tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post8435443203164744425..comments2024-03-25T09:43:27.402-04:00Comments on Divrei Chaim: women's donation to the MishkanChaim B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-6885508279585272652009-03-23T13:31:00.000-04:002009-03-23T13:31:00.000-04:00Now that you mention it, maybe the answer is Eih H...Now that you mention it, maybe the answer is Eih Hachi Nami.<BR/><BR/>If you look at the passuk (Shemos 35:25) it says that the women spun the material (red wool, purple wool, etc.) and then THEY brought it spun (Vayaviuh Matveh).<BR/><BR/>THEY BROUGHT is written in masculine form -- Vayaviuh. If the women who had spun the wool brought it, it shold be feminine form -- VaTavina (Vateveina?).<BR/><BR/>Perhaps it was the HUSBANDS brought the spun wook and linen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-16073248642629692402009-03-23T13:22:00.000-04:002009-03-23T13:22:00.000-04:00Rishonim say that the kesubah was practiced in som...Rishonim say that the kesubah was practiced in some form even prior to Mattan Torah as a minhag. That is the meaning of the passuk "Kessef yishkol ke mohar ha besulos." <BR/><BR/>That does not mean that the formal takkanos were in tact -- they were not instituted till much later.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-4861400747534950292009-03-23T13:02:00.000-04:002009-03-23T13:02:00.000-04:00I assume she means the single girls that were past...I assume she means the single girls that were past katnus and na'arus and still not married-- the old maids, so to speak. Because before that, their ma'aseh yadayim belongs to their fathers mide'oraysa.<BR/><BR/>And now, we see how our holy Toirah is merumaz at in our daily language-- (I hope you're sitting down...) http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=spinsterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-11319162387818621092009-03-22T12:18:00.000-04:002009-03-22T12:18:00.000-04:00You are right. I am not a big Hirsch fan -- other...You are right. I am not a big Hirsch fan -- other than his own speculations, what are his suggested symbolisms based on? You could say its no worse than the Rambam in Moreh, but I don't know if you gain much by saying that.Chaim B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-42930013594232927712009-03-20T16:04:00.000-04:002009-03-20T16:04:00.000-04:00If I'm not mistaken, only the goats had their hair...If I'm not mistaken, only the goats had their hair woven while still attached; the sheep wool was still m'chusar tviyah u'tzviah. (A nitpick, but having recently read RSRH's essay on symbolism as applied to the mishkan, I've been wondering a lot more about the significance of the minutae of the mishkan).Josh M.https://www.blogger.com/profile/14414532577328945154noreply@blogger.com