ה֤וּא עֶזְרָא֙ עָלָ֣ה מִבָּבֶ֔ל וְהֽוּא־סֹפֵ֤ר מָהִיר֙ בְּתוֹרַ֣ת מֹשֶׁ֔ה אֲשֶׁר־נָתַ֥ן יְהוָ֖ה אֱלֹהֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וַיִּתֶּן־ל֣וֹ הַמֶּ֗לֶךְ כְּיַד־יְהוָ֤ה אֱלֹהָיו֙ עָלָ֔יו כֹּ֖ל בַּקָּשָׁתֽוֹ׃ (פ)
Ezra inilah yang pergi dari Babel. Ia seorang ahli kitab yang mahir dalam Taurat Musa, yang telah diberikan oleh Yang Mahakekal, Allah Israel. Raja mengabulkan segala permintaannya, karena tangan Yang Mahakekal, Allahnya, menyertai dia.
Haamek Sheilah
BY RESOLVING THE APPARENT CONFLICT IN RAVA’S STATEMENTS, WE UNDERSTAND HOW THE MISAPPLICATION OF PILPUL CONTRIBUTES TO THE WORLD’S DESTRUCTION
Translator’s note: Here the Netziv asserts that pilpul is an elixir of life, a method of Torah study that God directed the Jewish nation to employ in order to guarantee its survival in the various exiles. However, if this precious tool of pilpul is misapplied, it becomes an elixir of death. The Netziv’s proofs depend on the meaning of three words ─ hukim, mishpatim and la’asos. The word hukim is generally interpreted as counter-intuitive laws,1E.g., the eating of pork and not wearing garments composed of wool and linen. whereas the word mishpatim refers to the laws that have a discernible rationale,2See Tractate Yoma 67b, as quoted by Rashi to Lev. 18:4. or laws that regulate conduct between persons – e.g., torts, contracts, etc.3See Tractate Bava Kamma 87. The word la’asos is usually translated as either to make or to perform. Both here, and in many places in his commentary on the Torah,4See the Netziv’s Introduction to Ha’amek Davar, and what he writes in Ha’amek Davar and Harhev Davar on Lev. 18:5, Ex. 24:3, 4, and Deut. 6:1. the Netziv argues that the translations of these terms vary according to context. With regard to the word hukim, he concludes that it may also mean analysis or analytical rules, such as the thirteen hermeneutical principles of R. Yishmael. Similarly, the word mishpatim can also mean practical laws, or, alternatively, the application of analysis, namely, the methodology as to how to apply hukim so that it results in the derivation of practical laws,5See Ha’amek Davar on Ex. 15:23. such as the ones in the Shulhan Aruch.
The word la’asos and its various conjugations may be translated as ‘to perform’ or ‘to create,’ depending on the context. The Netziv asserts that if la’asos is translated in various statements as “create” or “enhance,”6See the Netziv in his Introduction to Ha’amek Davar, os 8, arguing that the word la’asos, depending on the context, may be translated as “to make,” “to enhance” or “to arrange” something that already exists. the difficulties discussed in chapter 6 pertaining to the interpretation of various Talmudic statements and the contradictions between the various statements of Rava are resolved by limiting the word to the application of analysis and pilpul to generate new laws.
WE EXPLAINED in Part 1, chapters 7 and 8, that with the destruction [of the Temples] and the beginning of the exile, Isaiah [at the end of the First Temple period], and afterwards, the Men of the Great Assembly [led by Ezra during the Second Temple period], resolved to enhance the Torah and [use of] pilpul among Israel. This was the message of Malachi: [“Be mindful of the teaching of My servant Moshe, whom I charged at Horeb with hukim, laws, and mishpatim, rules, for Israel”].7Mal. 3:22. Malachi, [who is actually] Ezra,8Ezra understood that the purpose of the Jews returning to Israel and rebuilding the Temple was to prepare the Jewish nation for the approaching lengthy exile. See Ha’amek Davar on Deut. 32:36. as stated in Tractate Megillah 15a,9In Tractate Megillah there is a disagreement between the sages who were of the opinion that Malachi and Ezra were two separate prophets, and R. Yehoshua ben Korhah, who stated that they were the same person. The Talmud concludes in accordance with R. Yehoshua. [is referred to as] a sofer, “enumerator,” of the Torah of Moshe,10See Ezra 7:6, “Ezra came up from Babylon, a sofer [scribe] expert in the Torah of Moshe.” See Targum, Ibn Ezra and Gersonides that sofer in this context means that Ezra enumerated and explained the details and sources of the laws contained within the Torah. for he counted the letters of the Torah and applied exegesis to them. It is written in Ezra 7:11 that “He counted11The present tense in Hebrew is a participle and serves both as a verb and noun, therefore, sofer may also be translated as “enumerates.” the words of the commandments of God and his12In the next paragraph the Netziv, will define the phrase “his statutes” as referring to Ezra, not God. statutes that [were commanded] to Israel.” Had the text stated, “He counted God’s commandments,” I would say that Ezra had counted the commandments, [which is in itself] a great wisdom, [as explained in Part 2]. However, the language used is, “He counted the words of the commandments,” implying that he counted the details of each and every mitzvah.
Translator’s note: Here the Netziv asserts that pilpul is an elixir of life, a method of Torah study that God directed the Jewish nation to employ in order to guarantee its survival in the various exiles. However, if this precious tool of pilpul is misapplied, it becomes an elixir of death. The Netziv’s proofs depend on the meaning of three words ─ hukim, mishpatim and la’asos. The word hukim is generally interpreted as counter-intuitive laws,1E.g., the eating of pork and not wearing garments composed of wool and linen. whereas the word mishpatim refers to the laws that have a discernible rationale,2See Tractate Yoma 67b, as quoted by Rashi to Lev. 18:4. or laws that regulate conduct between persons – e.g., torts, contracts, etc.3See Tractate Bava Kamma 87. The word la’asos is usually translated as either to make or to perform. Both here, and in many places in his commentary on the Torah,4See the Netziv’s Introduction to Ha’amek Davar, and what he writes in Ha’amek Davar and Harhev Davar on Lev. 18:5, Ex. 24:3, 4, and Deut. 6:1. the Netziv argues that the translations of these terms vary according to context. With regard to the word hukim, he concludes that it may also mean analysis or analytical rules, such as the thirteen hermeneutical principles of R. Yishmael. Similarly, the word mishpatim can also mean practical laws, or, alternatively, the application of analysis, namely, the methodology as to how to apply hukim so that it results in the derivation of practical laws,5See Ha’amek Davar on Ex. 15:23. such as the ones in the Shulhan Aruch.
The word la’asos and its various conjugations may be translated as ‘to perform’ or ‘to create,’ depending on the context. The Netziv asserts that if la’asos is translated in various statements as “create” or “enhance,”6See the Netziv in his Introduction to Ha’amek Davar, os 8, arguing that the word la’asos, depending on the context, may be translated as “to make,” “to enhance” or “to arrange” something that already exists. the difficulties discussed in chapter 6 pertaining to the interpretation of various Talmudic statements and the contradictions between the various statements of Rava are resolved by limiting the word to the application of analysis and pilpul to generate new laws.
WE EXPLAINED in Part 1, chapters 7 and 8, that with the destruction [of the Temples] and the beginning of the exile, Isaiah [at the end of the First Temple period], and afterwards, the Men of the Great Assembly [led by Ezra during the Second Temple period], resolved to enhance the Torah and [use of] pilpul among Israel. This was the message of Malachi: [“Be mindful of the teaching of My servant Moshe, whom I charged at Horeb with hukim, laws, and mishpatim, rules, for Israel”].7Mal. 3:22. Malachi, [who is actually] Ezra,8Ezra understood that the purpose of the Jews returning to Israel and rebuilding the Temple was to prepare the Jewish nation for the approaching lengthy exile. See Ha’amek Davar on Deut. 32:36. as stated in Tractate Megillah 15a,9In Tractate Megillah there is a disagreement between the sages who were of the opinion that Malachi and Ezra were two separate prophets, and R. Yehoshua ben Korhah, who stated that they were the same person. The Talmud concludes in accordance with R. Yehoshua. [is referred to as] a sofer, “enumerator,” of the Torah of Moshe,10See Ezra 7:6, “Ezra came up from Babylon, a sofer [scribe] expert in the Torah of Moshe.” See Targum, Ibn Ezra and Gersonides that sofer in this context means that Ezra enumerated and explained the details and sources of the laws contained within the Torah. for he counted the letters of the Torah and applied exegesis to them. It is written in Ezra 7:11 that “He counted11The present tense in Hebrew is a participle and serves both as a verb and noun, therefore, sofer may also be translated as “enumerates.” the words of the commandments of God and his12In the next paragraph the Netziv, will define the phrase “his statutes” as referring to Ezra, not God. statutes that [were commanded] to Israel.” Had the text stated, “He counted God’s commandments,” I would say that Ezra had counted the commandments, [which is in itself] a great wisdom, [as explained in Part 2]. However, the language used is, “He counted the words of the commandments,” implying that he counted the details of each and every mitzvah.
Kitzur Ba'al HaTurim
והבאים and the following 2 cases in Tanakh in this case: And to say you, "who did come with Zerubbaḇel" (Neh 7:7). To say as in here "came naturally" (Gen. 6:20 יָבֹ֥אוּ אֵלֶ֖יךָ) so in that case likewise "ascended towards" and to draw into what? It was said that "Ezra went up."(Ezra 7:6)