18

A common commentary to the Yerushalmi that serves a similar function to Rashi is the Penei Moshe written by Rabbi Moshe Margolis. A volume from the Talmud Yerushalmi with his commentary can be seen here. Other commentaries that follow a similar pattern are Korban Ha'edah by Rabbi David Frankel and Chiddushei Ridvaz by Rabbi Yaakov David Willowsky. These are ...


17

This article, by Prof. Rivka Ulmer, might answer some of your questions... She writes (pg. 108): "Prior to the attestation in the New Testament, there is no evidence of Psalm 22 being used in a Jewish messianic context... Jewish interpretations of the Psalm identify the individual in the Psalm with a royal figure, alternatively interpreted as King David, ...


14

I have an old copy of The Jewish Observer that discusses the ban. It seems a couple comments in his translation of the Talmud implied that certain sages ruled consistently in a particular fashion (e.g. stringently) because their personality inclined in that direction. Some were worried that readers would infer that the sages were allowing their personal ...


14

You may be referring to a comment by the Rashash, who in turn explains a comment by Rashi on B'rachos 8a (s.v. כפיטורי בפי ושט). Rashi says: ים אוקיינוס יש בו מקומות שאינו מקבל ברזל ומחברין לוחי הספינה ע"י חבלים ועקלים שתוחבי' בנקביו ותוקעין אותו בדוחק לפי שהם גסין כמדת הנקב My translation: There are places in the ocean that do not tolerate iron, and ...


13

To summarize (and perhaps embellish) Prof. Yaakov Elman's The Rebirth of Omnisignificant Biblical Exegesis in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, which addresses all this at length, Hazal seemed to assume that every word in the Torah was deliberate, meaningful, and not mere stylistic flourish. However, in response to Karaism, Rav Saadya Gaon greatly ...


12

To quote S. from On The Main Line: Rashi was known by Christians as Rabbi Solomon Jarchi (Yarchi) because of a mistake, the mistake being that it was thought that 1) he was from Lunel and 2) that the yud stood for ירחי, which was Hebrew for "from Lunel" (Lunel as in luna as in moon). This mistake was so entrenched that the Chida (page 6 in linked ...


11

No edition of the Torah I have seen has included the commentaries M'tzudas David or M'tzudas Tziyon, but that does not prove anything. However, the author of both, in his introduction says the following, implying that the commentary is written specifically on (and beginning with) the N'vi'im (text is from this paper on the commentaries and the translation is ...


11

Rashi's commentary seems to indicate that it refers to the plight of the Jewish Nation in Exile.


10

A good place to look to find refutations of Christian messianic interpretations of the bible is Sefer Nitzachon, printed in Otzar Vikuchim by Dr. J. D. Eisenstein. This is his answer to this specific case (p. 256): The Christian claim is that Jesus was crying to G-d, his father, "Why have you abandoned me?" at the time he was being executed. But according ...


10

Two editions of Mishnayot I have on hand1 ascribe this commentary, the עיקר תוספות יום טוב, to R' Meshulam Katz. This Geni page attributes Ikkar Tosafot Yom Tov to R' Meshulam Katz, and identifies him as the Av Beit Din of Lvov, who died there in 1810. The text in the Geni page is apparently copied2 from a pedigree record included by R' Katz' great^3-...


9

Double AA covered the main commentaries on Yerushalmi. Here are a few very useful contemporary ones: Lev Yerushalayim (on all of Yerushalmi, I think) Commentary of Rav Chaim Kanievsky (example here) The Artscroll Yerushalmi (in progress)


9

Look at the Haga'ot HaGRI"V 26 on the "Klalim B'Rashi", printed after the Mavo LaTalmud, at the end of Masechet Berachot. He says: ‫דרך רש״י בהרבה מקומות לפרש המשנה כס״ד דמקשן כדי להבין המשנה כס״ד טרם בואו אל המסקנא וזהו אך דרך‬ ‫רש״י לא כן שאר מפרשים תוי״ט פ״ב דפאה מ״ב‬ ‫ It is Rashi's way in many places to explain the Mishna according to the ...


9

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 - God ...


9

Many laws applied to the Passover offering that do not apply to the Seder. For example, the Passover offering can only be eaten by people who are Tahor (a specific form of ritual purity). There is no requirement to be Tahor to attend a Seder nowadays. Similarly, the Passover offering had to be eaten only by the invited members of a group. Nowadays, anyone ...


8

According to the JNUL website, Printed editions of the commentaries on tractates Ta’anit, Nedarim, Nazir and Horayot have been mistakenly attributed to him, and were most probably written by the scholars of Mainz or others. Likewise the printed commentary on Moed Katan is wrongly attributed to him. Two tractates have partial Rashi commentaries: Bava Batra ...


8

It was written on all of the Prophets and the Writings with the exception of Ruth, Lamentations and Esther. It was not written on Chumash. Source


8

The Maharsha discusses the pig story in Chidushei Agadot at the end of Sotah, as advertised, but the comment is applied not to the portion of the Gemara on 49b where the story is told, but to the portion of the Mishna on 49a that that portion of Gemara comments on. Here is the text of the relevant comment in the Maharsha: בפולמוס של טיטוס כו' פרש"י שהביא ...


8

Some old non-allegorical commentaries on Shir HaShirim: Rashbam's commentary (translation) separates the allegorical and non-allegorical comments. R' Avraham ibn Ezra wrote his commentary in three levels: one lexical, one non-allegorical, and one allegorical. There are two anonymous commentaries here given under the headings פירוש מחכמי צרפת that are non-...


8

The source for this is the Chida in Shem HaGedolim letter Shin:7


8

The Ohr hachaim on the beginning of bereshit quotes the Talmud Chagigah 12a. There it lists 10 things were created in the first day, and one of them is Choshech. ואמר רב יהודה אמר רב עשרה דברים נבראו ביום ראשון ואלו הן שמים וארץ תהו ובהו אור וחשך רוח ומים מדת יום ומדת לילה שמים וארץ דכתיב בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ תהו ובהו דכתיב והארץ היתה תהו ...


8

Rav Sa'adya Gaon explains in his commentary to Psalms (51:7) that David was not making a statement about the state of Man. Rather, he was speaking personally; that he was so ashamed, that he felt as though he were conceived in sin. He writes (as translated into Hebrew by R. Qafih): והרי אני מרוב כלימתי כאלו בעון חוללתי For I, from my great ...


8

David's sin was a personal matter, Saul's was national. King Saul was personally commanded to eradicate Amalek. This was a national interest which was under his authority as king. When he sinned and didn't obey, it was in his position as king, and so God punished him as a king (i.e. by losing his monarchy). King David sinned in something everyone was ...


8

The largest cluster of lessons is 67. This occurs in a section of commentary covering the large majority of the book of II Samuel. Now for some more details: We have commentaries from Gersonides on the Scriptural books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Job, Proverbs, Ruth,...


8

A friend of mine compiled the following list: This edition: https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/14118 has Efodi, Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov, ibn Crescas, and Abarbanel. This: https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/31594 is the commentary of R. Moshe Narboni. This is the commentary of R. Shem Tov ibn Falaquera: https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/23920. Two commentaries by R. Yosef ...


7

"Rashi was also called Jarchi, derived from the name of the city in which he lived, "Lunel." Jerach being the Hebrew, as lune is the French for moon." ~taken from this webpage. ~The Chida brings this in Shem HaGedolim, in his entry on Rashi (page 6 of this pdf)


7

Yes, they are the same, according to this article. It was apparently his last name (maybe what he went by in legal papers).


7

The first Mikraot Gedolot was printed by Daniel Bromberg in 1516-1517. http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%9E%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%92%D7%93%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%AA


7

Rambam states explicitly in the first paragraph of his introduction to Sefer Hamitzvot that the Commentary to the Mishnah came first: After having completed our previous well-known work wherein we included a commentary to the whole Mishnah – our goal in that work having been satisfied with the explanation of the substance of each and every Halacha in ...


7

The difficulty with your question is as follows: In those days (almost) everything was oral. For example we have lots of things the Hillel said (he lived around then), but they were not written down then - they were written down later. So do they count? They are certainly commentary, but they were only written down later. The Talmud is full of things that ...


7

It's called שערי צבי - "Shaarey Tzvi" written by Rav Tzvi Rotter shlit"a (he is the son of the Shaaray Aharon). The book can be found here and can be partially viewed here. Hat tip to sam regarding another book with the same premise, ילקוט מלכו של עולם - "Yalkut Malko Shel Olam", information about it can be found here.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible