Tag Info

New answers tagged

1

"Rav D.Z Hoffman raises the difficulty that all insects have six legs, not four. He explains that they have 4 legs that are used for simple walking, while the other two are used for jumping." (From English Artscroll Chumash) Therefore in the context of the question, the midrash is stating that if they had "5 legs" specifically for walking, (i.e. 7 in total) ...


1

It continues, "up to anything with lots and lots of legs", which Rashi says is a centipede. The point is that all insects are not-kosher, with the rare exceptions of a few types of locust.


0

Blockquote I am not an expert in hares and hyraxes but the camel's issue is foot related but the others are cud related. I think the hare has 2 types of poop. One which it re-eats and the final form. Presumably the hyrax does the same thing with barf. We need the other 2 to say that these activities don't count as cud chewing. i'm upvoting your answer ...


2

There is another approach that can be taken regarding the death of Nadav and Avihu. Rather than seeing it as a punishment it can be regarded as a consequence. The difference is very subtle, but this perspective can give us a possible answer: Rashi brings up Rabbi Ishmael's opinion that they died for having entered the sanctuary intoxicated by wine, but ...


0

Your assumption is that their death was a "punishment" for their actions rather than a consequence of their actions. There is a difference. If you jump off a cliff or the roof of a high building it is likely you will die. Maybe nobody warned you but that will still be the consequence of your action. As they were not instructed to enter the Mishkan at that ...


-1

I am not an expert in hares and hyraxes but the camel's issue is foot related but the others are cud related. I think the hare has 2 types of poop. One which it re-eats and the final form. Presumably the hyrax does the same thing with barf. We need the other 2 to say that these activities don't count as cud chewing.


3

From The Living Torah by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan זצ"ל: In Leviticus 11:18, among the non-kosher birds: וְאֶת־הַתִּנְשֶׁ֥מֶת וְאֶת־הַקָּאָ֖ת וְאֶת־הָרָחָֽם׃‏ The swan, the pelican and the magpie. In his footnotes: 11:18 swan. Tinshemeth in Hebrew; kuknos in Greek; cycnus in Latin. Other sources identify it as a bat, chauve-souris in French ...


3

Isaac Levy who translated his grandfather's chumash (Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch) from German to English deliberately leaves tinshemes (as did his grandfather) in 11:18 untranslated because all birds not named are kosher and the consequences of an error would be too great. He comments that his grandfather had deliberately not translated the name of the bird ...



Top 50 recent answers are included