Tanach Thoughts

Yesterday in a certain waiting room I came across a book by Dr. Tzvi Betzer z"l, who was apparently a linguist, and who had passed away about 22 years ago, if I remember correctly. The book, dedicated in his memory, collected some (or perhaps all, I didn't check) of his various papers. Several caught my eye because they discussed topics that sounded relevant for some of my research interests. But one in particular seemed unusual. It was a short essay, more of a note, really, in terms of length, on the term "מסבות שם" (Mussabot Shem) which is typically translated something like "changed names". The term is used in Bamidbar 32:38  in reference to the Transjordanian cities captured by the Reuvenites and Gadites and resettled by their families. As mentioned above, the term is usually understood to refer to the literal names of the cities having been changed by the tribes, because the names had idolatrous connotations. However, strangely enough, in most cases we...

Last Shabbat I was skimming Yirmiyahu because I was looking for a particular verse and in that moment wasn't near a concordance (what would we Tanach-loving, Shabbat-observers ever do without a concordance???), and I came across something that frankly shocked me. I had studied Yirmiyahu before and I've written on that in the blog. But I was struck by the following verses ( 48:45-46 ): " בְּצֵל חֶשְׁבּוֹן עָמְדוּ מִכֹּחַ נָסִים כִּי אֵשׁ יָצָא מֵחֶשְׁבּוֹן וְלֶהָבָה מִבֵּין סִיחוֹן וַתֹּאכַל פְּאַת מוֹאָב וְקָדְקֹד בְּנֵי שָׁאוֹן.   אוֹי לְךָ מוֹאָב אָבַד עַם כְּמוֹשׁ כִּי לֻקְּחוּ בָנֶיךָ בַּשֶּׁבִי וּבְנֹתֶיךָ בַּשִּׁבְיָה." "In the shelter of Heshbon fugitives halt exhausted; for fire went forth from Heshbon, flame from the midst of Sihon, consuming the brow of Moab, the pate of the people of Shaon. Woe to you, O Moab! The people of Chemosh are undone, for your sons are carried off into captivity, your daughters into exile." What's surprising about thi...

This week's parsha features Bnei Yisrael passing through Edom and the two Emorite countries - Sichon's country and Og's country ( Bamidbar 21:21-35 ). Og was the last of the Rephaim ( Devarim 3:11 ), a race of giants that were wiped out way back during the War of the Four and Five Kings in Beresheet ( 14:5 ). Some midrashim state that Sichon was also a giant, of the antediluvian kind (for example, Devarim Rabbah 11:10 ). Looking through Tanach it occurred to me that giants might be frightening, but they obviously aren't unbeatable. David and his men defeated a number of giants, and, as mentioned already, the four Mesopotamian kings managed to defeat the Rephaim. And yet, two parshas ago, when the spies told Bnei Yisrael that there were Anakim in the Land of Yisrael ( Bamidbar 13:28 ), Kalev and Yehoshua said nothing about "hey, guys, giants are not unbeatable!" Kalev made a more generalized statement, that "yes we can, because we have Hashem!" ( ibid...

Last year I made a post about what I perceived (and still do, to some extent), to being a big mystery, and that, is the meaning of David's name. I brought a few theories and suggestions, but nothing solid. A few days ago, a new theory came to mind, which I think is more solid (though not necessarily perfect): Daat Mikra and others suggest that David is a short-form of Dodvayahu, which is a combination of Dod (beloved) and the name of Hashem, so it means = beloved of Hashem. I rejected this option in my previous post, but having thought about it again this week, I think it might point to another possibility: In Hebrew, there are things called "binyanim" (בניינים). Wikipedia  tells me that this should be translated as "grammatical conjugations". In short, in Semitic languages, verbs can be deflected to different tenses and forms. Typically, these are symbolized by verbs in the פעל (P'AL) root. One such form is the פעיל form, which means that someone is active...

 No, not that kind of Ham. In Parashat Derachim, pg. 338-339, Dr. Yitzchak Meitlis brings a view that the word "chavoteihem" (חותיהם), a group of settlements captured by Yair ben Menashe ( Bamidbar 32:41 ), is a combination of the words "Chavot" and "Ham"; Ham being a place mentioned in the conquest of the Four Kings ( Beresheet 14:5 ), or in other words, "chavoteihem" means "the villages of Ham". I thought that was a fascinating idea, particularly because that area was in Amorite territory. Why is that important? Because in Canaan there was an Amorite king named Hoham (הוהם) ( Yehoshua 10:3-5 ). As far as I know, not much is known about the Amorite language, but I'm guessing there's a connection between Hoham and Ham. Perhaps his name means something along the lines of "man of Ham" or "son of Ham", or something like that. Meanwhile, Obelix has discovered he enjoys gefilte fish. (images taken from Asterix an...

 In the parsha this Shabbat we heard tell of the first conquests of Bnei Yisrael as preparation toward conquering Canaan. After crushing Sichon at Yahtzah, the armies of Yisrael storm Og's land and from there the Tribe of Menashe storm the northeastern portion of the Golan and Bashan. Which raises a question: From p'shat, it seems that Am Yisrael was in the Golan, then headed back south to Arvot Moav, which is where Balak and Pinchas take place. They hang around that area until past Moshe's death, and then they head west, cross the Jordan River in Yehoshua and conquer Yericho (opposite where they were in Arvot Moav). Now, some people may not be aware of this, but it seems that this was hundreds of kilometers back and forth, just to get the people back to Arvot Moav! Why? I mean, why not simply conquer Canaan from the Golan? Rabbi Dr. Yoel Bin Nun explains in this  excellent class that Bnei Yisrael actually split into two groups: The advancing army which conquered the Land ...