Tag Info

New answers tagged

0

R. Shlomo Kluger in his sefer Imrei Shefer here says that גוים refer to the nations of the world, and לאומים refer to Yisrael.


3

Rav Moshe Eisemann wrote a book about Dovid HaMelech called "Music Made in Heaven" - the subtitle of the book is "some thoughts on Dovid Hamelech and Sefer Tehillim." He does not go systematically through Tehillim, but he uses Tehillim as a means of analyzing events in Dovid Hamelech's life. I think it could largely satisfy what you are looking for. It's ...


1

R. Shlomo Kluger in his sefer Imrei Shefer writes that: Eisav could have killed Ya’akov even while Yitzchok was still alive, but the reason why he delayed, saying to himself that when “the days of mourning for my father shall draw near I will kill Ya’akov, my brother” is because he knew that when he kills Ya’akov he will be very happy, and on the other ...


1

This shows us a great lesson always be humble........ like Rashi :-)


4

The sefer Tsror HaChaim (added to beginning of the sefer Shoshanas Ya’akov) here explains: Yitzchok was afraid that Ya’akov might come and trick him, as he in fact did. So what did he do to forestall this possibility? He figured that if Ya’akov was going to try to trick him into thinking that he is Eisav, he would change his voice and speak harshly like ...


4

The sefer Sifsei Kohen here writes that he heard someone explain (דרך הלצה) that Eisav said to himself: If I kill Ya’akov now I will have to observe a period of mourning for him, and when my father also dies I will have to observe another period of mourning. Therefore, I won’t kill Ya’akov now but rather “let the days of mourning for my father draw near” and ...


6

In Maayan Beis Hashoeivah 31 7, Rabbi Shwab asks this very question and suggests that perhaps Midyan was a tremendous nation or perhaps two nations, and only the ones under the jurisdiction of the five kings living on the border of Moav were killed, leaving the Moavites near Egypt alive. He also answers with this idea how Pinchas would wage war against his ...


2

According to the meforshim, he changed the narrative in order to convince them that matters proceeded "from Hashem". Rav Hirsch says The reason for all the little differences can at once be seen to be based, either on considerations of politeness, to which we have already referred above, or to make it more plausible to his hearers whom Eliezer ...


5

The sefer Yalkut HaGershoni here writes in the name of R. Tzvi Yaakov Klein: Ya’akov was very wise as we see from his cunning in dealing with Eisav and Lavan. Therefore he was called an איש תם, a man - a master - of guilelessness, and so according to the needs of the moment he would set aside his guilelessness and use cunning and deceit. However, ...


0

Correct. The fear and the not going up the mountain are not connected. The Meforshim seem to explain something along these lines: אָנֹכִי עֹמֵד בֵּין יְהוָה וּבֵינֵיכֶם בָּעֵת הַהִוא לְהַגִּיד לָכֶם אֶת דְּבַר ה' כִּי יְרֵאתֶם מִפְּנֵי הָאֵשׁ I had to be an intermediary between you and Hashem, as you were afraid of [even] the [(heavenly voices coming ...


2

Rashi there says: The half shekel weight of the nose-ring is a reference to the מחצית השקל, the half shekel coin that Jews donated to the Temple yearly. The bracelets refer to the ten tablets -- the two bracelets are the two tablets, and the weight of 10 shekels corresponds to the Ten Commandments. Tol'dos Yitzchak (by Rav Yitzchak Karo, uncle of the Bes ...


2

Rav Moshe Shapira explained this as part of a broader approach to the difference between the philosophy of Avraham and that of Shem. To summarize, Shem was an ascetic, and believed in spirituality divorced from physicality. His Torah was the Torah of pure spirituality which does not involve the physicality. He is, therefore, the authority on the ...


6

Rabbi Ovadya miBartenura (עמר נקא, בראשית כ"א ט"ז) explains that Hagar moved farther away than would be necessary to merely avoid seeing Yishmael's suffering and death. The reason for the extra distance is that Yishmael was an archer (per verse 20), and Hagar was concerned that Yishmael might become delirious and try to shoot her with his arrows. Therefore, ...


1

My rav explained: (IY"H, when I see him next week, I will ask him where he got this source, and edit it.) For now, the explanation sounds credible. Sorry - I don't want to reveal his name... Child sacrifice was common and customary at that time. Therefore, Avraham did not protest the request. Yes, Avraham probably was pained that he would have to sacrifice ...


6

I hope you'll accept my memory lapse as to who said it, but I once saw one of the mefarshim say that by Sedom, Avraham was "tipped" as to the fact that he should advocate, as he figured "why else would G-d be telling me if not that I am supposed to do something about it?" (Similar as to how Moshe knew to "argue" with Hashem about destroying the Jewish people ...


3

There are situations in which God delays performing an action until man prays for it. See for example Bereshis 2:5 with Rashi's commentary, that God waited for Adam's prayer before causing the vegetation to sprout in the Garden of Eden. An additional example is when God decided to destroy the Jewish people, he says to Moses "Now leave me alone and my anger ...


-2

No biblical characters were ever perfect, not even the most righteous ones. Their standards were a lot higher than ours but they were not perfect. Sarah's denial was obviously a fact that she did recognise that G-d could do miracles and it was not beyond G-d to give Sarah a child. Abraham also laughed at the end of last week's sedra. The name Yitzchak ...


5

To answer the last two questions: The Ohr HaChaim explains that Sarah's denial was actually a manifestation of a certain degree of righteousness. When a servant who has genuine awe of his master does something inappropriate towards his master, his intense awe of the master makes him unable to confess. This is what the verse means that she was afraid, she ...


0

The Maharil Diskin answers that the gemara in Berachos 35b asks if one should bentch if he makes wine the basis of his meal, and answers that we have to wait for Eliyohu (i.e. a prophet) to tell us whether wine can really serve as a basis for a meal. Therefore, since Avrohom was a prophet he determined that wine could be considered as the basis of a meal, ...


1

While I don't have much too add, there is a relevant source here. see Shabbos 10b, all the way on the bottom. Gemarah discusses how tzoar was one year younger than sedom, and therefore not condemned. What may remain, though, is whether it wasn't condemned then, meaning it still had some time, or that it wasn't condemned, meaning not included in this ...


0

Perhaps this is what you're thinking of: Rabbi Moshe Shapiro's book ממעמקים, at the start of one of the essays on פרשת לך־לך, indicates that there's a tradition in the name of the G'ra, and it's well accepted, that the first time something appears in the Torah tells us something of its true nature. Thus, he cites for example from Bava Kama 55, seeing the ...


3

R' Samson Rapahel Hirsch, in his commentary on this verse, explains (as alluded to in the question) that "קלל" refers to "decreasing the material means of a person or thing" ("lightening" them, like in the root "קל"), while "ארר" refers to a deeper curse, "internally and intensively, to rob somebody of the abilities for their inner life." Other nations can't ...


1

Other answers have explored why the Torah mentions the future in your case, so i'm just going to bring another case of this. Bereishit 32:33: עַל-כֵּן לֹא-יֹאכְלוּ בְנֵי-יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת-גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה, אֲשֶׁר עַל-כַּף הַיָּרֵךְ, עַד, הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה: כִּי נָגַע בְּכַף-יֶרֶךְ יַעֲקֹב, בְּגִיד הַנָּשֶׁה. Explaining this particular case, perhaps the ...


3

כלי יקר explains: "קלל" means "disparage" or "curse" whereas "ארר" means "ostracize and curse". If a dishonorable person disparages an honorable person, mere disparagement would be insufficient retribution, as it wouldn't affect the perpetrator: he doesn't mind such disparagement. Rather, he'd need ארר as retribution.


6

1st Question: How did Pharaoh know? Ramban: the manner of the affliction made it absolutely clear to Pharaoh that it was a punishment for taking Sarai. He therefore asked Sarai what he did to deserve this, and she told him that she was married to Avraham. There are a few ways that the affliction might have been clearly a punishment for taking Sarai: ...


1

Another one that Rashi actually points out is in Bereishis 2 14 d.h. Kush v'Ashur. As far as why here, I would suggest that it brings out the unbelievable unnatural event of the destruction, much like Eiliyahu watering everything before the heavenly fire struck.


4

Are there any other places in Tanach where this kind of explicit foreshadowing happens? There are probably a few, but, one memorable one for me is Shmot 16:35 that states that B'nai Yisra'el ate the manna for 40 years until they arrived at the border of Cana'an. Obviously, it hadn't yet happened. As to why such cases occur, in general, this fits into ...


5

As pointed out by many meforshim, the food in the teivah was provided miraculously. Rabbi Sorotzkin in Oznayim Latorah 6:21 (answer 3) says It is known that the Ark's provisions were insufficient to sustain its passengers for even a week, and only Hashem's blessing caused the food to last the entire year of the flood. Similarly, he says that after they ...


3

as @Nic said, the orientation of that time (note that the word comes from "east" [orient]) was to face the east as the base direction, unlike our modern maps which face north. This places the Mediterranean at their backs, the Negev (and Chevron) to their right, the Galilee to their left, and the Jordan river straight ahead. The reason that Shomron and ...


3

R. Yitzchak Hutner (in Pachad Yitzchak to Sukkos) writes that the reason a "hei" was added was because Avraham was becoming a new creation, so to speak - being fashioned from new. As the Midrash writes, (Midrash Rabba 12:2) when God created the world, He did so with the letter "hei". Whatever that may mean, the letter "hei" is clearly symbolic (and maybe ...


8

The Malbim to Shemos 22, brought here in Sefer HaKarmel, explains as follows: ארר refers to the ramifications of the curse, that it causes a loss or detriment to the person or belongings of the accursed from the cursor. Therefore, curses from Hashem are always ארורים. On the other hand, קלל is just the expression of the curse. Therefore, says the Malbim, ...


10

The Ramban says the reason why his name is not mentioned is due to the fact that the city was small with few people living there, he was not famous. The Shaarei Aharon (from whom I am quoting all these answers) suggests that the names mentioned here are based on the evil nature of the people we are mentioning. Being that the king of Tzoar was not so evil ...


3

I heard in a shiur from R' Moshe Wolfson that Avraham was given his new name in the context of the promise to have children and become a nation. The letter ה is the אות ההולדה, the letter of birth, as it is the feminine letter (the letter that turns a word into a grammatically feminine word). Avraham was being given the ability to father a nation, ...


3

Rav Shlomo Kluger in his sefer Imrei Shefer here explains that the posuk in Proverbs 15:27 does not say that "one who does not accept gifts will live", but "one who hates gifts will live", because sometimes it is necessary to accept gifts even though he hates them, for example, to pay off debts which is a mitzvah. Therefore, he continues, Avrohom accepted ...


4

As we see farther on, the "clean" animals are the ones designated for the altar. While Noach and the others are allowed to eat any animal, the ones being given to Hashem as a sacrifice are restricted more. See the relevant pesukim and the meforshim on the sacrifice upon exiting the ark. Rabbi Shimshon Rafael Hirsch, for example, goes into a long analysis ...


0

Not much of an answer to your questions, but perhaps a step in the right direction. Maayana Shel Torah to Bereshit 5:5, brings from HaKtav V'Hakabala to Bereshit 25:7 that it says Adam lived the years "which he lived" to tell us that he did not actually live as long as he was supposed to, because he gave 70 years to King David. So the years that he ...


3

There is a disagreement in the commentaries whether Cham was the youngest or middle son. If he was the middle son then it is easy to understand why Rashi explained that קטן means worthless and despised since he was not the youngest. In fact, Rashi himself in Avodah Zorah 9a says clearly that Cham was the middle son. The Gur Aryeh however is amongst those ...


0

You may be missing a nuance in the language the Torah uses for "drying". The word used in 8:13 is "charvu" which means "destroyed". Rashi gives a better explanation, there saying that it was like mortar / clay. Meaning, in practical terms, that it was too soft to walk on. In the following verse, 14, the Torah uses the term, "Yavsha", which is the usual word ...



Top 50 recent answers are included