Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Nitzavim sources

by aliyah
rishon (Devarim 29:9)
sheni (29:12), shlishi (29:15)
revii (30:1)
chamishi (30:7), shishi (30:11)
shevii (30:15), maftir
haftara (Yeshaya 61)

by perek

Rashi, in English and Hebrew
Shadal (here and here)
Daat -- with Rashi, Ramban, Seforno, Ibn Ezra, Rashbam, Rabbenu Bachya, Midrash Rabba, Tanchuma+, Gilyonot
Gilyonot Nechama Leibovitz (Hebrew)
Tiferes Yehonasan from Rav Yonasan Eibeshitz
Toldos Yizchak Acharon, repeated from Rav Yonasan Eibeshutz (nothing on Nitzavim)
Divrei Yehonasan -- not until Vayelech
Even Shleimah -- from Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Ehrenreich
R' Saadia Gaon's Tafsir, Arabic translation of Torah (here and here)
Collected commentary of Saadia Gaon on Torah
Zohar, with English translation (nothing on Nitzavim)
Baal Haturim (HaAruch)
Imrei Shafer, Rav Shlomo Kluger
Ibn Gabirol (nothing until end of Devarim)
Rashbam (and here)
Kol Eliyahu (Gra) -- nothing on Nitzavim
Mipninei Harambam -- nothing on sefer Devarim
Sefer Zikaron of Ritva -- nothing until Zot Habracha
Noam Elimelech -- not until Haazinu
Michlal Yofi
Tzror Hamor
R' Eleazer miGermayza -- not until veZot haBeracha
Tanach with He'emek Davar -- Netziv
Nachalas Yaakov -- R' Yaakov ben Yaakov Moshe of Lissa
Divrei Emes -- Chozeh mi-Lublin -- no more on sefer Devarim
Or Hameir, R' Zev Wolf of Zhitomir
Akedat Yitzchak
Melo HaOmer
Baalei Bris Avraham
Rav Chaim Vital
Beur and Meamer
Rav Yosef Karo

The following meforshim at JNUL. I've discovered that if you click on the icon to rotate sideways, change to only black and white, select only the portion which is text, it is eminently readable on paper.
Ralbag (394)
Chizkuni (153)
Abarbanel (401)
Shach (323)
Yalkut Reuveni (pg 176)
Sefer Hachinuch (pg 178)
Aharon ben Yosef the Karaite (247)
Aharon ben Eliyahu the Karaite

Daat, Rashi In Hebrew (perek 2930)
Judaica Press Rashi in English and Hebrew
MizrachiMizrachi (315, JNUL)
Gur Aryeh (Maharal of Prague) -- and here
Berliner's Beur on Rashi (here and here)
Commentary on Rashi by Yosef of Krasnitz
R' Yisrael Isserlin (on Rashi, 17, JNUL)
Two supercommentaries on Rashi, by Chasdai Almosnino and Yaakov Kneizel
Rav Natan ben Shishon Shapira Ashkenazi (16th century), (JNUL, pg 174)
Yeriot Shlomo (Maharshal)
Moda L'Bina (Wolf Heidenheim)
Minchat Yehuda and Mekorei Rashi (in Mechokekei Yehuda)
Yosef Daas
Nachalas Yaakov
Medayek HaRashi
Prachei Rashi
Pi Habe'er on Mizrachi
Baalei HaTosafot al HaTorah
Also see Mikraos Gedolos above, which has Rashi with Sifsei Chachamim

Daat, Ramban in Hebrew (perek 2930)
R' Yitzchak Abohav's on Ramban (standalone and in a Tanach opposite Ramban)
Rabbi Meir Abusaula (student of Rashba)

ibn ezra
Daat, Ibn Ezra in Hebrew (perek 2930)
Mechokekei Yehudah (HebrewBooks)
Mavaser Ezra -- nothing on Nitzavim
R' Shmuel Motot (on Ibn Ezra, pg 51, JNUL)
Ibn Kaspi's supercommentary on Ibn Ezra, different from his commentary (nothing on Nitzavim) -- an h
Avi Ezer -- nothing on Nitzavim
Tzofnas Paneach
Ezra Lehavin
Perush al Ibn Ezra
Also see Mikraos Gedolos above, which has Ibn Ezra with Avi Ezer

Targum Onkelos opposite Torah text
Shadal's Ohev Ger on Targum Onkelos
Chalifot Semalot
Avnei Tzion -- two commentaries on Onkelos
Or Hatargum on Onkelos
Commentary on Targum Yonatan and Targum Yerushalmi
Commentary on the Masorah -- nothing on Nitzavim
Taamei Masoret -- nothing on Nitzavim
Shiluv Hamasorot -- nothing on Nitzavim
Rama (but based on alphabet, not parsha) -- and here
Midrash Rabba at Daat (2930)
Midrash Tanchuma at Daat (2930)
Devarim Rabba, with commentaries
Midrash Tanchuma with commentary of Etz Yosef and Anaf Yosef
Commentary on Midrash Rabba by R' Naftali Hirtz b'R' Menachem
Matat-Kah on Midrash Rabba -- Nitzavim (and that's it)
Nefesh Yehonasan by Rav Yonasan Eibeshutz -- not until Valelech
Midrash Aggada (Buber) -- nothing until the end
Yalkut Shimoni
Sifrei, with commentary of the Gra
Tanach with Sifrei and HaTorah veHamitzvah
Sifrei with commentary of Meir Ayin
Midrash Lekach Tov

haftarah (Yeshayahu 61:10-63:9)
In a separate Mikraos Gedolos, with Targum, Rashi, Mahari Kara, Radak, Ibn Ezra, Metzudat David.
As a haftara in a chumash Devarim, with Malbim
Haftarah in Gutnick Edition
Daat, which includes Yalkut Shimoni, Radak
Ahavas Yehonatan by Rav Yonasan Eibeshutz
Aharon ben Yosef the Karaite

Interesting Posts and Articles #283

  1. At Hirhurim, another post about Uman on Rosh Hashanah, this time by Rabbi Gil Student. As he writes:

    Controversy over the pilgrimage is actually almost as old as the practice. Not only have the pilgrims’ trips been denounced, they have personally been taunted and beaten by other Jews.
    Slightly related, I wondered whether Rabbi Eliezer Berland's students were planning to go to Uman this year, given that he claimed that last Rosh Hashanah would be the last time.
  2. Blog In Dm weighs in Rav Amnon Yitzchok and his music ban. I last weighed in on it in this post, about how the video reveals how Rabbi Amnon Yitzchok was manipulating a gadol.
  3. A post at Cross-Currents about bans on burqas, from the Eidah Chareidis and in Europe.
  4. An Op-Ed by Yossi Sarid. I think he misunderstands Shmaya's directive of שנא את הרבנות. Seriously.
  5. Orthonomics discusses the second 11th hour yeshiva closing.
  6. Are silly banz dangerous for your kids? Snopes confirms. But it seems only if they wear it to sleep, and wear a lot of them. See the image and description.
  7. Haveil Havalim hosted as Izgad this week.
  8. Luke Ford and Dov Bear report on Rabbi David Orlofsky repudiating his apology, saying that it was a draft and not official, and now he cannot put out an official statement.
  9. Yeranen Yaakov has a good defense of Rav Ovadia Yosef's recent statements about "Abu Mazen and these Palestinians". An excerpt:

    Now, let me ask you a question:
    Who in the world would be considered "our enemies and haters and all those who seek us harm"?
    I could think of many nations, but one close one in particular who has been at the forefront of seeking us harm in the past century is the Palestinians and their leadership.
  10. On the Main Line has a released transcript (and analysis of said transcript) of Henry Kissinger and Rabbi Moshe Sherer. From a first-hand report of the state of Russian matzos at that time, I would add that it was not a matter of mere chumra, but that the matzas they had were mamash chametz.
  11. Here on parshablog, did Baba Sali lie to his son in a dream? Rather, everyone was acting mightily silly.

Monday, August 30, 2010

Did Baba Sali lie to his son in a dream? Will his bones be blasted?

Summary: The answer is no, because he didn't really appear in that dream. But this should caution us from being gullible the next time around.

Post: In the gemara, Rabbi Yochanan says:
"Let the bones be blasted of those who calculate the end of days!"
אמר ר' יונתן תיפח עצמן של מחשבי קיצין שהיו אומרים כיון שהגיע את הקץ ולא בא שוב אינו בא

But surprisingly, earlier this year, Baba Sali predicted the moshiach would come this year. That means that in less than two weeks, when Rosh Hashanah arrives, Baba Sali's prediction will have failed.

Details are here, from about the end of January 2010:
The most fascinating part of the recent interview with Baba Baruch was when he was asked if he had any other dreams recently in which he saw his father. He went on to describe a dream that he said he had “not long ago” - less than two weeks ago - in which the Baba Sali appeared. The Baba Sali, he said, told him, “Moshiach will come this year. Be ready. Get Ready. And prepare a seudah because of this dream…. Because there is no solution for Am Yisroel except for Moshiach Tzidkeinu.”
The answer, I think, is that Baba Sali did not appear to his son in a dream. As we read in Berachot daf 55:
Nahmani said in the name of R. Jonathan: A man is shown in a dream only what is suggested by his own thoughts.
Baba Baruch is excited about the prospect of moshiach coming, and probably listened to much to the misguided predictions of Rabbi Eliezer Berland and Rabbi Amnon Yitzchak, or others. Rather than coming up with his own prediction, he believes that he received a message from On High, from his much more famous father, who would know such things. Baba Sali didn't lie to his son in a dream. Baba Baruch lied to himself.

It was silly when he said it in January, and it is just as silly now. Except now that it will be a false prediction, people will be more willing to see how silly it is. And we won't get frantic in the future, and listen to all sorts of false dreamers. May moshiach come soon, but I don't put much stock in the individuals who claim knowledge that he is coming by a particular time, due to misinterpretations of text X or revealed message from person Y. 

Friday, August 27, 2010

posts so far for parshat Ki Tavo


  1. Ki Tavo sources -- begun in 2008, as links by perek and aliya to the relevant page in an online Mikraos Gedolos. In 2009, revamped,
    by adding a bunch of meforshim on the parashah and haftorah. In 2010, improved further.
  2. Ki Tavo: Is the blessing on hafrashat maaser Biblical? What about on shechitaAccording to the sefer Hilchot Eretz Yisrael, saying the beracha on shechita ismeakev. But this makes little sense if all berachot on mitzvot are a Rabbinic innovation. Apasuk in Ki Tavo, darshened by Sifrei and by a Mishna in Maaser Sheni, and brought by Rashi, might counter this. But I don't think so.
  3. The spelling of ויוציאנו -- Is this a typo in Minchat Kohen, or does he reverse himself?
  4. Bringing the bikkurim to the kohen who exists in those days -- Ramban criticizes Rashi (respect) based on a Sifrei (kashrut), but Rashi is really just restating a different version of the Sifrei. And Ramban's peshat explanation, that it refers to the mishmar of that week, is not as convincing as that of Ibn Ezra, that it holds as long as kohanim are presiding. Though I would suggest something even smoother, that it is part of the future-tense tone.

  1. If you sin too much, will you come back as an unripe fruit? An "interesting" interpretation of bevoecha and betzeitecha, via Revach, about gilgul as unripe fruit. And then a disproof from a gemara in Bava Metzia.
  2. Why is the krei / ketiv of yishkavena / yishgalena not a problem of reading not from the ketav? And an interesting story of someone who insisted it indeed was a problem.
  3. Hayom Hazeh -- these are the words of Moshe. Who else would be speaking? In which the standard interpretation of Ibn Ezra is that it is Moshe, rather than the farmer. But I suggest he means Moshe rather than a later peson issuing the Biblical command to the farmer.
  4. Does Arami Oved Avi refer to a wandering / poor Aramean, or to Lavan who sought to destroyThis post deals with an interpretation of Arami Oved Avi by Ibn Ezra and Radak which goes against the classic midrashic interpretation, and the reaction of two supercommentaries of Rashi to this "daring" interpretation. What comes into play is whether Ibn Ezra and Radak can claim to have absolute knowledge of Hebrew to be able to declare the midrashic interpretation to not work out according to the rules of dikduk; and whether one can argue on midrash, as they are doing, if after the midrashic interpretation goes all the way back to Sinai! It could also be that as supercommentators of Rashi, they are simply defending Rashi's interpretation as one of peshat.
  5. Arami Oved Avi -- the Karaites have their cake and eat it too! Related to the above. The purpose of this post is to bring forth an interesting explanation I saw in the commentary of Aharon ben Yosef the Karaite. It seems like he wants to have his cake and eat it too. That is, he agrees that אובד is a poel omed, an intransitive verb, and thus means that he was a pauper, as per Ibn Ezra. But at the same time, the Arami is Lavan!
  6. The Rav on Arami Oved Avi in the Haggadah -- Dr. David Segal told me over a peshat he heard from the Rav zt"l, in which Arami Oved Avi as expounded in the haggadah is in line with Ibn Ezra and Radak's insistence that Oved is an intransitive verb. Rabbi Wohlgelenter also heard this from the Rav. The chiddush here is that we would think that the haggadah is understanding it as Lavan, but really, it refers to Yaakov, even in the derasha.


Shadal on Tithes -- and how there is really only one tithe.

A Beautiful Midrash About Kinas Soferim, and about wanting Torah as a cherished inheritance, rather than a weird midrash brought down by Rashi.


Why plaster them with plaster? Well, it would be silly to plaster them with peanut butter. ;) But seriously, to make them long-lasting, for the future.

It's not so odd -- and how choosing God made us into the Am Segulah.

Vaytzav -- An important grammatical form, and how it saps the energy out of a multiple authorship proof.

Bikkurim -- an interesting theme and underlying message.

From parshat Matot, Pinchas the Flying Priest. In the course of this, I mention Arami Oved Avi, and how this is interpreted to be the saga of Bilaam from the time he was Lavan, until when he (Lavan rather than Yaakov) went down to Egypt, and so on and so forth, as Bilaam.


Talk of a Death Cult: Is this being doresh Torah shelo kehalacha? I analyze לֹא-אָכַלְתִּי בְאֹנִי מִמֶּנּוּ and show how each phrase may refer to practices of a death cult, which he is proclaiming that he did not participate in.

In Bowdlerization of Torah I mention the possibility that certain krei and ketiv pairs were formed because the original term changed in connotation and became a crude word.

to be continued...

Manipulating the Gedolim: Did Rav Amnon Yitzchak do this to Rav Shteinman?

People were very upset at Rabbi David Orlofky's remarks, five and a half years years ago, in which he disparaged Rabbi Weinreb and said that modern Orthodox were not frum Jews or bnei Torah. (In his letter of apology / clarification, he explains that he has now apologized to Rabbi Weinreb and was forgiven, and that he meant to say Conservative Jews, for surely modern Orthodox accept the Gedolim, or some Gedolim, or would if they had any. I don't buy the latter, because of the transition to secular Israeli, which shows he was giving a list, and because indeed modern Orthodox do not accept the Gedolim in this manner he describes, and do not buy in to the chareidi version of Daas Torah. Consider the second-to-last paragraph of this article by Rabbi Bejamnin Hecht, about yardsticks.)

But all this is beside the point. I want to put up his statement against some modern goings-on. Consider his statement. I haven't seen a transcript on line so I have transcribed it myself.
"And this is what people are doing all over and I'm hearing this. It's frightening. 'The gedolim don't know what they're talking about; the gedolim are being manipulated; the gedolim are being fooled by people; the Gedolim don't read English; the gedolim don't know {?} what's in the book; the gedolim don't know what they're talking about. Dadadadat.' That's it. You have now taken Torah Judaism and thrown it out the window. You are now a Conservative Jew. I want you to appreciate that. If you accept that argument you are not a frum Jew. You are a conservative. Finished. Finished. Take off the yarmulke, put it in your pocket, and put it on when you eat. You are done. You are no longer a Torah Jew. I want you to appreciate that. Once you strip yourself of the Gedolei Torah it's over. I don't care if a Conservative Jew says that. I don't care if a secular Israeli says that. I don't care if a modern Orthodox guy says that. But that a person who considers himself a ben Toirah would say such a thing?!"
If is indeed frightening. But if one accepts this argument, then it does not mean that one is not a frum Jew; that one is not a ben Toirah; that one is not chareidi. Right or wrong, I know chareidim who accept such an argument, and who cast the blame for certain pronouncements from Gedolim as a result of manipulation by askonim. The end result is that, due to the poverty of our generation, we cannot trust a statement from Gedolim unless we hear it ourselves (or from someone we trust) together with the precise context in which the question was phrased and framed. This is terrible, and as Bnei Torah, we should get angry, rather than living in denial. We should do something about it, to reclaim our Gedolim.

See this video of an askan manipulating Rav Elyashiv, shlita, and get angry at the askan's tone and his manipulation. Don't say that manipulation is impossible.

Here is a recent example of such manipulation. Consider the following report, at Kikar haShabbat, and compare it with what goes on in the video -- even though the video has been edited. It is the result of a conversation by Rav Amnon Yitzchak and Rav Aharon Leib Shteinman.

Kikar HaShabbat:

"יעקב שוואקי, הוא חילוני?" שאל הגראי"ל שטיינמן

"זה בסדר מה שאני עושה?", שאל הרב אמנון יצחק את הגראי"ל שטיינמן, בפגישה שנערכה בנושא המאבק בכוכבי הזמר החסידי. הגראי"ל השיב: "הלוואי שזה יועיל". במשך דקות ארוכות, סיפר הרב יצחק על המלחמה ב"זמרים הרשעים, מחטיאי הרבים". הגראי"ל השיב: "טוב מאד, "שתצליח" (חרדים)

"זה בסדר מה שאני עושה?", שאל הרב אמנון יצחק את הגראי"ל שטיינמן, בפגישה שנערכה בנושא המאבק בכוכבי הזמר החסידי.
הרב אמנון יצחק הגיע השבוע לביתו של הגראי"ל שטיינמן, וסיפר לו על המלחמה שהוא מנהל נגד זמרים חרדים המופיעים מול קהל מעורב.
"הוא חילוני?", שאל הגראי"ל כשהרב יצחק סיפר לו על יעקב שוואקי. "לא, דתי. אברך לשעבר מליקווד. יש כמה כאלה, כל העולם החרדי שומע אותם".
הרב אמנון יצחק סיפר ש"אין בית דתי שאין לו את הדיסקים האלה".
הגראי"ל הגיב בחיוך: "לי אין".
"הוא מחטיא את הרבים, הוא רשע. הוא נקרא גדול הזמר החסידי", המשיך הרב יצחק להלום בשוואקי. "חייבים לעשות משהו לעצור את זה. הרב חתם בזמנו על פסק כזה. יש דבר אחד שלא ברור: פשוט מאוד אסור לשומעם ואסור להחזיק את הדיסקים שלהם. הם מחטיאי הרבים שאין כדוגמתם".
הרב יצחק סיפר כי בפלורידה, בעידודו ובהכוונתו, שוברים אלפים דיסקים חסידיים. "תוך כדי הרצאה שאני מדבר, שרואים אותי בכל העולם, אנשים שוברים דיסקים".
"הלוואי זה יועיל", הפטיר הגראי"ל. "זה יועיל, כשאני נלחם זה עד הסוף ותמיד זה מועיל", השיב הרב אמנון יצחק.

Here is a video of this meeting.

See also the analysis at Life In Israel, and at Blog in Dm. While considered the context of the statement, and looking at body language and evasive language, he doesn't give the wholehearted approval implied by the report in Kikar haShabat, he still does wish him success and does express the hope that it helps. But this was a clear attempt at manipulation by Rabbi Amnon Yitzchak, and indeed he left with the ability to say that Rav Shteinman agrees with him. (Also manipulation by the other speaker, who summed up that 'certainly the concerts are bad, but do you agree that the CDs are also terrible, such that we should be smashing them?')

But here are some pointed questions, in light of Rabbi Dovid Orlofsky's statement.

(1) After seeing this video, do you get the impression that Rav Shteinman knows what the Internet is, other than that it is bad and the source of all modern woes?
(2) After seeing this video, do you get the impression that Rav Shteinman knows what a CD is?
(3) Does Rav Shteinman understand the implications of family seating at concerts and how some rabbis approve of it?
(4) Does he know Shwekey, his personality, whether he is a yerei Shamayim, the nature of his music? If he heard the music, would he be able to put it into musical context? Does he understand the role Jewish music plays in Judaism nowadays, how it puts words of Torah on Jewish kids' lips, and how it gets them excited about Judaism? Does he understand that Rav Amnon Yitzchak believes that there is no such thing as teshuvah meiAhavah?
(6) Related, rather than one side ambushing Rav Shteinman like this, wouldn't this have been better if both sides had been given opportunity to present their case? Bet Din doesn't hear one side without the other.
(7) Is someone trying to get Rav Shteinman's imprimatur on his own project, knowing that Rav Shteinman doesn't really have the background, because the name recognition of this Gadol will make people agree to his project?
(8) Does asking these questions, and being disgusted by this manipulation of a Gadol, make me not a Ben Torah and not a frum Jew? Should I strip off my yarmulke and put it in my pocket? Or rather, should we ask whether someone who would manipulate a Gadol in this manner (or in the manner of the askan in tznius video linked above) should be considered a Ben Torah?

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Bringing the bikkurim to the kohen who exists in those days

Summary: Ramban criticizes Rashi (respect) based on a Sifrei (kashrut), but Rashi is really just restating a different version of the Sifrei. And Ramban's peshat explanation, that it refers to the mishmar of that week, is not as convincing as that of Ibn Ezra, that it holds as long as kohanim are presiding. Though I would suggest something even smoother, that it is part of the future-tense tone.

Post: In Ki Tavo, the pasuk and Rashi:

3. And you shall come to the kohen who will be [serving] in those days, and say to him, "I declare this day to the Lord, your God, that I have come to the land which the Lord swore to our forefathers to give us."ג. וּבָאתָ אֶל הַכֹּהֵן אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם וְאָמַרְתָּ אֵלָיו הִגַּדְתִּי הַיּוֹם לַי־הֹוָ־ה אֱלֹהֶיךָ כִּי בָאתִי אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע יְ־הֹוָ־ה לַאֲבֹתֵינוּ לָתֶת לָנוּ:
who will be [serving] in those days: You have only the kohen in your days, whatever he is [and although he may not be as wise or holy as those of previous generations, you are obliged to address him with the respect due to his office as an agent of God]. — [Sifrei 26:3]אשר יהיה בימים ההם: אין לך אלא כהן שבימיך, כמו שהוא:

This is not the only place this derasha is given. It exists on a more appropriate pasuk, as we see in Rosh haShanah 25b:
ואומר  (דברים יז, ט) ובאת אל הכהנים הלוים ואל השופט אשר יהיה בימים ההם וכי תעלה על דעתך שאדם הולך אצל הדיין שלא היה בימיו הא אין לך לילך אלא אצל שופט שבימיו

Indeed, Rashi makes the derasha on this pasuk in Devarim 17:9 as well:

9. And you shall come to the Levitic kohanim and to the judge who will be in those days, and you shall inquire, and they will tell you the words of judgment.ט. וּבָאתָ אֶל הַכֹּהֲנִים הַלְוִיִּם וְאֶל הַשֹּׁפֵט אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם וְדָרַשְׁתָּ וְהִגִּידוּ לְךָ אֵת דְּבַר הַמִּשְׁפָּט:
[And you shall come to] the Levitic kohanim: i.e., the kohanim, who are descended from the tribe of Levi.הכהנים הלוים: הכהנים שיצאו משבט לוי:
and to the judge who will be in those days: Although this judge may not be [of the same stature] as other judges who preceded him, you must listen to him, for you have only the judge [who lives] in your time. — [R.H. 25b]ואל השופט אשר יהיה בימים ההם:ואפילו אינו כשאר שופטים שהיו לפניו אתה צריך לשמוע לו. אין לך אלא שופט שבימיך:

Yet we see this derasha on this local pasuk in Sifrei, and that is where Rashi gets it from:

ובאת אל הכהן אשר יהיה בימים ההם
זו היא שאמר ר׳ יוסי הגלילי • וכי עלתה על דעתך שתלך אצל כהן שלא היה בימיך (ב) אלא
כהן שהוא (כשר) וכה״א אל תאמר מה היה שהימים הראשונים היו טובים מאלה•

Instead of כשר, the Gra emends to בימיך.

(In Yerushalmi Terumot 40b, this pasuk is darshened in a different way:
 ר' יוחנן בשם ר' ינאי זה אחד מן ג' מקראות שהן מחוורין בתורה ובאת אל הכהן אשר יהיה בימים ההם וכי יש כהן עכשיו ואין כהן לאחר זמן ואיזה זה שהיה עומד ומקריב ע"ג המזבח ונודע שהוא בן גרושה או בן חלוצה שעבודתו כשירה 

Or the equivalent in Bavli Kiddushin 66b:
רבי ינאי אמר מהכא (דברים כו) ובאת אל הכהן אשר יהיה בימים ההם וכי תעלה על דעתך שאדם הולך אצל כהן שלא היה בימיו אלא זה כשר ונתחלל בעל מום דעבודתו פסולה מנלן אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל דאמר קרא (במדבר כה) לכן אמור הנני נותן לו את בריתי שלום כשהוא שלם ולא כשהוא חסר והא שלום כתיב אמר רב נחמן וי"ו דשלום קטיעה היא:

There is also the other derasha on Devarim 17, from Rabbi Yossi haGlili, on Sanhedrin 28b:
את זו דרש רבי יוסי הגלילי (דברים יז) ובאת אל הכהנים הלוים ואל השופט אשר יהיה בימים ההם וכי תעלה על דעתך שאדם הולך אצל שופט שלא היה בימיו אלא זה שהיה קרוב ונתרחק אמר רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן הלכה כר' יוסי הגליל

Perhaps Rashi is simply following the consistent explanation of the Sifrei. I would say rather than trying to offer great peshat here, he is bringing down an important and famous derasha in these two places.

Ramban has some objections to Rashi. He writes:
(ג): וטעם אל הכהן אשר יהיה בימים ההם - אל הכהן אשר יהיה שם בימים ההם, כי הם נתונים לאנשי משמר ככל הקורבנות, לא שיוליך עמו כהן מעירו להקריב בכוריו.

ורש"י כתב: 

אין לך אלא כהן שיהיה בימיך, כמות שהוא. 
ולא הבינותי זה, כי בעניין הזקן ראוי לומר "אל השופט אשר יהיה בימים ההם" (לעיל יז ט), אע"פ שאינו גדול וחכם כשופטים הראשונים אשר היו לפנינו מן העולם צריך לשמוע לו, יפתח בדורו כשמואל בדורו, אבל בהקרבת הבכורים למי יביאם אם לא לכהן אשר יהיה בימיו:

וכן ראיתי בספרי (תבוא ג): 

ובאת אל הכהן אשר יהיה, זו היא שר' יוסי הגלילי אומר וכי תעלה על דעתך כהן שאינו בימיך, אלא כהן שהוא מוחזק וכשר לך באותן הימים, היה קרוב ונתרחק כשר. 
וכן הוא אומר (קהלת ז י): אל תאמר מה היה שהימים הראשונים היו טובים מאלה וגו'. ונראה שהם ידרשו בזה, שאם הקריב בכורים או עולה וקורבנות בכהן שהוא בחזקת כשר ולאחר זמן נמצא שהוא בן גרושה הקורבנות כשרין, כמו שמוזכר בפרק האחרון של קידושין (סו ב).
ויכנס בו עוד, שאם היה קרוב ונתרחק כשר, וזה לעניין הזקן שאינו נדון על פי קרוב, ואינו עניין בבכורים:
Indeed, there are these difficulties with the interpretation given by Rashi, and if it were offered as peshat, it is legitimate to question it. It works out much better with the derasha regarding the shofet. But as he notes, his question of אבל בהקרבת הבכורים למי יביאם אם לא לכהן אשר יהיה בימיו echoes what the midrash, and Rabbi Yossi haGlili are saying prior to the derash. It is a good question, and therefore leads to the homiletic interpretation. And homiletic derashot are often quite semantically removed from the actual context of the pasuk. So his question is a good one, and that is why it is not relevant.

In terms of the Sifrei, we see that our Sifrei differs from that of Ramban. Yes, we have the word kasher which Gra removes (on the basis of sevara) and brings back to our context. And our Sifrei also has the text about וכה״א אל תאמר מה היה שהימים הראשונים היו טובים מאלה, which Ramban doesn't have. While Ramban uses this Sifrei as a question on Rashi, as it offers an alternative way of darshening,  it seems eminently likely that Rashi was using our girsa in the Sifrei, in which case this aspect of Ramban's question falls away. Rashi is merely echoing Chazal in the Sifrei.

In terms of Ramban's proffered peshat on this pasuk, namely:
אל הכהן אשר יהיה שם בימים ההם, כי הם נתונים לאנשי משמר ככל הקורבנות, לא שיוליך עמו כהן מעירו להקריב בכוריו. 

I may be objecting in ignorance, but according to Rashi on Taanis 26a, Shmuel and David established the 24 mishmarot. So to say that the much earlier pasuk is referring to the kohen of the week, rather than of the era, seems unlikely as peshat. Not to mention that the other pasuk in Devarim 17 which mentions shofet establishes the meaning of the phrase on the level of peshat, such that it is quite out of the ordinary for it to assume a different meaning here.

Ibn Ezra has an explanation more along the lines of peshat:
וטעם בימים ההם - שזה חיוב כל זמן ששם כהן גדול.

I, Josh, would simply say that since this is cast in the future, when they enter the land, this is keeping with the tone. Not to Aharon, but recall this is in the future, so to whichever kohen will be there at this time. And it is like asher yivchar in the previous pasuk.

(Gur Aryeh understands this Rashi as talking about other aspects of how to treat this kohen. I agree that this is its most likely meaning. Kli Yakar tried to resolve this Rashi by comparing it to a source about bringing a present to a talmid chacham.)

Interesting Posts and Articles #282

  1. Wolfish Musings on a Lakewood response to molestation.
  2. Jerusalem Kosher News on an "alarming tale" with a message for us all. An excerpt:

    Rabbi Altman phoned the chief mashgiach from the bakery, who confirmed that is exactly what occurred, adding this was not uncommon, explaining when the bakery for one reason or another had difficulty meeting an order, it would subcontract the job and make the delivery without informing the end-user that a switch occurred. He did not offer an explanation or apology for the fact that the ‘other bakery’ had a different hechsher.
    This disturbed the rabbi, compelling him to telephone a senior rav who is one of the authorities overseeing the Eida Chareidit kashrus operation. He felt the situation was indeed serious enough to warrant such a call on an erev shabbos. 
    The rav listened to the story and basically, without going into the details, concurred with the chief mashgiach, explaining this is a routine event. He too saw no reason for an explanation or an apology, despite the fact the bakery is synonymous with the Eida Chareidit, and permits itself to use its stationary and delivery documentation to send another hechsher without prior notification or even bothering to see if substituting a hechsher is acceptable. 
    Making things worse, as the rabbi tried to argue the merit of his case, the prominent Eida rav hung up the phone on him.
    This doesn't strike me as "alarming" in the slightest. More like "alarmist". The bakery doesn't make its own ingredients, but rather gets them from elsewhere, in a way such that the Edah Chareidis approves. If the Eidah Chareidis also apparently approve of the kashrus supervision of another bakery, for they do not consider it non-kosher and the substitution wholly acceptable and routine. It is also not surprising that the prominent Eida rav is not as patient as Hillel to nudniks bothering him on erev Shabbos, such that after explaining the policy, when the rabbi continues to "argue the merit of his case" on an erev Shabbos, he hung up on him.
  3. More on the controversy regarding Rabbi Orlofsky's intemperate remarks. A guest post at Emes veEmunah by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein. Then, a report of Rabbi Orlofsky's reaction, from someone who deems this "Rabbi Orlofsky bashing". And then a written response / clarification / apology from Rabbi Orlofsky, which on careful read does not seem like much of an apology. Bli neder, I'll try to analyze it in a separate post. And DovBear also posts, and reacts to the letter.
  4. Related (?), a woman in England throws a cat into a garbage bin. She thought it would be funny. Now caught on tape, she apologizes.
  5. Mishpacha on the need for Internet filters.
  6. Life In Israel on a videotaped meeting between Rabbi Amnon Yitzchak and Rav Shteinman, where the former tries to get the latter to ban Shwekey, in a way similar to how askonim typically try to manipulate gedolim:

    At the end he asks for a bracha and if he is doing the righ tthing. Rav Shteinman doesn't respond. He asks a few times, repeating his question. he pesters Rav Shteinman until he says something good enough for Rav Yitzchak - he basically says the same bracha he gives to every Tom Dick and Harry who walks in for a bracha, but now Rav Amnon Yitzchak can take that and tell people that Rav Shteinman supports him.

    The best, I think, is when Rav Amnon Yitzchak uses another argument. Rav Shteinman is not responding the way expected, so Rav Yitzchak says that Rav Shteinman supported banning the Internet, yet Shwekey makes a lot of money form the Internet - people can watch all of his music on the internet. So Rav Shteinman should join him against Shwekey because he uses the internet regularly to promote himself. I think this is the best part of the video because Rav Amnon Yitzchak himself has a website in which he promotes himself and his hashkafa, and makes video clips from his various sessions and drashos widely available. Yet he tries to get Shwekey banned for doing the same thing.

    Rav Shteinman doesn't seem to understand a lot of what Rav Amnon Yitzchak is saying. He doesnt seem to understand who Shwekey is and what he does. He doesnt understand what music albums are and what disks are. He doesnt understand what the internet is and how Shwekey uses it. Yet Rav Amnon Yitzchak persists until he can get Rav Shteinman to approve.
  7. A medical treatment carries a side-effect of limiting homosexuality, in some cases.
  8. .
  9. An important study that shows that nearly one million children have likely been mistakenly diagnosed with ADHD. Basically, there is a disparity in which the youngest children in the grade are diagnosed with it much more than the older children in a grade. And this is true across different states, which have different cutoff points for entering into a grade. The teachers are just reacting to the immaturity of a five-year-old over that of a six-year old.
  10. A cute mathematical story and devar Torah over at Geshmack Torah, about 39 vs. 40 lashes.
  11. Here at parshablog, all about Eldad Hadani, the charlatan who perverted our masorah, and the tie-in to our parsha of Ki Tavo.


Blog Widget by LinkWithin