Numbers Chapter 36
Laws Concerning Women Heirs
A. The problem of female and tribal inheritance.
1. (Numbers 36:1-2) The background.
Now the chief fathers of the families of the children of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of the sons of Joseph, came near and spoke before Moses and before the leaders, the chief fathers of the children of Israel. And they said, The Lord commanded my lord Moses to give the land as an inheritance by lot to the children of Israel, and my lord was commanded by the Lord to give the inheritance of our brother Zelophehad to his daughters.
The elders of the tribe of Manasseh came before Moses with a concern rooted in the earlier ruling regarding the daughters of Zelophehad. In Numbers 27:1-11, the daughters of Zelophehad came before Moses to plead for their father’s inheritance, since he had no sons. Their case resulted in a precedent-setting command from God Himself, establishing that in the absence of sons, daughters could inherit their father’s portion. The chief fathers here refer back to that same divine instruction, recognizing its legitimacy but foreseeing potential complications.
The text states, “The Lord commanded my lord Moses to give the land as an inheritance,” demonstrating that they acknowledged the divine authority of the command. This was not a matter of challenging God’s word but of seeking clarification for how it should be applied within the larger tribal framework. The elders were wise in bringing their concern before Moses and the leadership rather than acting independently or assuming authority.
The phrase, “to give the inheritance of our brother Zelophehad to his daughters,” points to the justice of God’s earlier ruling. It shows that God values fairness and continuity in family inheritance, ensuring that a man’s name and lineage would not perish simply because he had no sons. This provision elevated the position of women within Israel’s legal structure while still maintaining the order and headship principles that governed tribal life.
2. (Numbers 36:3-4) The problem raised by the solution regarding Zelophehad’s daughters and their issue.
Now if they are married to any of the sons of the other tribes of the children of Israel, then their inheritance will be taken from the inheritance of our fathers, and it will be added to the inheritance of the tribe into which they marry; so it will be taken from the lot of our inheritance. And when the Jubilee of the children of Israel comes, then their inheritance will be added to the inheritance of the tribe into which they marry; so their inheritance will be taken away from the inheritance of the tribe of our fathers.
The tribal leaders now present the unintended consequence of the previous law. If the daughters of Zelophehad were to marry outside their tribe, their inherited land would effectively be transferred to another tribe through their husbands. Because the inheritance laws were designed to keep land ownership tied to each tribe’s allotment, inter-tribal marriages involving heiresses would gradually shift the balance of property and territory between tribes.
The statement, “If they are married to any of the sons of the other tribes of the children of Israel, then their inheritance will be taken,” shows that even a single generation of mixed inheritance could weaken the integrity of tribal boundaries established by divine command. The land given to each tribe was not merely economic; it was a covenant inheritance. Each tribal portion represented God’s fulfillment of His promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Losing territory through marriage to another tribe was not just an administrative problem—it was a theological one.
Their concern deepened with the mention of “the Jubilee of the children of Israel.” According to Leviticus 25:10-13, the Year of Jubilee was designed to restore every family’s land to its original owners. However, in this case, if the daughters of Zelophehad married outside their tribe, their inherited land would not revert to their original tribe but would remain in their husbands’ tribal possession. Thus, even the sacred mechanism of Jubilee could not fix the redistribution problem caused by inter-tribal marriage.
The leaders’ reasoning concludes: “So their inheritance will be taken away from the inheritance of the tribe of our fathers.” Their statement recognizes a deep truth about the nature of law and justice: that solving one problem can often create another. While God’s command to allow daughters to inherit was righteous and compassionate, it introduced a new challenge regarding the unity and preservation of Israel’s tribal inheritance.
This passage illustrates an important principle of biblical wisdom—mature faith recognizes that even righteous solutions often involve trade-offs. There are rarely “perfect” or “cost-free” solutions in a fallen world. The right decision must still be made, but it must be made with awareness and humility. True maturity accepts the cost of obedience to God’s word, even when it complicates other matters.
B. God’s answer to the issue of daughters and tribal inheritance.
1. (Numbers 36:5-9) How to keep the land within the tribes.
Then Moses commanded the children of Israel according to the word of the Lord, saying, What the tribe of the sons of Joseph speaks is right. This is what the Lord commands concerning the daughters of Zelophehad, saying, Let them marry whom they think best, but they may marry only within the family of their father’s tribe. So the inheritance of the children of Israel shall not change hands from tribe to tribe, for every one of the children of Israel shall keep the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers. And every daughter who possesses an inheritance in any tribe of the children of Israel shall be the wife of one of the family of her father’s tribe, so that the children of Israel each may possess the inheritance of his fathers. Thus no inheritance shall change hands from one tribe to another, but every tribe of the children of Israel shall keep its own inheritance.
Moses, acting as God’s spokesman, affirmed that the concern raised by the tribe of Joseph was legitimate. He declared, “What the tribe of the sons of Joseph speaks is right.” This acknowledgment reveals a vital principle of biblical leadership: the wisdom to listen. Even though God had already given a command regarding the daughters of Zelophehad, the new question required further clarification. Moses did not dismiss the concern but sought and delivered God’s word on the matter, demonstrating humility and obedience to divine authority.
God’s response was both just and practical. The command, “Let them marry whom they think best, but they may marry only within the family of their father’s tribe,” preserved the freedom of choice within godly boundaries. It balanced individual liberty with corporate responsibility. The daughters were free to choose whom they would marry, but that freedom was constrained by God’s will for the preservation of tribal inheritance. This principle applies broadly to God’s people — freedom must always operate under the boundaries of divine order.
The reason is given clearly: “So the inheritance of the children of Israel shall not change hands from tribe to tribe.” God desired each tribe to maintain its distinct inheritance, not only to preserve fairness but also to maintain the prophetic order of the land. The inheritance was sacred because it was tied to covenant promise, not merely personal property. Allowing the land to move between tribes would distort the balance that God Himself had ordained.
The provision also ensured that “every tribe of the children of Israel shall keep its own inheritance.” Each tribe was a family unit under divine stewardship, and no tribe was to enrich itself at the expense of another. In modern terms, it reminds believers that God’s gifts and callings are not meant to be exchanged or envied between one another, but stewarded faithfully within the sphere God assigns (Romans 12:4–8).
If a daughter married outside her tribe, it appears she would forfeit her inheritance, as her husband’s tribe would not be permitted to hold land that belonged to another. This reinforced the principle that while the daughters had legal rights, the preservation of the tribe’s inheritance was a higher consideration. Thus, individual rights were not the ultimate priority; collective covenantal order was. God’s justice always operates with both personal fairness and communal righteousness in view.
2. (Numbers 36:10-12) How the specific problem worked out in regard to the daughters of Zelophehad.
Just as the Lord commanded Moses, so did the daughters of Zelophehad; for Mahlah, Tirzah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Noah, the daughters of Zelophehad, were married to the sons of their father’s brothers. They were married into the families of the children of Manasseh the son of Joseph, and their inheritance remained in the tribe of their father’s family.
The daughters of Zelophehad serve as a model of obedience and faith. Scripture records, “Just as the Lord commanded Moses, so did the daughters of Zelophehad.” This phrase marks them not only as petitioners who once asked for justice but as faithful daughters who accepted divine instruction without complaint. They did not use their inheritance as an excuse to pursue self-interest but submitted to God’s command for the greater good of their people.
Their obedience was expressed through marriage “to the sons of their father’s brothers.” By marrying their cousins, they ensured that their father’s inheritance remained securely within the tribe of Manasseh. This was more than a cultural custom; it was an act of covenantal faithfulness. They respected the tribal order God had established through Moses and honored both their father’s name and the Lord’s word.
The result is summarized simply: “Their inheritance remained in the tribe of their father’s family.” This was exactly what God intended — the preservation of inheritance, the stability of tribal identity, and the continuity of God’s promise to Israel. In this, the daughters of Zelophehad stand as examples of godly women who balanced faith, obedience, and prudence, demonstrating that divine blessing and human submission work hand in hand.
3. (Numbers 36:13) Conclusion to the book: By the Jordan.
These are the commandments and the judgments which the Lord commanded the children of Israel by the hand of Moses in the plains of Moab by the Jordan, across from Jericho.
The Book of Numbers concludes with this verse, bringing the long wilderness journey to its threshold. “By the hand of Moses in the plains of Moab by the Jordan” reminds the reader that what began in the desolation of the wilderness (Numbers 1:1) now ends within sight of the Promised Land. The people had wandered, learned, rebelled, been chastened, and matured. Now, at last, they stood “across from Jericho” — within reach of what God had promised centuries earlier to Abraham.
This closing summary underscores the faithfulness of God despite human failure. It was not the generation that left Egypt but their children who would now enter Canaan. Yet the same God who brought them out had preserved them every step of the way. The closing location, “across from Jericho,” is symbolic — they were not yet in the land, but they were closer than ever. It is a picture of faith’s journey: sanctification brings the believer ever nearer to God’s promise, but full possession still lies ahead.
From Mount Sinai onward, the Lord had been shaping Israel into a covenant nation. He taught them order through the census, purity through sacrifice, and faith through the tests of the wilderness. He revealed His presence through the tabernacle and His holiness through the priesthood. Yet despite His provision, the first generation perished because they would not believe. Their children, now standing by the Jordan, represent a new beginning — a generation ready to act on faith rather than fear.
Spiritually, this is a portrait of the believer’s walk with God. Many never move beyond the wilderness stage — always learning, always circling, but never entering into the fullness of what God intends. They see the Promised Land but never take possession because they fail to trust God completely. The Jordan River thus symbolizes the crossing point between knowing God’s promises and living in them.
The book closes with the unspoken call to move forward. Israel had come far, but the final step still required faith. Likewise, believers today stand on the promises of God’s Word, often within sight of greater spiritual blessing, yet must still take that final step of trust. God had brought Israel to the land; now Joshua would bring them into it.
