Numbers 27:4

Zelophehad had not joined Korah’s rebellion (16:1–50).If he had taken part in that rebellion, he may have lost his property rights because of his sin (see 15:30; compare 1 Kings 21:7–16).

Israelite society was patriarchal and patrilineal. This means that family ancestry and property were passed down through the male line. Normally, sons inherited their father’s land.

Zelophehad had no sons. His daughters wanted their father’s land to remain in their family. They asked for property rights equal to those given to sons. Their request was reasonable and based on a desire to preserve their family’s inheritance.

Zelophehad did not have any sons, which allowed for changes to the inheritance laws. They would later refine these laws more (compare 36:1–13).

Give unto us a possession among the brethren of our father--Those young women perceived that the males only in families had been registered in the census. Because there were none in their household, their family was omitted. So they made known their grievance to Moses, and the authorities conjoined with him in administering justice. The case was important; and as the peculiarity of daughters being the sole members of a family would be no infrequent or uncommon occurrence, the law of inheritance, under divine authority, was extended not only to meet all similar cases, but other cases also--such as when there were no children left by the proprietor, and no brothers to succeed him. A distribution of the promised land was about to be made; and it is interesting to know the legal provision made in these comparatively rare cases for preserving a patrimony from being alienated to another tribe. (See on Num 36:5).

Mention is made of the case of these daughters of Zelophehad in the chapter before, v. 33. It should seem, by the particular notice taken of it, that it was a singular case, and that the like did not at this time occur in all Israel, that the head of a family had no sons, but daughters only. Their case is again debated (Num 36:1-13) upon another article of it; and, according to the judgments given in their case, we find them put in possession, Jos 17:3, Jos 17:4. One would suppose that their personal character was such as added weight to their case, and caused it to be so often taken notice of.
Here is, I. Their case stated by themselves, and their petition upon it presented to the highest court of judicature, which consisted of Moses as king, the princes as lords, and the congregation, or elders of the people who were chose their representatives, as the commons, Num 27:2. This august assembly sat near the door of the tabernacle, that in difficult cases they might consult the oracle. To them these young ladies made their application; for it is the duty of magistrates to defend the fatherless, Psa 82:3. We find not that the had any advocate to speak for them, but they managed their own cause ingeniously enough, which they could do the better because it was plain and honest, and spoke for itself. Now observe,
1. What it is they petition for: That they might have a possession in the land of Canaan, among the brethren of their father, Num 27:4. What God had said to Moses (Num 26:53) he had faithfully made known to the people, that the land of Canaan was to be divided among those that were now numbered; these daughters knew that they were not numbered, and therefore by this rule must expect no inheritance, and the family of their father must be looked upon as extinct, and written childless, though he had all these daughters: this they thought hard, and therefore prayed to be admitted heirs to their father, and to have an inheritance in his right. If they had had a brother, they would not have applied to Moses (as one did to Christ, Luk 12:13) for an order to inherit with him. But, having no brother, they beg for a possession. Herein they discovered, (1.) A strong faith in the power and promise of God concerning the giving of the land of Canaan to Israel. Though it was yet unconquered, untouched, and in the full possession of the natives, yet they petition for their share in it as if it were all their own already. See Psa 60:6, Psa 60:7, God has spoken in his holiness, and the Gilead is mine, Manasseh is mane. (2.) An earnest desire of a place and name in the land of promise, which was a type of heaven; and if they had, as some think, an eye to that, and by this claim laid hold on eternal life, they were five wise virgins indeed; and their example should quicken us with all possible diligence to make sure our title to the heavenly inheritance, in the disposal of which, by the covenant of grace, no difference is made between male and female, Gal 3:28. (3.) A true respect and honour for their father, whose name was dear and precious to them now that he was gone, and they were therefore solicitous that it should not be done away from among his family. There is a debt which children owe to the memory of their parents, required by the fifth commandment: Honour thy father and mother.
2. What their plea is: That their father did not die under any attainder which might be thought to have corrupted his blood and forfeited his estate, but he died in his own sin (Num 27:3), not engaged in any mutiny or rebellion against Moses, particularly not in that of Korah and his company, nor in any way concerned in the sins of others, but chargeable only with the common iniquities of mankind, for which to his own Master he was to stand or fall, but laid not himself open to any judicial process before Moses and the princes. He was never convicted of any thing that might be a bar to his children's claim. It is a comfort to parents, when they come to die, if, though they smart themselves for their own sin, yet they are not conscious to themselves of any of those iniquities which God visits upon the children.
II. Their case determined by the divine oracle. Moses did not presume to give judgment himself, because, though their pretensions seemed just and reasonable, yet his express orders were to divide the land among those that were numbered, who were the males only; he therefore brings their cause before the Lord, and waits for his decision (Num 27:5), and God himself gives the judgment upon it. He takes cognizance of the affairs, not only of nations, but of private families, and orders them in judgment, according to the counsel of his own will. 1. The petition is granted (Num 27:7): They speak right, give them a possession. Those that seek an inheritance in the land of promise shall have what they seek, and other things shall be added to them. These are claims which God will countenance and crown. 2. The point is settled for all future occasions. These daughters of Zelophehad consulted, not only their own comfort and the credit of their family, but the honour and happiness of their sex likewise; for on this particular occasion a general law was made that, in case a man had no son, his estate should go to his daughters (Num 27:8); not to the eldest, as the eldest son, but to them all in copartnership, share and share alike. Those that in such a case deprive their daughters of their right, purely to keep up the name of their family, unless a valuable consideration be allowed them, may make the entail of their lands surer than the entail of a blessing with them. Further directions are given for the disposal of inheritances, Num 27:9-11. "If a man have no issue at all, his estate shall go to his brethren; if no brethren, then to his father's brethren; and, if there be no such, then to his next kinsman." With this the rules of our law exactly agree: and though the Jewish doctors here will have it understood that if a man have no children his estate shall go to his father, if living, before his brethren, yet there is nothing of that in the law, and our common law has an express rule against it, That an estate cannot ascend lineally; so that if a person purchase lands in fee-simple, and die without issue in the life-time of his father, his father cannot be his heir. See how God makes heirs, and in his disposal we must acquiesce.

Numbers 27:1-11

1. Then came the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph: and these are the names of his daughters, Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah.

1. Accesserunt autem filiae Salphaad, filii Hepher, filii Galaad, filii Machir, filii Manasse de familiis Manasse, filii Joseph: haec vero sunt nomina filiarum ejus, Malhah, Noah, Hoglah, et Milchah, et Thirsah.

2. And they stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying,

2. Hac steterunt coram Mose et coram Eleazar sacerdote, et coram principibus atque universa congregatione ad ostium tabernaculi conventionis, dicendo:

3. Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not in the company of them that gathered themselves together against the Lord in the company of Korah; but died in his own sin, and had no sons.

3. Pater noster mortuus est in deserto, qui tamen non fuit in congregatione qum congregata fuit adversus Jehovam, in congregatione Core: quia in peccato mortuus est, et filii non fuerunt el.

4. Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he hath no son? Give unto us therefore a possession among the brethren of our father.

4. Quare tolletur nomen patris nostri de medio familiae suae, propterea quod non sit ei filius? da nobis haereditatem inter fratres patris nostri.

5. And Moses brought their cause before the Lord.

5. Retulit autem Moses causam earum coram Jehova.

6. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

6. Et respondit Jehova ad Mosen, dicendo:

7. The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father's brethren: and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them.

7. Rectum filiae Salphaad loquuntur: dando dabis eis possessionem haereditatis in medio fratrum patris sui, et transferes haereditatem patris earum ad eas.

8. And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter.

8. Ad filios autem Israel loqueris, dicendo, Quum quis mortuus fuerit, et filius non fuerit illi, tum transferetis haereditatem ejus ad filiam ipsius.

9. And if he have no daughter, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his brethren.

9. Quod sinon fuerit ei filia, tunc dabitis haereditatem ejus fratribus ipsius.

10. And if he have no brethren, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his father's brethren.

10. Si vero non fuerint ei fratres, tunc dabitis haereditatem ejus fratribus patris ipsius.

11. And if his father have no brethren, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his kinsman that is next to him of his family, and he shall possess it: and it shall be unto the children of Israel a statute of judgment; as the Lord commanded Moses.

11. Quod si non fuerint fratres patri ipsius, tunc dabitis haereditatem ejus propinquiori illi de familia ipsius, haereditatemque accipiet illam: erit autem istud filiis Israel in statutum judicii, quemadmodum praecepit Jehova Mosi.

1. Then came the daughters of Zelophehad. A narrative is here introduced respecting the daughters of Zelophehad, of the family of Machir, who demanded to be admitted to a share of its inheritance; and the decision of this question might have been difficult, unless all doubt had been removed by the sentence of God Himself. For, since in the law no name is given to women, it would seem that no account of them was to be taken in the division of the land. And, in fact, God laid down this as the general rule; but a special exception is here made, i.e., that whenever a family shall be destitute of male heirs, females should succeed, for the preservation of the name. I am aware that this is a point which is open to dispute, since there are obvious arguments both for and against it, but let the decree that God pronounced suffice for us.

Although (the daughters of Zelophehad) plead before Moses for their own private advantage, still the discussion arose from a good principle; inasmuch as they would not have been so anxious about the succession, if God's promise had not been just as much a matter of certainty to them as if they were at this moment demanding to be put in possession of it. They had not yet entered the land, nor were their enemies conquered; yet, relying on the testimony of Moses, they prosecute their suit as if the tranquil possession of their rights were to be accorded them that very day. And this must have had the effect of confirming the expectations of the whole people, when Moses consulted God as respecting a matter of importance, and pronounced by revelation that which was just and right; for the discussion, being openly moved before them all, must have given them encouragement, at least to imitate these women.

3. Our father died in the wilderness. The plea they allege is no contemptible one, i.e., that their father died after God had called His people to the immediate possession of the promised land; for, if the question had been carried back to an earlier period, it might have originated many quarrels. This restriction with respect to time, therefore, aided their cause. In the second place, they plead that their father had committed no crime whereby he might have been excepted from the general allotment of the land; for in the conspiracy of Dathan and Abiram, they include by synecdoche, in my opinion, the other sins, whose punishment affected the posterity of the criminals. His private sin is, therefore, contrasted with public ignominy; for so I interpret what they say of his having "died in his own sin." And surely it is mere childish nonsense which the Jews [199] affirm of his having been the man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath-day, or one of the number of those who were slain by the bite of the serpents; and it is unnatural, too, to refer it to the curse under which the whole human race is laid. They distinguish, then, his private sin from any public crime, which would have caused him to deserve to be disinherited, lest the condition of their father should be worse than that of any other person. At the same time, they hold fast to the principle which is dictated to us by the common feelings of religion, that death, as being the curse of God, is the wages of sin.

5. And Moses brought their cause before the Lord. It is probable either that there was a difference of opinion, or that the minds of the judges were in doubt, as respecting an obscure and uncertain point. At any rate, it was expedient that the law should be laid down by God, lest any future controversy should arise; for, if a sentence had been pronounced by human judgment on the matter before them, the obstinacy of many would not perhaps have been sufficiently set at rest. It is worth while to remark the pious modesty of Moses, who was not ashamed to confess his ignorance, until he had been instructed by the mouth of God. Although he had promulgated the law forty years before, still he was always ready to learn. Besides, there is no doubt but that God impelled him to inquire of Himself, whenever any serious matters were in question, until his doctrine was absolutely perfect. And, although God does not now deliver from heaven what is to be done, nevertheless rulers are reminded that they ought to have recourse to God in points of perplexity, in order that He may instruct them by the Spirit of wisdom; and assuredly they will not be without this, if they ask Him; since he is no less ready to listen to them, than He here shewed Himself to be to Moses.

8. And thou shalt speak to the children of Israel. This question was the occasion of the delivery of a law, which was to be a perpetual and general rule as to the right of inheritance. But, although God prefers the daughters to all other relatives, when there is no male issue, still, with this single exception of the first degree, He admits none but males to the succession, and thus preserves the usual order. And surely it would be very unjust to exclude a man's (natural) heirs on account of their sex; but when it became necessary to pass from his own children to other kindred, the prerogative of the male line began to be established. I speak of the land of Canaan, in which not only the name of Abraham but also that of the twelve tribes was to be preserved, in order that the memory (of God's blessing) [200] might be more distinct and unclouded.

Footnotes:

[199] S.M. refers to this Rabbinical gloss. R. Sal. Jarchi tells us: "R. Akiba says, that he collected the wood; but R. Simeon says that he was one of those who were contumacious." -- Edit. Breihthaupt, in loco, p. 1243, and notes.

[200] Added from Fr.

Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he hath no son.... Or be withdrawn, and his family lose their part and share on that account; this they thought was unreasonable: according to the Targum of Jonathan, to prevent the name of their father being lost, and his part in the land, their motion was, that their mother might marry their father's brother, according to the law in Deuteronomy 25:5, with which Jarchi agrees; but it does not appear that that law was as yet in being; though how otherwise the name of their father would be preserved, than by raising up seed in that way, is not easy to say; except, as some think, it was done by a son of one of those heiresses, or by the first son of everyone of them, being called after the name of their grandfather Zelophehad, or their mother's grandfather Hepher; though the Jews (t) commonly by the "name" understand no other than the "inheritance", which seems to be confirmed by what follows:

give us therefore a possession among the brethren of our fathers; a part with their uncles, or their children; by which they express their faith that the children of Israel would inherit the land, though as yet it was not conquered, nor even entered into; and might signify, as some think, their concern to have a part and portion in the heavenly inheritance the land of Canaan was typical of; and if so, as Ainsworth observes, they may be considered as five wise virgins indeed.

(t) Pesikta, T. Bab. Jebamot, fol. 49. 1. Moses Cotzensis Praecept. Affirm. 51. Apud Selden. de Succession. ad leg. Ebra. c. 14. p. 97, 98.

Be done away; as it will be, if it be not preserved by an inheritance given to us in his name and for his sake. Hence some gather that the first son of each of these heiresses was called by their father’ s name, by virtue of that law, , whereby the brother’ s first son was to bear the name of his elder brother, whose widow he married.

A possession in the land of Canaan upon the division of it, which, though not yet conquered, they concluded would certainly be so, and thereby gave glory to God by believing.