1) Ch. 33, v. 4: "Asher hikoh Hashem bohem kol bchor" That Hashem smote in them every first-born What is the intention of "bo'hem"?
2) Ch. 33, v. 7: "Va'yisu va'yoshov" And THEY traveled and HE returned Why the change from plural to singular?
3) Ch. 33, v. 9: "Va'yisu miMoroh va'yovo'u Eilimoh" And they traveled from Moroh and they came to Eilim The verse does not say the common "vayisu mi va'yachanu b " Rather it says "va'yovo'u? Why the change?
4) Ch. 35, v. 25: "V'heishivu oso ho'eidoh el ir mikloto asher nos shomoh" And the court congregation shall return him to the city of his refuge to which he has escaped Although there is a total of 48 cities in which one can take refuge, the Torah insists that he be sent back to the same city. Why?
5) Ch. 35, v. 25: "V'yoshav boh ad mose haKohein hagodol" And he shall reside in it until the death of the Kohein Godol What connection is there between the death of the Kohein Godol and the term of exile of an accidental killer in a city of refuge?
1) Ch. 30, v. 2: "Zeh hadovor" THIS is the matter Rashi says that Moshe and other prophets prophesied with the expression "koh." ADDITIONALLY, Moshe prophesied with the expression "zeh hadovor." One would have thought that this most important point of information would be conveyed to us either at the beginning of Moshe's career as a prophet (according to those who posit that he had this level immediately), or at least at the receiving of the Torah. Why does the Torah wait until specifically this point to give us this information?
2) Ch. 30, v. 6: "Kol n'do'rehoh ve'eso'rehoh" All her vows and her prohibitions The words "kol n'do'rehoh" appear by the father's approving and by his annulling his daughter's vows. By the husband this term is only found by his abstaining/approving. Why the difference?
3) Ch. 31, v. 4: "L'chol matos Yisroel" For all the tribes of Yisroel Rashi comments that these words teach us that even the tribe of Levi sent soldiers. The question is obvious: If so, why does the next verse say that 12,000 were sent when it was 13,000?
4) Ch. 31, v. 8: "V'es Bilom ben B'ore HORGU becho'rev" And Bilom the son of B'ore THEY killed with the sword Targum Yonoson ben Uziel gives us a lengthy account of how Bilom was killed by Pinchos. Bilom made use of a negative spiritual power to propel himself and others who were attempting to escape the bnei Yisroel, into the air. Pinchos took flight after him by using the power of a Holy Name. When he caught up to Bilom, Bilom pleaded with him to be spared, and he would onwards only sing the praises of the bnei Yisroel. Pinchos refused, saying that Bilom was the cause of much sinning and death. He then killed Bilom with a sword.
What remains to be explained is the plural form "horgu," THEY killed, as it was only Pinchos.
5) Ch. 31, v. 10: "V'eis kol o'reihem b'moshvosom" And all their cities in their residences How do we explain this seeming double-talk?
1) Ch. 25, v. 11: "Pinchos ben Elozor ben Aharon haKohein" Rashi (gemara Sanhedrin 82b) says that people derided Pinchos, stating that he killed a tribal prince, and that this was an outgrowth of the terrible trait of murder genealogically flowing through his veins from his grandfather Yisro. Hashem said that it was otherwise, that he acted with the trait of Aharon, the peace-maker, and in spite/because of this trait it was in place to kill Zimri. How does giving him and all his descendants the status of Kohein fortify this counter-claim? How is this reward in kind?
2) Ch. 25, v. 14: "V'shem ish Yisroel hamu'keh" And the name of the Israelite man who was struck Rashi (Medrash Tanchuma 2) says that just as the righteous Pinchos had his ancestry mentioned as a praise, so too, the ancestry of the wicked Zimri was mentioned in derision. We understand Pinchos's ancestry being a praise, but how is Zimri's a derision? It is only his behaviour that is despicable, and not his ancestry.
3) Ch. 27, v. 17: "Katzone asher ein lohem ro'eh" As sheep that do not have for themselves a shepherd "Asher ein lohem" connotes that the norm is that they have no shepherd, and this is surely not the case. If the intention of the verse were to say that the bnei Yisroel should not be left like sheep that "happen" to not have a shepherd, the verse should have said "katzone bli ro'eh" or the like.
4) Ch. 28, v. 2: "Tish'm'ru l'hakriv li b'mo'ado" Shall you safeguard to offer to Me at its set time Why doesn't the verse say "takrivu?" What is the safeguarding?
5) Ch. 28, v. 3: "V'omarto lo'hem" And you shall say to them In what two ways is this verse unique by way of the reading of the Torah with a minyan?
1) Ch. 22, v. 2: "Va'yar Bolok" And Bolok saw Did Bolok actually SEE what Yisroel did to the Emorites?
2) Ch. 22, v. 3: "Va'yogor Moav mipnei ho'om m'ode ki rav hu" And Moav feared in the face of the nation greatly because it was numerous Why was Moav so frightened? The bnei Yisroel were restricted from attacking Moav.
3) Ch. 22, v. 12: "Lo so'ore es ho'om ki voruch hu" Do not curse the nation for it is blessed Rashi says that Bilom's response to this was to suggest to Hashem that he would instead bless them. Hashem told him that there is no need for his blessings as the bnei Yisroel are blessed, "ki voruch hu." When Hashem told him to not curse the bnei Yisroel why did he suggest blessing them instead? Did he suddenly become a Jew lover?
4) Ch. 22, v. 27: "Va'yach es ho'osone bama'keil" And he hit the donkey with a stick Why didn't he curse the donkey instead?
5) Ch. 23, v. 23: "Ki lo nachash b'Yaakov v'lo kessem b'Yisroel" Because there is no sooth saying in Yaakov and no occult act in Yisroel What is nachash and what is kessem?
1) Ch. 19, v. 23:"Vatomos shom Miriam" And Miriam died there This verse follows immediately after the chapter of"poroh adumoh." Psikta Zut'r'sa 16:2 derives from this that just as"poroh adumoh" brings atonement (This is derived from the words"chatos hee" in verse nine.), so too, the death of the righteous provides atonement. The gemara Mo'eid Koton 28a says that the death of Aharon's two sons, Nodov and Avihu, although it took place at the beginning of the month Nison, is recorded next to the Yom Kippur services to teach us that just as Yom Kippur offers atonement, so too, does the death of the righteous. The question arising from these two statements is obvious. Why is there a need for two sources for the same point?
2) Ch. 20, v. 3:"Bigva acheinu" In the death of our brethren Who were their brothers?
3) Ch. 20, v. 5:"Lo m'kome zera" Not a place of sowing Tosfos on the gemara Chulin 88b d.h."ela" writes that when the bnei Yisroel were in the desert plants grew. If this were so why did they complain that this was not a place of sowing?
4) Ch. 20, v. 8:"V'nosan meimov v'hotzeiso lo'hem mayim" And it will give forth its waters and you will extract for them water Why the double expression?
5) Ch. 21, v. 5:"V'nafsheinu kotzoh b'lechem haklokeil" And our soul is disgusted with this negligible bread Rashi says that the bread was considered negligible because it was totally absorbed into the body, with no waste expelled. They complained,"The manna will swell in our intestines. Can a human being take in and not have output?" This is most puzzling. They existed this way for close to forty years!
1) Ch. 16, v. 1: "Va'yikach Korach" And Korach took In the gemara Sanhedrin 109b Reish Lokish comments: Korach took a "mekach ra," a bad purchase, for himself. There are numerous explanations for this statement. How can we take it literally, that he PURCHASED something bad?
2) Ch. 16, v. 2: "Va'yokumu lifnei Moshe" And they stood up before Moshe Targum Yonoson ben Uziel says, "V'komu v'chutzpa," and they stood up with audacity. How is this indicated in the verse?
3) Ch. 16, v. 12: "Va'yishlach Moshe likro l'Doson v'laAvirom" And Moshe sent to call for Doson and Avirom Who were greater rebels against Moshe, Korach or Doson and Avirom?
4) Ch. 16, v. 14: "Ho'einei ho'anoshim ho'heim t'na'keir lo naa'leh" Even if you will pierce those people's eyes we will not ascend What explanation do you have for their choice of wording, "having their eyes pierced?"
5) Ch. 16, v. 32: "Vativla osom v'es kol horchush" And it swallowed them and all their possessions What was the point of having their property go into the abyss with them?
1) Ch. 13, v. 2: "Ish echod ish echod" - The gemara Yerushalmi Sotoh says that Rabbi Akiva derives from these words that two people were sent from each tribe, totaling 24. According to this opinion the derivation that a congregation is made up of ten people would be derived from somewhere else. Could we still derive that a minyan is ten people from here even according to Rabbi Akiva?
2) Ch. 13, v. 16: "L'Hoshei'a ben Nun Yehoshua" - Although some commentators say that Hoshei'a's name was changed to Yehoshua earlier than just prior to the sending of the spies, from this point on we find the Torah always calling him Yehoshua. However, there is one exception. This is in Dvorim 32:44. Why?
3) Ch. 14, v. 24: "V'avdi Cho'leiv ei'kev hoysoh ruach a'cher'es imo" - What does "ruach a'cher'es" mean?
4) Ch. 14, v. 39: "Va'y'da'beir Moshe ...... va'yisablu ho'om m'ode" - It seems that the nation truly repented. Why then did Hashem not accept their repentance and allow them to live and enter Eretz Yisroel?
5) Ch. 15, v. 32: "M'kosheish eitzim" - What act, "av m'lochoh," of desecration of Shabbos did he perpetrate?
1) Ch. 8, v. 2: Da'beir el Aharon v'omarto b'haalos'cho" Speak to Aharon and you shall say as you bring up The Rambam in hilchos bi'as mikdosh 9:12 says that the actual lighting of the menorah lamps may be done by a non-Kohein. May a woman light the menorah?
2) Ch. 9, v. 1: Bachodesh horishon" In the first month Rashi says that the first chapter in this book of Bmidbar took place chronologically earlier. This teaches us the rule of Ein mukdam um'uchar baTorah." Rashi then asks, V'lomoh lo posach b'zu." This seems to be a contradiction within Rashi. He just said that there need not be a chronological order, so why does he ask Why was this parsha not said at the beginning of sefer B'midbar?"
3) Ch. 9, v. 6: Va'y'hi anoshim" And there were men The change from singular to plural is problematic.
4) Ch. 9, v. 14: V'chi yogur itchem ger v'ossoh Fesach" If there will reside among you a convert and he will offer a Paschal sacrifice If a person converts to Judaism after Pesach but before Pesach Sheini, shall he bring a Paschal offering?
5) Ch. 11, v. 4: V'ho'safsuf asher b'kirbo hisavu taavoh" And the assemblage that was within them lusted a lusting Asher b'kirbo" seems to be superfluous.
1) Ch. 4, v. 24: "Laavode ulmasso" To serve and to bear a load "L'masso" is not mentioned earlier by the bnei K'hos, only "laavode."
2) Ch. 5, v. 6: "V'oshmoh" And it has sinned "The term "oshom" indicates an intentional sin. However, the beginning of the verse says "mikol chatos," indicative of an unintentional sin.
3) Ch. 5, v. 8: "Hamushov laShem" That which is returned to Hashem Why is the returning of the stolen item called "returned to Hashem?"
4) Ch. 5, v. 21: "Es y'reicheich no'fe'les v'es bitnach tzovoh" Your thigh will fall and your belly will swell Rashi comments that when the Kohein administers the threatening curse, he mentions the reaction of the thigh before that of the belly because if she sinned she first involved her thigh. In verse 27, which relates the results, the belly is mentioned first. Rashi there explains that since the bitter waters first enter her belly, they react first. Why didn't Rashi place this comment earlier, in verse 22, where it says, "Latzbos betten v'lanpil yo'reich?"
5) Ch. 6, v. 27: "Vaani avoracheim" And I will bless them The antecedent of "them" is either the bnei Yisroel or the Kohanim themselves. In the gemara Chulin 49a we find that Rabbi Akiva cites as the source for the Kohanim themselves receiving blessing from the verse in Breishis 12:3, "Vaavorcho m'vorachecho." Rabbi Yishmo'eil the Kohein cites these words of our verse, saying that they refer to the Kohanim. They receive their blessing from Hashem for blessing the bnei Yisroel. Since Rabbi Akiva's proof is from much earlier in the Torah, why does Rabbi Yishmo'eil haKohein prefer to use our verse as the source?
1) Ch. 26, v. 5: "Vaachaltem lach'm'chem losova" And you will eat your bread to the point of satiation Rashi (Toras Kohanim) explains that this is the blessing of eating a small amount but being satiated, as if one ate a large amount. How is this indicated by our verse?
2) Ch. 26, v. 5: "Vaachaltem lach'm'chem losova" And you will eat your bread to the point of satiation Why doesn't the verse simply say "lechem?" What is the intention of "YOUR bread?"
3) Ch. 26, v. 8: "U'mei'oh mi'kem r'vovoh yirdofu" - In keeping with the ratio of five pursuing 100, we should have 100 pursuing only 2,000, not 10,000.
4) Ch. 26, v. 19: "Es shmeichem kabarzel v'es artz'chem kanchushoh" Your heavens as iron and your land as copper The possessive suffix "chem" after the heavens and earth is puzzling. Since the verse relates that they will not cooperate, why would they be called "your?"
5) Ch. 26, v. 26: "V'ofu esser noshim lach'm'chem b'sanur echod v'heishivu lach'm'chem bamishkol, va'achaltem v'lo sisbo'u" These three statements are three curses. What are they and how do they connect one to the other?
1) Ch. 25, v. 11: "V'lo sik'tz'ru" And you (plural) shall not harvest The prohibition to harvest during the "yoveil" year is expressed in the plural form, while by "shmitoh" (verse 4) it is expressed in the singular form, "lo sizmor." Why the change?
2) Ch. 25, v. 17: "V'lo sonu ish es amiso" And you shall not distress your friend Note two differences between our verse and verse 14. There the verse says "al tonu," while here it says "v'lo sonu," and there it says "ochiv," while here it says "amiso."
3) Ch. 25, v. 18,19: "Vishavtem al ho'oretz lo'vetach, Vishavtem lo'vetach o'lehoh" And you will reside on the land securely, And you will reside with security upon it Why the repetition?
4) Ch. 25, v. 32: "G'ulas olom ti'h'yeh laL'viim" A permanent redemption shall be for the Levites Is this simply favouritism towards the Levites or is there an explanation for their deserving this special ruling over non-Levites, whose properties remain permanently sold?
5) Ch. 25, v. 36,37: "V'sarbis,Uvmarbis" With interest, And with interest Why do we have two forms of the same word, one beginning with a Tof and one with a Mem?
1) Ch. 21, v. 8: "V'kidashto kodosh yi'h'yeh loch" - Rashi (gemara Gitin 59b) says that we sanctify the Kohein by giving him the first turn and honouring him to lead the grace after meals.
These days those whom we consider as Kohanim are people who have had this status from generation to generation, i.e. the previous generation tells us that the fathers of today's Kohanim received the first "aliyoh," that they "duchaned," gave the priestly benediction, etc.
If a complete stranger comes to a community and claims that he is a Kohein, do we believe him? If yes, to what extent?
2) Ch. 21, v. 10: "V'haKohein hagodol mei'echov asher yutzak al rosho shemen hamish'choh u'mi'lei es yodo lilbosh es habgodim es rosho lo yifro u'v'godov lo yifrome" - Couldn't the verse have left out the words "asher yutzak al rosho shemen hamish'choh u'mi'lei es yodo lilbosh es habgodim" and simply have stated that the Kohein Godol should not let his hair be unkempt and should not rent his garments as signs of mourning?
3) Ch. 21, v. 19: "Shever regel o shever yad" - If the Kohein has a bone fracture in his leg or hand he is disqualified from serving. Similarly if the sacrifice has a bone fracture it is disqualified as mentioned in 22:22. Why does our verse describe the fracture as "shever regel o shever yad" and in verse 22 as "shovur?"
4) Ch. 23, v. 13: "U'minchoso shnei esronim so'les" - we say in the "musof" prayers of Yom Tov, "U'minchosom v'niskeihem kimdubor - And their meal offerings and libations as is stated, shloshoh esronim lapor, u'shnei esronim lo'oyil, v'isorone la'keves, - three tens (of an eifoh) for an ox, two tenths for a ram, and a tenth for a lamb," clearly detailing the volume of flour for each type of animal, while regarding the libation of wine we say, "v'ya'yin k'nisko, - and wine as is appropriate for its libation" without itemizing the different volumes for an ox, ram, and lamb?
5) Ch 24, v. 12: "Lifrosh lohem al pi Hashem" Rashi says that the incident of the blasphemous son of Shlomis bas Divri and that of Tz'lofchod took place in the same period of time. However, the two cases differed in that by Tz'lofchod the court knew that he was deserving of death, but not which of the four types of death administered by the court, as the verse says (Bmidbar 15:34), "ki lo forash mah yei'o'seh lo." In contrast, by the blasphemer, they didn't even know if he was deserving of death (T.K. 24:237), as it says here, "lifrosh lohem."
(We find the same words, "mah yei'o'seh lo," by the incident of Moshe being cast into the "suf" where his sister Miriam stood at a distance to find out "mah yei'o'seh lo." We can similarly interpret this to mean that she knew that he would definitely be saved, but stood and watched to see what form of rescue would take place.) Why didn't they know that he was culpable of the death penalty? Since one receives the death penalty for cursing his father or mother, surely for doing so to Hashem one deserves death as well.
1) Ch. 16, v. 1: "Va'y'da'beir Hashem el Moshe acha'rei mose shnei bnei Aharon" And Hashem spoke to Moshe after the death of two sons of Aharon Rashi comments: "Mah talmud lomar?" He then brings the parable of Rabbi Elozor ben Azarioh of two doctors who warn a person. What bothers Rashi with the beginning of our verse, how does the parable answer his concern, and how is it alluded to in the verse itself?
2) Ch. 16, v. 2: "Ki be'onon eiro'eh" Because in a cloud I shall be seen It was the opinion of the Tzidokim that first one lights the incense and only after it is already smoking, does the Kohein Godol enter the Holy of Holies, and this seems to be the simple understanding of these words. However, they are wrong, as we see from the mishnoh in the 1st chapter of Yoma. Nevertheless, what is the "pshuto shel mikra" application?
3) Ch. 16, v. 16: "Hashochein itom b'soch tumosom" Who rests with them in their defilement Rashi (gemara Yoma 56b) says that these words teach us that even when the bnei Yisroel are ch"v defiled through their sins, Hashem does not forsake them, and still rests among them. When does Hashem distance Himself?
4) Ch. 17, v. 13: "Chayoh o ofe asher yei'ocheil v'shofach es domo v'chisohu be'ofor" An undomesticated animal or a bird that may be eaten and he spilled its blood and he shall cover it with earth Why does this law apply only to "chayoh" and "ofe," but not to "b'heimoh," a domesticated animal?
5) Ch. 18, v. 18: "V'ishoh el achosoh lo sikoch" And a woman to her sister shall you not take Why doesn't the verse straightforwardly state, "V'achos ish't'cho lo sikach," and the sister of your wife you shall not take?
1) Ch. 14, v. 2: "Zose ti'h'yeh toras ha'metzora b'yom tohoroso" This will be the law of the afflicted person on the day of his purification The future form "ti'h'yeh" deserves clarification.
2) Ch. 14, v. 4: "V'lokach lamita'heir" And he shall take for the one who is becoming purified Who is the antecedent of "v'lokach"?
3) Ch. 14, v. 9: " Es rosho v'es z'kono v'eis gabose einov " His head and his beard and his eyebrows The Torah actually requires that he shave all his hair, so why are these three places specified?
4) Ch. 14, v. 34: "Ki sovo'u el eretz Canaan" when you will come into the land Canaan Rashi says that Hashem is making an "announcement" that when he bnei Yisroel will vanquish the inhabitants of the land and take over the properties, upon razing a house because of "tzoraas," they will find hidden treasures placed in the walls by the Emorites. What need is there for an "announcement?"
5) Ch. 15, v. 2: "Vaamartem a'leihem" And you shall say to them This is a most unusual expression. We usually find, "V'omarto a'leihem," in the singular form. Although Aharon is included in the previous verse, we know that it means that Moshe should tell Aharon. If so, why here are both commanded to pass on this information?
1) Ch. 12, v. 2: "V'tomoh shivas yomim" And she will be defiled for seven days Upon giving birth to a daughter she is defiled double this time (verse 5). Why double that of birth of a male?
2) Ch. 12, v. 7,8: "Zose toras ha'yoledes, V'im lo simtza yodoh" This is the law of the woman who gives birth, And if she cannot afford "Zose toras" is always reserved for the end of a subject. Why does the Torah place it here, in the middle of the laws of the offerings required of a woman who gives birth?
3) Ch. 13, v. 2: "Odom ki yi'h'yeh v'ore b'soro" A man who will have in the skin of his flesh M.R. Vayikra 17:4 says that Hashem does not go for the jugular vein immediately, but rather, He punishes in a lighter manner first, with the hope that the person gets the message, and if not, only then does He increase the punishment, and this is why first a nega is sent upon the house, then the garment, and finally upon the body. Yet, we find the order of the Torah in the reverse.
4) Ch. 13, v. 2: "V'huva el Aharon haKohein" And he shall be brought in front of Aharon the Kohein The gemara Zvochim 102a asks how Miriam attained the status of a "m'tzoraas," since Moshe was not a Kohein and Aharon was her relative. Why doesn't the gemara stick with the same reason for both Moshe and Aharon being disqualified by virtue of both being Miriam's brothers?
5) Ch. 13, v. 4: "V'hisgir haKohein es ha'nega" And the Kohein shall lock in the affliction According to those who translate "ha'nega" as "the afflicted person," why doesn't the verse clearly say, "hanogua?"
1) Ch. 9, v. 3: "S'ir izim l'chatos" A goat as an atonement offering Since this is brought to atone for their part in the sin of the golden calf, why weren't they commanded to bring a calf, just as Aharon was?
2) Ch. 9, v. 8: "Va'yikrav Aharon el hamizbei'ach" And Aharon approached the altar After much hesitation Aharon was convinced by Moshe to do the priestly service. At this point in time both Moshe and Aharon officiated as Kohanim G'dolim. The gemara Megiloh 9b relates that one time the Kohein Godol became temporary disqualified from doing the service and Rabbi Yoseif ben Ulom of Tzipori was elevated to the position of Kohein Godol in the interim. When the regular Kohein Godol was again qualified to serve, Rabbi Yoseif was left in limbo. He could now not serve as a regular Kohein, as once he was elevated he could not be demoted. As well, he could not continue being a Kohein Godol concurrently with the regular one because having two people in this position would cause animosity. He was no longer able to do service as a Kohein. How then, were Moshe and Aharon Kohanim G'dolim concurrently?
3) Ch. 10, v. 2: "Va'teitzei aish milifnei Hashem vatochal osom" And a fire went out from in front of Hashem and consumed them It is most unusual to find the name Hashem used here, where a most devastating punishment was meted out to Nodov and Avihu, since Hashem connotes the characteristic of mercy.
4) Ch. 10, v. 2: "Va'yomusu lifnei Hashem" And they died in front of Hashem The Holy Zohar writes that Nodov and Avihu were under the age of 20 years when they committed their sin. This raises the question of how they were punished by Heaven, based on the ruling that the Celestial court does not punish someone who is under the age of 20.
5) Ch. 10, v. 19: "Vatikrenoh osi ko'eileh v'ochalti chatos ha'yom" And if it has happened to me like this and I were to eat the atonement offering today Rashi says that Aharon told Moshe that although a mourner has the leniency to partake of the offering that was unique to the inauguration of the Mishkon, the same does not apply to the Rosh Chodesh atonement, which was a sacrifice for all time. How did Aharon know this difference?
1) Ch. 6, v. 2: "Tzav es Aharon" Command Aharon Rashi quotes Rabbi Shimon who says that extra warning is required where there is financial loss. What financial loss is involved in this parsha of removal of the ashes?
2) Ch. 7, v. 17: "V'hanosar mi'menoh" And that which is left over from it The Torah expresses this in a fait accompli manner, as if it will likely happen, in contra distinction with Shmos 29:34, "V'im yivo'seir," IF there will be left over.
3) Ch. 7, v. 29: "Hamakriv es zevach shlomov laShem yovi es korbono" The one who brings his shlomim sacrifice shall bring his offering The last words of this verse seem to be repetitive.
4) Ch. 7, v. 37: "Zose hatorah l'oloh l'minchoh ulchatos" This is the law for an oloh for a minchoh and for a chatos The Medrash Plioh, a wondrous puzzling collection of statements, says that this is the fulfillment of the verse, "Bidvar Hashem shomayim naasu" (T'hilim 33:6). How do we explain this?
5) Ch. 8, v. 14: "Va'yismoch Aharon uvonov es y'dei'hem" And Aharon leaned his hands and his sons their hands Compare this with verse 18 and 22, where the verses say, "Va'yis'm'chu Aharon uvonov es y'dei'hem," in the plural form.
1) Ch. 1, v. 3: "Lirtzono lifnei Hashem" With his willingness in front of Hashem The previous words "yakriv oso" seem to be contra-indicative, that he MUST bring the sacrifice.
2) Ch. 1, v. 9: "V'kirbo uchro'ov yirchatz" And its innards and its legs you shall wash We do not find this command by chatos, oshom, or shlomim. Why?
3) Ch. 1, v. 14: "V'im min ho'ofe oloh korbono laShem" And if an avian offering is his oloh to Hashem "LaShem" is mentioned here and not by the bovine or sheep offerings. Why?
4) Ch. 4, v. 27: "V'im nefesh achas techeto" And if a single soul will sin What it the intention of "achas?" The verse seems to be fine without this word.
5) Ch. 5, v. 15: "Ayil" A ram Rashi says that a ram is in its second year. Why does Rashi wait until here to give us this information? We find "ayil" earlier, for example at the end of parshas "ho'akeidoh."
1) Ch. 39, v. 30: "Va'yich't'vu olov" And they wrote upon it If just one person etched the two words "kodesh laShem" into the golden forehead plate, why does the verse say "va'yich't'vu," in the plural form?
2) Ch. 39, v. 32: "Vatheichel kol avodas haMishkon" And all the work of the Mishkon was complete The work was completed near the end of the month Kislev. However, the assembly took place on the 1st day of Nison. Why the 3 month wait?
3) Ch. 39, v. 40: "Es meisorOV vi'seidoseHOH" And HIS cables and HER pegs Why the change in gender?
4) Ch. 40, v. 20: "Va'yikach va'yi'tein es ho'eidus" And he took and he placed the testimonial tablets Every item was taken and placed, yet this is the only time we have "va'yikach."
5) Ch. 40, v. 38: "L'einei chol beis Yisroel" In front of the eyes of all the house of Yisroel From the moment the clouds of glory began functioning in the desert for the bnei Yisroel did they function continuously until the bnei Yisroel reached Eretz Yisroel?
1) Ch. 35, v. 4: "Va'yomer Moshe el kol adas bnei Yisroel leimore zeh hadovor asher tzivoh Hashem leimore" And Moshe said to the complete congregation of the bnei Yisroel thus saying: This is the matter that Hashem has commanded to say The double "leimore" requires clarification. Rashi explains that second "leimore" as, "This is what Hashem commanded me to tell you." This is the case with every mitzvoh related prophecy, and we don't usually find a double "leimore." Rashi's words obviously require further clarification.
2) Ch. 35, v. 11: "Es haMishkon" In this verse and the following verses the components of the Mishkon to be created are mentioned. There is a glaring omission, the creation of the "kruvim" on the "kaporres."
3) Ch. 35, v. 22: "Kol n'div lev" Everyone with a generous heart The gemara Shkolim notes that when material was donated for the creation of the golden calf the verse says that "kol ho'om" donated, and here by donating for the Mishkon the verse says "kol n'div lev." The gemara says that the bnei Yisroel are holy. When asked to give for the golden calf they gave and when asked to give for the Mishkon they also gave. If the gemara equates the two incidents of donations, why does the verse change its description of who actually donated, by the golden calf with "kol ho'om," while here with "kol n'div lev?"
4) Ch. 36, v. 6: "Va'yiko'lei ho'om mei'hovi" And the nation stopped bringing The word "va'yiko'lei" appears in Breishis 8:2 as well, "Va'yikolei ha'geshem min hashomayim." How can these two phrases be linked?
5) Ch. 36, v. 7: "V'hamlochoh hoysoh da'yom l'chol hamlochoh laasose osoh v'hoseir" And the material was sufficient for all that was to be done to make it and extra Was it sufficient or extra?
Important Numbers
