Thursday, September 15, 2011

If Only Rashi and Rashbam Would Have Seen the Zohar...

Pesahim 118b:

אמר רבי שמעון בן לקיש מאי דכתיב מושיבי עקרת הבית אמרה כנסת ישראל לפני הקב״ה רבש״ע שמוני בניך כחולדה זו הדרה בעיקרי בתים

Ribbi Shimon Ben Lakish said: What does the following verse mean: "Moshivi Akeret Habayit"?  The Kenesset Yisrael said before HKB"H, "Master of the universe, Your sons have placed me as a weasel that lives in the [cracks in the] foundations of the houses."
Rashba"m there:

אמרה כנסת ישראל. הזקנים והחשובים שבהן אמרו על שאינם חשובים כל כך כדמשמע אם הבנים שהאם צועקת על הבנים ששמוה עקרת הבית:

The Kenesset Yisrael said. The elders and important ones among them said about those who are not as important - as is implied "Eim habanim" - that the mother cries over her children who have placed her [in the cracks of the] foundation of the house.
Ben Yehoyada there:

שם אמרה כנסת ישראל לפני הקב״ה. פירש רש״י ז״ל הזקנים והחשובין שבהם אמרו על שאינן חשובין כ״כ. הנה רש״י ז״ל היה מוכרח לפרש כן אע״פ שראה את פירושו זה דחוק מאד מפני כי בימיו עדיין לא נגלית חכמת האמת של זוה״ק לכל אדם, אך עתה דתהילות לאל נגלית חכמת האמת נמצא ביאור כנסת ישראל פשוט הוא...

Ibid. The Kenesset Yisrael said before HKB"H.  Rash"i [i.e. Rashba"m] explains this to mean the elders and important people among them said this about those who are not as important. Behold, Rash"i [Rashba"m] Za"l was forced to explain this way - even though he saw his own explanation as being very forced [see also the Maharsha on this] - because, in his day, the wisdom of truth of the Holy Zohar was not revealed to everybody. However, now that - praised be G-d - the wisdom of truth was revealed, it comes out that the explanation of "Kenesset Yisrael" is simple...
His first explanation in a nutshell is that "Kenesset Yisrael" refers to the Shechina complaining that it is no longer in the Beit Hamikdash, but relegated to the Kotel Hama'aravi due to the sins of the Jewish people.


At Thu Sep 15, 08:31:00 PM 2011, Anonymous S. said...

What do you think he meant to say by "לכל אדם"? Is the implication that it was revealed to Rashi [sic], but he wasn't in a position to explain according to something which was not revealed לכל אדם? If not, then if it wasn't revealed to Rashbam, how could he assume that it was revealed to Resh Lakish?

At Fri Sep 16, 10:33:00 AM 2011, Blogger yaak said...

I think it's pretty clear from the Ben Ish Hai's words that it was not revealed to the Rashbam.

Passing a tradition to Reish Lakish, who lived in the same country and only a century or less after Rashb"i is an easy assumption to make.


Post a Comment

<< Home