מדרשי שמות במגילת רות ערכה והגישה- יעל מאלי

ByYael Maly

תיקון ליל שבועות בספריא תש"פ

רות רבה ב׳:ה׳

(ה) וְשֵׁם הָאִישׁ אֱלִימֶלֶךְ (רות א, ב), רַבִּי מֵאִיר הָיָה דּוֹרֵשׁ שֵׁמוֹת. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן קָרְחָה הָיָה דוֹרֵשׁ שֵׁמוֹת. וְשֵׁם הָאִישׁ אֱלִימֶלֶךְ, שֶׁהָיָה אוֹמֵר אֵלַי תָבוֹא מַלְכוּת. וְשֵׁם אִשְׁתּוֹ נָעֳמִי, שֶׁהָיוּ מַעֲשֶׂיהָ נָאִים וּנְעִימִים. וְשֵׁם שְׁנֵי בָנָיו מַחְלוֹן וְכִלְיוֹן, מַחְלוֹן, שֶׁנִּמְחוּ מִן הָעוֹלָם. וְכִלְיוֹן, שֶׁכָּלוּ מִן הָעוֹלָם.

Ruth Rabbah 2:5

(5) "The man’s name was Elimelech (Ruth 1:2": Rabbi Meir was interpreting names. Rabbi Joshua son of Karchah was also interpreting names. "The man’s name was Elimelech": he was saying: "To me (elai) will come the kingship (malkhut)". "His wife’s name was Naomi" because her deeds were pleasant (na'im) and pleasing (ne'imim). "and his two sons were named Mahlon and Chilion": Machlon because they were erased (nimchu) from the world. And Chilion because they were destroyed (kalu) from the world. "Ephrathites": Rabbi Joshua son of Levi says: "Royals (palatini)", and Rabbi the son of Rabbi Nechemiah says: "Nobles (eugenistai)". Another interpretation: "Ephrathites": Rabbi Pinchas said: "Ephraim was crowned with the whole crown from Jacob our father at the time he was departing (petirato) from the world. He said to him: "Ephraim, head of the tribe, head of the yeshivah, the ascended and the praised of my sons will be called by your name: "son of Tohu son of Zuph, an Ephraimite (1 Samuel 1:1)". "Jeroboam son of Nebat, an Ephraimite (1 Kings 11:26)". "David was the son of a certain Ephrathite (1 Samuel 17:12)". "Mahlon and Chilion—Ephrathites".

בדף המקורות הזה נתחקה אחר המשמעות של הגיבורים במגילת רות, ובעיקר נתמקד בדור הצעיר- מחלון וכיליון, ונשותיהם ערפה ורות. רוב ההורים אינם קוראים שמות בעלי משמעות שלילית לילדיהם. יש להניח שכאשר בחרו נעמי ואלימלך בשמות אלו הם חשבו על המשמעות הראשונית שלהם: "מחלון" מלשון מתיקות (חילו בערבית) ו"כליון" מלשון שלמות (כוליות). כאשר חז"ל דורשים שמות הם מטעינים אותם בתכונות אופי, בייעוד - במילוי היעוד או בהחמצתו, בציוני דרך ביוגרפיים ועוד.

עיינו במדרשי השם המצורפים, מצאו כיצד הם מהדהדים את תוכן מגילת רות ואת המשמעויות הדתיות, היסטוריות והחברתיות העולות מהדרשות.

נתחיל עם מחלון וכיליון. חז"ל מזהים את יואש ושרף (מספר דברי הימים) כמחלון וכיליון. מה שמאפשר להם להרחיב את מדרש השמות על מחלון וכיליון. עיינו בדרשה ושימו לב להבדל בין השם לכינוי.

דברי הימים א ד׳:כ״ב

וְיוֹקִים וְאַנְשֵׁי כֹזֵבָא וְיוֹאָשׁ וְשָׂרָף אֲשֶׁר־בָּעֲלוּ לְמוֹאָב וְיָשֻׁבִי לָחֶם וְהַדְּבָרִים עַתִּיקִים׃

I Chronicles 4:22

and Jokim, and the men of Cozeba and Joash, and Saraph, who married into Moab and Jashubi Lehem (the records are ancient).

ילקוט שמעוני על נ"ך ת״ר:א׳

כתיב מחלון וכליון וכתיב ויואש ושרף,

רב ושמואל, חד אמר מחלון וכליון שמם

ולמה נקרא שמם יואש ושרף, יואש שנתיאשו מן הגאולה, ושרף שנתחייבו שרפה למקום,

וחד אמר יואש ושרף שמם,

ולמה נקרא שמם מחלון וכליון, מחלון שעשו עצמם חולין, וכליון שנתחייבו כליה, אשר בעלו למואב שנשאו נשים נכריות...

אמר רבי יוחנן צריך אדם לחוש לשם,

מחלון שהוא לשון מחילה, נזדווגה לו רות שהיתה מרתתת מן העבירות,

כליון כליה, נזדווגה לו ערפה שיצאת ממנה גלית.

Yalkut Shimoni on Nach 600:1

...

ספרי במדבר ע״ח

"ויואש ושרף אשר בעלו למואב". יואש ושרף – זה מחלון וכליון:

יואש שנתייאשו מן הגאולה, יואש שנתייאשו מדברי תורה,

שרף ששרפו בניהם לעבודה זרה.

"אשר בעלו למואב" – שנשאו נשים מואביות,

"אשר בעלו למואב" – שהניחו ארץ ישראל ונהפכו בשדה מואב.

Sifrei Bamidbar 78

(1) (Bamidbar 10:29) "And Moses said to Chovav (Yithro) the son of Reuel the Midianite, the father-in-law of Moses": Was Chovav the father-in-law of Moses, or Reuel, viz. (Shemot 2:8) "And they came to Reuel, their father, etc."? — (Judges 4:11) "And Chever the Kenite had separated from the Kenites, from the children of Chovav, the father-in-law of Moses" (indicates that) his name was Chovav and not Reuel. How, then, are we to understand "And they came to Reuel their father"? We are hereby apprised that the young children called their father's father "father." R. Shimon b. Menassia says: His name was Reuel, "the friend (re'a) of G-d," viz. (Shemot 5:12) "And Aaron and all the elders of Israel came to eat bread with Moses' father-in-law before G-d." R. Dostai says: His name was Keini, for he had separated from the provocative deeds of the kanai ("the provokers"), who provoke the L-rd, viz. (Devarim 32:21) "They provoked Me (kinuni) with a no-god," and (Ezekiel 8:3) "where was the seat of the provocative image of provocation ("semel hakinah hamekaneh"). R. Yossi says: His name was Keini, for he had acquired (kanah) Torah for himself. R. Yishmael b. R. Yossi says: His name was Reuel, for he had befriended G-d, viz. (Proverbs 27:10) "Your Friend and the Friend of your father do not forsake." R. Shimon b. Yochai says: He had two names — Chovav and Yithro. "Yithro," because he added a section ("Yithro") to the Torah, viz. (Shemot 18:21) "And (Yithro said) you shall see from all the people men of valor, etc." Now were these things (of appointing judges) not known to Moses from Sinai, viz. (Ibid. 23) "If you do this thing and G-d commands you"? And why did they escape Moses? To credit the thing to Yithro. "Chovav," because he loved ("chivev") the Torah. For we find no other proselyte who loved the Torah as Yithro did. And just as Yithro loved the Torah, so did his descendants love the Torah, viz. (I Chronicles 2:55) "and the families of scribes who dwelt in Yabetz: Tirathim, Shimathim, Suchathim. (These were the Kenites, etc.") "Tirathim" — because they heard the teruah from Mount Sinai. "Tirathim" — because they cried out ("mathri'im) and fasted. "Tirathim" — because they did not shave themselves ("ta'ar" is a blade). "Tirathim" — because they sat in the gates ("tara" is a gate) of Jerusalem. "Shimathim" — because they did not anoint themselves with oil (because of their mourning over the destruction of the Temple). "Suchathim" — because they dwelt in succoth. "who dwelt in Yabetz": They left Yericho and went to Yabetz, to the desert of Judah in the south of Arad to learn Torah from him (Yabetz), viz. (Ibid. 4:10) "And Yabetz called out to the G-d of Israel … and G-d granted him what he requested." They were chassidim, who entreated G-d for someone to learn from, and he was a chassid who entreated G-d for someone to teach. The chassidim came to learn from the chassid, as it is written (Judges 1:16) "And the sons of the Keini, the father-in-law of Moses, etc.", and (Jeremiah 25:12) "Go to the house of the Rechavim and speak to them, and bring them to the house of the L-rd, etc.", and (Ibid. 6) "And they said: We will not drink wine for Yonadav the son of Rechav our father commanded us, saying … and a house you shall not build and seed you shall not sow … so that you may live many years on the land where you live" — Since this house (the Temple) is destined to be destroyed, see it as if it is already destroyed. (Ibid. 8-10) "And we heeded the vice of Yonadav ben Rechav our father … and we live in tents, for we heeded and did according to everything that Yonadav our father commanded us." And whence is it derived that the sons of Yonadav ben Rechav were of the sons of the sons of Yithro? For it is written (I Chronicles 2:55) "These were the Keinites, who descended from Chammath, the father of the house of the Rechavim." And what was their reward for this? (Jeremiah 35:18) "And to the Rechavim Jeremiah said: Thus said the L-rd of hosts, the G-d of Israel: Because you have heeded the command of Yonadav your father … (19) there will not be cut off from Yonadav ben Rechav one who stands before Me all of the days." R. Yehoshua says: Now may proselytes enter the sanctuary? Rather, they sat in the Sanhedrin and taught Torah. Others say: Some of their daughters were wed to Cohanim and their descendents entered the sanctuary. Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If those, who drew near (to Israel), were thus drawn near by the L-rd, then Israelites who do the will of the L-rd, how much more so (will He draw them near!) And thus do you find with Rachav Hazonah. What is written (of her)? (I Chronicles 4:21) "And the families of the house of the linen work, of the house of Ashbea": "the families" — Rachav Hazonah ("the feeder"), who kept an inn to feed her family. "the linen work" — She hid the spies among the linens. "the house of Ashbea" — The spies swore ("nisb'u") to her (to spare her family). Eight prophets, issued from Rachav Hazonah: Yirmiyahu, Chilkiyahu, Serayah, Machseyah, Baruch, Neriah, Chanamel, and Shalom. R. Yehudah says: Chuldah the prophetess was also of the descendants of Rachav Hazonah, as it is written (II Kings 22:14) "And Chilkiyahu the Cohein and Achikam and Achbor and Shafan and Asayah went to Chuldah the prophetess, the wife of Shalom the son of Tikvah, etc." And it is written (Joshua 2:18) "behold, when we (the spies) come to the land, you (Rachav) shall bind this line (tikvah) of scarlet thread, etc." Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If she, who came from a people of whom it is written (Devarim 20:16) "You shall not spare any soul," because she drew near (to Israel), was thus drawn near by the L-rd, then Israelites, who do the will of the L-rd, how much more so (will He draw them near!) And thus do you find with the Giveonites. What is written of them? (I Chronicles 4:22) "And Yokim and the men of Chezeva. "And Yokim" — Joshua fulfilled ("kiyem") for them his oath (to spare them). "Chezeva" — they deceived ("kizvu") Joshua, saying (Joshua 9:9) "From a very distant land did your servants come," and not from Eretz Yisrael." Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If these, who came from a people consigned to destruction, because they drew near (to Israel), were thus drawn near by the L-rd, then Israelites, who do the will of the L-rd, how much more so (will He draw them near)! And thus do you find with Ruth the Moavitess. What did she say to her mother-in-law (Ruth 1:16-17) "Your people is my people, and your G-d is my G-d. Where you will die, I will die." The L-rd said to her: You have lost nothing. kingdom is yours in this world and in the world to come. What is written (of her)? (I Chronicles 4:22) "and Yoash and Saraph, who had dominion in Moav." Yoash and Saraph are Machlon and Kilyon (viz. Ruth 1:2-6) "Yoash" — they despaired (nithya'ashu) of redemption. "Saraph" — they were liable to (the penalty of) burning, to the L-rd. "who had dominion over Moav" — they married Moavite women and left Eretz Yisrael and went and sojourned in the field of Moav. (I Chronicles, Ibid.) "and Yashuvilechem" — this is Ruth the Moavitess, who returned and dwelt in Beth Lechem. (Ibid.) "And these are ancient things" — each is discussed in its place. (Ibid. 23) "These are 'the keepers'" — the sons of Yonadav ben Rechav, who kept the oath of their father. "and the dwellers among the plants" — Solomon, who was like a (flourishing) plant in his kingdom. "and gedeirah ("the fence") — Sanhedrin, who sit and delimit the "fences" of Torah. "With the king in his work they sat there" — Ruth the Moavitess did not die until she saw Solomon, the grandson of her grandson (Yishai) sitting on his throne of kingdom, as it is written (I Kings 2:19) "And he (Solomon) sat on his throne, and he placed a seat for the mother of the king" — the mother of kingdom (i.e., Ruth). "and she sat at his right hand": as he busied himself with the work of the Temple, viz.: (I Chronicles, Ibid.) "with the king in his work they sat there. Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If she, who was of the people of whom it is written (I Kings 11:2) "You shall not come into them, and they shall not come into you," because she drew near (to Israel), she was drawn near by the L-rd, then Israelites, who do the will of the L-rd, how much more so! And if you would ask: But where do we see this (that the L-rd draws them near) with Israel? It is written (Shemot 1:15) "And the king of Egypt said to the Hebrew midwives, the first of whom was named Shifrah; and the second, Puah": Shifra is Yocheved (Moses' mother). Puah is Miriam (Moses' sister). "Shifra" — because she "beautifies (meshapereth) the child. "Puah" — because she "coos" (poeh) to the child. Variantly: "Shifra" — because Israel was fruitful (paru) and multiplied in her days. "Puah" — because she moaned (poah) and wept over her brother, as it is written (Ibid. 2:4) "And his sister stood from afar to know what would be done with him." (Ibid. 1:16) "And he (Pharaoh) said: When you deliver the Hebrew women … (17) and the midwives feared G-d … (21) and He made for them (the midwives) houses": I would not know what these "houses" were if not for (I Kings 9:10) "And it was at the end of twenty years that Solomon built the two houses — the house of the L-rd and the house of the king." "the house of the L-rd" — the priesthood; "the house of the king" — royalty. Yocheved attained to priesthood, and Miriam, to royalty. As it is written (I Chronicles 4:4) "These were the sons of Chur, the first-born of Efrathah, the father of Beth-lechem": "Efrathah" — Miriam, who married Calev, viz.: (I Chronicles 2:19) "And Calev took Efrath, and she bore to him Chur," and (Ibid. 50) "These were the sons of Calev, the son of Chur, the first-born of Efrathah, the father of Beth-lechem. "Efrathah" — This is the (royal) house of David, as it is written (I Samuel 17:12) "And David was the son of an Efrati man of Beth-lechem."

(2) (I Chronicles 4:5) "And Ashchur, the father of Tekoa, had two wives, Chelah and Na'arah." Ashchur is Calev. Why was he called "Ashchur"? Because his face was "blackened" (hushcharu") with fasting. "the father" — He was like a father to her (Miriam). "Tekoa" — He "pegged" (taka) his heart to his father in heaven. "two wives" — Miriam, who became to him like "two wives." "Chelah and Na'arah": At first she was sick (cholah), and then she "awakened" (na'arah). (Ibid. 7) "And the sons of Chelah were Tzereth, Tzochar, and Ethnan": Tzereth — she became a "vexation" (tzarah) to her co-wife, (who envied her). Tzochar — Her face was resplendent as mid-day (tzoharayim). "and Ethnan" — Anyone who saw her brought an "exchange" (for cohabitation) to his wife. (Ibid. 8) "And Kotz begot Anuv and Hatzovevah": "Kotz" is Calev, who "spurned" (katzath) the counsel of the spies. "Anuv" — he generated good in the bringing of the grape cluster (viz. Bamidbar 13:23) for if not for Calev they would not have brought it. "and Hatzovevah" — he did the will (tzivyon) of the Holy One blessed be He. "and the families of Acharchel the son of Charum. "and the families of Acharchel" — This is Miriam, viz. (Shemot 15:20) "and all the women went out after ("achar") her (Miriam) with timbrels and dances." "and the families" — He (Calev) merited establishing families from her. "the son of Charum" — This is Yocheved, of whom (the Cohanim) it is written (Bamidbar 18:14) "Every devoted thing ("cherem") in Israel shall be yours," (the Cohanim - Levites descending from Yocheved). Variantly: This ("Charum") is Miriam from whom there issued forth David, whose kingdom was exalted ("romem") by the Holy One Blessed be He, viz. (I Samuel 2:10) "And He will give strength to His king and He will exalt the horn of His anointed one." We find, then, that David came from the descendants of Miriam — whence we derive "One who draws near (to Israel) is drawn near by Heaven."

(3) (Bamidbar 10:29) "the father-in-law of Moses": This is the highest tribute of all, to be called "the father-in-law of Moses. "We are traveling" (immediately to Eretz Yisrael). "We are traveling": R. Shimon b. Yochai says: Is it not already written (Devarim 4:22) "For I shall not cross the Jordan"? (To teach) that even his bones will not cross the Jordan. Why, then, did Moses include himself with them? He said: Now Israel will say: If he who took us out of Egypt and performed all the miracles and mighty acts for us does not enter, we, too, will not enter. Variantly: Why did Moses include himself with them? So that Yithro not say, If Moses does not enter, I, too, will not come. The sages say: Why did Moses include himself with them? He "lost sight" (of having been told that he would not enter) and he felt himself entering with them to Eretz Yisrael. "to the place of which the L-rd said: It will I give to you" — and proselytes have no portion in it. How, then, am I to satisfy (Ezekiel 47:23) "And it shall be, with the tribe with which the proselyte dwells, there shall you give his portion"? If it cannot speak of inheritance, understand it as speaking of atonement — that if he lived among the tribe of Judah, he was atoned for with (the communal offerings of) the tribe of Judah; (If he lived among) the tribe of Benjamin, he was atoned for with the tribe of Benjamin. Variantly: If it cannot speak of inheritance, understand it as speaking of burial — that proselytes are allotted burial in Eretz Yisrael. "Come with us and we will do good with you": Is there a member of a man's household for which good is not done? It follows a fortiori — If good is done for a member of a man's household, how much more so, for "a member of the household" (i.e., Yithro) of Him who spoke and brought the world into being! "for the L-rd has spoken good for Israel": Now did He not speak good for Israel until now? The L-rd always spoke good for Israel! (The intent is) rather, that the L-rd commanded Israel to do good for the proselytes and to deport themselves to them with humility.

עד כאן מדרשי השמות על מחלון וכיליון, או יואש ושרף. שימו לב שהכינויים שלהם קשורים למעשים שלהם. כינוי בד"כ ניתן לאדם לאחר זמן, והוא קשור לאופיו ולמעשיו.

מה למדתם מהדרשות הללו על המעשים של שני האנשים? מה כוונתו של רבי יוחנן במילים: "צריך אדם לחוש לשם"?

לעומת שני המדרשים הראשונים, ה"זוהר חדש" מתייחס לשמות המקוריים שלהם, ועל כך חשבו- מה הגיע קודם-השם או המעשה? האם השם הוא גזירת גורל ובעצם מתווה את מי שהם יהיו, או להפך?

זוהר חדש, מדרש רות קל״ט

(קלט) וְשֵׁם שְׁנֵי בָנָיו מַחְלוֹן וְכִלְיוֹן.

רַבִּי פְּדָת וְרַבִּי פְּרַחְיָא אָמְרוּ, מַחְלוֹן: שֶׁמָּחַל לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְאַחַר זְמַן, עַל שֶׁהָיָה מוֹחֶה בְּיָדוֹ שֶׁל אָבִיו, וּמִשְׁתַּדֵּל בּוֹ עַל הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים.

כִּלְיוֹן: עַל שֶׁנִּכְלָה מִן הָעוֹלָם.

Zohar Chadash, Midrash Rut 139

...

רות רבה ב׳:ט׳

(ט) וַיִּשְׂאוּ לָהֶם נָשִׂים מֹאֲבִיּוֹת (רות א, ד),

תָּנֵי בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי מֵאִיר לֹא גִּיְּרוּם וְלֹא הִטְבִּילוּ אוֹתָם וְלֹא הָיְתָה הֲלָכָה לְהִתְחַדֵּשׁ, וְלֹא הָיוּ נֶעֱנָשִׁין עֲלֵיהֶם, עַמּוֹנִי וְלֹא עַמּוֹנִית, מוֹאָבִי וְלֹא מוֹאָבִית.

שֵׁם הָאַחַת עָרְפָּה, שֶׁהָפְכָה עֹרֶף לַחֲמוֹתָהּ.

וְשֵׁם הַשֵּׁנִית רוּת, שֶׁרָאֲתָה בְּדִבְרֵי חֲמוֹתָהּ.

Ruth Rabbah 2:9

(9) "They married Moabite women (Ruth 1:4)": The tannaim taught in the name of Rabbi Meir that they did not convert them nor did they immerse them and the new halakhah has not been made and they were not unpunished on account of them: [the halakhah being] Ammonite and not Ammonitess; Moabite and not Moabitess. "The name of the one was Orpah" because she turned her back (oref) on her mother-in-law. "The name of the other was Ruth" because she looked (ra'atah) to the words of her mother-in-law. Rabbi Beivai in the name of Rabbi Reuben said: "Ruth and Orpah were the daughters of Eglon, as it is said: "I have a secret message for you.” The king thereupon commanded, “Silence!” (Judges 3:19)". And it is written: "and when Ehud approached him...Ehud said, “I have a message for you from God”; whereupon he rose from his seat. (Judges 3:20)", and he said to him: "The Holy One, blessed be He said: "You stood from your throne for my glory, as you live I will cause to rise from you a son sitting on the throne of Hashem"". "And they lived there about ten years": like 30 or 40, more or less.

סוטה מ״ב ב

רב ושמואל

חד אמר הרפה שמה ולמה נקרא שמה ערפה שהכל עורפין אותה מאחריה

וחד אמר ערפה שמה ולמה נקרא שמה הרפה שהכל דשין אותה כהריפות

וכן הוא אומר (שמואל ב יז, יט) ותקח האשה ותפרוש המסך על פני הבאר ותשטח עליה הריפות

דכתיב (רות א, יד) ותשק ערפה לחמותה ורות דבקה בה

אמר רבי יצחק אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא יבואו בני הנשוקה ויפלו ביד בני הדבוקה

דרש רבא בשכר ארבע דמעות שהורידה ערפה על חמותה זכתה ויצאו ממנה ארבעה גבורים שנאמר (רות א, יד) ותשאנה קולן ותבכינה עוד כתיב חץ חניתו וקרינן עץ חניתו אמר רבי אלעזר עדיין לא הגיענו לחצי שבחו של אותו רשע מכאן שאסור לספר בשבחן של רשעים ולא לפתח ביה כלל לאודועי שבחיה דדוד.

Sotah 42b

Hear my words, the regulations of war, and consider who is fit to participate in the battle. And return home, all of you who are exempt from combat. What does he say on the battlefield? “Let not your heart faint; fear not, nor be alarmed, and do not be terrified of them” (Deuteronomy 20:3). These four cautions correspond to four actions done by the nations of the world: They clash their weapons, and they blast horns, they shout, and they trample heavily with their horses to frighten their adversaries. The mishna recorded the particulars of the priest’s address: The Philistines came championed by Goliath. The Gemara describes the battle between David and Goliath. What is implied by the name Goliath? Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The verse indicates that he stood before the Holy One, Blessed be He, with brazenness [gilui panim], as it is stated: “Choose yourselves a man [ish], and let him come down to me” (I Samuel 17:8), and man [ish] is referring to none other than the Holy One, Blessed be He, as it is stated: “The Lord is a man [ish] of war” (Exodus 15:3). The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: I will hereby fell him by the son of a man [ben ish], as it is stated: “Now David was the son of that man [ben ish] of Ephrath” (I Samuel 17:12). Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Meir: In three instances, his own mouth ensnared that wicked one and unwittingly foretold his own downfall. One time he said: “Choose yourselves a man, and let him come down to me,” describing himself at the bottom. And another time, he said: “If he is able to fight with me and kill me then will we be your servants; but if I prevail against him, and kill him, then shall you be our servants, and serve us” (I Samuel 17:9). There, he supposed that his opponent would defeat him, before supposing that he, Goliath, would be victorious. Finally, the other time was when he said to David (I Samuel 17:43): “Am I a dog, that you come to me with staves?” The Gemara asks: But didn’t David also speak in this manner? David also said to him: “You come to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a javelin” (I Samuel 17:45). The Gemara answers: David then said to him, immediately afterward: “But I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have taunted” (I Samuel 17:45). The verse says: “And the Philistine drew near morning and evening” (I Samuel 17:16). Rabbi Yoḥanan says: He did this specifically in order to prevent them from completing the recitation of Shema in the required times of morning and evening. “And Goliath presented himself forty days” (I Samuel 17:16). Rabbi Yoḥanan says: These days correspond to the forty days over which the Torah was given, as he wanted to do away with it. The verse introduces Goliath: “And a champion [ish habeinayim] went out from the camp of the Philistines, named Goliath” (I Samuel 17:4). The Gemara asks: What is indicated by the term beinayim? Rav said: The word is related to the root beit, nun, heh, meaning build, and means that he is built [muvneh] perfectly and free of any blemish. And Shmuel said: The word is related to the word bein, meaning between, and means that he was the middle [beinoni] among his brothers. A Sage from the school of Rabbi Sheila said: The word is related to the root beit, nun, heh, meaning build, and means that he was made strong as a building [binyan]. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The word is related to the word bein, meaning between, and means that he was born from among many, as follows: He was the son of one hundred fathers [pappi] and one dog [nanai], as his mother engaged in sexual intercourse with one hundred men and a dog, and he was fathered from among them. The verse recounts that he was “named Goliath, of Gath” (I Samuel 17:4). Rav Yosef taught: This is because everyone would thresh his mother by cohabiting with her like people do in a winepress [gat], where everyone tramples. It is written that Goliath came from “the caves [me’arot] of the Philistines” (I Samuel 17:23), but we read, according to the Masoretic text: He came from among “the ranks [ma’arkhot] of the Philistines.” What is meant by the written term me’arot? Rav Yosef taught: The word is related to the word he’era, meaning penetrated, and implies that everyone penetrated [he’eru], i.e., engaged in sexual intercourse with, his mother. It is written that Goliath’s mother was: “Harafa” (II Samuel 21:16), and in another place it is written: “Orpah” (Ruth 1:4), and the Gemara will soon explain that this was the same woman. Rav and Shmuel engaged in a dispute concerning this matter. One of them said: Her name was Harafa, and why is she called by the name Orpah? It is because everyone came at her from behind [orfin] her, i.e., sodomized her. And one of them said: Her name was Orpah, and why is she called by the name Harafa? It is because everyone threshed her like groats [harifot], i.e., engaged in sexual intercourse with her, and so it says that this word means groats: “And the woman took and spread the covering over the well’s mouth, and strewed groats [harifot] thereon” (II Samuel 17:19). And if you wish, you can say from here: “Though you should crush a fool in a mortar with a pestle among groats [harifot], yet will not his foolishness depart from him” (Proverbs 27:22). The Gemara continues its discussion of the battle of David and Goliath. “These four were born to Harafa in Gath; and they fell by the hand of David, and by the hand of his servants” (II Samuel 21:22). The Gemara asks: What are the names of the four siblings mentioned here? Rav Ḥisda said: They are Saph, and Madon, Goliath, and Ishbi in Nob (see II Samuel 21:16–20). It says: “And they fell into the hands of David and his servants.” Why? It is because of the acts of their forebears, as it is written: “And Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, and Ruth cleaved to her” (Ruth 1:14). Rabbi Yitzḥak says: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: The children of the one who kissed, referring to the four giants descended from Orpah, will come and fall into the hand of the children of the one who cleaved, referring to David, who was descended from Ruth. Rava taught: As a reward for the four tears that Orpah shed in sadness over her mother-in-law, she merited four mighty warriors descended from her, as it is stated: “And they lifted up their voice and wept again” (Ruth 1:14). It is written about Goliath: “And the half [ḥetz] of his spear was like a weaver’s beam” (I Samuel 17:7), and we read, according to the Masoretic tradition: “And the shaft [etz] of his spear.” Rabbi Elazar says: The written version of the text demonstrates that we have not yet reached half [ḥetzi] of the praise of that wicked man. Only half of his spear was as long as a weaver’s beam, but the Masoretic reading offers a less impressive description. It is learned from here that it is prohibited to relate the praise of wicked people. The Gemara asks: If so, then the verse should not begin by praising him at all. The Gemara answers: It was necessary in this case in order to relate the praise of David, who defeated Goliath. § According to the mishna, the priest would say: The Ammonites came championed by Shobach (see II Samuel, chapter 10). In one account, his name is written: “Shobach” (II Samuel 10:18), and in another place it is written: “Shophach” (I Chronicles 19:18). Rav and Shmuel engaged in a dispute concerning this matter. One of them said: His name was Shophach, and why is he called by the name Shobach? It is because he was built like a dovecote [shovakh], as he was exceptionally tall. And one of them said: His name was Shobach, and why is he called by the name Shophach? It is because anyone who would see him would become terrified and his courage would be spilled [nishpakh] before him like water from a jug. The Gemara records a dispute concerning the enemy forces of Nebuchadnezzar. The prophet states: “Their quiver [ashpato] is an open sepulcher, they are all mighty men” (Jeremiah 5:16). Rav and Shmuel, and some say Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, engaged in a dispute concerning the implication of the verse. One of them said: When they shoot an arrow, they produce heaps and heaps [ashpatot ashpatot] of corpses. And lest you say that they are skilled in the arts of battle but they are not particularly strong, the verse states: “They are all mighty men.” And one of them said: When they perform their needs, i.e., relieve themselves, they produce heaps and heaps [ashpatot ashpatot] of excrement, which indicates they eat heartily, like mighty men. And lest you say it is because they are ill in their intestines, the verse states: “They are all mighty men” and are not ill. Rav Mari said: Learn from this exchange that if there is one whose excrement is abundant, he is ill in his intestines. The Gemara asks: What difference is there whether or not he is ill in his intestines? The Gemara answers: It is so that one who suffers these symptoms will tend to himself medically. In a similar vein, one is urged to relieve his distress. The verse states: “If there is a care in the heart of a man, let him bend it [yashḥena]” (Proverbs 12:25). Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi dispute the verse’s meaning. One said: He should force it [yasḥena] out of his mind. He should remove his worries from his thoughts. And one said: It means he should tell [yesiḥena] his troubles to others, which will relieve his anxiety. The mishna recounts the priest’s address: But you are not like them, because, as the verse states: “For the Lord your God is He that goes with you, to fight for you against your enemies, to save you” (Deuteronomy 20:4). And why does the verse elaborate so much in spelling out the nature of God’s attendance in battle? It is because the ineffable name of God and all of His appellations that are written on the tablets

ברכות ז׳ ב

רוּת, מַאי ״רוּת״?

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: שֶׁזָּכְתָה וְיָצָא מִמֶּנָּה דָּוִד שֶׁרִיוָּהוּ לְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא בְּשִׁירוֹת וְתִשְׁבָּחוֹת. מְנָא לַן דִּשְׁמָא גָּרֵים?

אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״לְכוּ חֲזוּ מִפְעֲלוֹת ה׳ אֲשֶׁר שָׂם שַׁמּוֹת בָּאָרֶץ״, אֶל תִּקְרֵי ״שַׁמּוֹת״ אֶלָּא ״שֵׁמוֹת״.

Berakhot 7b

Until now, the Gemara has cited statements made by Rabbi Yoḥanan in the name of the tanna, Rabbi Yosei. Now, the Gemara begins to cite what Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: From the day that the Holy One, Blessed be He, created the world there was no person who called him “Lord” until Abraham came and called him Lord. As it is stated: “And he said, ‘My Lord, God, by what shall I know that I will inherit it?’” (Genesis 15:8). The Gemara cites another statement extolling that virtue of Abraham is mentioned, as Rav said: Even Daniel’s prayers were only answered on account of Abraham, as it is stated: “And now listen, God, to the prayer of Your servant and to his supplication; and cause Your face to shine upon Your desolate Temple, for the sake of the Lord” (Daniel 9:17). The verse should have said: And cause Your face to shine upon Your desolate Temple, for Your sake, as Daniel was addressing the Lord. Rather, this verse contains an allusion that the prayer should be accepted for the sake of Abraham, who called You, Lord. Daniel utilized that name of God in order to evoke Abraham’s virtue and enhance his prayer. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: From where is it derived that one must not placate a person while the person in the throes of his anger? As it is stated: “My face will go, and I will give you rest” (Exodus 33:14). And Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: From the day the Holy One, Blessed be He, created the world, no one thanked the Holy One, Blessed be He, until Leah came and thanked Him, as it is stated: “And she became pregnant and gave birth to a son, and she said, ‘This time I will give thanks to God,’ and thus he was called Judah” (Genesis 29:35). Tangential to the mention of Leah’s son, Judah, and the reason for his name, the Gemara explains the sources for other names, including Reuben. Rabbi Elazar said: Reuben’s name should be considered a prophecy by Leah, as Leah said: See [re’u] the difference between my son [beni] and the son of my father-in-law, Esau, son of Isaac. Even though Esau knowingly sold his birthright to his brother Jacob, as it is written: “And he sold his birthright to Jacob” (Genesis 25:33), nonetheless, behold what is written about him: “And Esau hated Jacob” (Genesis 27:41). Esau was not only angry over Isaac’s blessing, but he was angry about another matter as well, as it is written: “And he said, ‘Is he not rightly named Jacob, for he has supplanted me twice? He took my birthright, and behold, now he has taken my blessing’” (Genesis 27:36). Despite having sold his birthright, he refused to relinquish it. While my son, Reuben, even though Joseph took his birthright from him by force, as it is written: “And the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel, for he was the firstborn; but, since he defiled his father’s bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph, son of Israel” (I Chronicles 5:1). Nevertheless, he was not jealous of him, as it is written when Joseph’s brothers sought to kill him: “And Reuben heard and he saved him from their hands, saying ‘Let us not take his life’” (Genesis 37:21). Continuing on the topic of names, the Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the name Ruth? Rabbi Yoḥanan said: That she had the privilege that David, who inundated the Holy One, Blessed be He, with songs and praises, would descend from her. The name Ruth [Rut] is etymologically similar in Hebrew to the word inundate [riva]. Regarding the basic assumption that these homiletic interpretations of names are allusions to one’s future, the Gemara asks: From where do we derive that the name affects one’s life? Rabbi Eliezer said that the verse says: “Go, see the works of the Lord, who has made desolations [shamot] upon the earth” (Psalms 46:9). Do not read the word as shamot, rather as shemot, names. The names given to people are, therefore, “the works of the Lord upon the earth.” And Rabbi Yoḥanan said other aggadic statements in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: The existence of wayward children in a person’s home is more troublesome than the war of Gog and Magog, the ultimate war, the climax of the travails of Messianic times. As it is stated: “A Psalm of David, when he fled from his son, Absalom” (Psalms 3:1). And it is written thereafter: “Lord, how numerous are my enemies, many have risen against me” (Psalms 3:2). While concerning the war of Gog and Magog, which is alluded to in the second chapter of Psalms, it is written: “Why are the nations in an uproar? And why do the peoples speak for naught? The kings of the earth stand up and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against His anointed…He that sits in heaven laughs, the Lord mocks them” (Psalms 2:1–4). Yet in this chapter describing the war of Gog and Magog “how numerous are my enemies” is not written, as it is not as difficult as raising a wayward son like Absalom. Regarding the opening phrase of the psalm, which serves as its title, the Gemara wonders: It is said: “A Psalm of David, when fleeing his son, Absalom.” A Psalm of David? It should have said: A lament of David. Rabbi Shimon ben Avishalom said a parable: To what is this similar? It is similar to a person about whom a promissory note was issued stating that he must repay a debt to the lender. Before he repaid it, he was despondent, worried how he will manage to repay the debt. After he repaid it, he was glad. So too was the case with David. When the Holy One, Blessed be He, told him, through Natan the prophet, after the incident with Bathsheba, “Behold, I will raise up evil against you from your house” (II Samuel 12:11), David was despondent. He said: Perhaps it will be a slave or a mamzer who will rise up in my house, a person of such lowly status, who will have no pity on me. But once David saw that Absalom was the one through whom the prophecy was to be fulfilled, he rejoiced, as he was certain that Absalom would show him mercy. That is why David said a psalm, not a lament, thanking God for punishing him in the least severe manner possible. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: One is permitted to provoke the wicked in this world. Though the ways of the wicked prosper, one is still permitted to provoke them and need not fear (Maharsha), as it is stated: “Those who abandon the Torah will praise wickedness, and the keepers of the Torah will fight them” (Proverbs 28:4). That statement was also taught in a baraita, as Rabbi Dostai, son of Rabbi Matun, says: One is permitted to provoke the wicked in this world, as it is stated: “Those who abandon the Torah will praise wickedness, and the keepers of the Torah will fight them.” And if someone whispered to you, saying, on the contrary, isn’t it also written: “Do not compete with evil-doers, and do not envy the unjust” (Psalms 37:1), meaning that one should avoid provoking the wicked, say to him: Only one whose heart strikes him with pangs of conscience over sins that he committed says this. Rather, the true meaning of the verse is: Do not compete with evil-doers, to be like the evil-doers, and do not envy the unjust to be like the unjust. The Gemara cites proof from another verse. And it says: “One shall not envy the unjust, but be in fear of the Lord all the day” (Proverbs 23:17). In this context, to envy means to seek to emulate the unjust. From these verses in Psalms and Proverbs, it would seem that one is encouraged to provoke the wicked. The Gemara asks: Is this so? Didn’t Rabbi Yitzḥak say: If you see a wicked person upon whom the hour is smiling, do not provoke him. As long as he is enjoying good fortune, there is no point in confronting him. As it is stated: “His ways prosper at all times; Your judgments are far beyond him; as for his adversaries, he snorts at them” (Psalms 10:5). The verse teaches us that the ways of the wicked will always succeed. And not only that, but he emerges victorious in judgment, as it is stated: “Your judgments are far beyond him,” meaning that even when he is brought to justice, it does not affect him. And not only that, but he witnesses his enemies’ downfall, as it is stated: “As for all his adversaries, he snorts at them.” To resolve this contradiction with regard to whether or not one may provoke the wicked, the Gemara offers several explanations: This is not difficult, as it can be understood that this, which says that one may not provoke the wicked, is referring to his personal matters, while that, which says that it is a mitzva to confront them, is referring to matters of Heaven. And if you wish, say instead that this, which says not to confront the wicked and that, which says to confront the wicked, are both referring to matters of Heaven, and, nevertheless, it is not difficult. This, which says that one may not provoke the wicked, is referring to a wicked person upon whom the hour is smiling, who is enjoying good fortune. While that, which says that it is a mitzva to confront them, is referring to a wicked person upon whom the hour is not smiling. And if you wish, say instead that this, which says not to confront and that, which says to confront, are both referring to a wicked person upon whom the hour is smiling, but the question of whether one is permitted to confront him depends on who is confronting him. And nevertheless, this is not difficult. This, which says that it is a mitzva to confront them, is referring to a completely righteous person, while this, which says that one may not confront the wicked, is referring to one who is not completely righteous, as Rav Huna said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Why do You look on those who deal treacherously and hold Your peace? When the wicked swallows the man more righteous than he?” (Habakkuk 1:13). This verse is difficult to understand. Do the wicked swallow the righteous? Isn’t it written: “The wicked looks to the righteous and seeks to kill him; the Lord will not leave him in his hand, nor allow him to be condemned when he is judged” (Psalms 37:32–33), and it is written: “No mischief shall befall the righteous” (Proverbs 12:21)? Rather, in light of these verses, the verse: “The wicked swallows the man more righteous than he” means: The man who is more righteous than he, but not completely righteous, he swallows. The completely righteous he does not swallow. And if you wish, say: In general, the wicked cannot swallow the righteous, but when the hour is smiling upon him, it is different. When the wicked are enjoying good fortune, even the righteous can be harmed (Birkat Hashem). And Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: Setting a fixed place for prayer is so important that one who sets a fixed place for his prayer, his enemies fall beneath him, as it is said: “And I will appoint a place for My nation, Israel, and I will plant them, that they may dwell in their own place.” Through setting aside a place for prayer, they will merit to “be disturbed no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them anymore, as in the beginning” (II Samuel 7:10). This verse, cited by the Gemara, leads to an additional point. Rav Huna raised a contradiction: In the book of Samuel, in this verse it is written: “To afflict them,” while in the parallel verse in I Chronicles (17:9) it is written: “To destroy them.” The Gemara resolves this contradiction: The enemies of Israel intend first to afflict them, and, ultimately, to destroy them entirely. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: Service of Torah is greater than its study, i.e., serving a Torah scholar and spending time in his company is greater than learning Torah from him. Torah study is one component of a Torah life, but one who serves a Torah scholar learns about every aspect of life from his actions. This is derived from the verse that speaks in praise of Elisha, as it is stated: “Here is Elisha son of Shafat, who poured water over Elijah’s hands” (II Kings 3:11). The verse does not say that he learned from Elijah, rather that he poured water, which teaches that the service of Torah represented by Elisha pouring water over Elijah’s hands is greater than its study. As a prelude to another of the statements by Rabbi Yoḥanan in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai, the Gemara relates the following incident. Rabbi Yitzḥak said to Rav Naḥman: Why did the Master not come to the synagogue to pray? Rav Naḥman said to him: I was weak and unable to come. Rabbi Yitzḥak said to him: Let the Master gather ten individuals, a prayer quorum, at your home and pray. Rav Naḥman said to him: It is difficult for me to impose upon the members of the community to come to my home to pray with me (Sefer Mitzvot Gadol). Rabbi Yitzḥak suggested another option: The Master should tell the congregation to send a messenger when the congregation is praying to come and inform the Master so you may pray at the same time. Rav Naḥman saw that Rabbi Yitzḥak was struggling to find a way for him to engage in communal prayer. He asked: What is the reason for all this fuss? Rabbi Yitzḥak said to him: As Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai:

הצעה לתרגיל המשך: נסו לחשוב על השם שלכם ולדרוש אותו ברוח מדרשי חז"ל. "ולמה נקרא שמי?"