Komentaryong Sumisipi para sa Obadias 1:3

זְד֤וֹן לִבְּךָ֙ הִשִּׁיאֶ֔ךָ שֹׁכְנִ֥י בְחַגְוֵי־סֶּ֖לַע מְר֣וֹם שִׁבְתּ֑וֹ אֹמֵ֣ר בְּלִבּ֔וֹ מִ֥י יוֹרִדֵ֖נִי אָֽרֶץ׃

Nilinlang ka ng kapalaluan ng iyong puso, ikaw na naninirahan sa mga siwang ng bato, na ang tahanan ay nasa kataasan, na nagsasabi sa kanyang puso: “Sino ang makapagbababa sa akin sa lupa?”

Rashi

עזי וזמרת יה — Onkelos translated this by “my might and my praise”, taking עָזִּי the same as עֻזִּי, and וְזִמְרָת the same as וְזִמְרָתִי. But I wonder at the wording of the text if this translation is correct, for you will find no similar example of its punctuation (i. e. of עָזִּי) in the Scriptures except in three passages where it is, in each case, followed by וזמרת. In all other passages it is punctuated with שורק (i. e. our Kibbutz); e. g., (Jeremiah 16:19) ה' עֻזִּי ומעזי (Psalms 59:10) עֻזּו אליך אשמרה So, too, every word of two letters that is punctuated with a Melopum (our חולם) when it is lengthened by the addition of a third letter (i. e. when it has a pronominal suffix as in the examples given below), and the second has not a Sheva (חטף), the first is punctuated with a שורק (Kibbuts) — as, for instance, עֹז and עֻזִּי; ‎רֹק and ‎רֻקִי ; ‎חֹק and ‎חֻקִי ; ‎עֹל and עֻלִי as in (Isaiah 14:25) “then shall his yoke (עֻלּוֹ, from עֹל) depart from him”; — כֹּל and כֻּלּוֹ, as in (Exodus 14:7) “and captains over each of them (כֻּלּוֹ) — from כֹּל. But these three examples of עָזִּי וְזִּמְרָת, viz., that occuring here and that in Isaiah (12:2) and that in Psalms (118:14), are punctuated with short Kametz, whereas the translation of Onkelos would require עֻזִּי and not עָזִּי. Then further, in not one of them (these three passages) is it written וזמרתי, as Onkelos translates, but וזמרת and remarkably enough all of them are immediately followed by ויהי לי לישועה. — Therefore I say in explanation of the wording of the text that עָזִּי is not the same as עֻזִּי and וְזִמְרָת is not the same as וְזִמְרָתִי, but עָזִּי is a noun without a suffix of any kind, as we find in (Psalms 123:1) “The one who sits (הַיֹּשְׁבִי) in heaven”; (Obadiah 3:3) “The one who dwells (שֹׁכְנִי) in the cleft of the rock”; (Deuteronomy 33:16) “He that dwelleth (שֹׁכְנִי) in the bush” (where the syllable at the end of the word is part of the noun and is not the pronominal suffix denoting “my”). The praise, therefore, proclaimed in these words is this: The עז and the זִמְרָת of God, this was to me as a help. The word וזמרת is a noun in the construct state to the word which expressess the Divine Name (יָהּ), in the same sense as (Judges 5:23) “to the help of (לעזרַת — const.) the Lord”; (Isaiah 9:18) “through the wrath of (בעברת — constr.) the Lord”; (Ecc. 3:18) “because of (דברַת — const.) the sons of man”. The expression וזמרת has the meaning of the root which we find in (Leviticus 25:4) “thou shalt not prune (תזמר)” and in (Isaiah 25:5) “the cutting down (זמיר) of the terrible ones”, both of which have the meaning “lopping off” and “cutting down”. Thus the verse signifies: “The strength and vengeance of our God has become to us a help”. Do not be puzzled by the expression ויהי — that it does not state היה — for we have other verses also that use this idiom, and the following is an example of such a construction: (1 Kings 6:5) “round about the wall of the house, both of the temple and the most holy place, he made (ויעש) a side structure”, and it should have said (instead of ויעש etc.) עשה לו צלעות סביב. Similarly in Chronicles, (2 10:17) “But as for the children of Israel who dwelt in the cities of Judah, Rehoboam reigned (וימלך) over them”, where it should have said מלך עליהם. Other examples are: (Numbers 14:16) “Because the Lord was unable etc…. He slaughtered them (וישחטם)”, where it should have said שחטם; (Numbers 14:36, 37) “And the men whom Moses sent … they died (וימתו)”, where it should have said מתו; (Exodus 9:21) “And he that regarded not the word of the Lord left (ויעזב) his cattle, etc.”, where it should have said עזב‎.
Magtanong sa isang RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Rashi

And Tyre built a fortification for herself and [Tyre] says, “Who will bring me down to earth?”
Magtanong sa isang RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Pat Lechem

entices and seduces... the L-ord your G-d -- Behold the power of the yetzer (evil inclination) which brings a man's heart to sin is of two kinds. One, when a man is hesitant and not keen on doing a bad thing, whether due to fear of G-d or fear of something else. The yetzer comes cunningly and removes the fear from his heart, either by some rationalisation. Therefore he is called in this aspect "mesi" (enticing, literally "lift up") the heart of a man, which connotes lifting up, for he lifts up the man's hesitations.... The second aspect is that he intensifies his lust and warms his heart with imaginitive pictures of the pleasures of that act. Then he is called "seducer" (mesit)... (see there for more).... Now reader, the author ended with the words "the anger of the L-ord, your G-d". Certainly, he did not write two Names of G-d for nothing. They correspond to these two aspects. For the first aspect, where one removes the fear of G-d from his heart, he also arouses the wrath of the trait of mercy [the name "L-ord" corresponds to the trait of mercy]. But that which his heart turns towards superfluous lusts, there is room to have mercy on him and say that he is only entangled in the physical and he arouses only the wrath of the trait of justice [your G-d (Elokim) which corresponds to the trait of justice].
Magtanong sa isang RabbiBookmarkShareCopy