ציטירנדיקער פּירוש אויף ישעיהו 11:8

AND I WILL CAUSE EVIL BEASTS TO CEASE OUT OF THE LAND. According to Rabbi Yehudah who said¹⁵Torath Kohanim, Bechukothai 2:1. that He will remove them from the world [entirely, the verse] is [to be understood] in its plain sense — that evil beasts will not come into their Land. For since there will be plentitude and an abundance of blessings, and the cities will be full of people, [wild] beasts will not come into inhabited places. And according to Rabbi Shimon who says that He will cause them to cease from causing harm, the verse is stating: “and I will cause the evil of the beasts to cease out of the Land.” This is the correct interpretation for when [Israel] observes the commandments, the Land of Israel will be like the world was at its beginning, before the sin of the first man, when no wild beast or creeping thing would kill a man, just as the Rabbis have said:¹⁶Berachoth 33 a. “It is not the wild ass that kills, but it is sin that kills.” It is [because of] this that Scripture says, and the suckling child shall play on the hole of the asp,¹⁷Isaiah 11:8. and similarly, and the cow and the bear shall feed … and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.¹⁸Ibid., Verse 7. For dangerous beasts only prey [on human beings] on account of the sin of man, because of which it was decreed upon him that he be a prey to their teeth,¹⁹Psalms 124:6. See in Genesis 9:5 (Vol. I, pp. 134-135) where Ramban also discusses this theme. and preying was made a part of their nature so that they also prey on each other, as is well-known for having once preyed on man, they add [to this tendency that of preying on animals] so that they become more harmful. And so Scripture states, And he learned to catch the prey, he devoured men.²⁰Ezekiel 19:3. Now at the time of the creation of the world, it is said of the beasts that He gave them the herb for food, as it is written, And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth wherein there is a living soul, I have given every green herb for food,²¹Genesis 1:30. and Scripture states, and it was so,²¹Genesis 1:30. meaning that such was the nature with which they were endowed forever. It was [only] afterwards that they learned how to prey, on account of [human] sin which causes death, as I have explained. Now when slaughtering animals [for food] became permitted for the sons of Noah after the flood,²²See ibid., Vol. I, p. 57 for the reason for this permission. He warned with reference to humans [that shedding their blood was forbidden saying], And surely your blood of your lives will I require … the life of man,²³Ibid., 9:5. but not the blood of one beast from the hand of another, for they were left to prey [on each other and on man] as was their wont. But the beasts of the Land of Israel, when [man will be] in a state of perfection, will cease from their harmful way, and revert to their original nature with which they were endowed at the time of their creation. I have already referred to a part of this in Seder Eileh Toldoth Noach.²³Ibid., 9:5. Therefore Scripture stated concerning the time of the redeemer who is descended of the stock of Jesse, that peace will return to the world and preying and all dangerous beasts will cease, as was their nature at first. The [original] intention [when referring to the redeemer was in connection with] Hezekiah [king of Judah], whom the Holy One, blessed be He, had wished to make the Messiah,²⁴Sanhedrin 94 a. but their merits [i.e., those of the people of his generation] were not sufficient for such [achievement], so that the fulfillment [of that prophecy] will be with reference to the Messiah who is destined to come.

בשלחה According to some: with its sword.²⁵A. V., When it shooteth forth. The meaning of the sentence accordingly is: Samaria destroyed itself with its own instruments of war. Comp. השלח the sword (Joel 2:8). More correctly, however, it may be compared with שלחיך thy plants (Song 4:13), especially because of the words: on the day of the east wind.²⁶The figure the day of the east wind, leads the reader to suppose that there is also a reference to plants, which are damaged by the east wind. Samaria was punished with her own measure, she had quarrelled even with the people of her own villages,—which may be considered as her plants (שלחה)—therefore. הגה the Lord removed²⁷A. V., Stayeth.—Being in continual conflict with her neighbours, Samaria was taken away from amongst them. her; comp. ²⁸Hophal of יגה.הוגה he was removed (2 Sam. 20:13); ה replaces the radical י; as in ידה═הדה he stretched forth (11:8).

THE EMIM ABODE THEREIN FORMERLY etc. “You [Moses] might think that this is the land of the Rephaim which I gave to Abraham¹³³Genesis 15:20. because the Emim, who are Rephaim, dwelled there formerly, but this [the land of the Moabites] is not the land [that I promised to Abraham], because I drove out those Rephaim from before the children of Lot and settled them in place of the Rephaim. Those Emim were considered Rephaim,¹³⁴In our texts of Rashi this is marked as a comment upon Verse 11: “They also were accounted Rephaim, even as the Anakim (giants).” This is interpreted by Rashi to mean: “The Emim who formerly lived in the lands of Ammon and Moab were accounted as Rephaim, that is, the Anakim, (giants). But those lands of Ammon and Moab were not the land of the Rephaim which I promised to Abraham.” Therefore Moses was not to wage war against the lands of Ammon and Moab. like Anakim (giants) who are called Rephaim [from the root raphoh — weak] because the hands of everyone who sees them become ‘weak.’ Emim [from the root eimah — fear] are so called because their ‘dread’ lays upon people.” This is Rashi’s language. And similarly he wrote [further, in connection with the land of Ammon of which Scripture states], That also is accounted a land of Rephaim:¹³⁵Further, Verse 20. “because the Rephaim dwelled there formerly, but that [land] is not what I gave to Abraham.”
But I wonder at the words of the Rabbi! Why should Scripture explain to us concerning the land of Ammon and Moab that it is not the land of Rephaim which He gave to Abraham? Was it to state that it was not due to Israel and was not part of the land which G-d swore to their fathers to give them? [That could not be the reason! On the contrary,] Scripture states only, because I have given it unto the children of Lot for a possession¹³⁶Verse 19. meaning that, although it was part of Abraham’s inheritance, the Holy One, blessed be He, gave it to the children of Lot for Abraham’s sake. As Rashi himself wrote:¹³⁷Here on Verse 5. “[The lands of] two nations [from among the ten nations originally given to Abraham — Genesis 15:19-21], I gave to the children of Lot [Ammon and Moab] as a reward because Lot went with Abraham to Egypt¹³⁸Genesis 13:1. and kept silent concerning what Abraham said about his wife, ‘she is my sister.’” Moreover, the Rabbi himself wrote with reference to Esau:¹³⁷Here on Verse 5. “[The lands of] ten nations¹³⁹Ibid., 15:19-21: the Kenite, and the Kenizzite, and the Kadmonite; and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, and the Rephaim; and the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Girgashite, and the Jebusite. I gave to Abraham. Seven of them will be yours. [Concerning the lands of] the Kenite, and the Kenizzite, and the Kadmonite — which are Ammon and Moab, and Mount Seir — one [i.e., Mount Seir] belongs to Esau, and two of them to the children of Lot.” And if so, the lands of Ammon and Moab, and Mount Seir were certainly of the inheritance of Abraham; why then did the Holy One, blessed be He, say to Moses that he should not think that this [land of Ammon and Moab] is the land of Rephaim which was given to Abraham? What difference is there between [the lands of] the Kenite, and the Kenizzite, and the Kadmonite [which were promised to Abraham but given to the children of Lot and Esau], and [the land of] the Rephaim [which was also promised to Abraham]?¹⁴⁰In other words, Rashi wrote of the lands of the Kenite, etc., that, notwithstanding the fact that they were of the inheritance of Abraham, they were still given to the children of Lot for the reason stated by Rashi that Lot protected Abraham’s secret in Egypt. Similarly we could say that the land of the Rephaim, too, was originally destined for Abraham, but that G-d gave it to another nation. Therefore, on what does Rashi base his assertion that this land was not the land of Rephaim promised to Abraham? Moreover, the expression Rephaim dwelled there ‘l’phanim’ (of old)¹³⁵Further, Verse 20. indicates that it belongs to them because they dwelled there before anyone else, as in the verse ‘l’phanim’ (of old) Thou didst lay the foundation of the earth¹⁴¹Psalms 102:26. [thus raising another question on Rashi’s assertion: If the Rephaim lived there “of old,” why was this land given to the children of Lot]?
But the interpretation of the verses is the opposite of the Rabbi’s [Rashi’s] words. It was because the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, Be not at enmity with Moab etc. because I have given Ar unto the children of Lot for a possession,¹⁴²Verse 9. Scripture tells that the land was indeed due to the seed of Abraham except that He gave it to the children of Lot. Scripture further says that in that land there dwelled of old a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakim,¹⁴³Verse 10 before us. and, therefore, the Moabites called them ‘Emim’¹⁴⁴Verse 11. because of the great “dread” which they cast upon those who saw them. Now G-d, in honor of Abraham, performed a miracle for the children of Lot. They defeated [the Emim] and drove them from before them; it is therefore not proper to take from them by force the land which G-d gave them through a miracle. ‘Yeichashvu’ [They were also ‘yeichashvu’ Rephaim]¹⁴⁴Verse 11. is an expression of importance and esteem, similar to the following: he was despised, and we did not ‘chashavnuhu’ (esteem him);¹⁴⁵Isaiah 53:3. who shall not ‘yachshovu’ (regard) silver?;¹⁴⁶Ibid., 13:17. for how little is he ‘nechshav’ (esteemed)?¹⁴⁷Ibid., 2:22. and so many others. And in the language of the Sages we find the expression adam chashuv (an esteemed person).¹⁴⁸Berachoth 19a.
This is why Scripture placed the statements in proximity to [the verse that discussed the lands of Ammon and Moab, the children of Lot]. And in Seir the Horim abode formerly.¹⁴⁹Verse 12. It declares that for the same reason He stated [for restraining Israel from attacking] Moab, He likewise withheld them [Israel] from attacking the land of Seir. Because formerly it also belonged to the Horim, and it was part of the gift to Abraham — for the Horite is identical with the Hivite, and they [the Hivites] were of the children of Canaan, as it is said, Esau took his wives of the daughters of ‘Canaan’ etc. and Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon ‘the Hivite’¹⁵⁰Genesis 36:2. and Zibeon was of the sons of Seir ‘the Horite,’ the inhabitants of the land.¹⁵¹Ibid., Verse 20. So, also, wherever the inheritance of Israel is mentioned, the Hivite is always included with the Canaanite among the seven nations,¹⁵²See further, 7:1, etc. because the Hivite is enumerated as the sixth son among the children of Canaan.¹⁵³See Genesis 10:17. You will also see this in the narrative of the war of Amraphel which he fought against the kings of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zebaiim, and Zoar,¹⁵⁴See ibid., 14:8-9. who were Canaanite kings. They [Amraphel and his associates] smote ‘the Rephaiim’ in Ashteroth-karnaim,¹⁵⁵Ibid., Verse 5. and ‘the Horite’ in their mountain, Seir,¹⁵⁶Ibid., Verse 6. for the Horite and the Rephaim belonged to the Canaanite kings.
It is possible that [the Horite] was called Hivite [from the term chivi — a snake] because he was like a serpent in the way.¹⁵⁷Ibid., 49:17. He was also called the Horite from the noun ‘chor’ (the hole of) the asp.¹⁵⁸Isaiah 11:8. For names [like Horite, Hivite] preserve the meaning and change letters, like Zerach (Zerah)¹⁵⁹Numbers 26:13. The Hebrew word Zerach means “shining.” and Tzochar (Zohar),¹⁶⁰Exodus 6:15. Tzochar and Zerach both are names for the same son of Simeon. of the expression: and ‘tzochar’ (white) wool;¹⁶¹Ezekiel 27:18. ‘tzchoroth’ (white) asses,¹⁶²Judges 5:10. Ramban thus shows that the names Zerach and Tzochar (from the words “shining” and “white”) both refer to the same person although the letters in the names interchange. [and in the case of the Horite and Hivite, the names were chosen to suggest the treacherous, snake-like nature of the people]. They also assign new names to praise [someone]. Thus the name Ya’akov (Jacob), an expression of guile or of deviousness,¹⁶³Genesis 27:36. — Ibid., 32:29 [Jacob’s name changed to Israel]. was changed to Israel [from the word sar (prince)] and they called him Yeshurun (Jeshurun)¹⁶⁴Further, 32:15. from the expression whole-hearted ‘v’yashar’ (and upright).¹⁶⁵Job 1:1.
Thus Scripture is stating that the Horites [whose land was] given to Abraham¹⁶⁶Since the Horites are identical with the Hivites, as explained above, and the Hivites were children of Canaan, and the Canaanite is among the ten nations whose lands were given to Abraham (Genesis 15:21), it follows that the land of the Horites was given to Abraham. dwelled formerly in Seir, and the children of Esau who are of the seed of Abraham succeeded them and dwelled in their stead by a miraculous event. The Horites were a populous nation in their land and the children of Esau came to dwell there and overpowered them just as Israel did to the remaining nations [in the land that was] promised to Abraham, that G-d gave them in His great power. Thus G-d divided [the lands of] all these [ten] nations among the seed of Abraham — one to Esau, and the balance to Israel who was the firstborn son.¹⁶⁷See Exodus 4:22. It is therefore not proper to steal from Esau what G-d caused him to inherit, since G-d would be angry with anyone who would forcibly take from him [Esau] the inheritance that He, blessed be He, caused him to inherit, just as He would be wroth with him who would forcibly take the Land from Israel after He caused him [Israel] to inherit it, just as it says, As for all Mine evil neighbors, that touch the inheritance which I have caused My people Israel to inherit.¹⁶⁸Jeremiah 12:14. This is the sense of the expression mentioned here, as Israel ‘did’ unto the Land of his inheritance,¹⁶⁹Verse 12. This would seem to indicate that at the time that Esau conquered his land, Israel had already conquered theirs. But Israel had, at that time, not taken possession of any land. when it was not yet done! [But the meaning thereof is as explained: that just as G-d would be wroth with him who would rob Israel of his inheritance after He will have given it to him, in the same way, He does not give Israel the right to take the land of Esau after having given it to him.]
Similarly He further said with reference to [the land of] the children of Ammon that it is of the land of the Rephaim [which G-d gave to Abraham]¹⁷⁰Genesis 15:20. for that, too, belonged first to the Rephaim. The Ammonites called them Zamzummim,¹⁷¹Further, Verse 20. from the expression ‘z’mamo (his evil scheme) do not further,¹⁷²Psalms 140:9. except that [the letters zayin and mem] are doubled [in the name “Zamzummim”], which thus indicates “the people from whom nothing is withheld which they purpose to do.”¹⁷³See Genesis 11:6.

Therefore, for the lights (בָּאֻרִים). Jonathan paraphrases: When lights come to the righteous, concerning the two good tidings, both that of the redemption from Babylon and that of Edom. ([Most manuscripts read:] Jonathan paraphrases: When lights come to the righteous, concerning the two lights, etc.) And Menachem stated (Machbereth, p. 32) that אֻרִים is an expression of holes and crevices where they were fleeing, and so (Gen. 11:28): “אוּר, the valley of the Chaldees,” and so (supra 11: 8): “And on the hole (מְאוּרַת) of an adder,” the hole of its dwelling.

הנשך עקבי סוס THAT BITETH THE HORSE’S HEELS — this is the manner of the serpent. Scripture compares him to a serpent that bites the horse’s heels ויפל רכבו אחור THAT HIS RIDER FALLETH BACKWARD without it (the serpent) having touched him at all. We find the analogy to this in the case of Samson with reference to whom this prophecy was made (Judges 16:29): “And Samson took fast hold of the two middle pillars etc.” — and those on the roof died though not directly attacked. Onkelos translates נחש by כחיוי חורמן, like the serpent “Churman”, which is the name of a kind of serpent the bite of which is incurable. It is the serpent which in Hebrew is called צפעוני. It is called a חורמן because it destroys (חרם) everything. The word וכפיתנא in the Targum means “and like a פתן” (like an asp). יכמון in the Targum means יארוב “he lies in wait”.