A couple of questions come to mind.
First:
From Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chayim 138
The division between Balak and Pinchas puzzles me. The former ends with what the JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers characterizes as the "Idolatry and Expiation at Baal-Peor" (pg.211) and the latter begins with "the Pact with Phinehas" (pg.216) and a brief postscript - a total of 15 verses. Why end Balak with an act of zealotry and a death toll only to end the pericope just fifteen verses later? Does it suggest a discomfort with ending the final aliyah with a pact of friendship?
Second:
It seems reasonable to assume that the Tent of Meeting would be centrally located in the encampment and that, however one might choose to translate 'elef, that encampment would be sizeable, Why, then, would a Simionite prince and a Midianite princess march through the center of town (so to speak) and decide to have sex in a chamber easily accessible to an enraged Pinchas who proved able to strike and retreat without incident? This hardly sounds like apostasy and cultic prostitution (which one might expect to be carried out, well within the Midianite-controlled area). Is it not more likely that this is a contrived post hoc disparagement on Midian and, to a lesser extent, the tribe of Simeon?
Note: This is being posted in the Judaism DIR.
First:
From Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chayim 138
And one should aim to always begin to read on a good matter and to end on a good matter
The division between Balak and Pinchas puzzles me. The former ends with what the JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers characterizes as the "Idolatry and Expiation at Baal-Peor" (pg.211) and the latter begins with "the Pact with Phinehas" (pg.216) and a brief postscript - a total of 15 verses. Why end Balak with an act of zealotry and a death toll only to end the pericope just fifteen verses later? Does it suggest a discomfort with ending the final aliyah with a pact of friendship?
Second:
It seems reasonable to assume that the Tent of Meeting would be centrally located in the encampment and that, however one might choose to translate 'elef, that encampment would be sizeable, Why, then, would a Simionite prince and a Midianite princess march through the center of town (so to speak) and decide to have sex in a chamber easily accessible to an enraged Pinchas who proved able to strike and retreat without incident? This hardly sounds like apostasy and cultic prostitution (which one might expect to be carried out, well within the Midianite-controlled area). Is it not more likely that this is a contrived post hoc disparagement on Midian and, to a lesser extent, the tribe of Simeon?
Note: This is being posted in the Judaism DIR.