2

Slightly related.

Rashi on Divrei Hayamim 1:8:29 writes:

"...This is what is explained at the end of Megillath Yerushalmi. Ezra found scrolls: the scroll of מְעוֹנִים (Me'onim), the scroll of זַאַטוּטֵי (Za'atutei) and the scrolls of הָאַחִים (Ha'achim), and they rejected the words of the one and accepted the words of the two..."

This is a different version to what we have in Sofrim 6:4:

"R. Simeon b. Laḳish said: Three scrolls of the Torah were found in the Temple court: the Ma‘on scroll, the Za’aṭuṭë scroll, and the Hu’ scroll. In one of these they found the expression of ma‘on, and in the other two it was written, The eternal God is me‘onah (a dwelling place), so they adopted the reading of the two scrolls and discarded that of the one scroll. In another of the scrolls they found it written, And he sent the za‘aṭuṭë (nobles) of the children of Israel, and in the other two they found written And he sent na‘arë (the young men of) the children of Israel, so they retained the reading of the two and abandoned that of the one. In one of the scrolls hu’ was written eleven times, but in the other two hi’ was written eleven times, so they adopted the reading of the two and discarded that of the one."

and Yerushalmi Taanit 20b:

"שלשה ספרים מצאו בעזרה ספר מעוני וספר זעטוטי וספר היא באחד מצאו כתוב מעון אלהי קדש ובשנים כתיב (דברים ל״ג:כ״ז) מענה אלהי קדם וקיימו שנים וביטלו אחד. באחד מצאו כתוב וישלח את זעטוטי בני ישראל ובשנים כתוב (שמות כ״ד:ה׳) וישלח את נערי בני ישראל וקיימו שנים וביטלו אחד. באחד מצאו כתוב תשע היא ובשנים כתיב אחד עשר היא וקיימו שנים ובטלו אחד."

Translation: "Three scrolls were found in the Temple court: The Me'onei scroll and the Za'atutei scroll and the Hi' scroll. In one they found written "the eternal God is Me'on" and in two it was written "the eternal God is Me'onah (a dwelling place)", so they adopted the reading of the two scrolls and discarded that of the one scroll. In one they found written "And he sent the za‘atutei (nobles) of the children of Israel", and in the other two they found written And he sent na‘arei (the young men of) the children of Israel", so they retained the reading of the two and abandoned that of the one. In one of the scrolls hi’ was written eleven times, but in the other two hi’ was written eleven times, so they adopted the reading of the two and discarded that of the one."

My question is on Rashi's version of the story: In what way was the Ha'achim scroll different from the other two scrolls?


Note: Per @DoubleAA's suggestion, I'm going through whatever manuscripts of Rashi's commentary on Divrei Hayamim I can find, that are discernible enough.

The NLF's MS 164 reads ספר האחייא or ספר המחייא:

enter image description here

This is dated to 5010 (1250 CE).

The Vatican's MS 94 (pg. 283r) reads ספר האחיה:

enter image description here

This is dated to the 14th century.

Menachem Zahari in his book "Mekorot Rashi - Divrei Hayamim" used a version - which he doesn't appear to name, as far as I can tell - which reads ספר האהים.

5
  • Could this just be a typo in the rashi – Double AA Mar 7 at 0:29
  • @DoubleAA Always possible. Do you happen to have access to a manuscript of this particular Rashi (Seriously asking)? – Harel13 Mar 7 at 6:52
  • @DoubleAA According to this manuscript in the NLF, indeed it may be a typo, because it says there either ספר המחייא or ספר האחייא (hard to differentiate between the א and the מ). Interesting...(just FYI, there are a number of other small differences (that I could see) in that MS). – Harel13 Mar 7 at 10:51
  • The Vatican's manuscript puts it as ספר האחיה. – Harel13 Mar 7 at 12:23
  • 1
    I didn't think "Rashi" on divrei hayamim was actually Rashi. Not that it changes the question. – magicker72 Mar 7 at 12:36

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .