One could suggest that these two psukim serve as more than
just a buffer. Albeit their brevity, they do describe the
ideal fashion in which Bnei Yisrael should have traveled on
their journey to inherit the Land. [For example, compare with
Shmot 23:20-27, which describes God’s original plan for how
Bnei Yisrael would conquer the land.]
To emphasize what “could have been” in contrast to what
actually took place, the Torah intentionally delimits these
two psukim with upside down nun’s.
If so, then the “three books” of Sefer Bamidbar would be:
BOOK ONE: Bnei Yisrael’s preparation for their journey (1-10)
This ‘book’ is followed by two “versions” of that journey:
BOOK TWO: the ideal (two psukim)—what “could have been”
BOOK THREE: the actual journey that “failed”
(i.e. chapters 11-36)
To accent the tragedy of book three, the Torah first
presents a “glimpse” of what “could have been” in book two—the glorious manner in which Bnei Yisrael could have
travelled, had they not sinned.
looking at Torah as 7 books symbolizes the idea that Torah is the blueprint of creation, not just of what is, but of what might have been and what might yet be.