הֲלֹ֤א כָתַ֣בְתִּי לְ֭ךָ שלשום [שָׁלִישִׁ֑ים] בְּמ֖וֹעֵצֹ֣ת וָדָֽעַת׃
Hindi ba't isinulat ko para sa iyo ang mga dakilang bagay, ng mga payo at kaalaman,
Or HaChaim
If you follow our approach to the whole subject, it is possible to understand Proverbs 22,20: "indeed I wrote down for you threefold learnings and knowledge." There were three causes which combined to result in the deaths of Nadav and Avihu; two of them can be categorised as מועצות, learning, the third one as דעת, knowledge. These are the three aspects which caused the deaths of Nadav and Avihu. It teaches that G'd had not completely forgiven Aaron despite his threefold efforts, i.e. his prayers, his good deeds and his sacrificial offerings. The word מועצות is also an allusion to the failure of G'd to watch over the feet of the righteous so that they should not stumble into sin. This second aspect of מועצות is even more sophisticated than the former one. G'd deliberately failed to forgive Aaron completely so that He would have an excuse to allow Nadav and Aavihu to die.
Chidushei Agadot
Write me for [all] the generations, etc.: The explanation is that Esther requested that the Scroll [of Esther] be included in the Writings, as Rashi explains on the verse, "And he fulfilled the word of Esther, etc. and inscribed in the book" (Esther 9:32) - Esther requested of the Sages of the generation to commemorate her and to write this book with the rest of the Writings. And that is [the meaning of], "and inscribed in the book." To here [are his words]. And they answered here that Scripture excluded the Scroll from being included in the Writings, since it is written (Proverbs 22:20), "Have I not written for you, etc." As Scripture had written earlier (Proverbs 22:17), "For Incline your ear and hear the words of the sages, etc." The explanation is that the Scroll would be among the commandments that were only words of the Sages, like the commandment of the Chanukkah light; and not among the written commandments that were spoken with the holy spirit (ruach hakodesh). As it is written after this, "Have I not written for you, three times, etc." - you should not do it four times. [That was] until they found a support from Scripture that the Scroll is included in the three, like the one that reasons like this: As it is written (Exodus 17:14), "Write this" - that which is written in the Torah here in Exodus, and in Mishneh Torah (Deuteronomy) is one place; "a memorial" - that which is written in the Prophets is the second place; "in the book" - that which is written in the Scroll is the third place. So, "Have I not written for you, three times, etc." is now better understood as about the Torah, the Prophets and the Writings. And this is how it is explained in the Yerushalmi (Jerusalem Talmud Megillah 1:5:3): It is written in the Torah, as you would say (Deuteronomy 4:44), "And this is the Torah" (corresponding to "Write this"). "A memory" - that is the Prophets, as it is written (Malachi 3:16), "and a book of memory has been written before Him." "In the book - that is the Writings, as it is written, "And the word of Esther, etc. and inscribed in the book, etc." And they also said in the Yerushalmi that they answered her that it is because no other prophet is permitted to add anything for you afterwards. [That was] until the Holy One, blessed be He, illuminated their eyes and they found it written in the Torah, in the Prophets and in the Writings. And it can be said that our Talmud (Bavli) did not concern itself that they should answer her this, since it is surely an a fortiori argument (kal vechomer), as [it is found] later (Megillah 14a:5): If from slavery to freedom, they recited songs, from death to life, is it not all the more so? However this a fortiori argument is not sufficient for [our previous discussion], so that the verses are required here. For on account of this a fortiori argument, it is [also] fit to say it [only] as a commandment of the Sages, like the song (Hallel). But were it not for those verses, it could not be learned out from the a fortiori argument that it should be fixed among the Writings. And likewise, Rabbi Yehoshua who disagrees here is [with reference to] it not being fixed in the Writings, that it should [therefore] render hands impure. But he accepts the a fortiori argument from later, to read it [as a commandment] from the words of the Sages.
Ramban
I WILL PUT NONE OF THE DISEASES UPON THEE, WHICH I HAVE PUT UPON THE EGYPTIANS; FOR I AM THE ETERNAL THAT HEALETH THEE. Rashi wrote: “I will put none of the diseases upon thee, and if I do place them [because you will not hearken to My voice], they will be as though they had not been placed, for I am the Eternal that healeth thee. This is the homiletic exposition. But according to the plain meaning of Scripture, the verse is to be understood in the sense of a person who says, ‘I am the physician who warns you not to eat certain things which might bring a man back to his state of disease.’” Thus far the language of Rashi.
But according to the plain meaning of Scripture, rophecha is not an adjective, [or more precisely, a noun-adjective, as Rashi would have it, meaning “Thy physician Who teaches thee how disease should not befall thee.” Instead, the meaning of the verse is “that I am the One Who heals thee.”] Besides, it is not customary that a master should assure his servants that “if you will do all my will and desire, I will not slay you with sore diseases.” None of the Divine assurances of the Torah are expressed in that way! Rather, the verse here constitutes an admonition by which He warned them not to be among those that rebel against Him as the Egyptians had been. By hearkening to His voice, they will be saved from all sickness, since that sickness deservedly comes upon all those who rebel against His will, even as it befell the Egyptians when they did not hearken to Him. This is similar to that which He said that He will put upon thee all the diseases of Egypt which thou wast in dread of, and they shall cleave unto thee.266Deuteronomy 28:60. And He further said, For I am the Eternal that healeth thee. This constitutes a promise “that I will remove from you sickness that comes in the natural course of events, even as I healed the waters [at Marah].”
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that this sign, [i.e., making the bitter waters sweet], which was the first one done for them in the wilderness, was in contrast to the first plague that came upon the Egyptians. The waters of the [Nile] river were sweet and He changed them to be of evil effect, while these waters of Marah were bitter and He healed them. Thus it was shown that G-d does things which are contrary to each other, and therefore you should fear Him and not rebel against Him so that He should not afflict you as He did [afflict] them. You should love Him for He will bestow goodness upon you, even as He healed the waters for you. [Thus far Ibn Ezra’s comment.]
Now on the matter of Scripture making use here of two expressions, saying, “His commandments, His statutes,” and concluding, I will put none of the diseases upon thee, for I am the Eternal, [thus using the third-person and first-person pronouns in the same verse], I have already written you three times267Proverbs 22:20, according to Jonathan ben Uziel’s translation. Ramban uses the expression here in a figurative sense, meaning: “I have already elucidated this matter in other places.” See Vol. I, pp. 260-261. See also further, 24:2. on the explanation thereof. [Here] it can be understood from the word ‘l’kol’ (to the voice) and the word ‘ani’ (I), which convey the thought that if we shall listen to the voice of our G-d to keep G-d’s commandments and His statutes, the Glorious Name will be our healer. It is on the basis [of the verse] that the Sages instituted [the formula of] benedictions [which contain two different pronouns, thus: “Blessed art Thou O Eternal, our G-d, King of the universe,] Who hast sanctified us with His commandments and hast commanded us.” The benedictions contain an expression of acknowledgment of G-d’s Sovereignty, [saying as we do, “our G-d, King of the universe”], and the commandments have been given to us from everlasting even to everlasting.268I Chronicles 16:36. The student learned [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand.
And I will enlighten you [on this matter]. All benedictions which contain an expression of His Sovereignty are so formulated that they show respect to the Sovereign of the universe, Who has sanctified us [by His commandments] and Who has done [a certain deed] for us. But where a benediction follows another one, in which case the Sovereignty of G-d is not mentioned,269Such is an established rule in the prayers. The opening benediction starts: Baruch atah Hashem Elokeinu melech ha’olam (Blessed art Thou, O Eternal, King of the universe…), the Sovereignty of G-d thus being acknowledged in the second person, i.e., as the One directly addressed. But the benediction concludes with a reference to that Sovereign in the third person, thus concluding, “Who has sanctified us by His commandments.” The following benedictions do not open with a reference to G-d’s Sovereignty, but instead continue throughout in the second person. For example, in the Grace after the meal, the first benediction begins: “Blessed art Thou, O Eternal our G-d, King of the universe, Who sustains the whole world with His goodness… He giveth food to all flesh….” The second benediction begins: “We thank Thee, O Eternal our G-d, for the goodly and ample land of our desire which Thou gavest….” It should be noted that this rule applies only where a number of benedictions relate to one unit of prayer, such as the Grace after the Meal, or the Morning Sh’ma, the Evening Sh’ma, etc. Where the benedictions consist of short unrelated statements, such as the blessings of thanksgiving with which the Morning Service begins, each benediction contains an expression of G-d as the Sovereign of the universe. it is formulated in the second-person, such as [the benedictions beginning]: “Thou art Mighty,” “Thou art Holy,”270These are the second and third benedictions of the Sh’moneh Esreh [literally: the “Eighteen” Blessings — the central prayer around which the regular daily services are built]. They do not begin with a reference to G-d’s Sovereignty, and therefore are formulated in the second person: “Thou art Mighty;” “Thou art Holy.” It should be noted that in the first benediction of the Sh’moneh Esreh, although there is no reference to G-d as the Sovereign of the universe, the expression “G-d of Abraham” is deemed equivalent to “King of the universe,” since Abraham was the first to acknowledge His Sovereignty over the whole universe. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 361. and so all the others. The prayer of Aleinu l’shabei’ach [“It is for us to praise the Lord of all things,” a prayer which begins the three special sections of the New Year Additional Service], was designated in the third-person [even though it is not preceded by a benediction in which G-d’s Sovereignty is mentioned], because we mention therein, “And we bend the knee and bow low and offer thanks before the Supreme King of kings.”271When one stands in His very presence, it is not proper to address prayer to Him in the second person. Hence the Aleinu prayer is designated in the third person. (Ricanti). See my Hebrew commentary, p. 361. Understand this.
But according to the plain meaning of Scripture, rophecha is not an adjective, [or more precisely, a noun-adjective, as Rashi would have it, meaning “Thy physician Who teaches thee how disease should not befall thee.” Instead, the meaning of the verse is “that I am the One Who heals thee.”] Besides, it is not customary that a master should assure his servants that “if you will do all my will and desire, I will not slay you with sore diseases.” None of the Divine assurances of the Torah are expressed in that way! Rather, the verse here constitutes an admonition by which He warned them not to be among those that rebel against Him as the Egyptians had been. By hearkening to His voice, they will be saved from all sickness, since that sickness deservedly comes upon all those who rebel against His will, even as it befell the Egyptians when they did not hearken to Him. This is similar to that which He said that He will put upon thee all the diseases of Egypt which thou wast in dread of, and they shall cleave unto thee.266Deuteronomy 28:60. And He further said, For I am the Eternal that healeth thee. This constitutes a promise “that I will remove from you sickness that comes in the natural course of events, even as I healed the waters [at Marah].”
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that this sign, [i.e., making the bitter waters sweet], which was the first one done for them in the wilderness, was in contrast to the first plague that came upon the Egyptians. The waters of the [Nile] river were sweet and He changed them to be of evil effect, while these waters of Marah were bitter and He healed them. Thus it was shown that G-d does things which are contrary to each other, and therefore you should fear Him and not rebel against Him so that He should not afflict you as He did [afflict] them. You should love Him for He will bestow goodness upon you, even as He healed the waters for you. [Thus far Ibn Ezra’s comment.]
Now on the matter of Scripture making use here of two expressions, saying, “His commandments, His statutes,” and concluding, I will put none of the diseases upon thee, for I am the Eternal, [thus using the third-person and first-person pronouns in the same verse], I have already written you three times267Proverbs 22:20, according to Jonathan ben Uziel’s translation. Ramban uses the expression here in a figurative sense, meaning: “I have already elucidated this matter in other places.” See Vol. I, pp. 260-261. See also further, 24:2. on the explanation thereof. [Here] it can be understood from the word ‘l’kol’ (to the voice) and the word ‘ani’ (I), which convey the thought that if we shall listen to the voice of our G-d to keep G-d’s commandments and His statutes, the Glorious Name will be our healer. It is on the basis [of the verse] that the Sages instituted [the formula of] benedictions [which contain two different pronouns, thus: “Blessed art Thou O Eternal, our G-d, King of the universe,] Who hast sanctified us with His commandments and hast commanded us.” The benedictions contain an expression of acknowledgment of G-d’s Sovereignty, [saying as we do, “our G-d, King of the universe”], and the commandments have been given to us from everlasting even to everlasting.268I Chronicles 16:36. The student learned [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand.
And I will enlighten you [on this matter]. All benedictions which contain an expression of His Sovereignty are so formulated that they show respect to the Sovereign of the universe, Who has sanctified us [by His commandments] and Who has done [a certain deed] for us. But where a benediction follows another one, in which case the Sovereignty of G-d is not mentioned,269Such is an established rule in the prayers. The opening benediction starts: Baruch atah Hashem Elokeinu melech ha’olam (Blessed art Thou, O Eternal, King of the universe…), the Sovereignty of G-d thus being acknowledged in the second person, i.e., as the One directly addressed. But the benediction concludes with a reference to that Sovereign in the third person, thus concluding, “Who has sanctified us by His commandments.” The following benedictions do not open with a reference to G-d’s Sovereignty, but instead continue throughout in the second person. For example, in the Grace after the meal, the first benediction begins: “Blessed art Thou, O Eternal our G-d, King of the universe, Who sustains the whole world with His goodness… He giveth food to all flesh….” The second benediction begins: “We thank Thee, O Eternal our G-d, for the goodly and ample land of our desire which Thou gavest….” It should be noted that this rule applies only where a number of benedictions relate to one unit of prayer, such as the Grace after the Meal, or the Morning Sh’ma, the Evening Sh’ma, etc. Where the benedictions consist of short unrelated statements, such as the blessings of thanksgiving with which the Morning Service begins, each benediction contains an expression of G-d as the Sovereign of the universe. it is formulated in the second-person, such as [the benedictions beginning]: “Thou art Mighty,” “Thou art Holy,”270These are the second and third benedictions of the Sh’moneh Esreh [literally: the “Eighteen” Blessings — the central prayer around which the regular daily services are built]. They do not begin with a reference to G-d’s Sovereignty, and therefore are formulated in the second person: “Thou art Mighty;” “Thou art Holy.” It should be noted that in the first benediction of the Sh’moneh Esreh, although there is no reference to G-d as the Sovereign of the universe, the expression “G-d of Abraham” is deemed equivalent to “King of the universe,” since Abraham was the first to acknowledge His Sovereignty over the whole universe. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 361. and so all the others. The prayer of Aleinu l’shabei’ach [“It is for us to praise the Lord of all things,” a prayer which begins the three special sections of the New Year Additional Service], was designated in the third-person [even though it is not preceded by a benediction in which G-d’s Sovereignty is mentioned], because we mention therein, “And we bend the knee and bow low and offer thanks before the Supreme King of kings.”271When one stands in His very presence, it is not proper to address prayer to Him in the second person. Hence the Aleinu prayer is designated in the third person. (Ricanti). See my Hebrew commentary, p. 361. Understand this.