Why does the Torah insert the word "va'Ta'amodnah ... ", which it did not do by the Teme'im in Beha'alosha, 9:6?
Oznayim la'Torah: Because, whereas there, it was a matter that concerned Bein Adam la'Makom, here it concerned Bein Adam la'Chaveiro, where, presumably, the other litigants (the uncles of the B'nos Tz'lofchad) were present, and where the term Amidah is commonly used. 1
See for exmple, Melachim a, 3:17 and Shoftim, Devarim, 19:17. See Oznayim la'Torah, who elaborates and who also explains why the Torah adds that they also stood 'before the princes and before the entire congregation', which it also did not do in Beha'aloscha, in connection with the Teme'im.
?Lifnri Moshe ve?Lifnei Elazar?. Why did the B'nos Tz'lofchad ask Elazar after having asked Moshe? If Moshe did not know the answer, how would Elazar know?
Rashi #1 (citing R. Yoshiyah in Bava Basra 119b) and Targum Yonasan: The Torah means that they stood before Moshe after having stood before Elazar (and the Nesi?im and all the congregation ? Targum Yonasan [and not receiving an answer]).
Rashi #2 (citing Aba Chanan in Bava Basra 119b): The Torah means that they stood before all of them simultaneously in the Beis ha'Midrash.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes that they stood in front of all of them simultaneously in the Beis ha'Midrash. If so, why does the Torah say "ve'Lifnei Elazar ha'Kohen ve'Lifnei ha'Nesi'im"?
