Introduction: A Chapter of Boundaries and Names
Chapter 15 of Sefer Yehoshua begins the division of the inheritances in western Eretz Yisrael, describing the lot of the tribe of Yehudah. By way of introduction: the locations mentioned here are very numerous, as are their names, and the commentators delve into extensive calculations to reconcile them. There are locations mentioned in connection with two different tribes, requiring clarification as to whether there were two places with the same name; there are city counts that must be calculated to see if they truly match the total stated in the text. We will not enter into all of this, for a simple reason: we do not have a map. Had we had a map before us, we could have traced the border point by point; without one, it is very difficult to visualize the picture. Therefore, we will focus primarily on key reminders and on understanding the variations in phrasing in the pesukim, and whoever wishes can examine the extended discussions of the commentators. Nonetheless, we can certainly obtain a general overview: which tribe dwelled in the south, which in the north, and so forth.
The Southern Border: From Edom to the Brook of Egypt
וַיְהִי הַגּוֹרָל לְמַטֵּה בְּנֵי יְהוּדָה לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם אֶל־גְּבוּל אֱדוֹם מִדְבַּר־צִן נֶגְבָּה מִקְצֵה תֵימָן׃ - The lot for the tribe of the children of Yehudah according to their families was to the border of Edom, the wilderness of Tzin southward, at the end of the south.
The Malbim explains: Edom is located in the south of Eretz Yisrael toward the east - this is the famous Red Rock. The wilderness of Tzin is also on the southern side, but it does not run along the boundary line itself; rather, where the wilderness of Tzin ends, that is where the southern boundary begins. Therefore, it says "from the edge of Teiman" - this is not the absolute end, but merely from the edge of the south.
וַיְהִי לָהֶם גְּבוּל נֶגֶב מִקְצֵה יָם הַמֶּלַח מִן־הַלָּשֹׁן הַפֹּנֶה נֶגְבָּה׃ - And their southern border was from the end of the Salt Sea, from the tongue that faces southward.
The southern border is described from east to west. The text begins from the southernmost and easternmost point, namely the Salt Sea, which lies both south and east of Eretz Yisrael, and from there the delineation begins as it traverses the land from south to north and from east to west. Notice how precise the verse is regarding from which point to which point each inheritance extended, so that disputes would not arise at a later time.
Border Terminology: Vayetze, Venasav, Veta'ar, Totza'ot
וְיָצָא אֶל־מִנֶּגֶב לְמַעֲלֵה עַקְרַבִּים וְעָבַר צִנָה וְעָלָה מִנֶּגֶב לְקָדֵשׁ בַּרְנֵעַ וְעָבַר חֶצְרוֹן וְעָלָה אַדָּרָה וְנָסַב הַקַּרְקָעָה׃ - And it went out south of Maaleh Akrabbim, passed along to Tzin, ascended south of Kadesh Barnea, passed Chetzron, went up to Adar, and turned toward Karka.
Here the Malbim teaches us an important principle for understanding the entire chapter. Throughout the description of the boundaries, we encounter various terms: "vayetze" (and it went out), "venasav" (and it turned), "veta'ar" (and it traced / curved around), and more. The concept is that a measuring line was stretched from point to point. Wherever it says "the border went out" (vayetze), the surveyor's line deviated from the straight line to the side, inward or outward - meaning there is a protrusion included in the tribe's inheritance, and the line is not straight. Wherever it says "it turned" (venasav), it turned across two directions like the shape of the letter dalet, meaning it forms a corner, an angled area. And wherever it says "it traced" (veta'ar), the border encircled three sides, such as a rectangular protrusion that the line surrounds on three sides before returning to its course.
In light of this, the Malbim raises a difficulty: here it says, "and it went out (vayetze) south of Maaleh Akrabbim," whereas in Parashat Masei it says, "and the border shall turn (venasav) for you from the south to Maaleh Akrabbim." "Venasav" indicates two directions (a corner), while "vayetze" signifies merely a protrusion. He resolves this by explaining that Maaleh Akrabbim was not directly opposite the tongue of the sea, but rather extended further southward. Thus, both expressions are accurate: the line went out from east to west and angled diagonally toward the south - which is the "vayetze" in our verse; yet because it forms an angular turn, the verse in Masei uses "venasav." The Malbim reconciles additional verses further on in a similar manner, which we will not detail here.
Another expression we encounter is "totza'ot" (terminations / extremities). In Parashat Masei it is stated, "and its terminations (totze'otav) shall be south of Kadesh Barnea," which means: the place where that specific boundary line ends, or where that protrusion terminates. For example, if a line runs straight and then forms a semicircle that incorporates an additional section into the tribe's territory - the point where the bend ends and the line returns to being straight is called its "totza'ot."
וְעָבַר עַצְמוֹנָה וְיָצָא נַחַל מִצְרַיִם וְהָיוּ תֹּצְאוֹת הַגְּבוּל יָמָּה זֶה־יִהְיֶה לָכֶם גְּבוּל נֶגֶב׃ - And it passed along to Atzmonah, and went out to the Brook of Egypt, and the border ended at the sea; this shall be your southern border.
Here too, the Malbim addresses the difference between our wording, "and went out" (veyatza), and the wording in Parashat Masei, "and turned" (venesav): The brook encircled all the way to the sea; therefore, here it says "went out," which is the meeting point, whereas there it says "and turned" because it curves back in a circle to that same place, which formed a corner angle.
The Eastern and Northern Border
וּגְבוּל קֵדְמָה יָם הַמֶּלַח עַד־קְצֵה הַיַּרְדֵּן וּגְבוּל לִפְאַת צָפוֹנָה מִלְּשׁוֹן הַיָּם מִקְצֵה הַיַּרְדֵּן׃ - And the eastern border was the Salt Sea up to the edge of the Jordan, and the border of the northern side was from the tongue of the sea, from the edge of the Jordan.
"The eastern border" - the measuring line was drawn along the eastern side of Yehudah, toward the Salt Sea, which lies in the southeast. "Up to the edge of the Jordan" - the span of Yehudah's eastern border ran only opposite the Salt Sea, up to where the Jordan empties into the Salt Sea; from there northward is no longer Yehudah's border. "And the border of the northern side" - having described the entire southern sector, the verse must now specify where the northern boundary runs, since from there begins the territory of the next tribe. Therefore, it announces where the line cuts across Yehudah's inheritance on the north, from east to west: from the tongue of the sea, meaning the northern tip of the Salt Sea where it connects to the Jordan, all the way to the Mediterranean Sea. This line crosses the entire territory of Yehudah and forms its northern boundary.
וְעָלָה הַגְּבוּל בֵּית חׇגְלָה וְעָבַר מִצְּפוֹן לְבֵית הָעֲרָבָה וְעָלָה הַגְּבוּל אֶבֶן בֹּהַן בֶּן־רְאוּבֵן׃ - And the border went up to Beit Choglah and passed north of Beit HaAravah, and the border went up to the Stone of Bohan son of Reuven.
What is "the Stone of Bohan son of Reuven"? Radak explains that the master of this place was named Bohan son of Reuven; the Targum likewise translates "the son of Reuven," meaning a person who was a descendant of Reuven. And what is "Stone"? Either the name of the place was Even, or there was a large stone there marking the boundary. This was a frequent custom in those times, to erect large stones to mark a boundary, because a large stone is difficult to displace, preventing anyone from stealing land by moving the boundary mark.
The Malbim explains that Beit Choglah itself was already outside the northern boundary line and belonged to the territory of Binyamin, whereas "the shoulder of Beit Choglah" belonged to Yehudah, as the text states later, "and passed along to the side of Beit Choglah." Thus, Beit Choglah was one location and the shoulder of Beit Choglah was another: Beit Choglah belonged to Binyamin, and the shoulder of Beit Choglah belonged to Yehudah.
וְעָלָה הַגְּבוּל דְּבִרָה מֵעֵמֶק עָכוֹר וְצָפוֹנָה פֹּנֶה אֶל־הַגִּלְגָּל אֲשֶׁר־נֹכַח לְמַעֲלֵה אֲדֻמִּים אֲשֶׁר מִנֶּגֶב לַנָּחַל וְעָבַר הַגְּבוּל אֶל־מֵי־עֵין שֶׁמֶשׁ וְהָיוּ תֹצְאֹתָיו אֶל־עֵין רֹגֵל׃ - And the border went up toward Devir from the Valley of Achor, and turned northward toward the Gilgal that is opposite the Ascent of Adummim, which is south of the brook; and the border passed to the waters of Ein Shemesh, and its terminus was at Ein Rogel.
Radak explains: The Gilgal mentioned here is also called Gelilot, and "Adummim" was likewise a place well known in their time. "Ein Rogel" is translated by Yonatan as "Ein Ketzara," and "katzara" in rabbinic Hebrew means a launderer. Why is a launderer called "katzara"? Rashi in the Gemara cites: because he shortens (mekatzer) the garments. One brings him a sweater half a meter wide and gets it back at forty centimeters; it shrinks in the wash. Similarly, Yonatan translates "meshatka tzarya," a fuller's field. And why is the launderer called "rogel"? Because they used to rub and tread the garments with their feet (raglayim) during laundering, just as they would tread grapes with their feet. It was for this reason that the place was called Ein Rogel.
Jerusalem, Mei Neftoach, and the Strip of Yehudah
וְעָלָה הַגְּבוּל גֵּי בֶן־הִנֹּם אֶל־כֶּתֶף הַיְבוּסִי מִנֶּגֶב הִיא יְרוּשָׁלָ͏ִם וְעָלָה הַגְּבוּל אֶל־רֹאשׁ הָהָר אֲשֶׁר עַל־פְּנֵי גֵי־הִנֹּם יָמָּה אֲשֶׁר בִּקְצֵה עֵמֶק־רְפָאִים צָפוֹנָה׃ - And the border went up the Valley of Ben Hinnom to the side of the Yevusi from the south (that is Jerusalem), and the border went up to the top of the mountain that faces the Valley of Hinnom westward, which is at the northern edge of the Valley of Rephaim.
The Malbim explains: this ascent continues until the spring of the waters of Neftoach, and from there the border begins to descend. This is similar to what Chazal said, that they initially wished to build the Beis HaMikdash at Ein Eitam because it was a higher location, but ultimately they said: since it is stated, "and He dwells between his shoulders," and the most handsome part of an ox is between its shoulders - which is a slightly lower place - they therefore built the Beis HaMikdash there. Whereas the spring of the waters of Neftoach flowed down from above Ein Eitam, which is higher up. And regarding what is stated, "the shoulder of the Jebusite to the south, which is Jerusalem" - the Jebusite refers to the site of Jerusalem, as Yevus was its original name.
וְתָאַר הַגְּבוּל מֵרֹאשׁ הָהָר אֶל־מַעְיַן מֵי נֶפְתּוֹחַ וְיָצָא אֶל־עָרֵי הַר־עֶפְרוֹן וְתָאַר הַגְּבוּל בַּעֲלָה הִיא קִרְיַת יְעָרִים׃ - "And the border curved from the top of the mountain to the spring of the waters of Neftoach, and went out to the cities of Mount Ephron; and the border curved to Baalah, which is Kiryat Yearim."
We have already mentioned that wherever it says "the border curved" (ve-ta'ar ha-gevul), it means the boundary encompasses an area from three directions. Here it forms a rounded curve and takes a circular strip from the portion of Binyamin into the portion of Yehudah, which is why it says "and the border curved." This is what Chazal taught: a strip extended from the portion of Yehudah and entered the portion of Binyamin, upon which the Altar was built; and over this Binyamin the Righteous grieved and yearned for it all day long. The border "curved" and went out like a semicircle, annexing the site of the Altar to the portion of Yehudah, as it were at the expense of Binyamin's portion. The Malbim adds: regarding Binyamin it does not say "and the border curved," because from his side the line was shaped like the convex bulge of the circle rather than its concave hollow, and therefore it did not use the phrasing "and it curved" there.
וְנָסַב הַגְּבוּל מִבַּעֲלָה יָמָּה אֶל־הַר שֵׂעִיר וְעָבַר אֶל־כֶּתֶף הַר־יְעָרִים מִצָּפוֹנָה הִיא כְסָלוֹן וְיָרַד בֵּית־שֶׁמֶשׁ וְעָבַר תִּמְנָה׃ - "And the border turned westward from Baalah to Mount Seir, and passed along to the shoulder of Mount Yearim on the north, which is Chesalon, and went down to Beit Shemesh, and passed on to Timnah."
Here the text returns to the initial reckoning, from east to west. The border went to the shoulder of Mount Yearim to its north, meaning the boundary line passed to the north of Mount Yearim, so that Mount Yearim itself was within the territory of Yehudah, inside the boundary line.
וְיָצָא הַגְּבוּל אֶל־כֶּתֶף עֶקְרוֹן צָפוֹנָה וְתָאַר הַגְּבוּל שִׁכְּרוֹנָה וְעָבַר הַר־הַבַּעֲלָה וְיָצָא יַבְנְאֵל וְהָיוּ תֹּצְאוֹת הַגְּבוּל יָמָּה׃ - "And the border went out to the shoulder of Ekron northward; and the border curved to Shikkeron, and passed along to Mount Baalah, and went out to Yavne'el; and the terminus of the border was at the sea."
וּגְבוּל יָם הַיָּמָּה הַגָּדוֹל וּגְבוּל זֶה גְּבוּל בְּנֵי־יְהוּדָה סָבִיב לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם׃ - "And the western border was the Great Sea and its coast. This is the border of the children of Yehudah round about, according to their families."
The Inheritance of Calev: "El Pi Hashem"
וּלְכָלֵב בֶּן־יְפֻנֶּה נָתַן חֵלֶק בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יְהוּדָה אֶל־פִּי יְהֹוָה לִיהוֹשֻׁעַ אֶת־קִרְיַת אַרְבַּע אֲבִי הָעֲנָק הִיא חֶבְרוֹן׃ - "And unto Calev the son of Yefuneh he gave a portion among the children of Yehudah, according to the word of Hashem to Yehoshua: Kiryat Arba, the father of Anak, which is Chevron."
The Malbim asks: everywhere else it says "al pi Hashem" (by the word of Hashem), so why does it say here "el pi Hashem"? He answers that there are only two other places where it says "el pi Hashem": regarding the portion of the daughters of Tzelafchad (below, chapter 17), and in the cities of the Levites (chapter 21). What they all have in common is that in these three cases there was already a prior command given through Moshe Rabbeinu, and it was not an entirely new command. When a command is new, it says "al pi Hashem" - in accordance with what Hashem has commanded now; but "el pi Hashem" indicates something that had already been spoken previously.
Furthermore, we learn of an additional miracle here: since Chevron was given to Calev, Heaven ensured that he would not reside in a place far from his tribe, but rather that his tribe would be right next to him. For he could have received territory, for instance, in the north of the Land; yet Heaven orchestrated that the land he received would be adjacent to his tribe so that he would not have to be disconnected from it.
וַיֹּרֶשׁ מִשָּׁם כָּלֵב אֶת־שְׁלוֹשָׁה בְּנֵי הָעֲנָק אֶת־שֵׁשַׁי וְאֶת־אֲחִימַן וְאֶת־תַּלְמַי יְלִידֵי הָעֲנָק׃ - "And Calev drove out from there the three sons of Anak: Sheshai, and Achiman, and Talmai, the children of Anak."
Rashi explains that this occurred after the death of Yehoshua, for Chevron was not captured during Yehoshua's lifetime, as explained in Sefer Shoftim. Why then is this mentioned here? Because here the verse enumerates all the places they conquered, and therefore it also mentions what they would conquer in the future. But the Malbim, as is his way, explains differently: this took place during Yehoshua's lifetime. And as for what appears in Sefer Shoftim to have occurred after his death, we have already explained that there is a difference between conquering the city itself and conquering the open lands around the city, and there the Malbim elaborates on the matter at greater length.
Devir Is Kiryat Sefer
וַיַּעַל מִשָּׁם אֶל־יֹשְׁבֵי דְּבִר וְשֵׁם־דְּבִר לְפָנִים קִרְיַת־סֵפֶר׃ - "And he went up from there against the inhabitants of Devir; and the name of Devir formerly was Kiryat Sefer."
Calev did not want to leave non-Jews in his vicinity, so that they would not harass them later on, and therefore he went up from there against the inhabitants of Devir. Chazal note that in the Persian language a book is called devir. The plain meaning of the verse implies that Kiryat Sefer was its ancient name and Devir was its contemporary name. Some explain why it was called Kiryat Sefer: because its air was spiritual and all of its inhabitants were literate and scholarly. Furthermore, they said that the kings would gather there for consultations, and they would record their words in a book (sefer); therefore it was called Kiryat Sefer.
וַיֹּאמֶר כָּלֵב אֲשֶׁר־יַכֶּה אֶת־קִרְיַת־סֵפֶר וּלְכָדָהּ וְנָתַתִּי לוֹ אֶת־עַכְסָה בִתִּי לְאִשָּׁה׃ - "And Calev said: Whoever strikes Kiryat Sefer and captures it, to him I will give Achsah my daughter as a wife."
Chazal say that Achsah was exceedingly beautiful, and why was she named Achsah? Because anyone who saw her would become angry (ko'es) with his own wife, wondering why she was not as beautiful as her. Whoever can understand what reason there is to be angry, let him understand; but when a person is angry, do not ask him for reasons, he is simply angry.
Chazal also taught that in that generation, three thousand halachot were forgotten during the days of mourning for Moshe, and some say three hundred. Initially, the people came to challenge Yehoshua, saying to him: "In Moshe's time nothing was forgotten, yet in your time halachot have been forgotten!" Yehoshua asked the Holy One, blessed be He, to reveal those halachot to him, but was answered: "It is not in Heaven; halachot are not received through prophecy." He said before Him: "What shall I do?" He said to him: "Go and occupy them in battle." Once he occupied them in war, they no longer had the peace of mind to press claims against Yehoshua for what had been forgotten. Yet the halachot themselves remained forgotten and had to be restored. And Chazal taught that Calev said: "Whoever restores those halachot will merit my daughter." And the one who restored them, as we will soon see, was Otniel ben Kenaz.
And why did Yehoshua himself not restore them through his sharp analysis (pilpul)? Because there was a claim against Yehoshua that he had exhibited a trace of pride. Moshe had said to him: "I am taking leave of you; if you have any questions, ask." Yehoshua replied to him: "Did I ever miss a single day from the Beit Midrash? Everything you taught, I know it all." There was a slight trace of pride in this, and therefore he was punished by having those halachot forgotten; consequently, their restoration could not come through him, but through another. Another explanation: Yehoshua was preoccupied with the wars and was not free to delve into Torah like Otniel ben Kenaz. A third explanation: Yehoshua was a prophet, and halachot cannot be derived through prophecy; had he told them the halachot, they would have said to him, "You surely received this through prophecy," and they would not have accepted them from him, for "it is not in Heaven." Therefore, it was necessary for Otniel ben Kenaz to come and restore them through his pilpul. And pilpul means that we have methods to reconstruct the Torah when it is forgotten - the thirteen hermeneutical principles by which the Torah is expounded, and the thirty-two principles of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, through which, if something from the Torah is forgotten, one goes and derives it from the sources through analytical reasoning, and in this manner all the forgotten halachot can be restored.
The Explanation of the Arvei Nachal: The Inward Essence of a Place Is Its Portion in the Torah
The author of the Arvei Nachal raises several questions here, and through them builds a magnificent thesis. First: Why was it that everywhere else they went was not difficult to conquer, yet specifically here, in Devir, it was so difficult for them that Calev had to promise his daughter to whoever succeeded - especially given that all their conquests were supernatural? Second: "And the name of Devir formerly was Kiryat Sefer" - what practical difference does it make what it was called formerly? Why is that important to us? Third: "Whoever strikes Kiryat Sefer" - it should have said "Whoever strikes Devir," for its present name was Devir! Fourth: "Strikes" and "captures" - why this double expression, and why was one of them not sufficient? And fifth: What prompted Chazal to depart from the simple meaning of the verse and expound that Kiryat Sefer refers to the three hundred or three thousand halachot that were forgotten during the days of mourning for Moshe and that Otniel restored through his pilpul? After all, according to the plain meaning, there is a war here, and whoever conquers the city will receive Calev's daughter! Where did Chazal see this matter hinted at in the verse?
He explains: The entire conquest of the Land by Israel was supernatural, because the Torah is the blueprint of the world, its design. Eretz Yisrael is connected directly to the Torah, and every region of Eretz Yisrael draws its vitality from its corresponding portion in the Torah. When the people of Israel accept the Torah and observe it, the entire vitality of Eretz Yisrael is in their hands; and since the whole Torah is in our hands, every part of the Land is likewise in our hands. Therefore, they had no difficulty conquering - because we have the Torah, and consequently we have the Land; the two are inextricably bound together.
He adds: It is known that the inner vitality of every entity is its name, as it is written, "and whatever the man called each living soul, that was its name." In holy books, immense significance is attributed to the concept of a name, because a name expresses essence - and particularly when speaking of the Names of Hashem, blessed be He, where each Name teaches about the manner of divine influence and the channel through which spiritual flow is attained. This is what the verse means: "And the name of Devir formerly (lefanim) was Kiryat Sefer" - lefanim does not only mean "in the past," but also "inwardly" (bipnimiyut). The name of Devir in its inner essence is Kiryat Sefer; the external aspect is Devir, but its inner vitality is Kiryat Sefer - that is, its portion in the Torah, the part that sustains it.
According to this: when those three thousand halachot were forgotten at that time, it resulted in that place in Eretz Yisrael corresponding to that forgotten portion of the Torah becoming unconquerable. For we can conquer only that which we have grasped in its corresponding part in the Torah. And since we had not yet grasped Kiryat Sefer - the portion in the book - we consequently lacked the power to attain this portion in the physical realm as well, and we could not conquer the place called Devir. Therefore, when they arrived there, their strength failed them, and they had no vitality in that place.
This is why Kalev says, "Whoever strikes Kiryat Sefer," and not "Devir": he was referring not to its past name, but to its inner essence. What was needed now was to grasp its inner dimension, the portion of Torah corresponding to this place - that is, to restore the halachot through deep analytical reasoning (pilpul). This resolves the apparent redundancy: "Whoever strikes Kiryat Sefer" - that he restore the halachot; "and captures it" - then he will naturally conquer the city easily and in an instant, for once the place's spiritual counterpart in the Torah is attained, it is easy to conquer it in the physical realm. And this is why it says, "And Otni'el captured it": Chazal teach that he restored the halachot through his pilpul, and then captured that district - a truly exquisite explanation.
Otni'el ben Kenaz, Kalev's Brother
וַיִּלְכְּדָהּ עׇתְנִיאֵל בֶּן־קְנַז אֲחִי כָלֵב וַיִּתֶּן־לוֹ אֶת־עַכְסָה בִתּוֹ לְאִשָּׁה׃ - And Otni'el the son of Kenaz, the brother of Kalev, captured it; and he gave him Achsah his daughter as a wife.
There appears to be an apparent paradox here: Kalev is the son of Yefuneh, so how could he have a brother named Otni'el the son of Kenaz? It should have been Otni'el ben Yefuneh, or Kalev ben Kenaz! The simple answer, as Chazal often explain such questions, is that he was his maternal brother. They were brothers through their mother, not through their father - that is, from two different fathers. The same woman had been married to Kenaz and bore Otni'el, and later married Yefuneh and bore Kalev.
However, the Radak suggests another possibility: he was his brother from both his father and his mother, and their father had two names - both Yefuneh and Kenaz - for it is common in Scripture for one person to have two names. That same person was called both Kenaz and Yefuneh; hence Otni'el is called the son of Kenaz while Kalev is called the son of Yefuneh, but in truth Kenaz and Yefuneh were one and the same person. The Radak then offers yet another explanation, which he considers the most correct: Kenaz was the name of the head of the family, and the family members traced their lineage back to him, so whether it says "the Kenizzite" or "son of Kenaz," it is all the same. That is to say, the father's personal name was Yefuneh, but the family clan was Kenaz or the Kenizzite. The necessity for this explanation is that it is forced to say a person would be identified through his mother's husband, as this was not their custom; rather, brothers were always traced patrilineally.
Achsah Requests a Field
וַיְהִי בְּבוֹאָהּ וַתְּסִיתֵהוּ לִשְׁאוֹל מֵאֵת־אָבִיהָ שָׂדֶה וַתִּצְנַח מֵעַל הַחֲמוֹר וַיֹּאמֶר־לָהּ כָּלֵב מַה־לָּךְ׃ - And it came to pass, as she came, that she persuaded him to ask of her father a field; and she alighted from the donkey, and Kalev said to her, "What is troubling you?"
Achsah asks that her father give her a field, and this fits beautifully with everything we have said. She is saying to him: You gave me a Torah scholar who is in the category of "You gave me a south land (eretz haNegev)" - dry and parched (menugav), having no means of livelihood. If he is such an outstanding scholar of pilpul, whose sole occupation and interest is the holy Torah with no regard for material pursuits, then I am in need of a source of sustenance. Therefore, she alighted from the donkey, evidently to draw her father's attention, so that he would grant her the field and provide them with a livelihood.
The holy Alshich explains: In light of this, one can understand why Otni'el is called here "the brother of Kalev." Seemingly, Kalev was just his brother, while Otni'el was the exalted scholar devoted to Torah; why should he be defined by his brother? Rather, it is like Chazal's statement regarding "Shimon, the brother of Azaryah": Azaryah supported Shimon so that he could engage in Torah study; he was the benefactor and supporter, and therefore Shimon was named after him, for one who upholds the Torah is considered primary, as it says, "In the shadow of wisdom is the shadow of money." Since Kalev gave Otni'el a field here to serve as his livelihood, Kalev assumed the role of Azaryah. Consequently, Otni'el is called "the brother of Kalev" - the brother of his benefactor - giving honor to the one who supports and sustains the Torah scholar.
וַתֹּאמֶר תְּנָה־לִּי בְרָכָה כִּי אֶרֶץ הַנֶּגֶב נְתַתָּנִי וְנָתַתָּה לִי גֻּלֹּת מָיִם וַיִּתֶּן־לָהּ אֵת גֻּלֹּת עִלִּיּוֹת וְאֵת גֻּלֹּת תַּחְתִּיּוֹת׃ - And she said, "Give me a blessing; for you have given me a dry land, so give me springs of water." And he gave her the upper springs and the lower springs.
She requested: You gave me a field, but the field is drained of water. This is "You have given me a dry land (eretz haNegev)" - a dry, parched place. As the Radak notes, the Targum renders dried-up waters as "the waters were parched (negivu maya)"; a dry place is called menugav. Therefore she asks for "gulot mayim" - a place containing springs with which she can irrigate the field. And "give me a blessing (berachah)" - this can be interpreted as a literal blessing, an additional bounty, which refers to those springs of water; or it can be understood as related to the word bereichah (pool), meaning reservoirs and pools of water from which the field could be irrigated. Rashi explains "berachah" as meaning a livelihood.
Chazal expound: When she said, "You have given me a dry land (eretz hanegev)" - you have given me a home that is drained (menugav) of all good. And why? "Give me also springs of water" - you have given me a man whose sole preoccupation is with water, and water refers to nothing other than Torah; he is entirely devoted to Torah, and consequently I have no economic livelihood. This was not like our days, where a kollel avreich still has some income, his wife works, and the like; in their time a wife did not work outside the home, nor did a Torah scholar receive any stipend, and thus there was no possibility of livelihood. It turns out that you have given me a man drained of all material well-being. And to this, "And he gave her the upper springs and the lower springs" - Chazal say, it was as if he said to her: Shall one from Whom the upper and lower beings seek sustenance fail to provide for him? It is guaranteed that the Holy One, Blessed be He, will assist him - "nor have I seen the righteous forsaken, or his seed begging for bread" - and you have no reason to worry, for the Holy One, Blessed be He, will provide his livelihood properly. According to the plain meaning of the text: in that location there were upper springs and lower springs - just as we find at Ein Eitam, where the spring flows from an elevated place, while in other places springs flow from a low place - and he gave her both.
The Cities of the Negev and the Count of Twenty-Nine
זֹאת נַחֲלַת מַטֵּה בְנֵי־יְהוּדָה לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם׃ - This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Yehudah according to their families.
וַיִּהְיוּ הֶעָרִים מִקְצֵה לְמַטֵּה בְנֵי־יְהוּדָה אֶל־גְּבוּל אֱדוֹם בַּנֶּגְבָּה קַבְצְאֵל וְעֵדֶר וְיָגוּר׃ - And the cities at the extremity of the tribe of the children of Yehudah toward the border of Edom in the south were Kavtze'el, and Eder, and Yagur.
"At the extremity of the tribe of the children of Yehudah" - at the border of the tribe of the children of Yehudah. Chazal note: Yehoshua listed only the towns situated along the borders, meaning he marked out the boundaries of all those tribes. From here, the text continues listing: Kinah, Dimonah, and Adadah; Kedesh, Chatzor, and Yitnan; Zif, Telem, and Be'alot; Chatzor Chadattah, and Keriot Chetzron (which is Chatzor); Amam, Shema, and Moladah; Chatzar Gaddah, Cheshmon, and Beit Palet; Chatzar Shu'al, Be'er Sheva, and Bizyoteyah; Ba'alah, Iyim, and Etzem; Eltolad, Kesil, and Chormah; Tziklag, Madmannah, and Sansannah; Leva'ot, Shilchim, Ayin, and Rimmon.
וּלְבָאוֹת וְשִׁלְחִים וְעַיִן וְרִמּוֹן כׇּל־עָרִים עֶשְׂרִים וָתֵשַׁע וְחַצְרֵיהֶן׃ - And Leva'ot, and Shilchim, and Ayin, and Rimmon; all the cities are twenty-nine, with their villages.
Here Chazal ask: You say twenty-nine, yet when you enumerate them individually, you find thirty-eight! There are nine extra cities here. The commentators explain that those nine were taken by the children of Shimon from Yehudah's portion, meaning they did not truly belong to Yehudah, but to Shimon; and the fact that they are enumerated here is not part of his permanent share, for his own portion consisted of only twenty-nine. Proof of this is that these very cities are listed in the inheritance of the children of Shimon: Be'er Sheva, Moladah, Chatzar Shu'al, Etzem, Eltolad, Chormah, Tziklag, Ayin, and Rimmon.
The Malbim finds difficulty with this explanation, and therefore explains that several cities listed here are actually one. Kinah, Dimonah, and Adadah are a single city: the main city is called Kinah, and its surrounding open lands are Dimonah and Adadah. Likewise, Tziklag, Madmannah, and Sansannah are a single city: the main one is Tziklag, and the outskirts are Madmannah and Sansannah. Furthermore, "and Chatzor Chadattah, and Keriot Chetzron (which is Chatzor)" does not add to the count, for all of these are descriptions of Chatzor: Chatzor Chadattah is the new Chatzor, and Keriot Chetzron is part of Chatzor. Similarly, Leva'ot and Shilchim, which the commentators counted as two, are actually one, as he proves later from the inheritance of the children of Shimon, where Leva'ot and Sharuchen are mentioned and are identical. Thus, when one identifies several names as the designations of a single city and its surrounding lands, or a city and its descriptive epithets, the total count reaches exactly twenty-nine and no more.
Kinah, Dimonah, and Adadah: The Derashah of the Gemara in Gittin
Based on this, the Malbim explains, one can understand the words of the Gemara in Gittin (page 7a): Rav Huna said to Rav Ashi, "What is meant by that which is written: 'Kinah, and Dimonah, and Adadah'?" He said to him, "The verse is merely enumerating places in Eretz Yisrael." He replied, "Do I not know that it is enumerating places in Eretz Yisrael? Rather, Rav Geviha of Bei Argaza stated an explanation for it: Whoever bears resentment (kinah) against his fellow and remains silent (domem), He Who dwells for all eternity (Shochen Adei Ad) exacts justice for him." He said to him, "Then what about 'Tziklag, and Madmannah, and Sansannah'?" He replied, "If Rav Geviha of Bei Argaza were here, he would state an explanation for it." Rav Acha of Bei Choza'ah explained: "Whoever has an outcry over lack of sustenance (tza'akat legimah) against his fellow and remains silent (domem), He Who dwells in the bush (Shochen baSeneh) exacts justice for him."
"And if you plow with my heifer, you will find their riddle," says the Malbim. On the surface, this Gemara is perplexing: there are twenty-nine cities listed here - or thirty-eight if counted individually - so why did the Gemara expound homiletically on specifically these names and not the rest? It is because the Sages knew that Kinah, Dimonah, and Adadah are a single city along with its open districts, its suburbs and quarters. Therefore they wondered: Why were the suburbs counted specifically here, whereas with the other cities, Scripture did not enumerate the suburbs? To this he replied, "It is enumerating places in Eretz Yisrael" - meaning, it gives importance even to small hamlets. The other answered: Do I not know that? Yet it still requires explanation why specifically here. To this Rav Geviha provided the reason: because in that generation, the name of the city Kinah was commonly uttered together with its districts as a mnemonic device, as it was their practice to attach moral teachings to familiar place-names. Therefore, the prophet mentioned Kinah the way they were accustomed to mention it together with its districts, so that people would remember the ethical lesson: Kinah - one who has resentment (kinah) against his fellow; Dimonah - and remains silent (domem); Adadah - He Who dwells for all eternity (Shochen Adei Ad) exacts justice for him. And when he challenged him, "Then what about Tziklag, Madmannah, and Sansannah?" - where Scripture also lists a city and its suburbs - he answered that there too, they had an ethical teaching associated with them: Tziklag - an outcry over sustenance (tza'akat legimah); Madmannah - and remains silent (domem); Sansannah - He Who dwells in the bush (Shochen baSeneh) exacts justice for him. Thus, precisely regarding these two cases did the Gemara feel compelled to expound, because these were not distinct cities, but rather open lands and suburbs surrounding the main city.
The Cities of the Shephelah
וְשַׁעֲרַיִם וַעֲדִיתַיִם וְהַגְּדֵרָה וּגְדֵרֹתָיִם עָרִים אַרְבַּע־עֶשְׂרֵה וְחַצְרֵיהֶן׃ - "Shaaraim, Adithaim, Gederah, and Gederothaim; fourteen cities with their villages."
Preceding this were: in the Shephelah, Eshtaol, Zorah, and Ashnah; Zanoah, En-gannim, Tappuah, and Enam; Jarmuth, Adullam, Socoh, and Azekah. Here too Rashi notes: if you count them, you will find fifteen! Rashi resolves this by explaining that Tappuah and Enam are actually one place - Tappuah and its ayin, meaning its spring, since ayin means a spring of water, and this is the "En-tappuah" mentioned elsewhere. Similarly, Rosh HaAyin means the head of the spring, and "And I came this day to the spring (ha'ayin)" refers to the spring. According to this, "En-gannim" is likewise the spring of the city of Gannim. Radak, on the other hand, resolves it differently: Gederah and Gederothaim are one city, disagreeing with Rashi regarding Tappuah and Enam, and thus we arrive at the total of fourteen cities and their villages.
וּגְדֵרוֹת בֵּית־דָּגוֹן וְנַעֲמָה וּמַקֵּדָה עָרִים שֵׁשׁ־עֶשְׂרֵה וְחַצְרֵיהֶן׃ - "Gederoth, Beth-dagon, Naamah, and Makkedah; sixteen cities with their villages."
Prior to this, the text listed: Zenan, Hadashah, and Migdal-gad; Dilan, Mizpeh, and Joktheel; Lachish, Bozkath, and Eglon; and Cabbon, Lahmas, and Kithlish. Regarding "Gederoth, Beth-dagon," Metzudat David explains that these are two separate towns: one called Gederoth, and the other Beth-dagon.
The Philistine Cities and the Great Sea
אַשְׁדּוֹד בְּנוֹתֶיהָ וַחֲצֵרֶיהָ עַזָּה בְּנוֹתֶיהָ וַחֲצֵרֶיהָ עַד־נַחַל מִצְרָיִם וְהַיָּם הַגָּדוֹל וּגְבוּל׃ - "Ashdod, its towns and its villages; Gaza, its towns and its villages; unto the Brook of Egypt, and the Great Sea and its border."
Preceding this: Libnah, Ether, and Ashan; Iphtah, Ashnah, and Nezib; Keilah, Achzib, and Mareshah - nine cities with their villages; Ekron, with its towns and its villages; from Ekron westward, all that were near Ashdod, with their villages. Wherever "its villages" (chatzeireha) is mentioned, it refers to the open courtyards and plots of land surrounding it, while "its daughters" (benoteha) are the smaller satellite villages nearby. As we have previously noted, when scripture says "let the daughters of Judah rejoice," it does not mean the literal daughters of Judah, but rather the Levite cities within the territory of Judah, which are called the daughters of Judah. The Brook of Egypt was in the south of Judah, and the Great Sea formed the western border of the Land of Israel; and regarding "and its border" (ugevul) - Metzudat David explains that even the coastal border, the islands in the sea, were likewise part of the territory of Judah.
The Cities of the Hill Country
וְחֻמְטָה וְקִרְיַת אַרְבַּע הִיא חֶבְרוֹן וְצִיעֹר עָרִים תֵּשַׁע וְחַצְרֵיהֶן׃ - "Humtah, and Kiriath-arba, which is Hebron, and Zior; nine cities with their villages."
Preceding these: and in the hill country: Shamir, Jattir, and Socoh; Dannah, and Kiriath-sannah, which is Debir; Anab, Eshtemoh, and Anim; Goshen, Holon, and Giloh - eleven cities with their villages; Arab, Dumah, and Eshan; Janum, Beth-tappuah, and Aphekah.
מָעוֹן כַּרְמֶל וָזִיף וְיוּטָּה׃ - "Maon, Carmel, and Ziph, and Juttah."
Notice: there is a Juttah (Yutta) in the Land of Israel too, not only Utah in the United States! And it is not our fault; this is how we inherited the names from the Canaanites. Incidentally, many of the names of modern settlements were chosen out of a desire to align with history and archaeology. For instance, the founders of Kiryat Ye'arim originally named it Telz-Stone, but since archaeologists claimed that this was the historical site of Kiryat Ye'arim, the name Kiryat Ye'arim was officially established. The same applies to Gedera and similar places. No one would place Beersheba in the north, because it is known to have been in the south; archaeologists have markers that may not be completely exact, but regarding the general region they are correct. In this manner, efforts are made to call places by their original names, and many locations indeed match.
הַקַּיִן גִּבְעָה וְתִמְנָה עָרִים עֶשֶׂר וְחַצְרֵיהֶן׃ - Hakayin, Givah, and Timnah: ten cities and their villages.
And further: Yizreel, Yokdeam, and Zanoach; Chalchul, Beit Tzur, and Gedor; and Maarat, Beit Anot, and Eltekon - six cities and their villages; Kiryat Baal, which is Kiryat Yearim, and Rabbah - two cities and their villages; in the wilderness: Beit HaAravah, Middin, and Sechachah; and Nivshan, Ir HaMelach, and Ein Gedi - six cities and their villages.
The Yevusi in Yerushalayim: The Oath of Avraham
וְאֶת־הַיְבוּסִי יוֹשְׁבֵי יְרוּשָׁלַ͏ִם לֹא־יָכְלוּ בְנֵי־יְהוּדָה לְהוֹרִישָׁם וַיֵּשֶׁב הַיְבוּסִי אֶת־בְּנֵי יְהוּדָה בִּירוּשָׁלַ͏ִם עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה׃ - And as for the Yevusi, the inhabitants of Yerushalayim, the children of Yehudah could not drive them out; and the Yevusi dwelt with the children of Yehudah in Yerushalayim to this day.
The Radak notes: It is written (ketiv) "yuchlu" [they will be able] and read (keri) "yachlu" [they were able]. The keri is in the past tense - "they were not able to dispossess them"; while the ketiv is in the future tense - "they will not be able," since in practice they were unable to dispossess them until the days of David, and only David finally drove them out.
Our Sages, however, say: They were capable, but they were not permitted to do so because of the oath that Avraham had sworn to Avimelech. And the Radak emphasizes that this Yevusi was not the Yevusi of the seven nations of Canaan, and one should not confuse them. Cham had four sons: Cush, Mitzrayim, Put, and Canaan. And Canaan fathered Tzidon his firstborn, and Chet, and the Yevusi, and the Emori, and the Girgashi. The Yevusi thus appears as the son of Canaan, son of Cham, but that is not who is referred to here. Rather, explains the Radak, there was an individual whose name was Yevus, and he was from the Pelishtim (Philistines). The Pelishtim were also descendants of Cham, but not through Canaan; rather, through Mitzrayim, as it is written: "And Mitzrayim fathered Ludim, and Anamim, and Lehavim, and Naftuchim, and Patrusim, and Casluchim - from whence came the Pelishtim - and Caphtorim."
And why did we suffer so much from the Pelishtim throughout history, and even from the modern "Palestinians"? Because they were mamzerim (of illicit birth). Rashi writes on "and Patrusim, and Casluchim, from whence came the Pelishtim": It cannot be known from which of them, from Patrusim or from Casluchim, because there was promiscuous mixing there and they would exchange wives, and from them emerged the Pelishtim - mamzerim. And it is not for nothing that a sharp-witted person is colloquially referred to as a "mamzer." It is cited in holy books that a mamzer is conceived through immense lust, for "stolen waters are sweet," and consequently this produces sharp-witted offspring. Therefore, when people want to describe someone as exceptionally sharp, they say, "he is a mamzer."
It turns out, then, that the matter of the Pelishtim is not related to the Yevusi descended from Canaan. The Yevusi mentioned here descended from Avimelech and belonged to the Pelishtim; the place was named Yevus after him, and the members of the family residing in Yerushalayim were called Yevusi after their lineage to Yevus. Similarly, Aravnah the Yevusi, who was the king of the place, traced his descent to the Pelishtim, not to the Yevusi descended from Canaan. And the fortress of that site was Tziyon, which is the central citadel in Yerushalayim.
And why did they not conquer it? A similar question was already raised regarding Devir, since they had conquered all the other places. Here, too, there was a specific reason: the oath. Avraham had sworn to Avimelech, "that you will not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor with my grandson" - an oath extending to son and grandson - and our Sages say that until the time of David, it was not yet permitted to conquer the place. The limitation was not military or technical, but stemmed from the oath.
And how did they bar their entry? By means of copper idols that the Pelishtim erected there - the "blind and the lame" - upon which the matter of the oath was inscribed. And why specifically blind and lame figures? Because they sought thereby to mock our Forefathers: one in the likeness of Yitzchak, who was blind, and one in the likeness of Yaakov, who was lame, as it says, "and he was limping on his hip."
In any event, coarse though they were, this prevented us from conquering it, and this is what is meant by the verse: "You shall not come in here, unless you remove the blind and the lame." Later on, the Malbim will elaborate on the entire matter of the conquest and how it was accomplished, and what was unique about those blind and lame figures, which were fashioned with a special mechanism that prevented the conquest beyond the issue of the oath. Ultimately, King David removed the blind and the lame, conquered that fortress, and purchased the city of the Yevusi with a deed of gold as an everlasting possession, as it is written that David weighed out gold shekels to Aravnah for the site.
According to the peshat, the Radak explains: the fortress was strong and they lacked the power to conquer it, and what we have discussed until now is the derashah of Chazal. Even according to the peshat, however, this was brought about by Hashem so that King David would be the one to conquer it and the place would be named after him, as he was the head of the kingdom of Israel. This is why we call it the "City of David," for David conquered it and took possession of it. It was well known that in those times, any place that was conquered was named after its conqueror, as we find with Yoav, who summoned David and said to him: Come and conquer it yourself, so that the city will be named after you. Here too, Heaven did not allow them to conquer it at that time, so that the conqueror would be David and the place would be called by his name.
As for the phrase "unto this day," the Radak explains that Yehoshua wrote it in his book, meaning that up until the time of Yehoshua they had not conquered it; indeed, later on, when David came and reigned, the place was conquered. In Sefer Shoftim, chapter 1 (verse 8, and the printing there citing verse 9 is an error), the Malbim explains the apparent contradiction between what is written here and what is written there and properly resolves the matter, and with Hashem's help, we will study this in Sefer Shoftim.
In summary:
Chapter 15 delineates the allotted territory of the tribe of Yehudah: its southern, eastern, northern, and western borders, along with the list of its cities categorized by district - the Negev, the Shephelah, the Mountain, and the Wilderness. From the Malbim, we learned the precise nuances of the boundary terms (ve-yatza, ve-nasav, ve-ta'ar, totza'ot), the deeper meaning of "according to the commandment of Hashem" pointing to an earlier directive given through Moshe, and the strip of land that extended from Yehudah's portion into Binyamin's portion upon which the Altar was built. At the heart of the chapter stand Calev and Otniel: the teaching of the Arvei Nachal explains that Devir was not conquered because its inner essence - "Kiryat Sefer," its share in Torah - had been forgotten, and only after Otniel restored the halachot through his keen analysis could it be captured; and Achsah's request teaches the profound merit of one who supports Torah scholars. The chapter concludes with the Yevusi in Yerushalayim, who could not be dispossessed because of Avraham's oath to Avimelech, until King David arrived, removed the blind and the lame, purchased the site at full value, and Yerushalayim was called the City of David.