1) Ch. 1, v. 1: "Hashomayim" The Heavens Why plural?
2) Ch. 1, v. 11: "Eitz pri" A fruit tree Rashi writes that Hashem's intention was that the trees develop in such a manner that the taste of their fruit would be present in the wood of the tree itself. However, the earth did not produce such a result and the wood of the fruit trees does not taste like its fruit, save the esrog, which complied. When Odom was punished for partaking of the forbidden fruit the earth was likewise punished. Why did Hashem wait until then to punish the earth?
3) Ch. 1, v. 12: "V'eitz oseh pri" And a tree that produces fruit Which fruit producing tree cannot develop another tree from its seed?
4) Ch. 2, v. 15: "L'ovdoh ulshomroh" To work her and to guard her Since the antecedent of "her" is the "gan," there seems to be a gender conflict, as "gan" is male.
5) Ch. 6, v. 8: "V'Noach motzo chein b'einei Hashem" And Noach found favour in the eyes of Hashem The next verse, which is the first verse of parshas Noach, tells us that Noach was a righteous man. If so, why does Noach need special "chein," favour, to be saved?
1) Ch. 33, v. 8: "T'ri'veihu" Rashi says that this refers to "mei m'rivoh," the waters of discord. Even though only Moshe said "Shimu noh hamorim" (Bmidbar 20:10), Aharon and Miriam were also held responsible even though they did nothing. I have difficulty understanding this, as Miriam died before the incident of "mei m'rivoh." How is the mention of this incident a praise for the tribe of Levi?
2)Ch. 33, v. 9: "Ho'omeir l'oviv u'l'imo lo r'isiv v'es echov lo hikir v'es bonov lo yodo" Rashi (Sifri and Yalkut Shimoni remez #955) says that when the bnei Yisroel sinned with the golden calf Moshe announced "Mi laShem eiloy" (Shmos 32:26). The complete tribe of Levi assembled and Moshe told them to kill the sinners even if they were the person's own father, meaning his mother's father (one calls his grandfather "father"), his maternal brothers, and his daughter's sons (one calls his grandchild his child). Rashi adds that it impossible to explain "father" literally, or "brothers" as paternal brothers, nor "sons" literally, since the sinners would then be members of the tribe of Levi and this cannot be since the same verse says "Va'yei'osfu eilov KOL bnei Levi," that not even one person of the tribe of Levi sinned.
Why doesn't Rashi point this out earlier, in parshas Ki Siso on the words "v'hirgu ish es ochiv" (32:27)?
3)Ch. 33, v. 19: "V'liZvulun omar smach Zvulun" And to Zvulun he said rejoice Zvulun Rashi explains the repetition of the noun of direct address by Zvulun, as well as by Gad, Don, Naftoli, and Osher. They were the weakest of the tribes and this repetition of their names gave them vigour. This seems most puzzling. Rashi on the next verse d.h. "k'lovi" states that only "giborim" can live at the border, and that is why Gad had a border allotment. Rashi on Dvorim 3:18 d.h. "lifnei" clearly states that the tribes of Reuvein and Gad were the strongest and they were at the head of the army. Mosaf Rashi d.h. "v'toraf" (verse 20) also states that the people of Gad were "giborim."
4) Ch. 33, v. 20: "V'toraf zro'a AF kodkode" When Gad slew the enemy with his sword, he not only decapitated him, but also severed the enemy's arm in one swing of his sword. Why doesn't the verse simply say "kodkode uzroa" leaving out the word AF and mention "kodkode" first, as one goes after the enemy's head?
5) Ch. 33, v. 29: "Vaasher cherev gaavo'secho" Do the bnei Yisroel pride themselves with the power of the sword? Is this not the vocation of Eisov, as per Breishis 27:40, "V'al char'b'cho sichyeh?"
1) Ch. 29, v. 9: "A'tem nitzovim" You are standing steadfast Why did Moshe choose to use the word "nitzovim," rather than "omdim?"
2) Ch. 29, v. 9: "Kulchem" All of you Since "all of you" is mentioned, why bother delineating "rosheichem shivteichem" etc.?
3) Ch. 29, v. 22: "Gofris vo'melach sreifoh chol artzoh k'mahpeichas S'dome vaAmororoh" Sulfur and salt a conflagration of all her land as the upheaval of S'dome and Amoroh The destruction Hashem will send will be self-evident. What need is there to equate this with the upheaval of S'dome, Amoroh, Admoh, and Tzvo'im?
4) Ch. 29, v. 25: "Va'yeilchu va'yaavdu elohim acheirim" And they went and served foreign gods "Va'yeilchu" seems superfluous.
5) Ch. 31, v. 25: "Va'y'tzav Moshe es haL'viim nosei aron bris Hashem" And Moshe commanded the Levites carriers of the ark of the covenant of Hashem Where the Levites mentioned here L'viim or Kohanim who are also of the tribe of Levi?
1) Ch. 26, v. 2: "Mei'reishis" From the first Rashi (gemara M'nochos 84b) says that one only brings "bikurim" from the first-ripened produce of the seven species. This is the list of species mentioned in parshas Eikev, 8:8. Rashi here goes on to clarify the technical meaning of the words "zeis shemen" and "d'vash" in Eikev. This seems to be out of place here and should have been clarified there.
2) Ch. 26, v. 2: "V'samto ba'tenne" And you shall place it into a basket The mishnoh Bikurim 3:8 says that each person according to his financial ability brought a basket to beautify the mitzvoh. The wealthy man brought the "bikurim" in a gold or silver basket, while them poor man brought it in a wicker basket. The Sifri says that our verse teaches us that it is a requirement to bring the first-ripened produce in a basket.
We know that every mitzvoh is to be enhanced and beautified, as per the verse "Zeh Keili v'anveihu" (Shmos 15:2), which the gmera Shabbos 133b interprets to mean that we should enhance every mitzvoh. If so, why does the Torah spell it out here, since this has to be done anyway?
3) Ch. 26, v. 13: "Lo ovarti mimitzvosecho" I have not transgressed any of Your precepts Why is there a requirement to make a verbal confession specifically when bringing the required tithing, "maa'seir," to the Beis Hamikdosh?
4) Ch. 27, v. 12: "Eilu yaamdu l'vo'reich es ho'om" These will stand to bless the nation By the curse the verse does not say "to curse" "l'ka'leil," but rather, "al hakloloh," in a passive sense. Why the difference?
5) Ch. 29, v. 5: "Lechem lo achaltem v'yayin v'sheichor lo sh'si'sem l'maan teidu ki ani Hashem Elokeichem" Bread you have not eaten and wine you have not drunk so that you should know that I am your G-d Did the bnei Yisroel have absolutely no bread or wine in the desert? We see that Nodov and Avihu, the sons of Aharon drank wine, as mentioned in parshas Shmini (also see Dvorim 2:28,29).
1) Ch. 23, v. 4,5,6: "Lo yovo Amoni uMoavi bikhal Hashem, Vaasher sochar o'lecho es Bilom ben B'ore, V'lo ovoh Hashem Elokecho lishmo'a el Bilom" An Amonite or a Moabite shall not enter the congregation of Hashem, And that he hired for you Bilom the son of B'ore, And Hashem did not desire to listen to Bilom" The flow of these verses seems to indicate that if ch"v Hashem was willing to have Bilom's curses come to fruition then Amonites and Moabites would be accepted into our congregation, i.e. allowed to marry a bas Yisroel.
2) Ch. 23, v. 5: "Al dvar asher lo kidmu es'chem ba'lechem uvamayim" Because of the matter that they did not initially greet you with bread and water The gemara Y'vomos 76b says that the prohibition against these two nations is limited to its male converts. The female converts may be married to a ben Yisroel, as we find with Boaz and Rus. The gemara explains that although there is a reason given, that they did not offer bread and water, this is only a claim against men, whose nature is to come into the public arena, and not against women, who usually stay at home. This seems to be a startling statement in light of the fact that the Moabite women offered themselves for licentious activities.
3) Ch. 23, v. 25: "Ki sovo b'cherem rei'echo v'ochalto anovim k'naf'sh'cho so'vecho" When you come into the vineyard of your friend and you may eat grapes to your satisfaction to your satiation Rashi (gemara B.M. 89b) explains that this refers to a hired worker. It is only when the worker is harvesting ripe produce and placing into the owner's vessels that the worker may also partake of the produce. If however, he is hired to prune the vines or the like he may not eat the fruit.
The gemara Taanis 9a states that although Hashem gives reward for mitzvos in the world-to-come, when it comes to the mitzvoh of charity there is reward given in this world as well. The gemara goes on to say that we may even "test" Hashem in this by giving charity and expecting to see reward right here in this ephemeral world, based on the verse "b'chonuni noh b'zose." Why indeed is charity unique in this manner?
4) Ch. 24, v. 1: "Ki motzo voh ervas dovor v'chosav loh sefer krisus" Because he found in her a shameful matter and he will write for her a writ of separation What is the "ervas dovor?"
5) Ch. 25, v. 14: "Eifoh v'eifoh" A measurement and a measurement This is the prohibition against having false weights in one's possession, even if they are not used in commerce. Our Rabbis say that the punishment for use of false weights is greater than that of illicit relations. This is difficult to comprehend. Some illicit relation sins even carry the death penalty. Why should using false weights be harsher? For the answers, click here!
1) Ch. 16, v. 18: "Shoftim v'shotrim" Judges and enforcers Why is this law juxtaposed to the festivals of the previous parsha?
2) Ch. 17, v. 8: "Bein dom l'dom" Between blood and blood What is the issue at hand for which we must decide between one type of blood and another?
3) Ch. 17, v. 1: "Asher yi'h'yeh vo moom" That will have a flaw Why doesn't the verse simply say "asher bo moom"?
4) Ch. 17, v. 11: "Lo sosur min hadovor asher yagidu l'cho yomin usmole" Do not deviate from the ruling that they relate to you neither right nor left Rashi (Sifri #154) says that these words teach us that you must follow their rulings even if they tell you that right is left and left is right, i.e. even if to you it is crystal-clear that they said the exact opposite of the proper ruling. Is the intention of our verse to tell us that we are guaranteed that they will surely come to a correct ruling, no matter how preposterous it seems to us?
5) Ch. 17, v. 13: "V'chol ho'om yish'm'u v'yiro'u" And all the nation shall hear and fear Rashi (gemara Sanhedrin 89a) says that we derive from these words that we do not put the rebellious scholar to death immediately, as is the case with others, but rather, we wait until all the bnei Yisroel assemble at the next of the thrice yearly pilgrimages, and put him to death in a public display. This is derived from "and all the nation." We similarly find this expression or "v'chol Yisroel" by the person who incites idol-worship, the rebellious son, and the false witnesses called "zom'mim." Is their death likewise delayed until a Yom Tov?
1) Ch. 14, v. 1: "Bonim a'tem laShem Elokeichem" You are children of Hashem your G-d How is this a cogent explanation for what follows, to not gouge oneself in mourning?
2) Ch. 14, v. 1: "Lo sisgod'du v'lo sosimu korchoh bein eineichem" Do not gouge and do not create a bald area between your eyes The Torah prohibits these forms of mourning upon the death of a person. We likewise derive from these words two other important rules. One is that we should not create separate groups that might bring rancor, disparity among us (gemara Y'vomos 13b). The second is that although the Torah says to place our head tefillin between our eyes (Dvorim 6:8, 11:18), the intention is on our hair above the area between our eyes, as our verse also mentions "between your eyes," and obviously the intention is our hair on the top of our heads, as this is the place that we can create a bald spot.
It is most interesting to note that the placement of our tefillin is clarified in a verse that carries the message to not create rancor and disunity in our ranks. How do these two thoughts connect one with the other?
3) Ch. 14, v. 21,22: "Bacha'leiv imo, Shonoh shonoh" In its mother's milk, Year after year What do we derive from the juxtaposition of these two verse?
4) Ch. 15, v. 7: "Ki yi'h'yeh v'cho evyon" If there will be within you a destitute person The word "v'cho" seems superfluous.
5) Ch. 15, v. 18: "Lo yiksheh v'ei'necho b'sha'leichacho oso chofshi avodcho sheish shonim" Do not find it difficult in your eyes when you send him away free he has served you for six years The master owned this slave for a maximum of six years only. When sending away an indentured slave who might have worked for his master as for as long as 49 years (Vayikra 25:10,13) the Torah does not commensurate with the owner or comfort him by stating that the servant did what was required of him and that we were likewise slaves in Egypt and were freed (verses 15 and 18). It would seem that there is a greater need to mention these concepts there.
1) Ch. 7, v. 14: "Boruch ti'h'yeh mikol ho'amim lo yi'h'yeh v'cho okor vaakoroh" You will be blessed by all the nations there will be no sterile man nor woman among you Why it was necessary to give this blessing? It seems redundant as the previous verse just stated, "u'veirach pri vit'n'cho ufri admo'secho."
2) Ch. 7, v. 15: "V'heisir Hashem mimcho kol choli v'chol madvei Mitzrayim horo'im asher yodato lo y'simom boch" And Hashem will remove from you all sickness and all bad afflictions of Egypt which you have known He will not place in you If you will not have these sicknesses what does it mean to remove them?
3) Ch. 7, v. 15: "Kol choli v'chol madvei" All sickness and all afflictions What is the difference between these two words?
4) Ch. 8, v. 1: "Kol hamitzvoh asher onochi m'tzavcho l'maan tichyun" Every mitzvoh that I command you so that you may live The verse begins in the single form "m'tzavchO" and ends in the plural, "tichyUN."
5) Ch. 10, v. 21: "Asher ro'u ei'necho" Which your eyes have seen The main point is that Hashem has done great wonders. What is added with saying that you witnessed this with your eyes?
1) Ch. 4, v. 3: "Asher holach acharei baal p'ore" Who has gone after baal p'ore Sforno says that this refers to cleaving to the daughters of the baal p'ore adherers. Once they involved themselves with these women they inevitably fell into the trap of serving baal p'ore. Although this is historically what happened, why does the Sforno mention this to explain our verse, which could be understood in a straightforward streamlined manner, simply that they served baal p'ore?
2) Ch. 4, v. 37: "Va'yotziacho b'fonov" And He took you out in front of Him Everything takes place in front of Hashem, so what is the meaning of "b'fonov"?
3) Ch. 4, v. 40: "Ulmaan taarich yomim al ho'adomoh asher Hashem Elokecho nosein l'cho kol ha'yomim" And so that you extend the days upon the land that Hashem your G-d gives you all the days The final two words of this verse, "kol ha'yomim" seem problematic. To which earlier part of the verse do they connect?
4) Ch. 5, v. 18: "V'lo sachmode eishes rei'echo v'lo sis'aveh beis rei'echo" And you shall not lust your friend's wife and you shall not lust your friend's house What is the difference between "chemdoh" and "taavoh?"
5) Ch. 6, v. 4: "Shma Yisroel" Hear Yisroel This verse is arguably the second most daily repeated verse in all the Torah, as it is said at least four times in our daily prayers. What is the most daily repeated Torah verse?
1) Ch. 1, v. 2: "Kodeish Barnei'a" Rashi says that it was from this location that the spies were sent. This is clearly stated in Yehoshua 14:7, "Bishloach Moshe evved Hashem osi miKodeish Barnei'a l'ra'geil es ho'oretz." Wha other names does this location have?
2) Ch. 1, v. 23: "Vo'ekach mi'kem shneim ossor anoshim" And I took from you twelve men The cantillation for the word "shneim" is a "munach," a sort of comma. This is puzzling because the number twelve is obviously a unit. Why separate the two from the twelve?
3) Ch. 3, v. 9: "V'al tisgor bom milchomoh" And do not incite a war against them Is this an ongoing mitzvoh and included in the count of 613 mitzvos or not?
4) Ch. 3, v. 12: "LoReuveini v'laGadi" To the Reuveini and to the Gadi Compare this with "lachatzi sheivet haMenasheh," where we have the title "sheivet."
5) Ch. 3, v. 21: "YehOshua" This is the only place in the Torah that we find his name spelled out fully, with the letter Yud between the Hei and Shin. Why is it spelled differently here?
1) Ch. 30, v. 2: "Zeh hadovor" THIS is the matter Rashi (Sifri 2) says that Moshe and other prophets prophesied with the expression "Ko." ADDITIONALLY Moshe prophesied with the expression "zeh hadovor." We must both clarify what the exact difference is between these two expressions and why Moshe used both, while other prophets only used the one. As well, all commentators say that "zeh" is a higher level. If so why would Moshe use "Ko" when he could use "zeh"?
2) Ch. 30, v. 2: "Zeh hadovor" THIS is the matter Rashi says that Moshe and other prophets prophesied with the expression "Ko." 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?
3) 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.
4) Ch. 33, v. 4: "Asher hiKo Hashem bohem kol bchor" That Hashem smote in them every first-born What is the intention of "bo"hem?"
5) Ch. 33, v. 7: "Va"yisu va"yoshov" And THEY traveled and HE returned Why the change from plural to singular?
1) Ch. 25, v. 11: "Pinchos" Why does the previous parsha of Bolok stop in the middle of this painful story, and only complete it in the next parsha?
2) 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. a) How does giving him and all his descendants the status of Kohein fortify this counter-claim? b) Why is this reward in kind?
3) 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.
4) Ch. 26, v. 8: "Uvnei Falu Eliov" And the sons of Palu were Eliov This verse expresses itself in the plural, "uvnei," even though Palu had but one son, Eliov. The gemara B.B. 143b takes note of this and derives that in the common parlance a person would say that his "children" are , citing his only child. The gemara cites a second proof for this in the name of Rabbi Yoseif from Divrei Ha'yomim. Why does the gemara brings a second proof from Divrei Ha'yomim when we have a quite satisfactory proof from the Torah itself, "Uvnei Dan Chushim?"
5) Ch. 27, v. 17: "Katzone asher ein lohem ro'eh" As sheep who 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 who "happen" to not have a shepherd, the verse should have said "katzone bli ro'eh" or the like.
For the answers, click here.
1 Ch. 22, v. 2: "Va'yar Bolok" And Bolok saw Did he actually see, or did he hear what Yisroel did to the Emorites?
2 Ch. 22, v. 2: "Va'yar Bolok" And Bolok saw Rabbi Eliyohu Mizrochi, in his lengthy commentary on Rashi on the first verse of the Torah, in the final paragraph, beginning with the words "Shebatchiloh oloh v'mach'shovoh" says that Rashi's explanation of the word "boro" is similar to "Va'yilochem b'Yisroel" of Bolok. This seems extremely puzzling. Although we find the words "va'yilochem b'Yisroel" in Bmidbar 21:23, it has nothing to do with Bolok. It is discussing the war with Sichon. Secondly, where do we find Bolok actually waging war with the bnei Yisroel?
3 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. The Torah says, "Al totzer es Moav v'al tisgor bom milchomoh" (Dvorim 2:9).
4 Ch. 22, v. 29: "Ki atoh haragtich" Because now I would have killed you The words "ki atoh" seem superfluous.
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 in Yisroel What is "nachash" and what is "kessem?"
1) Ch. 19, v. 2: "Zose chukas haTorah asher tzivoh Hashem leimore" This is the statute of the Torah that Hashem commanded thus saying The expression "chukas haTorah" is unusual. We find the Torah saying that this is "chukas haPosach" (Shmos 12:43) or the like, where the Torah says that this is the statute of this or that specific mitzvoh. Our verse seems to indicate that "this is the statute for the whole Torah."
2) Ch. 20, v. 3: "Va'yomru leimore" And they said to thus say Why the double expression?
3) 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 "n'sinoh" and "hotzo'oh?"
4) Ch. 20, v. 27: "Va'yaas Moshe kaasher tzivoh Hashem l'ei'nei kol ho'eidoh" And Moshe did as Hashem commanded in sight of all the congregation How was this "as Hashem commanded"? In verse 25 Hashem commands Moshe to ascend Hor Hohor with Aharon and Elozor, but without mentioning to do this in the public view.
5) Ch. 20, v. 29: "Va'yivku es Aharon shloshim yom kole beis Yisroel" And all beis Yisroel cried over Aharon for thirty days Rashi (Pirkei d'Rebbi Eliezer ch. #17, Ovos d'Rebbi Noson 12:3) says that because Aharon brought harmony between neighbours and husband and wife, ALL beis Yisroel mourned him. Yalkut Shimoni says that this was not the case with Moshe, where only the men mourned him. Moshe admonished people for their wrongdoing, but Aharon didn't. As well, Aharon brought peace between those who argued. If Aharon's behaviour was so laudable, why didn't Moshe do the same?
1) 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?
2) 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?
3) Ch. 16, v. 14: "Af lo el eretz zovas cholov udvash heviosonu vati'ten lonu nachalas so'deh vocho'rem" Also not to a land that flows of milk and honey have you brought us and you have (also not) given us an inheritance of field and vineyard Note the words in parentheses in the translation. Rashi says that LO in the beginning of our verse refers not only to the immediate words following, but also to "vati'ten " Where are there three more places in our parsha where we find this phenomenon, albeit they are not as straight forward and obvious as in our verse?
4) Ch. 16, v. 15: "Va'yichar l'Moshe m'ode" And it bothered Moshe exceedingly Rashi comments that "va'yichar" means that he was greatly pained. Why doesn't Rashi translate this word as "and he was angered," as is the normal interpretation?
5) Ch. 17, v. 6: "Va'yilonu al Moshe v'al Aharon leimore a'tem hami'tem es am Hashem" And they complained against Moshe and Aharon to say you have caused the death of Hashem's nation Here we have a large group of people saying that Moshe and Aharon killed "am Hashem." Notwithstanding their great disappointment that so many people died, how could they have the extreme audacity to tell Moshe and Aharon in their faces that they are killers? For the answers, click here!
1) Ch. 13, v. 2: "L'cho" For you Besides Rashis explanation that "l'cho" means "as per your decision," and Tosfos who say that it means "for your benefit," what other explanation do you have which is more than just an answer to why wasnt this word left out, but also that is a key to understanding the wrongdoing of the spies?
2) Ch. 13, v. 24: "Lamokome hahu koro nachal Eshkol" To that place he named Nachal Eshkol The previous verse already called it Nachal Eshkol.
3) Ch. 14, v. 8: "Im chofeitz bonu Hashem" If Hashem wants us What is the difference between "chofeitz" and "choseik," as both basically mean "wants?"
4) Ch. 14, v. 21: "V'ulom chai oni" But I remain alive These words connote a vow (Rashi). What need is there for a vow here?
5) Ch. 15, v. 38: "Psil" Twisted thread Rashi says that the eight threads that we have in each corner of our four-cornered garments corresponds to the eight days the bnei Yisroel spent from the day of their exodus from Egypt until they sang their praise, "shiras ha'yom." We all know that it was only seven days.
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." Why?
2) Ch. 4, v. 32: "Uvsheimos tif'k'du es klei mishme'res maso'om" And with names shall you appoint the safeguarding of the vessels of their load What exactly was the appointment "by name?"
3) Ch. 5, v. 4: "Va'yaasu chein bnei Yisroel va'y'shalchu osom el michutz lamacha'neh kein ossu bnei Yisroel" And the bnei Yisroel did so and they sent them away from the encampment thus did the bnei Yisroel do Why is the statement that the bnei Yisroel complied with the command to send defiled people out of the encampment repeated?
4) Ch. 7, v. 17: "Zeh korban Nach'shone ben Aminodov" This is the offering of Nach'shone the son of Aminodov The Sifri says that these words teach us that Nach'shone brought his offering from his own possessions, and not through collecting from his tribe. Why does the Sifri add on "and not through collecting from his tribe"? If it was from his own possessions, then it is obvious that it cannot be from others.
5) Ch. 7, v. 48,54: "Ba'yom hashvii nosi livnei Efroyim, Ba'yom hashmini nosi livnei Menasheh" On the seventh day the tribal head for Efrayim, On the eighth day the tribal head for Menasheh The medrash relates that Hashem told Yoseif, "You did not commit adultery. I swear that in this merit your sons Efrayim and Menasheh will bring offerings one after the other." What is the connection between these two?
1) Ch. 1, v. 2: "L'mish'p'chosom" To their families We find no tally of members of each family, only the tribe total. Indeed, Rashi clearly states that knowing the families is only a medium to arrive at the tribal totals. How so?
2) Ch. 1, v. 4: "Ish rosh l'veis avosov" A man who is head to the household of his ancestors What information does this add to the previous words "ish ish lama'teh?"
3) Ch. 1, v. 17: "Va'yikach Moshe v'Aharon eis ho'anoshim ho'ei'leh asher nikvu b'sheimos" And Moshe and Aharon took these people who were designated by names Rashi d.h. "asher nikvu" says "lo kan, b'sheimos," to him here, by names. What is Rashi clarifying with these words?
4) Ch. 2, v. 3: "Keidmoh mizrochoh" Eastward We translate these two words as being synonymous, both meaning eastward. What explanation allows for these two words to mean two separate things?
5) Ch. 3, v. 39: "Shna'yim v'esrim o'lef" Twenty-two thousand Rashi (gemara B'choros 5a) asks that when we add the totals of the Levite families we have 22,300, not 22,000. He answers that since the Torah discusses the Levites being a redemption for the first-born, we must say that there were 300 Levite first-born as well, and their ability to redeem a first-born is used up by redeeming themselves.
This seems to not be very conclusive. Why not say that they cannot self-redeem, and that there were only 150 Levite first-born who were redeemed by another 150 regular Levites, and this is how we account for the missing 300 Levites? For the answers click here!
1) Ch. 25, v. 17: "V'lo sonu ish es amiso" And you shall not distress your friend Note 2 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."
2) 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?
3) Ch. 26, v. 32: "V'hashimosi ani es ho'oretz" And I will lay to waste the land The word "ani" seems superfluous, as it is contained in the suffix pronoun of the verb "v'hashimoSI."
4) Ch. 26, v. 40: "V'hisvadu es avonom" And they will confess their sin The response to their confessing their wrongdoing is in the next verse.
1) Why does Hashem say that He will respond in kind to their sin of attitude of happenstance with the same? After all, they are repenting and confessing that this was their wrongdoing.
2) Why in the previous verse do we have the plural "baavonOSE," the sinS, while here it is in the singular?
3) Why are they including the sins of their fathers in their confession?
4) Even with their inclusion of their fathers' sins, why is it mentioned as part of their inequity, "v'es avone avosom b'maalom asher mo'alu vi"? (This could be understood as the inequity of their fathers and not theirs, as the antecedent of the pronoun suffix of "b'maalOM" could well be their fathers.)
5) Why is their "walking with Me in a manner of happenstance" coupled with their sins and the sins of their fathers?
6) Why is exiling them to the land of their enemies (next verse) a proper response?
7) Why is sending them to their enemies' land called "I will also walk with them in a manner of happenstance?
8) The next verse ends with Hashem's saying that after this punishment their insensitive and insubordinate heart will hopefully become submissive, and only then will their sin be appeased. How will exile into their enemies' land remedy this?
9) How is this punishment in kind?
10) How does becoming subordinate automatically bring about atonement, as indicated by the words "oz yikona l'vovom he'o'reil v'oz yirtzu es avonom?"
5) Ch. 26, v. 42: "V'zocharti brisi Yaakov" And I will remember My covenant with Yaakov This verse, one of comfort, seems totally out of place in the middle of this lengthy admonishment.
1) Ch. 21, v. 1: "L'nefesh lo yitamo" To a soul he shall not defile himself This verse tells the adult Kohanim to be vigilant in seeing to it that the young Kohanim likewise not defile themselves. Why is there a stress on the special supervision for this prohibition more than for any other sin?
2) Ch. 21, v. 7: "Ishoh zonoh vachaloloh lo yikochu v'ishoh grushoh mei'ishoh" A woman who is either a zonoh or a desecrated woman and a woman who is divorced from her husband When the Torah lists the women who are prohibited to a Kohein Godol the order of these three women is reversed, "ugrushoh vachaloloh zonoh." Why?
3) Ch. 23, v. 33: "V'ini'sem es nafshoseichem b'sishoh lachodesh" And you shall afflict your souls on the ninth of the month Although the straight-forward translation of these words seems to be saying that we should fast on the ninth day of the seventh month, the gemara Yoma tells us that the exact opposite is true, that it is a mitzvoh to eat on the ninth day. This extreme departure from the simple meaning of these words can be explained from the cantillation. How?
4) Ch. 23, v. 43: "Ki vasukos hoshavti es bnei Yisroel" Because in huts I have placed the bnei Yisroel The "mesoroh" lists three verses that have the common word "ki." They are our verse, "Ki vorchove nolin" (Breishis 19:2), and "Ki ner mitzvoh v'Toroh ohr" (Mishlei 6:23). What is the thread of commonality that runs through these three expressions?
5) Ch. 24, v. 22: "Mishpat echod yi'h'yeh lochem ka'geir ko'ezroch" One law there shall be for you the same for the convert the same for the citizen Verse 10 begins the tale of the blasphemer. It ends with verse 23, where the Torah relates that he was put to death. It is most unusual for the Torah to interrupt this with the laws of injuring and killing of people and animals. Although commentators explain this, for example: Hashem told Moshe that he who blasphemes Hashem is put to death, and hand-in-hand with this was told that Hashem likewise respects the bnei Yisroel and if they are either injured or killed retribution is likewise extracted, be it the death penalty or monetary payment, but it would seem that it would suffice to state this in a separate parsha, immediately following ours, to show the connection. Why is killing and injuring plunked down right here, without even a dividing parsha space, and a mere one verse before the completion of the blasphemer story?
Important Numbers
