Tag Info

New answers tagged

-1

The real answer to this question is probably that Yaakov didn't have the requirement to follow the halakhos of the Torah. See here. It appears to have been common practice in those times for the firstborn of the main wife to take the 'firstbornhood', as with Yitzchak and Yishmeal (though perhaps that isn't a great proof for a few reasons). However, either ...


1

Indeed, in Devarim 21:16 - 17 it states that the father cannot favor the son of the beloved wife over the older son of a hated wife. But that is with all else being equal, with the only reason one favors the younger firstborn being love for the more beloved wife. Reuven lost his firstborn rights for sleeping with Bilhah, his father's concubine. This is ...


7

I heard once from Rabbi Dovid Fohrman that this was exactly the question that the sons of Yaakov were challenging him with. Bereishis 37:32 וישלחו את-כתונת הפסים, ויביאו אל-אביהם, ויאמרו, זאת מצאנו: הכר-נא, הכתונת בנך היא--אם-לא And they sent the cloak to him, and it was brought to their father, and they said, "We found this. Recognize, please, is ...


1

The Malbim, commenting on the second of the two verses, explains that שבי refers to someone who is already definitively a captive, i.e. it has already been decided that they will be taken and kept as a captive/slave. שביה, on the other hand, refers to those who are still under consideration whether they will be taken as captives. Thus, the Midrash ...


3

שבי means "captives" referring to the people themselves. שִּׁבְיָה means "captivity" referring to the state of being imprisoned. Compare the use of the term שִּׁבְיָה in the Mon. - Thurs. davening just before returning the Torah "Acheinu kol bet yisrae'l..." the term שִּׁבְיָה is used, there because it means the state of captivity. The use of the 2nd term ...


-2

My dikduk skills are lacking but the word שביו is the posessive of the nation. שביה on the other hand is not a possesive term as evidenced by the fact that it is not written with a מפיק הא, in פסוק י׳ג for instance her שמלת שביה does have a מפיק הא. This also holds true also in Targum where שביו is given possesive treatment שביהון, & on the other hand ...


5

Excellent questions; I'll take these out of order, forgive me here. "The congregation of God" here simply means marrying into the Jewish mainstream. So a man who chose to be castrated is allowed to marry a convert, but not a born-Jew. "What is the spiritual significance?" Don't go there. It's a technical law on the books. For all other aspects, he's a Jew ...


1

With regards to a mamzer (Devarim 23:3), see Maayano Shel Torah, quoting a teaching from HaRav HaKadosh of Ostrovska (perhaps the Zichron Shmuel) : A loose translation: Why does the Torah need to emphasize that a Mamzer is forbidden even after 10 generations? There is an opinion in the Talmud Yerushalmi that a berya, a complete creature can become ...


1

These laws are found in Shulchan Aruch Even Ha'ezer siman 5. Many of these laws are based on the inability to procreate and therefore in modern times where there have been medical discoveries, many poskim rule slightly different than the straight Shulchan Aruch & Ramma. For instance, no difference is made between which testicle is damaged.


0

As discussed here the Lubavitcher Rebbe equates both readings - if you are reading it one way on one occasion, you should be consistent on all occasions. This is the Chabad custom.


0

I've been in one shul where they have found a compromise, if you can call it that. The shul wasn't as much concerned about the pronunciation issue of "zecher" as much as it was concerned about questions of repeating verses either in whole or in part. (There are various opinions regarding this, and different people in the congregation would "argue" about this ...


3

Rabbi Moshe Feinstein writes in the Igros Moshe Orach Chaim vol 5 siman 20 subsection 32 that it is more important to repeat it when reading it in parshas Ki Seitzei than in parshas Zachor. But, just for the record, the Vilna Gaon also repeated it during Ashrei, and no one seems to have accepted that practice.


3

It seems to me that the first (נשני) is an active forgetfulness, and the second (שכחה) is passive. This we see from the gemora in Sanhedrin 102b which expounds that the name Menashe (ben Chizkiyohu) signifies that he caused Yisrael to forget Hashem. And even according to the Maharsha who disagrees with Rashi that נשני is an expression of forgetfulness and ...


1

The only source that exists for the Zeicher/Zecher reading is the Mishna Berura, as discussed here. He only mentions this stringency for parshat Zechor, and not for parshat Ki Teitzei. As to your assertion that many have a minhag of saying both - I'm not convinced that it's accurate. For a start Sefardim and Yekkes have not adpated this Safek. BTW: Rabbi ...



Top 50 recent answers are included