What is the significance of the backward-facing 'Nunin', one before the two current Pesukim, and one after them?
Rashi #1: They serve as markers, to indicate that this Parshah does not really belong here, 1 and the Torah only inserted it here in order to break between two punishments. 2
Rashi #2 (in Shabbos, 116a): The Torah places these two Pesukim in parentheses, a sign that they form an independent Seifer, 3 dividing the Torah into seven Sefarim. 4
Riva: It indicates that this Parshah belongs fifty Parshiyos earlier, after 2:17. 5
Which explains why the hint appears in the form of 'Nunin' (Gematriya fifty). Moshav Zekenim: Moreover, 'Nun' resembles 'Chaf' and 'Reish', a hint to 'Ach' and 'Rak' - exclusions, to hint that this is not its place. (See also Ba'al ha'Turim). See also Oznayim la'Torah, who presents other explanations for the reversed 'Nunin'.
Refer to 10:33:1:1* & 10:33:2:2*. See also Ba'al ha'Turim.
This is the opinion of Rebbi there - See Torah Temimah, note 22 and Ba'al ha'Turim on Pasuk 36 - whereas answer #2 goes according to R. Shimon ben Gamliel , who argues with (his son) Rebbi.
As the Pasuk writes in Mishlei, 9:1 "Chatzvah Amudehah Shiv'ah".
See Ba?al ha?Turim.
Rashi (Shabbos, 116a) writes that these two Pesukim form a Seifer. How can such a short Parshah be considered a Seifer?
Yadayim, 3:5: 'A parchment that contains at least eighty-five letters - like the Parshah of "Vay'hi bi'Neso'a ha'Aron" - is Metamei the hands'. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 23 and Ba'al ha'Turim.
Which two punishments do the two 'Nunin' separate?
Rashi (in Shabbos, 116a): The desire to eat meat and the Mis'onenim. 1
Ramban (citing a Midrash 2 ): In fact, there are three punishments: One before the 'Nunin' - leaving Har Sinai joyfully, like a child running away from school, 3 ; and two after them - the Mis'onenim, and the desire to eat meat. And the 'Nunin' serve as a break, to avoid writing three consecutive punishments, thereby creating a Chazakah.
Riva: They left Har Sinai like a child running away from school 4 - before the 'Nunin' and the Mis'onenim, who complained about a [lack of] meat 5 - after the 'Nunin'.
The Ramban queries this, since both of them are written after the 'Nunin'? Perhaps Rashi holds that when leaving Har Sinai, they intended to complain about meat, just it was written later. There is no basis for this. (Refer to 10:35:3:3* - PF.)
Yalkut Shimoni 729: Moshe told them to go one day, and they went three days.
Ramban: Chazal refer to it as a punishment - despite the fact that no punishment is mentioned in the Pasuk - because, apparently, if not for this sin, Hashem would have taken them straight into Eretz Cana'an. Rosh - B'nei Yisrael traveled back eight journeys, and Hashem killed many of them.
Rosh: Out of fear that Hashem would command them more Mitzvos.
Pesukim 11:1-3 state that the prople complained [an unspecified complaint], and Hashem burned some people, and Pasuk 4 begins the complaint about meat. Perhaps Riva learns from "His'avu" (11:4), that this was before (the fire, and explains the complaint). If it were after, it would have said "va'Yis'avu"! Refer to Bereishis 4:1:1:1. (PF)
When is "Vay'hi bi'Neso'a ha'Aron" referring to?
Rashi (in 9:18): It refers to each time that Yisrael traveled. 1
Seforno: It refers to what ought to have been the last time they broke camp before entering Eretz Cana'an. 2
What are the implications of the words "Kumah Hashem ... "?
Rashi #1: Since the Aron traveled three days ahead of the camp of Yisrael, Moshe would announce 'Stop Hashem and wait for us! Don't distance Yourself any more!'
Seforno: Had Yisrael not sinned by the Eigel, they would have entered Eretz Cana'an without a fight; and in that vein Moshe prayed for the enemy to scatter and flee before Hashem.
Rashbam: Moshe declared this with reference to the Shechinah, that was about to move off the lid of the Aron.
Targum Yonasan: When the time came to travel, and the Cloud folded (and gathered above the camp of Yehudah), it did move until Moshe prayed and declared "Kumah Hashem", asking Hashem to display His anger against the enemy. 2
What are the connotations of the phrase "Veyafutzu Oyvecha Veyanusu Mesan'echa Mipanecha"?
Rashi: The former constitutes a Tefilah that the enemy that has gathered together should scatter 1 ; the latter, a prayer that those who pursue Yisrael should flee.
Seforno: Refer to 10:35:5:3 - And he Davened that the enemy should flee their cities for fear that Yisrael would come and wipe them out.
Targum Yonasan: Refer to 10:35:5:5. Moshe Davened that the enemies of Hashem's nation should scatter before His anger and that they should not have a leg on which to stand.
Da'as Zekenim and Hadar Zekenim: Even two who come to attack Yisrael will not remain together. If they come, they will flee and not rise again. This was their Tefilas ha'Derech.
Bearing in mind that the Torah is referring to the enemies of Yisrael, why did Moshe say (?Oyvecha? and) "Mesan'echa" with reference to Hashem?
Rashi: Because whoever hates Yisrael, hates the One who created the world. 1
Targum Yonasan: actually translates "Oyvecha" and "Mesan'echa" as 'the enemies and haters of Your people'.
Rashi: As the Pasuk in Tehilim indicates.
Why does the Torah write "bi'Neso'a ha'Aron", and not bi'Neso'a Nos'ei ha'Aron?
Moshav Zekenim, citing R. Eliezer of Garmaiza: The Aron carried itself. Even though it says "Nos'ei Aron" (Devarim 31:25), it means that they appeared to carry it.
