New York – ‘Parshat Chayei Sarah’ The Age Of Rivkah At Her Wedding 3 Years?

    227

    New York – How old was Rivka when she was discovered by Avraham’s servant and brought to Canaan to marry Yitzchak?

    Join our WhatsApp group

    Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email


    You are a graduate of a yeshiva education and you still say “three years old.” And you justify this by saying that “three-year-olds were more sophisticated in those days.”

    [The views and opinion of this article is solely of the writer Rabbi Avi Billet, that was printed in this weeks newspaper the Jewish Star, and doesn’t represent in anyway the views of VIN News, we merely bring the writings of Rabbi Avi Billet – feel free to debate this issue in the comments section in a respectful way with common sense, no ranting and raving.

    Or you never really came across this question and you say, “Hmmm. I never thought about that. How old was she?”

    We do not know the answer because the Torah doesn’t tell us. The Torah also doesn’t tell us how old Yitzchak was when he was bound on the top of a mountain by his father. Yet we seem to have that one clear as well. Unequivocally, he was 37 years old.

    Right? Wrong! At least about it being “unequivocally” a certain number.

    Based on the midrash, Rashi ties together the Akeidah (binding of Yitzchak) with Rivka’s birth and Sara’s death –– all because they take place in the same few verses in the Torah. Since we know Sara was 127 when she died, simple mathematics produce Yitzchak being 37 at her death, and Rivka’s birth at that time. Since Yitzchak marries at age 40, Rivka becomes three at her nuptials.

    Please do not misunderstand: there are no hard feelings against Rashi. I believe there are many ways to look at things and Rashi does not always have to be the bottom line. There is a reason why we have other commentaries and approaches which are considered valid, and we cannot continue to be satisfied with only one approach. Especially if that approach, at its core, really bothers us. And if it doesn’t bother us, it should either bother us, or we really do not understand it.

    We ignore the fact that years can pass between verses. For example, in one pasuk Avraham is 86 as Yishmael is born (16:16), and in the very next pasuk (17:1), Avraham is 99 and about to circumcise himself. That’s a 13 year jump, and no one questions the validity of the change in years. So why do we accept that there wasn’t a gap between the Akeidah and Sara’s death? Ibn Ezra, for example, believes Yitzchak was 13 at the time of his binding. This would make Sara 103 at that time, a good 24 years before her death.

    Where were we? Rivka’s age at her wedding.

    The Talmud (Yevamot 61b) mentions Rivka’s marriageable status, and Tosafot quote a Sifrei (Devarim 397:7) that indicates Rivka was 14 at the time of her marriage. The Midrash puts Rivka in the category of pairs of people that lived to the same age, and she is partnered with Kehat, who lived to be 133. Working backwards, the conclusion is that Rivka was 14 on her wedding day and 34 when she gave birth to her twin sons.

    While in our times we do not approve of girls marrying at age 14, we know it was once a reality. We are certainly aware that 14-year-olds in our society (hopefully not in our community) do things of a marital nature –– including having babies –– even if they are not emotionally mature enough to understand or foresee the outcome of their decisions.

    On the other hand, some 14-year-olds may look and act like very mature adults.

    I have yet to meet a three-year-old who fits into this category, and I never want to meet a three-year-old who fits into this category. To think that Rivka is three years old and understands the idea of offering water to camels, can physically shlep water back and forth tens of times to feed 10 camels, is given respect to make her own decision whether she’ll go with Avraham’s servant, is viewed as a marriageable prospect, and is appreciated by Yitzchak, as his wife, to fill the void in his life left by his mother’s passing is, unequivocally, untenable to my line of thinking.

    Put her at age 14, however, and it makes a whole lot of sense.

    So why are we so fascinated with age three? Why do we also accept blindly that Avraham was three when he discovered G-d? These midrashim are fascinating and very deep and I would not presume to say I understand them, nor would I suggest taking them solely at face value.

    Perhaps they are meant to teach us at what age our children ought to be when we begin teaching and inculcating in them important knowledge and lessons about life and the religion to which we commit ourselves.

    Or perhaps we want to be inspired by the sophistication of our Avot and Imahot even at such a young age. I, for one, am happy to be inspired by a 14-year-old, as I prefer for the three-year-olds to remain just as they are: cute kids.


    Listen to the VINnews podcast on:

    iTunes | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Stitcher | Podbean | Amazon

    Follow VINnews for Breaking News Updates


    Connect with VINnews

    Join our WhatsApp group


    227 Comments
    Most Voted
    Newest Oldest
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    Didn’t Yitzchak not have children for 20 yrs? That makes Rivkah 23 yrs old when she gave birth.

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    I do notknow who the author of this article is but it is good that he rmains nameless I think he should read the Raban’s hakdomah to sefer Beraishis and what he writes there about the pirush of Rash’i. We know that Rashis based on chazal says that Rivkah was three years old who are you with your small mind (or no mind at all) coming to say that it makes more sence that she was 14. You are speaking about kedoishei elyon and in my opinion your thoughts border on pure apikorois.

    tipshus
    tipshus
    15 years ago

    Just because YOU do not UNDESTAND things does not mean that its not to be taken at face value!!!.
    If Rashi can SO CAN WE.
    If YOU do not understand it ad it to your list of unanswered kashis

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    so sarah imeini died because the satan told her about the akeides yitzchok so the malach told it to her 23 years later and she got shocked!!!????

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    #2

    Please define the word “apikorois”?

    WolfishMusings
    WolfishMusings
    15 years ago

    Anon,

    How about specifically pointing out the issue with facts rather than name calling? In other words, if you feel that the article writer is wrong, how about clearly and calmly stating why. Perhaps quote the Raban (did you mean the Ramban?) so that we can all know what it says.

    The Wolf

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    This is what happens when one learn Torah without remembering and internalizing that There Is A Nosen HaTorah.
    Rabbi Billet, before one opens up a sefer and learns, especially before one writes a “commentary”, remember we are mere mortals, dust, insignificant etc.
    In Chassidic terms this is called “bittul”.
    Then remember that the Rishonim including Rashi had Ruach HaKodesh.
    So if there is something that our minds does not comprehend, realize that the deficiency is with US.
    We can definitely discuss the different Meforshei HaTorah,
    just without offering our own preferences.
    Please Rabbi Billet learn some Chassidus, eg. Tanya Maamorim and you will see
    the Torah in a whole new light.

    Big Masmid
    Big Masmid
    15 years ago

    what happening here? why get excited if some one was able to persuade the editor of VIN to post THEIR views, agree with them or not, why jump at them.

    Perhaps VIN should have a separate Torah section to benefit the public.
    I am not about to comment because I did not bother reading it, sorry.

    Oy Vey!
    Oy Vey!
    15 years ago

    pretty much that “Rashi has his opinion and i have mine”
    were is the respect for our Rishonim Achronim etc.
    this is obviously a product of secularism (3 is too young, 14 makes more sense)
    mishugas!

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    Vos Iz Neias, you’ve really crossed the line now. I stopped reading this “article” as soon as I saw the disrespectful way he wrote about Rashi and the Torah. You really, really need to make teshuva on this one. For repeating information aimed at speaking against a tzaddik and trying to cause thousands of Yidden to question their Torah education. Shame on you!!!

    yitzy
    yitzy
    15 years ago

    to anonymous # 2 – does this mean that you consider Tosafos, who claim that she was 14 based on other midrashim – apikorsim?

    rescue
    rescue
    15 years ago

    To # 2,
    did you even bother reading the article. He quotes tosfos that quotes the Sifei that put Rivkah at 14 and always back into 14 with the another source tying her to Kehas. Maybe your question should be, how could Rashi disagree with the Sifrei? Or the question is, how could Tosfos disagree with Rashi and quote a differing opinion. Just because your morah taught you in kindergarten the Rivkah was 3, it doens’t necessarily make it so. The only thing apparent is, that you don’t appear to have improved in your learning beyond the kindergarten level, if you don’t understand that there could be other opinions. Would you also say that tosfos is right when he says that you can be koneh an elephant by making it jump? ELEPHANTS CANNOT JUMP, it is a fact.

    MOSHE
    MOSHE
    15 years ago

    Putting Rivka at 14 based on other Midrashim is not a problem, but trying to get her older then 3 because it doesent fit with todays world is wrong.

    merkin
    merkin
    15 years ago

    Why do you jump to call R. Billet an apikorus? Ibn Ezra also gives a different age for Rivkah Is Ibn Ezra an apikorus? You are much too fast to point fingers and call people names for not being “religious” enough. I think in our community many of us have turned off our brains and in place of thinking we just shout slogans at each other mostly to accuse others of not being frum enough. Or maybe our minds were never turned on to begin with. It is a real shame. A tragedy of our dor.

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    The basis of ANY logical and intellectual pursuit of a text, especially under the caliber of an outstanding , methodical, genius such as Rashi is only approached by accepting first the premises that –

    that Rashi has a logical solid basis for his opinion even if there are other opinions who disagree and even though your pea brain may not yet get it –

    if you dont go with that approach, you probably miss the boat on many other issues as well.

    WolfishMusings
    WolfishMusings
    15 years ago

    Rescue,

    Oh no! Please don’t bring up the jumping elephants… 🙂

    The Wolf

    AuthenticSatmar
    AuthenticSatmar
    15 years ago

    I don’t have a problem with “Rabbi” Billet bringing sources to quote that she was 14. I am concerned with his idea that Rashi must be mistaken that she was 3, because it makes no sense.
    The torah is not about what we understand. Does Rabbi Billett understand how a father sells his daughter as a slave and then she’s forced to marry her owner or his son?
    The Torah is eternal, and it would be more appropriate to leave it un-understandable then to try to make sense of it.
    To his credit, I assume that he is in a similar predicament to the Rambam’s Moreh Nevuchim. There the rambam writes very contreversial statements, which are explained that he only wrote them to alleviate the questioning folk attempting to “modernize” the torah, but not necessarily accurate. For example, the Rambam writes there that the reason for karbonos was because G-D was jealous of the other G-D’s whose followers were offered sacrifices. Its obvious that G-D isn’t jealous, but nonetheless the Rambam wrote it to ease the minds of the people of those times.
    Rabbi Billett serves a community that is liberal and attempts to align Torah values with modern values, hence his need to explain it the way he did. It also helps that he has a mekor for it.
    Let’s refrain from calling him names.

    simple jew
    simple jew
    15 years ago

    This is not “borderline” apikursos this IS apikursos! This is what happens when small minds get all full of themselves in this day and age and chas v’shalom think they can challenge Rashi with their own reasoning as if Rashi was just one opinion and theirs is another. Shame on you VIN for reprinting such an article (even if it is not your view).

    R' Billet's Cousin
    R' Billet's Cousin
    15 years ago

    Rabbi Billet is an extremely intelligent, learned individual. He brings valid sources for his claim, and I am happy to have that clarified rather than swept under the rug with a simplistic “she was more mature.”

    Charlie Hall
    Charlie Hall
    15 years ago

    This may be a just matter of different manuscripts of the Seder Olam having a different age. The manuscripts that were available to Rashi said Rivkah was 3 years old. However, manuscripts from the Middle East, where Seder Olam was written, say she was 14, which is more consistent with Sifrei and also with a baraita in Talmud Bavli Yevamot 61b which says she was a “naarah” which clearly means age 12 from the discussion there. How can we simply dismiss these other opinions, which seem to be the majority? I wish the rabbi had brought forth these sources that support his point.

    Source: *Seder Olam: The Rabbinic View of Biblical Chronology*. Translated and with commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Aronson Press, 1998. ( I’ve been told this is now out of print; I hope that is incorrect.)

    Charlie Hall
    Charlie Hall
    15 years ago

    Clarification: by the sources I meant the middle eastern texts of Seder Olam.

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    I have no problem with someone prefering one commentery over another because of shaleh he has as long as he understands the the other commentary knew exactly what’s bothering you and non-the-less still felt his approach was the correct one. However when the sheilah is so obvious as this and you are inclined to disagree just because you dont understand how someone can marry at age of three and look down at it as if Yitzchak was an abuser, then yes you ARE an apikores. An Apikores means one who laughs at what Chachamim tell us. You might as well believe that Moshe was on Hashish when he thought he accepted the Torah from G-D and that it’s impossible that Adam Harishon was as tall as from planet earth to the sky and as long as from one end of the world to another when lying down. You may not be a Reform Jew but what’s bothering you is exactly what was bothering them, they wanted to update the Bible so they can explain it to a gentile without having him say, “What”.

    You can ask why Rashi went along with this approach and not with the one of the Gemara and as you very well bring out relevent arguments why the other approach is more probable, and therefor go along with the other approach as long as you understand that Rashi most like new all these questions you had and you dont fully understand what his real approach is, it’s called being humble. However, when you start asking questions that say that what Rashi is saying is against common sense or even more that kids are meant to be cute, that’s apikorses. You’re laughing at Rashi rather then asking a valid question based on the laws of how to learn torah, and one of them is not to ask how is it possible.

    You’d better be off trying to explain rashi in a veru different light. Not so long ago it was very common practice to engage children very soon after they were born. Nows of course there was no validity to it because the boy can always reject the engagement, but it was symbolic. In this case it would be valid, because the groom was an adult but it was more symbolic, because it is pretty obvious that she was still a baby. she was still being nursed. That is just one example how to do it with respect, I just put a different light to Rahi’s approach without just saying that I disagree with Rashi because Rash believes kids ar not meant to be cute and play at home. That is apikorses!

    gerrorist
    gerrorist
    15 years ago

    Very interesting, and thoughtful!

    AchdusHashem
    AchdusHashem
    15 years ago

    Everyone please calm down, before this issue gets out of hand and accusations start flying all over the place.

    Let us get one thing straight. When dealing with “Midrahshie Chazal”, any statement that seems out of the ordinary “seder haolam” needs to be carefully analyzed and in most cases the true intention is not the literal translation but some hidden meaning that Chazal conveyed in this manner.

    This is established by the Rishonim such as the Rashba Z”L and R` Avrohom ben Harambam Z”L found in the introduction to “Ein Yaakov

    Following is a link to an English translation of the latter.

    http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ein_Yaakov/Introduction

    This an important topic that should be studied by every individual who either has difficulty with comprehending Midrashei Chazal or, on the other hand, often finds himself accusing others as being Apikorsim

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    The problem isn’t disagreeing with Rashi – the problem is the language and tone used in disagreeing with Rashi.

    puzzled
    puzzled
    15 years ago

    To # 22 and others,
    Are you saying that rashi is wrong? dont we know that Rashi and all other rishonim wrote with Ruach Hakodesh?
    what is next? that the gemara is wrong?

    Yachtzel
    Yachtzel
    15 years ago

    “Why do we also accept blindly that Avraham was three when he discovered G-d?”

    “Rabbi” Billet, did you ever wonder why the (mature?) Yidden accepted the Torah “blindly” & said Naaseh V’nishma before they knew what the Torah says? Or would you not take this Midrash at face value either?

    Milton
    Milton
    15 years ago

    You obviously have no hakaras hatov for what RASHI has given us

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    I thought Rivka was betrothed (errusin) when she was 3 went back with Yitzchok and Elierzer then finaly had kedushin when she was 14

    rescue
    rescue
    15 years ago

    I am sure others can bring proof, but could it e possible the Rashi never wrote that she was 3 but rather wrote shlosh-esreh and there was a printing mistake. There are other places in shas where this has been proven (I don’t know where off hand) that something was written and the printers either made a mistake or truncated the original to the point where the written words are wrong. Hence we have hagahos habach, hagahos hagra, the frankel rambem, the oz v’hadar print that brings all diferent nuschaos. To say that it makes no sense to me that Rivkah was 3 but what do I know because the Rishonim wrote it, it must be so, is not derech hatorah. I can’t say Rashi is wrong, but I can say it doesn’t make sense to me and prove from elsewhere that my “disagreement” is correct. Yisikheit does not beleive in infalibility, (wich is the current definition of daas torah, see JO article written for the passing of R’ Chaim Ozer Grodzensky for proof) to say a kadmon was never wrong is cathalosism, and I don’t belong to that religion.

    Big Mike
    Big Mike
    15 years ago

    Here we have a learned man, Rabbi Billet, who is studying Chazal and Torah and he has a thought about something that is hard to understand, and instead of praise for learning and being Oisek in Torah, the people on this blog hurl invectives at him and call him names. Where have we gone wrong, rabbosai? There is a world of Jews out there, 95% never heard of Rashi and 99% never learned a blatt gemorah. A fellow Jew comes along and offers an opinion and you jump down his throat like he is a Cossak. We are in galus gentleman for one reason and one reason only: Sinas Chinum. And it is apparent right here on this blog. I say Kudos to Rabbi Billet for learning Torah and thinking into Torah and writing about Torah. Talmud Torah k’negged coolam rabbosai, and we should not be attacking our scholars even if we have a different opinion.

    baruch
    baruch
    15 years ago

    Excepting a determination of whether or not Rabbi Billet’s approach is apikorsus this entire matter is less than a tempest in a teapot, i.e., a non-issue. Why? Simply stated, the m’forshim cite that while Rivkah imeinu was three when she was wedded to Yitzchak avinu they did not begin to cohabit until after she became a na’arah.

    anon
    anon
    15 years ago

    Vayikra Rabba 20:2 talks about Yitzchak returning and telling his mother, in graphic detail, every component of the Akeidah story. While it says she died from the news, it doesn’t mention any passage of time (or lack thereof). Is Yitzchak the Satan?

    Read the article. Read the sources. You’ll see that the comments about Rashi are that he is not the ONLY opinion. And that to say one midrash’s numbers are unequivocally correct over a different midrash is wrong. Midrashim conflict with each other. Or did you not know that?

    Any “disrespect” is aimed at challenging the reader (not Rashi) to open your eyes and look beyond the bottom of your second grade chumash. There’s a whole world of Torah and learning out there. Don’t approach any of it with blinders on. You’re likely to be blindsided.

    And the lashon hora is inexcusable.

    As is your use of the internet. Rashi surely would not have approved of the internet.

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    Just a quich thought according to Rabbi Billet most of Mesectes Kedushen makes no sense. The Talmud writes many times over that a father is allowed to marry off his CHILD daughter without her concent as long as she is a child which I think is about the age of 12. The gemara brings some stories as well. According to Rabbi Billet this makes no sense and is unfair and discrimination of genders. Rabbi Billet, Rabbi Mier Kahane would put you into your place. It would be worth it to look up a debate he had with Allen Durshewits.

    Puzzed
    Puzzed
    15 years ago

    The Ramban said he didn’t believe a certain medrash.

    So, if I had a view on that point, would I be an apikorus for rejecting the medrash, or an apikorus for disagreeing with the Ramban?

    Just need to know for my peace of mind.

    TB-MR
    TB-MR
    15 years ago

    As a general rule Rashi is mefaresh Peshuto Shel Mikru. That is, in the case where there is no apparent and obvious problem with the organization context and in this case time line that would derive from the basic interpretation of a posuk, Rashi will adapt the basic peshat. Rashi did not have an obvious issue with accepting that Rivka was 3 years old at her wedding, therefore Rashi accepted the time line offered by Seder Olam as Peshuto Shel Mikru – indicating that the Akeidah, birth of Rivka and death of Sarah happened at the time. Had Rashi felt that putting Rivka’s age at her wedding at 3 years old was not rational, Rashi would have adapted the approach alluded to in Sifrei, although that would have not been in line with his preference for “Pushet Pshat”. Of course anyone who feels uncomfortable with Rivka being 3 at her wedding, could offer a different time line, as long as he accepts that it will not be the best fitting approach in the pesukim. (As far as the social issue is concerned, we should remember that the circumstances in every generation change, what was “normal and accepted 100 years ago as prime marriageable age is considered crazy today. Trying to figure the norms in Rashi’s days and the days of the Avos is somewhat of a stretch)

    eitza geber
    eitza geber
    15 years ago

    Even in the generation prior to WWII it was not uncommon to “be m’shadech” young children. The Satmarer Rebbe zt”l was something like 6 years old when he was engaged. Even babies were engaged occasionally. Rashi himself in parshas Toldos says that Yitzchok had to wait 10 years till he was able to consummate the marriage

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    ITS A CHILLEL HASHEM EVEN TO POST SUCH A ARTICALE

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    My goodness, so many angry Jews!

    Why are there so many people willing to take the time to attack the writer (BTW, #2 , clearly identified!)and so few that aren’t afraid to even identify themselves? Could it be that deep down, inside, they know they’re just being silly and venting their suppressed anger here? Certainly it is valid to prefer one opinion when the rishonim offer several…

    Yossi Ginzberg

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    I once heard R’ Shalom Shvadron tell a story. He had an uncle that told him, “When Chazal say that when Moshiach comes ‘gluskaos’ (cakes, bulkelach) will grow from trees, it does not mean literally. Only that the great Shefa Tov that will be in the world at that time will make it seem like that.” R” Shalom responded, Apikorus! The uncle then said, “But it’s a Rambam!” and he quoted the Rambam where he says just that. R’ Shalom responded, “Du bist noch altz an apikorus”. But the uncle asked, “Ay, the Rambam?” R’ SHalom’s response, which fits here as well, was “The Rambam has no shailos in believing Chazal. If Chazal say that bulkelach will grow, then bulkelach will grow. As it happens, The Rambam DArshans a possuk that it means something slightly different. But you, who have never seen bulkelach growing on trees and can’t imagine it happening, and therefore you look for alternative pshatim that fit your small mind a little better, you are an apikorus!”

    According to R’ Shalom, to quote the author above, the concept of Rivka getting married at 3 is “unequivocally, untenable to my line of thinking.” he is not arguing on Rashi because of the Sifri, but because it conflicts with his weltanschaaung (or however that is spelled). That is apikorusus.
    (The full vort can be found in Lev Shalom on pasrshas Vayechi, on the topic of Yaakov Avinu lo mes)

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    So what this author is saying is that Rashi is an idiot since he thinks that she was 3, which is clearly too young to get married OR that Rashi himself understood that 3 year olds are too young to get married, but since chazal said so, he will write their pshat, even though Rashi knew its bunk.

    Hmmmm, why dont we just assume like everyone else who learns that pshat that 3 year olds WERE more mature then than they are now

    rescue
    rescue
    15 years ago

    As I re-read the article, it just hit me what a lousy job yeshivas must be doing in educating us in reading comprehension. Rabbi Billet says: “Please do not misunderstand: there are no hard feelings against Rashi. I believe there are many ways to look at things and Rashi does not always have to be the bottom line. There is a reason why we have other commentaries and approaches which are considered valid, and we cannot continue to be satisfied with only one approach….”
    NOWHERE does Rabbi Billet say Rashi is wrong, the most he says is that he likes other pshatim better. Is everyone here ready to tell me that you never preferred on pshat in the gemarah over another? I do not see how anybody can read into the dvar Torah (discounting lousy reading comprehension) as there being any attack on Rashi. Rabbi Billet didn’t like Rashi’s explanation so, he found others he did. It is no difference than not liking Rashba’s expalnation and saying you like Ritvah’s better. Just because Rabbi Billet doesn’t agree to the pshat your morah told you, does not mean he is wrong.

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    shame on you how dare you speak like this about rashi which was writteb in ruach hakodesh do you think your on the same level as hin or bring him dowm like just another commentary I’m shaking while reading this article …you are to fly to rashi’s kever with a minyan and ask mechila.

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    My dear Mr. Rescue. I suggest that YOU reread the srticle. He says that Rashi’s pshat is “unequivocally, untenable to my line of thinking.” THAT is what everyone is complaining about. Not the machlokes rishonim.

    sd
    sd
    15 years ago

    There’s nothing wrong with asking questions on Rashi or in disagreeing with him, especially when you’ve got other Chazals to back you up. The problem is HOW you do it. This particular article is dripping with gayva and imaturity.

    Rabbi Avi Billet
    Rabbi Avi Billet
    15 years ago

    Rather then just attacking the auther, contact him at avbillet gmail.com and tell him what your issues are.

    Ahavas  Briyos
    Ahavas Briyos
    15 years ago

    The hateful remarks and name-calling by those posters here is disgraceful.Only non-Torah people express themselves that way. Besides, these people write in such an immature way and with such bad grammar and spelling,which shows how unintelligent they are. Rashi is kodosh,no doubt.However,he is not T H E Torah.He is peirush and one must understand what he is hinting at. There can be other ways of understanding this as other meforshim do.Have some respect for another Jew .Have respect for a person who just might know a little more than you,just as you want the writer to respect Rashi,which he does.

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    81 Today at 12:46 PM
    Anonymous Says: Reply to #53
    WolfishMusings Says:
    “ I wasn&#8 217;t aware that believing in the &#8 220;divinity&#8 221; of Rashi&#8 217;s writings was one of the ikkarei emunah.

    The Wolf ”

    I guess you don&#8 217;t say the Ani Maamins. So let me write it for you. Ani Maamin #8 &#8 220;I believe with perfect faith that the entire Torah that we now have is that which was given to Moses&#8 221;. What Rashi wrote is toras emes and if you don&#8 217;t believe your an apikores according to the Rambam.

    This is brilliant satire.

    Mr Anonymous, see if you can find the gap in your &#8 220;logic&#8 221;

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    95 Today at 01:24 PM
    Anonymous Says:

    “Yes, even Toras Habaal Shem is Toras emes and if you dont believe that your an apikores according to the Rambam. In regards to you adding to the Torah, if you mechadesh a Torah or say a pshat in a gemora and you do it lshem shomayim than according to the Rambam it is part of Toras Moshe that was given on Har Sinai.”

    Nonsense.This is the OPPOSITE of what the Rambam says.

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    15 years ago

    Rashi is very hard to understand in this weeks Parsha. Sara was bas 20 kbas 7 in beauty.