1) Ch. 31, v. 13: "Es Shabsosai tishmoru" My Sabbaths you shall safeguard Why is this repeated so shortly afterwards, in 35:2, "Uva'yom hashvi'i yi'h'yeh lochem kodesh Shabbos Shabbosone?"
2) Ch. 32, v. 2: "Por(a)ku nizmei hazohov asher b'oznei n'sheichem b'neichem uvnoseichem" Remove the golden rings that are in the ears of your wives your sons and your daughters Why was it necessary for Aharon to point out the present location of these gold pieces of jewellery?
3) Ch. 32, v. 16: "Choroos AL haluchos" Etched ONTO the tablets. This is problematic. Etching is INTO.
4) Ch. 33, v. 4: "V'lo shosu ish edyo olov" And they did not PLACE each man his ornaments upon himself This is the simple translation of "shosu." If they did not place their jewellery upon themselves, how do we understand the command Hashem gave Moshe in the next verse to relate to the bnei Yisroel, "horeid ed'y'cho," remove your ornaments, and also "va'yisnatzlu" of the following verse?
5) Ch. 34, v. 26: "Lo s'vasheil g'di bacha'leiv imo" This prohibition has already been given in Shmos 23:19, and again in Dvorim 14:21. The Sforno on 23:19 says that the "Tzabo'oh" people (often mentioned by the Rambam in Moreh N'vuchim) had the custom of cooking a goat in its mother's milk and then pouring this liquid over their fields, in the belief that this would appease their gods and bring a bumper crop. Hashem has therefore commanded us to do otherwise. If we want success in agriculture we should follow the advise of our verse, as elucidated in Yechezkeil 44:30, "V'reishis kol bikurei l'honiach brochoh el bei'secho," we should bring the first-ripened fruit to Hashem's Sanctuary and give Him thanks. This is the connection between the two statements in the verse, which is verbatim, even to the point of the same cantillation, exactly the same in these two places. (This explains why "bossor b'cholov" has the stringencies of a prohibition to create and to even derive benefit from it is also prohibited. The prohibition is based on this being an "avodoh zoroh" based act.)
In a very concise manner, the Sforno says the same on our verse. However, he adds one thing here. He says that they did this to bring success with LIVESTOCK as well. On Dvorim 14:21 he says that they (He says that the Canaanites did this) do this for success with "miknei'hem v'chol kinyonom uvhemtom," not even mentioning their agricultural produce by name. These differences surely deserve our attention.
1) Ch. 28, v. 1: "Nodov vaAvihu Elozor v'Isomor" Why are these names enumerated? We already know all of Aharon's sons by name.
2) Ch. 28, v. 9: "V'lokachto ES shtei avnei shoham" And you shall take two "shoham" stones The Ohr Hachaim Hakodosh asks why the word ES is used here. It seems that his question is based on the assumption that ES indicates either specific stones or stones that are already known by earlier reference. He answers that this refers to the "avnei shoham" mentioned in the beginning of parshas Trumoh 25:7. Although that verse mentions the need to bring numerous types of stones to fill the settings of the breast-plate, only "shoham" stones are mentioned by name. This is because of their unique function in the shoulder straps of the "eifode," besides being the second stone of the fourth row on the breast-plate, hence the word ES. This most puzzling. The word ES is used in so many other places and the Ohr Hachaim Hakodosh makes no issue of it. What is bothering him specifically here?
3) Ch. 28, v. 9: "Ufitachto a'leihem" And you shall etch out upon them In this verse and in verse 11, where we have the word "t'fatach," the verse expresses the etching procedure as a straightforward command, "you shall etch." However, by the etching of the names into the breastplate stones the Torah expresses it in a descriptive manner, "Pituchei chosom" (verse 21).
4) Ch. 28, v. 11: "Al shmos bnei Yisroel" ON the names of the bnei Yisroel Rashi is bothered with the word "al," as literally, it means UPON. How are the stones upon the names of the bnei Yisroel? He therefore explains that the intention of AL is WITH, You should etch the stones WITH the names. How can we explain the word AL in a literal manner?
5) Ch. 28, v. 35: "V'nishma kolo b'vo'o el hakodesh" And its sound will be heard when he enters the Sanctury The Rashbam writes that the sound emanates from the bells when he walks. This happens when the bells bang each other. Even though there are pomegranate shaped cloth balls between them, they still hit each other.
This is most puzzling. The gemara Z'vochim 88b clearly states that the bells were outer casings and an inner clapper, "zug v'inbal." The sound clearly comes from the inner clapper hitting the casing.
We have a similar difficulty with the words of the Lekach Tov. He writes that the sound emanates from the bells hitting the pomegranate shaped cloth balls. Although this should not produce a sound, miraculously, the cloth balls were hard and banged the bells so that they would ring. Again, this seems to run contrary to the words of the above-mentioned gemara.
The Rashbam goes on to say that the need for a sound system to accompany the Kohein Godol when he performed the service was to alert others in the Sanctuary to leave when he was doing the service, as per the verse in Vayikra 16:17, "V'chol odom lo yi'h'yeh b'ohel mo'eid b'vo'o l'cha'peir ad tzeiso." This is also most puzzling, as the verse is discussing the service of Yom Kippur. When the Kohein Godol enters to bring the bloods of the atonement ox and goat he does not wear the "m'il," which has the bells on its bottom, rather, only the four "white garments" of a regular Kohein.
1) Ch. 25, v. 9: "K'chole asher ani ma'reh os'cho ...... v'chein taasu" - Rashi says that "v'chein taasu" tells us that for all generations the form of the Sanctuary and the form of its vessels should remain the same. We find that King Shlomo made an altar of different dimensions and that there were numerous other changes such as the altar of King Shlomo was not covered with copper plating. How will Rashi answer this?
2) Ch. 25, v. 10: "V'OSSU oron" - Why by the command to create all other vessels does it say "v'ossoh" and here "v'ossu?"
3) Ch. 25, v. 20: "Ish el ochiv el hakaporres" - Are they to face each other or the lid of the Holy Ark?
4) Ch. 25, v. 29: "M'nakiosov" - Rashi, in his first translation of this word, says that these are two pairs of vertical panels which are attached to the shulchon. They have thin pipes attached to them which support the "lechem haponim." This serves a double purpose, to support each bread so that an upper one does not crush the one below it, and to allow for air to circulate around each bread, so that they do not get mouldy. The way the pipes stay in place is by their lying in notches cut into the panels.
The text of Rabbi Eliyohu Mizrochi of our Rashi says that there were FIVE sets of notches, "pitzulim," in each pair of panels. This seems very logical. The two bottom "lechem haponim" sit on the table itself and need no support. To allow for air to circulate it is sufficient to place thin pipes below them, but there is no need for supporting notches, as the pipes sit on the shulchon. However, the original text in Rashi is SIX sets of notches. How is this to be understood?
5) Ch. 27, v. 10: "Vachashukei'hem" - Rashi explains that these were silver threads that were attached to the pillars that held the cloth walls of the courtyard in place. Rashi adds that he does not know if the threads wound around the pillars from top to bottom, or only on top, or only in the middle. This is most puzzling, as the verse clearly states "vachashukei'hem kesef v'tzipuy roshei'hem kosef v'heim m'chushokim kesef," (Shmos 38:17).
1) Ch. 21, v. 2: "Ki sikneh evved Ivri" When you will purchase a Hebrew slave Why doesn"t the verse say "Ki sikach," as this is the more common Torah expression for acquiring? Why is the transaction here expressed as purchasing, while by the maidservant in verse 7 it is expressed as selling, "V"chi yimkore?"
2) Ch. 21, v. 12: "Ma"kei ish vo"meis mose yumos" The one who smites a man and he dies he should surely be put to death Although Rashi comments that there are numerous verses discussing a murderer and surely each tells us new information, we find a very unusual sequence. Our verse tells of an intentional murderer, the next an accidental killer, and the next, again an intentional one. This deserves clarification. Shouldn"t the Torah complete the details of intentional before it goes off to unintentional?
3) Ch. 23, v. 10: "V"sheish shonim tizra es artzecho" And six years you may sow your land The parsha of "shmitoh" here and in B"har is expressed in the singular (25:3,4,5), while the parsha of "yoveil" is expressed in the plural, "Lo siz"ro"u v"lo sik"tz"ru v"lo siv"tz"ru" (Vayikra 25:11). Why the change?
4) Ch. 23, v. 15: "Shivas yomim tochal matzos Kaasher tzivisicho" Seven days you shall eat matzos as I have commanded you Compare this with Shmos 34:18, "Shivas yomim tochal matzos asher tzivisicho," lacking the letter Kof before "asher."
5) Ch. 24, v. 14: "Aharon v"Chur imochem mi baal dvorim yigash a"lei"hem" Aharon and Chur are with you whoever has a claim should draw close to them The gemara B.K. 46b derives from these words that if one has a claim against another, it is incumbent upon the claimant to substantiate his claim, and not upon the defendant to prove that he does not owe. Since this is a universal rule that applied even before Moshe was about to ascend the mountain, why did he impart this information just at this point, when he was leaving for a while and had Aharon and Chur tend to judging and ruling on claims?
1) Ch. 18, v. 1: "Va'yishma Yisro" And Yisro heard Rashi comments that he heard of the splitting of Yam Suf and the war with Amo'leik. He obviously heard much more, but these two events prompted him to come (verse 5). Why these two more than anything else?
2) Ch. 18, v. 16: "Ki yi'h'yeh lohem dovor ba eilai" When there is a matter of dispute between them he comes to me According to this literal translation of these words we have two disputants, "lohem," and yet, the verse ends in the singular, "ba."
3) Ch. 20, v. 2: "Onochi Hashem Elokecho asher hotzeisicho mei'eretz Mitzrayim" I am your G-d Who has taken you out of the land Egypt The medrash says that when Moshe heard this Command he responded with the blessing "shelo osani goy." How do we explain Moshe's response?
4) Ch. 20, v. 9: "Taavode v'ossiso kol m'lachtecho" You shall labour and do all your work What is "avodoh" and what is "m'lochoh?"
5) Ch. 20, v. 14: "Beis rei'echo , Eishes rei'echo" Your friend's house , Your friend's wife In Dvorim 5:18 we find the prohibition of lusting a friend's wife ahead of lusting his house.
1) Ch. 15, v. 2: "Zeh Keili v'anveihu" This is my G-d and I will glorify Him The gemara Shabbos 133b derives from these words that one should not do mitzvos "on the cheap," but rather, should beautify them. The halacha is that one should upgrade the quality of a mitzvoh up to a third more than the basic/available cost. Why is this concept placed in these words?
2) Ch. 15, v. 22: "Va'yeilchu shloshes yomim bamidbor v'lo motzu moyim" And they traveled for three days in the desert and did not locate water How did they survive for three days without water?
3) Ch. 16, v. 25: "Ki Shabbos ha'yom" Because it is Shabbos today Rashi explains that they received no manna Shabbos morning and came back again in the evening, asking if they should look for manna. This is most puzzling. They never received manna at night, so why should they inquire about evening manna?
4) Ch. 16, v. 35: "Arbo'im shonoh" Forty years Ibn Ezra writes that among all of the miracles Moshe wrought, this is the greatest. This is because it was not a short-lived miracle, but a continuous one that lasted forty years. Ibn Ezra, in his final comment on parshas Mishpotim writes that Moshe's remaining alive even though he did not eat nor drink for forty days and nights is the greatest wonder heretofore. We must differentiate between the term "nes," used here, and "pelle," used there.
Why was the miracle of the wellspring of Miriam not of equal stature? True that it came in the merit of Miriam, but Moshe wrought it. As well, the wellspring gave water even on Shabbos and Yom Tov, while the manna did not descend on Shabbos, nor on Yom Tov.
5) Ch. 16, v. 35: "Ad bo'om el eretz nosho'ves es hamon ochlu ad bo'om el k'tzei eretz K'no'an" Until their coming to an inhabited land the manna they eat until they came to the edge of the land Canaan Rashi explains that the earlier part of the verse means that they still ate manna that remained in their vessels until the 16th of Nison, and the latter part refers to the actual falling of manna, which lasted only as long as Moshe was alive (see gemara Kidushin 38a). This seems to be a contradiction to his words in the previous verse, where he says that the manna ceased on the 15th of Nison.
1) Why are the ten plagues not all in one parsha? Once they are divided, why specifically seven and three?
2) Ch. 10, v. 1: "Bo" Come Why is BO used here, while in other places Hashem said LEICH?
3) Ch. 10, v. 1: "Bo el Paroh" Come to Paroh We do not find Hashem telling Moshe that the next plague would be that of locust before Moshe told this to Paroh.
4) Ch. 10, v. 1: "V'es leiv avodov" And the hearts of his servants Where do we find that his servants' hearts were hardened?
5) Ch. 10, v. 11: "Lo chein l'chu noh hagvorim v'ivdu es Hashem ki osoh a'tem m'vakshim" - Not so only the men will now go and you shall serve Hashem because that is what you request Paroh seems to be contradicting himself in the same breath. He first says no to sending the children, whom Moshe just included in the previous verse, so how does Paroh say that this is your request?
1) Ch. 6, v. 12: "Vaani aral s'fosoyim" And I have clogged lips Rashi explains that in response to Moshe's attempting to excuse himself for being reluctant to be Hashem's spokesman to Paroh because of his speech impairment, Hashem advised him that Aharon would accompany him and be the actual spokesman. If so, why was Moshe needed at all? Why not have Aharon do the task on his own?
2) Ch. 6, v. 26: "Hu Aharon uMoshe" They are Aharon and Moshe Rashi explains the reversal of order in the next verse. Their order is interchangeable because they are equal. This is difficult to comprehend because one of the 13 tenets of our faith is that Moshe is unique among all the prophets, not only in his generation and the previous ones, but for all generations.
3) Ch. 7, v. 19: "V'yi'h'yu dom v'hoyoh dom" And they will become blood and there will be blood The seeming redundancy is obvious.
4) Ch. 8, v. 20: "Tishocheis ho'oretz mipnei ho'orove" The earth WAS destroyed by the mixture of animals Literally, "tishocheis" means "it WILL be destroyed," as there is no "Vov hamha'peich" here. Nevertheless, Rashi says that it means past tense, although he gives no explanation for this. What explanation can you offer?
5) Ch. 9, v. 26: "Rak b'eretz Goshen asher shom bnei Yisroel lo hoyoh borod" Only in Goshen where the bnei Yisroel were present there was no hail If a ben Yisroel was outside Goshen would it hail upon him?
1) Ch. 1, v. 15: "Va'yomer melech Mitzrayim" And the king of Egypt said Why until now were the harsh edicts expressed in the plural form, "va'yosimu, v'chaasher y'anu, va'yaavidu, va'y'mor'ru," and now in the singular?
2) Ch. 2, v. 1: "Va'yeilech ish" And a man went Why doesn't the verse simply say "Va'yikach ish mi'beis Levi?"
3) Ch. 2, v. 6: "Vatomer mi'yaldei hoIvrim zeh" How did she know?
4) Ch. 2, v. 23: "Vataal shavosom el hoElokim" And their cry rose up to Elokim The next verse goes on to say that Elokim heard their entreaty. It is obvious that well before the king of Egypt contracted a skin affliction they were hard at prayer as well. Our verse is telling us that it was just now that their prayers had an affect. Why now all of a sudden?
5) Ch. 4, v. 8: "V'he'eminu l'kole ho'ose ho'acharone" And they will believe the calling of the last sign The next verse goes on to offer a third sign if the first two are not sufficiently convincing. If so, why does our verse call the penultimate sign "ho'acharone?"
1) Ch. 47, v. 28: "Sheva shonim v'arbo'im u'm'as shonoh" Seven years and forty and one-hundred years Rashi comments on the years of Soroh's life (Breishis 23:1) that her one-hundred years are compared to her twenty years, and her twenty years are compared to her seven years. This is because the word "years" is mentioned three times. Here we have the word "years" only twice. Taamo Dikro offers that it is left out once because there is no comparison of years to years for beauty for a man, as per the gemara Kesubos 59. However, this seems problematic, as we find "years" by Avrohom three times, and a comparison of his being sinless by all three. If so, we are left with the question, "Why is the term years' only mentioned two times by Yaakov?"
2) Ch. 47, v. 28: "Va'yichi Yaakov" And Yaakov lived Rabbeinu Bachyei notes that "va'yichi" has the numeric value of 34. Yaakov had a pleasant life for 34 years, the 17 years from the birth of Yoseif until Yoseif was sold, and the final 17 years of his life. Why weren't the years before Yoseif's birth just as pleasant?
3) Ch. 48, v. 5: "Efrayim Um'nasheh KiReuvein v'Shimon" Efrayim and Menasheh like Reuvein and Shimon If Yaakov's only intention was to give these two grandsons the status of sons, i.e. as tribes, why did he single out Reuvein and Shimon as examples?
4) Ch. 48, v. 14: "Si'keil es yodov" He placed his hands with intention When Yaakov crisscrossed his hands, which was the upper, the right or the left?
5) Ch. 48, v. 15: "HoElokim asher his'halchu avosai l'fonov" Elokim Whom my forefathers have brought themselves to walk in front of Him Why is this prelude used to express the blessing he was bestowing upon Efrayim and Menasheh?
1) Ch. 44, v. 18: "Va'yigaSH eiloV YehudoH" And Yehudoh drew close to him Baal Haturim notes that the final letters of these three words form the word "ShoVoH," equal. Yehudoh advised Yoseif that he was his equal, also a king. If this is so, is the statement of Rashi that Yehudoh warned Yoseif that he was about to speak to him in a harsh manner agreed upon by the Baal Haturim? Since Yehudoh was of equal stature his words are not to be considered something that might incite another king.
2) Ch. 44, v. 20: "Va'yivo'seir" And he was left over Compare this with the synonymous word "v'hu l'vado NISHOR" (42:38).
3) Ch. 44, v. 32,34: "Ki av'd'cho orav es hanaar, Eich e'eleh el ovi v'hanaar einenu iti" Because your servant has is responsible for the youth, How will I be able to ascend to my father without the youth Why was it necessary for Yehudoh to add the second reason since the first in its own right is very compelling?
4) Ch. 46, v. 21: "Uvnei Vinyomin Bella voVecher" And the sons of Binyomin were Bella and Becher Rashi on 43:30 explains that Bella alludes to Yoseif's being swallowed into the society of the gentiles, while Becher alludes to his being the first-born to his mother Rochel. Since Yoseif was a first-born upon birth and only later was swallowed into the gentiles, why didn't Binyomin name his first son Becher and his second son Bella?
5) Ch. 47, v. 6: "B'meitav ho'oretz hosheiv es ovicho v'es achecho yeishvu b'eretz Goshen" In the prime of the land place your father and your brothers they shall reside in the land of Goshen Did Paroh offer that Yoseif's father and brothers reside in one land or in two?
1) Ch. 41, v. 1: "U'Pharoh choleim" And Paroh is dreaming Where is the indication in the dream that during the famine the distribution of the stored food would be administered by just one man?
2) Ch. 41, v. 1: "Choleim" Is dreaming Shouldn't the verse have said "cholam," he dreamt?
3) Ch. 41, v. 4: "Vatochalnoh haporos ro'ose hamar'eh v'dakose habosor eis sheva haporos" And the poor looking and emaciated cows ate the seven cows Verses 2 and 3 inform us that Paroh dreamt of 7 robust and 7 emaciated cows. Our verse begins by telling us that the poor looking and emaciated cows swallowed , without repeating their number, assuming that we would understand that it was 7 of the previous verse. Yet the verse goes on to say that they swallowed the SEVEN healthy looking and robust cows. Why repeat the number 7 by the healthy ones and not by the emaciated ones?
4) Ch. 41, v. 7: "V'hi'nei chalome" And behold a dream Why wasn't this said at the end of the cows dream as well, or at least say "chalomos" here? Why bother saying these words at all?
5) Ch. 41, v. 25: "Higid l'Pharoh" He related to Paroh Compare this with verse 28, where it says "heroh es Paroh."
1) Ch. 37, v. 35: "Va'yimo'ein l'hisnacheim" And he refused to console himself Rashi explains that although Hashem set into a person's psyche to forget the sorrow of the death of a loved one after the passing of a year (gemara P'sochim 54b), there is no consolation when the assumed deceased is actually alive (maseches Sofrim ch. #21). If so, why didn't Yaakov realize that Yoseif must still be alive?
2) Ch. 37, v. 36: "V'haM'donim mochru oso el Mitzroyim l'Photifar" And the M'donim sold him to Mitzrayim to Potifar A new name appears on the scene, M'donim. Targum Onkelos, mosaf Rashi, and some Baa'lei Tosfos, say that they are the Midyonim of verse 28. They offer no explanation for the change from Midyonim to M'donim. However, Targum Yonoson ben Uziel does not translate as Targum Onkelos, "uMidyono'ei," but rather, "uM'dono'ei," seeming to indicate that he is of the opinion that they are two nations. Similarly, some Baa'lei Tosfos say that there are two distinct groups, Midyonim and M'donim, descended from Avrohom's offspring, as we find, "Va'tei'led lo v'es M'don v'es Midyon." The Rashbam says that M'don and Yishmoeil are one nation. He does not explain why the Torah calls them Yish'm'eilim in verse 28 and M'donim here.
According to the commentators who say they are one and the same, why indeed does the Torah give them two names?
3) Ch. 38, v. 14: "Va'teishev b'fesach einayim" And she sat at a road junction This is Rashi's interpretation. The reason that a road junction is called "pesach einayim" is because one has to open his eyes, i.e. pay special attention at a junction, so that he continues his trip on the proper path (Rabbeinu Menachem and Pirush al Targum Yonoson ben Uziel). If this is so, why in verse 21 do we only have "vo'einayim al ha'derech," without "pesach"?
4) Ch. 38, v. 23: "Pen ni'h'yeh lovuz" Lest we will be a mockery Why a mockery? It would seem that a term along the lines of dishonestly, not keeping one's word, or the like would be more fitting.
5) Ch. 38, v. 25: "V'hee sholchoh el chomihoh" And she sent to her father-in-law Rashi (gemara Brochos 43b) says that Tomor did not simply say that Yehudoh impregnated her. Rather she only sent his payment, saying, "The man to whom these items belong is responsible for my pregnancy. If he admits it fine, and if not, let them burn me rather than my embarrassing him." From this we derive that it is preferable for a person to throw himself into a fiery cauldron rather than embarrassing his fellow man.
The Baal Haturim and Rabbi Yehudoh Chosid say that Yehudoh's words of the previous verse, "Hotziuhoh v'siso'reif," do not mean that she was to be burned to death, but rather, that a mark be made on her face with a burning brand, as a constant sign to her sin. If so, what is the proof that it is preferable to be burned to death, as that wasn't going to be her punishment? As well, how do we derive that it is preferable to "throw oneself" as she was not about to do this to herself, but rather, it would be done by others?
1) Ch. 32, v. 5: "Im Lovon garti" I have sojourned with Lovon Rashi comments that "garti" has the numeric value of 613, "taryag," and Yaakov sent a covert message to Eisov. "Don't do war with me because I have the merit of keeping all 613 mitzvos of the Torah." Where in the Talmud do we have an incident that is similar to this message of Yaakov, that through the merit of the Torah he would be protected from an army coming to war against him?
2) Ch. 32, v. 7: "Bonu el ochicho el Eisov" We have come to your brother Eisov Why doesn't the verse say that they also did Yaakov's bidding, namely to relate Yaakov's message of verses 5 and 6?
3) Ch. 32, v. 9: "V'hoyoh hamacha'neh hanishor lifleitoh" And the camp that will remain will escape How was Yaakov assured of this?
4) Ch. 34, v. 30: "Va'yomer Yaakov el Shimon v'el Levi achartem osi" And Yaakov said to Shimon and Levi you have made me murky How can we explain Yaakov's complaint to Shimon and Levi not as a concern that they riled up the surrounding people to fight in response to their killing out Sh'chem, but as a complaint that they have shown that they are weak?
5) Ch. 35, v. 5: "Va'y'hi chitas Elokim al he'orim asher svivoseihem" And there was the fear of Elokim upon the cities surrounding them What brought on this fear?
1) Ch. 28, v. 10: "Va'yeilech Choronoh" And he went to Choron At the end of the previous parsha (28:2) Yitzchok commanded Yaakov to go to Padan Arom. In verses 5 and 7 it says that he went to Padan Arom. If so, why does our verse say that he went to Choron?
2) Ch. 28, v. 11: "Va'yishkav bamokome hahu" And he lied down in that place Since he was right near a city, as it was called Luz earlier, why didn't he enter the city and sleep there overnight?
3) Ch. 29, v. 13: "Va'y'cha'bek lo va'y'nasheik lo" And he hugged him and he kissed him We find the opposite order with Yaakov and his grandsons Efrayim and Menasheh, "Va'yishak lo'hem va'y'chabeik lo'hem" (Breishis 48:10).
4) Ch. 29, v. 14: "Va'yeishev imo chodesh yomim" And he resided with him a month of days Rashi comments that Lovon was willing to take Yaakov into his home because he was his relative, but it was not gratis. He had Yaakov work as a shepherd. In the middle of this Rashi says, "v'chein ossoh," and he did like this. Mahar"i Chalavoh explains that Rashi is telling us that Lovon kept his word. What has Rashi accomplished in clarifying our verse by telling us this point of information?
5) Ch. 31, v. 1: "Lokach Yaakov eis kol asher l'ovinu u'mei'asher l'ovinu ossoh eis kol hakovode ha'zeh" Yaakov has taken all that was our father's and from what belongs to our father he has amassed all these possessions There is an obvious contradiction in their words. Lovon's sons first claim that Yaakov took ALL Lovon's possessions and then immediately say that "FROM what belongs to our father," but not all of his property, he amassed his wealth. Secondly, how did they have the audacity to claim that Yaakov took everything, since Lovon was left with numerous sheep that were not speckled, banded, etc.?
1) Ch. 25, v. 21: "Ki akoroh hee" Because she was barren Was Yitzchok also barren?
2) Ch. 25, v. 21: "Vatahar Rivkoh ishto" And Rivkoh his wife conceived Earlier in this verse we have "l'nichach ishto" without Rivkoh's name mentioned, as it is obvious. If so, why is her name mentioned here?
3) Ch. 25, v. 33: "Hishovoh li" Swear to me Why was it necessary to have this transaction take place with an oath?
4) Ch. 26, v. 1: "Milvad horo'ov horishon asher hoyoh bi'mei Avrohom" Besides the first famine that took place in the days of Avrohom It is now eighty years after the famine that took place in Avrohom's days. If so, what need is there to tell us that this was not one and the same as the earlier one?
5) Ch. 27, v. 41: "Va'yistom Eisov es Yaakov al habrochoh asher beiracho oviv" And Eisov hated Yaakov because of the blessing that his father blessed him Wasn't the hatred because Yaakov fooled his father and RECEIVED the blessing? If so, why doesn't the verse say "al habrochoh asher LOKACH mei'oviv?" For the answers, click here!
1) Ch. 23, v. 1: "Mei'oh shonoh v'esrim shonoh v'sheva shonim" One-hundred years and twenty years and seven years Rashi comments that Soroh at the age of twenty had the beauty of a seven year old. Usually a twenty-year old woman is more attractive than a seven-year old child.
2) Ch. 23, v. 9: "M'oras hamachpeiloh" The double cave What was doubled?
3) Ch. 23, v. 16: "Arba mei'os shekel kesef" Four-hundred silver shkolim Why doesn't the verse say "shiklei kesef" in the plural?
4) Ch. 24, v. 57: "V'nishaloh es pihoh" And we will ask her opinion In verse 51 we find, "Hi'nei Rivkoh l'fo'necho kach vo'leich," clearly stating that it was a done deal, so why do her mother and brother suggest that she be asked?
5) Ch. 24, v. 60: "Va'y'vorchu es Rivkoh" And they blessed Rivkoh Tosfos on the gemara Ksubos 7b d.h. "she'ne'emar" says that the blessings were the 7 blessings of "eirusin" that are made under the chupoh. Rashi on verse 57 says that we do not bring a girl/woman into marriage without her agreement. In the previous offering it was clarified that this is the requirement when she is an orphan, and indeed the M.R. here clearly states this. Since this type of marriage arrangement allows for "mei'un," her right to annul the marriage upon her reaching the age of majority, how do we allow for blessings to be made earlier, which might later be retroactively be negated? For the answers, click here!
1) Ch. 18, v. 2,3: "V'hi'nei shloshoh anoshim, Va'yomer A-DO-NOY" And behold three men, And he said A-DO-NOY There is a false theological concept of trinity, that there are three combined spiritual powers/beings that combine into becoming one deity, hence tri-nutty. They bring a proof from these two verses. Three people came in front of Avrohom and he addresses them as one and calls them a-do-noy, one.
This cheap bit of theological logic is readily rebutted in a few different ways. How?
2) Ch. 18, v. 24: "B'soch ho'ir" Within the city Why here when requesting clemency in the merit of 50 righteous people did Avrohom say "b'soch ho'ir," and when he asked even in the merit of 45 he said "shom?"
3) Ch. 19, v. 24: "Gofris vo'aish" Sulfur and fire What else destructive came down from the skies?
4) Ch. 20, v. 12: "V'gam omnoh achosi vas ovi hee" And also in truth she is my sister the daughter of my father Why does Avrohom explain his misleading words here to Avimelech, and by very similar circumstances with Paroh (12:19) he makes no attempt to explain?
5) Ch. 20, v. 15: "Hi'nei artzi l'fo'necho batov b'ei'necho sheiv" Behold my land is available to you in the area that is best in your eyes reside Contrast this appeasing offer with Paroh's abrupt send-off, "Hi'nei ish't'cho kach vo'leich" Here is your wife take her and go (Breishis 12:19). Why the difference in response?
1) Ch. 16, v. 2: "Ulai ibo'neh mi'menoh" Perhaps I will build from her When Rochel offered Yaakov her maidservant Bilhoh she did not say "perhaps," but rather, confidently stated that she would build from Bilhoh, "V'ibo'neh gam onochi mi'menoh" (30:3). Why did Rochel express herself in a more confident manner than Soroh did?
2) Ch. 16, v. 3: "Lo l'ishoh" To him as a wife Targum Yonoson ben Uziel writes that Soroh first gave her a writ of emancipation. Was Hogor no longer Soroh's maidservant?
3) Ch. 16, v. 4: "Va'yovo el Hogor vatahar" And he came to Hogor and she conceived Rashi (M.R. 45:4) says that she became pregnant through their first union. How do we derive this from these words?
4) Ch. 12, v. 5: "Va'yikach Avrom es Sorai ishto v'es Lote ben ochiv v'es kol r'chushom" And Avrom took Sorai his wife and Lote his brother's son and all their possessions The Rokei'ach notes that the order here is "choviv choviv kodem," most beloved first. Why is this not contrary to Rashi's comment on Breishis 33:2, d.h. "v'es Leah vilo'dehoh acharonim?" Rashi comments, "acharon acharon choviv," most beloved last.
5) Ch. 17, v. 26: "Nimol Avrohom vYishmo'eil bno" Avrohom and his son Yishmo'eil were circumcised Who was their Mohel?
For the answers, click here!
1) Ch. 6, v. 13: "Keitz kol bossor" The end for all flesh Rashi says that wherever we find adultery or idol worship destruction comes to the world and destroys the good with the bad. It is interesting to note that the next words of Rashi d.h. "Ki" are that their doom was sealed because of theft. This seems to contradict his previous words, that adultery or idol worship brings death.
2) Ch. 6, v. 17: "Hamabul mayim" The deluge of water The M.R. explains "chomos" as immoral behaviour in the monetary realm that was not outright theft. A person would have a large amount of bricks piled up at his building site. One person after another would take only one brick, an item whose value is almost negligible, and could surely not be retrieved in court. This continued until there was not a brick left, a monumental loss for the builder, but an insignificant theft by each brick snatcher. How was the "mabul" punishment in kind?
3) Ch. 7, v. 21: "Va'yigva v'chole ho'odom" Why did the minors deserve to die?
4) Ch. 8, v. 20: "Va'yaal olos" And he offered oloh sacrifices Why specifically "olos?"
5) Ch. 9, v. 23: "Va'yikach Shem voYefes es hasimloh" Shem and Yefes took the garment The gemara Sanhedrin 70a says that in the merit of Shem's taking the garment his descendants received the mitzvoh of "talis shel tzitzis." The gemara Chulin 89a seems to say otherwise. The merit for tzitzis is Avrohom's saying "Im michut v'ad sroch naal" (Breishis 14:23).
Important Numbers
