Joseph’s territory stood to lose ground if Zelophehad’s daughters married men from other
tribes, as our chapter suggests.

“And when the Children of Israel celebrate the jubilee, their legacy will [revert and] accrue to those
tribes into which they (the daughters) marry, and it will lessen our father’s tribe’s legacy.” In cases of the
daughters of Zelophehad “marrying out”, the plaintiffs explained, their own loss would be irreversible.

The laws of jubilee, recall, feature a return of land to their original and former holders. Notwithstanding
the equalizing effect of the jubilee, in Joseph’s case, there would be no remedy or relief. That is, even
when the jubilee arrived, Joseph’s territory would not revert back to the that tribe as only the women’s
husbands’ tribes would benefit. Hence, Joseph’s suit centered on hedging against a potentially
devastating socioeconomic event. For unlike the case of sales (which are reversed in the jubilee), the
transfer of ownership brought about through inheritance is permanent. Underscore and bold: it is not
undone by the jubilee year.

As we reach the end of Numbers, let us take stock, Abravanel advises. In particular, let us track
the sequence of events, pegged to when the Maker told Moses to ascend Mount Abarim
continuing until this present juncture.

Now it is plain why after the Torah’s listing the Hebrew sojourns it led to what Abravanel may
call the “five commandments”, per se. He understands why they had not been issued earlier.
Apropos, Abravanel conveys why they are credited to the prophet, though logic may dictate
that Joshua get the “credit” insofar as he liberated Canaan and he acted as the trustor for the
tribes to inherit the Holy Land. Joshua performed those tasks since Moses had not crossed the
Jordan.

“These are the commandments and statutes which God commanded Moses to the Children of
Israel on the plains of Moab along the Jordan, across from Jericho.” Certainly, the tone suggests
that Moses had been there in person, though, of course, he wasn’t.

In review, Abravanel puts forth that God requested Moses to execute five commandments
before the prophet’s death. The Creator assuaged His loyal servant’s concerns about not
crossing the Jordan River. This buoyed Moses’ spirits, allowing him attend to tasks that would
forever be associated with the prophet’s legacy.