Bereishit 5779

(1) The creation story in chapter 1 uses a number of verbs to describe the creative process. What's the difference between them all? Specifically, we have ויעש and ויברא; the latter used only for creation of sea creatures and humans. Why?

(2) What is the nature of the עץ החיים, and why does it suddenly become relevant only after the episode of eating from the עץ הדעת טוב ורע? Was it permitted to be eaten prior to this episode?

(3) In 4:17, what is the purpose of informing us that (a) Kayin built a city and (b) that he named the city after his son?

(4) Chapter 5 gives a list of the generations between אדם and נח, listing their ages. Since the Torah is not a history book, why do we need to know how long everyone lived for? To put the question in context, in the Torah we only know the ages of these people, those of the generations from נח to אברהם (by implication), and then only those of אברהם, שרה, ישמעאל, יצחק, יעקב, יוסף, לוי, קהת, עמרם, משה and אהרן.

Comments

  1. Unknown7.10.18

    My possibly answers according to Ramban:
    1)creation was in two stages, the creation of primordeal matter (hule - ויברא) and the forming thereof into matter as we know it (ויעש) man and leaviathans needed extra creative work beyond forming, therefore requiring more ברא. (see 1:21 ד.ה. ויברא)
    2) not sure the supposition is correct. both are mentioned equally in verse 2:9, possibly only knowledge mentioned in 2:17 because that is the only one relevent for the sin
    However, Ramban implies that if it were not for eating knowledge man would have lived forever (ד.ה. ביום, see אם כן.
    3 To prove it wasn't for himself because then there was a chance it would last (ד.ה. וידע)
    4 Not sure, a possible answer derrived from the Ramban was to show the greatness of the Avot as they had lifespan like the first generations even though those around them were living shorter lives ( 5:4 ד.ה. ויהיו see ונראה כי בדורות)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pinchas 5781

Question:  Why are מנשה counted before אפרים, in distinction to most of the rest of the time when the two are mentioned? Approach: It's possible to suggest that the reason is based on the relative sizes of the counts of the two tribes; משנה being larger than אפרים (the opposite to the count in במדבר). Alternatively, we can suggest that the wish to mention the בנות צלפחד - apart from being a preview of the upcoming subject - gave מנשה more importance.
Read more

Ki Tavo 5779

1. How does the לוי have cause to be happy with ביכורים? 2. When was the תורה meant to be written on the stones? 27:3 implies before moving them to הר גריזים והר עיבל, but 27:8 implies afterwards 3. In all other cases where the לויים are separated out from the rest of the nation, מנשה ואפרים replace יוסף. Why not with the ceremony on הר גריזים ועיבל? 4. Why are the punishments of bodily ailments split?
Read more

Re'eih 5783

Question:  Why are the laws of בכור not written together with the other קרבנות rules earlier in the פרשה? Approach: The rule of בכור being only allowed to be eaten in המקום אשר יבחר ה' is mentioned in the earlier section. This section comes to teach us the rule of the בכור בעל מום, and the special leniencies that apply, allowing the animal to still be eaten - and anywhere. It thus could be viewed as similar to the released slave, who no longer is limited to his master's domain (the rules mentioned just before).
Read more