Kashas on the Parsha

Home Coffeeroom Bais Medrash Kashas on the Parsha

Viewing 50 posts - 151 through 200 (of 276 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1169290

    coffee addict
    Participant

    zaidy,

    yaakov was saying these seven years i worked for rachel therefore i should be marrying her now

    #1169291

    zaidy78
    Member

    coffee, so how was Rochel allowed to cheat Yaakov? and why is she still so praised by it?

    #1169292

    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    From the Pasuk that Coffee Addict mentioned it seemed to me that obviously Leah didn’t know. There are Midrashim about Leah answering Yaakov Avinu in the morning that she learned from him how to trick people, but such Midrashim might be conveying an implied conversation rather than a real conversation. The Medrash says that he had in mind to divorce her but when she had children he kept her. In the end, he agreed to it as it says ?????? ????? ?? ??? ????.

    The reason Rachel went along with it was not to embarrass Leah. According to this understanding, that Leah wasn’t aware of this being a trick, the embarrassment would be tenfold.

    With this we come to understand another topic. Chazal tell us that when Rachel gave away a night to Leah in return for a plant, she lost her opportunity to be buried with Yaakov. “She made light of being with the Tzaddik so she wasn’t buried with him.” The question is, why indeed did she give up being with him for a flower?

    However, now we can understand. Leah told her, not only you took my husband you also want to take what my son brought me? This can only be said by someone who really thought she was cheated of what was rightfully hers. Rachel went through her life acting as if it was she who cheated her sister. Now, faced with an accusation of attempting to cheat her again she had to think to herself how someone who is actually guilty of that would respond. Therefore, she answered, tonight can be your turn.

    #1169293

    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    As for the Mekach Ta’us problem, Yaakov was Mekadesh with Bi’a. There is a Chazaka that ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ????. This couldn’t be more true about Yaakov Avinu. He was ??? ????? since he rather that it be a good Keddushin.

    #1169294

    coffee addict
    Participant

    her intentions were to save leah the embarrasment

    #1169295

    oomis
    Participant

    Yekke

    I have a better question. The malachim are malachei Elokim they are spiritual and powerful beings with a shlichus from Hashem, why on earth would they need “Lots pritection?!”

    They didn’t, but LOT didn’t know that!

    #1169296

    yekke2
    Participant

    The ???? ???’ ????? ???”? ?? ?”? ??”? writes that the first ??????? was ????? but he remarried her. According to this, he asks, when he married her a second time, she was a ?????, and therefore should only have ???? ??? ???? as opposed to the normal 7 of a ?????. T (???? ?? ?? ????? ?????? ??????? ??? ???”? ????? ?????? ???? ???”? ??”?)

    The ???”? ?? ????? brings from ?”? that ???? was ???? for ???s trickery, and therefore had ??? that if it would be ??? he wanted to be ???? her. (Although that is contradictory to the ???? that he gave ?????? to ??? so that he shouldn’t trick – but it could be this was different – if he was anyways having the ????, he wouldn’t want it to be a ???? ???? and therefore wanted the ??????? (see HaLevi before))

    #1169297

    yekke2
    Participant

    Q: The ???? says that Leah could daven for her embryo to be changed from male into female only because it was within the first 40 days of pregnancy.

    The question is – what happens to ?????? ???? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?????? — what happens when they get switched around now?

    #1169298

    yekke2
    Participant

    ??? ??????? ?”? says that we learn from ??? that one should not marry off his younger daughter before his older daughter.

    The question is: Why do we learn from ??? because he gave ??? – We should learn from ????, because he wanted to marry ??? even though she was younger!?

    The ???? says that ??? and ??? were twins – therefore ???? was ?????? because last week he says that the younger twin is older because the creation is first even though the birth is last; therefore even he agreed that one cannot marry before older siblings, ??? was older!!!

    #1169299

    yekke2
    Participant

    ????? ?????? ????

    The Brisker Rav says that before ??? ???? even the ???? had no ???????, but just had ??????? (As seen in ???”? ??? ?’ ????? ??’ ?) — and ???”? in ?????? ?”? says that it isn’t ???? to have a ?????? ????, so the question doesn’t start.

    (Although ???’ ?????? ? brings that Eliezer was ???? Rifka, and ??”? ?? ????? brings a few times ??????? by the ????).

    ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?”? ??? ?’ ???? ???

    #1169300

    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    Yekke, your last post is obviously the basic answer, especially since we can say that in Chutz La’aretz he didn’t do Kedushin, as the Ramban writes regarding all other Mitzvos.

    Also, even if we find that the Avos kept the Mitzvos, it’s not like they were Bar Chiyuva. It was more like an Inyan. In more Halachic terms, their Kedushin probably had the status Kedushei Ketana and Maamar.

    The other answers are more like Afilu Im Tirtze Lomar…

    #1169301

    Toi
    Member

    Why couldnt lavan just buy new trofim. Ayin daas zikeinim mibaalei tosfos. not for the faint of heart.

    #1169302

    yehudayona
    Participant

    I don’t think anybody has answered Baalhabooze’s question about Lavan’s cheshbon. The best I can come up with is that he solved two problems by switching Leah for Rachel: the “shidduch crisis” and the fact that it’s hard to find good shepherds who are willing to sign a 14-year contract.

    Here’s my question about Vayetze: Why did Rachel steal the teraphim? Rashi says she wanted to encourage Lavan to give up idolatry, but it hardly seems that a diehard idolator wouldn’t just go out to his local idol store and get new ones. Also, since it’s forbidden to possess idols, Rachel should have destroyed or hidden them rather than steal them.

    Ramban says teraphim weren’t really idols, they were used to tell time, but some people (like Lavan) used them for divination. But that doesn’t explain why Rachel stole them. Since Lavan had worshipped them, why didn’t they become assur to Rachel? And why did she need them?

    #1169303

    yekke2
    Participant

    Yekke, your last post is obviously the basic answer, especially since we can say that in Chutz La’aretz he didn’t do Kedushin, as the Ramban writes regarding all other Mitzvos.

    I am not sure if you understood what i wrote fully; I don’t think i explained myself correctly.

    Kiddushin is a Chiddush Hatorah – i don’t mean they didn’t KEEP that law, i mean that Kiddushin before Har Sinai doesn’t work (The Rambam says that before Matan Torah there was Nissuin only and no Kiddushin; Kiddushin can only happen after Matan Torah) – therefore the Avos were not going against the Torah at all by not doing Kiddushin

    #1169304

    yekke2
    Participant

    ___________________________________________________

    PARSHAS VAYISHLACH:

    Why did Yackov bow “7” times to Eisav? What is the significance of the number 7?

    I once heard an amazing explanation: ???? has the numerical value of 182, which is 7 X 26 (????). This corresponds to seven levels of ????? he had. ???? has the numerical value of 208, which is 8 X 26. When he gave the ?????, he gave over 7 levels of ????? to Yackov (whatever that means), keeping one for himself. ??? came in and asked for ONE BROCHO – getting the remaining level which ???? originally intended on keeping for himself. Therefore – ??? is 376, which is 50 (???) X 7 [350], + 26 (1 X ????).

    When ??? came to kill ????, ???? bowed 7 times, using his 7 powers of ????? to fight ???s 7 powers of ????, leaving ??? with only 1 level of ?????. [According to the ??? that ???s intentions when he hugged ???? were not pure, you have to say that his plan didn’t work]

    (I might have heard this ??? the ???? ????, but I am not sure)

    #1169305

    yekke2
    Participant

    Q. Did Yaackov actually split them into two groups? It was supposed to be part of the plan but we don’t see it ever carried out?

    #1169307

    yekke2
    Participant

    Why was ???? scared to kill ??? (Rashi says that ???? refers to killing others) — there is a ??? of ??? ????? ???? ?????, that if one comes to kill you, can kill him first?

    One cannot answer that one is only allowed to kill a ???? if it is impossible to save him through disabling him somehow [and therefore ???? was scared that he would kill even if he wouldn’t need to], because the ???? and the ???”? hold that this law applies only to a bystander; the victim himself is permitted to kill the ???? even if it is possible through other means to save himself?

    There are those who answer that ??? came to kill ????s family, not ???? himself (because ??? promised not to kill ???? while ???? was still alive), and therefore he didn’t have the ???? of killing; he was considered like a bystander, and therefore was not permitted to kill without trying to disable first.

    (There are those who explain this ??? of the ???? because he is ???? (confused, not thinking straight), which comes under the category of ????. I don’t understand this, because the ???? of ???? does not apply to the 3 Cardinal Sins of ????? ???, ????? ???? ?????? ?????, which are ????? ??? ?????? One could answer that the ???? does not create a ???? to kill, but rather changes the circumstances so that it isn’t ???? ?????? ???? ??????.)

    #1169308

    yekke2
    Participant

    How does ??”? know that it was ???? who was missing? The ???? says ?”? ??????; how does ??”? know who it was?

    The ????”? says that ???? is the only one who makes sense, whereas the others have no explanation, so ??”? knew it was her.

    There is a ????? that the ??? ????? was in the portion of ??? ??????, because he is the only who didn’t bow to ???. If it was another brother missing, then the ????”? could be in his portion. It follows, therefore, that it was ???? who was missing.

    One can ask – maybe it was ??? who was missing, and he didn’t get the ????”? because ??? ??? didn’t get a ???? in ??”??

    The ???? answers that the ?????? hint to ???? — using the standard laws of grammar, when one refers to plural of both men and women, one talks in masculine, unless the women are more ????. However, if there is only one woman and many men, even if the woman is ????, we use a masculine form.

    When the maidservants came forward, the ???? says ???????? – plural feminine. When ??? came, however, it says ??????? – plural masculine. The reason is because ??? was the only woman — and where was ????? This is ??”?s proof that it was her who was missing more than any of her brothers.

    #1169309

    BaalHabooze
    Participant

    yekke2- “Q. Did Yaackov actually split them into two groups? It was supposed to be part of the plan but we don’t see it ever carried out?”

    That’s a great kasha that bothered me for years. I will quote to you this vort that was in Parsha Potpourri 2010 by R’ Oizer Alport:

    #1169310

    yekke2
    Participant

    ??? ???!!!

    #1169311

    BaalHabooze
    Participant

    PARSHAS VAYEISHEV


    Yehuda suggests not to kill Yosef.

    ?????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ???? ?? ??????

    Rash”i says,” ?? ??? ” to mean,” ?? ????”, what monetary gain is there if we kill him!

    What does MONEY have to do with Yosef’s verdict?? If he deserves to die, kill him. If not, let him live. Was Yehuda trying to make a fast buck??

    #1169312

    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    It means, what do we gain by killing him. Rashi simply explains the meaning of the word.

    #1169313

    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    Yekke, why do you say it wasn’t carried out? It says Vayachatz. That’s not a plan, that’s action. The problem with the Vort Baal Habooze quotes is that the Pasuk repeats Vayachatz after the incident with the Malach.

    If you look you should notice that when they approached Esav to bow to him first it says Vatigashna Hashfachos, then it says, Vatigash Gam Leah. This is because they were not together. First the first group bowed, then the next group also approached and bowed.

    This might be a Kasha on the Brisker Rav, too. Why did he continue to take caution if he already won? Perhaps, though, he was still afraid of what the Gid Hanashe injury, that the Malach scored, could represent. It turns out, as Chazal say, it was in the future.

    #1169314

    yitayningwut
    Participant

    BaalHabooze –

    #1169315

    yekke2
    Participant

    The ???? ??? ????? ?”? says that ?? ???? ????? ???? ????? ?? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?????. This is why ??? didn’t announce Yehudahs partnership in the story.

    ????? ???? in ???? ????? that the ????? is because of ????????? ??????, which is ????? ??? ?????. The question is that ????? was now giving her the death sentence (wrongly), and therefore was a ???? – she had the rights at least to embarrass him pub lically!! (???? ???? ?”? ??’ ??”?)?

    The ?????? ?? ?”? ??”? asks this by all ???? ?????? we should say you can kill them ???? ????? (See ????? ?? ??? ? ?? ? who discuses this at length)

    Even though ?????s role here finished after he sentenced her, the ???? ?? ??? is a ???? – according to the ??? in ?”? ?”? that ?? ???? ???? ????? when the ???? is a ????, then ????? is still a ?????

    Even according to ??? ?”? ?”? that ??? ???? ???? ????? even when the ???? is a ????, there is a ??? of ???? even by a ???? ????? (See ???? ?????? ?? ?”? ??? ? and ???? ??? ?? ? ???”? and the ?????? above), and therefore ????? is causing her to be killed?

    However – the ???? ??? says that this ???? of ???? ????? only applies by a Jew, because in a every ???? there are two parts: A) The ???? ???? of the ???? and B) ???? ????? (Saving the victim. This ??? of ???? ????? is only in the saving of the victim, not as a ???? ???? on the ????, and by a ?? ?? the ???? isn’t so worried about ????.

    According to this, one can answer with the ??? of the ???? ????? ???? ? ?’? – where proves that ??? held like those that they were all ??? ?? before ??? ???? (whereas ????? said they had ???? ?????), and therefore she didn’t have this ???? of ???? by ????.

    However, if they were ??? ??, the ???? ????? ?????? ?? ?”? says that every ??? has ?????? to another ???, and will also have the ???? of ?? ???? ???? ????? – and therefore we don’t need to come onto the ??? of ????!!

    (See ???? ?????? ?? ?”? ???”? ????? ?”? ???? ???? ?????? ?”? ?”? ?”? ??”? ??”? ??”?; See also ????? ?”? ??”? and ????? ???? ??”?)

    The ???? ????? asks ?? ??”? ??”? – according to those who hold that ?? ???? ???”? by ????, why does the ???? ??? ??? need to go to ???? if he kills by mistake [when he is ????? ????? ???] – it should be the ??? ??? because of ??????? *

    The ??? ???? brings from ?’ ????? ?????? that once ??? ??? have paskened, they are no longer involved, and anybody can carry out the ????? or the ????, and therefore the ???? ??? ??? is not ?????? ?????? – it would come out that ????? is only a ???? ???? which is ???? by a ?? ??.


    * I don’t understand why the ???? is a ???? when he is ????? ????? ???, because he is finished his job, so the ????s ???? doesn’t really start.

    (???? ?????? taken from ????? ????? ??”? by ?’ ????? ??????)

    #1169316

    BaalHabooze
    Participant

    PARSHAS BO


    It says by Makkas Bechoros, that Hashem killed all the bechorim “from Man to Animal” (???? ?? ????) and Rash”i explains that Man (the Mitzri) is first (to die) since he initiates sin, (and then the animals died).

    The question is, how is it shayich to say first the people died then the animals died, if we know that makkas bechoros occured in one, exact, split milli-second of midnight (Kachatzos Halayla)?

    #1169317

    BaalHabooze
    Participant

    PARSHAS BESHALACH


    When the Bnei Yisroel approached the Yam Suf, the medrash tells us that the sea originally didn’t want to split, because it was created on the 3rd Day and mankind on the 6th Day of creation. It was only because of Yosef, or because of (fill in the blank), and countless other medrashim and chaza”ls, that tell us what zechus the yidden had that it actually did split.

    Q. Why now of all times do we find the Sea arguing to do something shelo kederech HaTevah, something we have not heard any other segment of creation tayna (claim) until now, despite the occurance of the 10 incredible makkos in Mitzrayim (ex: We never found the Nile argue not to turn to blood, etc.)?

    #1169318

    WIY
    Member

    BaalHabooze

    Your last weeks kasha bothers me too.

    #1169319

    playtime
    Member

    To baalhabooz:

    The split second of chatzos is when Macas Bechoros BEGAN. Paroh was nervous because he though since he was a bechor, he would die any second (just like his son).

    #1169320

    WIY
    Member

    BaalHabooze

    I think the answer for Beshalach q is that the makos were punishments on Mitzrayim so they deserved that. Krias yam suf was not a punishment (at that point) but rather to allow klal yisroel to pass through. They were undeserving of a neis of that magnitude because it was for them and they were also oivdei avodah zora.

    #1169321

    yekke2
    Participant

    1) We find that creations don’t always listen, if it makes sense, to HKB”H – every tree was supposed to taste like the fruit it bore, and only Esrog bark when boiled tastes the same as the esrog fruit,

    2) The Moon ‘taynad’ that the sun should be made smaller, and then the moon itself was diminished.

    What this means, I don’t understand, but we DO find it.

    #1169322

    yekke2
    Participant

    There was a ???? in ??????? where a ?? who had had ???? but no ????? went to R’ Shmuel Salant, to find out whether he should keep ??? or not (because a ??? who keeps ??? is ???? ????). R’ Shmuel wasn’t there at the time, and another ?? forced him to write on ???.

    The ???? ???? ??’ ?”? brings the ???? that the ???? of ??? was given at ???, and asks that at the time, the entire ??? ????? had had ???? (before eating ???? ???), but the ????? didn’t take place until ?? ????. The ???? ????? ?? says that a ?? who has had ???? but not ????? is not a Jew. So what is ??? in the ???? that ??? ???? ???? ?????

    (I think the ??? ???? is ????? a ???? somewhere that the whole ????? for a ??? to keep ??? is because of ‘???’, and before it was given to ??? ????? there was no such ????, and therefore the ???? kept the ????. You can say the same thing here – if it was given to them, then there is no ???. But i don’t remember where it is)

    The ???? ???? says that once they had ????, they were considered ??? ???? and could keep ???, and he learns from here that that every ?? ??? ??? ??? is ?????? to keep ???. (See the ???? ??? ??”? ??’ ??”? ??”?, who goes along similar lines)

    #1169323

    BaalHabooze
    Participant

    So someone wanted to answer for Parshas Bo an answer that I liked.

    It’s brought down b’sheim R’S.Z. Aurbach, that he asks a stirah. In the morning we say first ?? ??????? ?????….i ?????? ??????and in the evening we say ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ?? ??? ????? so which came first? So it’s brought down in mesechta (?) that the Mitzriyim were actually struck at midnight but they remained like a goysis (half-dead) till after the yidden left the land. So we can answer the stira, that they takeh were struck with a makka, but they didn’t die immediately, only after the yidden were redeemed and left.

    This answers our original question that the bechor animals could have died anytime between chatzos and when the yidden left Mitzrayim.

    Agav I was thinking maybe that could be one reason why it’s called Makkas bechoros and not necessarily Harigas Bechoros. Because for many hours the Bechorim were struck with a Makka that suspended them into this state, of hanging between life and death.

    #1169324

    BaalHabooze
    Participant

    WIY – that was a nice pshat, I was actually entertaining along those ideas, and I think we’re on to something! yasher koach, u’boruch sh’kivanti!

    yekke2- good ha’arahs (re: esrog/moon)! Now it’s all the more confusing.

    #1169325

    benignuman
    Participant

    KASHA,

    Why did Hashem tell Moshe to lie to Paroah that they were only going to leave for 3 days? Why not just demand to leave? To put it differently, wasn’t Paroah right to chase after the B’nai Yisroel when they didn’t return? If so, why was he punished?

    #1169326

    WIY
    Member

    benignuman

    To show the evil of Pharoah that he wouldnt even let them leave for 3 days!

    #1169327

    benignuman
    Participant

    WIY,

    But doesn’t that justify Pharoah in chasing after them? Also is that really a reason to lie?

    #1169328

    BaalHabooze
    Participant

    benignuman- I heard once that originally that is what the plan was. To go away for just 3 days. Afterall the shibud mitzrayim was supposed to be for 400 years. Once they leave for 3 days and receive the torah, they can go back to mitzrayim, EVEN IN THE NUN SHA’AREI TUMAH, because now with their new-found Gift, the torah, they have the greatest spiritual tool to rise above mitzrayim’s immorality . The power of the torah will protect them from forever getting lost, no matter how deep they sink, and how low they fall, even if they reach the 50th shaar of tumah.

    Once Pharoah didn’t even agree to that, Hashem had no choice but to free the yidden, because they were in the 49th level of tumah, and, because they had no torah, were in danger of being eradicated forever once they reach the 50th.

    #1169329

    BaalHabooze
    Participant

    Parshas Yisro


    Here are fundamental questions in the story of Matan Torah.

    Why didn’t Hashem present us the torah with a Sefer Torah? What do the Luchos accomplish? What is the tachlis of the Luchos? What is it with these specific 10 Mitzvos, that they deserve its prestigious place as part of the Luchos, more than all the other 613?

    #1169330

    benignuman
    Participant

    BaalHabooze,

    That is a good answer if you understand pshat that the shibud was supposed to be longer. If you understand that the 400 years is counted from leidas Yitchak then your answer doesn’t work.

    #1169331

    musser zoger
    Member

    BaalHabooze,

    There wasn’t a complete sefer torah until the end of the 40 years.

    The 10 commandments include all 613 mitzvos.the 10 are major headings. like allthe mitzvos of yom tov and Shabbos are included in zachor. all arayos are included in lo tinaf, etc.

    #1169332

    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    Throughout the Makos the request was for a distance of three days. Once Makas Bechoros came about Paroah sent them out unconditionaly. He just wanted them to get out.

    That is why it says Vayugad Limelech Mitzraim Ki Borchim Hem. What exactly was he told? He thought that they came back without any evidence thereof? The answer is that he never thought they should come back and it didn’t dawn on him to consider them Borchim. But, as with all negetive attitudes, when someone expresses it a certain way it catches on.

    Hence, Paroah was told that, “The Jews escaped!” After that he looked at it the same way, forgetting that he actually sent them out for good.

    #1169333

    HaLeiVi
    Participant

    BaalHabooze, we were presented at Har Sinai with the Aseres Hadibros, not the Luchos.

    #1169334

    yekke2
    Participant

    The entire ????, both ????? and ??? ?? was given at ?? ????, with all the details.

    #1169335

    playtime
    Member

    Haleivi:

    BaalHabooze is asking the same question that perplexed me after I watched ‘the ten commandments’

    #1169336

    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    The entire ????, both ????? and ??? ?? was given at ?? ????, with all the details.

    So, Moshe knew at Har Sinai about the sin that would prevent him from entering Eretz Yisroel?

    Or is it possible that the mitzvos were given at Sinai, but the actual text of the Torah wasn’t finalized until 40 years later?

    The Wolf

    #1169337

    BaalHabooze
    Participant

    HaLeivi – yeah, but still, it’s one and the same. The Aseres Hadibros that we heard by Har Sinai, we eventually got in written form (Luchos) 40 days later.

    #1169338

    BaalHabooze
    Participant

    benignuman – the “unofficial” official cheshbon is from Leidas Yitzchok, as you said. The “official” official cheshbon is when the shibud mitzrayim actually started. That’s why it’s brought down in seforim that the remaining 190 years had to be made up in a later time.

    I’m not sure what this all means, but that’s what is written in many seforim.

    #1169339

    BaalHabooze
    Participant

    yekke2 – That is true, very true.

    So how do you understand what the Aseres Hadibros are all about?

    #1169340

    benignuman
    Participant

    HaLeivi,

    Rashi explain “Vayugad” to mean that Pharaoh sent spies along with the Jews to see if they would come back and the spies sent word that they weren’t coming back but were instead escaping. I also don’t understand your pshat, are you saying that Pharaoh sent them out but his servants didn’t know? Why were they telling him that the Jews ran away?

    BaalHabooze,

    I don’t know what seforim you mean (kabbalah?). But Rashi doesn’t learn that way so we still need a pshat for Rashi (and other Rishonim).

Viewing 50 posts - 151 through 200 (of 276 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Trending