- This topic has 10 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Exodus 20:12:
??????? ??????????? ????????????? ??????? ?????????? ???????
Rashi:
?? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ???? ???????? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??
In Kiddushin (61a) there is a machlokes as to whether a tenai needs to be a tenai kaful in order to be valid. R’ Meir says it does and R’ Chanina Ben Gamliel says that it doesn’t. The halacha is in accordance with R’ Meir. Which would mean that not only would it not be ??? ??? ??????, it also wouldn’t be ?? ???? ??????? because the entire tenai is invalid.
Now lest one say that the Torah doesn’t have to conform to the rules of tenai, I will point out that the Gemara tries to prove that R’ Meir is correct from various places in the Torah where there was in fact a tenai kaful. The most similar to the case of kibud would be ??? ??????????? ???????? and ????? ??????????? ?????????? where the Torah had to say both sides of the tenai. And to make matters worse, R’ Chanina’s defense there is that the Torah had to say ????? ??????????? ?????????? not because of tenai kaful, but because if it didn’t then you would think that if you are ?????????? then you just don’t get the blessings, kamashmalan that you actually get the curses. So by kibud we should say the same thing, namely that if it only says ?? ???? ??????? then we would think that if you don’t honor your parents then you just don’t get long life. We would need the Torah to specifically tell us that you actually get a shortened life. So it would seem that Rashi’s pshat doesn’t fit with either Tanna.
Perhaps Rashi holds its an U’kimta.
Similar to the case of one who sells land to relocate and the move does not materialize.
Yes, umdana. Its been a while. My apologies.
I’m not either sure why the Torah doubles it in other places but not here. I do know that in regards to the sugia of tnai kofel there are exceptions when an umdina is present. I am merely sugesting a route which might lead you to an answer.
Another path to take would be perhaps that the Torah is referring to ??????? ?????????? ??????? as a metzios outcome. Not a scharr.
Bichkosai is clearly a blessing not a direct outcome.
The m’ever hayardain is clearly a promise not a direct outcome.
Any of the cases the gemara brings in regard to the halocha of having tnai kaful between one person and another; chovos, shtaros not direct metzios obviously.
I haven’t looked around and I would not be able to say this on my own but maybe long life is in metzios attributed to kibud av v’em. Respecting ones parents, honouring them, lowering your ego to them can definitely lead to great menuchas hanefesh. Getting a bit too machshavadik now but if there is something there then Rashi is merely stating that the reverse effect is true as well not that it is a promise that the Torah needs to double. Maybe.
Why do you assume this is s t’nai?
I’m suggesting that the Torah using the term ???? instead of ?? means the rules of t’nai don’t apply here.
Rashi on Vayedaber Elokim might shed some light.
Also, the list of Brachos are not related to the list of Klallos, while the obvious opposite of ‘you will live long if you do this’ is that otherwise you won’t. Rashi is saying that the Torah uses this as a means to convey a message.
Lastly and mainly, I agree with Daas Yochid that not everything in the Torah is a Tnai. Nobody thought to bring up ???? ???? when you don’t transgress a Lav to keep you from getting Malkos. In the Torah Hashem is letting you know what the benefit is, or the punishment. ?? ?????? is actually being expressed as a conditional arrangement .
When we know that the Torah speaks that way then it is a valid understanding. In a normal conversation it isn’t necessarily understood automatically. This is why Rashi is telling us that the Torah uses this language, as we find by Aharon, Velo Yamus.
My point with the opposite of Arichus Yamim is that although not having Arichus doesn’t have to mean a Kitzur, it can be used as a hint to Kitzur. On the other hand, the Klallos of Bechukosai are not related to the Brachos and they are many more Psukim longer.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.