Hot answers tagged

10

This is found in Tanna Devei Eliyahu Rabba, beginning of chapter 18 and Yalkut Shamoni Eicha 1034. The Tanna Devei Eliyahu version is: מאי שפכי כמים לבך נוכח פני ה' מכאן אמרו כל ת"ח שיושב וקורא ושונה ועוסק בתורה הקב"ה יושב כנגדו וקורא ושונה עמו What does "Poor out your heart like water opposite the face of Hashem" mean? From here they said that ...


8

In Talmud Bavli Rosh Hashanna 20b, R' Zeira quotes R' Nachman as saying: כ"ד שעי מכסי סיהרא לדידן שית מעתיקא ותמני סרי מחדתא לדידהו שית מחדתא ותמני סרי מעתיקא For 24 hours, the [moon] light is covered: For us [in Babylon] - 6 of the old [month] and 18 of the new [month]; for them [in Jerusalem] - 6 of the new and 18 of the old. (Translation ...


6

I'm not sure that this what you're looking for, but the Gmara in Baba Batra on daf 15 writes: בתר דשכיב משה מי שריא שכינה על עובדי כוכבים והא אמר מר ביקש משה שלא תשרה שכינה על עובדי כוכבים וניתן לו, שנאמר: "ונפלינו אני ועמך". Although it doesn't specify that this was a result of Bilaam but rather a request to make Israel more unique. This Gmara is more ...


6

The principles of Occam's razor and תפסת מרובה לא תפסת are not equivalent. Occam's razor is a logical principle stating that when comparing equivalently predictive hypotheses, the one that requires the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct. The principle of "תפסת" on the other hand, is not a logical principle in the same way. Instead, it is more ...


5

The difficulty in understanding the Rashi on a simplistic level is that no sacrifice atones for intentional sin. However, if you look at the actual text of the Midrash which Rashi is basing himself off of (Bamidbar Rabba 13:14), the atonement of this sacrifice was for something much more specific. The Medrash recounts how Yehuda was responsible for dipping ...


4

Rashi on Sanhedrin 100a seems to interpret it to mean that he died: גל של עצמות. שמת, דאדם שמת נעשה גל של עצמות. A mound of bones. that he died, for a person who died becomes a mound of bones The Maharal in Chiddushei Aggadoth on Shabbath 34a interprets it to mean sudden death: ועשה אותו גל עצמות. פירוש [מיתה פתאמית] וזה נקרא גל של עצמות ...


4

In general, rabbinic commentators (e.g. Maimonides, Maharal, Ramchal, Vilna Gaon) have been strongly opposed to the literal interpretation of medrash, and these midrashim are no exception.* To quote from the Jewish Encyclopedia: These haggadot concerning the leviathan are interpreted as allegories by all the commentators with the exception of some ...


4

The rhetorical usage of "Oh yeah, we'll see what will be with that" is modern, but the proper usage of ונראה is the future tense, waiting to see what will happen as a result of their actions.


3

R. Eliyahu Mizrachi and the Maharsha both write that that the term "ein___ela___" (x is only y) doesnt mean that is the only thing that it means, but rather that this is how it is being interpreted there. R. Mizrachi in his commentary to Rashi on Lech L'cha (15: 3): אין הבט אלא מלמעלה למטה...ואינו רוצה לומר שכל הבטה היא מלמעלה למטה...אלא הכי פירושא אין ...


3

Maharatz Chajez has a piece inspecting the antiquity of various medrashim. It is conveniently printed in the standard Vilna edition of the Medrash Rabba set as one of the last introductory sections. His analysis, based on lack of being quoted in early Rishonim, leads him to say that Bemidbar Rabba was not as ancient as some of the other sections. He lays ...


3

A weapon with a long blade for cutting or thrusting (source) Or this one (Avoda Zara 20b), a more fascinating description here אמרו עליו על מלאך המות שכולו מלא עינים, בשעת פטירתו של חולה עומד מעל מראשותיו וחרבו שלופה בידו, וטיפה של מרה תלויה בו As mentioned here, by Mida KeNeged Mida, Hashem punished the Egyptians with a sword since they thought to ...


3

The מעם לעז says Yaakov avinu added the sleeves, which is why it says ועשה. Yaakov made the sleeves for the cloak which originally belonged to Adam HaRishon.


3

Early Rabbinic Views on Understanding Aggadah/Midrash Rav Sherira Gaon 906-1006, head of the Pumbedita Academy Sefer Haeshcol, Hilkhot Sefer Torah, p. 60a Those points brought out from scriptural verses called Midrash and Aggadah are assumptions. Some are accurate such as Rabbi Judahs statement that Simeons portion was included in that of Judah, for we find ...


3

Kli Yakar (who cites Yalkut Shim'oni on Numbers 13:2:4): ד"א לכך פרט אנשים, לפי שארז"ל (ילקו"ש פנחס תשעגכז) האנשים היו שונאים את הארץ ואמרו נתנה ראש ונשובה מצרימה (במדבר יד.ד) והנשים היו מחבבות הארץ ואמרו תנה לנו אחזה (שם כז.ד) וע"כ אמר הקב"ה לפי דעתי שאני רואה בעתיד היה יותר טוב לשלוח נשים המחבבות את הארץ כי לא יספרו בגנותה, אבל לך לדעתך שאתה ...


3

RaSh"I on Numbers 26:64 (thanks to Chabad.org)


3

There seems to be confusion in the literature about that exact point. The Literature of the Sages, Part 2 describes the perakim as subdivisions of the parshiot, and notes in footnote 370 that "the editor of the printer edition did not understand that the perakim are part of the parsha..." explaining the confusion about numbering. However, The Anthology in ...


3

Rav Hrsch explains that the language changing would have occurred as people spread out in any event. It was the miracle of all the languages suddenly erupting into existence rather than over a period of time that was the miracle of the dispersion. Thus, it affected everyone in the world, with the migdal Bavel as the center of the change (expanding out from ...


2

Rava (Bavli 12) sees it in 1:9, which says Vashti made a party for women in the king's home: he says she must have made it there rather than in her own home because she intended sin [presumably lewd intermingling].


2

As noted here, the Chovos Halevavos makes the argument from overturned ink. However, there is a Midrashic precedent for your recollection as well, cited here: We see this in the Midrash (Midrash Temurah in Midrash Aggadot Bereshit): An athiest [sic] came to Rebbi Akiva. "Who created the world?", he queried. R. Akiva answered, "The Holy One, ...


2

Buber says there are two traditional attributions. One is by Rabbi Avraham [sic] HaSefardi in Ohel Yosef, where he attributes it to Rabbi Yochanan (the redactor of the Talmud Yerushalmi). However Buber himself must be making an error, as the author of Ohel Yosef (published uncensored under the name Tzefas Paneach - a famous and controversial pirush on the ...


2

Sifre (on Bamidbar and Devarim) https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%A1%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%99 Netziv - assuming you mean HaEmek Davar (and not Davar HaEmek or one of the others), Sefaria has most of it: http://www.sefaria.org/Haamek_Davar_on_Genesis http://www.sefaria.org/Haamek_Davar_on_Exodus http://www.sefaria.org/Haamek_Davar_on_Leviticus Bamidbar will be ...


2

At the end of the day, it was a mitzvah from Moshe to the meraglim. Secondly, the fruits' incredible qualities were undeniable. Not bringing them back for klal yisrael to see would prevent the nation from making their own judgments about the land's bounty. At least Calev and yehoshua could make a stronger case with the evidence.


2

Malbim's reading of Song of Songs breaks it into five chapters, plus a coda about an orchard that was worth thousands. Thus: "his song was five, and a thousand."


2

I've tried to keep to the literal interpretation as much as possible. ‘Reuven’, as it is stated, (Exodus 3, 7,) “I have surely seen the affliction of My people.” ‘Shimon’, named for (Exodus 2, 24,) “And God heard their groaning.” ‘Levi’, named so because the Holy One, blessed be He connected to their plight from the midst of the bush, to fulfil what is ...


2

Isaiah (58:2): וְאוֹתִי, יוֹם יוֹם יִדְרֹשׁוּן, וְדַעַת דְּרָכַי, יֶחְפָּצוּן; כְּגוֹי אֲשֶׁר-צְדָקָה עָשָׂה, וּמִשְׁפַּט אֱלֹהָיו לֹא עָזָב, יִשְׁאָלוּנִי מִשְׁפְּטֵי-צֶדֶק, קִרְבַת אֱלֹהִים יֶחְפָּצוּן The Yerushalmi Rosh Hashana (4:8) says: ואותי יום יום ידרושון זו תקיעה וערבה The reference is to the Aravah ceremony which was performed on the ...


2

There are some general understandings on these things. The Yerushalmi is believed to be completed by Rabbi Yochanan, Reish Lakish, and their peers around the year 350; the Bavli, by Ravina and Rav Ashi (and one generation past them), around the year 500. We generally follow the Bavli as it had the time to consider the Yerushalmi, then supersede it. Some ...


2

My Chumash gives the reference to the Medrash Rabbah 71 (8). In this Medrash Rabbah it's 71 (11). I see there one notarikon. ותאמר רחל נפתולי אלהים נפתלתי וגו׳ . נופתי פתיתי תליתי אחותי עלי. א״ר יוחנן נינפה היה לי לעשות לפני אחותי. אילו שלהתי ואמרתי לו תן דעתך שהם מרמין בך לא היה פורש which I understand to mean from the commentary: נופתי I ...


2

What is odd about this pasuk is the sequence of tenses. Normally, once we start with a consecutive vav construction (ואמרנו), and the subject stays the same (ie. the sentence is unmarked: there's no contrast involved, or there's not quotation), we continue using consecutive vav. The major exception is when a word intervenes in the clause before the verb, ...


2

Like can been found in Sefer Orot HaGra, on the section dealing with Torah, the Vilna Gaon expresses the idea that all events and all people from the beginning of time to the end are contained within the five books of Moshe. He explains that all these hermeneutical details are necessary in order to include every detail of creation.



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible