Is there a contradiction in the Torah?
The word 'temimim' in the Gem. 45a. is written with a letter 'yud' between the last 'mem' and the 'mem' before it. And this is to be expected.
Yet in the Torah this word is spelled chosor, with the letter 'yud' missing! Isn't it a 'stirah miney ubey', to write the word 'temimim' as chosor ? How could a word meaning perfect be spelled 'chosor'
Reading 'The words in this sentence are spelled corectly.'in a book, as well as the 'perma press' setting on an iron, may bring a smile to one's face; but for 'Temimim' without a 'yud' in the Torah, an explanation is required as well.
In fact; this word is spelled 'chosor' EVERY TIME it is mentioned in the Torah! And 25 out of 26 times if you include the whole T'nach in your search.
Yet if one were to search the entire range of all the seforim offered on Davka's disk (Judaic Classics Deluxe Edition), you would find that NOWHERE is the word 'Temimim' ever spelled 'chosor'; except in the Torah!
So I ask you; is Temimim in the Torah perfect or missing!?
Thanks for considering my question.
Alex Lebovits, toronto, canada
This is an interesting observation. However, it happens very commonly that the Gemara adds a Yud or a Vav to words of the Torah which are spelled without them, and this is not something particular to the word "Temimim."
In fact, in this case the Gemara actually adds something to certain versions of the Sefarim in Yechezkel 46:6. Our text in the Gemara is "Tamim," but the Mesores ha'Shas changes this to "Temimim." Minchas Shai on Yechezkel 46:6 also cites versions of the Navi which read "Tamim." Radak points out that there is a very obvious difficulty in the verse. The verse says "Par" which is singular, so why does it say "Temimim" which is plural? Radak's explanation is based on the Gemara here. The Gemara refers to the sacrifice of Rosh Chodesh which the Torah says is comprised of two bulls (Bamidbar 28:11). However, the Gemara teaches that if one can find only one bull, he should at least offer this, even though he is not offering two. It follows that when the Navi says "Par," he is teaching that sometimes one Par may also constitute the Rosh Chodesh Korban. When the Navi says "Temimim," he teaches that l'Chatchilah the Korban should be comprised of two (plural) cows.
So in this particular case, Temimim is not so Chaser, even though it is "missing" a Yud, because -- on the contrary -- it is fuller than Tamim and hints that two Parim are not necessarily the minimum possible!
Chailcha l'Oraisa,
Dovid Bloom
Reb Dovid, Hello! It's a pleasure to hear from you again. Thank you very much for your pleasurable answer.
The idea that a word that's spelled 'chosor' is in actuality a 'molei d'molei' of the word Tamim is a very ingenious explanation both for this Gemorah and for this Posuk in Yechezkel!
But taking this mehalech of answering only this particular Posuk with this particular Gemorah leaves us with 24 other questions remaining to be answered.
Why is the word 'Temimim' spelled chosor all the rest of the time in the Torah?
Thank you again for all the time you take to be able to answer so thoughfully.
Kol Tuv
Alex Lebovits
Alex, another fascinating question about why Temimim is always Chaser in the Torah!
1. a) Rabeinu Bachye (to Bamidbar 28:3) writes that the fact that "Temimim" is written without a Yud teaches that the two daily Tamid offerings should be identical. This explanation is also given by the Roke'ach in his commentary on the Torah on this verse, and it is also printed in the Perush of the Roke'ach to the Sidur (on Parshas ha'Tamid, near the beginning of Shacharis).
b) In both contemporary editions of Rabeinu Bachye with footnotes, and in the Roke'ach Sidur with footnotes, it is pointed out that this explanation is surprising because it appears to contradict an explicit Gemara in Yoma (62b). The Gemara there seems to conclude that it is not an absolute requirement that the daily Tamid offerings be identical.
c) I would like to suggest an answer to the question of the publishers of Rabeinu Bachye and Roke'ach. The Ritva to Yoma (62b) cites a commentator who writes that although it is not stated anywhere in the Mishnah or Beraisa, there is a Mitzvah that the two Korbenos Tamid be as similar as possible. The Ritva rejects this explanation as incorrect. However, we have found that Rabeinu Bachae and the Roke'ach agree with the explanation rejected by the Ritva.
2. a) I have another suggestion to explain why "Temimim" is Chaser. We must first compare "Temimim" to a very similar word, "Taninim," the creatures that Hashem created on the fifth day of Creation (Bereishis 1:21). The Ba'al ha'Turim there writes that the fact that "Taninim" is written without a Yud hints to what the Gemara in Bava Basra (74b) says: Hashem killed the female and salted its flesh so that the Tzadikim will enjoy it the World to Come. (This interpretation is based on Bereshis Rabah 7:4.)
b) The idea is that since the Taninim cannot reproduce, they are "Chaser" -- there is obviously something missing in the fact that they cannot perpetuate their race. The same idea applies to the Korbanos offered in the Beis ha'Mikdash. Because they are intended as Korbanos, their purpose in the world is obviously not to fulfill "Peru u'Revu," which is something that animals are also "commanded" to fulfill.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Reb Dovid Hello!
Thank you for that Rebeinu Bachye as well as The Rokeach. I had agonized over this question for a long time without finding anyone that asked it.
A while ago I was at my grandson's bris, on a Shabbos in Monsey, where I was honored with an aliyah which had the word Temimim spelled Chaser. Rabbi Deutch is the Bal Koreh in that Shul, as well as it's Rav. Being part of the family I was seated next to him at the Kiddush and I asked him "How could the word Temimim ever be spelled Chaser?" His immediate one sentence answer to me was; to tell us that, "There is no greater 'Chaser' than a man that thinks of himself as a Tamim!'
I savored that thought for a long long time afterwards.
And this Pesach, thinking along the same lines, a very similar idea, yet different altogether, occured to me. I would like to say that the Torah is telling us that, 'One need not be perfect to be called a Tamim by the Torah, he only has to be as good as he can be!'
A proof (if necessary), can be brought from Noach. The Torah calls him a Tamim, even though according to one opinion, if he would have been in Avraham's generation he would have been considered a nobody. Even according to that opinon, he has to hold, that the Torah considers him a Tamim.
It is nice to know that Rabeinu Bachye asks this question.
Thank you and Kol Tuv
Alex Lebovits
Alex- that is a beautiful insight from Rabbi Deutch!
During my research on Temimim I found some other interesting things:
1) Even though Temimim is always spelled Chaser in the Torah it is remarkable that in the book of Mishlei the 3 times it appears it is always Malei. The first time is in Mishlei 1:12. The Mesorah, printed on the side of the page in the Mikra'ot Gedolot, writes that every Temimim of animals is written without a Yud at the end with the exception of Yechezkel 43:25.
2) The Mesorah is pointing out that there is a difference between Temimim that is written in the Torah in connection with the animal sacrifices, where it is written Chaser, and between Temimim written in Mishlei which is mentioned in connection with people.
3) The other occasions in Mishlei where Temimim occurs are in 2:21 and 28:10 where it is written with a Yud in both places.
4) However in Tehilim 37:18 Temimim is written without a Yud even though it refers to people not animals.
5) My suggestion to explain the above is that the perfection that can be achieved by human beings is greater than what can be achieved by the animal kingdom ,even Korbanos.
(However I still do not have an explanation why there is an animal Temimim in Yechezkel 43:25 which is Malei and conversely a human Temimim in Tehilim 37:18 which is Chaser).
Kol Tuv
Dovid Bloom
Rabbi Bloom Hello!
I finally got to the Rabeinu Bachye that you mentioned regarding Temimim.
I did not see anything more there than what you wrote in your answer. And I have trouble understanding that answer.
Writing that the animals should be Temimim and spelling it 'chosor' indicates to me that they don't have to be completely the same (that something can be missing and they are still called Tamim), which is exactly the opposite of what R' Bachye says! Spelling it 'Moleh' would indicate to me that they have to be identical.
Where am I going wrong?
Thanks for your patience.
Alex Lebovits
See Vayikra 16:6 "v'Lakach Es Shnei ha'Se'irim" (the last word spelled Chaser), and Chulin bottom of 11a (where we learn from that verse that the two Se'irim must be identical). True, it is possible that the Gemara in Chulin is using the methodology of Yoma 62b, where we learn from that verse (and from verses 5 and 8, the latter of which is also Se'irim Chaser) that the Se'irim must be identical from the extra word "Shnei." However the Gemara in Chulin does not bring the first verse of the three, as the Gemara in Yoma does. Thus it might be learning this point from the fact that it is spelled Chaser.
As for the logic behind the Drasha - Rabeinu Bachye explains it in Bamidbar 7:10. He says (regarding the word Nesi'im, Chaser) that the letter "Yud" is used to denote that the word is plural. The lack of a Yud shows that the plurality is really a singularity - i.e. in our case, that the two are identical.
See similar Drashot in Rashi to Bereishis 1:21 regarding "Taninim" Chaser, and in Rashi to Shemos 31:18 and Da'as Zekeinim to Shemos 32:15 (based on the Midrash Shemos Raba 41) regarding "Luchos" Chaser.
I think that clears up this Drasha pretty much.
Best wishes,
Mordecai Kornfeld
Kollel Iyun Hadaf
Shalom Alex!
I would just like to add that according to what Rabeinu Bachye wrote in Bamidbar 7:10 (cited above), we may suggest a beautiful explanation for why Temimim is spelled Malei each of the three times that it appears in Sefer Mishlei.
As I cited earlier, the Mesorah to Mishlei 1:12, writes that every time Temimim is mentioned in Tanach in connection with animal sacrifices, it is spelled Chaser (with the exception of Yechezkel 43:25). The Temimim mentioned in Mishlei, however, are 'complete' human beings. That is why they are spelled Malei.
According to Rabeinu Bachye Bamidbar 7:10 one may add the following. Korbanos bring about the unity of Hashem with of His creations. Chaser denotes unity, and since Korbanos bring all of the forces in the world together (see Rabeinu Bachye there) the word Temimim with reference to Korbanos is written Chaser.
Cheilchem l'Orayta!
Dovid Bloom