Chapter 2 of Sefer Ezra consists entirely of a list: family names, place names, and numbers. At first glance, it appears to be nothing more than a data table, yet the Malbim reveals that every textual variation and every numerical detail teaches an entire foundational concept - who ascended, from where they ascended, what their primary aspiration was, and who was of verified lineage to enter the congregation and who was not. We read the entire chapter, even the names unfamiliar to us, so that the account may be complete, and to remember the importance and stature of those individuals. Just as we say, "The name of the wicked shall rot," so too do we say, "The memory of the righteous is for a blessing." Come and see who these individuals were, who possessed the stirring of soul and spirit to rise and build the House of their God. These people were etched into Scripture for all eternity, so that future generations would know: this family merited this, and so did this one, and so did that one.
וְאֵלֶּה בְּנֵי הַמְּדִינָה הָעֹלִים מִשְּׁבִי הַגּוֹלָה אֲשֶׁר הֶגְלָה נְבוּכַדְנֶצַּר מֶלֶךְ־בָּבֶל לְבָבֶל וַיָּשׁוּבוּ לִירוּשָׁלַיִם וִיהוּדָה אִישׁ לְעִירוֹ׃ - "Now these are the people of the province who came up out of the captivity of those who had been carried away, whom Nevuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had exiled to Babylon, and who returned to Jerusalem and Judah, each man to his city."
"The people of the province" - the people of the province of the Land of Israel, who are now ascending from the captivity of exile to return to their land. Yet in Sefer Nechemiah, chapter 7, this passage is repeated and counts the returnees once again, but the numbers there are different. Upon examination, one sees that the numbers of people are not the same, even though this appears to be the very same aliyah.
The Malbim explains: there were two types of aliyot. There was an aliyah of the prominent people, who ascended from Babylon itself, and an aliyah of the common folk, who ascended from the rest of the province. In the first exile, the exile of Yechanyah, the dignitaries were exiled, and Nevuchadnezzar settled them in Babylon itself - the capital city, the central province, the royal palace. Later, when he exiled the poorest of the people and the Temple was destroyed, he gathered the vinedressers and plowmen, the simpler folk, and settled them in the provinces rather than in Babylon itself.
From here, the Malbim explains, one can understand the phrasing of the verses: in our book it says, "whom Nevuchadnezzar king of Babylon had exiled to Babylon," whereas in Nechemiah it says simply, "whom Nevuchadnezzar had exiled," without "to Babylon." There it refers to the exiles of the second exile, the exile of Tzidkiyahu and the destruction of Jerusalem, the poorest of the people who were not settled in the royal city. Here, however, it refers to those who were exiled to Babylon itself, to the royal city - the elite.
This also yields a practical distinction regarding the destination of their return: the prominent individuals went to Jerusalem and spread out from there to the rest of the cities of Judah, as their primary focus was the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash. In contrast, the common folk went directly to the cities of Judah, where each one sought out his field and his home, to see what remained of his land, his inheritance, and his estate.
Here it says, "and who returned to Jerusalem and Judah," while in Nechemiah it says, "to Jerusalem and to Judah." What is the difference? We have a principle from the Malbim: if the prepositional letter lamed is written on both the first word and the second, it indicates that both are of equal importance. But if the lamed appears only on the first word and not on the second, it indicates that the first is primary and distinguished, and the second is subordinate to it. This also aligns with grammatical logic, and this is how one naturally reads and understands it: "to Jerusalem and Judah" - primarily to Jerusalem, and secondarily to Judah.
Therefore here, where the verse refers to the prominent individuals ascending from Babylon - the scholars and the elite - their primary focus was Jerusalem, and only through that did they disperse from there into Judah. In Nechemiah, however, where the text refers to the simpler people whose primary focus and preoccupation were worldly affairs, it is written "to Jerusalem and to Judah" - for it was as important to them to return to Judah as it was to return to Jerusalem, each person seeking out his home, his land, and his inheritance. This explains the variation between the verses and provides the initial explanation for the variation in the numbers; further on, we will see in the Malbim's words a more intricate explanation.
אֲשֶׁר־בָּאוּ עִם־זְרֻבָּבֶל יֵשׁוּעַ נְחֶמְיָה שְׂרָיָה רְעֵלָיָה מָרְדֳּכַי בִּלְשָׁן מִסְפָּר בִּגְוַי רְחוּם בַּעֲנָה מִסְפַּר אַנְשֵׁי עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל׃ - "Who came with Zerubbabel: Yeshua, Nechemiah, Serayah, Re'elayah, Mordechai, Bilshan, Mispar, Bigvai, Rechum, Baanah. The number of the men of the people of Israel:"
All the names mentioned here are names of individuals, and these were the prominent leaders who came with Zerubbabel. "Mordechai Bilshan" - Chazal explain that this refers to a single individual, rather than Serayah, Re'elayah, Mordechai, and Bilshan being separate people. And who was he? Mordechai HaYehudi. Why was he called Bilshan? Not a "linguist" or "detective" in the modern sense, but "Bilshan," because he was proficient in languages - fluent in seventy languages, and a member of the Sanhedrin. As for "Yeshua," it is simply the name of an individual, unrelated to Yehoshua or to the Christian figure at all.
Notice that the word "mispar" appears here twice: "Mispar Bigvai" - this is a person's name; while "mispar anshei am Yisrael" ("the count of the men of the people of Israel") - this is a descriptive noun, indicating that this is the count of the men of the people of Israel. For this reason, the first is vocalized with a kamatz [Mispār] and the second with a patach [mispar], so that one would not mistakenly think there was another person here named Mispar.
בְּנֵי פַרְעֹשׁ אַלְפַּיִם מֵאָה שִׁבְעִים וּשְׁנָיִם׃ - The children of Parosh: two thousand one hundred seventy-two.
Rashi notes that some are counted by their patriarchal family name, while others are counted by their place of origin. Why the difference? The Malbim explains: when a family was large, Scripture counted it by the family name. But when an individual family was not large, yet many people originated from the same town, Scripture could not count three from here and four from there, since its aim was to record large groups. Therefore, it grouped them together and counted them by their location: those who were exiled from such-and-such a place, and those from another place. From this, one can understand why some are mentioned by patriarchal lineage and others by their town.
The family of Parosh was a large family, and therefore it was counted by its name: two thousand one hundred seventy-two. The text continues: the children of Shephatiah, three hundred seventy-two; the children of Arach, seven hundred seventy-five. "The children of Pachat-moab, of the children of Yeshua and Yoav" - Pachat-moab was the patriarch of the family, and Yeshua and Yoav were his sons, and they came to the Land. Likewise: the children of Eilam, the children of Zattu, the children of Zaccai, the children of Bani, the children of Bebai, the children of Azgad, the children of Adonikam, the children of Bigvai, the children of Adin, the children of Ater of Hezekiah, the children of Bezai, the children of Yorah, the children of Chashum, the children of Gibbar - and in contrast, "the men of Beit-lechem, one hundred twenty-three," who were counted by their location.
There is an additional reason for listing these names: as we will see later, there were individuals who had issues regarding their genealogical lineage. Therefore, Scripture comes to tell us who arrived with verified lineage and who arrived without verified lineage. This carries major halachic ramifications (a significant nafka mina), as the Gemara in Masechet Gittin and elsewhere deals with questions of lineage based on what we learn here in Sefer Ezra.
אַנְשֵׁי נְטֹפָה חֲמִשִּׁים וְשִׁשָּׁה׃ אַנְשֵׁי עֲנָתוֹת מֵאָה עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמֹנָה׃ - The men of Netophah: fifty-six. The men of Anatot: one hundred twenty-eight.
Regarding "the men of Anatot," the Malbim refers to what he wrote in Sefer Yirmeyahu. There, in chapter 16, verse 3, the verse states: "For thus said the Lord concerning the sons and the daughters born in this place, and concerning their mothers who bore them and their fathers who fathered them in this land: They shall die grievous deaths; they shall not be lamented, nor shall they be buried; they shall be as dung upon the face of the earth; and they shall be consumed by the sword and by famine; and their carcasses shall be food for the birds of the sky and the beasts of the earth." And concerning whom was this said? Concerning the men of Anatot, who were deeply wicked and grievously harassed and tormented Yirmeyahu. It was regarding them that Yirmeyahu prayed: "Cause them to stumble with unworthy paupers" - so that even if a merit should come their way by chance, an impostor pauper would approach them, so that even the charity they give would not benefit them in the least. And an entire litany of "blessings" [curses] addresses the retribution that Yirmeyahu dealt them.
This is truly astonishing, as the verse in Yirmeyahu seemingly contradicts what is written here: here we see that one hundred twenty-eight men ascended from Anatot - alive, enduring, and breathing. What, then, became of the decree?
The Malbim explains: What was said there concerning the fathers was that destruction was decreed upon them wherever they might be; therefore, the verse specifically states, "and concerning their fathers that begat them in this land," meaning they would die wherever they were. For the children, however, the decree applied only to those born in that place, and only as long as they remained in Anatot. Once they leave Anatot and no longer dwell there, the destruction does not apply to them. Therefore, the men of Anatot who ascended here, one hundred twenty-eight, were their children who arose after them, and not the original men of Anatot themselves, concerning whom the prophecy foretold that they would perish and die.
בְּנֵי עֵילָם אַחֵר אֶלֶף מָאתַיִם חֲמִשִּׁים וְאַרְבָּעָה׃ - The children of the other Elam: one thousand two hundred fifty-four.
And within the list: the children of Azmavet, the children of Kiryat Arim, Chefirah, and Beerot, the children of Ramah and Geva, the men of Michmas, the men of Beit El and Ai, the children of Nevo, the children of Magbish. And afterwards, "the children of the other Elam" - yet the children of Elam were already counted above in verse 7 as one thousand two hundred fifty-four! Rather, the verse tells us: this is not the same Elam spoken of earlier, but another Elam. And following them are the children of Harim, the children of Lod, Hadid, and Ono, the children of Yericho, and the children of Sena'ah, three thousand six hundred thirty.
הַכֹּהֲנִים בְּנֵי יְדַעְיָה לְבֵית יֵשׁוּעַ תְּשַׁע מֵאוֹת שִׁבְעִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה׃ - The Kohanim: the children of Yedayah, of the house of Yeshua: nine hundred seventy-three.
After enumerating the Children of Israel, the text now counts the Kohanim and the Levi'im separately, and from the Levi'im it counts the singers and the gatekeepers, and at the end it counts the Netinim - those who served the Kohanim as hewers of wood and drawers of water. Among the Kohanim: the children of Yedayah, the children of Immer, one thousand fifty-two, the children of Pashchur, one thousand two hundred forty-seven, and the children of Harim, one thousand seventeen.
הַלְוִיִּם בְּנֵי־יֵשׁוּעַ וְקַדְמִיאֵל לִבְנֵי הוֹדַוְיָה שִׁבְעִים וְאַרְבָּעָה׃ הַמְשֹׁרְרִים בְּנֵי אָסָף מֵאָה עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁמֹנָה׃ - The Levi'im: the children of Yeshua and Kadmiel, of the children of Hodavyah: seventy-four. The singers: the children of Asaf: one hundred twenty-eight.
The children of Asaf were the singers, just as we say, "A song, a psalm of Asaf" - Asaf was among the singers. And following them were the children of the gatekeepers: the children of Shalum, the children of Ater, the children of Talmon, the children of Akuv, the children of Chatita, the children of Shovai - in all, one hundred thirty-nine.
הַנְּתִינִים בְּנֵי־צִיחָא בְנֵי־חֲשׂוּפָא בְּנֵי טַבָּעוֹת׃ - The Netinim: the children of Tzicha, the children of Chashufa, the children of Taba'ot.
The Netinim were the Gibeonites who served as hewers of wood and drawers of water, as we mentioned. The verse enumerates them by name: the children of Keros, the children of Siaha, the children of Padon, the children of Levanah, the children of Chagavah, the children of Akuv, the children of Chagav, the children of Shalmai, the children of Chanan, the children of Giddel, the children of Gachar, the children of Re'ayah, the children of Retzin, the children of Nekoda, the children of Gazam, the children of Uzza, the children of Pasei'ach, the children of Besai, the children of Asnah, the children of Me'unim, the children of Nefusim, the children of Bakbuk, the children of Chakufa, the children of Charchur, the children of Batzlut, the children of Mechida, the children of Charsha, the children of Barkos, the children of Sisera, the children of Tamach, the children of Netziach, the children of Chatifa.
בְּנֵי עַבְדֵי שְׁלֹמֹה בְּנֵי־סֹטַי בְּנֵי־הַסֹּפֶרֶת בְּנֵי פְרוּדָא׃ - The children of the servants of Shlomo: the children of Sotai, the children of Hasoferet, the children of Peruda.
Who are the "children of the servants of Solomon" (Benei Avdei Shlomo)? The Gemara in Masechet Yevamot cites one opinion that if a non-Jew or a non-Jewish slave has relations with a Jewish woman, the offspring is a mamzer. According to this view, these children were mamzerim, for they were the descendants of Solomon's servants, who, by virtue of their great prominence, married Jewish women and fathered children with them. This relates to what we will mention shortly regarding a shetuki and an asufi. However, according to the opinion that the offspring is kosher, they are treated as emancipated slaves. And what is the halachic status of a Canaanite slave who has been freed? He is a Jew in every respect. They were the descendants of Solomon's servants, holding the status of freed slaves, falling under the category of "converts and freed slaves" (geirei vacharurei) mentioned in Masechet Yevamot, who are like converts - for a slave is already half-Jewish, obligated in mitzvot like a woman, and the moment his master frees him, he becomes a full Jew.
Yet, the Malbim explains that from the fact that Scripture counts them together with the Netinim, one must understand that they were from the seven Canaanite nations whom Solomon subjected to forced labor, as it is written in Divrei HaYamim that he did not convert all of them, but rather placed some of the nations under forced labor. Therefore, their status was identical to that of the Netinim.
As for "the children of Hasophereth" - the Malbim notes that one should not think there was a female scribe (soferet) and the letter Hei is the definite article; rather, the full proper name is "Hasophereth". Just as with "the children of Hodaviah" (where the Hei is part of the name and not the definite article), so too here. Following them are the children of Jaalah, the children of Darkon, the children of Giddel, the children of Shephatiah, the children of Hattil, the children of Pochereth-hazzebaim, and the children of Ami.
כׇּל־הַנְּתִינִים וּבְנֵי עַבְדֵי שְׁלֹמֹה שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת תִּשְׁעִים וּשְׁנָיִם׃ - All the Netinim and the children of Solomon's servants were three hundred and ninety-two.
Herein lies the importance of the census: so that we may know who is eligible to enter the congregation and who is not. If a person comes and says, "I am from the family of Hattil," they tell him: "Hattil? Those are from the Netinim, from the Gibeonites, not from the children of Israel, and they are forbidden to marry into the congregation." Thus, by knowing a family's lineage, it was possible to determine whether a person was permitted to enter the congregation or disqualified.
וְאֵלֶּה הָעֹלִים מִתֵּל מֶלַח תֵּל חַרְשָׁא כְּרוּב אַדָּן אִמֵּר וְלֹא יָכְלוּ לְהַגִּיד בֵּית־אֲבוֹתָם וְזַרְעָם אִם מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל הֵם׃ - And these were those who went up from Tel-melach, Tel-harsha, Cherub, Addan, and Immer, but they could not declare their fathers' house or their lineage, whether they were of Israel.
Tel-melach, Tel-harsha, Cherub, Addan - all these are names of places. The people who ascended from there could not declare which family they belonged to, nor their lineage, whether they were of Israel. Why? Because they were asufim (foundlings). An asufi is a person gathered from the marketplace in an area whose majority population is gentile; presumably, then, whose child is he? The child of a gentile. Thus it is impossible to know whether he is of legitimate lineage or a mamzer. This is what is enumerated among the ten genealogical classes (in Kiddushin): shetuki and asufi. An asufi is one gathered from the marketplace. And a shetuki (a silenced one) - why is he called this? Because when he asks his mother, "Mother, who is my father?", she tells him, "Be silent (shetok), do not ask questions," for his mother silences him so that he will not ask embarrassing questions.
בְּנֵי־דְלָיָה בְנֵי־טוֹבִיָּה בְּנֵי נְקוֹדָא שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת חֲמִשִּׁים וּשְׁנָיִם׃ - The children of Delaiah, the children of Tobiah, the children of Nekoda, six hundred and fifty-two.
These too went up from Tel-melach.
וּמִבְּנֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים בְּנֵי חֳבַיָּה בְּנֵי הַקּוֹץ בְּנֵי בַרְזִלַּי אֲשֶׁר לָקַח מִבְּנוֹת בַּרְזִלַּי הַגִּלְעָדִי אִשָּׁה וַיִּקָּרֵא עַל־שְׁמָם׃ - And of the children of the kohanim: the children of Habaiah, the children of Hakkoz, the children of Barzillai, who took a wife from the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite and was called by their name.
The Malbim explains: The family of Hakkoz was a family of Kohanim, and so it appears in Divrei HaYamim - they were the seventh priestly watch. And now, a slight doubt arose regarding the lineage of the children. What gave rise to the doubt? Because Hakkoz took a wife from the daughters of Barzillai. Barzillai the Gileadite was a very prominent man in the days of David, and therefore the sons born of this woman were called, as a mark of honor, "the sons of Barzillai" - after their mother.
We have already found individuals who were called by their mother's name as a mark of honor even though they had a father: Yoav the son of Tzeruyah, Avishai the son of Tzeruyah. And who was Tzeruyah? David's sister. And since she was King David's sister, it was an honor and a title of distinction to say "the son of Tzeruyah", and people did not refer to them by their father's name, but by their mother's name.
And this is what the verse means: Hakkoz was the one who took a wife from the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite, and Chavayah was the son born of this woman; "and he was called by their name" - he was named both after his father and after his mother. Therefore, the sons were called both "the sons of Hakkoz" and "the sons of Barzillai."
אֵלֶּה בִּקְשׁוּ כְתָבָם הַמִּתְיַחְשִׂים וְלֹא נִמְצָאוּ וַיְגֹאֲלוּ מִן־הַכְּהֻנָּה׃ - "These sought their genealogical record, but it was not found; therefore they were disqualified from the kehunah."
As long as they possessed the genealogical scroll, we knew who each person was, who his father was, and where he came from. They could say: Here is the genealogical scroll, everything is recorded in it. "You might object: But you are called by such and such a name!" - Set aside what I am called; let us bring the scroll and examine it. But with the exile and the upheavals, their genealogical records were lost - the family record that every family had concerning its ancestral lineage, and that every individual had concerning his personal lineage - and consequently, doubt fell upon them.
Thus they were told: What are you called? The sons of Hakkoz, the sons of Barzillai. Hakkoz - we know that they are Kohanim, but how does the name Barzillai attach to you? Evidently, your father married a woman who was not from the priesthood and was disqualified from marrying a Kohen, and if so, what is your status? A chalal (a profaned priest). And perhaps for that very reason an additional name was attached to you, because you intermingled with a family unbefitting you. And not only that: since you married into another family, there may have been those who did not feel bound to the family of Hakkoz, but instead said, "I am bound to the family of Barzillai." Is the family of Barzillai permitted to marry a divorcee? I, too, will marry a divorcee. And since the name of Hakkoz was not the only one borne by them, but also the name of Barzillai, they were no longer scrupulous and regarded themselves as non-Kohanim, and we have no certainty that everyone here is a full Kohen. Therefore they were told: The only way is to find your genealogical records. "But they were not found" - and consequently, the outcome was: "therefore they were disqualified from the kehunah."
וַיֹּאמֶר הַתִּרְשָׁתָא לָהֶם אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יֹאכְלוּ מִקֹּדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים עַד עֲמֹד כֹּהֵן לְאוּרִים וּלְתֻמִּים׃ - "And the Tirshatha said to them that they should not eat of the most holy things until a Kohen should stand up with the Urim and Thummim."
Chazal say: The Tirshatha is Nechemiah ben Chachalyah. And why was he called by this title? Because, as we will see later, he stood and served before the king, and his role was to serve wine to the king and taste it beforehand - as was customary, to taste the wine to see if it had an unusual flavor, to ensure no one was attempting to poison the king. Some kings would first have a dog drink, while others would appoint a person to taste and eat from all the king's food to ensure there was nothing fatal in it. Consequently, Nechemiah had to drink wine that a non-Jew had touched and transported - wine that carried the concern of yayin nesech (wine poured for libation), or at least stam yeinam (ordinary non-Jewish wine). Therefore, Chazal said he was called "the Tirshatha," an acronym for hitir shetiyah ("he permitted drinking"), meaning that a special dispensation was granted to him to drink stam yeinam, even though it is ordinarily forbidden.
And what did he mean by telling them, "until a Kohen should stand up with the Urim and Thummim"? In the Second Temple, there were no Urim and Thummim at all - it was one of the five things that were missing from it. And why would the Urim and Thummim be needed here in the first place? Because the Urim and Thummim served as the "detector": one would inquire through it regarding each individual, and whatever the Urim and Thummim said would be decisive; the stones of the breastplate reveal hidden matters. But since there were no Urim and Thummim, was Nechemiah merely offering them an illusion?
Rashi explains: It is like a person saying to his friend, "Until the days of Mashiach this will not come to pass." When someone asks a person when he will visit, he replies: "God willing, when Mashiach comes, I will visit you" - meaning, I will not be coming. When Mashiach comes, certainly, but until Mashiach comes, it will not happen. So too here: he tells them, "I am sorry, I cannot admit you until there are Urim and Thummim" - which means, until Mashiach comes. He is not fostering an illusion that the Urim and Thummim will soon be available, for they all knew that they were absent.
The Malbim, on the other hand, explains based on what we saw in the Book of Daniel: the entire duration of the Second Temple, from its beginning to its end, was not termed a redemption, but rather bore the designation of exile, and for two reasons. First, the majority of the nation was still in exile - a little over fifty thousand ascended, and all the rest were not here. And second, this era was an atchalta degeulah (the beginning of redemption), a probationary period of four hundred and twenty years: if you prove worthy and demonstrate that you are truly deserving of the Beit HaMikdash and the service of Hashem, then at the end of four hundred and twenty years the Third Temple will be built, descending ready-built in fire, bringing an absolute and complete redemption. But if not - Heaven forbid, there will be an exile worse than the first, for the first exile was given a definite endpoint and time, whereas for the second exile, in which we unfortunately still find ourselves, no fixed limit was given, neither an end nor a timeframe.
According to this, what was supposed to happen at the conclusion of the four hundred and twenty years of the Second Temple? Redemption and a Third Temple whose structure would surpass the first, honor and splendor, Mashiach, and all those miracles, signs, and wonders that existed in the First Temple - everything returning. And this is what Nechemiah is referring to. He does not mean to tell them "until Mashiach comes" in a negative sense of postponement, but rather: very soon, after this Temple the Third Temple will be built, after this probationary period will come the eternal redemption, and then we will inquire of the Urim VeTumim and know with certainty.
כׇּל־הַקָּהָל כְּאֶחָד אַרְבַּע רִבּוֹא אַלְפַּיִם שְׁלֹשׁ־מֵאוֹת שִׁשִּׁים׃ - "The entire congregation together was forty-two thousand, three hundred and sixty."
A ribo is ten thousand, so the total sum is forty-two thousand, three hundred and sixty. However, when you examine the numbers and calculate all the individual tallies - as Rashi already pointed out - "in their detail they amount to only thirty thousand." Where, then, are the remaining thirteen thousand?
One answer is that everything enumerated here belongs to the tribes of Yehudah and Binyamin, but people also ascended from the other tribes, and from those other tribes there were thirteen thousand. That is to say, the bulk of the returnees were from Yehudah and Binyamin, and in addition, another thirteen thousand came from the remaining tribes, and they were included in the total sum.
The Malbim explains differently: the figures enumerated here represent those who arrived in the initial massive wave of aliyah, but afterward a steady trickle continued unabated, and this trickle eventually accumulated to another thirteen thousand people. The tally recorded at the beginning consists of those who could be counted together, "the entire congregation as one" - it was possible to count all those who ascended together as a collective. But when one arrives today from here and another tomorrow from there, was there border registration? Could one see who disembarked from a ship that day and count him? These added up to another thirteen thousand, and in this manner the Malbim resolves the discrepancy between the grand total and the individual details.
The Malbim further explains, returning to the point with which we opened: there are individuals and groups mentioned here who are not mentioned in Nechemiah, and there are those mentioned in Nechemiah who are not mentioned here, and the numbers between them seemingly differ. How do we resolve this? The Malbim explains that there were people who in one place were counted under their family name, and in the other under the name of their city. For example, if it says here that a certain family had seven hundred and there it says eight hundred, the extra one hundred were counted under their city; in the tally of "the people of such-and-such city" or "the people of Beit Lechem," that is where the missing hundred from that family are located. Therefore, the variations you find are merely cosmetic shifts rather than fundamental contradictions in the numbers.
The Malbim also presents an additional, somewhat more forced possibility: that although seven hundred are written here and eight hundred there, eight hundred actually ascended and one hundred returned - meaning that there were those who made the journey up but ultimately returned to their place of origin. Since some returned, the tally recorded here in Ezra reflects the number after their departure. However, the Malbim notes that one need not resort to this forced explanation, since it can be explained according to the first approach: that at times a person was counted by his hometown and at times by his family.
מִלְּבַד עַבְדֵיהֶם וְאַמְהֹתֵיהֶם אֵלֶּה שִׁבְעַת אֲלָפִים שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת שְׁלֹשִׁים וְשִׁבְעָה וְלָהֶם מְשֹׁרְרִים וּמְשֹׁרְרוֹת מָאתָיִם׃ - "Besides their menservants and their maidservants, of whom there were seven thousand three hundred and thirty-seven; and they had two hundred singing men and singing women."
Afterward, the text enumerates their livestock: their horses were seven hundred and thirty-six; their mules, two hundred and forty-five; their camels, four hundred and thirty-five; their donkeys, six thousand seven hundred and twenty.
וּמֵרָאשֵׁי הָאָבוֹת בְּבוֹאָם לְבֵית יְהוָה אֲשֶׁר בִּירוּשָׁלִָם הִתְנַדְּבוּ לְבֵית הָאֱלֹהִים לְהַעֲמִידוֹ עַל־מְכוֹנוֹ׃ - And some of the heads of the ancestral houses, when they came to the House of the Lord which is in Jerusalem, made freewill offerings for the House of God, to set it up upon its place.
"Made freewill offerings for the House of God" - in order to come and serve in the House of the Lord and establish it on its foundation.
כְּכֹחָם נָתְנוּ לְאוֹצַר הַמְּלָאכָה זָהָב דַּרְכְּמוֹנִים שֵׁשׁ־רִבֹּאוֹת וָאֶלֶף וְכֶסֶף מָנִים חֲמֵשֶׁת אֲלָפִים וְכָתְנֹת כֹּהֲנִים מֵאָה׃ - According to their ability, they gave into the treasury of the work sixty-one thousand darics of gold, five thousand manehs of silver, and one hundred priestly garments.
"According to their ability, they gave" - according to their means and capability. "Darics" (darkemonim) is the name of a gold coin. "And one hundred priestly garments" - priestly vestments, so that the kohanim would be equipped to serve in them.
וַיֵּשְׁבוּ הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַלְוִיִּם וּמִן־הָעָם וְהַמְשֹׁרְרִים וְהַשּׁוֹעֲרִים וְהַנְּתִינִים בְּעָרֵיהֶם וְכָל־יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּעָרֵיהֶם׃ - So the kohanim, and the Levi'im, and some of the people, and the singers, and the gatekeepers, and the Netinim dwelt in their cities, and all Israel in their cities.
The kohanim, the Levi'im, some of the people, the singers, the gatekeepers, and the Netinim - all returned to their land and their homeland. At first, they did not go straight to building the Temple; rather, they first planted fields, sowed seed, planted vineyards, and produced crops. Why? Because the very first prerequisite is basic sustenance. If one immediately sets about building the Beit HaMikdash, from where will you eat? From where will you drink? Where will your children and family live? Therefore, the first necessity was to build houses, settle the families, build shelters for the livestock they had brought with them, plow the fields, and sow them. Only once there is food to eat can one begin building the Beit HaMikdash.
The Malbim adds another reason: since they were not granted permission to rebuild the city wall, as we will see further on, they did not settle in Jerusalem; instead, each person went to his own city. Initially they had arrived intending to settle in Jerusalem, but permission to rebuild the wall was withheld - a topic we will discuss in the next chapter, with God's help: the authorities feared that a wall would be a means of rebelling against the king, fortifying themselves against him. Consequently, having no alternative, they went and settled in the provincial cities. For if there is a protective wall, one chooses to live in Jerusalem where there is protection; but if one cannot build a wall anyway, why not return to one's ancestral town and live in the place to which one was accustomed?
Chapter 2 is not a dry list, but a roll of honor and a pedigree of lineage. The Malbim teaches us that the differences between the list in Ezra and the list in Nechemiah stem from two distinct waves of aliya: the prominent people of Babylon, whose primary focus was Jerusalem and rebuilding the Temple ("to Jerusalem and Judah"), and the simpler folk of the periphery, each seeking his ancestral inheritance ("to Jerusalem and to Judah"). Counting them by family name versus by city also resolves the discrepancies in the numbers, while the grand total includes the trickle of returnees who continued to arrive, as well as members of the other tribes. Within this roster we learned of the pedigree of Mordechai Bilshan, the status of the Netinim and the descendants of Solomon's servants, the shetuki and asufi, the family of Hakotz who had lost their genealogical records, and the ruling of the Tirshatha - Nechemiah - "until a priest shall arise with Urim and Tummim." For Rashi, this was like saying "until the days of the Mashiach," while for the Malbim, it looked forward to the conclusion of the 420-year probationary period of the Second Temple, at which point the complete Redemption was meant to arrive. And finally, the wisdom of proper order: first houses, fields, and vineyards, and only then the building of the Beit HaMikdash - for the service of God cannot be sustained without a foundational basis of physical livelihood.