במדבר פרק יב

In his usual fashion, Abravanel asks a number of questions on Perek Yud Bet:

Abravanel proposes two ways to view the Lashon Hara of Miriam and Aharon (Abravanel assumes that Isha Kushit refers to Tzipporah):  

1. Chazal's approach: When the na'ar came and told Moshe that Eldad and Meidad were getting nivuah in the machane, Miriam was sitting with Tzipporah. Tzipporah heard this and exclaimed that she felt bad for the wives of Eldad and Meidad, for she knew that when Moshe got nivuah, he had to separate from her. Tzipporah felt bad for the wives of Eldad and Meidad who supposedly would have to do the same. The lashon hara that Miriam (and Aharon) was (were) speaking was about Moshe's relationship with Tzipporah. 

2. Ran's approach: Miriam and Aharon thought that initially, Moshe was so involved in leading the people that he did not have time to be with his wife, and for this Miriam and Aharon judged him favorably. However, now that Moshe has been given the 70 zikeinim and his load has been lightened, they assume that he has time to be with his wife. Miriam (and Aharon) was (were) talking about how had not done so.

Abravanel gives three possible reasons for which Moshe separated from his wife (1 or all 3 of these reasons are correct, according to the Abravanel):
A. Tzipporah was from Kush, and therefore she had dark skin. Moshe did not like that she had dark skin, and therefore he separated from her. 
B. As a navi, Moshe needed to be ready at all times to get nevuah. Therefore, he had to separate from his wife. 
C. In what in Moshe's nature to refrain from relations with his wife. 

Abravanel says that Miriam was punished (and Aharon was not) because she was more obscene in her discussion of Moshe and Tzipporah.

In Abravanel's usual fashion, he lays out many questions and answers on this perek and quotes the approaches of multiple mifarshim in a number of his answers. It is unclear from the text of his commentary which answer he favors- Chazal's or the Ran's. Each approach deals with a smichut haparshiyot. The midrash deals with the smichut haparshiyot between this story and the story of Eldad and Meidad, while the Ran's approach deals with the smichut haparshiyot between this story and the appointment of the Shivim Zikeinim. While Chazal's approach does address the connection between Isha Kushit and the actual lashon hara of Miriam (and Aharon), namely that Miriam (and Aharon) was (were) exclaiming that they too got nivuah but did not separate from their spouses, the Ran's approach does not directly address what Miriam (and Aharon) actually said.

במדבר פרק ה

אברבנאל asks nine questions on פרק ה of ספר במדבר:

Within his answers to these questions, אברבנאל quotes a מדרש (beginning with "ובמדרש"):

The מדרש explains that those who are not permitted to enter the מחנות represent the three עברות for which בנ"י will be exiled from ארץ ישראל. The צרוע represents one who has committed the sin of עבודת כוכבים, the זב represents one who has committed the sin of גילוי עריות, and the טמא לנפש represents one who has committed the sin of שפיכות דמים. Since at this point, the nation is heading straight into the land, now is the time for them to purify the camps. What better what to do so than to purify it the way א"י is supposed to be purified? Since these three sins are the ones that will cause a member of the nation to be exiled from the land, these three types of people should also be exiled from the camps in the מדבר.

It is difficult to pinpoint exactly which question אברבנאל is addressing with this מדרש, but it seems like this explanation serves as one answer to his first question regarding why this law is placed here instead of in ספר ויקרא. Since this law is relevant to entrance into the א"י and the way in which the nation prepares for that event, the law is placed right before the nation is supposed to begin their journey into the land. 

Abravanel's Resume

Click on the link below to see Abravanel's resume:

Abravanel's Resume