In that particular Rashi on the Omud Aleph after the Mishnah Rashi points out that the Possuk in Bamidbar is talking about Elozor and Isomor who were Meshuchim.
But if you look at the context of the Pessukim in the Parshah the Possuk refers to all 4 of Aaron's sons including Nodov and Avihu why does Rashi not mention them or "Fakert" why does he seem to go out of his way that its Elozor and Isomor ONLY and not Nodov and Avihu when clearly the Mashmous of the Possuk in the Parshah is not like that. They only die in Possuk Daled but the reference in the Gemoro is to Possuk Gimmel when it seems clearly that ALL 4 OF THEM were Meshuchim.
Boruch Kahan, London England
The way I understand it, Pasuk 3 is also referring only to Elazar and Itamar. Pasuk 2 talks about all four sons. Then Pasuk 3 talks about the Meshuchim, but it does not say explicitly whether it is referring to the four in the previous Pasuk or if it is only referring to the two who survived. I want to say that it is only referring to the two who survived. Then Pasuk 4 continues and tells us that Nadav and Avihu died, but this does not mean that they are considered as the Meshuchim mentioned in Pasuk 3, but on the contrary it is explaining to us why they are not considered as Meshuchim, and only Elazar and Itamar are Meshuchim, because they are the only ones who survived.
Reb Boruch, Kesivsh v'Chasimah Tovah, and a Gut Gebenched Yohr!
Dovid Bloom
Shkoyach for your Terutz
I must disagree with you
There is no Mashmous in Possuk Gimmel that its only Elozor and Isomor and not Nodov and Avihu if the Possuk says they were Niftar only in Possuk Daled they must have been alive in Possuk Gimmel and I am sure that all 4 of his sons were Meshuchim so I still think Rashi had some other reason to know that Nodov and Avihu weren't Meshuchim
Good Yom Tov
Boruch Kahan
Reb Boruch, I have found that Rabeinu Bachye seems to be on your side!
1) This is Rabeinu Bachye on the Pasuk in Bamidbar 3:3. He deals with the question why does the Torah repeat that these are the names of the sons of Aharon, and why does it add that they were the "Kohanim ha'Meshuchim" -- the annointed Kohanim? Rabeinu Bachye explains that the Torah is teaching that "Ha'Kadosh Baruch Hu Medakdek Im ha'Tzadikim k'Chut Ha'Se'arah" -- Hashem expects a much higher standard from the Tzadikim. That is why the Torah adds that they were Kohanim ha'Meshuchim. We are being told that even though they were on a very high Madregah -- as they had been annointed, and their hands had been "filled" so that they could serve as Kohanim in the Mishkan -- nevertheless when they transgressed an Aveirah, Hashem did not forgive what they did, but took their lives.
2) One sees from Rabeinu Bachye that when the Torah says "ha'Kohanim ha'Meshuchim," it is also referring to Nadav and Avihu, not like I wrote in my first reply.
3) So now I have to try again to answer your question. I will attempt to base my answer on what the Panim Yafos, by the Hafla'ah on the Chumash, writes on the Pesukim. He discusses why 3:1 tells us who were the sons of Aharon on the day that Hashem spoke to Moshe on Har Sinai. He writes that Nadav and Avihu were part of the number of Aharon's sons only on the day that Hashem spoke on Har Sinai but not afterwards. Since the Gezeirah that Nadav and Avihu would die was passed already on that day (as Chazal (Bamidbar Rabah 15:24) learn from Shemos 24:11, "And to the nobles of Bnei Yisrael Hashem did not stretch out His hand," that at that time the death sentence was pronounced upon them), this means that Nadav and Avihu can no longer be counted as part of the number of four sons. From then on, only Elazar and Itamar could be considered as Aharon's sons.
4) I understand that the Panim Yafos is saying a Peshat similar to the one I was trying to say in my first reply. In Pasuk 3, Nadav and Avihu were no longer considered to be amongst Aharon's sons. Even though they were still alive, since the decree had already been made that they would die, they were no longer considered as Kohanim Meshuchim.
5) I could add a little "Peshetl" which may illustrate my point a bit further. The Gemara uses the term "a Kosher Kohen." We can suggest that Nadav and Avihu were not considered as Kosher, but rather they were more similar to a "Tereifah Kohen." A Tereifah is an animal that is destined to die within a certain time period. Nadav and Avihu also could not live for long, because the Gezeirah had been made that they would die, so they were no longer considered as Kosher Kohanim.
Gmar Chasimah Tovah,
Dovid Bloom
I sent your question to a Gadol and he replied: "Kvar Meisu."
That is, Nadav and Avihu had already died, so that is why Rashi only mentions Elazar and Itamar.
Possibly, even if we say like Rabeinu Bachye that the Pasuk is referring to Nadav and Avihu, nevertheless since they died in Parshas Shemini, by the time we get to Parshas Bamidbar we understand that the important Kohanim for practical purposes are Elazar and Itamar, so this is why Rashi mentions only those who were still alive.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Further to this "Shakloh VeTarioh" we had on this point earlier in Zevochim at Daf 13a I am now holding by Daf 19b in Zevochim and an interesting Heoroh has come up which could be Noygeah to our discussion here.
It is concerning Kiddush Yodayim VeRaglayim if you go through the Sugya literally that ENDS before it gets wide ie from the Tonu Rabbon near the top of the Omud until "Ubonov" then go through the Rashis particularly D.H.Moshe there is a discussion who are the 4 Kohanim because if you then go to the Torah Temimah on the Possuk in Parshas Pekudei Perek 40 Possuk 31 Ois 9 on his Heoros he creates a Machloikes Rashi and Rambam on this Nekudah.
Just by the way I don't know what print you will use on that Torah Temimah but the Gemoro he refers to is in Avodah Zoroh 34a and the Rambam he refers to is in Hilchos Bias Hamikdosh Perek 5 Halochoh 13 AND MOST IMPORTANTLY Noygea to or discussion the Kesef Mishneh there on that Rambam who asks about Nodov and Avihu
I await to hear what you think once you have gone through the Inyan
Kol Tuv
Boruch Kahan
Yes, I agree that the Kesef Mishneh is a good proof to what we answered for Rashi 13a, that if Nadav and Avihu would have been alive, the Halachah should have related to them. One sees from the Kesef Mishnah that since Nadav and Avihu were still alive in Parshas Pekudei, they should have been mentioned, which is why he asked his question. In contrast, since Nadav and Avihu had already died by the
time we get to Parshas Bamidbar, it follows that Rashi on 13a only mentions Elazar and Itamar.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Further to my email this morning about Zevochim 19 b Noygea to this question here on 13 a I have now discovered that the Shitta Mekubetzes on the side Ois 3 Mammosh says the Loshon there like you have quoted here about Nodov and Avihu "Kevar Meisu"
Boruch Kahan