New answers tagged

6

There is a Midrash (Megillah 14a) that Sarah was really the same as Yiskah (from Gen 11:28), which would make her Avraham's niece, which is pretty close to a sister. However, Ibn Ezra (Gen 20:12) writes that Avraham was just saying something to appease Avimelekh, and we shouldn't assume it is true. Indeed he addresses your question earlier (Gen 11:28) when ...


2

Sara was the daughter of Haran (Avraham's brother), the sister of Lot and was also called Yiskah. In order to keep the women in the family, Avram and Nachor married the two daughters of their brother Haran. Bereishis 11:29 29 And Abram and Nahor took themselves wives; the name of Abram's wife was Sarai, and the name of Nahor's wife was Milcah, the ...


4

Rashi on Genesis 20:12 points out that she was actually Haran's daughter and thereby the granddaughter of Terach. To explain the fact that she is called Abraham's half-sister, he employs the Talmudic principle of בני בנים הרי הם כבנים, that grandchildren are considered as children. Therefore, Sarah was truly Avraham's sister in the sense that she was his ...


0

Shadal explains that the pasuk is talking in the general case, even if in individual specific cases, it was not a blessing. Each, as he blessed them: which, each one, he blessed in accordance with his blessing, a specific blessing to each of them. (And so I have found afterwards to the Ramban in parashat Miketz.) And if there are those among them he ...


1

I don't remember where I saw this explanation, it was a while ago. It might have been in one of these, either in Pinchas or in the Yom Tov volume. They quote someone who suggested that one of שעיר and שעיר עזים refers to Edom and the other refers to Yishmael. I don't remember which is which (although the Ibn Ezra in the פירוש הארוך in Shemot 23:19 says ...


4

The nation of Israel. http://outreachjudaism.org/gods-suffering-servant-isaiah-53/ As per that website, that has been the position of Jews for a long time Origen, a prominent and influential church father, conceded in the year 248 CE – eight centuries before Rashi was born – that the consensus among the Jews in his time was that Isaiah 53 “bore ...


1

Zimri didn't do anything wrong until after the sentencing. See the way the narrative is explained here (Kehot Chumash with interpolated Translation Bamidbar 25:4-6) : The offenders from the tribe of Simeon then approached one of their princes, Zimri son of Salu, and complained, “We are being sentenced to death! Why don’t you do something to defend ...


2

Yalkut Shimoni (763) says Moshe was told to learn a perek (mishnah) and the rock would give water. See Alshich for explanation


0

He made a big show of it. It seems that everyone was sort of stunned by Zimri's words and actions; Moshe himself was shocked into forgetting what to say after a bout of mudslinging (Zimri accused Moshe of marrying a Midianite woman himself, so how could he prohibit Kozbi?) Also since Zimri was a nasi beis av, that could have helped him--Pinchas was the only ...


2

In his commentary to that Numbers (20:8), Rav Sa'adyah Gaon renders "אל הסלע" as "על הסלע". (according to R. Yosef Qafih's Hebrew translation of R. Sa'adyah's Arabic.) In his notes there, R. Yosef Qafih explains that the intent was not that Moshe should speak to the stone, but rather that he should speak to the Jews in the proximity of the stone. ...


1

The meforshim bring out that the initial creation of the animals was the appropriate amount for each species to be able to have a full existence. Thus,passenger pigeons, which could not survive as less than massive flocks were created in that number. Also, herbivores were created to be able to be in balance with the amount needed to eat the vegetation. ...


-1

The Tur explains the change. נכחו is referring to the direction from which they approached, like in Yechezkel 46:9. תחנו is referring to the camping of the Jewish people.


3

In the Artscroll Stone chumash, there is a reference to R. Hirsch in 1:27 "although all living creatures were created male and female." But this might indicate some combination within a single entity. Rashi on 2:19 writes: It also teaches you here that at the time of their forming, immediately on that day, He brought them to man to name them (Avoth d’...


0

Your question assumes that hitting the rock was the sin. I happen to believe that the sin was falling on their faces in front of the nation and not standing up for G-d, which was an (in)action perpetrated by both. I cannot explain the entire theory here; read these source sheets: http://www.sefaria.org/sheets/tags/Moshe%20and%20Aharon's%20Real%20Sin.


1

In ancient Semitic languages such as Akkadian and Sumerian, the root P-L-N means an anonymous person. Both of these languages are contemporaneous with or older than Megillat Rut. This is the case in Arabic and Farsi as well. Source: I heard this from someone familiar with these languages.


2

Aharon was punished because he did not act in conformity with his defining middah of Oheiv Shalom V'Rodeif Shalom by restraining Moshe's anger and ensuring that the dispute over the water shortage would be brought to a happy ending. According to the peshat, as recognized by the Rashbam, Chizkuni and Kli Yakar, the Mateh at Kadesh was the Mateh Aharon ...


1

After taking a closer look at the pesukim, I realized that the question can be rephrased: why by Edom did they first offer not to drink water and then offered to pay, whereas by Moav did they not rephrase their offer? The answer, also by taking a closer look at the pesukim, is that they didn't get a chance. Sichon made the first strike, and Klal Yosrael ...


0

The ramban says their chet was they implied the rock should give water because of their instruction, so they should have said to the rock, Hashem says you should give water.


2

The Midrash Tanchuma ask the question: See Midrash Tanchuma (see here paragraph 10 (Yod)): וַיֹּאמֶר ה' אֶל מֹשֶׁה וְאֶל אַהֲרֹן יַעַן לֹא הֶאֱמַנְתֶּם בִּי. לָמָּה נֶעֱנַשׁ אַהֲרֹן. ‏ The Midrash later says that Moshe itself asked this: אַף כָּךְ אָמַר מֹשֶׁה לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם, אֲנִי הִקְפַּדְתִּי, ...


0

Actually if you look carefully, by the time the story concludes it's become all about the followers and henchmen; Korach is pretty much moot. The verse actually says the pit swallowed Dasan, Aviram, and Korach's stuff. By the time a fight gets big, whatever cause was technically the original spark is often forgotten.


3

There's a Gemara about the Kohen who described the size of his sacrificial bread in terms of "a lizard's tail." That was considered uncouth, as lizards aren't kosher. So we may prefer to compare people to kosher animals. Grasshoppers -- well technically they're white locusts --are the smallest kosher animal you'd encounter on land.


1

Actually, the punishment was made lenient by being spread over the next forty years so that the people (between 20 and 60) would not die at once. As stated by many people including the Kli Yakar and Rav Hirsch as I explain in Why were the Jews punished for 40 years if the spies were the ones who were there for 40 days? The punishment was that all those who ...


1

This article offers an insight: The reason why the punishment here is seemingly so harsh is because of the gravity of the sin of lashon hara that lashon hara drags back previous sins and makes one get punished more stringently for those too. Thus, via the lashon hara Bnei Yisrael did not just get punished for this sin, but in essence for parts of ...



Top 50 recent answers are included