Search Results

The Beauty of Adar This upcoming week ushers in the month of Adar in all its glory. Like all the months of the Jewish calendar, the name Adar is derived from the Babylonian calendar—its original name was Addaru. Based on the interchangability of the Aramaic ALEPH with the Hebrew HEY, the name Adar seems to be correlated to the Hebrew word hadar. In this essay, we will explore the difference between the word hadar (“glory”) and its twin sister hod (“splendor”). In doing so, we will also discover the connection alluded to by Kabbalists between the month of Adar and the tribe of Yosef. An anonymous work entitled Sefer ha-Kushyot (from the 13th century school of Chassidei Ashkenaz) explains that Adar is called so because during that month the hadar of the trees manifests itself (because Adar heralds the coming of spring), or because that was the month in which the glory of the Jewish people—Moshe Rabbeinu—was born. What does hadar mean? R. Shlomo of Urbino (a 16th century Italian scholar) in his work Ohel Moed (a lexicon of Hebrew synonyms) writes that hadar and adar are two of ten synonymous which refer to the concept of beauty: yofi, hod, hadar, adar, na’eh (naaveh), ziv, ziz, tzvi, shefer (shapir), and tov. [Interestingly, Ziv—which literally means “radiance”—is the original name of the month Iyyar, which, like Adar, is partially in the spring.] The Vilna Gaon explains the difference between hod and hadar by way of an analogy to astronomy. He explains that hod denotes self-beauty, just as the sun’s light express the essence of the sun. Hadar, on the other hand, denotes reflected beauty, just as the moon’s light is not inherent to the moon, but only appears to come from the moon. The true source of moonlight is the sun. R. Moshe Shapiro (1935–2017) adds that in Aramaic, the word hadar means to “return back”, which is an apt description of the moon that reflects sunlight. The moon takes what it receives from the sun and reflects back the same light. R. Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg (1785–1865) cites R. Shmuel Dovid Luzzatto (1800–1865) who wrote that the word hadar (“glory” or “honor”) is related to the Aramaic word for “going backwards” because he who beholds something in its full glory is taken aback by its grandeur and reflexively recoils in awe. The Vilna Gaon further explains that the term hadrat panim is the beauty of one’s facial ambiance and is visible to the naked eye. The term hod on the other hand, refers to a person’s inner good (i.e. morality), which is reflected in one’s facial ambiance. Moshe Rabbeinu attained a spiritual level known as karnei hod (“rays of glory”) in which his inner goodness shone through in a very physical way (see Rashi to Ex. 34:34). As we will see below, Yehoshua remained with only hadar. The Malbim explains that hadar refers to outward beauty. An etrog (citron) tree is called an eitz hadar (“beautiful tree”) because its fruits are outwardly beautiful. The word hod, on the other hand, refers to the concept of inner beauty. A person to whom the adjective hod is applied is somebody whose beauty lies in his character traits. He is humble, merciful, just, etc… Hod cannot be seen with the eye, it can only be beheld by the intellect. When G-d tells Moshe that his successor will be Yehoshua, He commands Moshe, “Give from your hod to him” (Num. 27:20) this does not refer to the exchange of any physical gift which Moshe possessed and should pass on to his protégé. Rather, it refers to the unseeable spiritual beauty which Moshe had, that he was to somehow transmit to his student. R. Simcha Maimon explains that this is the meaning of the Talmudic adage “The face of Moshe is like the sun, and the face of Yehoshua is like the moon” (Bava Batra 75a); Yehoshua received his inner hod from Moshe in the same way that the moon receives its hod from the sun. Hod makes up the root of the word hodaah (“admission” or “thanksgiving”). This is because the concept of hodaah is that one recognize what he knows deep down to be true and allows it to come to the forefront by verbally expressing it. In this again, we see that hod refers to that which lies underneath the surface. The Midrash Sifrei (to Deut. 33:17) understand that the term hod refers specifically to the quality of kingship, possibly because a king assumes inherent powers. When Moshe prophetically blessed the Tribe of Yosef on his deathbed, he said, “Like a firstborn ox, hadar is to him.” (Deut. 33:17). This means that the first leader of the post-Mosaic period will come from the Tribe of Yosef. Indeed, Yehoshua—Moshe’s successor—was a descendant of Yosef’s son Ephraim. In this passage, Moshe does not use the word hod which implies the glory attached to the full sovereignty of kingship. Rather, he used the word hadar which implies only the outer trappings of kingship, but not the full monty. For this reason, Moshe is called a king (Zevachim 102a), while Yehoshua—an important leader as he was—is never explicitly called a king. The Moshe-Yehoshua paradigm itself mirrors the Yaakov-Yosef model. Yaakov’s entire lifestory foreshadowed all the future events of Yosef’s life. In fact, Yosef is the quintessential descendant of Yaakov (see Genesis 37:2) and even looked exactly like him (see Rashi)! Yet, Yaakov is one of the three forefathers, while Yosef is merely a reflection of that potential. Yosef was hadar, but not hod. For this reason, the month of Adar is associated with the Tribe of Yosef because in that month Moshe died and his successor Yehoshua took the reigns. The Bible (I Chron. 29:25) tells that when King Solomon ascended the throne, G-d granted him Hod Malchut (“royal glory). However, when Daniel (Dan. 11:20) describes the glory of the future Hasmonean Kingdom, he uses a similar, but different, phrase: Hadar Malchut (“royal glory”). Why does the Bible use the word hadar when describing the Hasmonean Kingdom, and not the word hod like Solomon’s Kingdom? Based on the above, R. Simcha Maimon explains that the term Hod Malchut refers to somebody to whom the kingship inherently belongs, so it is applied to King Solomon, an integral link in the chain of the Davidic Dynasty. The Hasmoneans, on other hand, did not inherently deserve the kingship. On the contrary, they were not of royal stock, but of Priestly descent. Therefore, the Hasmoneans were not in essence kings, they only appeared to be kings on the outside. For this reason, Hasmonean kingship is described as Hadar Malchut—the word hadar representing something which is only true in practice, but not in essence. The Bible in many places speaks of G-d possessing hod and hadar. Based on our definitions, the Malbim explains that His hadar is manifest in the way He interacts with creation and reveals Himself in the world. However, G-d’s hod is something hidden which we cannot begin to understand because it speaks to something deeper than our ability to perceive. As R. Samson Raphael Hirsch (1808–1888) puts it, G-d’s hadar is His role in the world, while His hod is His essence. Rabbi Aharon Soloveichik (1917–2001) explains that hod is reflection, hadar is diffraction, and ziv is refraction. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

Article Abstract: The root גבח appears in all of Scripture only in this week’s Torah portion, Tazria, in connection with the “leprosy” called tzaraat. The word גבח describes characteristics of the disease which can affect the Halachic טומאה (contamination) status of the human sufferer or textile carrier. Aside from Tazria, however, the word appears only in the Talmud once, in the context of permissible and impermissible grasshoppers. The definition of גבח in each of these contexts is the subject of this week’s study. The root גבח appears in all of Scripture only in Parashat Tazria, in Chap. 13 of Leviticus. It appears here in two different contexts, צרעת of Man, and צרעת which appears on clothing. Regarding צרעת of Man we find: Lev. 13:40-41 – If a man loses the hair on [the back of] his head, he is קרח (bald). He is clean. And if he loses his hair on the side toward his face, he is גבח (bald at the front). He is clean. Regarding that of clothing, Scripture states: Ibid. 47, 55 – [And as for] the garment that has the lesion of צרעת upon it… You shall burn it in fire. It is a penetrating lesion on the worn or new [article]. One might have supposed that, despite the different circumstances of the verses (Man, garment), the word גבח itself would maintain a single meaning. But Onkelus (reflected in the English translation quoted here), renders the word differently for each situation. Regarding צרעת of Man, the root גלש is used[1] (we will be examining the meaning of גלש below). But for that of an article of clothing, he uses the term חדתותיה (newness). Regarding human צרעת, Rashi (13:41) stresses that the baldness of the head called גבח is located in the front incline of the head. In contrast, no allusion to “front” or “back” is mentioned concerning garments; only that קרח means a worn item and גבח denotes a new one. Rashi (13:55) explains the disparity: “Concerning the explanation and translation [of these terms], the simple meaning is that קרח means ‘old’ and גבח means ‘new.’ It is as though it were written, ‘[It is a lesion on] its end or its beginning,’ for קרח means ‘back’ [i.e., at the end of the garment’s life, when it is old], and גבח means ‘front’ [i.e., the beginning of its life, when it is new]. This is just as is written: ‘And if [he loses hair] at the front of his head, [he is bald at the front גבח]’ (verse 41). And קרח refers from the crown toward his back.” In other words, the Torah used the words גבח and  קרחin the context of garment צרעת only as analogues of their primary meanings – back and front, as previously defined in the context of human צרעת. Rashi (ibid.) adds the reason the Torah uses these terms specifically here (instead of simply stating “new” and “old”): “and because of the Midrashic explanation, that this language is necessary for a Halachic exposition here [גזירה שוה, a link between two seemingly unrelated passages through the occurrence of common terms, thereby linking the laws of one passage to the laws of the other, as follows]: Whence do we know that if a lesion on a garment spreads [throughout the entire garment], it is clean? Because [Scripture] states גבח and קרח in the context of [lesions that appear on] man (verse 42), and here, in the context of [lesions on] garments, [Scripture] also states גבח and קרח. Just as there [in the case of lesions on man], if it spread over the entire body, he is clean (verses 12, 13), so too, here, [in the case of lesion on garments,] if it spread over the entire garment, it is clean (San. 88a). For this reason, Scripture adopts the [unusual] terms גבחת and קרחת.” Aside from these occurrences in Lev. 13, the root גבח is found only in the Talmud (Chullin 65b), in a discussion of the signs of kosher grasshoppers.[2] Rashi explains the word גבחת there in accordance with its meaning in Lev. 13, namely baldness. [3]In contrast, the Aruch maintains that the Talmudic usage denotes elevation, i.e. that it refers to a bulge on the insect’s back, analogous to a camel’s hump.[4] Some link גבחת in the context of garments to elevation as well, hinted to by the similarity of the root גבח to גבה (height). Namely, that the protruding fibers and filaments of a new garment “stand” more upright than a worn one.[5] In analyzing this dispute between Rashi (baldness) and the Aruch (hump), we mention once more that since the root גבח appears only in Lev. 13 in all Scripture, it would stand to reason that the Talmudic usage should derive from the scriptural meaning there. Furthermore, it is reasonable to assume that the Talmudic meaning is based on צרעת of Man, since (as per Rashi cited above) the meanings of גבח and קרח in the context of garments are only analogues of the primary meanings – those relating to human צרעת. However, regarding human צרעת we find two essential attributes: 1. baldness and 2. the front / back “slope” of the skull. Why does Rashi in the Talmud omit the front / back aspect; and why does the Aruch omit the baldness characteristic? A clue to Rashi’s reasoning may be found in his commentary on: Song of Songs 4:1 – your hair is like a flock of goats that streamed down [שֶׁגָּלְשׁוּ] from Mount Gilead; Rashi – “שֶׁגָּלְשׁוּ, that they became bald [שנקרחו]. גבח is rendered by the Targum as גלוש. When the animals descend from the mountain, the mountain becomes bald [נקרח] and bare [וממורט] of them.” Rashi employs no less than three synonyms in explaining the word גלשו, namely: קרח, גבח, מרט, unequivocally underscoring that the meaning is baldness (of hair, or in this case, of sheep) – all based on the Targum of גבח as גלוש in Lev. Chap. 13. I would suggest that the dispute between Rashi and the Aruch arises from differing interpretations of the Midrash in this verse: Song Rabba 4:3 – your hair is like a flock of goats that streamed down from Mount Gilead [הַר גִּלְעָד]… this means, the mountain from which I tore away I made a standing witness [גַּלְעֵד] to the other nations. And what was this? The Red Sea.[6] R. Joshua of Siknin said in the name of R. Levi: it means: the mountain from which you streamed away. When a woman’s hair grows thick she makes גלשין גלשין in it. Etz Yosef explains that this means she makes קרחים, i.e., she shaves / cuts her hair. I suggest that this is the source of Rashi’s interpretation, that גלישה means thinning, shaving, leaving bare. The Aruch, on the other hand, interprets this Midrash differently, explaining גלשין גלשין as meaning that she braids or ties her hair, the better to manage it. Now, in order to braid or tie hair, it must be gathered together – quite different from shaving and cutting. The Aruch therefore appears to understand גלישה regarding hair as analogous to gathering stones in order to create a mound or monument. And this is precisely the interpretation of the Targum found to this verse, cited by the Aruch elsewhere,[7] which homiletically interprets the verse as referring to the sons of Jacob[8] establishing a mound / monument. This would then explain the Aruch’s reading of גלישה as a mound / elevation, from which derives the interpretation of the grasshopper’s גבחת to mean an elevation on its back. Again, all connects back to Onkelus’ rendering of גבח as גלוש in Parashat Tazria. One may further suggest that Rashi and the Aruch differ on the interpretation of the beginning of the above-cited Midrash as well: “goats that streamed down from Mount Gilead… this means, the mountain from which I tore away I made a standing witness [גַּלְעֵד] to the other nations. And what was this? The Red Sea.” According to the Aruch (mound), what would be the connection to the Red Sea? Perhaps for this reason Rashi interprets Rabbi Levi’s גל as an expression of [9]גילוי (baring, stripping) – i.e. the baring of the seabed of its water cover for the benefit of the Israelites represented a truly eternal testimony, a figurative monument to God’s power. The Aruch, on the other hand could counter that the common usage of גל (pile, mound) is very relevant in relation to the Red Sea as well, as Scripture states in that connection: And with the breath of Your nostrils the waters were heaped up; the running water stood erect like a wall (Ex. 15:8). The waves (גלים) were thus piled up, not unlike a mound of rocks! The root גל seems a clear instance of “a thing and its opposite” united in the same root, which can mean both 1) a mound, and 2) a revelation / “baring” (גילוי). These meanings are similar to the two meanings that arise from the root סקל, which can mean stoning [the biblical punishment], in which stones are transported to their target[10]; but it can also mean removing stones [from a field]. As in all examples of one word with contradictory meanings, there is a common denominator. In the case of גל, a prime example is Jacob’s removing the stone that covered the well. After he removed the stone, it didn’t just disappear, rather it was relocated elsewhere. Meaning, the identical act that revealed the well [גילוי] caused the stone to become a “mound” somewhere else. So too concerning the root סקל: Stones that are hurled [לסקול] are inevitably removed [לסקל] from place A to place B – a single action leading to opposite results. The two interpretations of גלישה may be understood in a like fashion. In Rabbi Yehoshua’s version of Rabbi Levi’s metaphor, in the course of the woman’s haircut the discarded hair inevitably will occupy space elsewhere, fitting with the Aruch’s interpretation (mound). On the other hand, just as someone getting a haircut is generally not interested in preserving the trimmings, [11] so too the essence of the event of the Red Sea is indisputably the resulting dry bed, not the incidental mounds of waves. And this would appear to explain Rashi’s position, namely that the “standing witness” of the event was metaphorically the bared (גלוי) seabed.[12] Perhaps this also explains why Rashi emphasizes the aspect of baldness in the context of the גבחת of the grasshopper in Chullin, in contrast to those who underscore the element of an elevated mound. Since גלישה in Song of Songs means shaved / denuded / bared and גלוש is the Targum of גבח in Leviticus 13, perforce the Sages’ usage of the term in relation to the grasshopper must stem from its primary meaning, unrelated to the bulge in the body of the grasshopper, as elevation is not the main characteristic[13] of this feature. Perhaps the opposing view (the Aruch et al) would claim that Rashi’s refraining from mentioning the element of elevation in גבחת is what forced him to explain that this word appears in conjunction with clothing only incidentally, in order to enable a גזרה שווה. But according to this,גבחת  refers to elevation in clothing as well, meaning the hairs of a new garment stand up on edge. Rashi could counter that this explanation works only for גבח, but not קרח, leaving Rashi with no choice but to explain that these words were used regarding clothing only for the גזרה שווה. Whether the root גבח refers to elevation or baldness, though, perhaps our Sages subtly hinted to a moral lesson by applying this singular word to the grasshopper. Our Sages (Arachin 16a) teach us that צרעת strikes Man as a consequence seven evil traits, including evil speech / gossip and haughtiness. The grasshopper’s גבחת may be teaching us to counter both of these pernicious qualities by emulating the grasshopper. Namely, we counter self-importance by viewing ourselves as the quintessential lowly insect, as we find in Scripture: In our eyes, we seemed like grasshoppers, and so we were in their eyes (Num. 13:33).  And if we find ourselves in the company of idle gossipers, we must view our presence there as if we are faced with a mortal danger, and act as a grasshopper does in that situation: leap away to safety immediately. My the Lord open (יגל) our eyes and bring us joy (גילה) by revealing the Messiah, and we will glide (נגלוש) to the open entrance Holy Mount and rejoice in the building of our Temple in the Temple Mount, speedily in our times. [1]  וכן תרגם גם בפסוקים הבאים: ויקרא יג:מב – בַקָּרַחַת אוֹ בַגַּבַּחַת נֶגַע לָבָן אֲדַמְדָּם צָרַעַת פֹּרַחַת הִוא בְּקָרַחְתּוֹ אוֹ בְגַבַּחְתּוֹ; ת”א – בקרחותיה או בגלישותיה מכתש חיור סמוק סגירות סגיא היא בקרחותיה או בגלישותיה. פסוק מג – לְבָנָה אֲדַמְדֶּמֶת בְּקָרַחְתּוֹ אוֹ בְגַבַּחְתּוֹ; ת”א – חיור סמוק בקרחותיה או בגלישותיה. [2] הגמרא מציינת את סימן הגבחת, אבל סימן זה מובא רק לצורך הבחנה בין מין למין, ולא שהוא מהווה סימן טהרה לעצמו, שהרי יש כשרים עם גבחת וכשרים בלי גבחת; כך פרש”י: חולין סה: – ואין לי אלא הבא ואין לו גבחת… אתה דן בנין אב משלשתן: לא ראי ארבה כראי חרגול; רש”י – הרי אתה דן כו’ לא ראי כו’ – שיש בזה מה שאין בזה ועל כרחך אין סימני הטהרה תלוי בזנב ובגבחת לא ביש לו ולא באין לו שהרי יש כאן אין לו וכשר, ויש לו וכשר. [3] וכשיטתו פירשו גם: רבינו גרשום חולין סה: – מאי גבחת שממורט בפניו. מאירי (שם): כל שיש לו גבחת ר”ל שראשן מרוט. [4] וכן: רבינו גרשום [“כתוב בגליון”] חולין סה: – פירוש גבחת גבהות בשדרה שלו כעין גמל. האשכול (סימני בהמה, ס‘ כג): וחגבים… בין יש לו גבחת כעין גמל ובין אין לו. [5] אוצר טוב (מכ”י – תוס‘ רי”ד), דף 16: בקרחתו היינו בגד ישן… קרח בנפול שערו. ובגבחתו היינו גבהותו, שח’ וה’ מתחלפין, והוא בעת שמגביה שער ואז הוא חדש עדיין. ולכך הסכימו גם פרשנים אחרים: תוי”ט נגע’ יא:יא – וגבחתו אלו חדשים. שהמוכין עדיין גבוהים עליהם ויהי’ בגבחתו כאילו כתיב בגבהתו. קרבן אהרן (תזריע – פ’ נגע’ ה:טו) –  בגבחתו כאילו כתיב בגבהתו בה’, ירצה בגובהתו, שעדיין המוכין הגבוהים… בחדשים. מזרחי ויק‘ יג:נה – ו’בגבחתו’ משמע… חדש, שהמוכין גבוהין… כאלו אמר: בגבהתו, דח’ וה’ מתחלפין, זהו מה שפ’ קצת מפר’; וע’ מלבי”ם (תזריע ס’ קמה), מעשה רקח לרמב”ם טומאת צרעת יב:ט. [6] The connection between a “mountain” and the Red Sea will be explained in the following paragraphs. [7] ערוך (ערך ‘גבשוש‘ -ת”ד): תל קטן של עפר… שֶׁגָּלְשׁוּ מֵהַר גִּלְעָד (שה”ש ד:א) תרגם: כבנוי דיעקב דלקטו אבנין ועבדו גבשושיתא ס”א גלשושיתא בטורא דגלעד. [8] כך פרש”י: בר‘ לא:מו–מז – וַיֹּאמֶר יַעֲקֹב לְאֶחָיו לִקְטוּ אֲבָנִים… וַיַּעֲשׂוּ גָל… וְיַעֲקֹב קָרָא לוֹ גַּלְעֵד. רש“י: אחיו – הם בניו. [9] כדוגמת: גַּל עֵינַי וְאַבִּיטָה (תה’ קיט:יח). [11] ומי שעיקר חפצו דווקא בשיער המתגלח יתדמה לכאורה לחופר בור ואינו צריך אלא לעפרה שהיא מלאכה שאינה צריכה לגופה ובכך פטור מדאורייתא בשבת. [12]  שהרי אילו היה מתייבש לגמרי, או שהיו המים מתאדים כליל, לכאורה לא היתה בכך הפחתת הנס כלל. [13]  שהגבחת היא סימן חמישי (בנוסף לד’ הנמנים במשנה (חולין ג:ו): חברותא חולין סה: – חגב הבא לפנינו ויש לו גבחת, שאינו דומה לארבה אלא בארבעת הסימנין המוזכרין במשנה, ואילו בסימן החמישי הוא שונה ממנו. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

This Shabbat we read Parshat HaChodesh, the last of four special Torah readings before Pesach. Parshat HaChodesh establishes Nissan as the first of the months of the Biblical Year. This is especially germane because this year we read Parshat HaChodesh on the day of Rosh Chodesh Nissan. So we discuss the first month of the year on the first day of that month. In this essay we will discuss two Hebrew words that both mean “month” — chodesh and yerach. We will strive to find the difference in their etymology and how/why they are used in different contexts. Although some say that chodesh is Aramaic, while yerach is Hebrew, others offer a more sophisticated approach. The Malbim and Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (1808-1888) provide a penetrating insight as to the etymology of the word chodesh. They explain that the primary meaning of the word chodesh is not “month” but rather “beginning of the month.” In this way we find that the word chodesh appears in the Bible when one would otherwise expect the phrase Rosh Chodesh to appear (see Num. 28:14, I Sam 20:18, and Isa. 1:13). The word chodesh, therefore, primarily refers to the concept of chadash (“new”) or chiddush (“novel” or “renewal”), and specifically denotes the novelty of the month. That chodesh also refers to the idea of a “month” is only a secondary, borrowed meaning. What, then, does the word yerach mean? Malbim explains that the word yerach simply denotes a period of thirty days — regardless of whether or not those thirty days represent an astronomical event related to the moon. However, in truth, the word yerach is actually related to yareach (“moon”), whose lunar movements help us define the duration of a month. Based on this we may posit that while chodesh denotes the beginning of the month, yerach denotes the entire month as a whole. Rabbi Aharon Marcus (1843-1916) writes that the word yerach is related to the Hebrew word oraiach (“path”) and to the Aramaic word itrachish (“it happened”). He does not explain the thematic link between these words, but to me it seems fairly clear. The word chodesh is related to the idea of “new,” and alludes to G-d’s role in administering the world, in which He introduces new occurrences that are outside of the normal system of nature. We call these events “miracles”. For this reason, the first of the months is Nissan, whose very meaning is “miracles” because the Exodus from Egypt, one of the greatest miracles of all time, happened then. In general, we use the word chodesh colloquially, because we wish to focus on G-d and His awesome miracles. On the other hand, the word yerach is less commonly used because it is related to the word for “path” and does not connote anything “happening” beyond the regular system of nature. When we refer to a month with the word yerach, we refer to time running its course in a natural way, as if to say that it just “happened,” seemingly without G-d’s miraculous intervention. Rabbi Hirsch offers another way of differentiating between chodesh and yerach which fits with our model. He argues that the word chodesh denotes the idea of a month as simply a unit of time (measured by the amount of time it takes the moon’s light to disappear and reappear). In this way, the word chodesh is transcendental, or abstract. On the other hand, he explains, the word yerach connotes the month as a vehicle for maturation. That is, the word yerach implies a physical manifestation of the passage of time — more specifically, in the growth of produce. According to this understanding, the word yerach refers to a month in a very tangible or physical context, a month that is bound to the rules of nature. Rabbi Mordechai Jaffe (1530-1612), the author of the Levush, writes that the custom is to refer to the month on a divorce document (a get) as a yerach, and on a marriage document (a ketubah) as a chodesh. He explains that this is because the word yerach is associated with being sent away, geresh yerachim (Deut. 33:14), while the word chodesh is associated with something new, and marrying a woman is called “taking a new wife” (Deut. 24:5). (It is also unfortunately true that many marriages end when the novelty wears off and a couple is left in a stale rut. The hope that this will not plague the newlyweds is reflected in the word chodesh that appears in the ketubah.) Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

Edmund Burke (1729-1797), the father of contemporary conservatism, purportedly said, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” When good people stand idly by and allow evil people to do as they please, then evil will certainly triumph. The implication of Burke’s dictum is that it is incumbent upon good people to stop the treachery of evildoers. The Torah takes this Burkian approach to the responsibility of the righteous and implores us to reprimand the wicked for their sins (Lev. 19:17). The Hebrew language collates the notion of rebuking sinners in two different words: tochachah and mussar. In the following paragraphs we shall seek to delineate the differences between these two words and their implied approaches to rebuke. The Vilna Gaon (1720-1797) explains that tochachah is rebuke that comes from the mouth, while mussar comes from other body parts. In other words, telling somebody off for his misdeeds constitutes tochachah, while physically driving home the same point is called mussar. Thus, when a parent disciplines his child by hitting him (obviously, in a non-abusive way) or when G-d teaches somebody a lesson by afflicting him, that is called mussar. In fact, the Vilna Gaon connects the word mussar with the word yissurin (“suffering”). When G-d warns the Jews of the calamities that shall befall them should they fail to properly heed the Torah’s laws, this is called tochachach. Indeed, there are two passages in the Torah which do exactly that, and each is traditionally known as “the tochachach”: Leviticus 26:14-43 (which is always read before Shavuot) and Deuteronomy 28:15-68 (which is always read before Rosh Hashana). The Malbim (1809-1879) identifies three differences between the implication of the words tochachah and mussar. Those differences lie in the “who, what, and why” of the admonition in question. Firstly, mussar is rebuke given by a person of authority to a subordinate, while tochachah may even be rebuke exchanged amongst equals. Secondly, mussar may be carried out through corporal punishment or simply a verbal tongue-lashing, while tochachah exclusively refers admonishing another by logically proving that he has done wrong. Thirdly, mussar focuses on inculcating proper behavior for the future, while tochachah focuses on castigating a sinner for his past deeds. (This last distinction is also found in the writings of the Vilna Gaon.) Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim of Breslau (1740-1814) connects the word tochachah to nochach, which means “opposite” — both in terms of ideology (e.g., “Communism is the opposite of Capitalism.”) and physical location (e.g., “The car stopped opposite the red light.”). By offering his words of criticism, the rebuker opposes the rebukee, both in an ideological sense and possibly even in a physical sense, if the two meet face-to-face. Nonetheless, Rabbi Pappenheim argues that the most effective way of rebuking another is not direct confrontation, but to “innocently” question his actions and spur a debate about their correctness. Hopefully, the ensuing discussion will allow the sinner to realize the folly of his ways in a more powerful way than if he was simply confronted with a litany of his misdoings. For this reason, the word tochachah is also related to the words hochachah (proof) and vikuach (debate). Indeed, the proper way of chastising is not simply sermonizing about fire and brimstone descending from the heavens à la Jonathan Edwards’ Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God. That Puritan tract may indeed arouse emotive feelings of repentance through elaborate descriptions of the hellish fires of purgatory, but such emotions are merely fleeting bursts of contrition, unless they are backed with a logical and intellectual acceptance to do only good. Tochachah seeks to logically prove the vanity of sin and provide fodder for a rational acceptance to do only good. On the other hand, Rabbi Pappenheim writes that the word mussar is related to the word le’hasir (“to remove” or “to separate”). This is either because mussar seeks to “displace” or “remove” an offender from the path of sin within which he had been entrenched or because it clearly “delineates” and “separates” between what is right and what is wrong. Alternatively, the word mussar is related to the word assur (which literally means “tied”, although it colloquially means “forbidden”) because the rebuker seeks to show the rebukee that he is “bound” to certain expectations of right and wrong. Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg (1785-1865) similarly explains that mussar is related to “tying” because it gives a person the ability to tie down his evil inclination and keep his illicit desires in check. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

Article abstract for Metzora: As part of the leper’s purification process following his affliction with tazraat, this week’s portion mandates all the hair on his head, including his beard, the זקן. This word is obviously derived from the same root as זָקֵן, aged, but the root is expounded by the Sages as a compound word, based on the underlying two letters קן. The article examines the core meaning running through all the words in Biblical Hebrew containing this string, and the profound message embodied in this import regarding the very creation of the world and its continual renewal. ויקרא יד:ט – וְהָיָה בַיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי יְגַלַּח אֶת כָּל שְׂעָרוֹ אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ וְאֶת זְקָנוֹ וְאֵת גַּבֹּת עֵינָיו. And it shall be, on the seventh day, that he shall shave off all his hair: [that of] his head, his beard [זְקָנוֹ], his eyebrows (Lev. 14:9). In the verse quoted above, the Torah lists a number of actions which the מצורע must perform as part of his spiritual cleansing process. Among them, he must shave off all of his hair, including his beard. The word זָקָן (beard) is clearly derived from the word זָקֵן (older person). But our Sages interpreted the word זקן homiletically, as an acronym of זה קנה חכמה (one who has acquired wisdom): Kiddushin 32b – The word זקן refers to the wise man, as it states: Gather to me seventy men from the זִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל; R’ Yossi Hagelili says, the only זקן is one who acquires wisdom, as it states: Prov. 8:22 – Hashem made me [קָנָנִי] as the beginning of His way. Rashi explains that this interpretation is based on viewing the word זקן as an abbreviation[1]: “The only זקן is one [זה] who has acquired [שקנה] wisdom – the verse employs an abbreviation.” But since there is no letter ‘ח (the first letter of חכמה) in the word זקן, the abbreviation would appear to apply only to the words זה קנה. Support for this can be found in a Midrash (Gen. Rab. 59:6), where זקן is interpreted as “the acquisition of two worlds” without a connection to חכמה specifically: וְאַבְרָהָם זָקֵן (בר’ כד:א), זקן זה קנה שני עולמות. Another word is also homiletically treated in the Talmud (Brach. 56b) as a reference to wisdom: “One who dreams of a reed [קָנֶה] should anticipate [acquiring] wisdom.” The common thread between these three expositions is that all the words interpreted contain the two letters קן – which the Sages apparently see as a hidden reference to קנין (acquisition). These two letters first appear in Scripture in the naming of Cain, the meaning of which is explained in the verse itself: Gen. 4:1 – She conceived and bore Cain, and she said, “I have acquired [קָנִיתִי] a man with the Lord.” This is interpreted in various ways by the commentators. Ramban (ad loc) explains that she meant that he would be “an acquisition” (קנין) to God, Whom he would serve in their place after she and Adam died. Haketav Vehakabbalah, however, explains that Eve’s expression קָנִיתִי stems from the word קנאה (jealousy): Haketav Vehakabbalah (ibid.) – In the Midrash Hane’elam[2]… this one will not be like us, to give his honor to another, because the very name of Hashem is the ‘Zealous One’ [קַנָּא] He is a zealous God [קַנָּא הֽוּא] (Ex. 34:14) [here ends the quote from the Midrash Hane’elam]… It seems to me that the intent of קניתי is קנאה [jealousy], and this is not such a strange thing, because we find in Ezekiel (8:3) that the symbol of jealousy isהַמַּקְנֶה ,[3] and Rashbam[4] explains that the word הַמַּקְנֶה is to be understood as המקניא… [therefore, Eve] called her son Cain… because he would be a man who be jealous / zealous for the honor of God. Haketav Vehakabbalah then offers an explanation as to the connection between קנה and קנא: “Upon reflection, it seems that קנאה is related to קנין, because קנין is the word used for an item’s coming into someone’s domain; it now belongs to him; he is its owner.” Rabbi S. R. Hirsch explains similarly concerning God, as it were: R’ S. R. Hirsch Ex. 20:5 – A zealous קנא God – “קנא is close to קנה,[5] to make a claim of ownership and demand something as one’s right, to claim the offense of a right that was compromised – one’s own right or that of someone else.” Separately from the connection between קנה and קנא, Ricanati (Gen. 1:1) hints tersely to a link between קנה and קן צפור – a bird’s nest.[6] The background for his comments apparently derives from the words of the Zohar (2:8b) – “Once the Messiah has been ‘rectified’ (אתקן)… he returns to a place called ‘the bird’s nest,’ קן צפור, where he observes a vision of the destroyed Temple along with the many righteous people murdered there. He then takes from there ten… garments of zealousness.” Notice that the Messiah takes the garments of קנאה from the place called the קן, and he enters there only when he is מתוקן. We can explain, based on Ricanati’s words, that the concept of acquisition [קנין] begins with the home, the קן. Acquisition means bringing something into my home / nest.[7] And once it is in my nest, I either guard it zealously, or run the risk that this “acquisition” will be appropriated by strangers, i.e., it will fall into an outsider’s קן. On the verse: God is the Maker [קֹנֵה] of heaven and earth (Gen. 14:19), Haketav Vehakabbalah (paraphrased) expands on the connections between these words: “The term קנין comes in reference to doing, creating, as in: for you have created [קָנִיתָ] my kidneys [the seat of my thoughts] (Ps. 139:13)… and also: Is He not your father and Master [קָּנֶךָ], has He not created you and firmed you? (Deut. 32:6)… and it seems to me that the word קנה is an expression of תיקון, of repair, ordering, straightening out and preparing, as in: a twisted thing cannot be made straight [לִתְקֹן] (Eccles. 1:15) and: arranged [תִּקֵּן] many proverbs (ibid. 12:9), and like the word תקנה used by the Rabbis… And [קן can mean תקון even] without the ת’ as well, [as] the Sages said, ‘he heard the sound of the etching [קַן] of the scribe’s quill and the etching [קַן] of the scroll,’ (Gittin 6a) – referring to the תיקון and etching of the quill… And perhaps for this reason the bird’s nest is called a קן, because it is ordered and prepared to guard the chicks and the eggs against dropping to the ground and being destroyed, and this too is an expression of תקנה. According to the Sages the word קנה as well implies תיקון, for they explained that the statement ‘קונה of heaven and earth’ refers to Abraham – who ‘repaired’ the world from the destruction of their deeds and their flawed opinions[8]…” Haketav Vehakabbalah adds from the Mechilta of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai (chapter 7):[9] “God is the קונה of heaven and earth – He is the one who leads and shapes and repairs” the world. In fact, Rashi preceded both Ricanati and Haketav Vehakabbalah in his explanation of אביך קניך as an expression of תיקון, קן and [10]תקנה: Deut. 32:6 – Is He not your father and קָּנֶךָ; Rashi – [The word קָּנֶךָ means:] Who created / acquired (קָנָה) you; [alternatively it means:] Who nested you (קִנְנֶךָ) in a nest (קַן) of rocks and in a strong land; [alternatively it means:] Who has rectified you (תִּקְּנֶךָ) with every type of repair (תַּקָּנָה).” One could ask, though, why Rashi did not explain קָּנֶךָ according to its plain meaning of doing and creating,[11] as he himself explained in: Gen. 14:19 – God is the Maker [קֹנֵה] of heaven and earth; Rashi – קֹנֵה of heaven and earth, as in Maker of heaven and earth (Ps. 134:3). We will return to this question shortly.[12] We cited above what the Sages said about קנה סוף: Brach. 56b – One who sees a reed [קנה] in a dream should anticipate acquiring [the type of wisdom called] חכמה, as Scripture states,קְנֵה חָכְמָה ; acquire wisdom (Prov. 4:7); [one who sees] reeds should anticipate acquiring [they type of wisdom called] בינה, as it states (ibid.), וּבְכָל קִנְיָנְךָ קְנֵה בִינָה – from your every acquisition acquire בינה. Previously, when we cited the Sages’ interpretation of the word זקן (literally, an older person) as one who acquires wisdom, that seemed reasonable, because the average person will accumulate wisdom over the years to some degree or other, This time, though, the Sages are saying that one who sees reeds in a dream can expect wisdom. How are reeds connected to wisdom? A hint may be found in one general property of reeds, namely: hollowness (the basis for e.g. the branches of the Menorah being referred to as קנים).[13] The structure of the reed is similar to a pipe, generally used for transmitting water from place to place. On the abstract level, water is the symbol of Torah wisdom (BK 17a). Thus, the logic of the proof-text brought by Rabbi Yossi Hagelili (ibid.) becomes apparent: The Lord קנני me at the beginning of His way (Prov. 8:22). The choice of the word קנני as a synonym for creation -as opposed to e.g. ברא or עשה- may be interpreted by way of its connection to קָנֶה in the sense of reeds. G-d created the world and constantly renews it by means of pipelines and channels through which the wisdom of Torah flows. This interpretation is reinforced in the following verses: When there were no depths, I was formed [חוללתי] (ibid. 24). The word חוללתי is another synonym for creation, but again, this word implicitly suggests hollowness. That is, God created the world on a foundation of “pipelines,” capable of continually conveying the eternal תיקון so that this world not deteriorate, because degradation is indeed the default outcome for any object which is left to follow its natural course.[14] Therefore, although Rashi is typically the commentator who provides the simple meaning of a word or verse, when it came to אביך קניך, he saw fit to provide three meanings, because unlike the root ברא, which indicates creation ex- nihilo (something from nothing, יש מעין) and nothing more, the root קנן intimates the constant involvement of the Creator, and the ongoing system of renewal of the world. God revealed this to us and connected us to this eternal “fountain of youth,” through which we can acquire this world and the next. May we acquire eternal renewal through the קנים our קונה has been מקונן for us. And may the Messiah soon leave his קן and redeem us! [1] נוטריקון in Hebrew, which can also mean contractions and acronyms. [2] מדרש הנעלם פ’ בר’, מאמר קניתי איש את ה’. זהר חדש פ’ בר’, מאמר קניתי (א:לג.) – א”ר אליעזר חזרה חוה להודות על אותו עון שעברה, ואמרה לא יהיה זה כמונו לתת כבוד לאחר זולתו. אבל זה [יהיה] את השם ממש ולא לאחר. [3] כלומר, אע”פ שהמלה “המקנה” מורה ג”כ על קנאה, היא מופיעה כאן באות ה’ תמורת א’, בהתאם למדרש הנעלם, שדרש “קניתי” מלשון “קנאה”, שמרמז לקשר בין שני הענינים הללו, כפי שמסביר בהמשך. [4] צ”ל רד”ק, וכ”כ אברבנאל ומצ”ד שם. [5] בחילוף אותיות אחה”ע. [6] ריקאנטי בר’ א:א – מלת קן מלשון קנין ומלשון קן צפור והבן. [7] כפי שדרשו ז”ל את הפסוק “קנים תעשה את התיבה“ מלשון “קן” צפור: ב”ר נח לא:ט – קִנִּים תַּעֲשֶׂה אֶת הַתֵּבָה (בר’ ו:יד), קילין ומדורין; מת”כ – דרש לשון “קן צפור“. [8] ב”ר מג:ז, ע”ש ובמת”כ וידי משה. [9] השוה מכילתא דרשב”י בשלח פ’ טו. [10] ספר קדושת התורה ודקדוקיה לדברים לב:ו. וראה גם את ספר משכיל לדוד שם. [11] כפירוש רמב”ן כאן, וכדמשמע מהזוהר בפסוק אחר: מדרש הנעלם דף ה. – בתורה ברא את העולם, שנאמר: ה’ קָנָנִי רֵאשִׁית דַּרְכּוֹ (משלי ח:כב). וזהו בראשית ברא אלהים. וראה גם ספר חרדים, מצוות התלויות בארץ פרק ג. [12] אמנם בפשטות, י”ל שכאן רש”י מפרש “קונה” מהמבט של הגוי הצדיק מלכי-צדק. בניגוד לכך, בהאזינו הַמְדַבֵּר הוא כביכול הקב”ה בכבודו ובעצמו – שהתכוון ללמד לעם את כל ההיבטים שמָנָה רש”י – במלה “קנך”. [13] שמות כה:לב – וְשִׁשָּׁה קָנִים יֹצְאִים מִצִּדֶּיהָ; אב”ע – טעם קנים. עגולים ארוכים, חלולים. ומכאן יש להסביר מלים אחרות משרש ‘קן’ (לשיטת מחברת מנחם), כגון המלה “קִינוֹ”, שפרש”י כלשון תיק המתלבש מעל ידית הרומח: ש”ב כא:טז – וּמִשְׁקַל קֵינוֹ שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת; רש”י – ומשקל קינו – הוא כמו תיק שבראש בית יד הרומח. היינו חללו של התיק (בדומה לחלל הקנה). ושמא יש להציע שהמלים “קינה” ו”קוננים”, נגזרות בהשאלה מהמקוננות שניגנו בכלי בעל חללא: יחז’ כז:לב – וְנָשְׂאוּ… קִינָה וְקוֹנְנוּ עָלָיִךְ. תת הערה: אהיינו ה”אירוס” בלשון משנה (כלים טו:ו, ועיי”ש גם ביכין טז:ז), שפירש רמב”ם בפה”מ: “בלע”ז טבור”י (תוף מרים), וכבר יקוננו בזה הכלי על המת”. [14] ואכן, המלה “טבע“ מבטאת את הרעיון הזה: שרש ‘טבע’ מורה בין השאר על טביעה, היינו שקיעה תמידית, קרי: שחיקה תמידית. וכן הכינוים המצויים במקרא ל”עולם” מורים על כך: “תֵּבֵל” נגזרת מן ‘בל’1, כדוגמת: “לֹא בָלוּ שַׂלְמֹתֵיכֶם מֵעֲלֵיכֶם” (דברים כט:ד). וכן “חלד”: הַאֲזִינוּ כָּל יֹשְׁבֵי חָלֶד (תה’ פרק מט:ב), ופרש”י שנקראת הארץ כן ע”ש שהיא נושנת ומתחלדת. בניגוד לכך, המלה “עולם” במקרא לפי רוב המפרשים תמיד מורה לא על כדור הארץ, אלא על נצחיות (כמו: “וְגַם בְּךָ יַאֲמִינוּ לְעוֹלָם” [שמות יט:ט]). ונראה לכאורה שחז”ל אימצו את המלה הזאת בדווקא לתאר את העולם הגשמי – בדרך סגי נהור. אמנם עומק סיבתם נלע”ד הוא האמור כאן: למרות השחיקה הבלתי נפסקת של העולם הגשמי, דווקא בו ניתנו לנו הכלים לקנות את הנצחיות שכולנו משתוקקים לה. תת הערה: 1ראה ח”ש ערך ‘בל’ (ומאמרינו לפ’ אחרי מות בהרחבה).

זְבוּב: fly דַּבְּרוּ אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַאֲמַרְתֶּם אֲלֵהֶם אִישׁ אִישׁ כִּי יִהְיֶה זָב מִבְּשָׂרוֹ זוֹבוֹ טָמֵא הוּא Speak to the Bnei Yisrael and say to them: “[any] man who will have a flow from his flesh, its flow is impure.”1 זָב: Flow Eretz Yisrael is referred to as אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָבוּדְבָשׁ/aland flowing with milk and honey, where זָבַתmeans flowing. The flesh that the above verse speaks about from where the flow is emitted is from the man’s ervah/nakedness. The fact that the flow comes from this area is symbolic that this type of impurity comes from a sickness that is in the heart of man, namely having improper thoughts.2These improper thoughts are expressed as a zav/emission, an impure outflow from the body in this area. In the Midrash Rabbah, it says that Hashem will inflict one who sins in his youth withzavusand tzara’as, not so much as a punishment, but as a means to hint to the person that he needs to change his ways and do teshuvah.3As we know, the body’s ailments are not just happenstance, but are signals for us to awaken from our spiritual slumber and change our ways.4 זְבוּב: Fly In the same way as the זָב/zav, whose impure flow from within is a signal from Hashem for him to change his ways, so too the זְבוּב/fly is a signal from Hashem for us to change. Why did Hashem create the fly? We know that there is nothing in Creation that does not have a purpose. Before Adam sinned there was no need for flies. As a result of man’s sin, the earth was cursed and the fly was born — not only born but airborne — to do its job of bugging man! The fly is the king of all bugs because it bugs us the most. The Midrash clearly states that flies are Hashem’s messengers.5 The fly is one of my favorite creatures with whom I have a love/hate relationship. While on holiday in my youth, I was in a hot climate where there was an abundance of flies. I began to observe them and noticed a certain pattern in their behavior, to the point where I could control them! I observed that whenever I was having bad thoughts, the flies would come and bug me, and when my thoughts were clean, they would leave me alone and instead bug someone else. It was clear to me that Hashem was sending these creatures to bug us purposely, not randomly, as a litmus test to see where we were holding with regard to our thoughts. It caused me to become more aware and ask myself what it was that I was thinking about that was bugging Hashem that He in turn was bugging me to change my thoughts from impure to pure. In secular literature, I had read that there was a being referred to as the “Lord of the Flies,” a rebellious angel called Beelzebub who had fallen from Heaven, which in Hebrew means “lord of the flies,” and in the Torah is a form of idol worship. As I became more religious, I discovered with great joy that the commentary of the Kli Yakar in Bereishisquotes Chazal as referring to the yetzer haraand the Satan as a fly!6Just like the yetzer haracrouches at the opening, so too the fly does.7The mouth of the fly is too weak to inflict a wound on its own; instead, it waits until there is an existing wound and then makes it bigger. Similarly, the yetzer haracannot inflict any harm on someone who is in a state ofshleimus/perfection; rather, he waits for him to make an opening, where he then enters and makes the opening bigger. A sure way to know if we have or have not achieved the lofty goal ofshleimusis whether flies bother us or not. We see this with the prophet Elisha, whom the Shunamite woman recognized as a holy man since she never saw any flies around his table.8 Anyone who has spent hours lying on a beach will testify to the fact that flies are partial to one’s feet and ankles. Now that we see the connection between the fly and the Satan, we can piece the pictures of the puzzle together. The Satan, in the form of the snake, was punished in that he had to walk on his stomach and could only inflict pain on man’s heel, yetman has the power to step on him. Man’s weakest point is the heel (in Greek mythology, his “Achilles’ heel”), because that is the place where the snake can inflict its bite. Rashi, in the beginning of Parshas Eikev, relates that if we trample with our heels on the small mitzvos and treat them lightly, it will lead us to trample on the bigger mitzvos. Just like the poison of the snake travels from the heel upward to the head, so too the yetzer haracauses us to transgress the light mitzvos with our heels, and then one thing leads to another.9 Once there is a breach in the armor, the poison spreads. This is the power of the snake, and this is the power of the fly. The Gemarawarns a person with tzara’asto be careful of flies because the flies love open wounds and can cause disease to spread.10 In this week’s parshah, the Kli Yakar compares the speakers of lashon harato flies. Just like flies are not found by people who are shalemand are only found by people who have blemishes, so too speakers oflashon haraleave people alone if they have a good name and only attack people with blemishes in an attempt to widen their blemish and spread the disease. One of my chavrusas,Binyamin, once said: “If you keep your mouth shut, the flies can’t come in.” Anotherchavrusa,Amos, once said that the flies are just like Arabs in that they have their hands in everything, just like flies that have no concern for borders. In the Midrash Tanchuma,thegoyimare also compared to flies.11One of the rabbis was admiring the stature and regal appearance of one of the Romans. Afterward, the rabbi and his friend were passing through the market, and when they saw a basket of dates and figs crawling with flies, the rabbi’s friend told him that the Romans and goyimwere no different than the flies in that Hashem uses them as hissheluchim, quoting the pasukthat Hashem sends the flies to do battle against us, referring to the armies of Sancherev. Have you ever wondered where the flies go to in the winter? Referring to my essay on the חוֹרֶף/winter,12the wintertime is the season where everything appears to be dead. In actuality, however, it is the beginning of life, the stage of youth in which one has not fully developed his individuality, as evidenced by the fact that he is not even accountable for sin by the Heavenly Court until reaching the age of twenty. Until one is twenty, one is very much under the domain of the yetzer hara, where everyone believes the whole world revolves around him. This is most prevalent in younger children — the younger the child, the purer the yetzer hara. It is only when one starts to develop as a man does the fly come to attack. This occurs in the spring and summertime of one’s life, when one’s fruits are developing and maturing. Here is when the flys strikes. Where there is an abundant of fruits, there is an abundant of fruit flies. The idea is that Hashem bugs us because He wants us to purify ourselves and become shalem/complete. When the flies finally leave us alone, as they did with the prophet Elisha, then it signals that we have reached shleimus. One last point: Given an empty barrel of dung and an empty barrel of honey, which do you think the flies would be more attracted too? Most people would say the dung, but, in actuality, the flies are more attracted to the sweetness of the honey. This analogy is compared to the difference between the dead bodies of a goyand a Jew. The forces of tumahgather around the body of a Jew, for this is where the most taharahhas been, leaving behind the remnants of sweetness that the flies are attracted to, whereas with a goythere is little or no comparison.13 This is the love/hate relationship of a זְבוּב/fly. Like a זָב, itflows from a place of tumahto reveal to us our shortcomings. Hashem loves us, so He bugs us and wants us to change. See Appendix iv, the Song of the Fly. 1Vayikra 15:2. 2Sefornoto Vayikraibid. 3Vayikra Rabbah 18:1. 4Brachos 5a. 5Midrash Tanchuma, Vayeshev3, on the verse in Yeshayahchap. 7. 6Kli Yakar to Bereishis 4:7. 7Brachos 61a: אמר רב, יצר הרע דומה לזבוב. 8Ibid., 10b. 9See essay to Parshasעקבon the root עקב. 10Kesubos 77b. 11Midrash Tanchuma, Vayeshev3. 12See Parshas Kedoshim. 13Ohr HaChaim to Bamidbar 19:2. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

In this essay we will explore the different words for gehinnom (commonly translated as “hell” or “purgatory”). The Talmud (Eruvin 19a) cites Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi’s statement that there are seven Biblical terms which refer to gehinnom: sheol, avadon, be’er shachat, bor shaon, tit hayaven, tzal-mavet, and eretz hatachtit. In the following paragraphs we will explore the literal and esoteric meanings of these seven terms, as well as several more. The word sheol and its various forms appear close to seventy times in the Bible. Sheol’s literal meaning is “grave.” Interestingly, Ibn Ezra to Gen. 37:35 criticizes the Christian Vulgate for translating sheol in that verse as the Latin infernus (“inferno”), because Ibn Ezra maintains that sheol literally means grave. However, Rashi (there) explains that although the plain meaning of sheol is “grave,” exegetically it can refer to the post-mortem purgatory of the soul. The Malbim writes that sheol literally means a deep pit from which it is impossible to get out. This may apply to both a “grave” and gehinnom. Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim of Breslau (1740-1814) explains that the root of the word sheol is SHIN-LAMMED, which denotes something “thrown away” or “negated.” That meaning extends to the grave because death marks the onset of a plane of existence which is “away” from the realm of the living. My friend Rabbi Tzvi Matisyahu Abrahams takes a more exhortative approach in his book Root Connections in the Torah. He writes (p. 274): “The grave is called sheol because at the time when we will be placed into the ground, there will be a big question (sheilah) mark hanging over our heads as to where we will be headed.” A second word for gehinnom is avadon (Ps. 88:12), which either refers to the destruction/rotting of the body after death, or the fact that souls are “lost” (avad) there for some time. The third term for gehinnom is shachat or be’er shachat (Ps. 16:10, 55:24). In many cases the word shachat in the Bible does not clearly refer to the grave or gehinnom, but refers to a pit. Rabbi Avraham Bedersi HaPenini (1230-1300) explains that a shachat is a pit dug for the purpose of capturing wild animals. He connects this to gehinnom by noting that the wicked sometimes set up traps in order to ensnare the righteous. He also explains that shachat is an expression of “destruction” (hashchatah), for the body rots and decomposes in the grave. Rabbi Pappenheim explains that the root of shachat is SHIN-CHET, which refers to “bending.” This is connected to a “pit” because when one is stuck in such a cramped place he is forced to “bend” his body. Other words which are derived from this root include hishtachavah (“bowing,” by which one “bends” his posture) and mashach (“anointing,” because applying oil to hard things softens them, leaving them more pliable and “bendable”). The fourth term cited by Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is bor shaon (literally, the “Pit of Noise”), found in Ps. 40:3. Rabbi Yonah ibn Janach and others explain that shaon — which means a “ruckus of noise” — and shaanan — which means “quiet” — are actually related to each other. This is an example of a common phenomenon in Hebrew where words with diametrically opposed meanings sometimes have related roots. In light of this it seems that bor shaon might actually means “Pit of Silence,” and refer to the fact that one can no longer complain or even speak after death. Rashi (to Isa. 9:4) and Radak in Sefer HaShorashim explain that the word shaon has the same root as the word shoah (“holocaust” or “destruction”). This fits with the terms avadon and shachat,which are also related to “destruction.” The fifth term proffered by Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi is tit hayaven (literally, “slimy mud”), also found in Ps. 40:3 (alongside with bor shaon). Gehinnom restricts one’s freedom of movement like somebody stuck in quicksand, and in death the dead lie lifelessly in the grave. Rabbi Pappenheim explains that the word hayaven is derived from the root YUD-NUN, which refers to “trickery” or “deception.” This root is related to the word onaah (essentially “to profit by ripping somebody off”), and yayin (“wine,” which deceives the drinker by tasting good but then taking away his capacity to think properly). In the same vein, quicksand also “deceives” people by appearing to be dry land that one can walk on top of, but, in reality, if one attempts to do so he will drown in the slime. (Similar explanations are offered by Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch in his commentary to Gen. 9:20 and by Rabbi Aharon Marcus in Keset HaSofer to Gen. 10:2.) The sixth synonym for gehinnom is tzal-mavet, literally “shadow of death” (Ps. 107:10, Iyov 10:21). The connection is obvious. The seventh and final term that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi mentions is eretz hatachtit (literally, “the underworld”). When discussing this term the Talmud cannot find an example of Biblical usage, and so it simply concludes that there is a tradition linking this term with gehinnom. Another version of Rabbi Yehoshua’s list, found in Sefer Russiana and in Menorat HaMaor by Rabbi Yitzchak Abuhab (14th century Spain) has eretz chittit (literally, “the Land of the Hittites”) instead of eretz tachtit. In fact, the Tosafists actually prefer this version. They argue that the term eretz tachtit actually does appear in the Bible (several times in Ezek. 31, see also Deut. 32:22), so if eretz tachtit was a term for gehinnom the Talmud would not have had to resort to a non-Scriptural tradition to prove so. The term eretz chittit, on the other hand, does not appear in the Bible. This substantiates the position that the Talmudic passage in question should indeed read eretz chittit, which was inadvertently changed toeretz tachtit by a scribal error. In other words, if we assume that the seventh term is eretz chittit, the Talmud’s entire discussion makes more sense. Rabbi Shmuel Eidels (1555-1631), also known as the Maharsha, explains that these seven names for gehinnom correspond to seven different places in gehinnom (see Sotah 10b). Indeed, Midrash Konen (printed in Rabbi J. D. Eisenstein’s Otzar Midrashim, p. 256) writes that different types of sinners occupy different places in gehinnom: Korach and his companions occupy sheol; the lost souls of the wicked occupy avadon; robbers, thieves, and those who withhold wages from workers occupy be’er shachat; those who violated the laws governing intimate relations occupy tit hayaven; slanderers occupy tzal-mavet; those who argue with Torah Scholars occupy eretz tachtit; and so forth… The Tosafists cite several sources that presume that alukah (literally, “leech” or “sanguisuga”) — a word that appears in Prov. 30:15 — is another term for gehinnom (although they also discuss the possibility that it is an alternate name for King Solomon). Maharal explains that just as a leech sucks out a person’s blood, so does gehinnom “suck out” a person’s soul. Similarly, Rabbi Chaim of Volozhin (1749-1821) explains in Nefesh HaChaim (1:12) that gehinnom is called a “leech” because a leech sucks out a person’s bad blood and then dies. This is comparable to gehinnom which cleanses a person of his sins, thus causing all impure pollutants created by his sin to disappear. Before continuing with the Talmud’s reaction to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, I must state that other sources have alternate versions of his list: Midrash Hallel (Otzar Midrashim, p. 134) omits bor shaon and eretz hatachtit, and instead includes gehinnom and tziyah (literally, “place of desolation). Midrash Din HaKever (Otzar Midrashim, p. 94) replaces bor shaon with be’er shaon; eretz hatachtit with bor hatachtit (literally, “the underpit”); andtzal-mavet with chatzar-mavat (literally, “Courtyard of Death”). The Targumic Tosefta (beginning of Ezek.) replaces bor shaon with dumah (literally, “quiet” — in Kabbalistic sources, dumah is the name of the angel in charge of gehinnom). It also replaces eretz hatachtit with arka (Aramaic for “earth,” see Jer. 10:11), and tzal-mavet with gehinnom. After citing and finding proof-texts for the seven words in Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi’s list the Talmud then turns to another two words which he seems to have neglected: gehinnom and tophet. Those two words do not explicitly refer to the netherworld in the Bible. In the Bible the terms gei ben hinnom (the “Valley of Ben Hinnom,” from which the word gehinnom is derived) and tophet refer to sites in Southern Jerusalem where idol worshippers served the Baal, in part with child sacrifices (see Jer. 19). Nonetheless, these two terms were borrowed as expressions of the sinner’s afterlife. Based on that borrowing, the Talmud asks why Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi did not include these two terms in his list. The Talmud answers that gehinnom and tophet are not additional names for the underworld or places within that realm, but are actually allusions to the reasons why somebody might end up there. Meaning, the Talmud expounds on the word gehinnom as referring to the deep “valley” (gei) into which those who engage in “pointless” (chinam, which Rashi explains refers to sexual impropriety) activities descend. Similarly, the Talmud expounds on tophet as referring to the place into which those who are “convinced” or “seduced” (mifateh) by the Evil Inclination fall. In light of this, gehinnom and tophet do not fit into the theme of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi’s list (i.e. Biblical terms which refer to gehinnom) and he therefore left them out. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

Following the Israelites' murmuring against the manna sent from heaven, God dispatched snakes to bite them. The word "נשיכה" appears only in relation to the snake, and not regarding the bite of any other living thing such as dogs, scorpions or mosquitos. In this article, we focus on the depth of this word, and why it is applies only to the snake and not to any other living being. Num. 21:5-6 – …there is no bread and no water, and we are disgusted with this accursed bread. The Lord sent against the people the venomous snakes, and they bit the people, and many people of Israel died. The root נשך in the sense of a physical bite[1] appears more times in this week’s Torah portion (3x) than in all the rest of the portions combined. Our Sages expressed puzzlement in general over the benefit to the snake of its bite: Deut. Rab. 5:10 – The serpent was asked: ‘ What benefit do you derive from biting? ‘ He replied: ‘ Instead of asking me, ask those who engage in slander, as it is said: Surely the serpent will bite without enchantment, neither is there profit for the slanderer  (Eccl. 10:11), which means: What benefit does the slanderer derive from his slander? While the question could just as easily have been posed to e.g. the bee or the scorpion, the snake is different from the stingers in that it sinks it teeth into the flesh of its victim from above and below. Since other beasts biting in this manner would naturally remove and devour the flesh “while they’re at it,” the snake’s disinterest appears especially peculiar. [2] In any event, there certainly seems to be a unique aspect to the snake’s bite being hinted at in this Midrash and indeed in the singular use of the term נשך only in relation to the serpent among all brutes. The author of Yeriot Shlomo (1:110a) terms the snake’s bite as “settling” (משכין) its teeth in its prey, and thereby connects נשך with other words bearing the two letters ‘שכ’, such as: ‘משכן’   (Tabernacle/abode), ‘נשכה’/’לשכה’ (rooms on the Temple Mount),  ‘שכם’  (shoulder), ‘אשך’ (male privates). With this as a point of departure, we have added other words containing the ‘שכ’ string to this group to test if the gamut of these words shares a common theme. In total, we found eleven such words/roots: 1. ‘שכך’ 2. ‘נשך’ 3. ‘נשך’/’לשך’ 4. ‘שכן’ 5. ‘חשך’ 6. ‘שכב’ 7. ‘שכם’ 8. ‘שכח’  9.’אשך’[3]  10. ‘שכר’  11. ‘משך’. We suggest that all these words share meanings related to: Settling/resting, as well as the related themes: embedding, sinking, descending, retreating, waning, receding, and pacification/sedation. We will now examine them one at a time: ‘שכך’ – This word denotes sinking[4] (Gen. 8:1), pacification (Est. 2:1, 7:10), putting to rest (Num. 17:20, T. Onk. ad loc.). Note that T. Yon. on the Pentateuch and the Targum Sheni in Esther render שכך with derivatives of the Aramaic שדך (the source of שידוך, [5] for only marriage can bring a calm, settled state). Other words sharing this Aramaic translation are שקט (quiet, [6] calm; [7] vis. T. Yon. Josh. 11:23, 14:15, Ju. 3:11, 3:30, 5:31, 8:28, IIK 11:20, Is. 14:7, Ez. 16:49), שוב (pacification; see T. Yon. Gen. 27:44) and שכב (lying down; see T. Yerush. Num. 23:24). ‘נשך’ – This word means embedding fangs/teeth in prey, rendered משכין –settling– by Yeriot Shlomo, as above. ‘נשך’/’לשך’ – The term לשכה/נשכה (Neh. 12:44, 13:4, 7, Ez. 40:17) refers to various discreet rooms on the Temple Mount. This designation is derived from their purposes and activities comparable to “dwelling” (שכונה/לשכון]], see Yeriot Shlomo 1:110a; Maim. Beit Habechira with R. Shalom Tzadok’s commentary). ‘שכן’ – This word means dwelling/settling (e.g. Gen. 14:13. Note that Onk. renders the word שרי, a word related to לשרות, immersing – because the term indicates “dropping anchor”/ “sinking roots,” similar in meaning to להשתקע [settling permanently] from שקיעה [descending/sinking]). ‘חשך’ – Darkness comes with the descent of the sun, bringing with it calm and lying down to sleep). [8] ‘שכב’ – The time of lying down –descending to one’s bed– is a time of peace and calm. As cited above, T. Yerush. Num. 23:24 renders שכב with the same word –שדך– as שכך and שקט. ‘שכם’ – A synonym for shoulder, the only naturally horizontal part of the human anatomy, upon which a load may rest[9] (hence: “to shoulder a burden”). Yeriot Shlomo (ibid) and RSR Hirsch (Gen. 9:23) explain that the word השכם (to awaken early) derives from rousing the resting shoulder to return to its toils. See also Ohr Chadash (Gen. 19:2) for an alternate explanation of השכם. ‘שכח’ – Forgetting. Manot Aharon[10] (Esther 2:1) compares שכח to שכך [i.e. both refer to a thought, intention or memory waning and receding]. 9.’אשך’  – This word (denoting male privates) is rendered פחתין by Onk. (Lev. 21:20). פחתין is also the Targum of שקערורות (depressed, sunken, vis. Lev. 14:37). A pit (a depression in the ground) bears a similar rendering by T. Yon. in various places. This lower part of the anatomy is given to sinking downwards according to the forces of gravity. It is interesting to note that Chanania ben Antignus (Bechor. 7:5) equates אשך with חשך (similar to the equation of to ויאבק to ויחבק see Ramban Gen. 32:23). See Etz Yosef (Shir Rab. 11:11) for explanation of Chanania’s position. [11] ‘שכר’ – Drunkenness. Inebriation causes a waning and deadening of one’s awareness and senses. The Targum of “drunk” is רוי (see Gen. 9:21). The Aruch (entry מרוא) brings a second meaning of the word (from Targum to Nachum 3:14) – “mud”/“muck” – perhaps underscoring the level to which the drunkard can sink. [12] Along these lines, רעל, poison, carries the same Targum (Zech. 12:2). ‘משך’ – Pulling, dragging, removing. This word appears to bear an opposite meaning to the permanent sinking and settling denotation characteristic of the other ‘שך’ words. Here again we turn to Yeriot Shlomo (1:110a), who simply explains that while משך indicates removal, all matter removed from one place eventually is transplanted elsewhere; משך denotes simply removal of an object from one abode to another. [13] Alternatively, Yeriot Shlomo (1:116a) cites other examples of a leading מ changing the meaning of a word to the opposite; for instance: 1. While נע denotes movement, מנע means halting and impeding progress. 2. While עד indicates eternal endurance (e.g. שוכן עד, Is. 57:15), the definition of מעד is falling/collapsing. Similarly, שך means settling permanently while משך indicates uprooting and removing. May G-d extend (ימשוך) His kindness to His people, such that the biting fangs of our enemies be forgotten forever, and darkness will be replaced with light. May He establish His Temple as a permanent abode, and we will ascend shoulder to shoulder, speedily in our times. Amen. [1]  [בניגוד למובן  ריבית שמופיע ארבע פעמים בפרשת כי תצא]. [2]  [ואכן לא מצינו פועל ‘נשך’ במקרא אצל שום בעל חי חוץ מהנחש, אלא רק בהשאלה אצל מלווים בריבית, אצל נביאי שקר (מיכה ג:ה), ואצל מלכודת בעל שינים (יר’ ה:כו)]. [3]  [ראה י”ש א:י,ב-יא,א (הקדמה); קט,ב-קי,א; קטז,א; ג:יז,א]. [4]  [ומכאן נגזרת בלשון חז”ל המלה “שייך”, כלומר ענין המתחבר עם ענין אחר, היינו ש”נח” עליו, “חל”, “נופל” עליו (כטעם “לשון נופל על לשון”)]. [5]  [ומכאן “שידוך” בל’ חז”ל, שמושאלת לענין  סידור קידושין – דבר המשקיט רוחו של אדם]: שבת יב. – אין משדכין את התינוקות לארס. [כי האדם חש מנוחת הנפש ושקט, ומסוגל להשתקע – רק עם מצא אשה, מצא טוב]. [6]  [ראה ת”י יהושע יא:כג, יד:טו; שופ’ ג:יא, ל; ה:לא; ח:כח; מ”ב יא:כ; ישע’ יד:ז; יחז’ טז:מט]. [7]  [ת”י בר’ כז:מד]. [8]  [וע’ אור חדש (ר’ דוד שלוש) לבראשית א:ב]. [9]  [בדומה לביטוי בלע”ז: to shoulder a burden]. [10]  [בדומה לביטוי בלע”ז: to shoulder a burden]. [11]  [ומצינו “פחתין” כתרגומו של “שקערורות”, שפרש”י: “שקועות”. “שוחה” (בור) מתורגם “פחת”. “פחתת” ת”י “שקיעא”. “פחד ופחת” פרש”י: גומא ליפול בוץ עכ”ל רש”י, וכולם ענין שקיעה ושככה עד למטה. מעניין להעיר גם שהתנא חנניה ב”א השוה “אשך” ל”חשך” (אולי מעין השוואת “אבק” ל”חבק” [ע’ רמב”ן לפסוק “ויאבק איש עמו”])]: בכור’ ז:ה – מרוח אשך חנניה בן אנטיגנוס אומר כל שמראיו חשוכים. [ומביא העץ יוסף (ש”ר יא:יא) את דברי הערוך (ערך ‘חשך’): בבכור’ מד: כל שמראיו חשוכים פי’ מי שיש לו מרוח לעולם פניו חשוכים]. [12]  [גם רעל מתורגם “מרוי”, כלומר חומר שפל וירוד]: זכ’ יב:ב – סַף רַעַל; ת”י – מָן מְלֵי מַרְוֵי. [13]  [ולהלן מסביר י”ש את הענין על פי האות מ’ בראש המלה]: י”ש א:קטז. (ת”ד) – כבר הראנוך בשמות… ‘מנע’, ‘מעד’… ודומיהם מנוספי מ’ האמנתי”ו בראש המלה המורות על היפוכן… שם ‘נע’ המציין תנועה, ושם ‘מנע’ – על בטול תנועה… שם ‘עד’ המציין וועד [היינו  פעילות מתואמת (לשון “מועד” ו”ועד”)  והמשכיות (כלשון “עדי עד”)], ושם ‘מעד’ – על העדר הוועד [כלומר  התמוטטות… כך גם] שם ‘שך’ מורה על השכונה, ושם ‘משך’ – על נתוק השכונה. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

Someone sent me the following question: Anyone knows why do doubt and satisfaction, ספק וסיפוק, share the same Hebrew root? Answer: very appropriate this week, because the word appears in the Parshas hashavua: במ’ כד:י – וַיִּחַר אַף בָּלָק אֶל בִּלְעָם וַיִּסְפֹּק אֶת כַּפָּיו וַיֹּאמֶר בָּלָק אֶל בִּלְעָם לָקֹב אֹיְבַי קְרָאתִיך The meaning there is hitting, as it is in Jer. 31:18, Ez. 21:17, Job 34:26. On the other hand, in Jer. 48:26, Job 34:37, Job 20:22 (I Kings 20:10 is disputed, but the simple meaning probably fits here too) it means contentment, fulfillment. Where does the meaning of “doubt” derive from? We find the following verse in Isaiah: ישע’ ב:ו – כִּי מָלְאוּ מִקֶּדֶם וְעֹנְנִים כַּפְּלִשְׁתִּים וּבְיַלְדֵי נָכְרִים יַשְׂפִּיקוּ For you have abandoned your people, the house of Jacob, because they are replenished from the east, and are soothsayers like the Philistines, and they please themselves in the children of strangers. Rashi’s commentary appears somewhat paradoxical, and is subject to different interpretations. On the one hand the verse refers to the sinners’ pleasure with foreign women, and their offspring from them. But Rashi then compares it to Job 36:18 where it means “incitement resulting from abundance.” The OF word he uses for incitement is “debatement”, which sounds at first blush like the source for the “doubt” meaning of ספק. But this could be the key to understanding the common thread amongst the meanings: 1. hitting 2. abundance 3. doubt. Balak’s clapping his hands is an expression of frustration and angst – and confusion/doubt as to his next step. But just as anxiety can lead to doubt and uncertainty, so can satiation and abundance. The Torah expresses this elsewhere as וישמן ישורון ויבעט And Yeshurun grew fat and kicked (Deut. 32:15). One has everything he needs, and he begins to doubt whether he still needs the Lord at all C”V. This is my take at first glance at least. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

The bulk of the Torah portion "Balak" concerns Bilaam cursing Israel. The primary word used for cursing though is the highly unsual term קבה –unique, according to one opinion. Furthermore, this same word is singularly used in Balak to denote tents and other objects. What is the underlying meaning of the two letters קב, and why is this string so ubiquitous particularly in this Parashah? This week's essay focuses on these questions. Num. 22:11 – Behold! The people coming out of Egypt has covered the surface of the earth. Now go and curse (קבה) them for me; perhaps I will be able to make war against them and drive them away. The word קבה, which means ‘to curse’, appears 10 times in this week’s Parsha. According to Ribag and Radak, this word derives from the root קבב. According to this opinion, our Parsha is the only place in Scripture where this word is used, while a similar word for cursing based on the root נקב is found in Job 3:8, ibid. 5:3 and Prov. 11:26,. However, Menachem Ben Soruk considers all of these words to be based on the same root קב (he includes all of the above mentioned verses in a single subdivision [of six such sub-sections] that are attributed to that root). It is interesting to note that there is a verse towards the end of the Parsha that includes two other words containing the letters קב: Num. 25:8 – He followed the Israelite man into the tent (הקבה) and pierced them both, the Israelite man and the woman into her stomach (קבתה). The first word קבה is interpreted as meaning a tent, a singular word in this sense in all of Scripture. The meaning of the word קבתה is subject to various interpretations, some of which would indicate that it is also a unique word. Returning to the discussion regarding the word קבה in the sense of a curse, Yeriot Shlomo (2:28b) explains that it indicates a curse which specifies G-d’s name, based on the verse in Leviticus 24:16 וְנֹקֵב שֵׁם השם. Others interpret קבה based on the word נקב which indicates stabbing or piercing in the sense that the cursed person becomes empty and hollow (see Hirsch Numbers 22:11). We find the root נקב meaning curse in other places in Tanach (see Job 3:8, ibid. 5:3 and Proverbs 11:26)1. It seems that the above mentioned dispute stems from the two different meanings attributed to words that incorporate the letters קב. 1) To stab or penetrate – as seen in Kings II 12:10 and Isaiah 36:62 2) To fix or state explicitly – as seen in Genesis 30:28, Onkelos ad loc., Numbers 1:17, Onkelos ad loc., Isaiah 62:2, Radak ad loc., Amos 6:1, Metzudos Tzion ad loc. Rav Hirsch (Gen. 30:27-30) finds difficulty in identifying a single underlying principle for these two disparate meanings. We will discuss 10 different words that share the letters קב. We can group these words into two categories, 1) The first 6 which relate to the idea of a hole or cavity 2) The last 4 which relate to fixing or limiting. The following are the 10 words that we will analyze. ‘קבב’ 2. ‘נקב’ 3. ‘יקב’ 4. ‘קב’ 5. ‘רקב’ 6. ‘קבר’ 7. ‘קבע’ 8. ‘עקב’ 9. ‘קבץ’ 10. ‘קבל’1. KVV קבב – This root means to curse according to Radak, who cites three examples of this usage in our Parsha (Numbers 23:8, 23:13 and 23:27). As we saw above from Rav Hirsch, the common theme may be the desire of the curser to render cursee pierced/empty/hollow. As mentioned above, this root appears twice in Numbers 25:8 with two different meanings: a) .s this same root twice whcurse ם, ‘יס, שנת רס תולדותן ק ון.   לקללה הנראת ‘קבה’. the first appearance, קבה, is interpreted to mean a tent, which is a unique usage in Tanach. b) the second appearance, קבתה, has three possible interpretations: 1. Stomach (as in Deut. 18:3. So interprets Onkelos in Numbers 25:8). 2. Tent[1] (similar to the word used at the beginning of the verse). 3. Female genitals (Sanhedrin 82b, Chulin 134b) (we find elsewhere the stomach being used as a euphemism for such, e.g. Ibn Ezra Genesis 15:4). It is interesting to note that each of these three interpretations fits with the underlying meaning of an empty space or a hole (קבה in the sense of curse being interpreted as a desire to “empty” the cursee, as above). NKV נקב – As mentioned above, this word can have three different meanings; 1. A hole or cavity 2. To fix the terms of an agreement 3. To curse. YKV יקב – Generally refers to a vineyard. Rashi (Numbers 18:27) explains that this word technically refers to the pit into which the wine flows from the winepress. KV קב – A Scriptural measure of volume, equivalent to four לוג (Rashi Numbers 16:36). That is, a measure of the empty space corresponding to this volume. RKV רקב – The name of a type of worm. This usage is based on the nature of this worm to eat wood thereby carving out a cavity. (Hosea 5:12, Rashi ad loc.[2]; see also Avot DeRebbi Natan addendum to version 1 chapter 9). רקוב means spoiled or rotten; this may stem from the רקב worm that eats through and ruins wood. KVR קבר – A grave, which is a cavity in the ground in which a dead person is buried. (The word קבר is a permutation of רקב; this similarity is the basis for the ruling of the Talmud Yerushalmi that, in certain circumstances, deteriorated matter causes Tuma (ritual impurity) (Talmud Yerushalmi Nazir 7:2, Pnei Mosh ad loc., Bartenura on the Mishna Nazir 7:2). KVA קבע – This word can have three different meanings: 1. A goblet (Isaiah 51:17, Rashi ad loc. Others interpret it as referring to the residue at the bottom of the cup). 2. A helmet (I Samuel 17:38, see Metzudot Zion to 17:5 there). 3. Theft (Malachi 3:8, Rashi ad loc. Ibn Ezra points out that it can also have a related meaning, to inflict a wound. (Ibn Ezra Proverbs 22:23). All three meanings are related to the fundamental idea of a setting limitations. 1. A goblet can contain a limited volume of liquid. 2. A helmet must be fitted to the size of the person’s head. 3. Theft also relates to the fact that you are limiting the possessions of the victim (in the context of the above mentioned verse, the Jews were cutting  back on the required apportionment of tithes). AKV עקב – One meaning of this word is delay[3] (Job 37:4, Targum Yonatan ad loc., Ralbag ad loc.). This relates to the idea of withholding or limiting progress. (Note: there are those who interpret the word ויעקביני in Genesis 27:36 as synonymous with ויעכבני despite the replacement of the כ with a ק. See Gen. Rabba 67:4, Tiferet Tzion ad loc., Ramban to Leviticus 23:28, Radak to Psalms 89:52[4]). KVTZ קבץ – To gather. Chazal indicate that the word קבץ is related to the word קמץ, also meaning to gather, based on the principle that the phonetically related letters בומ”ף can be interchangeable (Ketuvot 77a, Psikta Zutra Lekach Tov to Genesis 41:47)[5]. קבל – This word has two meanings: 1. To receive. This word also relates to limiting the object’s freedom of motion (Ezra 8:30, Chronicles 12:18, Proverbs 19:20). 2. To stand opposite to (Numbers 19:5, Kings II 15:10, Radak ad loc., Ezekiel 26:9). This meaning is also related to the idea of setting limitations because something standing between two opposing bodies is limited to a specific place, e.g. a river that flows between the two banks of the river. We mentioned above RSR Hirsch’s difficulty with the apparent lack of connection between the various meanings of the word נקב. We can now suggest that just as the word קבע can be used to mean theft or injury because it limits the possessions or activity of one’s fellow, so too the word נקב can mean a curse, because such action is designed to limit the victim’s ability to succeed – in short to “peg” him in a fixed hole, as it were. So too in the phrase נוקב השם one could be said to be, G-d forbid, attempting to assign a limit to G-d’s capabilities[6]. There seems to be an interesting connection between the word קבה used in the beginning of the Parsha and the words הַקֻּבָּה and קֳבָתָהּ used at the end of the Parsha. The Midrash Tanchuma (Balak Chapter 8) points out that Balak initially used the word ארה for ‘curse’ when a requested that Balak curse the Jews. Bilam, however, substituted a different word קבה to mean curse in his response to Balak. The significance of this substitution can be appreciated based on the Midrash Rabba (20:7) which points out that the word ארה can also mean to harvest figs. The unique aspect of harvesting figs as contrasted with other fruits is that figs do not ripen simultaneously, thus they must be harvested individually. Likewise, Balak’s strategy was to curse each person individually and not the nation as a unit, in the same manner that Amalek began by attacking the weaker individual Jews ‘כל הנחשלים’. Bilam, however, felt that a different strategy would be more successful and that was to entice them all to succumb to desire and immorality. This is hinted at in his choice of the word קבה which relates to the words הקבה and קבתה which allude to the sin of immorality. This idea is also hinted at in the blessing that Bilam was forced to give the Jews ‘מה טובו אהלך יעקב’ ‘How goodly are your tents, Oh Jacob’. The sanctity of the Jewish home was the source of their strength and its contamination would bring about their downfall. The word used here for tent is אהל which can also mean light (as in the verse in Job 25:5), to indicate the sanctity of the Jewish home. On the other hand, in the verse describing the sin of immorality the word קבתה is used to hint at the disgrace of the קבה which refers to the act of immorality. Unfortunately, this plot of Bilam succeeded in causing the destruction of a 24,000 Jews in Shittim. We pray that the sanctity of the Jewish home will return to its full glory and will become a beacon of light to the nations. May this be fulfilled speedily in our times. Shabbat shalom, Yehoshua Steinberg, Veromemanu Foundation for research of the Holy Tongue. [1]  [ראב”ע כאן בבלק. ובאור חדש הציע שנקרא האהל כן בדרך לשון נופל על לשון מטעם  מקולל (בגין שימושו)]. [2]  [השוה גם משלי יב:ד]. [3]  [בענין המשותף לכל הוראות ‘עקב’, ראה מאמרינו לפרשת תולדות]. [4]  [כך פירשו שם]: רד”ק תה’ פט:נב – חרפו עקבות משיחך, הִתְאַחֲרוּת מְשִׁיחֲךָ, שֶׁמִּתְאַחֵר כל כך לבוא ואומרים שלא יבוא לעולם. וכן: וְלֹא יְעַקְּבֵם כִּי יִשָּׁמַע קוֹלוֹ (איוב לז:ד), ולא יְאַחֲרֵם, כי עקב הוא אחרית הגוף וסופו. [5]  [וכן משמע מריב”ג ורד”ק (ערך ‘קמץ’)]. [6]  [הכוה”ק (במ’ יא:ד) מציע הקבלה לכך]: וּקְדוֹשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל הִתְווּ (תה’ עח:מא) – [נסיון להגביל את כחו ית’ ח”ו]. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr

Article abstract for Parashat Pinchas: Moses is commanded: " צרור (oppress / distress) the Midianites… for they have oppressed you." The word צרור is related to the word צר, which denotes narrow, strait, constrained. This article examines the gamut of words in the Holy Tongue and attempts to demonstrate how each and every one relates to these essential concepts. Pinchas: An Expansive Lesson on Constriction צָרוֹר אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִים וְהִכִּיתֶם אוֹתָם. כִּי צֹרְרִים הֵם לָכֶם בְּנִכְלֵיהֶם אֲשֶׁר נִכְּלוּ לָכֶם... (במדבר כה:יז-יח). Distress (צרור) the Midianites and smite them; for they tormented you through their conspiracy that they conspired against you… (Num. 25:17-18). RSRH (Num. 25:17-18) interprets the root צררto mean contraction, compression or restriction of power.[1] This explanation is also implied by Onkelus, who renders צָרוֹר as אָעֵיק, an Aramaic cognate of the Hebrew word מעקה - a rooftop enclosure / fence. RSRH’s definition would also appear to fit many other roots containing the two-letter string צר. However, we suggest broadening the definition somewhat, to include the following related or figuratively-linked meanings: pressure / expressing / constricting / compressing, tension, overcrowding / congestion, sucking / drawing, thrust / impulsion, apprehension / detention / prohibiting, incision, closure / lockdown, watching / guarding, trapping, surrounding / encirclement, collection / combination. Based on these meanings, we will now examine the following sixteen words sharing the string צר: 1. אצר (treasure) - This root refers to a collection / lockdown / guarding (of valuable items). Anאוצר is a store of valuable items,[2] which are concealed and locked up in a guarded place. According to YS (2:53a) and RSRH (Deut. 28:8), the letter א is extraneous, and the primary root is simply צר / צרר. This also seems to be implied by the Sages' teaching in the Midrash: Ecc. Rabba 3:25 - "Both the souls of the righteous and the souls of the wicked ascend Above. However, the souls of the righteous are entered into the אוצר, as Abigail told to David through the Holy Spirit: May my lord's soul be bound up (צרורה) in the bond of life (I Sam. 25:29)."[3] The connection between the wordsאוצר and צרורה implies that the string צר is the underpinning of both, thus suggesting that the א in אוצר is extrinsic. Rashi also seems to linkצרר and אצר in a different context. In Taanit 23a, the Talmud relates that during an era when grains of barley grew to historically large sizes, “people צררו some of them as a sample for later generations”. In that context, Rashi defines צררו as "they tied them (in a bundle) and stored (אצרו) them away."[4] 2. בצר - This word refers to a collection / enclosure / guarding (of grapes).[5] The rootבצר has three primary definitions: A) Harvesting a vintage of grapes (e.g. Lev. 26:5; Deut. 24:21, Jer. 6:9[6]). B) Strength / Reinforcement (i.e., fortified walls or cities[7] - see Num. 13:19, 28; Jer. 15:20).[8] C) Prevent / Withhold (seeיִבָּצֵר [withhold] in Gen. 11:6 and Job 42:2; בַּצֹּרֶת ]shortage / hunger[ in Jer. 17:8[9]). However (as suggested by YS 2:61b-62b, 3:11a), all three definitions have in common the aspects of gathering and enclosing: as: A) the grapes of the vintage are gathered and preserved. B) The fortified cities are built for the purpose of allowing masses of people to gather therein. C) An entity restrained from movement and access is akin to one confined in a fortress.[10] 3. חצר (courtyard) - This word essentially denotes gathering / collection (in a guarded site). Shoresh Yesha (entry חצר) comparesחצר to[11]עצר (halt / hold) in that it holds and shelters the object in abeyance while enclosing it. Similarly, he suggests that a trumpet is called a חצוצרה because it is an instrument that is used to muster people on the day of a battle.[12] 4. עצר (multiple meanings) - The most common meaning of this root is halting / blocking / withholding. [13]But it also has another three meanings: A) Enclose - We find this root used in the sense of treasury / cache / repository, according to Rashi (Avoda Zara 71a).[14] B) Gather - In Dan. 10:8, the phrase עָצַרְתִּי כֹּחַ is interpreted by Rashi as "I gathered strength."[15] [See also RSRH (Gen. 16:1-2) who equates עצר with phonetically related words indicating gathering and retaining strength.] C) Pressure (in both a positive and negative sense) - The Aramaic term for squeezing grapes is ועצרית (see Targum to Gen. 40:11[16]). Similarly, the Aramaic word for winepress isמַעֲצַרְתָּא (Jud. 6:11),[17] where grapes are both gathered and expressed. 5. צור / צרר / צר (multiple meanings) - These three similar roots[18] give rise to many derivatives (enumerated below). All of those associated imports relate in some way to one or more of the following meanings: gathering / enclosing / watching / restricting / compressing. A) Hard rock (צּוּר) [Ex. 17:6[19]] - So called because it is in essence highly compressed (the ultimate form of gathering) material. B) Fortification, siege - The word בצור refers to a fortified city (מִבְצָר – Num. 32:36[20]), and מצור refers to the siege of a fortified city (בְּמָצוֹר - Deut. 28:53[21]). This usage involves circumscription (closure) and guarding. C) Pressure / distress (צַר) [Psalms 119:143[22]] - This refers to physical and / or spiritual enclosure and compression. D) Trouble / distress (צָּרָה) [Psalms 10:1[23]] - This refers to an enclosure and pressure, primarily of an emotional nature. E) Messenger / agent (צִיר) [Isaiah 18:2; Jer. 49:14, Josh. 9:4[24]] – Efficient messengers restrict themselves to following the straight and narrow path. F) Door hinge (צִיר) [Prov. 26:14[25]] – The hinge is a focused, narrow point of connection. G) Harass (צרר) [Num. 25:17, 33:55[26]] - This refers to pressure and the restriction of someone’s freedom.[27] H) Trouble / distress (צָּרָה) [Psalms 118:5; Lam. 1:3[28]] - This refers to an enclosure and pressure, primarily of an emotional nature. I) Bundle (צרור) [Gen. 42:35[29]] - A bound package is closed and guarded. J) Boundary / border (מיצר) [Talmudic term - see Baba Metiza 107a[30]] - Such a line of demarcation limits and restricts freedom.[31] 6. פצר (badger / urge) - The Biblical commentators define this simply as a multitude.[32] However, most of the Scriptural occurrences of the root פצר relate in particular to repeated, incessant pleas / requests [e.g., Gen. 19:3, 9; I Sam. 15:23; II Kgs. 2:17, 5:16[33]]. Radak (entry פצר) concludes that all such instances refer to an effort to persuade or even force someone to act in a given way. Thus, this word involves heavy verbal pressure to change someone's mind. 7. יצר (forming) - This act involves pressure / compression / forcing together / fastening together (physical and abstract) different materials and ingredients to form something new. In contrast to the root ברא, which means creation ex nihilo, the root יצר denotes the integration of existing components to forge a new entity.[34] YS (2:53a) appears to expand on this basic definition of יצר, suggesting that it specifically refers to forming objects / thoughts to create a holistic, unified body / program, be it in the physical domain[35] or in the abstract.[36] Thus, יצר is related to the rootצר צרר / and its derivatives, as it involves the consolidation and amalgamation of various components to fashion one strong body.[37] Other words linked to יצר include: A) אוצר (a sealed / guarded treasure; see item #1 above): In Zech. 11:13, Radak interprets the word יצר as אוצר.[38] In the Midrash (Ecc. Rabba 2:1), יצר is linked to B)צייר (artist, painter) and to C)צור (stone / an appellation for God), averring that the Creator is like an artist, whose world is His beautiful painting[39] (see also Megillah 14a[40] and Lev. Rabba 23:12[41] for similar expositions). All these linkages trace back to the core meanings of צר, namely gathering / conjoining, guarding. See also YS 2:53a–b for further elucidations regarding these connections. 8. נצר (guard) - Guarding requires (in various circumstances) protecting / binding / fastening. One guards an object by enclosing and/or binding it. Both Menachem and YS (2:53a) see the word as deriving from the 2-letter root צר. In the (paraphrased) words of the latter, "נצר (like אוצר, a treasure) denotes a secure fastening which protects and guards. A sprig planted in order to grow a sapling is therefore called aנֵצֶר (e.g. Isa. 11:1, 60:21) - since it is guarded and protected until it can become a tree.”[42] 9. קצר (shorten) - This word is related to pressure / congestion, as follows: Shortening an object restricts and contracts it. Thus, the verse: for the mat will be too short (קָצַר) for stretching out (Isa. 28:20), is interpreted by Rashi to mean that God will send an enemy to pursue and oppress Israel. Thus, this shortening is indeed linked to stressful force and oppression.[43] 10. צרב (cauterize) - This term involves contraction / pressure / compression through the heating of the skin. According to Radak (entry צרב), צָרֶבֶת means the cauterization of the skin. However, Rashi, in his comments on the verse it is the צָרֶבֶת of the inflammation (Lev. 13:23), explains that צָרֶבֶת refers to the contraction of the skin that occurs as a result of the cauterization.[44] In short, the heat of the צָרֶבֶת dries the skin, which in turn shrivels and shrinks the skin. Wrinkles represent an aggregation of different parts of the skin together - that is, connecting them to one another.[45] This might explain the connection between צרב and צרף [46] (refining - see item #11 below), which denotes the cleansing of impurities that leads to the unification of all the untainted components. 11. צרף (refine / combine) - This endeavor involves contracting / pressuring / compressing / gathering / combining through heating metal. The meaning of this root in Scriptural Hebrew is always the refining and purification of metals from its impurities through fire (e.g. Isa. 48:10; Mal. 3:2).[47] However, in Mishnaic Hebrew and in the Targum, it means to combine / join (e.g., see Brachot 7:5, Targum Yerushalmi to Num. 24:24[48]). We propose that the two definitions are indeed linked, as follows: The phenomenon of amalgamation / consolidation is the natural outcome of the refining / purification of metal. That is, when metal is heated up to its melting point, this causes it to expel all impurities. However, the internal micro-vacuums created by the removal of the foreign matter are filled immediately with the purified molten metal, bringing about an absolute joining and unification of the purified elements. [Parenthetically, by re-arranging its letters, the root צרף becomes פצר (badger / urge / pressure – item #6 above). As explained earlier, פצרinvolves an attempt to bring about a result via pressure and stress, through non-stop, incessant verbal pleas. Likewise, צרף denotes using pressure and stress to cause the discharge of impurities]. 12. צרד (dry) - This word is related to the concepts of contracting / gathering / combining materials by drying them out. This is a Talmudic word not found in Scripture. We find it both in the context of food (צָרִיד - Maaser Sheini 2:4[49]), and in the context of a sound being dry, or hoarse (צָרוּד - Rosh Hashana 27b).[50] Both of these instances are interpreted by the early commentators (in their respective locations) as dry.[51] As mentioned above (item #10), dryness causes contraction and shriveling. In Scripture, dryness and shriveling take on similar meanings, such as the reference to dry grapes (i.e., raisins) as צִמֻּקִים in I Sam. 30:12,[52] or the mention of shriveled breasts שָׁדַיִם צֹמְקִים)) in Hos. 9:14, which the Targum and Metz. Tzion defines as dry breasts.[53] We also find in the Talmud (Shabbat 37b) that overcooked food is מצטמק, which Rashi explains to mean shriveled.[54] 13. צרח (shout) - This root is related to stress / crowding / gathering. It refers to cries in reaction to some physical or emotional sorrow / stress,[55] and also refers to a tight / narrow place.[56] 14. צרך (need) - The feelings and/or situations of pressure / distress / stress / cramped are all common features of poverty and need. There is but a single appearance of this root in all of Scripture (II Chron. 2:15).[57] However, it is more commonly used in Mishnaic Hebrew (e.g. Brachot 3:6) and in Aramaic. The word pauper (אֶבְיוֹן) is rendered by Targum Yerushalmi (Deut. 15:11, 24:14[58]) with the Aramaic word צְרִיכָא, needy. This is also the meaning of the invitation we issue to indigent guests in the Passover Hagaddah: כָּל דִּצְרִיךְ יֵיתֵי וְיִפְסַח, “let all who are needy come and partake of the Paschal meal.” 15. צרע (illness / leprosy) - Pressure / distress / stress are likewise symptoms of an ill person. Our Sages (Tanchuma Metzora 2) expound the word צָרוֹת (plural of צָרָה, tribulation) as צָרַעַת (leprosy / illness).[59] Another hint to this linkage is found in the Talmud (Arachin 16a), where the Sages explain that one is afflicted with צָרַעַת as punishment for his stinginess, which is referred to as צָרוּת עַיִן, "narrowness" of eyes (i.e., he is unwilling to share his wealth with others).[60] Ibn Ezra also links the word צִרְעָה (hornet-swarm) to צָרַעַת (seeing the root צרע as a term indicated various manifestations of affliction).[61] 16. צרה (liquid extract / syrup / sap) - The actions of sucking / absorbing / pushing are all involved in producing liquid essence. The word צֳרִי (derived from the root צָרָה), appears several times in Scripture (e.g. Gen. 37:25[62]). It is defined in the Talmud (Shabbat 26a) as שְׂרָף, the sap that is extracted from a certain tree. [63][We note parenthetically that the term שְׂרָף is very similar in sound to the English word "syrup." Similarly, Rashi says that it means גומ"א in Old French, which resembles the English word "gum," which is indeed a gelatinous substance extracted from certain plants]. The system of liquids that sustain trees is one of the astonishing wonders of God's natural world. In contrast to a person, for example, who is created with a heart that continuously pumps blood throughout all parts of his body, there is no similar mechanism in trees. The explanations for this phenomenon vary, with some scientists acknowledging that they lack a comprehensive explanation for the mechanics of the overall system (especially in giant trees such as the Sequoia). What is clear, however, according to all the views, is that the liquids are transported through a system of capillary action in artery-like passageways, through a combination of suctioning / pulling from above, initiated by the evaporation of moisture from the leaves on the one hand, and a pushing / pressure from the water absorbed by the roots below on the other hand. Whereas the verbשׂרף (burn) in Hebrew denotes heat and the byproducts of fire, the verb שׂרף in Aramaic takes on the meaning of גמיעה (drinking, sipping and gulping) [64][equivalent to the Scriptural גמיאה, see Rashi to Gen. 24:17, Avodah Zarah 29b and Nazir 36b[65]], מציצה (sucking - see Tiferet Yisrael to Avodah Zarah 2:5[66]), andשאיבה (drawing - see Zohar 3:154b[67] and Rashi to Brachot 61b, who appears to equate מציצה with שאיבה[68]). Thus, to summarize, the צֳרִי is the fluid that drips out of the tree, [69] and the Aramaic nounשְׂרָף is an adaptation of the Aramaic verb שׂרף - the action central to the wondrous system of drawing and pressing that we have just described. As noted above, a twig planted in order to grow a tree, is referred to as a נֵצֶר (see Isa. 11:1, 14:19, and 60:21). Perhaps we can propose that this name also derives from its primary sustenance, the צֳרִי / שְׂרָף. This can be explained by the fact that the word צרי is similar to the word [70]טרי, which also indicates moisture in Scripture (see Jud. 15:15; Isa. 1:6). Moreover, both the root צר and the root טר can mean preserving in Scripture, as in, Preserver (נוֹצֵר) of Kindness (Ex. 34:6), and You shall not preserve (תִטוֹר) a grudge (Lev. 19:18). [71]Thus, the branch is named after the primary sustainer that guards and preserves its life in all its forms, namely, water. [See also our essay in Parashat Tetzaveh on the meaning of the root טר]. From between the distresses [בין המצרים, the woe-filled 3-week period leading up to the Temple's destruction], let us call out to God, that He transform it speedily to a festival and holiday, and He shall lead us from the straits [מיצר] to wide-open relief, and we shall say before Him songs of praise in His Sacred Courtyards [חצרות] speedily in our days. Amen. [1] רשר"ה הירש במ' כה:יז - צרור את המדינים - 'צרר': צמצום, דחיסה, הגבלה של כח. [2] כמו: אֶת אוֹצָרוֹ הַטּוֹב (דברים כח:יב). [3] קה"ר ג:כו - תני אחת נשמתן של צדיקים ואחת נשמתן של רשעים כולם עולות למרום, אלא שנשמותיהן של צדיקים הם נתונות באוצר שכן אביגיל אמרה לדוד ברוח הקדש: והיתה נפש אדוני צרורה בצרור החיים (ש"א כה:כט). [4] תענית כג. - בימי שמעון בן שטח, שירדו להם גשמים... עד שנעשו... שעורים כגרעיני זיתים ועדשים כדינרי זהב, וצררו מהם דוגמא לדורות; רש"י - וצררו - קשרו ואצרו. [5] וְאֶת עִנְּבֵי נְזִירֶךָ לֹא תִבְצֹר (וי' כה:ה), כִּי תִבְצֹר כַּרְמְךָ (דב' כד:כא), כַגֶּפֶן... כְּבוֹצֵר עַל סַלְסִלּוֹת (יר' ו:ט). [6] רש"י פירש ש"בצירה" היא לשון לקיטה: ב"מ פט: - עודרים בתאנים, וגודרים בתמרים, ובוצרים בענבים, ומוסקין בזיתים; רש"י - עודרין מוסקין בוצרין גודרין - כולם לשון לקיטה הן, לכל מין ומין. ויש במשמעות "לקיטה" אסיפה סתם, כדמצינו אצל הקש והמן (שמ' ה:יב, במ' יא:ח). [7] ומופיע גם בענין נגעים בהשאלה: נגע' ד:ג - בִּמְבֻצָּר; ר"ש - מבוצר - ב' שערות באמצע הנגע כמבצר באמצע העיר. [8] וכן: יר' ו:כז - נְתַתִּיךָ בְעַמִּי מִבְצָר; מצ"ד - נתתיך בעמי מחוזק כמגדל מבצר ולא תירא מהם. [9] וְעַתָּה לֹא יִבָּצֵר מֵהֶם (בר' יא:ו), וְלֹא יִבָּצֵר מִמְּךָ מְזִמָּה (איוב מב:ב), וּבִשְׁנַת בַּצֹּרֶת לֹא יִדְאָג (יר' יז:ח). [10] י"ש (ב:סא,ב-סב,א -ת"ד) - וישמש מן 'בצר' ללשון מניעה, כמו: וְעַתָּה לֹא יִבָּצֵר מֵהֶם (בר' יא:ו), וְלֹא יִבָּצֵר מִמְּךָ מְזִמָּה (איוב מב:ב) כי הדבר המנוע הרי הוא כמבוצר... ומענין 'מבצר', שם 'בציר' להוראת אסיפת הענבים, כי שם 'בציר' שם התכלית, והיינו הכנסת פרי הגפן להיותו בצור ומשומר, וכטעם 'אוצר' - שיהיה נצור, חסון, אגור ואסוף. אמר: כי כָּלָה בָצִיר אֹסֶף בְּלִי יָבוֹא (ישע' לב:י)... ושרש 'בצר' יתכן שהוא מורכב מן 'בא'-'צר' - היינו ביאה במצור, צרור ומקושר היטב. י"ש (ג:יא,א) - וְעַתָּה לֹא יִבָּצֵר מֵהֶם (בר' יא:ו), וְלֹא יִבָּצֵר מִמְּךָ מְזִמָּה (איוב מב:ב)... לשון מניעה וסגירת דבר - מושאל מן 'מבצר' (כגון במ' לב:יז), וערים 'בצורות' (כגון יחז' לו:לה). ר"ל, שנבצר הדבר ונסגר מבלי שיכולין לבא אליו כסגור במבצר, שאינו יכול לצאת. [11] בחילוף אותיות אחע"ה. [12] שרש ישע (ערך 'חצר' - ת"ד) - 'חצר' כמו 'עצר' על היותו עוצר ומחסה לדבר העצור וכנוס בתוכו. וטעם דומה מציע גם למלה "חצוצרה": חצצרות כסף (במ' י:ב): כלי זמר עשוי לאסוף עם המפוזר ביום קרב, וא"כ 'חצר' כמו 'עצר' הנזכר.בדומה לשתי ההוראות שרש 'זעק': 1. צעקה (ירמיה נ:מו), 2. קיבוץ ואסיפה (יהושע ח:טז). [13] כמו: עָצֹר עָצַר ה' (בר' כ:יח), עֲצָרַנִי ה' מִלֶּדֶת (שם טז:ב), וְעָצַר אֶת הַשָּׁמַיִם (דב' יא:יז), אִשָּׁה עֲצֻרָה לָנוּ (ש"א כא:ו). [14] ע"ז עא. - אל יאמר אדם לעובד כוכבים עול תחתי לעוצר; רש"י - עול תחתי לעוצר - ...לשון אחר, לשון אוצר שממונה על אוצרות יין ושמן של מלך לגבות ולאצור. [15] דנ' י:ח - וְהוֹדִי נֶהְפַּךְ עָלַי לְמַשְׁחִית וְלֹא עָצַרְתִּי כֹּחַ; רש"י - ולא עצרתי כח - כלומר לא כנסתי, כל כחי הלך מקרבי. [16] בר' מ:יא - וָאֶקַּח אֶת הָעֲנָבִים וָאֶשְׂחַט אֹתָם; ת"א - וּנְסֵיבִית יַת עִנְבַיָיא וְעַצְרִית יַתְהוֹן. [17] שופ' ו:יא - חֹבֵט חִטִּים בַּגַּת; ת"י - חָבֵיט חִטִין בְּמַעֲצַרְתָּא. [18] לפי מח' מנחם, שרש כולם הוא 'צר' (שרש בן י' מחלקות לשיטתו). ולפי רד"ק וסיע', ההוראות הבאות מופיעות בב' ערכים, 'צור' ו'צרר' (גם ההוראות מסוכמות מת"ד רד"ק שם). אמנם כתב רד"ק שהגם שחילק את 'צור' מ'צרר', בכ"ז הם "ב' שרשים בענין אחד", כך שהפער בין מנחם לרד"ק לעניינינו מוגבל לכאורה רק לשמות הערכים. [19] הִנְנִי עֹמֵד לְפָנֶיךָ שָּׁם עַל הַצּוּר (שמות יז:ו). [20] עָרֵי מִבְצָר וְגִדְרֹת צֹאן (במדבר לב:לו). [21] וּבָנִיתָ מָצוֹר עַל הָעִיר (דברים כ:כ). [22] צַר וּמָצוֹק מְצָאוּנִי (תהלים קיט:קמג). [23] תַּעְלִים לְעִתּוֹת בַּצָּרָה (תהלים י:א). [24] וְצִיר בַּגּוֹיִם שָׁלוּחַ (יר' מט:יד), הַשֹּׁלֵחַ בַּיָּם צִירִים (ישע' יח:ב), וַיֵּלְכוּ וַיִּצְטַיָּרוּ (יהושע ט:ד). [25] הַדֶּלֶת תִּסּוֹב עַל צִירָהּ (משלי כו:יד). [26] וְצָרְרוּ אֶתְכֶם (במדבר לג:נה), צָרוֹר אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִים (במדבר כה:יז). [27] רד"ק (שרשים, ערך 'צרר') כתב ש'צרר' ו'צור' הם "שני שרשים בענין אחד", כנ"ל, וענינו פירש בערך 'צור'. וזו לשנו שם: יעמדו סביבותיה במצור עד רדתה מרעב. [28] מִן הַמֵּצַר (תה' קיח:ה). כָּל רֹדְפֶיהָ הִשִּׂיגוּהָ בֵּין הַמְּצָרִים (איכה א:ג). [29] וְהִנֵּה אִישׁ צְרוֹר כַּסְפּוֹ (בראשית מב:לה). [30] ב"מ קז. - אילן העומד על המיצר - יחלוקו. [31] ראה רש"י במ' לד:ו, ז; רש"י יהושע טו:ב, ה, יא, יח:יב. [32] ומצאנו שרש זה כשמו של כלי חידוד: ש"א יג:כא - הַפְּצִירָה פִים. רש"י מסביר את הכינוי ע"ש ריבוי פיותיו: רש"י - פיות וחידודים הרבה היתה להם לחדד המחרשת והאתים. אולם, אף הוא קשור להכרח, כי ריבוי חידודיו מבטיחים -מכריחים- את התוצאה הרצויה. [33] וַיִּפְצַר בָּם מְאֹד (בר' יט:ג), וַיִּפְצְרוּ בָאִישׁ בְּלוֹט (בר' יט:ט), וַיִּפְצַר בּוֹ לָקַחַת וַיְמָאֵן (מ"ב ה:טז), וַיִּפְצַר בּוֹ חֹתְנוֹ (שופ' יט:ז), וַיִּפְצְרוּ בוֹ עַד בֹּשׁ (מ"ב ב:יז), וְאָוֶן וּתְרָפִים הַפְצַר (ש"א טו:כג). [34] כלשון מהרז"ו בפירושו לברייתא ל"ב מידות שהתורה נדרשת בהם: מהרז"ו (הקדמה לפ' למדרש רבה) - תיבת ברא מורה על בריאת יש מאין, אבל יצר משמע יש מיש. [35] כמו: וַיִּיצֶר ה' אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָאָדָם עָפָר מִן הָאֲדָמָה (בראשית ב:ז). [36] כפי שפי' אלשיך: תה' לג:טו - הַיֹּצֵר יַחַד לִבָּם; אלשיך - היוצר יחד לבם... כלומר כי הנה בכל לב ולב אשר לכל איש ואיש יש יצר הטוב ויצר הרע, והוא יתברך היוצר אחדות לבם שהם שתי בחינות הלב יחד. ואכן הפסוק "יצר מחשבות מבין" נדרש במדרש מלשון יצירה לפי מתנות כהונה: ב"ר ט:ג - רבי חגי בשם רי"א... שְׁלֹמֹה בְנִי דַּע אֶת אֱלֹהֵי אָבִיךָ... וְכָל יֵצֶר מַחֲשָׁבוֹת מֵבִין אִם תִּדְרְשֶׁנּוּ יִמָּצֵא לָךְ (דה"א כח:ט), קודם עד שלא נוצרה מחשבה בלבו של אדם כבר היא גלויה לפניך; מת"כ - עד שלא נוצרה - דייק מדכתיב יצר מחשבות, ודרש יצר לשון יצירה. יצירה של המחשבה הוא הקב"ה מבין. [37] י"ש (ב:נג,א - ת"ד): 'יצר' מן 'צר', המורה על הדוחק וההידוק... הפעל שלו: וייצר ה' אלהים את האדם (בר' ב:ז)... ותאר השם: וכל יצר מחשבות לבו (בראשית ו:ה)... שהצורה הוא הפעל השכליי המקשר הדברים המנותחים ועושה לו מקבוצם ציור אחד שלם. [38] רד"ק (ערך 'יצר'): הַשְׁלִיכֵהוּ אֶל הַיּוֹצֵר (זכריה יא:יג), וָאַשְׁלִיךְ אֹתוֹ בֵּית ה' אֶל הַיּוֹצֵר (שם), הוא כמו אוצֵר, מענין אוצָר. [39] קה"ר ב:א [יא] - ויצר ה' אלהים את האדם - מה ת"ל אשר יצר (בר' ב:ח), אלא הצור הוא צייר נאה, כביכול מתגאה בעולמו. [40] אין צור כאלהינו אין צייר כאלהינו... הקב"ה צר צורה בתוך צורה ומטיל בה רוח ונשמה קרבים ובני מעים. [41] צור ילדך תשי (דב' לב:יח) - התשתם כוחו של יוצר. [42] י"ש (ב:נג,א - ת"ד): נקרא 'נצר' ע''ש הקשור החזק שלא יתפזר, כטעם "אוצר", לשון צרירה וקשור. והוא ענין 'נצר' להוראת הנטיעה... ששומרים ונוטרים אותה להעשות אילן: נצר מטעי (ישע' ס:כא); ונצר משרשיו יפרה (ישע' יא:א). [43] ישע' כח:כ - כִּי קָצַר הַמַּצָּע מֵהִשְׂתָּרֵעַ; רש"י - כי קצר המצע מהשתרע - כי אביא עליכם שונא דוחק אתכם. [44] וי' יג:כג - צָרֶבֶת הַשְּׁחִין הִוא; רש"י - צרבת השחין - צרבת לשון רגיעת עור הנרגע מחמת חימום... רייטרי"ר בלע"ז [לכווץ][44]. צרבת - ריטריימינ"ט בלע"ז [כיווץ]. [45] ספר זכרון על רש"י מסביר את הקשר בין 'רגיעה' ל'כיווץ': ספר הזכרון על רש"יi - נרתע העור לאחור ונכווץ, מלשון: עורי רגע דאיוב. כך פרש"י שם באיוב: איוב ז:ה - עוֹרִי רָגַע; רש"י - רגע - נקמט כמו רוגע הים (ישעיה נא). יר' לא:לד - רֹגַע הַיָּם; רש"י - רוגע הים - מנידו ומרתיחו ונעשה קמטים קמטים כמו: עורי רגע (איוב ז). ~~~תת-הערה: iלרבינו אברהם בר' שלמה הלוי בקראט (ממגורשי ספרד. חובר בתוניס, שנת רס"ז. מובא בספר י"א מפרשי רש"י). [46] בחילוף אותיות בומ"ף. [47] מלאכי ג:ב - כִּי הוּא כְּאֵשׁ מְצָרֵף; מצ"צ - מצרף - ענין זכוך מהסיג כמו צרפתיך ולא בכסף (ישע' מח:י). [48] ברכות ז:ה - בִּזְמַן שֶׁמִּקְצָתָן רוֹאִין אֵלּוּ אֶת אֵלּוּ, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מִצְטָרְפִין לַזִּמּוּן. במ' כד:כד - וְצִים מִיַּד כִּתִּים וְעִנּוּ אַשּׁוּר; תר"י - וְיִצְרְפוּן עִמְהוֹן לִגְיוֹנִין סַגְיַין מִן דְרוֹמָאֵי וִישַׁעְבְּדוּן אֲתוּרַיָא. [49] מעשר שני ב:ד - כַּרְשִׁינֵי מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי, יֵאָכְלוּ צִמְחוֹנִים... וְשֶׁל תְּרוּמָה... שַּׁמַּאי אוֹמֵר, יֵאָכְלוּ צָרִיד; ר"ש - צריד - לשון יובש כמו: צריד של מנחות, בפ"ב דחולין (לו.). [50] ר"ה כז: - היה קולו דק או עבה או צרוד - כשר, שכל הקולות כשירין בשופר; אור זרוע (חלק ב, הלכ' ר"ה, ס' רנט) - היה קולו דק או עבה או צרוד פי' יבש - כשר. [51] ובתרגום יונתן (ויק' ט:יז, כד:ז, במד' ה:כו, מ"ב ט:ל), המלה מורה על אבקה יבשה. [52] ש"א ל:יב - וּשְׁנֵי צִמֻּקִים וַיֹּאכַל; ת"י - וּתְרֵין אִיתְכְּלִין דְעִינְבִין יַבִּישִׁין; מצ"צ - צמוקים - ענבים יבשים והוא מל' ושדים צומקים (הושע ט). [53] הושע ט:יד - תֵּן לָהֶם רֶחֶם מַשְׁכִּיל וְשָׁדַיִם צֹמְקִים; ת"י - וּשְׁדֵין יְבִשִׁין; מצ"צ - צומקים - יבשים ונגובים ולזה יקראו הענבים היבשים צמוקים. [54] שבת לז: - שמע מינה: מצטמק ויפה לו מותר; רש"י - מצטמק - מתמעט וכויץ, רטיי"ט [אוצר לעזי רש"י: מתכווץ, מצטמצם] לשון שדים צומקין (הושע ט). [55] כגון: צפניה א:יד-טו - מַר צֹרֵחַ שָׁם גִּבּוֹר. יוֹם עֶבְרָה הַיּוֹם הַהוּא יוֹם צָרָה וּמְצוּקָה. [56] כגון: ש"א יג:ו - וְאִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל רָאוּ כִּי צַר לוֹ כִּי נִגַּשׂ הָעָם וַיִּתְחַבְּאוּ הָעָם בַּמְּעָרוֹת וּבַחֲוָחִים וּבַסְּלָעִים וּבַצְּרִחִים וּבַבֹּרוֹת; רש"י - ובצרחים - פליישי"ץ בלע"ז. אוצר לעזי רש"י: מצודת גדר בנויה מעצים מסורגים. ובאהלי יהודה כתב שהוא מגדל גבוה וצר, "לא תסיג יד צר ואויב לבוא אל שעריו". [57] דה"ב ב:טו - וַאֲנַחְנוּ נִכְרֹת עֵצִים מִן הַלְּבָנוֹן כְּכָל צָרְכֶּךָ. [58] דברים טו:יא - פָּתֹחַ תִּפְתַּח אֶת יָדְךָ לְאָחִיךָ לַעֲנִיֶּךָ וּלְאֶבְיֹנְךָ; תר"י - מִפְתַּח יַת יְדֵיכוֹן לַאֲחֵיכוֹן מִסְכֵּינַיָא וְלִצְרִיכַיָא. דברים כד:יד - לֹא תַעֲשֹׁק שָׂכִיר עָנִי וְאֶבְיוֹן; תר"י - לָא תַעֲצוּן אַגְרָא דַאֲגִירָא מִסְכֵּינָא וּצְרִיכָא. [59] מדרש תנחומא (בובר) פ' מצורע - שֹׁמֵר פִּיו וּלְשׁוֹנוֹ שֹׁמֵר מִצָּרוֹת נַפְשׁוֹ (משלי כא:כג), אל תהי קורא כן, אלא שומר מצרעת נפשו. [60] ערכין טז. - א"ר יוחנן על ז' דברים נגעים באין: על לשון הרע... ועל צרות העין, דכתיב: ובא אשר לו הבית... ותנא דבי ר' ישמעאל: מי שמיוחד ביתו לו; שיטת הקדמונים - על צרות עין. שעינו צרה בשלו, שאינו רוצה שיהנו אחרים משלו. [61] דב' ז:כ - הַצִּרְעָה יְשַׁלַּח ה'; אב"ע - הצרעה - חולי... מגזרת צרעת. [62] בראשית לז:כה - וּגְמַלֵּיהֶם נֹשְׂאִים נְכֹאת וּצְרִי וָלֹט. [63] שבת כו. - ר' שמעון בן אלעזר אומר: הצרי אינו אלא שרף מעצי הקטף. וכן בתרגום המיוחס ליב"ע: ת"י בראשית לז:כה - וּגְמַלֵיהוֹן טְעוּנִין שַׁעֲוָה וּשְׂרַף קְטַף. [64] וכן בשפה הערבית, המלה "לשתות" היא "שׁרבּ" (شرب). [65] רש"י - הגמיאיני נא - לשון גמיעה, הומיי"ר בלע"ז. עבודה זרה כט: - מפני מה אסרו גבינות עובדי כוכבים... שמעמידין אותה בקיבה של נבילה... והלא קיבת [קרבן] עולה חמורה מקיבת נבילה, [ובכל זאת] כהן... שורפה חיה; רש"י - שורפה - הומי"ר בלע"ז, גומעה. וכן: רש"י נזיר לו: - שריף מישרף - שגומע ואוכל. וראה הכוה"ק וי' כא:ט בהרחבה. השוה גם תענית כד,ב. [66] תפארת ישראל ע"ז ב:ה - שורפה - לשון שרף הנוטף, ור"ל גומעה ומוצצה. חיה - ר"ל כשהקיבה עדיין חי ולא נתבשל, אז רשאי למצוץ החלב שבה. [67] זוהר ג:קנד,ב (עם תרגום הסולם) - דִּגְלָא תְּלִיתָאָה שׁוֹר [דגל השלישי (שהוא דגל מחנה דן, הוא פני) שור]... כַּד צָחֵי, אָזִיל לְגַבֵּי הַהוּא נְהַר דִּינוּר, וְשָׁאִיב לֵיהּ בִּגְמִיעָא חֲדָא [כשצמא, הולך אל נהר דינור ושואב אותו בגמיאה אחת]. [68] ברכות סא: - ריאה שואבת... משקין; רש"י – שואבת... משקין - אף על פי שהן נכנסין בכרס דרך הושט, הריאה מוצצתן ושואבתן. [69] ושמא יש להציע שגם הלעז של רש"י הנ"ל -גומ"א- בעצמה נובעת מלשון "גמיאה" בלשון הקודש, שאכן ענינה השאיבה והמציצה, המניעים את השרף לכל ענפי האילן. [70] בחילוף אותיות צ' וט', דוגמת: צל = טלל (בר' יט:ח), צלע = טלע (שם לב:לב) נצר = נטר (שמ' לד:ז, דב' לב:י), צבי = טביא (דב' יב:טו), ציפורן = טופרא (שם כא:יב), צהרים = טיהרא (שם כח:כט), עצל = עטלא (מש' ו:ו). [71] וע' תרגומים לשמ' לד:ז, דב' לב:י, ישע' ח:טז.

This week’s installment features two words which are not only synonyms, but also homonyms. The word mateh sometimes means “tribe” (almost exclusively in Numbers and Joshua) and its plural form serves as the namesake for Parshat Mattot. However, another word for “tribe” in Hebrew is shevet (or shevatim in plural). Moreover, both mateh and shevet share an alternate meaning: they both mean “stick”. Other words for sticks are mishenet, makel, sharvit, and choter. In this essay, we will discuss the different words for sticks in Hebrew and highlight their differences in connotation. Then, using some of that data, we will be able to understand the connection between sticks and tribes, which will help us discern the difference between the two synonyms for “tribe”. Malbim (to Jeremiah 1:11) says that the word mateh denotes a stick held by a dignitary, which demonstrates the honor due to him by showing his exalted status. Mishenet is a walking stick upon which an elderly person can lean (mishan means “lean” or “rely”); in other words, a cane. Makel is a rod used for hitting. In the Bible, it generally appears in the context of a shepherd who hits the animals in his charge. (The word makel is probably related to the Hebrew word malkot/makkot, which means “lashes”). Rashi (to Sanhedrin 5a) writes that the word shevet denotes the authority and the associated responsibility. In the context of law, the shevet or shotim is the instrument used for flogging those whose offenses deserve such punishment. Rabbi Shlomo Aharon Wertheimer (1866–1935) explains that these terms originally referred to a stick used for hitting animals and only refer to hitting people as a borrowed usage. The Vilna Gaon (1720–1797) writes that both a mateh and shevet are using for hitting, but differ slightly: to hit with a mateh, one only needs to raise one’s hand a bit in order for the impact to be felt, while to hit with a shevet, one must wind up one’s hit with energy for the impact to be felt. The word sharvit appears in the Scroll of Esther as the royal scepter held by the Persian king Ahasuerus. Some explain that shevet and sharvit refer to the same object, but that sometimes the Bible adds extra r-sounds to words (just as the Bible generally calls the ancient Syrian city Damascus Damesek, but sometimes calls it Darmesek). Similarly, Rabbi Wertheimer explains that mateh denotes a stick held by a person in a position of authority. Of all the characters in the Bible who carried a stick, only Moshe’s stick is called a mateh because he held a certain degree of authority unparalleled by any other Jewish leader on account of his dual role as a prophet and king. Moreover, R. Wertheimer argues that the word mateh is related to the Hebrew word mateh (“inclined”) and refers to the curvature at the top of the stick used for gripping the object. He also explains that mateh and makel are only made from wood, while shevet can be made from wood or metal (see Psalms 2:9 which refers to an iron shevet). Indeed, R. Yehuda ibn Kuraish (a ninth century Spanish grammarian) writes that the word mateh is specifically a stick made out of dry wood (although rabbinic tradition teaches that Moshe’s mateh was made of blue rock—either sapphire or lapis lazuli). According to R. Wertheimer, a mishenet is also made of wood, but must be an especially thick branch because a mere twig cannot support a walker. The word choter is probably a Hebraized form of the Aramaic word chutra (which the Targumim use for translating mateh and shevet into Aramaic). Wertheimer explains in the name of Rabbi Yaakov Lorberbaum of Lissa (1760–1832) that the three words have different connotations. The word makel has a bad connotation (as it is generally associated with the meting out of punishment), the word mishenet has a good connotation (as it helps support an elderly person in walking), and the word mateh has a neutral connotation. With this, R. Wertheimer explains why the staff with which Moshe performed miracles in Egypt and on the Red Sea is called a mateh: because the effects of his staff were positive for the Jews, but negative for the Egyptians, the Bible uses the word mateh which neither implies something positive nor negative. Citing an explanation from Rabbi Shmuel Dovid Luzzatto (1800–1865), Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg (1785–1865) writes that the words shevet and mateh actually have different meanings, but because they are conceptually related, they became interchangeable. He explains that the word shevet originally referred to the leader of a tribe, while mateh originally referred to the other members of a tribe. The leader of a tribe is similar to a mast upon which a flag is mounted because all the members of the tribe rally around the leader. In this way, the word for a leader of a tribe is homonymous with the word for stick. Since all the members of a tribe are united behind their leader, references to them can be subsumed under the word used for the leader. Thus, the word shevet also came to mean members of a tribe because the leader of the tribe embodies the entire tribe itself. In terms of sticks, he argues that shevet and mateh can both refer to the exact same type of stick, but they refer to different parts of the stick. The word shevet refers to the top of the stick (just as the leader sits atop the hierarchal structure of a tribe), while the word mateh—seemingly related to the Hebrew word lematah (underneath)—refers to its bottom (just as the other members of the tribe live under the leadership of their clan chief). Malbim (to Gen. 49:28) writes that the word shevet does not literally mean “stick”, rather it means “branch,” which was the most common item used as a stick. Based on this, he explains that shevet means branch and tribe because each of the Tribes of Israel are simply branches of the greater family tree of Jacob’s descendants. Using the synonyms in question as a springboard for discussion, Rabbi Zev HaKohen Hoberman (1930–2012) sums up the dual role assumed by the tribes of Israel. On the one hand, they are called shevatim because G-d has granted them certain forms of authority and responsibility over the nations of the world. Yet, paradoxically they are also called mattot (which he equates with the words mishenet and chutra) because they serve as Jacob’s “cane” in death upon whom he “leans” to carry on his legacy. In that way, they are not autonomous, but simply follow the tradition of their illustrious forefather. R. Moshe of Trani, also known as the Mabit, writes (Beis Elohim, Shaar ha-Yesodos ch. 48) that the tribes as known as matot because their merit is something upon which the Jewish People can lean for all generations, like a walking stick. They are also called shevatim because their merit serves as the justification for G-d smiting the Jews’ enemies with His rod of vengeance. Now you can re-read the title of this article and appreciate the pun. Share this: WhatsApp More Telegram Email Print Share on Tumblr