The Gemara makes 2 points regarding gezeiras m'roglim:
1. It did not apply to shevet Levi.
2. It did not apply to those less than 20 or more than 60; the latter known via Gezeira Shuvuh.
Interestingly, Rashi in Parshas Sh'lach [14:29] only makes reference to item 1.
Rashi makes no mention of Item 2. Now less than 20 is obvious, as the Gemara states it is written in the pasuk. However, it cannot be that the non-applicability to the more than 60 is also obvious - the Gemara needed a Gezeira Shuvuh as proof.
[However, the Art Scroll Stone Chumash mentions item 2 at the beginning of Bamidbar].
Any thoughts on the matter ??
Meyer M Lieber
Sholom Rav,
True, above sixty is not obvious. However, it goes together,
(and is always quoted together) with under twenty - Ask any child
at which age Yisrael was counted, and he will answer 'over twenty
and under sixty'. Consequently, since Rashi doesn't find it necessary to mention under twenty, he doesn't mention over sixty either ...
Sheivet Levi, on the other hand, is an independent case which is
learned from an independent source. So Rashi sees fit to mention it.
be'Virchas Kol Tuv
Eliezer Chrysler
I disagree. The over 60 exclusion is as much an independent source [Gezeira Shuvuh from Erechin] as is the Sheivet Levi exclusion. Neither in Ki Seesuh, or Ba'midbar or parshas Pinchas does the Torah mention an upper age limitation - only with respect to counting Sheivet Levi [between 30 & 50].
Forgive me, but your answer is almost like saying that Chazal prohibited a
Chalutzah to a Cohain because people always say Ge'rushah Va'chalutzah
together. I believe it was the other way around.
A Freilechen Shavuos
Meyer M Lieber
Sholom Rav,
I think you misunderstood what I meant. I did not say that over sixty is not an independent source - Of course it is!
What I meant to say was that, in spite of its independence, it is generally mentioned together with under twenty, and that therefore Rashi did not find it necessary to mention it separately. Bear in mind that we are not talking about a Gemara or a Ma'amar Chazal, but about an almost casual statement of Rashi.
Be'Virchas Kol Tuv,
Eliezer Chrysler
Thank you again for your response.
I believe I found the answer in the peirush Ba'er Heitev by the Mateh Moshe [found in the "11 Meforshei Rashi" Chumash set]. Although he does not ask the question, I think he supplies the answer.
Rashi is bothered why the Torah also mentions "Mi-ben Esrim" after "L'chul Misparchem". Rashi answers "L'chul Misparchem" could also include Sheivet Levi, since they were in fact counted. Therefore, the torah adds "Mi-ben Esrim" to exclude Sheivet Levi who were counted only from age 30. Rashi is NOT discussing those who were never counted.
In conclusion, next week is Parshas Sh'lach. Please take an informal survey. How many people actually know that over 60 were excluded & where it is written ??
Thank you again.
Meyer M Lieber