Cytowanie Komentarza do Psalmów 8:5

The wise child, what does he say (Mah hu omer)? The wise child’s question could have been Mah omer; the word hu is unnecessary. The statement could have simply been, “the wise child says...” The expression, then, is both a question and an answer. The Haggadah says “The wise child is saying Mah.” The first three children each phrase their ‘question’ and ‘answer’ with the word, Mah. In each case the word Mah has a different connotation.
For the wise child, the opening statement is, “The wise child says mah!” The word Mah implies fear and love of God, as in “And now O Israel WHAT (Mah) does the Lord demand of you? Only this to fear the Lord your God and to walk only in His paths and to love Him,”⁸⁹Deuteronomy 10:12 and “He who suspends the earth over nothingness (b’li –mah)”⁹⁰Job 26:7 The word MAH is associated with the Sephirah of Chokhmah, wisdom. Because it is among the first of the Sephirot (the Ten Sephirot are divided into two groups: the first three: Keter, Chokhmah, and Binah and then the seven lower Sephirot. Keter is beyond human knowledge, so Chokhmah is the first Sephirah through which we even begin to understanding the unfolding of the divine. It is existence, undifferentiated, the primal dot – the very beginning of existence. It is so unknowable that we call it Mah, what. But it is also divine wisdom. Sephirot are the ten enumerations or emanations in the inner life of God through which we can understand the universe. Each of them is connected with a complex series of symbols and terms so that language, knowledge, and all existence are connected to them. When the wise child asks Mah, he is acknowledging the divine source of all existence. The one who worships God faithfully begins with this word. The statement of the wise child then is both a question and an affirmation. “Mah includes the testimonies and the statutes and the laws which the Lord has commanded you.” We are called on to fulfill the commandments out of love and reverence which is called Mah, what! The wise child says, “Which the Lord commanded YOU,” out of a sense of humility. When we see how beloved the commandments are to him we should teach him all the commandments down to the law of the afikomen, so that the taste and the love of the commandments should remain in his mouth.
The wicked child, on the other hand, mocks and ridicules the commandments. He also says, Mah. But for him the word ‘Mah/What’ implies something small and inconsequential. “He says Mah/what’s (the big deal about this service?” His statement is also not a question but a rhetorical question since he has no interest in observing God’s commandments. He says, “what is this ritual lakhem/to you,” in order to remove himself from the community.
The simple child sees the deep thoughts and analysis of the wise child as well as the sarcasm of the wicked child. Both of them use the word Mah, and so he formulates his question with this word: “Mah/what is this?” What is the meaning of the word Mah? He says, “I don’t understand all the discussion in which you are engaging or why you are debating with one another on this particular night!” To him we answer, “It is with a strong hand…” that is, it is the things that happened on this night that have caused us to worship the Lord with reverence and love.
The word Mah can be used to express a question (as in Mah she’eilatekh, “What is your request?”⁹¹Esther 5:6) or a general statement (as in, Mah tovu ohalekha Yaakov, “How Good are your tents O Jacob”⁹²Psalm 133:1) It can also be used as an expression of surprise (as in Mah ta’arkhu lo, “What form can compare to God!”⁹³Isaiah 40:18 Or Mah enosh ki tizk’renu, “What is man that you should be mindful of him!”⁹⁴Psalm 8:5) The wise child uses the word Mah in the sense of a general statement (Mah tov - how good are these statutes and judgments!); he is asking out of a desire to fulfill the commandments. The wicked uses Mah as an introduction to a rhetorical question (mah ha’avodah – what’s the point of this ritual?) and the simple child asks as a sincere question (mah zot – what exactly is this all about?)

Ad-nai, how (mah): In the Holy Tongue [Hebrew], [the word mah (מה)] applies both to something honored/great and to something lowly/despised. For example: [great,] "How (mah) great are Your works!" (Psalm 92:6); [lowly,] "What (mah) is man that You are mindful of him?" (Psalm 8:5). And in this context (Psalm 3:2), it expresses wonder/astonishment ["How numerous..."]. And Israel [those involved in the rebellion] were divided concerning him [David] into three groups: Some of them were [general] foes (tzarim), such as the men of Benjamin [who harbored resentment from Saul's time, like Shimei ben Gera - cf. (II Samuel 16)]. And some of them were attackers (kamim), namely his [own] son [Absalom], and Amasa [Absalom's commander, David's nephew - cf. (II Samuel 17:25)], and [other] relatives. And there were others saying [expressing the sentiment mentioned in the next verse, v. 3]: that "He has fallen and will not rise again." [Identifying the third group as those who declared David's situation hopeless].

Tanchuma on Chukat 8 comments as follows on the words: “they shall take a red cow to you.” The words “a cow to you,” mean that I, G’d, will reveal the meaning of this legislation to you, but for everyone else it will remain in the realm of a חוקה, a statute, beyond their understanding. This interpretation is based on an illuminating comment by Rav Huna on two verses (Psalms 75,3 and Zecharyah 14,6). In the former verse the psalmist writes: At the time I choose I will give judgment equitably.” [At that time the justice of My ways will become revealed to everyone, seeing G’d did not mean to imply that up until that time His justice had been inequitable. Ed.]. In the other verse the prophet quotes G’d as saying: “in that day there shall be neither sunlight nor cold moonlight, but there shall be a continuous day -only the Lord knows when- of neither day or night, and there shall be light at eventide.” The meaning of the verse is that there will remain matters which while they are not revealed to you in this world will be revealed to you in that future, such as the blind man who gains his sight, of whom Isaiah 42,16 writes: “I will guide the blind by a road they did not know, and I will make them walk by paths they never knew I will turn darkness before them to light.....these are the things which I have done and I will not abandon them.” The crucial word in that verse is the word עשיתים, instead of אעשה אותם, i.e. “I have done them,” instead of “I am going to do them” (as we would have expected). This means (according to Tanchuma) that what is described here as a view of the future G’d has already shown to Rabbi Akiva and his companions (who descended into the Pardess).
A different approach to the same verse: Even matters which have not been revealed to Moses will be revealed to Rabbi Akiva. This is based on Job 28,10: “his eyes behold every precious thing.” These words which describe someone as seeing “every precious thing” refer to Rabbi Akiva. Solomon said in Kohelet 7,23: “All this I tested with wisdom; I thought to myself that I would become wise, but it is beyond me.” The words: “I would become wise,” are a reference to the testimony in Kings I 5,9: “the Lord had given wisdom to Solomon and discernment in great measure....and his wisdom was greater than that of all the Kedemites and all the wisdom of Egypt.” What precisely did the wisdom of the Kedemites consist of? They knew how to interpret zodiac signs, were experts in astrology; they were also familiar with the tiar, a bird (raven?) based on Kohelet 10,20: “for a bird of the sky may carry the sound, and some winged creature may betray the matter.”
Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel used to say that he liked three customs of the Orientals. They do not kiss on the mouth but on the hand; when they cut meat they always employ a knife; when they ask someone’s advice on a matter they invariably do this in the field (where they cannot be overheard). This latter practice is based on Yaakov consulting with his wives in the field on his decision to leave Lavan (compare Genesis 31,4). What did the wisdom of the Egyptians which Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel praised consist of? You will find that when Solomon was about to build the Temple he sent word to Pharaoh Necho asking him to supply him with artisans on loan to help him in the construction. How did Pharaoh answer this request? He consulted his astrologers to determine which of his artisans would not live out the year and he then dispatched these artisans to Solomon. When Solomon saw these people he realized with the aid of Holy Spirit that they were all going to die during that year. He provided each one with a shroud and sent them back to Pharaoh with a note reading: “were you short of shrouds in Egypt? Here I send you your artisans back with a gift of shrouds.” When the Book of Kings wrote that Solomon was wiser than “כל האדם, “any man” (or “Adam,”) what precisely did the unique wisdom of Adam consist of? You will find a discussion in the Midrash that when G’d was about to create Adam He consulted with the ministering angels about His plan saying: “let us make Adam in our image and in our likeness.” The angels countered: “what is so special about Adam that You want to bother with him?” G’d responded that the Adam He intended to create would be wiser than they. How did G’d proceed to prove His point? He assembled all the beasts, the birds, etc., and asked the angels to name them. The angels were unable to do this. After G’d had created Adam, He paraded all the animals in front of him and asked him: “what is the name of this animal, etc.?” Adam replied: “this one is called “lion,” this one is called “giraffe,” this one is called “sheep,“ etc.; etc. This is the meaning of Genesis 2,20: “Adam called the names of all the beasts.”‘ All these names Adam gave the beasts were not merely arbitrary names he chose to call them by, but they reflected the essence of each animal respectively. I have already discussed this in greater detail in my commentary on Genesis 2,19. When G’d asked Adam what his own name was, he answered: “Adam.” He explained that he said this seeing he had been created out of אדמה, raw material taken from the soil. Thereupon G’d asked Adam what His name was. Adam answered that G’d’s name was the tetragram. When G’d wanted to know what had given him this idea, (seeing he had not been told) he answered: for You are the Master of all creatures. We know that Adam was correct from Isaiah 42,8 אני י-ה-ו-ה הוא שמי, “I am the Lord, this is My name.” G’d meant that He adopted (or retained this name) seeing the first human being Adam had bestowed it upon Him. This was a pact between Adam and G’d that G’d would henceforth be known by the name bestowed upon him by His first intelligent creature.
When we read in Kings I 5,11 that Solomon was wiser than Eytan the Ezrachi, whom did Jeremiah (author of that Book) have in mind when he wrote these words? It was a reference to Avraham. Psalm 89 is attributed to Avraham as the word האזרחי, at the beginning of that psalm is a reference to the “East” according to our sages in Baba Batra 15. Heyman is understood to be Moses (ibid). The philological connection is established by the word נאמן in Numbers 12,7 that G’d said of Moses בכל ביתי נאמן הוא, “he is trusted in My entire House.” כלכל, another of the wise men mentioned in the chapter of the Book of Kings extolling Solomon’s wisdom is a reference to Joseph (who “provided” for all of Egypt economically with his wisdom). The Egyptians recognized that the only reason a man whom they considered a slave was able to rule over them was the extreme wisdom of Joseph which enabled him to maintain himself in that position. The Egyptians who had been suspicious of Joseph and his ability brought him seventy different pieces of paper, each in a different language, asking him to explain what was written thereon. Joseph was able to read each in its respective language. Not only that; Joseph also knew Hebrew, a tongue which the Egyptians did not understand. We base this on Psalms 81,6: עדות ביהוסף שמו, i.e. an allusion that Joseph knew something in addition to what anyone else knew. The word דרדע, another person named as very wise in Kings 5,11 is a reference to the generation of Israelites who had experienced the revelation at Mount Sinai in the desert and who had been granted insights exceeding that of any other generation. They were known as the דור דעה, “the generation imbued with knowledge.” The בני מחול who are also listed in the Book of Kings as possessing outstanding wisdom are an allusion to the people of the period of the golden calf whom G’d had forgiven their participation in that sin, hence they were called בני מחול, “people who had been pardoned.”
The Book of Kings there continues in quantifying Solomon’s wisdom by attributing to him no fewer than three thousand parables (proverbs) and over one thousand poems. Concerning this enigmatic statement Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmeni opines that he made a search of the entire Bible and could not come up with more than approximately 800 verses in which Solomon is mentioned as saying anything of significance. We are therefore forced to interpret these numbers mentioned in the Book of Kings not as original sayings recorded in the Bible but as the number of interpretations offered by Solomon on a far smaller number of texts. When Kings I 5,13 speaks about Solomon “speaking about trees,” one such example may be that Solomon examined the phenomenon of a person afflicted with the skin disease tzoraat requiring some of the wood from the tallest tree (cedar) and some of the wood from the most lowly tree (hyssop) to effect his purification. Solomon suggested that the cause of the affliction was that the person so stricken was guilty of arrogance, considering himself superior to his contemporaries. In order to be cured of this psychological defect he had to “lower” himself (even in his own eyes) to the level of the hyssop, the lowest of the trees in order to be fit to rejoin society. The Book of Kings goes on to describe part of Solomon’s wisdom as his ability to speak על הבהמה ועל העוף ועל הרמש ועל הדגים, “on the mammals, the birds, the creeping creatures and the fish.” He defined the reason why mammals, if fit to eat, require the severing of both the gullet and the windpipe, whereas birds require the severing of only one of these organs. He explained that this was related to the raw material these creatures were made of, i.e. the mammals were created from the soil (Genesis 1,24), whereas the birds were created from a mixture of water and soil, i.e. from mud (Genesis 1,20).
When Solomon is reported as speaking about the creeping things, the meaning is that he explained why eight of these species confer ritual impurity on contact with their carcass, etc. He also explained why people who hunt or injure these species on the Sabbath are guilty of a major infraction of the Sabbath legislation, whereas other related creeping creatures are not treated in that way by halachah, i.e. because these eight species are covered by skin (Shabbat 107). Concerning the statement in Kings that Solomon spoke about the fish, he explained why they do not require ritual slaughter in order to make them fit to eat for Israelites, as we know from Numbers 11,22 where Moses speaks of slaughter for mammals and fowl, but implies that the mere gathering in of fish make them fit to be eaten. In short, Solomon declares that whereas he was able to figure out satisfactory reasons for all the legislations of the Torah concerning these creatures, the reason for the red cow legislation had escaped him. It is interesting that the numerical value of the words והיא רחוקה, which Solomon uses to describe his inability to fathom the meaning of something, is the same as that of פרה אדומה, “red cow” (341).

nets [lit. holes.] Since the suffix is irregular, ordinarily חוֹרִים Rashi enumerates similar instances e.g.,] (Psalms 8:5) “The beasts of the field (שָׂדָי)”; (Jer. 22:14) “And he will cut out for himself windows (חַלּוֹנָי).”

ואני הנני מביא AND I, BEHOLD, I DO BRING — God says, “Now I am prepared to agree with those angels who cautioned Me and long ago said to Me (when I was about to create man), (Psalms 8:5) “What is man that thou art mindful of him” (Genesis Rabbah 31:12).