Showing posts with label yisro. Show all posts
Showing posts with label yisro. Show all posts

Thursday, January 16, 2014

Tzipporah returns to Har HaElokim

In the beginning of Yisro:

Now Moses' father in law, Jethro, and his [Moses'] sons and his wife came to Moses, to the desert where he was encamped, to the mountain of God.ה. וַיָּבֹא יִתְרוֹ חֹתֵן משֶׁה וּבָנָיו וְאִשְׁתּוֹ אֶל משֶׁה אֶל הַמִּדְבָּר אֲשֶׁר הוּא חֹנֶה שָׁם הַר הָאֱלֹהִים:
According to Rashi's interpretation of the relevant pesukim, she also was sent away from Har HaElokim earlier:

 So Moses' father in law, Jethro, took Zipporah, Moses' wife, after she had been sent away,ב. וַיִּקַּח יִתְרוֹ חֹתֵן משֶׁה אֶת צִפֹּרָה אֵשֶׁת משֶׁה אַחַר שִׁלּוּחֶיהָ:
after she had been sent away: When the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him in Midian, “Go, return to Egypt” (Exod. 4: 19), “and Moses took his wife and his sons, etc.” (Exod. 4:20), and Aaron went forth “and met him on the mount of God” (Exod. 4:27), he [Aaron] said to him [Moses], “Who are these?” He [Moses] replied, “This is my wife, whom I married in Midian, and these are my sons.” "And where are you taking them?" he [Aaron] asked. “To Egypt,” he replied. He [Aaron] retorted, “We are suffering with the first ones, and you come to add to them?” He [Moses] said to her [Zipporah], “Go home to your father.” She took her two sons and went away. — [from Mechilta]אחר שלוחיה: כשאמר לו הקב"ה במדין (שמות ד יט) לך שוב מצרימה, (שם כ) ויקח משה את אשתו ואת בניו גו' ויצא אהרן לקראתו, (שם כז) ויפגשהו בהר הא-להים. אמר לו מי הם הללו. אמר לו זו היא אשתי שנשאתי במדין ואלו בני. אמר לו והיכן אתה מוליכן. אמר לו למצרים. אמר לו על הראשונים אנו מצטערים ואתה בא להוסיף עליהם. אמר לה לכי אל בית אביך, נטלה שני בניה והלכה לה:

This is based on logic and juxtaposition. Moshe was staying with his in-law Yisro at that point, tending sheep. He encountered the burning bush on Har HaElokim. (Shemot 3:1). And he is given the sign that in the future, when they leave Egypt, they will worship Hashem on that mountain (Shemot 3:12). Which is Har Sinai and which they indeed do (see Shemot 24:4-5). Hence the name Har HaElokim. He is told to leave for Egypt. He puts Tziporah and her sons on the donkey (Shemot 4:20), with it unclear whether to Midian or to Egypt (presumably to Egypt, thus the following incident with Chatan Damim). And Aharon meets him on Har HaElokim (Shemot 4:27):

The Lord said to Aaron, "Go toward Moses, to the desert." So he went and met him on the mount of God, and he kissed him.כז. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֶל אַהֲרֹן לֵךְ לִקְרַאת משֶׁה הַמִּדְבָּרָה וַיֵּלֶךְ וַיִּפְגְּשֵׁהוּ בְּהַר הָאֱלֹהִים וַיִּשַּׁק לוֹ:
And thereafter it is just Moshe and Aharon. So it stands to reason that there, at Har HaElokim, is where she took her leave. And so it is fitting that here is where she returns, after the interlude.

Of course, one can explain otherwise...

Wednesday, January 15, 2014

YUTorah on parashat Yisro

parsha banner

Download the YUTorah Parsha Reader for Yitro 5774 

Audio Shiurim on Yitro
Articles on Yitro
Parsha Sheets on Yitro
Rabbi Jeremy WiederLaining for Parshat Yitro
See all shiurim on YUTorah for Parshat Yitro
New This Week












Saturday, January 11, 2014

Posts so far for parshat Yisro

2013

1. Can Rashi on Chumash interpret a pasuk against halacha? My answer to a question on Mi Yodea.

2. YUTorah for parshas Yisro for 2013.

2012

  1. Yisro sources -- further improved and expanded.
    .
  2. Darshening a psik, that the three days time period was elongated.  Such is the remez suggested by Birkas Avraham. Thus, "11. The trup symbol of psik alludes to the day that Moshe added at his own initiative."
    .
  3. YU Torah on parashat Yisro for 2012.
    .
  4. Difficulties due to Tzipporah's being sent away --  What suffering did the tribe of Levi suffer? And how could Moshe, as a Kohen, remarry Tzippora? Rav Chaim Kanievsky asks, and answers. I also try my hand at it.
    .
  5. Who's the man? Moshe's the man!  But why not Yisro, who is called HaIsh is Shemos? And why not another prooftext local to sefer Shemot? The Chasam Sofer answers that it really was a function of Moshe's humility (mentioned in the continuation of the prooftext). Plus my own suggestion.
    .
  6. A choice in garb -- I saw the following interesting bit of history in Vayakhel Moshe (R' Moshe HaKohen Gordon) on parashas Yisro"And on a related note -- in 5610 (1850), the decree went out from Russian rulership in Poland to change the traditional Jewish dress, and to shave their beards and peyos. And the police force assembled in Warsaw, and any Jew who passed was grabbed, and his beard and peyos were shaved off..."

2011

  1. Yitro sources -- further improved and expanded. For example, many more meforshei Rashi.
    .
  2. Why does Rashi omit the word milchemetThe first time, Rashi refers to milchemet Amalek. The second time, just Amalek. Why the difference?
    .
  3. Ibn Ezra on the Aseres HaDibros, and differences between the account in Yisro and in Vaeschanan. A lengthy essay, but he develops some very important points in the nature of peshat and his parshanut. For now, part onetwothree, and four.
    .
  4. Rashi on Asher Zadu --  And peshat and derash.
    .
  5. How was Moshe saved from Pharaoh's sword?   Two different midrashim, rather than Rashi's spin on a midrash. Which is why it is important to know Rashi's sources, as well as not leap to conclusions based on the sources we have.
    .
  6. Does Naaseh veNishma imply the former before the latter?  Presenting Ibn Caspi's take on this.
    .
  7. Ibn Ezra on seeing at a distance --  He follows Galen's extramission theory of sight.
    .
  8. Ibn Ezra and a theory of memory --   Ibn Ezra following Galenic science as to the functioning of the brain.
    .
  9. Another Ibn Ezra on brain anatomy --  which seems based on contemporary, Galenic science.
    .
  10. Was Korach a Gilgul of Kayin or of Yisro? Also, the earliest Torah code, perhaps known to Rishonim! I'm off the mark about whether one can be a gilgul of two people, apparently. I still like my reading of Tziuni as presenting a Torah code.
    .
  11. Changes between the luchos -- the reason for Shabbat --  Perhaps the elaboration on why servants get to rest is related to the changed reason of Exodus over Genesis.

2010
  1. Yisro sources -- revamped. More than 100 meforshim on the parsha and haftarah, organized by topic.
    .
  2. One is Gershom, and one is Eliezer -- What is bothering Ibn Ezra? I would guess that he is responding to Saadia Gaon, who makes much of the duplication.
    .
  3. Did all the nation see the sounds? After considering several, including Saadia Gaon, who maintain that the sound was visual, we cite Ibn Ezra who maintains that it means perception. As peshat, Ibn Ezra appears correct, though there are a number of other compelling suggestions. The Karaites side with Rashi and Saadia Gaon, and the Samaritans emend away the difficulty.
    .
  4. The kamatz and the aleph at the end of panay -- In the phrase לֹא-יִהְיֶה לְךָ אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים עַל-פָּנָי, the last vowel is written as both a kamatz and a patach. Grappling with this variation. The true answer is that one is a pausal form, and that it intersects with taam elyon and taam tachton. The Gra also has a drasha based on this.
    .
  5. Do variant translations in Onkelos of שִׁלּוּחֶיהָ reflect different sides of a dispute in Mechilta, as to whether Moshe sent Tzipporah away or divorced her? I part ways with a consensus, and consider that Onkelos is merely trying to preserve the ambiguity of the Biblical text.
    .
  6. Does Onkelos take a position on whether Moshe divorced or merely sent awayDo variant translations in Onkelos of שִׁלּוּחֶיהָ reflect different sides of a dispute in Mechilta, as to whether Moshe sent Tzipporah away or divorced her? I part ways with a consensus, and consider that Onkelos is merely trying to preserve the ambiguity of the Biblical text.
    .
  7. Is 1/10 of the Israelite population as judges plausible?!  Ibn Ezra does not think so, especially since there are these moral requirements. Therefore, he parts ways with the midrash Chazal. And see Ibn Caspi's reaction, and Avi Ezer's reaction.
    .
  8. The Samaritans make Yisro bow --  It is a general feature of the Samaritan Torah that they "fix" the text to solve difficulties. This is something to keep in mind if you would think to rely on a Samaritan variant as preferable to the Masoretic text. Three examples from this week's parsha alone. They make Yitro bow to Moshe; they make the nation hear the sounds; and they emend Har Eval to Har Grizim, which they deem holy. There are others. Also, Ibn Ezra argues against Lower Biblical criticism.
    .
  9. Length of days -- Does it refer to long life, or long dwelling in the land of Israel?
2009
  1. Yisro sources, in an online Mikraos Gedolos, plus many meforshim on the parsha and haftara.
    .
  2. Yitro running commentary, pass i, part i -- a different style of parshablogging, giving a running and perhaps integrated commentary. This first post is just on the first pasuk in the parsha.
    Yitro running commentary, pass i, part ii; and part iii
    .
  3. A great proof that it was Moshe who bowed to Yisro -- to quote myself:
    I was of the opinion that either Moshe bowed down to and kissed Yisro, or else that there was mutual bowing and kissing. Rashi brings down a Mechilta on that early pasuk in parshat Yisro with proof that it was Moshe, based on a gezera shava of ish-haIsh, here with Ish leRei'eihu, and there with veHaIsh Moshe.

    But in this past week's parsha sheet, Torah Lodaas, we have the following great, and entertaining explanation, from the Cheshek Shlomo...
2008
  1. The Trup on el-Hamidbar -- with a three way dispute between revii, zakef-gadol, and pashta-zakef. Shadal decides in favor of the revii, and labels the others a result of taut sofer. I analyze what each would mean. And I suggest that these two parsings may accord with the Talmudic dispute of whether Yisro come before or after matan Torah.
    .
  2. The Meaning of the Trup and Nikkud On לֹ֥א תַֽעֲשׂ֖וּן אִתִּ֑י אֱלֹ֤הֵי כֶ֨סֶף֙ וֵֽאלֹהֵ֣י זָהָ֔ב לֹ֥א תַֽעֲשׂ֖וּ לָכֶֽם׃ -- Two potential parsings of that pasuk, and how the trup decides. And how Shadal rereads itti as oti, to make the first part of the pasuk about making graven images of God, with the second part as elaboration.
    .
  3. Did Yisro remain silent when he fled? Two different readings, one in which he fled rather than speaking, and one in which he protested and then was forced to flee. I prefer the latter, and in fact Yisro has a long speech against Pharaoh's plan in Ginzberg's the legend of the Jews. This year, I noticed that in fact this is taken directly from sefer hayashar. See here.
2007

2006
  1. What Parsha Did Yisro Add? It depends on what you mean by "parsha." Leading to an interesting discussion in the comments.
    .
  2. Parsha, Meaning Topic -- As an attempt to reinforce the definition above.
    .
  3. Class Notes of Sidra vs Parsha -- as a distinction between the portions of Bavel and Eretz Yisrael
    .
  4. Sidra vs. Parsha -- The Article
2005
  1. Hashem is greater than the other gods! Er... What other gods? -- Two Targumim take up the challenge.
2004
  1. Round Trip Tickets -- In which Pesach Mitzrayim occurred at the Bet HaMikdash!
    .
  2. Ha'Am as Elders -- and how the zekeinim existed as such before Yitro's suggestion.
    .
  3. A Jewish Scholar Class? How these judges appointed at Yisro's urging devoted themselves full-time to learning and judging, rather to any profession.
    .
  4. From parshat Bahaalotcha, but appropriate nonetheless: Who was Chovav? Who was Yisro? various opinions and their basis. Was Yisro a father-in law or brother-in-law to Moshe?
    .
  5. Also, on the same topic as above, in terms of what Choten might mean (father-in-law /brother in law), see Another interesting cognate from "Hebrew Cognates in Amharic"
    .
  6. From Behar/Bechukotai and Shavuot: BeDibbur Echad and a summary of this dvar here.
to be continued...

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Can Rashi on Chumash interpret a pasuk against halacha?

The following question on Mi Yodeya, about parashat Yitro:
On the Posuk "Zochor Es Yom HaShabos L'Kadsho", Rashi says
תנו לב לזכור תמיד את יום השבת שאם נזדמן לו חלק יפה יהא מזמינו לשבת (Take heart to remember the Shabbos - if you find something nice place it aside for Shabbos).
Rashi's source seems to be Beitzah 16. However the Gemora there records an argument between Bais Hillel and Bais Shamai how to prepare for Shabbos. Given that we rule according to Bais Hillel, why is Rashi here quoting according to Bais Shamai?
There are some good answers there, especially this one:
I've heard from Rabbi Shalom Carmy that the reference to Beitzah is actually a printer's error and Rashi got this from this Mechilta D'Rabbi Yishmael, where it remains undisputed.
Rashi didn't give a source, and it was the printer's perogative to give any and all sources he felt like. But say it is Mechilta. As a commenter at Mi Yodeya asks, how does that help? Isn't it still against Halacha, meaning like Bet Shammai instead of like Bet Hillel?

I think that one can put forth the following points.

Look at the context. By this, I mean look at the other Rashis in the perek, and see how many of them are from the Mechilta. See this in Mekorei Rashi, or alternatively, from Chabad's Tanach. A taste:

1. God spoke all these words, to respond:א. וַיְדַבֵּר אֱלֹהִים אֵת כָּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה לֵאמֹר:
God spoke: Heb. אֱלֹהִים. [The word] אֱֱלֹהִים always means “a judge.” [This Divine Name is used here] because there are some sections in the Torah [that contain commandments] that if a person performs them, he receives a reward, but if not, he does not receive any punishment for them. I might think that so it is with the Ten Commandments. Therefore, Scripture says: “God (אֱלֹהִים) spoke,” [signifying God’s role as] a Judge, [Whose function is] to mete out punishment [when the Ten Commandments are not obeyed]. [from Mechilta]וידבר א-להים: אין א-להים אלא דיין. לפי שיש פרשיות בתורה שאם עשאן אדם מקבל שכר, ואם לאו אינו מקבל עליהם פורענות, יכול אף עשרת הדברות כן, תלמוד לומר וידבר א-להים, דיין ליפרע:
all these words: [This] teaches [us] that the Holy One, blessed be He, said the Ten Commandments in one utterance, something that is impossible for a human being to say [in a similar way]. If so, why does the Torah say again, “I am [the Lord, your God (verse 2)]” and “You shall have no…” (verse 3)? Because He later explained each statement [of the Ten Commandments] individually. — [from Mechilta]את כל הדברים האלה: מלמד שאמר הקב"ה עשרת הדברות בדבור אחד, מה שאי אפשר לאדם לומר כן. אם כן מה תלמוד לומר עוד אנכי ולא יהיה לך, שחזר ופירש על כל דבור ודבור בפני עצמו:
to respond: Heb. לֵאמֹר, lit., to say. [This] teaches [us] that they responded to the positive [commandments], “Yes,” and to the negative [commandments], “No.” -[from Mechilta]לאמר: מלמד שהיו עונין על הן הן ועל לאו לאו:


What Rashi is doing in this perek is a running commentary, primarily adapted from the Mechilta. He is channeling the Mechilta for us. As such, if Mechilta has a comment of the sort Rashi would bring (uleaggada hameyashevet divrei hamikra), we would expect him to bring it, even if elsewhere, in a gemara somewhere, there is a dispute, and we rule against the position.

Further, this is not the only place Rashi brings a midrash halacha which is against the paskened halacha. Some modern meforshei Rashi take note of this, and explain that Rashi will bring forth such a midrash if he feels that it is more along the lines of peshat, since his goal is a peshat-oriented commentary, as adopted / adapted from midrash. So indeed, Rashi can and will cite midrash which will be against decided halacha, on occasion.

YUTorah on parashat Yitro



Audio Shiurim on Yitro

Articles on Yitro
Parsha Sheets on Yitro
Rabbi Jeremy WiederLaining for Parshat Yitro
See all shiurim on YUTorah for Parshat Yitro
New This Week
photo

LinkWithin

Blog Widget by LinkWithin