Comentario citado sobre Deuteronómio 28:4

והותרך ה׳ לטובה בפרי בטנך, "And G'd will give you bountiful goodness, in the fruit of your womb, etc." Although the Torah had already mentioned earlier "the fruit of your womb will be blessed," there is a difference. At that time (verse 4) the promise was in return for studying Torah. Here the promise is a reward for observing the commandments. This is why the Torah had to detail it as one reward cannot be deduced from another reward. The Torah emphasises והותרך השם לטובה, "He will grant you additional goodness," and did not say פרי בטנך, "the fruit of your womb," because this promise is specifically designed to compensate you for observance of the negative commandments. The Torah means that in view of the fact that if one does not violate G'd's commandments one does not create negative, destructive forces in the universe, it follows that one's children will not be afflicted by these negative phenomena which are caused by one's own sins. Compare what I have written on the subject in connection with ראובן בכרי אתה, in Genesis 49,3.

עץ פרי, the verb תדשא also includes the command to the earth to produce fruit-bearing trees. The meaning of the expression עושה פרי is that when this tree emerges from the bowels of the earth it is not to be masculine [like certain strains of palms, Ed.] but is to directly produce fruit, much as a woman produces children. The trunk does not need to be fertilised by a feminine counterpart. The tree therefore bears a name which includes its masculine and feminine components. Similarly, what the tree produces is known as פרי. As for the Torah sometimes speaking of פרי אדמתך, “the fruit of your soil,” (Deut. 28,4) when we would have expected פרי עציך, “the fruit of your trees,” this formulation is justified seeing that it is only the fruit which is edible and not the trunk, i.e. the tree itself. Therefore the word פרי appears in a construct form, belonging to אדמתך, i.e. the source which also brought forth the tree itself. We find a similar construction in Hoseah 8,7 צמח בלי יעשה קמח, “a plant yielding no flour. Perhaps the best known such construction is להוציא לחם מן הארץ, (Psalms 104,14) or, as we say in our daily benediction before eating bread: המוציא לחם מן הארץ, “Who brings forth bread from the earth.” Bread does not come forth from the earth but is baked by man; nonetheless its origin is in the stalks growing out of the earth.
It is possible, on the other hand, to understand in the term עץ not only the trunk, but the foliage, seeing the leaves and the peel also grow and act as protective covers, shields [שומרים in halachic parlance, Ed.] Even though these leaves do not serve as food for human beings, they do serve as food for the birds. For these various reasons the expression עץ פרי as opposed to פרי העץ can be justified, i.e. even the parts of the tree which are not, strictly speaking, its fruit, may be described as if they were. There is a popular saying quoted in Chulin 92,יבעון איתכליא רחמי על עליא דאלמלי עליא לא מתקיימין איתכליא, “let the grapes pray for the leaves for without the leaves the grapes would not exist.” [a parable comparing the scholars to the ignorant people, reminding the former that but for the latter there would be no point to their own existence. Ed.] As to the fact that the leaves are also part of the trees, the same applies to trees that do not bear fruit. If it were not so, the Torah would have made separate mention of that category of tree when reporting what had been created on the third day.
Consider the fact that David listed the sequence of what G’d had created during these 6 days in Psalm 104. When he referred to the birds in verse 12, mentioning that they sing in the foliage of the trees, he went on in verse 16 to mention the cedars of Lebanon as the place where some of these birds make their nests. These cedars are not fruit-bearing trees, but are referred to as trees which G’d planted. In other words, the non fruit-bearing trees are singled out by David as having been made by G’d for the benefit of the birds. (compare author’s commentary on that Psalm in detail) Moreover, each of those trees is also useful for man who makes all kinds of tools and furnishings out of these non fruit-bearing trees.

Our Sages said: “Why are they called עשתרות, etc. Our Sages do not disagree with Menachem’s explanation, for they also hold that עשתרות expresses strength. Otherwise, our Sages will be contradicting themselves. For in Parshas Ki Savo (below 28:4), regarding עשתרות צאנך Rashi explains: “As Onkelos translates. And our Sages said, ‘Why are they called עשתרות? Because they enrich their owners and strengthen them, like these עשתרות which are mighty cliffs.’” This indicates that our Sages also hold that עשתרות is an expression of strength, just as Menachem. Rather, they disagree on this point: Menachem explains that עשתרות refers to the [condition of the] flocks, but our Sages explain that it refers to [the condition of] their owners. Re”m explains similarly below (ibid).

like a lamb [and] a bull Heb. ככבש אלוף. Dunash and Judah son of Kudish (Karish) interpreted it as a lamb and a bull, brought to the slaughter. And אלוף is like (Deut. 28:4) “the offspring of your cattle (אלפיך).” Although it was not stated ואלוף, we find similar cases, e.g., (Habukkuk 3:11) “The sun [and] the moon (ירח) stood on high”; (Isaiah 38:14) “Like a crane [and] a swallow (עגור) so I chirp.” And Menahem interpreted ככבש אלוף, a large lamb (see Psalms 58:9, Rashi ad loc.), and Jonathan supports him, since he renders like a choice lamb.