Numberschapter 27
23 verses · Moses, by tradition · 15th to 13th century BC · The Law
Let the Lord, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation,
Introduction
Moses, by tradition, The Law, Numbers Overview.
This chapter sets two scenes side by side near the end of Moses' life. In the first, five sisters of the tribe of Manasseh raise a question of inheritance that the law had not yet answered. In the second, Moses hears again that he will not enter the land, and he turns at once to the question of who will lead after him. Both scenes concern what passes from one generation to the next. Listen for the way Moses carries a hard case before the LORD for a ruling. Listen also for the shepherd picture in his prayer, which the Gospels echo when Jesus sees the crowds.
Context
- Who
- A nation about to divide land, and about to change leaders
- What
- Case law and narrative, in which the daughters of Zelophehad win an inheritance and Joshua is commissioned to succeed Moses.
- Where
- The entrance to the tent of meeting in the camp on the plains of Moab, with the Abarim range to the east.
- When
- The fortieth year after the exodus, shortly before the death of Moses, about 1406 BC by the count of 1 Kings 6:1, or near 1230 BC on a later dating of the exodus.
- Why
- To secure every family's share in the land and to give the people a leader before Moses dies.
Historical context
The chapter belongs to five women and to two men. Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah and Tirzah were the daughters of Zelophehad of the tribe of Manasseh, and the other two are Moses and Joshua.
Show the rest of the historical context, 6 more paragraphs
The time is the fortieth year, directly after the census of chapter 26, which is the one place in either census where daughters are listed.
The place is the entrance of the tent of meeting, in front of Moses, Eleazar, the leaders and the whole assembly, and then a height in the Abarim range that Deuteronomy 32:49 names as Nebo.
The occasion is the division of land that the census was taken to make possible, and a household with no son stood to lose its name and its holding.
A first hearer knew that land normally passed from father to son. He also knew the workarounds other legal systems used, the adoption of a son in law, or a daughter given a legal standing as a son. Arrangements of that kind are documented in family archives from Mesopotamian towns such as Nuzi.
He knew what the sisters were doing when they separated their father from the company of Korah. That put him under the general sentence of 14:29 rather than under a particular judgment, and it is a legal move rather than a family memory.
And he knew what laying on hands in the sight of the assembly meant. Authority was transferred in public, and the limit set at verse 21 was public too, that Joshua would stand before Eleazar the priest for guidance.
Significance
Israel saw that the law was open. Five women with no political standing raised a real problem, and the ruling was changed in their favour before the land was ever divided.
Show the rest of the significance, 1 more paragraph
They also saw a leader told he would die outside the land spend his next breath on who would take care of the people. That is the note the transfer of power was set in.
This chapter in Jewish lifeWhat this chapter is in Jewish life and reading.
How it is read
Rashi reads the pedigree of the daughters of Zelophehad as praise. Joseph held the land dear, and his daughters held it dear in the same way when they asked for an inheritance. He states the rule he is working by. Where Scripture traces a person's descent back to someone worthy of praise, that person is righteous and the child of a righteous father (Rashi on Numbers 27:1:1, citing Sifrei Bamidbar 133:1). Their names stand in one order here and another at Numbers 36:11. Rashi reads the change as a sign that they were of equal worth (Rashi on Numbers 27:1:2, citing Sifrei Bamidbar 133:2).
The setting of the hearing is read closely. Because they came to Eleazar rather than to Aaron, Rashi dates the case to the fortieth year, after Aaron's death (Rashi on Numbers 27:2:1). He records a dispute over the order of the words. Rabbi Josiah would read the verse the other way round, since Eleazar could hardly answer what Moses could not. Abba Chanan in the name of Rabbi Eleazar held that no inversion is needed. The court was sitting in the House of Study, and the women stood before them all (Rashi on Numbers 27:2:2, citing Bava Batra 119b). On the plea itself he holds that the sisters argued as heirs in the place of sons. If daughters were no issue in law, their mother should have married her husband's brother (Rashi on Numbers 27:4:1). Rashi also records the disputed sin of their father. Rabbi Akiba held that he was the man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath. Rabbi Simeon held that he was one of those who went up against the command (Rashi on Numbers 27:3:1, citing Shabbat 96b).
The judgment is read as a rebuke to Moses and a credit to the women. Rashi holds that the law escaped him, and that he was punished for having said that the hard cases should be brought to him. He gives a second reading beside it. The chapter should have been written through Moses, and it was written through the daughters because their merit deserved it (Rashi on Numbers 27:5:1, citing Bava Batra 119a and Sanhedrin 8a). On the verdict he takes God to be saying that the chapter already stood so before him. This "tells us that their eye saw what Moses' eye did not see" (Rashi on Numbers 27:7:1, citing Sifrei Bamidbar 134:1). He adds that kinship in the law of inheritance runs on the father's side only (Rashi on Numbers 27:11:1).
The sentence on Moses is read through two parables. Rashi holds that Moses hoped the decree had been lifted when he was told to divide the land, and God answered that the decree stood (Rashi on Numbers 27:12:1, citing Midrash Tanchuma, Pinchas 9). In the second parable a king forbids his son the palace. He lets the son follow him through the gate and the hall, and stops him at the door of the private room (Rashi on Numbers 27:12:1). Rashi then explains why the offence is named whenever the death is named. Moses asked for it, so that nobody would count him with the rebels of the wilderness. A second parable follows, of two women punished by a court for very different faults, the lighter of whom asked that her offence be proclaimed (Rashi on Numbers 27:13:1, citing Yoma 86b).
The handing over to Joshua is read as a lesson in office. Rashi holds that the request of the fifteenth verse shows the praise of the righteous. They turn from their own affairs to the affairs of the community as they leave the world (Rashi on Numbers 27:15:1, citing Sifrei Bamidbar 138). He then records what Moses had hoped for and did not get. Moses thought to ask that his sons inherit his position. The answer was that Joshua deserved the reward of his service, because he never left the tent (Rashi on Numbers 27:16:1). Rashi reads the going out before them as a rule for a commander. The leader marches at the head rather than sending armies from home, as Joshua did and as David did (Rashi on Numbers 27:17:1, citing Sifrei Bamidbar 139:2). He holds that Moses was to take Joshua with good words, and to warn him plainly that the people are troublesome (Rashi on Numbers 27:18:1 and 27:19:1). The glory put upon him he reads as the shining of the skin of the face (Rashi on Numbers 27:20:1). On the laying on of hands he notes that Moses was told to use one hand and used two. He thereby "made of him a full and heaped up vessel" (Rashi on Numbers 27:23:1, citing Sifrei Bamidbar 141:3).
Ibn Ezra comments at three places here and the corpus carries none of his text, because the licence Sefaria reports for it does not permit keeping it. He stands cited and unquoted at Ibn Ezra on Numbers 27:3:1, 27:8:1 and 27:9:1.
What the rabbis say
The corpus carries forty locators on this chapter and the text of none, so each is cited and linked here rather than quoted. Twenty-one of them are midrashic and nineteen are Talmudic, which is the most even balance of any chapter in this span. Bava Batra carries the heaviest run, because the law of inheritance is settled there. It stands at 108b:1, 108b:3, 109a:7, 110b:3, 110b:9, 115a:10, 118b:5, 119b:5 and 147a:5, with the Jerusalem Talmud at Bava Batra 8:1:4 and 8:4:1. Avot DeRabbi Natan stands at 1:3, 17:3 and 37:13, with Recension B at 30:8, 40:12 and 40:13. Chagigah stands at 16a:14 and Avodah Zarah at 5a:11.
The midrashic locators run beside them. Bamidbar Rabbah stands at 8:4, 12:9, 14:7, 21:10, 21:12, 21:13, 21:14 and 21:15. Midrash Lekach Tov stands at Numbers 27:12:1, 27:13:1, 27:14:1 and 27:17:1. Ein Yaakov in the Glick Edition stands at Bava Batra 8:8, Bava Kama 8:9 and Sanhedrin 1:18. Midrash Tannaim on Deuteronomy stands at 3:23:1 and 34:5:18. Midrash Aggadah stands at Numbers 27:4:1, Aggadat Bereshit at 70:3, Midrash Tanchuma at Vaetchanan 5:1, and Bereshit Rabbati at Parashat Vayechi 9. What each of them teaches is a saying of the rabbis, and is reported as theirs wherever this site quotes one. The quotations wait on a fetch that carries the text, because the corpus holds these locators without it.
Sources: Rashi, Rashi on Numbers 27:1:1 to 27:23:1, the Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary translated by M. Rosenbaum and A. M. Silbermann, 1929 to 1934, public domain; Ibn Ezra, Ibn Ezra on Numbers 27:3:1, 27:8:1 and 27:9:1, cited by ref because the licence the corpus reports does not permit keeping the text; The Sefaria corpus, scripts/data/sources/sefaria/numbers/27.json, the 21 Midrash and 19 Talmud locators of this chapter, fetched 2026-09-19.
The heads below are this chapter's scenes. The numbered points under each are its verses.
The daughters who asked for a portion
Numbers 27:1-2
The census had just named these five women at Numbers 26:33, and here they come and stand. Their descent runs back four generations to Manasseh and Joseph, so they claim a portion of a named tribe, not land in general. They stand at "the entrance to the Tent of Meeting" before Moses, Eleazar, the leaders and "the whole congregation", putting a family question before the entire assembly.
Numbers 27:1
“Women in Israel had not, up to the present time, enjoyed any distinct right of inheritance. Yet a father, whether sons had been born to him or not, had the power, either before or at his death, to cause part of his estate to pass to a daughter; in which case her husband married into her family rather than she into his, and the children were regarded as of the family from which the estate had come.”
John Wesley explains the place: the rulers met near the entrance to the Tent of Meeting because hard cases often needed God's direction. Albert Barnes adds that the leaders named here were the men taking the census under Moses and Eleazar. The women brought their claim to the men who kept the lists, since their household had no man to register.
Numbers 27:2
“By the door of the tabernacle of the congregation - The place of solemn assembly of the elders. The daughters of Zelophehad made their suit to the princes, the heads of tribes and of families, who were making the census under the superintendence of Moses and Eleazar.”
1 more voice on this verse
Numbers 27:2
“To them these young ladies made their application; for it is the duty of magistrates to defend the fatherless, Ps. lxxxii. We find not that the had any advocate to speak for them, but they managed their own cause ingeniously enough, which they could do the better because it was plain and honest, and spoke for itself.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
Numbers 27:3-4
Our father died in the wilderness: Their father "was not among the followers of Korah", so no charge of rebellion touches his house, and "he died because of his own sin" under the general sentence of Numbers 14:29. Barnes reads the claim as resting on the promise to that generation's children at 14:31. They ask that their father's name be kept in his family, and the land is the means of keeping it.
Numbers 27:3
“But died in his own sin - i. e., perished under the general sentence of exclusion from the land of promise passed on all the older generation, but limited to that generation alone. By virtue of the declaration in Num 14:31 the daughters of Zelophehad claim that their father’s sin should not be visited upon them.”
The land was still unconquered, yet the daughters ask for their share as if it were already theirs. The claim rests on a promise. Matthew Henry reads the request as strong faith in God's word, and he cites Psalm 60:6-7. John Wesley records the view that each heiress's first son took her father's name, on the pattern of Deuteronomy 25:6.
Numbers 27:4
“Be done away - As it will be, if it be not preserved by an inheritance given to us in his name and for his sake. Hence some gather, that the first son of each of these heiresses was called by their father's name, by virtue of that law, Deut. xxv, 6, whereby the brother's first son was to bear the name of his elder brother, whose widow he married.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
1 more voice on this verse
Numbers 27:4
“A distribution of the promised land was about to be made; and it is interesting to know the legal provision made in these comparatively rare cases for preserving a patrimony from being alienated to another tribe.”
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown · Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871)reformed
Numbers 27:5-6
Moses hears a case he has no law for and leaves it undecided, as with the defiled men at 9:6-8 and the sabbath-breaker at 15:32-36. Numbers 9:8 gives the shape of all three: "Wait here until I find out what the LORD commands concerning you". Gill takes verse 6 as spoken from the mercy seat, on the promise of Exodus 25:22 and as Numbers 7:89 records.
Numbers 27:5
“And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... From off the mercy seat, where he consulted him, and from whence he promised to commune with him about any difficult matter that came before him, Exo 25:22, saying; as follows.”
Matthew Henry explains why Moses did not rule himself: his orders at 26:53 were to divide the land among those counted, and only men were counted. John Calvin adds that the question had arguments on both sides. The answer came from God. Henry notes that God attends to the affairs of single families as well as nations.
Numbers 27:7-8
The ruling goes further than the request, making a standing law for every man who "dies and leaves no son". Gill notes that what was determined in their case became a general law, so five women without an advocate set the nation's inheritance rule. At Numbers 36:5 the same verdict, "speaks correctly", is given to the tribe of Joseph when it objects to this ruling.
Numbers 27:7
“Thou shalt surely give them - an inheritance among their father’s brethren - There is a curious anomaly here in the Hebrew text which cannot be seen in our translation. In Hebrew they, them, and their, you, ye, and your, are both of the masculine and feminine genders, according as the nouns are to which they are affixed; but these words are of no gender in English. In this verse, speaking of the brethren of the father of those women, the masculine termination הם hem, Their, is used instead of the feminine, הן hen, governed by בנות benoth, daughters.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
1 more voice on this verse
Numbers 27:7
“It should seem, by the particular notice taken of it, that it was a singular case, and that the like did not at this time occur in all Israel, that the head of a family had no sons, but daughters only. Their case is again debated ( ch. xxxvi. ) upon another article of it; and, according to the judgments given in their case, we find them put in possession, Josh. xvii.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
Albert Barnes notes that women in Israel had held no distinct right of inheritance before this. A father could still pass land to a daughter, and her husband then married into her family. Matthew Henry reads the new law as giving the estate to all the daughters in equal shares. No eldest daughter took the whole.
Numbers 27:8
“And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel,.... The above affair occasioned a law to be made, in which all the people would have a concern, among whom such cases should happen, as after related: saying, if a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter; as in the above case of the daughters of Zelophehad; what was determined as to their particular case was made into a general law.”
Numbers 27:9-11
The law sets an order of succession: son, daughter, brothers, father's brothers, then "the next of kin from his clan". Every step stays inside the father's house, and "a statutory ordinance for the Israelites" makes it a standing rule, not a single ruling. Chapter 36 finds its limit when the fathers of Manasseh object that a daughter's marriage would carry her land into another tribe.
Numbers 27:9
“13 And when thou hast seen it, thou also shalt be gathered unto thy people, as Aaron thy brother was gathered. 14 For ye rebelled against my commandment in the desert of Zin, in the strife of the congregation, to sanctify me at the water before their eyes: that is the water of Meribah in Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
John Gill takes the father's brothers to include their children, so the line runs to uncles and cousins. Matthew Henry reports the Jewish teaching that a living father inherits before the brothers. He finds that step absent from the written law. In Henry's reading the estate moves sideways through the family and never back up to a parent.
Numbers 27:10
“No brethren -- nor sisters, as appears from ver. 8. A statute of judgment - A statute or rule, by which the magistrates shall give judgment in such cases.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
The final step still stays within the clan. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown note that the rule was extended beyond the daughters' case to estates with no children and no brothers, so that no patrimony would pass to another tribe. Matthew Henry observes that the English law of his day agreed with this order. His summary is short: God makes heirs.
Climb the mountain and look at the land
Numbers 27:12-13
A ruling about who inherits stands next to a man being told he inherits nothing. Moses is sent up the Abarim range to see the land, and Deuteronomy 32:49 names the height as Nebo while Deuteronomy 34:1 calls it Pisgah. The words "gathered to your people, as your brother Aaron was" point back to Numbers 20:23-28, where Aaron died on Hor with his garments already given to his son.
Numbers 27:12
“The Lord said unto Moses, Get thee up into this mount Abarim, and see the land--Although the Israelites were now on the confines of the promised land, Moses was not privileged to cross the Jordan, but died on one of the Moabitic range of mountains, to which the general name of Abarim was given (Nu 33:47).”
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown · Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871)reformed
John Wesley reads gathered to your people as a joining, since death brought Moses to rest with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. John Gill takes as your brother Aaron was to mean a death like Aaron's, quiet and easy. Moses had seen that death himself. Gill adds that Moses asked to enter the land at Deuteronomy 3:25, and seeing it was all he was allowed.
Numbers 27:13
“And when thou hast seen it,.... Which was all he was admitted to; for to go into it and see it was not allowed him, though he importuned it, Deu 3:25, thou shalt be gathered unto thy people, as Aaron thy brother was gathered; die as he did, in the same sudden, easy, quiet, and cheerful manner; see Num 20:26.”
The reason is Meribah in the Wilderness of Zin, where Moses was told to speak to the rock at Numbers 20:8 and struck it twice. This verse charges him with failing "to show My holiness in their sight", and Numbers 20:12 calls it unbelief, while at Deuteronomy 1:37, 3:26 and 4:21 Moses says he bore God's anger on Israel's account. Both accounts stand and neither chapter reconciles them.
Numbers 27:14
“If Aaron and Moses (who seemed to waver at the waters of contradiction) did not deserve to enter the Promised Land, does it not stand to reason that we, bent under the burden of sin, shall be far less able to cross the river Jordan and reach Gilgal, the place of circumcision, if we shall cause one of these little ones to sin?”
Jerome · written before 420 · HOMILY 90patristic
Hands laid on Joshua before them all
Numbers 27:15-16
Moses answers the sentence by asking a successor for the people, and Deuteronomy 3:23-26 records a refused plea to cross the Jordan, which Numbers omits. He addresses "the God of the spirits of all flesh", the title he and Aaron used facedown at Numbers 16:22. Barnes reads the title as owning that the men who need a leader are flesh and helpless of themselves.
Numbers 27:15
“And Moses spake unto the Lord,.... Having requested to go into the land and see it, which was denied him; and perceiving he must quickly die, and being a man of a public spirit, and concerned for the welfare of the people of Israel, prays that a successor might be nominated and appointed: saying; as follows.”
1 more voice on this verse
Numbers 27:15
“And Moses spake unto the Lord - Concerning his successor. We should concern ourselves both in our prayers and in our endeavours for the rising generation, that God's kingdom may be advanced among men, when we are in our graves.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
the God of the spirits of all flesh: John Wesley hears the title as a plea to the searcher of spirits, who knows who is fit for the work. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown add that the Author of every gift can also raise up a man equal to the hardest task. Moses leaves the choice with God. He asks only that a man be appointed.
Numbers 27:16
“The God of the spirits of all flesh - An acknowledgment that man, who is but flesh (compare Gen 6:3), is of himself helpless; and “lives and moves and has his being” in God Act 17:28. The words are suitably employed here to introduce an entreaty that God would not leave the congregation without a guide and leader, and in Num 16:22 as a preface to an intercession that the whole people should not suffer for the sin of a, few.”
Going out and coming in before them names a leader's whole public conduct, in war and out of it. Moses asks that the congregation not be "like sheep without a shepherd", as Micaiah says of Israel at 1 Kings 22:17, and Ezekiel 34:5 and Matthew 9:36 take up the image. Clarke reads the request as Moses describing the office he had filled himself.
Numbers 27:17
“That the congregation of the Lord be not as sheep which have no shepherd - This is a beautiful expression, and shows us in what light Moses viewed himself among his people. He was their shepherd; he sought no higher place; he fed and guided the flock of God under the direction of the Divine Spirit, and was faithful in all his Master’s house. To this saying of Moses our Lord alludes, Mat 9:36.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
1 more voice on this verse
Numbers 27:17
“Go out before them - That is, who may wisely conduct them in all their affairs, both when they go forth to war, or upon other occasions, and when they return home and live in peace.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
Numbers 27:18-19
The one qualification named is that Joshua is "a man with the Spirit in him", and the camp had watched him at Exodus 17:9, Exodus 33:11 and Numbers 14:6-9. Deuteronomy 34:9 says he "was filled with the spirit of wisdom because Moses had laid his hands on him". The charge is given "in their sight", so the congregation watches the transfer.
Numbers 27:18
“This was done in token of Moses' transferring the government to him, as the laying of hands on the sacrifice put the offering in the place and stead of the offerer; also in token of God's conferring the blessing of the Spirit upon him, which Moses obtained by prayer. It is said ( Deut. xxxiv. 9 ), Joshua was full of the spirit of wisdom, for Moses had laid his hands on him.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
1 more voice on this verse
Numbers 27:18
“In whom is the spirit - This must certainly mean the Spirit of God; and because he was endued with this Spirit, therefore he was capable of leading the people. How miserably qualified is that man for the work of God who is not guided and influenced by the Holy Ghost! God never chooses a man to accomplish his designs but that one whom he himself has qualified for the work.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
John Wesley takes the commission as counsel and instruction for the trust Joshua was receiving. Matthew Henry says the people were given into his hand as sheep to a shepherd, and he would answer for them. Joshua would command Israel. Henry adds that he stayed under command himself, since the highest must know there is one higher.
Numbers 27:19
“He must be charged with the people of Israel, who were delivered into his hand as sheep into the hand of a shepherd, and for whom he must be accountable. He must be strictly charged to do his duty to them; though they were under his command, he was under God's command, and from him must receive charge. The highest must know that there is a higher than they.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
Numbers 27:20-21
Joshua receives "some of your authority", but Eleazar will "seek counsel for him before the LORD by the judgment of the Urim", while God spoke with Moses "face to face" at Numbers 12:8. Barnes reads this as setting Joshua below Moses beside every later ruler, and points to Joshua 9:14, where that counsel went unasked. The stated purpose is that the congregation "will obey him".
Numbers 27:20
“And thou shalt put, etc. - מחודך mechodecha, of thine honor or authority upon him. Thou shalt show to the whole congregation that thou hast associated him with thyself in the government of the people.”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
John Wesley notes that Urim stands for the Urim and Thummim together, consulted before the LORD near the inner veil. He takes at his command as the word of the LORD given through the priest. The priest carried the question. Matthew Henry reports the Jewish teaching that only the king, the head of the council or the people's representative could inquire by Urim.
Numbers 27:21
“And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest ... - Joshua was thus to be inferior to what Moses had been. For Moses had enjoyed the privilege of unrestricted direct contact with God: Joshua, like all future rulers of Israel, was to ask counsel mediately, through the High Priest and those means of inquiring of God wherewith the high priest was entrusted. Such counsel Joshua seems to have omitted to seek when he concluded his hasty treaty with the Gibeonites (Jos 9:3 ff). Judgment of Urim - See Exo 28:30 note.”
1 more voice on this verse
Numbers 27:21
“Who shall ask counsel for him - When he requires him to do so, and in important and difficult matters. Of Urim - Urim is put for both Urim and Thummim.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
Numbers 27:22-23
The doing follows the words of the command, as Moses lays his hands on Joshua before Eleazar and the whole congregation. Moses had two sons, Gershom and Eliezer, whose line 1 Chronicles 23:14-15 leaves among the ordinary Levites, so the government passes out of his family in public. Henry reads the ordination as Moses willing that the people look away from him to the man coming after.
Numbers 27:22
“And Moses did as the Lord commanded him - It had been little to resign his honour to a son of his own. But with his own hands, first to ordain Eleazar high-priest, and now Joshua chief ruler, while his own children had no preferment at all, but were left in the rank of common Levites: this was more to his glory than the highest advancement of his family could have been.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
The rite is old. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown trace the laying on of hands through Jacob's blessing at Genesis 48:14, the offering at Leviticus 1:4 and Timothy's gift at 1 Timothy 4:14. Adam Clarke reads the act as a public proof that Joshua was appointed to the work and fitted for it.
How this psalm is built
The form: Case law arising out of a petition, set beside a public commissioning, as Keil and Delitzsch classes it.
The patterns in this chapter
| Device | What it does | Where to see it |
|---|---|---|
| The five named twice | Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah and Tirzah are listed in the census at 26:33 and listed again by name here. The one place in either census where daughters appear is the place this chapter takes its petitioners from. | Numbers 27:1 |
| The case argued in two moves | They separate their father from the company of Korah so that no charge of rebellion attaches to his house. Then they say he died in his own sin, which places him under the general sentence of 14:29 rather than under a particular judgment. Both moves are legal. | Numbers 27:3, Numbers 27:4 |
| The order of succession | Verses 9 to 11 write the ruling out as a list, son, daughter, brothers, father's brothers, then the nearest relative of the clan. Every step stays inside the father's house, so the land holds still where the tribal allotment put it. | Numbers 27:9, Numbers 27:10, Numbers 27:11 |
| Sheep without a shepherd | Moses gives the reason for his request at verse 17 in a figure the rest of Scripture takes up. Micaiah uses the words of a leaderless Israel at 1 Kings 22:17, Ezekiel 34:5 turns them into a charge against the shepherds, and Matthew 9:36 puts them in the mouth of Christ over the crowds. | Numbers 27:17 |
The chapter is the clearest case in the Torah of a law being made rather than recited. Five women without political standing raised a real problem, and the ruling went further than the request. They asked for their father's portion, and verse 8 gave the nation a rule. John Gill notes that what was determined in their case was made into a general law.
11 more paragraphs on the patterns
The ruling has a limit, and chapter 36 finds it. The fathers of Manasseh object that a daughter's marriage would carry her land into another tribe, and the same verdict of having spoken right is given to them at 36:5. What chapter 27 opens, chapter 36 closes, and the two chapters are the frame of the last movement of the book.
The historical value
Land in that world normally passed from father to son, and a household with no son faced losing its name and its holding. Other ancient legal systems worked around it in various ways, by the adoption of a son in law, or by giving a daughter a legal standing as a son. Arrangements of that kind are documented in family archives from Mesopotamian towns such as Nuzi, and Roland de Vaux sets out the Israelite practice in Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. What is unusual here is that the change came from the women themselves petitioning.
The New Testament's use
Matthew 9:36 puts the words of verse 17 in the mouth of Christ, who saw the crowds and had compassion on them because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. The figure passes from Moses asking for a successor to the Gospel describing a need for one.
Deuteronomy 34:9 records what the laying on of hands at verse 18 did, that Joshua was full of the spirit of wisdom because Moses had laid his hands on him.
The debated point
Why Moses was barred is restated here and stated differently elsewhere. Verse 14 charges him with rebelling against the command and with failing to uphold God as holy at the waters before their eyes. Numbers 20:12 puts it as unbelief. Moses himself tells Israel at Deuteronomy 1:37, 3:26 and 4:21 that the LORD was angry with him for your sakes. Both accounts stand in the canon and neither chapter reconciles them. The three positions on the fault itself are carried with their holders in the dossier for this book and in the row for chapter 20.
A second point is what Numbers leaves out. Deuteronomy 3:23 to 26 records that Moses also pleaded to be allowed over the Jordan and was refused, which Numbers does not report, and both accounts stand.
Where to go deeper
The office Joshua is given is set out at the priest on its priestly side, since verse 21 puts him before Eleazar for guidance. The generation whose land this ruling divides is set out at the wilderness generation. The towns the later chapters set aside are set out at the cities of refuge. A feature page on Aaron is owed, and the row for chapter 20 carries the full presentation of his death, which verse 13 refers back to.
Keep studying
Studies2
Sources for this chapter
The summary
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory; John Calvin, Commentaries; John Wesley, Notes on the Old Testament and Matthew Henry, Complete Commentary.
The form and classifications
John Gill, Exposition of the Old Testament, 1748 to 1763, on Numbers 27:5; Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament: The Pentateuch, 1866 to 1891, on Numbers 27:9 and Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, 1710, on Numbers 27:18.
The exposition
Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Bible; Albert Barnes; Jamieson, Fausset & Brown; John Calvin; John Gill; John Wesley, Notes on the Old Testament; Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament: The Pentateuch and Matthew Henry.