Tag Info

New answers tagged

3

Radak (Y'sha'ya 28:4) comments that ציץ is the masculine form and ציצית is the feminine form: נזכר בלשון זכר ציץ ובלשון נקבה ציצית The Zohar (Sh'lach 174b) likewise notes this. The Zohar understands this connection as representing a kabbalistic dichotomy where ציצית represents the feminine aspects of Creation and the physical world while the ציץ ...


0

Thanks to Shokhet and Fred for pointing me to this answer. The Ohr HaChaim on Devarim 21:11 says as much. There's more, but i'll only quote some of it here. (Translations are my own.) אלא באה להעיר שבאמצעות היותו עוסק במצוה יגלה ה' את עיניו להכיר בגויה שיש בה יפת תואר שהיא נשמה הקדושה הנקראת יפת תואר, כי זוהר נשמות הקדושות מופלא ועצום הוא, וזאת האשה ...


0

Ibn Ezra writes: כי הוא דרך בזיון על כן אמר כי תועבת ה For it is an embarrassment, therefore it is written "for it is an abomination of God." Kli Yakar writes: לפי שגם הכלבים עזי נפש מזנים בפרהסיא...והרי שניהם שוים בזנות ובעזות Because dogs also are brazen, in that they are promiscuous in public...therefore, the two of them (the ...


1

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].


0

One could answer by explaining his intent was an expression of his desperation. He asked God for help because he was in such a difficult position that he was forced to split his camp.


1

The Malbin always explains that שָׂשׂוֹן is the external manifestation of happiness, and שִׂמְחָה is feeling happy. See, for example, the Malbim on ישעיה Posuk 22:13 וְהִנֵּה שָׂשׂוֹן וְשִׂמְחָה הָרֹג בָּקָר וְשָׁחֹט צֹאן אָכֹל בָּשָׂר וְשָׁתוֹת יָיִן אָכוֹל וְשָׁתוֹ כִּי מָחָר נָמוּת: שמחה היא שמחת הלב הפנימית, וששון היא המחול והריקוד והמשתה אשר יעשו ...


-1

I believe it is the Gra who explains that Sasson refers to open, outer joy while Simcha refers to inner joy. You can explain the Pasuk as prioritizing one over the other, or suggesting which led to the other.


3

This idea is found in the S'fas Emes on the Chumash (B'ha'alos'cha 5635, s.v. ויעש כן אהרן - thank you Chiddushei Torah for finding this helpful citation): ויעש כן אהרן. שלא שינה. יש לפרש כי עשה מעשה המצוה כל ימי חייו בכוונה ורצון אחד. כי דרך כל אדם. שבהתחלה מתעורר לטוב. אח"כ נשכח ממנו. וצריך לחפש התעוררות באופן אחר תמיד. והאמת כי ההתפעלות הראשון הוא ...


0

Ruach was the first herald to the shechinah mentioned in malachim 19:11, followed by ra'ash, then eish, then the kol demamah dakah (shofar). That also seems to follow the structure of har sinai - the cloud came first (ruach), then the ra'ash came before the eish, and right before it says the dibros it says "Kol hashofar halech vichazek me'od." Most ...


0

The Zohar interprets these events to mean the Yaakov was exploring the secrets of the mitzvah of Tzitzis.


8

Sotah 17a: דריש ר''ע איש ואשה זכו שכינה ביניהן לא זכו אש אוכלתן R. Akiba expounded: When husband and wife are worthy, the Shechinah abides with them; when they are not worthy fire consumes them. (Soncino translation) Rashi there explains: שכינה ביניהם - שהרי חלק את שמו ושיכנו ביניהן יו"ד באיש וה"י באשה The Shechinah abides with them - ...


0

Seems like the Tur's introduction to Even HaEzzer.


3

First of all, the plain-sense meaning of the verse (even without the te'amim) is that בהר and יי are in construct ("the mountain of God"), as is evidenced by the niqqud. As mevaqesh noted in a comment on the previous answer, "on the mountain" is בָּהַר (bahar), while בְּהַר (behar) means "on the mountain of". So the niqqud and the te'amim are, in this ...


3

Chazal state that Har Hamoriah and the place Yaakov slept were identical to Har Sinai, which is called "Har Hashem." Matan Torah was the point where Hashem "made himself seen on the Mountain of Hashem," which would be the literal interpretation of the text when using the masoretic taamim. He also appeared to Yaakov at that location, who identified the place ...


5

Avos d'rabbi Nassan (ch. 11) quotes R. Shimon Ben Elazar who is pretty explicit that this refers to physical labor; cited by Meiri to Avos (ch. 1). This is also the implication of Recanti (13th century kabbalist). Sifrei (Eikev 41) writes that it refers to service of God Specifically, "to work it" refers to [Torah] study, and "to guard it" refers to ...


0

Seems like Rav Hirsch is addressing this. He writes on that verse: בעבור in the transition to something, in the intention to achieve something. לבעבור for this intention: נסות אתכם So that you prove to yourselves whether you are able to receive God's Torah directly from Him, and inasmuch as you yourselves feel the necessity for an intermediary, you will all ...


0

Based heavily on this answer of mine The answer to this question is classically understood to be subject to a debate between the Rambam and the Behag. The Rambam did count belief in God as one of (in fact, the first of) the 613 commandments, and proves that it should be counted as such due to a Talmudic comment on the first of the 10 Commandments. However, ...


1

R. Avraham Ben HaRambam cites the verse "do not touch my anointed and do not harm my prophets" (Psalms 105:15) in the context of negative assessments of members of these categories. This would certainly include the Avos, (the prophecy of the Imahos on the other hand is not explicit in the Torah, so this "prohibition" isn't as clear.)


5

Apparently although the Mechilta understood the prohibition to be kidnapping it still recognizes the literal meaning of theft. This is implied by this mechilta and also somewhat implied by this mechilta.


0

To borrow Avraham Yitzchak's answer here, the Mechilta cited by Rashi (19:24) explains that the second warning was necessary as per the principle of repeated warning, before and during act.


2

The most famous case of a Rishon pointing out the human flaw of a patriarch is the Ramban's discussion of Avraham's descent to Egypt in Lech Licha 12:10. Rabbi Hirsch goes to great lengths to expound on that opinion. The Medrash Rabba in the beginning of parshas Shemos has a list of our heroes who ruined their children by showing them too much love. Avraham ...


2

Unlike Rashi (19:24) who understands that Moshe was questioning God, R. Saadya Gaon writes that he was troubled by this verse for many years until he saw in a certain work that a servant tells his master that he has completed an assigned task upon receiving a command for the next task. Similarly, Moshe was merely telling God that he had performed his ...


4

The Kedushas Levi explains that Moshe was responding to Hashem according to Moshe's own perception - Moshe lived on a level where if Hashem said no, then it is impossible to disobey - Hashem's command is reality, and it's inviolable. Therefore he said "They can't come up, because You told them not to." Hashem's response was "לך רד" - go down; go down to ...


5

Rashi answers your question when he says on verse 24: Go, descend: And warn them a second time. We admonish a person before the act [he is to perform], and we admonish him again at the time of the act [when it is to be performed]. [from Mechilta] Moshe evidently thought that one warning was enough and the intent of his response was to understand ...


3

Shadal has two commentaries on Torah: a shorter one called Mishtadel a longer one, with two printings. One of these printings is a censored text, which leaves out e.g. some of Shadal's citations of gentile scholars. This one is available online in plain text. The other of these printings is the full uncensored version and is available on Google Books (but ...


1

Sefaria has some of his writings. Bereishis Shemos Vayikra Bamidbar


1

http://ishimshitos.blogspot.com/2008/09/blog-post.html?m=1 This may be your best bet. Not all the links seem to be working, but the Torah ones are.


6

What's the difference between Amalek and his nation? On “Amalek and his nation” Seforno says “who were collected from another people to fight”. I understand him to mean that the “nation” were his in the sense that he assembled them to fight with him but that they were not amalekites (may their name be erased). The Sefer שערי אהרון quotes the שכל טוב to ...


0

The basic principle is discussed in Meseches Chagiga Daf 3:, quoting Koheles Perek 12: בעלי אספות - אלו תלמידי חכמים שיושבין אסופות אסופות ועוסקין בתורה, הללו מטמאין והללו מטהרין, הללו אוסרין והללו מתירין, הללו פוסלין והללו מכשירין. שמא יאמר אדם: היאך אני למד תורה מעתה? תלמוד לומר: כולם נתנו מרעה אחד - אל אחד נתנן, פרנס אחד אמרן, מפי אדון כל המעשים ברוך ...



Top 50 recent answers are included