as you know there is 3 pasukim which derive the 3 oaths from in shir hashriam my question is why are pasuak 2,7 and 3,5 the same it say Im Ta'iru v'Im Tisoriru Es ha'Ahavah Ad she'Techpatz. Yet in 8,4 has dif wording and says Mah Ta'iru u'Mah T'oreru Es ha'Ahavah Ad she'Techpatz. why the dif wording?
jack franco, new york usa
Shalom Jack!
As you indicated, both verses 2:7 and 3:5 contain the phrase "Im Ta'iru v'Im T'oriru," while verse 8:4 uses the different wording "Mah Ta'iru u'Mah T'oriru." On a straightforward level of interpretation, several commentaries, including Rashi and Malbim, suggest the following. The phrase "Im" merely expresses adjuration, and therefore also a prohibition to rouse (l'Orer). But the phrase "Mah" actually indicates impossibility, implying that even if a violation of the adjuration were attempted, it would inevitably be unsuccessful.
On a Drash level of interpretation, the Tzror ha'Mor delves further into the meaning. Because the intent of his comment is somewhat subtle -- to my mind, at least -- therefore I invite you see it inside. Here is a link if you would like to access it online:
https://www.sefaria.org/Song_of_Songs.8.4?lang=bi&p2=Tzror_HaMor_on_Song_of_Songs.8.4.3&lang2=bi
Honestly, I am not fully sure what he means, but it sounds like he is indicating that "Mah Ta'iru" signifies that in the end of days, there will be utter clarity which will expose the evil nature of the nations' behavior which in turn will render them hated by Hash-m.
Warmest regards,
Yishai Rasowsky
i asked about why the differnce in langue of the 3 verese you said that the difernec of the wording implies even if we were to to volaite it wont be succfel does that me the state wont in the end be succefl
Shalom R' Franco,
I appreciate your inquiry and would like to provide clarification regarding the commentaries I referenced, notably that of Rashi. These interpretations may not precisely align with the nuanced Drash expounded by Chazal in Kesuvos 111.
For instance, within the context of the three oaths, Rashi consistently attributes all three verses to be addressing the gentiles. Of the three oaths, on the other hand, two of them are directed towards the Jewish people (do not ascend en masse; do not rebel against the nations), while one pertains to the gentiles (do not excessively oppress the Jews).
Addressing weighty inquiries such as the potential success of the state of Israel surpasses my area of expertise. However, I would like to recommend perusing the following article, which may offer insightful perspectives on the subject: https://www.dafyomi.co.il/discuss_daf.php?gid=15&sid=20&daf=111&n=6.
Should you wish to delve further into this matter, I remain at your disposal for additional discussions.
Warmest regards,
Yishai Rasowsky