We learn that a certain word in five Pesukim can be read in two ways. The word in question can either be associated with the phrase that precedes it, or the phrase that follows it.
I don't understand:
(a) Aren't the "Ta'amei ha'Mikra" a Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai? If so, why can't we resolve the Safek based on them? (I know that there are times where a Drasha ignores the Ta'amei ha'Mikra, but isn't this a question of Peshat?). Not only are we ignoring an "Esnachta" here and there, we are even ignoring a Sof Pasuk (in the case of Arur Apam...)!
Maybe this is related to the above; the Rambam sometimes explains the Pshat of a Pasuk ignoring the Ta'amim (such as "Mimenu l'Da'as Tov v'Ra, in Hilchos Teshuvah 5:1). How can he do that? Or is that just Drush and not Pshat?
(b) I have particular difficulty with one of the verses in question: "Se'es". How can it be connected to the following words? The next word is "v'Im [Lo Seitiv...]. Doesn't the Vav make it obvious that it is the beginning of a new phrase?
Thank you again for your help
Q. Reese, Atlanta, GA
The Ritva says that the Gemara's statement is that there is a doubt regarding these five Pesukim before taking the Tamei ha'Mikra into account (besides for the word "Meshukadim," which is still in doubt after taking the Tamei ha'Mikra into account). Tosfos (DH "Se'eis") apparently holds otherwise. The Maharsha explains the position of Tosfos by saying that the Gemara was not certain that the Ta'amim we have in these Pesukim are correct. Moreover, the Gemara illustrates in Kedushin (30a) how we are not certain that every single Pasuk ends where it ends and starts where it starts. This is how the Gemara could even have this Safek by the word "Arur" which starts a Pasuk (see Magen Avraham O.C. 32:45). [The Derasha used by the Rambam above doesn't really negate the rules of Peshat, as he is carrying on the meaning of "mi'Menu" used in the first part of the Pasuk and applying it to understand the second part of the Pasuk.]
Regarding "Se'eis," the Mikri Dardaki asks your question. He answers that Kayin's disappointment that his Korban was rejected by Hash-m was tied to the fact that he was haughty. The Gemara in Erchin (16a) says that because of the sin of haughtiness one receives Tzara'as. One form of Tzara'as, the Torah states, is called "Se'eis" (Vayikra 13:2). The Pasuk could therefore be indicating a form of punishment Kayin would receive if he did not do Teshuvah.
Kol Tuv,
Yaakov Montrose