The Age of Trup, part iv

Continuing from Shadal's Vikuach Al Chochmat haKabbalah, we finish the topic of how various classic Biblical commentators first established that one should not argue on trup and nikkud, and then proceeded to do just that. So far, we have addressed Rashi, Rashbam, and Ibn Ezra. Now we turn to address Ramban.

And the Ramban, z"l, upon the verse {in the very beginning of parshat Vayera, when Avraham greets the three "men," in Bereishit 18}:

ג וַיֹּאמַר: אֲדֹנָי, אִם-נָא מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ--אַל-נָא תַעֲבֹר, מֵעַל עַבְדֶּךָ.

3 and said: 'My lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant.

he wrote:

"We find it {the word Adonai} in some sefarim with a kametz {under the nun}, and {if so}, behold, he {=Avraham} called them {=the angels} by the name of their Master, with Aleph Daled {that is, the name Adonai}."

Thus, we see that he relies on the vowel points.

And so too, on {the verse in parshat Noach, in Bereishit 8:11}:

יא וַתָּבֹא אֵלָיו הַיּוֹנָה לְעֵת עֶרֶב, וְהִנֵּה עֲלֵה-זַיִת טָרָף בְּפִיהָ; וַיֵּדַע נֹחַ, כִּי-קַלּוּ הַמַּיִם מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ.

11 And the dove came in to him at eventide; and lo in her mouth an olive-leaf freshly plucked; so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.

he wrote:

"And the simple explanation of Scriptures they explain in it that it {taraf} is an adjective of "leaf," and a support to the matter is the presence of kamatz in the word."

And with all this, upon {a pasuk from the previous perek, Bereishit 7, also from parshat Noach}

כג וַיִּמַח אֶת-כָּל-הַיְקוּם אֲשֶׁר עַל-פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה, מֵאָדָם עַד-בְּהֵמָה עַד-רֶמֶשׂ וְעַד-עוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם, וַיִּמָּחוּ, מִן-הָאָרֶץ; וַיִּשָּׁאֶר אַךְ-נֹחַ וַאֲשֶׁר אִתּוֹ, בַּתֵּבָה.

23 And He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and creeping thing, and fowl of the heaven; and they were blotted out from the earth; and Noah only was left, and they that were with him in the ark.

he wrote:

"And it is as if it were written in the verse "And He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, for both man, and cattle, and creeping thing, and fowl of heaven were blotted out of the earth."

And behold, according to his explanation, the etnachta should have come under the word הָאֲדָמָה {but rather a revii comes on that word, and an etnachta on the word haAretz}.

And so too he explains {again in Vayera, when Avraham argues with Hashem about Sodom, in Bereishit 18:23}:

כג וַיִּגַּשׁ אַבְרָהָם, וַיֹּאמַר: הַאַף תִּסְפֶּה, צַדִּיק עִם-רָשָׁע

23 And Abraham drew near, and said: 'Wilt Thou indeed sweep away the righteous with the wicked?

that the anger {apo} of Hashem is His Attribute of Judgment, and according to this, behold, the heh should have had a kametz {presumably since it is no longer a chataf patach question being promoted to patach, but rather is the definite article patach, being promoted to kametz via tashlum dagesh, that is compensatory lengthening since the aleph cannot receive a dagesh to geminate it, since it is a guttural}.

And so too he reads {in Vayishlach, in Bereishit 36:11-12}

יא וַיִּהְיוּ, בְּנֵי אֱלִיפָז--תֵּימָן אוֹמָר, צְפוֹ וְגַעְתָּם וּקְנַז.	11 And the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz.
יב וְתִמְנַע הָיְתָה פִילֶגֶשׁ, לֶאֱלִיפַז בֶּן-עֵשָׂו, וַתֵּלֶד לֶאֱלִיפַז, אֶת-עֲמָלֵק; אֵלֶּה, בְּנֵי עָדָה אֵשֶׁת עֵשָׂו.	12 And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz Esau's son; and she bore to Eliphaz Amalek. These are the sons of Adah Esau's wife.

as:
וַיִּהְיוּ, בְּנֵי אֱלִיפָז--תֵּימָן אוֹמָר, צְפוֹ וְגַעְתָּם וּקְנַז וְתִמְנַע = "And the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz, and Timna,"
and afterwards the verse
הָיְתָה פִילֶגֶשׁ, לֶאֱלִיפַז בֶּן-עֵשָׂו, וַתֵּלֶד לֶאֱלִיפַז, אֶת-עֲמָלֵק; אֵלֶּה, בְּנֵי עָדָה אֵשֶׁת עֵשָׂו = "There was concubine to Eliphaz Esau's son; and she bore to Eliphaz Amalek. These are the sons of Adah Esau's wife."
And it does not elaborate upon the name of the concubine.
{And thus he ignores the pasuk division.}

And upon the verse {Vayikra 1:2}

ב דַּבֵּר אֶל-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם, אָדָם כִּי-יַקְרִיב מִכֶּם קָרְבָּן, לַה--מִן-הַבְּהֵמָה, מִן-הַבָּקָר וּמִן-הַצֹּאן, תַּקְרִיבוּ, אֶת-קָרְבַּנְכֶם.

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them: When any man of you bringeth an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd or of the flock.

he wrote

"the intent of this verse is 'A man from amongst you, when he offers from the domesticated animals {=beheima} an offering to the LORD, from the herd or from the sheep you shall bring it.' "

{Thus, beheima is not side by side with bakar and tzon as options, but rather bakar and tzon are elaborations of what is meant by beheima.} And behold, according to this, it is fitting that the etnach comes under the word habeheima {rather than laHashem}.

And so too {Devarim 1:5}

ה בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן, בְּאֶרֶץ מוֹאָב, הוֹאִיל מֹשֶׁה, בֵּאֵר אֶת-הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת לֵאמֹר.

5 beyond the Jordan, in the land of Moab, took Moses upon him to expound this law, saying:

he explains "began to expound," and according to this, the bet {of בֵּאֵר} should have had a kametz, rather than a tzeirei.

And so too in the verse {in parshat Haazinu, in Devarim 32}:

ה שִׁחֵת לוֹ לֹא, בָּנָיו מוּמָם: {ס} דּוֹר עִקֵּשׁ, וּפְתַלְתֹּל. {ר}

5 Is corruption His? No; His children's is the blemish; a generation crooked and perverse.

he connects the word לֹא with the word בָּנָיו {thus, "not his sons"}.

And he has more like this.