New answers tagged vayera
Based on their plain hermeneutic, the 19th Century Hebraists Keil and Delitzsch provide their explanation through the lens of Bereshit 35:11 and Bereshit 17:4, which had spoken to the anticipated or future rule of kings in Israel.
R' Samson Raphael Hirsch, in his commentary on these two verses and on Genesis 2:5, says that "שיח," in both contexts, refers to "growth." In 21:15, R' Hirsch interprets "תַּחַת אַחַד הַשִּׂיחִם" as, generically, "under something that was growing there," underlining Hagar's panicked indifference to where she dropped Yishmael, to the point of not taking note ...
It's not really a matter of context. It is a word and it happens to be the name of an object. Connections of this type are typically very weak and are therefore endless. The basis for these connections are often more Kabbalistic, based on the idea that the letters define the life of the concept. Therefore, same letters = same life force. But don't expect ...
Linguistically, either there is no connection, or they are closely related, depending on which root you decide is being employed. Ernest Klein's Etymological Dictionary (page 654) has 2 separate words spelled שיח. One is "speak, talk, converse" and is traced to the Arabic (was diligent) and is also spelled with a samech. The other means a shrub, traced to ...
Maimonides (The Guide of the Perplexed II.42; as explained, I believe, by Rabbi Dr. Menachem Krakowski) maintains that the passage is describing the events as they were prophetically witnessed by Abraham, meaning he was aware of the entire sequence of events.
Rashi on Genesis 20:1:1: ויסע משם אברהם. (excerpt) להתרחק מלוט שיצא עליו שם רע שבא על בנותיו My translation (and context): The parsha (paragraph) following the story of Lot mentions that Avraham travelled to Grar. Almost every commentary asks why Avraham did this, as there was nothing wrong living in Elonei Mamre and there was no famine or other ...
Sforno says "hofech" can mean "transform", not just "flip." Thus, God transformed the entire space into a fiery, sulfury mess.
Avraham prayed that Hashem would save a city, and give 10 righteous people a chance to influence the rest. Lot not only prayed for compassion and patience: in his prayer he was offering to actively be that positive influence. (This was my understanding when I learned the Yad Yechezqeil R Ozer Alport cites in sam's answer, but apparently R Chaim Kanievsky ...
Avraham and lot were making two totally different arguments. Avraham was basing his argument on merit vs sin. There wasn't enough merit so the cities couldn't be saved. Lot was saying i am weak and can't walk so far, can't you let me go there. He wasn't asking for justice but for mercy. The addition of Zoar being younger was just something to which to "hang" ...
Top 50 recent answers are included