Or HaChaim on Numbers 15:32/אור החיים על במדבר ט״ו:ל״ב

1 ויהיו בני ישראל במדבר, While the children of Israel were in the desert, etc. Why did the Torah have to let us know that the children of Israel were in the desert? This may be understood in conjunction with what we learned in Shabbat 96. Rav Yehudah is quoted as saying that the sin of the person collecting the firewood consisted of his carrying it a distance of 4 cubits in the public domain. We have aslo learned in Shabbat 6 that a Seratya or a Platyah i.e. a camp or a busy highway, constitute a public domain. The Talmud asks there why the Baraitha which mentioned the examples of a camp or busy highway did not include a desert as a further example of a public domain? Abbaye answered that this was not really an appropriate question as the desert constituted a public domain only while the Israelites (600,000 plus) marched through the desert, whereas the Baraitha was concerned with conditions at the time. Rashi comments on this as follows: "In those days the desert was considered a public domain whereas in our time it is not considered an area traversed by many people. When a Baraitha did mention that a desert may also be a public domain this is based on the assumption that the desert once more became a route used by multitudes of people on a regular basis."

2This is basically what the words "while the Israelites were in the desert" wanted to convey to us. The reason that the מקשש עצים, the person gathering firewood, was guilty of violating the Sabbath, was because at that time the desert was a proper public domain and carrying in it for a distance of four cubits or more was forbidden on pain of death. If the Israelites had not at that time travelled through the desert, the act of the מקשש would not have been punishable.

3According to the opinion of Maimonides in Hilchot Shabbat chapter 14 there does not seem to be a difference between the status of the desert in the days of the Israelites' trek through the desert and nowadays. I explained this in a volume called Chefetz Hashem which I composed during my youth. Maimonides understood the words of Abbaye to mean that the scholar who included the desert as an example of the public domain spoke of a period when the Israelites travelled through the desert. The other scholar who did not list the desert as a public domain was only concerned with conditions prevailing during his lifetime. Seeing that during his lifetime the desert was not travelled by many people he did not bother to define its status. In actual fact, however, the desert must be regarded as a public domain even in our own times. If this is the correct interpretation of what Abbaye had in mind we are back to square one, i.e. why did the Torah have to tell us that the Israelites were in the desert when this incident took place?

4We may be able to explain our verse with the help of another statement in Shabbat 96 where a Baraitha is quoted which defines the sin of the מקשש as lopping the wood off the tree rather than carrying it a distance of 4 cubits. This appears difficult in view of a halachah in Chulin 88 that earth taken from the desert is unfit to be used to cover the blood of wild beasts or birds after their having been slaughtered. The reason given is that such earth is salty and incapable of supporting growth of plants. If this is so, where did the מקשש find trees in the desert that he could lop branches off? The Torah answers this question by writing that the Israelites had been in the desert for quite a while when the incident under discussion occurred. During the years preceding the incident with the מקשש the travelling well accompanying the Israelites had irrigated the desert around their camp so that that part of the desert became capable of producing a variety of plants. It was from these plants that the מקשש lopped off some firewood. This interpretation even fits the opinion offered by Rabbi Acha in Shabbat 96 that the מקשש was gathering in firewood lying on the ground, making a pile of them. This too would have been possible once we assume that the well of Miriam had irrigated the desert around the camp of the Israelites.

5וימצאו איש מקשש עצים, they found a man collecting firewood. The reason that the Torah employs the word "they found" is because according to Yalkut Shimoni Moses had instructed the people to spread out and search for any one who was violating the Sabbath. The word מצא is used in a similar sense in Esther 2,23 where the plot to assassinate Ahasverus was being investigated.

6מקשש עצים ביום השבת, gathering firewood on the Sabbath. The reason the Torah first mentioned the deed before mentioning the day when it occurred is to tell us that the man was well aware that it was the Sabbath. If the Torah had reported this in the reverse order the meaning would have been that they found him on a day which they (the searchers) knew to be the Sabbath. The present phraseology makes it clear that the man gathering the firewood knew that it was the Sabbath. Our sages in the Sifri have cleverly deduced that the man was aware that it was the Sabbath from the repetition of the word מקשש עצים in verse 23. That repetition indicates that even after the man had been found collecting the firewood and had been warned about it he continued to do it. According to our own approach the repetition of the words מקשש עצים proves that the man had not erred in thinking that his activity was one which was permitted on the Sabbath. The men who found him warned him immediately about the fact that what he was doing was forbidden on pain of judicial execution. The man was guilty of being aware that it was the Sabbath (on which certain work prohibitions apply) as well as that the work he was performing was one of the forbidden categories.