Difference between revisions of "Dictionary:Changing Meanings/0"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
 
(283 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
<page type="Basic">
 
<page type="Basic">
<h1>Lexical: Changing Meanings</h1>
+
<h1>Changing Meanings</h1>
 
<div><b><center><span class="highlighted-notice">This topic has not yet undergone editorial review</span></center></b></div>
 
<div><b><center><span class="highlighted-notice">This topic has not yet undergone editorial review</span></center></b></div>
 +
<div class="overview">
 +
<h2>Overview</h2>
 +
All languages evolve, and semantic shift can sometimes result in a word's modern meaning being radically different than its original usage.&#160; Hebrew is no exception, as is said, "לשון התורה לחוד ולשון נביאים לחוד ולשון חכמים לחוד" (<multilink><a href="TosafotKiddushin37b" data-aht="source">Tosafot Kiddushin 37b</a><a href="TosafotKiddushin37b" data-aht="source">Kiddushin 37b</a><a href="Ba'alei HaTosafot" data-aht="parshan">About Ba'alei HaTosafot</a></multilink>). Words might take on one meaning in Torah, another in the Prophets and yet another in Rabbinic or modern Hebrew.&#160; Often, one's familiarity with the contemporary usage of a word influences the way one interprets Tanakh, as one might not recognize that a word's definition might have evolved, becoming more narrow, more expansive, or changing totally.&#160; Below is a listing of many terms whose meaning has shifted, with examples of how the changing definitions might have influenced different understandings of the Biblical text.</div>
 
<category>Within the Biblical Period
 
<category>Within the Biblical Period
<p>There are many words whose meaning might have changed from one period within Tanakh to another:</p>
+
<p>There are several words whose meaning might have changed from one period within Tanakh to another:</p><ul>
 +
<li><b>אֲבָל&#160;</b>– The meaning of this word has shifted over time, from meaning "indeed" or "verily" in the earlier books of Tanakh<fn>See, for example, <a href="Bereshit17-18-19" data-aht="source">Bereshit 17:19</a>,&#160;<a href="Bereshit42-20-21" data-aht="source">Bereshit 42:21</a> and <a href="ShemuelII14-4-5" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 14:5</a> (and see Rashi there, who explains "<b></b>אבל&#160;– בקושטא").</fn> to meaning "but" in later books such as Daniel, Ezra and Divrei HaYamim.<fn>See, for instance, <a href="Daniel10-7" data-aht="source">Daniel 10:7</a>, <a href="DivreiHaYamimII1-2-4" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 1:4</a>, or <a href="DivreiHaYamimII33-15-17" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 33:17</a>.</fn></li>
 +
<li><b>בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל</b> – The connotation of this word has changed slightly over time, becoming more expansive in meaning. In Sefer Bereshit<fn>See <a href="Bereshit42-5" data-aht="source">Bereshit 42:5</a>,&#160;<a href="Bereshit45-17-21" data-aht="source">Bereshit 45:21</a> and <a href="Bereshit46-5" data-aht="source">Bereshit 46:5</a>.</fn> and the opening verses of Sefer Shemot<fn>The phrase "בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" in&#160;<a href="Shemot1-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 1:1</a> clearly refers to the sons of Yaakov but verse 7 is ambiguous and could refer either to Yaakov's sons or to the entire Israelite nation. This depends on whether the verse is still part of the opening summary of Sefer Bereshit or is referring to events after the brothers' death.</fn> the term refers to the literal sons of Yaakov, whereas afterwards it refers to the nation of Israel.&#160; The turning point might be <a href="Shemot1-7-9" data-aht="source">Shemot 1:9</a>, which uniquely states "<b>עַם</b> בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל",&#8206;<fn>This is the only place in Tanakh in which this exact term is used and there are only two other places in Tanakh (Shemot 3:10, 7:4) where Hashem uses a similar term, "עַמִּי בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל".</fn> perhaps to clarify that the people have become a nation.<fn>See&#160;<multilink><a href="RSRHirschShemot1-1" data-aht="source">R. Hirsch</a><a href="RSRHirschShemot1-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 1:1</a><a href="RSRHirschShemot1-9" data-aht="source">Shemot 1:9</a><a href="R. Samson Raphael Hirsch" data-aht="parshan">About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch</a></multilink> on Shemot 1:1 and 9 who implies this.</fn>&#160; There are a couple of cases in which the meaning of the term is ambiguous:</li>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li><b>בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל</b> – In most of Sefer Bereshit<fn>See Bereshit 42:5, 45:2 and 46:5. In several other verses () the meaning of the term is ambiguous.&#160; See discussion below.</fn> and the opening verses of Sefer Shemot<fn>The phrase "בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" in Shemot 1:1 clearly refers to the sons of Yaakov but verse 7 is ambiguous and could refer either to Yaakov's sons or to the entire Israelite nation. This depends on whether the verse is still part of the opening summary of Sefer Bereshit (cf. Bereshit 47:27) or is referring to events after the brothers' death.</fn> the term&#160; refers to the sons of Yaakov, whereas afterwards it refers to the nation of Israel.&#160; The turning point might be Shemot 1:9, which uniquely states "<b>עַם</b> בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל",&#8206;<fn>This is the only place in Tanakh in which this exact term is used and there are only two other places in Tanakh (Shemot 3:10, 7:4) where Hashem uses a similar term, "עַמִּי בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל".</fn> perhaps to clarify that the people have become a nation.<fn>See R. Hirsch on Shemot 1:1 and 9 who implies this.</fn>&#160; There are several cases in which the meaning of the term is ambiguous:</li>
+
<li>"לֹא יֹאכְלוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה" (<a href="Bereshit32-33" data-aht="source">Bereshit 32:33</a>) See the debate in&#160;<multilink><a href="BavliChulin100b" data-aht="source">Bavli Chulin 100b</a><a href="BavliChulin100b" data-aht="source">Chulin 100b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink> whether this refers to a prohibition Yaakov's sons accepted upon themselves or whether this was first commanded to the nation at Sinai and placed in Sefer Bereshit only to provide the reasoning behind the command.<fn>Compare also <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit32-33" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit32-33" data-aht="source">Bereshit 32:33</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>,&#160;<multilink><a href="RadakBereshit32-33" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakBereshit32-33" data-aht="source">Bereshit 32:33</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah32-33" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaParashah32-33" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaParashah 32:33</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink>'s reading of the verse.</fn></li>
 +
<li>"וַיַּשְׁבַּע יוֹסֵף אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל... וְהַעֲלִתֶם אֶת עַצְמֹתַי" (<a href="Bereshit50-24-25" data-aht="source">Bereshit 50:25</a>) – It is ambiguous from this verse whether Yosef is speaking to his brothers or all their descendants (the nation). The difference relates to a larger question: Did Yosef assume that after his death, the family would immediately return to Canaan and take his bones with them, or was Yosef aware the nation was to remain in Egypt for centuries and was requesting that the nation remember him when redeemed?<fn>See the third approach in <a href="Yosef's Economic Policies" data-aht="page">Yosef's Economic Policies</a> for discussion of whether the brothers had originally planned to return to Canaan immediately after the famine and its repercussions eased.</fn></li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>דֶּגֶל&#8206;</b><fn>See D. Curwin's Balashon blog, "<a href="http://www.balashon.com/search/label/Parashat%20Bamidbar">degel</a>" for further discussion.</fn>&#160;–&#160;<multilink><a href="ShadalBemidbar1-52" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalBemidbar1-52" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 1:52</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> asserts that the original meaning of this word is not flag or banner, but rather military unit.<fn>See also <multilink><a href="TargumOnkelosBemidbar1-52" data-aht="source">Onkelos </a><a href="TargumOnkelosBemidbar1-52" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 1:52</a><a href="Targum Onkelos" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Onkelos</a></multilink>who translates, "טִקְסֵיהּ", which Shadal claims is related to the Greek "taxis", meaning order and group.</fn> As such, when Sefer Bemidbar states that the nation camped "אִישׁ עַל דִּגְלוֹ" or traveled "לְדִגְלֵיהֶם" the verses are emphasizing the nation's military organization, not the fact that they had military flags. He claims that it is only later that the word came to also refer to the standard that marked the unit.<fn>Cf. J. Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers, (Philadelphia, 1990), who agrees regarding the meaning of the word "דֶּגֶל" in Bemidbar but suggests that the semantic shift happened in the reverse order. The original meaning of the word was flag, and only afterwards was it extended to refer also to the army division.</fn> Thus, in <a href="ShirHaShirim2-4" data-aht="source">Shir HaShirim 2:4</a>, the beloved uses the secondary meaning, saying: "וְדִגְלוֹ עָלַי אַהֲבָה", that her lover's banner is his love for her.<fn>See<multilink><a href="RashiShirHaShirim2-4" data-aht="source"> Rashi</a><a href="RashiShirHaShirim2-4" data-aht="source">Shir HaShirim 2:4</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>, though, who appears to understand "דִגְלוֹ" in this verse, too, in the sense of "unit of people", explaining the phrase to mean that the lover's gathering (דגלו) of the beloved to him, was the expression of his love. See also&#160;<a href="Dictionary:Cognates and Loanwords" data-aht="page"> Cognates and Loanwords</a> for the suggestion that "דגל" relates to the Akkadian <i>dagalu</i>, meaning to look or gaze, and that the lover is saying, "his gaze upon me is loving".</fn></li>
 +
<li><b>דָּת&#160;</b>–&#160;<multilink><a href="ShadalDevarim33-2" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalDevarim33-2" data-aht="source">Devarim 33:2</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> points out that the word "דָּת" is a Persian loan word, first appearing as an independent word in the Book of Esther, where it means law or decree. The term appears only once earlier in Tanakh, in <a href="Devarim33-2" data-aht="source">Devarim 33:2</a>, but only as part of a larger term "אשדת". The word is written as just one word "אשדת" but read as if written "אֵשׁ דָּת". This has led commentators to debate the term's meaning:</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>Adopting the later meaning of "law" back to this verse,&#160;<multilink><a href="RashiDevarim33-2" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiDevarim33-2" data-aht="source">Devarim 33:2</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorDevarim33-2" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorDevarim33-2" data-aht="source">Devarim 33:2</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink> assume that the verse is referring to the Torah which was given amidst the fire. <multilink><a href="ShadalDevarim33-2" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalDevarim33-2" data-aht="source">Devarim 33:2</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>, though, claims that the word has no connection to"דת".&#160; It is instead related to the noun "אשדה", meaning slope, and like many other words in the verse refers to a location.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>חֹדֶשׁ</b>&#160;– It is possible that in Torah, "חֹדֶשׁ" refers to the full month,<fn>In most cases, the word "חֹדֶשׁ" is accompanied by a number (בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשֵּׁנִי / בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁלִישִׁי), is mentioned as part of a specific date (בְּשִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר יוֹם לַחֹדֶשׁ), or acts as an age marker (מִבֶּן חֹדֶשׁ וָמַעְלָה), all implying that the word refers to a full month and not just the first day. When Torah wants to express the first of the month specifically, it says "בְּיוֹם הַחֹדֶשׁ" (see <a href="Shemot40-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 40:2</a>, where it is accompanied by the clarification, "בְּאֶחָד לַחֹדֶשׁ") or gives the date. Variations of the term "ראש חדש" appear three times in Torah (<a href="Shemot12-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 12:2</a>,&#160;<a href="Bemidbar10-10" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 10:10</a> and <a href="Bemidbar28-11-14" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 28:11</a>), but the meaning of the term is debated. [See discussion below.]</fn> while it is first in the Prophets that it also takes on the additional meaning of "Rosh Chodesh", the first of the month specifically.<fn>See, for instance, <a href="ShemuelI20-5" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 20:5</a>, <a href="MelakhimII4-23" data-aht="source">Melakhim II 4:23</a>, <a href="Yeshayahu1-13" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 1:13</a>,&#160;<a href="Yeshayahu66-23" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 66:23</a>, <a href="Yechezkel45-17" data-aht="source">Yechezkel 45:17</a>, and <a href="Tehillim81-4" data-aht="source">Tehillim 81:4</a>.&#160; Interestingly, in Nach (as opposed to Torah) the phrase "ראש חדש"' never appears, though the synonymous term "יוֹם הַחֹדֶשׁ" is used in <a href="ShemuelI20-34" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 20:34</a> and in <a href="Yechezkel46-1-6" data-aht="source">Yechezkel 46:1-6</a>.</fn> See, though,&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-2" data-aht="source">R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-2" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 12:2</a><a href="R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla</a></multilink> who claims that the primary meaning of "חֹדֶשׁ" in Torah is "Rosh Chodesh".<fn>See&#160;<multilink><a href="ShadalShemot19-1" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot19-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 19:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> who suggests that originally the word referred to the "new moon", i.e. the first of the month and was later used to refer to the entire month.</fn>&#160; The different possibilities might affect one's reading of several verses:</li>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li>Bereshit 32:33 "לֹא יֹאכְלוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה" – See the debate in Bavli Chulin 100b whether this refers to something Yaakov's sons accepted upon themselves or whether this was a prohibition first commanded to the nation at at Sinai and placed in Sefer Bereshit to provide the reasoning.<fn>Compare also R"Y Bekhor Shor, Radak and Ralbag's reading of the verse.</fn></li>
+
<li>"בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁלִישִׁי" (<a href="Shemot19-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 19:1</a>)&#160;This verse states that the nation arrived in Sinai, "בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁלִישִׁי לְצֵאת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם", understood by many to mean that they arrived in the third month. However, <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary19-1" data-aht="source">R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary19-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 19:1</a><a href="R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla</a></multilink>,&#160;<multilink><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot19-1" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot19-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 19:1</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="ShadalShemot19-1" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot19-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 19:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> all suggest that "בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁלִישִׁי" means the third "new moon" rather than the "third month"<fn>In this case the reading is also influenced by the fact that the verse does not mention a specific date within the month. <a href="Bemidbar20-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 20:1</a>&#160;is a similar verse, mentioning that the nation arrived in the Wilderness of Tzin "בַּחֹדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן" without specifying a date.&#160;<multilink><a href="SederOlamRabbah9" data-aht="source">Seder Olam Rabbah</a><a href="SederOlamRabbah9" data-aht="source">9</a><a href="Seder Olam Rabbah" data-aht="parshan">About Seder Olam Rabbah</a></multilink> explains that here, too, the verse refers to Rosh Chodesh.</fn> and that the verse is stating that the nation arrived in Sinai on the first of Sivan.</li>
<li>Bereshit 36:30</li>
+
<li>"וּבְרָאשֵׁי חׇדְשֵׁיכֶם" – Most understand the phrase "רָאשֵׁי חׇדְשֵׁיכֶם" in both <a href="Bemidbar10-10" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 10:10</a> and&#160;<a href="Bemidbar28-11-14" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 28:11</a> to refer to the new moon, the "head" (ראש) of the month (חדש). <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-2" data-aht="source">R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-2" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 12:2</a><a href="R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla</a></multilink>, though, assumes that it refers to the first of the new moons<fn>Since he understands the word "חֹדֶשׁ " itself to refer to the new moon, the term "ראש חודש" must refer to the first of these new moons.</fn> (i.e. Rosh Chodesh Nissan specifically). According to him, the trumpets discussed in Bemidbar 10 are blown specifically on the first of Nissan (and not every month) since it is the beginning of the year.<fn>According to him, then, on both "New Years", the first of Tishrei (ראש השנה) and the first of Nissan, there is a blowing of trumpets or horns.</fn></li>
 +
<li>זֹאת עֹלַת חֹדֶשׁ בְּחׇדְשׁוֹ"&#8207;&#8206;&#8206;" (<a href="Bemidbar28-11-14" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 28:14</a>)<fn>See also the similar phrase "עֹלַת הַחֹדֶשׁ" in <a href="Bemidbar29-1-6" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 29:6</a>.</fn> – Compare <multilink><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar28-14" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar28-14" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 28:14</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>,&#160;<multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar28-14" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor,</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar28-14" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 28:14</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink> and Ibn Chiquitilla as to whether this verse means: This is the Olah that was brought monthly, this is the Olah of the month, to be brought when the moon is renewed, or this is the Olah of the new moon, to be brought each month.</li>
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
<li>שבת</li>
+
<li><b>עצר/ת </b>–&#160;<multilink><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannVayikra23-33" data-aht="source">R. D"Z Hoffmann</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannVayikra23-33" data-aht="source">Vayikra 23:33</a><a href="R. David Zvi Hoffmann" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Zvi Hoffmann</a></multilink> asserts that in Torah this root means to restrain.&#160; The holiday immediately following Sukkot and the last day of Pesach are given this name as they are days in which one is restrained from engaging in work and other activities.<fn>R. D"Z Hoffmann attempts to explain why it is only these days which are so-called and not other days in which work is forbidden. [He does not address the question of why Shavuot is never referred to in this manner.]</fn>&#160; Only later did the word take the additional meaning of gathering, as such days tended to be days of gathering.<b><br/></b></li>
<li>חדש In Torah the word refers to a month, while in Neviim it also takes on the meaning of "Rosh Chodesh", the first of the month.<fn>See, for instance, Shemuel I 20:5, Melakhim II 4:23, Yeshayahu 1:13, Yeshayahu 66:23, Yechezkel 45:17, Amos 8:5, and Tehillim 81:4.&#160; The phrase "יוֹם הַחֹדֶשׁ" also refers to Rosh Chodesh and appears 4 times in Tanakh, once in Shemot 40:2, where it is accompanied by the clarification, "בְּאֶחָד לַחֹדֶשׁ", and in Shemuel I 20:34, Yechezkel 46:1 and 46:6.</fn></li>
+
<li><b>שַׁבַּת</b>&#160;It is possible that it is first in Prophets that the word "שַׁבַּת" refers to the seventh day of the week,<fn>See <a href="MelakhimII4-23" data-aht="source">Melakhim II 4:23</a>, <a href="Yeshayahu1-13" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 1:13</a>,&#160;<a href="Yeshayahu56-2" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 56:2</a> or <a href="Yeshayahu66-23" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 66:23</a>.</fn> while in Torah it refers to either a state of cessation,<fn>See A. Ron, "ממחרת השבת", Megadim 16 (1992): 37-43, who analyzes each of the appearances of the word "שַׁבַּת" in Torah to show how they must refer to a state of cessation and not a day of the week.</fn> or the full week.<fn>See, for example, <a href="Vayikra23-15" data-aht="source">Vayikra 23:15</a>.</fn> When Torah speaks of the seventh day, it instead uses the terms "יּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי"&#8206;<fn>See, for example, <a href="Bereshit2-2-3" data-aht="source">Bereshit 2:2-3</a>, <a href="Shemot16-26" data-aht="source">Shemot 16:26</a>, <a href="Vayikra23-3" data-aht="source">Vayikra 23:3</a>.</fn> or "יוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת".&#8206;<fn>See, for example, <a href="Shemot20-8-10" data-aht="source">Shemot 20:8-10</a>, <a href="Shemot31-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 31:15</a>, or <a href="Vayikra24-7-8" data-aht="source">Vayikra 24:8</a>.</fn></li>
<li>חתן</li>
+
<ul>
 +
<li>The meaning of the word has important implications for the debate regarding the meaning of the phrase "מִמׇּחֳרַת הַשַּׁבָּת" in <a href="Vayikra23-15" data-aht="source">Vayikra 23:15</a>, and hence the dating of both the bringing of the Omer offering and Shavuot.&#160; See <a href="MiMachorat HaShabbat" data-aht="page">MiMachorat HaShabbat</a> for discussion.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>שָׂטָן </b>– In earlier books of Tanakh<fn>See, for example,&#160;<a href="ShemuelI29-4" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 29:4</a>, <a href="ShemuelII2-19" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 2:19</a>, <a href="MelakhimI5-18" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 5:18</a>, and <a href="MelakhimI11-14" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 11:14</a>.</fn>&#160;this word refers to a human adversary or enemy, and not to a celestial (or demonic) being. In the later books of&#160;<a href="Zekharyah3-1-3" data-aht="source">Zekharyah</a> and <a href="Iyyov1-6-12" data-aht="source">Iyyov</a>, in contrast, the word is used to refer to a celestial being, though it is not clear if the word "שטן" is a proper name (Satan),<fn><multilink><a href="ShadalIyyov1-6" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalIyyov1-6" data-aht="source">Iyyov 1:6</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>&#160;suggests that originally he was called "Shatan", as his function was to be "משוטט בארץ" so as to report back to Hashem on any evil being done. However, since people saw him as an adversary, he became known as "Satan".</fn> or if it is simply a way of referring to an "adversarial" or "prosecuting" angel. In several instances, commentators debate whether the term takes on the earlier or later meaning:<fn>In both these sources the word "שָׂטָן" does not take a definite article, which might be a factor in the debate.</fn></li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>"הַפְקֵד עָלָיו רָשָׁע וְשָׂטָן יַעֲמֹד עַל יְמִינוֹ" (<a href="Tehillim109-1-6" data-aht="source">Tehillim 109:6</a>) – Contrast&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraTehillimSecondCommentary109-6" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraTehillimSecondCommentary109-6" data-aht="source">Tehillim Second Commentary 109:6</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> who assumes that the psalmist is praying that his enemy (spoken of in prior verses) should be forced to face his own human adversary, with&#160;<multilink><a href="RadakTehillim109-6" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakTehillim109-6" data-aht="source">Tehillim 109:6</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> who assumes the verse is speaking of an angel who will act as his enemy's prosecutor.</li>
 +
<li>"וַיַּעֲמֹד שָׂטָן עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיָּסֶת אֶת דָּוִיד" (<a href="DivreiHaYamimI21-1" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim I 21:1</a>) – <multilink><a href="IbnEzraTehillimSecondCommentary109-6" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraTehillimSecondCommentary109-6" data-aht="source">Tehillim Second Commentary 109:6</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="RadakDivreiHaYamimI21-1" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakDivreiHaYamimI21-1" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim I 21:1</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> have the same dispute regarding this verse.<fn>In this case the meaning of the word is further clouded by the fact that in the parallel verse in <a href="ShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 24:1</a>, the incitement of David is attributed to Hashem and not to a "שטן" at all.</fn></li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>רֹאֶה, נָבִיא,&#160;חֹזֵה</b> – Tanakh itself attests to the changing terms used to describe a prophet.&#160; See <a href="ShemuelI9-9" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 9:9</a>, " כִּי לַנָּבִיא הַיּוֹם יִקָּרֵא לְפָנִים הָרֹאֶה". The different terms might reflect varying conceptions of the prophet's main role.&#160; Was he primarily a "seer", fore-teller of the future, or a spokesman,<fn>See Shemot 7:1, "רְאֵה נְתַתִּיךָ אֱלֹהִים לְפַרְעֹה וְאַהֲרֹן אָחִיךָ יִהְיֶה נְבִיאֶךָ", which from context would appear to mean that Aharon is to be the spokesperson.</fn> someone whose job it was to relay the word of Hashem or rebuke the people?</li>
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
 
</category>
 
</category>
 
<category>Biblical vs. Rabbinic Hebrew
 
<category>Biblical vs. Rabbinic Hebrew
 +
<p>There are many words whose usage might have changed from the Biblical period to the Mishnaic period:</p>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li><b>אמה</b> –
+
<li><b>אֶגְרֹף</b> &#8206;<fn>For a full discussion of the evolution of this word, see Y. Etsion, "<a href="https://www.safa-ivrit.org/writers/etsion/egrof.php">אגרוף - מגרפה?</a>"</fn><b> </b>– This word appears in
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
 
</category>
 
</category>
 
<category>Biblical vs. Modern Hebrew
 
<category>Biblical vs. Modern Hebrew
 +
<p>Many modern Hebrew words might take on different meanings than their Biblical counterparts:</p><ul>
 +
<li><b>אָחֻז&#160;</b>– The meaning of this word has become narrower with time. In Tanakh it refers to taking a part from a whole, but not necessarily one from one hundred.<fn>See <a href="Bemidbar31-30" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 31:30</a>, where it speaks of taking one out of fifty, and&#160;<a href="DivreiHaYamimI24-6" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim I 24:6</a> where the word refers to taking an undefined portion.</fn> It is first in modern times that it comes to mean percent specifically.<fn>For further discussion, see Y. Etsion "<a href="https://www.safa-ivrit.org/writers/etsion/akhuz.php">אחוז מזה וגם מזה</a>".</fn></li>
 +
<li><b>אֶמֶת </b>– In modern Hebrew אמת stands in contrast to שקר and means truth.&#160; In Biblical Hebrew, however, the meaning of the word is broader and includes also the connotation of being steadfast or faithful,<fn>See, for instance, <a href="Bereshit24-27" data-aht="source">Bereshit 24:27</a>,&#160;<a href="Bereshit24-48-49" data-aht="source">Bereshit 24:48-49</a> (and&#160;<multilink><a href="RashbamBereshit24-48" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamBereshit24-48" data-aht="source">Bereshit 24:48</a><a href="RashbamEsther1-2" data-aht="source">Esther 1:2</a><a href="RashbamEsther3-8" data-aht="source">Esther 3:8</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary24-49" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar15-15" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 15:15</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary24-49" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 24:49</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherFirstCommentaryIntroduction" data-aht="source">Esther First Commentary Introduction</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherFirstCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther First Commentary 1:2</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary1-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 1:1</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-2" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 12:2</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary19-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 19:1</a><a href="IbnEzraTehillimSecondCommentary66-7" data-aht="source">Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherSecondCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther Second Commentary 1:2</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> there), <a href="Bereshit32-11" data-aht="source">Bereshit 32:11</a>, <a href="Yehoshua2-12" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 2:12</a>, <a href="Yeshayahu16-5" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 16:5</a>,&#160;<a href="Tehillim91-3-4" data-aht="source">Tehillim 91:3-4</a> or <a href="Tehillim132-11" data-aht="source">Tehillim 132:11</a>.&#160; The context of many of these verses is the keeping of promises.&#160; In many, too, the word "אמת" is paired with "חסד" and might refer to Hashem's steadfast kindness.</fn> with "אֶמֶת" being synonymous with "נאמנות".&#8206;<fn>See the discussion and examples brought by S. Melzer, "משמעויות מקראיות מקוריות", Beit Mikra 18:3 (1973): 303-305.</fn>&#160;<multilink><a href="RadakSeferHaShorashim_2" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakSeferHaShorashim_2" data-aht="source">Sefer HaShorashim</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> even suggests that the original root of the word is "אמן" where the nun was dropped.<fn>See&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary24-49" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary24-49" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 24:49</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherFirstCommentaryIntroduction" data-aht="source">Esther First Commentary Introduction</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherFirstCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther First Commentary 1:2</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary1-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 1:1</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-2" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 12:2</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary19-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 19:1</a><a href="IbnEzraTehillimSecondCommentary66-7" data-aht="source">Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherSecondCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther Second Commentary 1:2</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> similarly, "והמלה מגזרת: אמונה, והתי״ו לשון נקבה".</fn></li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>The two possible Biblical meanings of the word are highlighted when comparing two instances of the phrase "תּוֹרַת אֱמֶת".&#160; In <a href="Malakhi2-6" data-aht="source">Malakhi 2:6</a>, the context "תּוֹרַת אֱמֶת הָיְתָה בְּפִיהוּ וְעַוְלָה לֹא נִמְצָא בִשְׂפָתָיו בְּשָׁלוֹם וּבְמִישׁוֹר הָלַךְ אִתִּי" might suggest that the phrase refers to truth or honesty.<fn>See<multilink><a href="IbnEzraMalakhiFirstCommentary2-6" data-aht="source"> Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar15-15" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 15:15</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar28-14" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 28:14</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim27-2" data-aht="source">Devarim 27:2</a><a href="IbnEzraYeshayahu5-16" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 5:16</a><a href="IbnEzraKohelet3-11" data-aht="source">Kohelet 3:11</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary24-49" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 24:49</a><a href="IbnEzraMalakhiFirstCommentary2-6" data-aht="source">Malakhi First Commentary 2:6</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary1-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 1:1</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-2" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 12:2</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary19-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 19:1</a><a href="IbnEzraTehillimSecondCommentary66-7" data-aht="source">Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherSecondCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther Second Commentary 1:2</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> who suggests that the individual in the verse is not open to bribes, and&#160;<multilink><a href="RadakMalakhi2-6" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakSeferHaShorashim" data-aht="source">Sefer HaShorashim</a><a href="RadakMalakhi2-6" data-aht="source">Malakhi 2:6</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> who says that he is not "אחד בפה ואחד בלב".</fn> In <a href="Tehillim119-142" data-aht="source">Tehillim 119:142</a>, "צִדְקָתְךָ צֶדֶק לְעוֹלָם וְתוֹרָתְךָ אֱמֶת, the parallel to "לְעוֹלָם" might instead support the meaning "steadfast", that Hashem's laws are constant and unchanging.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>אֶפֶס&#160;</b>– It is relatively recent that the word "אֶפֶס" is used to express the number zero,<fn>See the discussion in Y. Etsion, "<a href="https://www.safa-ivrit.org/writers/etsion/efes.php">על האפס</a>".who points out that is only in the last 200 years that the word has been used to express the number zero.</fn> but it is not difficult to see how the modern word might have stemmed from the Biblical "אֶפֶס".&#160; In Tanakh the root relates to cessation.&#160; As such, in noun form it can mean nought<fn>See&#160;<a href="Yeshayahu40-17" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 40:17</a> (מֵאֶפֶס וָתֹהוּ נֶחְשְׁבוּ לוֹ),&#160;<a href="Yeshayahu41-12" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 41:12</a> (כְאַיִן וּכְאֶפֶס), <a href="Yeshayahu45-6" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 45:6</a> (אֶפֶס בִּלְעָדָי אֲנִי ה' וְאֵין עוֹד).&#160; The verbal form similarly means to cease, as in <a href="Bereshit47-15" data-aht="source">Bereshit 47:15</a>, "כִּי אָפֵס כָּסֶף". Form these examples, it is easy to see why the word would have been chosen to express "zero".</fn> or it might refer to the ends of the earth (as in the phrase "אַפְסֵי אָרֶץ").<fn>See <a href="Devarim33-17" data-aht="source">Devarim 33:17</a>, <a href="ShemuelI2-10" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 2:10</a>, or <a href="Yeshayahu45-22" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 45:22</a>.</fn>&#160; [In Tanakh the word might also express "but",<fn>See <a href="Bemidbar13-28" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 13:28</a>, <a href="Devarim15-1-8" data-aht="source">Devarim 15:4</a>, <a href="Shofetim4-9" data-aht="source">Shofetim 4:9</a>, and <a href="Amos9-8" data-aht="source">Amos 9:8</a>.</fn> qualifying a previous statement.]<fn>This connotation might also relate to cessation; the "but" limits or ends what came before.</fn></li>
 +
<li><b>אֶקְדָּח&#8206;</b><fn>For elaboration, see the discussion in Y. Etsion, "<a href="https://www.safa-ivrit.org/writers/etsion/kadachat.php">בין קדחת למקדחה</a>".</fn>&#160;– This word refers to a handgun in modern Hebrew, a usage obviously not found in the Biblical period.&#160; The word appears only once in Tanakh, in <a href="Yeshayahu54-12" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 54:12</a>, "וְשַׂמְתִּי כַּדְכֹד שִׁמְשֹׁתַיִךְ וּשְׁעָרַיִךְ לְאַבְנֵי אֶקְדָּח".</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>As the root "קדח" relates to burning or fire,<fn>In all five of its appearances in verb form, the word is accompanied by the word "אֵשׁ" and means to kindle or burn. See, for example,&#160;<a href="Devarim32-22" data-aht="source">Devarim 32:22</a>,&#160;<a href="Yeshayahu50-11" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 50:11</a>, and&#160;<a href="Yeshayahu64-1" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 64:1</a>, The noun "קַדַּחַת" similarly means fever. See <a href="Devarim28-22" data-aht="source">Devarim 28:22</a>.</fn> the phrase "אַבְנֵי אֶקְדָּח" is understood by most commentators to refer to a fiery or sparkling stone such as a carbuncle.<fn>See <multilink><a href="IbnEzraYeshayahu54-12" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraYeshayahu54-12" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 54:12</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>,&#160;<multilink><a href="RadakYeshayahu54-12" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakYeshayahu54-12" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 54:12</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="ShadalYeshayahu54-12" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalYeshayahu54-12" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 54:12</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>.</fn>&#160; As such, when looking for a word to describe a pistol (something which "fires stones"), Ben Yehuda raised it as a possibility.<fn>In his article, "<a href="https://www.safa-ivrit.org/writers/etsion/kadachat.php">בין קדחת למקדחה</a>", Y. Etsion notes that in his newspaper "הצבי", Ben Yehuda first suggested that a gun be called a "מַקְשֵׁט" (in Rabbinic Hebrew קשט means to shoot an arrow in a straight line).&#160; He then added: "עוד שם אחד אפשר לקרוא להכלי הזה, והאמת נאמר כי השם הזה יותר מסביר לנו פנים. כי הנה השם אשר קראו להכלי הזה לשונות צרפתית וגרמנית וכן איטלקית היא על שם האבן שקודחים ממנו אש... לנו בעברית יש שורש המורה גם על מין אבן כזאת וגם על התלהבות האש. השורש הזה הוא קדח, והשם הוא אקדח".</fn>&#160; <multilink><a href="RashiYeshayahu54-12" data-aht="source">Rashi </a><a href="RashiYeshayahu54-12" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 54:12</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>brings an alternative understanding of the phrase, suggesting that the verse speaks of a "מקדח", a hollowed out stone.&#160; This, though, is taking an anachronistic understanding of the root "קדח", as it is first in Rabbinic Hebrew that the root "קדח" takes on the meaning to bore a hole.<fn>See&#160;<multilink><a href="MishnaShabbat12-1" data-aht="source">Mishna Shabbat</a><a href="MishnaShabbat12-1" data-aht="source">Shabbat 12:1</a><a href="Mishna Shabbat" data-aht="parshan">About Mishna Shabbat</a></multilink>,&#160;<multilink><a href="MishnaOholot13-1" data-aht="source">Mishna Oholot</a><a href="MishnaOholot13-1" data-aht="source">Oholot 13:1</a><a href="Mishna Oholot" data-aht="parshan">About Mishna Oholot</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="YerushalmiRoshHaShanah3-6" data-aht="source">Yerushalmi Rosh HaShanah</a><a href="YerushalmiRoshHaShanah3-6" data-aht="source">Rosh HaShanah 3:6</a><a href="Yerushalmi Rosh HaShanah" data-aht="parshan">About Yerushalmi Rosh HaShanah</a></multilink>. [Today the word is used also metaphorically to refer to someone who is speaks incessantly and is "חופר".]</fn></li>
 +
</ul>
 +
</ul><ul>
 +
<li><b>בטח&#160;</b>– Y. Etsion<fn>See the discussion in his article, "<a href="https://www.safa-ivrit.org/writers/etsion/bitahon.php">מה בין ביטחון לאבטיח</a>".</fn> suggests that though today this root is associated with stability and means to trust and rely upon another, it is possible that originally in Tanakh, like in Arabic today, it meant to fall (and only from there also to lean upon or to trust).<fn>See <a href="MelakhimII18-21" data-aht="source">Melakhim II 18:21</a>, "הִנֵּה בָטַחְתָּ לְּךָ עַל-מִשְׁעֶנֶת הַקָּנֶה הָרָצוּץ הַזֶּה, עַל-מִצְרַיִם אֲשֶׁר יִסָּמֵךְ אִישׁ עָלָיו, וּבָא בְכַפּוֹ וּנְקָבָהּ", where the root is associated with the terms "מִשְׁעֶנֶת" and "יִסָּמֵךְ".</fn>&#160; There are several verses in which the traditional understanding of "trust" is difficult, yet the definition of "fall" is appropriate:</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>"וּבְאֶרֶץ שָׁלוֹם אַתָּה בוֹטֵחַ וְאֵיךְ תַּעֲשֶׂה בִּגְאוֹן הַיַּרְדֵּן" (<a href="Yirmeyahu12-5" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 12:5</a>) – See <multilink><a href="RashiMishlei14-16" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiMishlei14-16" data-aht="source">Mishlei 14:16</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> that the analogy might mean that if Yirmeyahu is already falling in peaceful territory, what will he do in enemy territory?<fn>Other commentators are forced to read the clause as if it is truncated and the ending assumed: If in peaceful territory which you thought was trustworthy [you are nevertheless weary], what will you do when faced with true enemies?</fn></li>
 +
<li>"חָכָם יָרֵא וְסָר מֵרָע וּכְסִיל מִתְעַבֵּר וּבוֹטֵחַ" (<a href="Mishlei14-16" data-aht="source">Mishlei 14:16</a>) – <multilink><a href="RashiMishlei14-16" data-aht="source">Rashi </a><a href="RashiMishlei14-16" data-aht="source">Mishlei 14:16</a><a href="RashiEsther10-3" data-aht="source">Esther 10:3</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>and&#160;<multilink><a href="RadakMishlei14-16" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakSeferHaShorashim" data-aht="source">Sefer HaShorashim</a><a href="RadakMishlei14-16" data-aht="source">Mishlei 14:16</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> explain that the verse is contrasting the wise person who is wary of and avoids obstacles, with the fool who is not and therefore falls.&#160; <multilink><a href="RalbagMishlei14-16" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagYehoshua8-31" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:31</a><a href="RalbagMishlei14-16" data-aht="source">Mishlei 14:16</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink>, in contrast, suggests that the verse speaks of the wise man who is afraid and therefore avoids evil, with the angry fool who is so self-confident that he does not worry about the consequences of his anger.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>בִּירָה</b> – Though today, "בִּירָה" is used to refer to a capital city, in Biblical Hebrew the word generally means simply palace or fortress,<fn>See <a href="Nechemyah2-8" data-aht="source">Nechemyah 2:8</a>, <a href="DivreiHaYamimI29-1" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim I 29:1</a>, and <a href="DivreiHaYamimI29-19" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim I 29:19</a>.</fn> related to the Akkadian "<i>birtu</i>".</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>The later usage of the term has influenced many to understand the phrase "שׁוּשַׁן הַבִּירָה" throughout Megillat Esther to mean "Shushan, the capital city".<fn>See, for example,&#160;<multilink><a href="RashbamEsther1-2" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamEsther1-2" data-aht="source">Esther 1:2</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="RYosefNachmiasEsther1-2" data-aht="source">R"Y Nachmias</a><a href="RYosefNachmiasEsther1-2" data-aht="source">Esther 1:2</a><a href="R. Yosef Nachmias" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Nachmias</a></multilink> on Esther 1:2.</fn> See, though,&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraEstherSecondCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherFirstCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther First Commentary 1:2</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherSecondCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther Second Commentary 1:2</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> (and <multilink><a href="RBachyaKadHaKemach" data-aht="source">R. Bachya </a><a href="RBachyaKadHaKemach" data-aht="source">Kad HaKemach</a><a href="R. Bachya b. Asher" data-aht="parshan">About R. Bachya b. Asher</a></multilink>in his wake) who point out that a distinction should be made between "שׁוּשַׁן" or "העיר שושן", which do refer to a city, and "שׁוּשַׁן הַבִּירָה" which refers to the fortified castle.<fn>This distinction might impact one's understanding of several verses in the Megillah:<br/>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li><a href="Esther1-5" data-aht="source">Esther 1:5</a>&#160;– The second seven day party might have been only for those in the castle.&#160; If so, in contrast to what is suggested by <a href="EstherRabbah2-5" data-aht="source">Esther Rabbah</a>, there were likely very few, if any, Jews in attendance.</li>
 +
<li><a href="Esther2-5" data-aht="source">Esther 2:5</a>&#160;– This verse might teach not that Mordechai lived in the city of Shushan, but that he had a position (and perhaps lived) in the palace even before Esther was taken.</li>
 +
<li><a href="Esther9-6" data-aht="source">Esther 9:6</a>&#160;– This verse might refer to the killing of 500 supporters of Haman in the castle complex itself.</li>
 +
</ul></fn></li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>בקר</b> – Today this root can mean both to visit and to criticize, inspect or oversee.&#160; In Tanakh it generally takes the connotation of inquiring or inspecting/discerning rather than visiting.</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>There is one verse, though, which can sustain also the later meaning of visit, though it is not suggested that the root etymologically means that.&#160; In Tehillim 27:4, the psalmist expresses the wish that he be able to dwell in Hashem's Temple and "וּלְבַקֵּר בְּהֵיכָלוֹ".&#160; See Radak and Ibn Ezra that the connotation is that He wishes to inquire of God or contemplate His laws.&#160; Rashi, though, connects the word to the noun "בוקר", morning, and suggest that the author requests "to appear in the sanctuary (or perhaps: visit) every morning".</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>דּוֹד&#8206;<fn>For a discussion of the different usages of this word, see Y. Etsion, "<a href="https://www.safa-ivrit.org/writers/etsion/dod.php">הדודה והדוד</a>".</fn>&#160;</b>– Though today "דּוֹד" can refer to an uncle on either the mother or father's side, see <multilink><a href="RashiYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 32:12</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink><fn>See also Sefer HaShorashim of both Ibn Janach and Radak.</fn> who notes that in Tanakh, the term is reserved for a father's brother.<fn>See also&#160;<multilink><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra10-4" data-aht="source">Onkelos</a><a href="TargumOnkelosBereshit21-23" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:23</a><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra10-4" data-aht="source">Vayikra 10:4</a><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra20-20" data-aht="source">Vayikra 20:20</a><a href="TargumOnkelosVayikra25-49" data-aht="source">Vayikra 25:49</a><a href="TargumOnkelosBemidbar36-11" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 36:11</a><a href="Targum Onkelos" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Onkelos</a></multilink> who consistently translates "דוד" as אַחְבּוּהִי and דֹדֵיהֶן as אֲחֵי אֲבוּהוֹן.</fn>&#160; [It also takes the meaning of beloved, as in Shir HaShirim].&#160;</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>See&#160;<a href="Yirmeyahu32-7-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 32:12</a> where Rashi attempts to explain how Chanamel can be referred to as both Yirmeyahu's cousin and uncle,<fn>See Yirmeyahu 32:7,9 and 12.</fn> rejecting the possibility raised by some that he was Yirmeyahu's cousin on his father side and his uncle on his mother's side, claiming, "לא מצינו בכל המקרא אח האם קרוי דוד".&#8206;<fn>Cf.&#160;<multilink><a href="ShadalYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot1-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 1:15</a><a href="ShadalShemot2-5" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:5</a><a href="ShadalShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 3:1</a><a href="ShadalDevarim32-43" data-aht="source">Devarim 32:43</a><a href="ShadalYirmeyahu32-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 32:12</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> brings an opinion that the word "דוד" in the verse should be understood as "ידיד". This understanding might relate to the usage of "דוד" to refer to a beloved.</fn></li>
 +
<li>See also <multilink><a href="RadakAmos6-10" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakAmos6-10" data-aht="source">Amos 6:10</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink><fn><multilink><a href="IbnEzraAmosFirstCommentary6-10" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar15-15" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 15:15</a><a href="IbnEzraKohelet3-11" data-aht="source">Kohelet 3:11</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary28-11" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 28:11</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary37-35" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 37:35</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotFirstCommentary2-5" data-aht="source">Shemot First Commentary 2:5</a><a href="IbnEzraAmosFirstCommentary6-10" data-aht="source">Amos First Commentary 6:10</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherFirstCommentaryIntroduction" data-aht="source">Esther First Commentary Introduction</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherFirstCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther First Commentary 1:2</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary1-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 1:1</a><a href="IbnEzraTehillimSecondCommentary66-7" data-aht="source">Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherSecondCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther Second Commentary 1:2</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>&#160;brings this possibility in the name of R. Yehuda ibn Kuraish, but rejects it. See also Sefer HaShorashim of Ibn Janach.</fn> on <a href="Amos6-8-11" data-aht="source">Amos 6:10</a>, who raises the possibility that the hapax legomenon "מסרף" in the phrase "דּוֹדוֹ וּמְסָרְפוֹ" might refer to an uncle on the mother's side (suggesting that the words דוד and מסרף are a pair).<fn>Others suggest that the word is a variant of "משרף" and refers to one who comes to burn a corpse so it does not rot.</fn></li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b> "דָּת" </b>– The word "דָּת" is a Persian loan word,<fn>See discussion above.</fn> which appears predominantly in Sefer Esther, and consistently means "law" or "decree".<fn>See, for example, <a href="Esther3-14-15" data-aht="source">Esther 3:14-15</a>,&#160;<a href="Esther4-3" data-aht="source">Esther 4:3</a> or <a href="Esther8-17" data-aht="source">Esther 8:17</a>.</fn> This stands in contrast to the word's prevalent usage today where it means "religion".<fn>In the Rabbinic period, one might find attestations to both usages.&#160; See Tosefta Ketubot 4:9 which speaks of "דת משה וישראל", referring to the laws of the Torah or customs of Israel and Bavli Sukkah 56b, which speaks of Miryam, " שהמירה דתה", who apostated.&#160; It is possible, though, that In Bavli Sukkah, too, the phrase literally means that she "changed her laws."</fn><b><br/> </b></li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>The difference in usage might lie at the core of a debate regarding the meaning of Haman's words, "וְדָתֵיהֶם שֹׁנוֹת מִכׇּל עָם וְאֶת דָּתֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ אֵינָם עֹשִׂים" in <a href="Esther3-8" data-aht="source">Esther 3:8</a>. While&#160;<multilink><a href="RashiEsther3-8" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiEsther3-8" data-aht="source">Esther 3:8</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="RashbamEsther3-8" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamEsther3-8" data-aht="source">Esther 3:8</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> asserts that Haman is complaining that the nation does not keep the king's laws, not paying taxes or participating in the army,&#160;<multilink><a href="MalbimEsther3-8" data-aht="source">Malbim</a><a href="MalbimEsther3-8" data-aht="source">Esther 3:8</a><a href="R. Meir Leibush Weiser (Malbim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Meir Leibush Weiser</a></multilink> presents Haman as pointing to the different religious beliefs of the nation.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>חֹזֶה</b>&#160;– While today this word refers to a contract, in Tanakh it refers to a prophet, or more literally a "seer". The modern usage might stem from <a href="Yeshayahu28-15" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 28:15</a>, "כָּרַתְנוּ בְרִית אֶת מָוֶת וְעִם שְׁאוֹל עָשִׂינוּ חֹזֶה" where the definition "prophet" is somewhat difficult and the parallel to "בְרִית" implies that "חֹזֶה" might mean an agreement:</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>See <multilink><a href="ShadalYeshayahu28-15" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalYeshayahu28-15" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 28:15</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink><fn>See also Ibn Ezra who suggests that "חֹזֶה" should be understood as "ברית חוזה", an agreement like one made by a prophet.</fn> who notes the parallel, but attempts to maintain the regular Biblical meaning of the root "חזה", suggesting that "חֹזֶה" refers to an open, viewable (rather than sealed) document.<fn>It is referred to as a "חֹזֶה" since it can be seen, as opposed to a sealed contract which cannot be viewed.</fn> He compares it to the term "הַגָּלוּי" (an open contract) in <a href="Yirmeyahu32-11" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 32:11</a>.<fn>The verse implies that there were two copies of the deed of sale, "הֶחָתוּם" and "הַגָּלוּי", one sealed and one not.</fn> Contrast&#160;<multilink><a href="RashiYeshayahu28-15" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBereshit15-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit 15:2</a><a href="RashiBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Bereshit 45:24</a><a href="RashiShemot2-5" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:5</a><a href="RashiShemot2-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:6</a><a href="RashiShemot17-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 17:15</a><a href="RashiYeshayahu28-15" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 28:15</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> who suggests that "חֹזֶה" of this verse stems from a totally different root, the word "מָחוֹז",&#8206;<fn>See&#160;<a href="Tehillim107-30" data-aht="source">Tehillim 107:30</a> and <a href="MelakhimI7-4" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 7:4</a>.</fn> meaning place or edge.<fn>According to him, the verse in Yeshayahu means: "we have set a border beyond which "Sheol" or death cannot pass". Cf.&#160;<multilink><a href="REliezerofBeaugencyYeshayahu28-15" data-aht="source">R"E of Beaugency</a><a href="REliezerofBeaugencyYeshayahu28-15" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 28:15</a><a href="R. Eliezer of Beaugency" data-aht="parshan">About R. Eliezer of Beaugency</a></multilink> who explains, "we have set a place to run away from Sheol."</fn></li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>חשל </b>– This root appears twice in Tanakh, once in <a href="Devarim25-17-18" data-aht="source">Devarim 25:18</a>, "וַיְזַנֵּב בְּךָ כׇּל הַנֶּחֱשָׁלִים אַחֲרֶיךָ" where it refers to weary stragglers and once in <a href="Daniel2-40" data-aht="source">Daniel 2:40</a>, where the Aramaic means to shatter or be beaten (by a hammer or the like).<fn>See D. Curwin's Balashon blog, "<a href="http://www.balashon.com/2007/05/nechshal.html">nechshal</a>" where he discusses the etymology.&#160; He notes that the relationship between the two meanings of the word might be similar to the English word "beat" which, in verbal form, can mean to strike, yet as an adjective can mean tired and worn out.</fn> In modern Hebrew, in contrast, the word takes on an almost opposite meaning: to forge or strengthen. The contemporary usage likely stems from the Aramaic, where to "crush by a blow" evolved into "forge",<fn>One forges metal by beating on it with a hammer.</fn> and from there to "strengthen".</li>
 +
<li><b>להתחתן (חתן)&#8206;</b><fn>See also the discussion in Y. Etsion, "<a href="https://www.safa-ivrit.org/writers/etsion/hatan.php">החתן, הכלה והחותנת</a>".</fn>&#8206;&#8206;<b> </b>– In Tanakh, in contrast to modern Hebrew, the parties who are "מתחתן" are the חֹתֵן (father<fn>See the discussion above that this term might also refer to the brother of the bride, if he is the one contracting the marriage.</fn> of the bride) and the חָתָן (son-in-law)<fn>See <a href="Bereshit34-9" data-aht="source">Bereshit 34:9</a>, <a href="ShemuelI18-22-27" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 18:22-27</a>, <a href="MelakhimI3-1" data-aht="source">Melakhim I 3:1</a>.</fn> or the חֹתֵן (father of the bride) and the father of the groom,<fn>See <a href="Devarim7-1-4" data-aht="source">Devarim 7:3</a> and <a href="DivreiHaYamimII18-1" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 18:1</a>.</fn> not the husband and wife. The verb "להתחתן" is not used to describe the forming of the marital relationship between the bride and groom<fn>To describe the groom's taking of a wife, the verbs נשא or לקח are used instead.</fn> as it was the father of the bride and not the bride herself who was the active party in the marital contract. This betrays the nature of marriage in Tanakh as the formation of an alliance<fn>See, for instance, Shelomo's many marriages.</fn> rather than a bonding of love.</li>
 +
<li><b>יָרֵא אֱ-לֹהִים </b>– Today, this phrase is used to refer to a person who is a believing, God-fearing Jew, and focuses on the person's relationship to Hashem.&#160; In Tanakh, though, it might also be used in the context of interpersonal relations, referring to someone's moral or ethical conduct.<fn>For examples where this usage might be implied, see <a href="Bereshit20-10-11" data-aht="source">Bereshit 20:10-11</a>, <a href="Shemot1-15-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 1:17</a>,<a href="Vayikra19-14" data-aht="source">Vayikra 19:14, 32</a>, <a href="Devarim25-18" data-aht="source">Devarim 25:18</a>, and <a href="Iyyov1-1" data-aht="source">Iyyov 1:1</a>. See N. Leibowitz, Iyyunim Chadashim BeSefer Shemot (Jerusalem, 1970): 32-33 and N. Sarna, Exploring Exodus (New York, 1986): 25-26, 120-121 who elaborate on this point</fn>&#160;<multilink><a href="ShadalShemot1-15" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot1-15" data-aht="source">Shemot 1:15</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> suggests that the term might refer to anyone who fears even a false god, for someone who fears such a higher authority will have some sense of morality.&#160; The difference in meaning might affect how one reads several stories:</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>The Midwives – As the midwives are said to have "feared God" (<a href="Shemot1-15-17" data-aht="source">Shemot 1:17</a>), whether one understand the phrase to refer to having belief in Hashem or having a sense of morality will influence whether one suggests that they were Egyptian or Hebrew. See <a href="Who are the Midwives" data-aht="page">Who are the Midwives</a>.</li>
 +
<li>Amalek - In speaking of Amalek's attack,&#160;<a href="Devarim25-18" data-aht="source">Devarim 25:18</a> states, "וְאַתָּה עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ וְלֹא יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים".&#160; Commentators debate whether the description "יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים" refers to Amalek or Israel, and, if the former, whether it describes the Amalekites' lack of ethics or disregard for God. See <a href="Annihilating Amalek" data-aht="page">Annihilating Amalek</a>.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>"יְרַקְרַק אוֹ אֲדַמְדָּם"</b>– In modern Hebrew the doubling in each of these words signifies a lighter shade of the color (greenish rather than green). There is a dispute as to whether this is true in Tanakh as well. While&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraVayikra13-49" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraVayikra13-49" data-aht="source">Vayikra 13:49</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> writes, "וזה הכפל לחסרון", explaining, "ואדמדם – כמו כן <b>קל</b> האדמומית", the&#160;<multilink><a href="SifraVayikra13-49" data-aht="source">Sifra</a><a href="SifraVayikra13-49" data-aht="source">13:49</a><a href="Sifra Vayikra" data-aht="parshan">About the Sifra Vayikra</a></multilink> declares the opposite, explaining ירקרק to refer to "יָרֹק שֶׁבַּיְּרֻקִּים".</li>
 +
<li><b>כן&#160;</b>– Though this word appears hundreds of times in Tanakh, it never means "yes" as it does in modern Hebrew, but rather "thus" (כך)<fn>See, for example, the repeated formula, "וַיְהִי כֵן" throughout Bereshit 1 or variations of the phrase "וַיַּעֲשׂוּ כֵן" in <a href="Bereshit29-26" data-aht="source">Bereshit 29:26</a>,&#160;<a href="Shemot7-10" data-aht="source">Shemot 7:10</a> or <a href="Shemot8-14" data-aht="source">Shemot 8:14</a>.</fn> or veritably / right (נכון).<fn>See <a href="Bemidbar27-7" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 27:7</a>, "כֵּן בְּנוֹת צְלׇפְחָד דֹּבְרֹת" or <a href="MelakhimII7-9" data-aht="source">Melakhim II 7:9</a>, "לֹא כֵן אֲנַחְנוּ עֹשִׂים הַיּוֹם".</fn> In Biblical Hebrew there is actually no equivalent of the word "yes".&#160; A positive reply is instead expressed by repeating the verb mentioned in the question.&#160; For example, in answer to Yaakov's question, "הַיְדַעְתֶּם אֶת לָבָן בֶּן נָחוֹר", the people do not say yes, but "יָדָעְנוּ" (<a href="Bereshit29-5" data-aht="source">Bereshit 29:5</a>).&#8206;<fn>As another example, in reply to David's questioning in <a href="ShemuelI23-2" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 23:2</a>, "הַאֵלֵךְ וְהִכֵּיתִי בַּפְּלִשְׁתִּים הָאֵלֶּה", Hashem's responds, "לֵךְ וְהִכִּיתָ בַפְּלִשְׁתִּים".&#160; For many more examples and a general discussion of how Tanakh expresses, "yes", see E. Greenstein, "The Syntax of saying Yes in Biblical Hebrew", JANES 19 (1989): 51-29.</fn></li>
 +
<li><b>כַּעַס&#160;</b>– The meaning of this word has become narrower over time.&#160; Today, it means "anger" but in Tanakh it also takes the connotation of sorrow and pain. See, for example, Shemuel I 1:6, 15, Tehillim 6:8 or Kohelet 1:18. In some cases it is debated whether anger or sorrow is implied:</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li><a href="Kohelet7-1-5" data-aht="source">Kohelet 7:3</a>: "טוֹב כַּעַס מִשְּׂחוֹק כִּי בְרֹעַ פָּנִים יִיטַב לֵב"&#160;– According to several commentators<fn>See Kohelet Rabbah and Rashi.</fn> the verse is exhorting that it is better to get angry and rebuke one who does wrong than to be lighthearted about the wrong-doing. Others,<fn>See <multilink><a href="RYosefKaraKohelet7-3" data-aht="source">R"Y Kara</a><a href="RYosefKaraKohelet7-3" data-aht="source">Kohelet 7:3</a><a href="R. Yosef Kara" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Kara</a></multilink>, the commentary attributed to <multilink><a href="AttributedtoRashbamKohelet7-3" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="AttributedtoRashbamKohelet7-3" data-aht="source">Kohelet 7:3</a><a href="Attributed to Rashbam" data-aht="parshan">About Attributed to Rashbam</a></multilink>, and <multilink><a href="ShadalKohelet7-3" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalBereshit15-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit 15:2</a><a href="ShadalBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Bereshit 45:24</a><a href="ShadalKohelet7-3" data-aht="source">Kohelet 7:3</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>.</fn> though, connect the verse to the previous one (טוֹב לָלֶכֶת אֶל בֵּית אֵבֶל מִלֶּכֶת אֶל בֵּית מִשְׁתֶּה) and suggest that it, too, is stressing that sorrow (rather than happiness) leads to reflection and is ultimately good for the heart.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
</ul><ul>
 +
<li><b>לֶחֶם</b>&#8206;<fn>For further discussion, see Y. Etsion, "<a href="https://www.safa-ivrit.org/writers/etsion/lehem.php">לחם, מלחמה והלחמה</a>".</fn>– The meaning of this word has become narrower over time. Whereas today it refers specifically to bread, in Tanakh it can also refer to any food or meal.<fn>See, for example, <a href="Bereshit31-54" data-aht="source">Bereshit 31:54</a>, where the word refers to the "זבח" that was just prepared or <a href="ShemuelI14-24" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 14:24</a>, where Shaul makes an oath forbidding all from eating "לָחֶם", and wants to hold Yonatan accountable for tasting even honey.</fn>&#160;As bread was the staple of the diet, all foodstuffs could be spoken of in terms of "לֶחֶם".&#8206;<fn>In Arabic, "לַחְם" refers to meat, perhaps because in the desert, meat, not bread, was the staple food.</fn>&#160; This general understanding exists in English as well, in the term, "breaking bread," which refers to sharing a meal.</li>
 +
</ul><ul>
 +
<li><b>מִדְבָּר </b>– In modern Hebrew a "מדבר" is defined as an area with a hot, dry climate and less than 250 mm of precipitation a year. <multilink><a href="RadakYehoshua8-15" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakYehoshua8-15" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:15</a><a href="RadakYirmeyahu12-12" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 12:12</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink><fn>See also&#160;<multilink><a href="RashbamVayikra16-10" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamVayikra16-10" data-aht="source">Vayikra 16:10</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="ShadalShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 3:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>. Cf. <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot3-1" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor </a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot3-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 3:1</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>who claims the opposite.&#160; On Shemot 3:2, he explains that Moshe went specifically "אחר המדבר" to shepherd, "שבמדבר לא היה מרעה".</fn> points out that in Tanakh, in contrast, the term refers to grazing land, unfit for agriculture but well suited for shepherding.&#160; He suggests that the word "מִדְבָּר" might relate to the root "דבר" meaning to lead (or shepherd).</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>The difference in meaning affects how one thinks about the forty years in the wilderness.&#160; Did the nation trek through barren, arid land, with intense heat and almost no water,<fn>This fits the descriptions of desolation in&#160;<a href="Devarim32-10" data-aht="source">Devarim 32:10</a> and <a href="Yirmeyahu2-6" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 2:6</a>.</fn> or were the conditions considerably better, with pasture for their livestock?<fn>See&#160;<a href="Bemidbar20-4-11" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 20:4-11</a> which suggests that the nation had livestock throughout the 40 years.</fn>&#160; See <a href="Realia:Life in the Wilderness" data-aht="page">Life in the Wilderness</a>.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>מוֹקֵד&#160;– </b>The modern meaning of this word, center or focus, appears to have nothing in common with its Biblical counterpart which means fire.<fn>See&#160;<a href="Tehillim102-4" data-aht="source">Tehillim 102:4</a> and&#160;<a href="Yeshayahu33-14" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 33:14</a> and the verbal form "יקד" which means to burn (see <a href="Vayikra6-2-6" data-aht="source">Vayikra 6:2-6</a>,&#160;<a href="Devarim32-22" data-aht="source">Devarim 32:22</a> or <a href="Yeshayahu10-16" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 10:16</a>).</fn><b>&#160; </b>Y. Etsion suggests that the choice can be understood in light of the etymology of the English word focus. In Latin, "focus" originally referred to an oven or fireplace, but in the 17th century was adopted to refer to the center of a lens, the site where the suns rays concentrate enough to produce enough heat to ignite a fire. From here the word's meaning slowly moved to refer to any center.&#160; When modern linguists were looking for an appropriate Hebrew translation for the word focus, they looked to מוקד as a fitting choice.</li>
 +
<li><b>מַחֲמָאָה </b>– This word appears only once in Tanakh, in <a href="Tehillim55-22" data-aht="source">Tehillim 55:22</a>.&#160; It is likely the source of the modern "מחמאה", meaning compliment, though the Biblical usage of the word might be somewhat different.&#160; In the verse, the phrase "חָלְקוּ מַחְמָאֹת פִּיו" is parallel to "רַכּוּ דְבָרָיו מִשֶּׁמֶן", leading&#160;<multilink><a href="RadakTehillim55-22" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakSeferHaShorashim_2" data-aht="source">Sefer HaShorashim, אמן</a><a href="RadakSeferHaShorashim" data-aht="source">Sefer HaShorashim, גוי</a><a href="RadakSeferHaShorashimחמה" data-aht="source">Sefer HaShorashim, חמה</a><a href="RadakBereshit32-33" data-aht="source">Bereshit 32:33</a><a href="RadakYehoshua8-15" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:15</a><a href="RadakTehillim55-22" data-aht="source">Tehillim 55:22</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink> and the commentary&#160;<multilink><a href="AttributedtoRashbamTehillim55-22" data-aht="source">attributed to Rashbam</a><a href="AttributedtoRashbamTehillim55-22" data-aht="source">Tehillim 55:22</a><a href="Attributed to Rashbam" data-aht="parshan">About Attributed to Rashbam</a></multilink> to suggest that "מַחְמָאֹת" relates to חמאה, meaning butter or cream. The verse is saying that the person's speech was "smoother than cream".&#8206;<fn>According to this reading, the <i>mem</i> is not part of the noun itself, but instead means "more than" (as if written with a <i>tzereh)</i>. Others do raise the possibility that the <i>mem</i> is part of the noun, in which case "מַחְמָאֹת" is unrelated to "חמאה" and simply means flattery. If so, the shift in meaning is small and relates only to whether the word has a negative or positive connotation.&#160; For discussion, see E. Segal-Halevi, "<a href="http://tora.us.fm/tnk1/ktuv/thlim/th-55-22.html">מחמאה - מילה שנוצרה בטעות</a>".</fn>&#160; It speaks of false flattery rather than sincere compliments.<b><br/></b></li>
 +
<li><b>מֶשֶׁק&#8206;</b><fn>For discussion, see Y. Etsion, &#8207;."בן המשק הראשון", מעמקים 36, תשע"א</fn>– Today this word refers to running a farm, household or even to the economy as a whole, which leads many to naturally assume that the phrase "וּבֶן מֶשֶׁק בֵּיתִי הוּא דַּמֶּשֶׂק אֱלִיעֶזֶר" in <a href="Bereshit15-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit 15:2</a> refers to one who was in charge of administering Avraham's household. The word "מֶשֶׁק", though, is a hapax legomenon and its original meaning is unclear:</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>The modern understanding stems from&#160;<multilink><a href="TargumOnkelosBereshit15-2" data-aht="source">Onkelos</a><a href="TargumOnkelosBereshit15-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit 15:2</a><a href="Targum Onkelos" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Onkelos</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RashiBereshit15-2" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBereshit15-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit 15:2</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>'s explanation of the verse which connects "משק" with the root "נשק", as in <a href="Bereshit41-40" data-aht="source">Bereshit 41:40</a>'s: "אַתָּה תִּהְיֶה <b>עַל בֵּיתִי</b> וְעַל פִּיךָ<b> יִשַּׁק</b> כׇּל עַמִּי".&#8206;<fn>Shadal basically comes to the same conclusion, but thinks the word stems from the root "שקק", meaning to go to and fro.</fn> However, <multilink><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannBereshit15-2" data-aht="source">R. D"Z Hoffmann</a><a href="RDavidZviHoffmannBereshit15-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit 15:2</a><a href="R. David Zvi Hoffmann" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Zvi Hoffmann</a></multilink>, in contrast, suggests that "משק" is related to "משך" and refers to one who acquires, i.e. an inheritor.<fn>According to him, then, verses 2 and 3 are parallel.</fn> He compares the verse to <a href="Zephanyah2-9" data-aht="source">Zephanyah 2:9</a>, "מִמְשַׁ֥ק חָר֛וּל", which he understands to mean "the acquisition of the "חרול". A third possibility is raised (and rejected) by&#160;<multilink><a href="ShadalBereshit15-2" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalBereshit15-2" data-aht="source">Bereshit 15:2</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> in the name of the scholar Quatremère who associates the word with "משקה", suggesting that Eliezer was a "שר המשקים", or butler.<fn>If one takes this meaning, too, it is easy to see how the modern usage might have evolved.</fn></li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>נוֹרָא</b> – This word has shifted in connotation, from primarily meaning "awesome" in the Biblical era<fn>See, for instance, <a href="Bereshit28-17" data-aht="source">Bereshit 28:17</a>, <a href="Shemot15-11" data-aht="source">Shemot 15:11</a>, or&#160;<a href="Devarim28-58" data-aht="source">Devarim 28:58</a> where the word has a positive connotation.</fn> to meaning "awful" in the modern period. The shift might relate to the few exceptional cases in Tanakh where the word takes the negative connotation, dreadful.&#160; See the descriptions of the wilderness in <a href="Devarim1-19" data-aht="source">Devarim 1:19</a>,&#160;<a href="Devarim8-15" data-aht="source">Devarim 8:15</a> or <a href="Yeshayahu21-1" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 21:1</a>.</li>
 +
<li><b>נִין וָנֶכֶד</b>&#8206;&#8206;<fn>For a comprehensive discussion of the evolution of the terms, see S. Sharvit, "הנין יהנכד - מן המקרא ללשון ימינו" in 'עיוני מקרא ופרשנות ח (Ramat Gan, 2008): 165-174.</fn>&#8206;&#8206;&#8206;&#8206;&#8206; – This pair of words appears three times in Tanakh,<fn>See <a href="Bereshit21-23" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:23</a>,&#160;<a href="Yeshayahu14-22" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 14:22</a> and <a href="Iyyov18-19" data-aht="source">Iyyov 18:19</a>.</fn> always in this order.&#160; As such, in context, the terms would appear to mean child and grandchild respectively,<fn>See, for instance, the translation of <multilink><a href="TargumOnkelosBereshit21-23" data-aht="source">Onkelos </a><a href="TargumOnkelosBereshit21-23" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:23</a><a href="Targum Onkelos" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Onkelos</a></multilink>or <multilink><a href="TargumYonatanYeshayahu14-22" data-aht="source">Targum Yonatan</a><a href="TargumYonatanYeshayahu14-22" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 14:22</a><a href="Targum Yonatan (Neviim)" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Yonatan (Neviim)</a></multilink>.</fn> or perhaps refer more generally to descendants (with no differentiation between the terms).<fn>See, for example, the&#160;<multilink><a href="SeptuagintBereshit21-23" data-aht="source">Septuagint</a><a href="SeptuagintBereshit21-23" data-aht="source">Bereshit 21:23</a><a href="Septuagint" data-aht="parshan">About the Septuagint</a></multilink> and R"Y Ibn Janach.</fn> In modern Hebrew, in contrast, נין and נכד no longer take on the general connotation of "descendant", and the chronological order is reversed and moved down a generation, with נכד referring to a grandson and נין referring to a great-grandson.<fn>In Tanakh, grandchildren and great-grandchildren are referred to as "שלש" and "רבע" (the third and fourth generations).&#8206; See <a href="Bereshit50-23" data-aht="source">Bereshit 50:23</a>, <a href="Shemot20-4" data-aht="source">Shemot 20:4</a>, <a href="Shemot34-7" data-aht="source">Shemot 34:7</a>, and <a href="Devarim5-8" data-aht="source">Devarim 5:8</a></fn></li>
 +
<li><b>נַעַר&#160;</b>– Though in modern Hebrew this word refers to a youth rather than an infant or adult, in Tanakh, it might refer to any of the three.<fn>See <a href="Shemot2-5-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:5-6</a>, <a href="Shofetim13-2-22" data-aht="source">Shofetim 13:8</a>,&#160;<a href="ShemuelI1-22" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 1:22</a> and&#160;<a href="ShemuelII12-16" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 12:16</a> where it is mentioned in connection to infants.</fn></li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>Familiarity with the later meaning is likely what lies behind&#160;<multilink><a href="RashiShemot2-6" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiShemot2-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:6</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary2-6" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar15-15" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 15:15</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar28-14" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 28:14</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim27-2" data-aht="source">Devarim 27:2</a><a href="IbnEzraYeshayahu5-16" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 5:16</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary2-6" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 2:6</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>'s questioning of why baby Moshe is referred to as a "נער", a question which assumes that an infant cannot be a "נער".&#160; [Rashi, thus, suggests that his voice was like that of a "נער" and Ibn Ezra proposes that he was big-boned.]<fn>See also Hadar Zekenim who goes so far as to suggest that the words "וְהִנֵּה נַעַר בֹּכֶה" refer to Aharon rather than to Moshe.</fn> Contrast&#160;<multilink><a href="RambanShemot2-6" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanShemot2-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:6</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> who points out that this is simply normal Biblical usage of the word.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>נפש</b> – In modern Hebrew this word has a range of meanings including soul or pysche, a person or life, the seat of appetite, emotion or desire, and breath. These meanings all exist in Biblical Hebrew, but it is possible that originally the word had a much more concrete meaning, neck or throat,<fn>For this usage in Tanakh, see, for example, Yeshayahu 5:14, "לָכֵן הִרְחִיבָה שְּׁאוֹל נַפְשָׁהּ וּפָעֲרָה פִיהָ" where the word is parallel to "mouth". See also Tehillim 69:2, "כִּי בָאוּ מַיִם עַד נָפֶשׁ" or Yonah 2: " אֲפָפוּנִי מַיִם עַד נֶפֶשׁ" which both might be speaking of water reaching until the neck.</fn> stemming from the Akkadian "napistu", and it was only later that it took on all the secondary meanings above.<fn>See: L. Durr, "Hebr. נפש = akk. napistu = Gurgel, Kehle", ZAW 43 (1925): 262-269.</fn></li>
 +
<li><b>נצל</b>&#160;– The הפעיל form of this verb (הציל) has maintained the meaning of to save or deliver until today, but the meaning of the פיעל and התפעל forms might have changed over time:</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>The פיעל form appears in four places in Tanakh, but its meaning is ambiguous.&#160; Based on the context, in three cases (<a href="Shemot3-22" data-aht="source">Shemot 3:22</a>, <a href="Shemot12-35-36" data-aht="source">Shemot 12:35-36</a>, and <a href="DivreiHaYamimII20-25" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 20:25</a>) the word appears to mean to strip or despoil,<fn>In Divrei HaYamim the word is surrounded on both sides by the verb "בזז".</fn> while in a fourth case it appears to mean to "save".&#160; Both possibilities stand in contrast to the modern usage of "to exploit". See <a href="Reparations and Despoiling Egypt" data-aht="page">Reparations and Despoiling Egypt</a> for how the different understandings might affect how one reads the command to borrow / ask for vessels from the Egyptians.</li>
 +
<li>The&#160;התפעל form of "נצל" appears only once, in&#160;<a href="Shemot33-5-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 33:6</a> where it appears to mean remove from one's self.<fn>Cf. "הוֹרֵד עֶדְיְךָ" in the previous verse</fn> Today, in contrast, the word means to apologize.&#160; Y. Etsion<fn>See his article, &#8207;"<a href="http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/ktav_et/maamar.asp?ktavet=1&amp;id=859.">ארבע לשונות סליחה</a>", מעמקים 31, תש"ע.</fn> notes that the connotation of the verb has changed over the years. In medieval times it was used in the context of defending one's self against others' arguments (rather than acknowledging guilt),<fn>See <multilink><a href="RambanBereshit20-12" data-aht="source">Ramban Bereshit 20:12</a><a href="RambanBereshit20-12" data-aht="source">Bereshit 20:12</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink>,&#160;<multilink><a href="RambanBereshit31-35" data-aht="source">31:35</a><a href="RambanBereshit20-12" data-aht="source">Bereshit 20:12</a><a href="RambanBereshit31-35" data-aht="source">Bereshit 31:35</a><a href="RambanBereshit44-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 44:1</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> or&#160;<multilink><a href="RambanBereshit44-1" data-aht="source">44:1</a><a href="RambanBereshit20-12" data-aht="source">Bereshit 20:12</a><a href="RambanBereshit31-35" data-aht="source">Bereshit 31:35</a><a href="RambanBereshit44-1" data-aht="source">Bereshit 44:1</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> where he uses the term in this manner.</fn> and it meant to save one's self or cast off blame (thus, somewhat in keeping with the Biblical usage of the term). Only in modern times does it refer to the taking responsibility for one's actions and expressing regret for them.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>עָיֵף&#160;</b>– Today this word refers to being tired, while in Tanakh<fn>See discussion in Y. Etsion, "<a href="https://www.safa-ivrit.org/writers/etsion/tired.php">עייף ולא רוצה לישון</a>".&#160; He notes that in Rabbinic Hebrew, though more rare, evidence of this usage can be found as well. See, for instance, Shir HaShirim Rabbah 1:2.</fn> it has a broader meaning, also referring to one who is thirsty (or hungry).<fn>See Ibn Janakh and Radak who both note this and point to several examples where the word "עיף" is parallel to words meaning dry or thirsty. See <a href="Yeshayahu29-8" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 29:8</a>, <a href="Yeshayahu32-2" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 32:2</a>, and <a href="Tehillim63-2" data-aht="source">Tehillim 63:2</a>.</fn> The two meanings might be connected as thirst/ hunger is often connected to weariness. The less well known usage might shed new light on verses which can sustain both meanings:</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>"הַלְעִיטֵנִי נָא מִן הָאָדֹם הָאָדֹם הַזֶּה כִּי עָיֵף אָנֹכִי" (<a href="Bereshit25-30" data-aht="source">Bereshit 25:30</a>) –&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary25-29" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary25-29" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 25:29</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit25-29-30" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBereshit25-29-30" data-aht="source">Bereshit 25:29-30</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink> suggest that the verse refers not to weariness but to thirst and hunger, with R"Y Bekhor Shor suggesting that Esav was literally starving and would soon die if he did not eat. This reading has important ramifications for how one evaluates Yaakov's actions in the episode. See <a href="Sale of the Birthright – A Fair Deal" data-aht="page">Sale of the Birthright – A Fair Deal</a>.</li>
 +
<li>"וְאַתָּה עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ" (<a href="Devarim25-17-18" data-aht="source">Devarim 25:17-18</a>) – Though many assume that "עָיֵף" in this verse is parallel to "יָגֵעַ",&#160;<multilink><a href="RashiDevarim25-18" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiDevarim25-18" data-aht="source">Devarim 25:18</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraDevarim25-18" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim25-18" data-aht="source">Devarim 25:18</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> suggest that the verse refers to Israel's thirst, noting that Amalek attacked when the nation was in Refidim, without water. See <a href="Annihilating Amalek" data-aht="page">Annihilating Amalek</a> for how this reading might impact one's understanding of the immorality of Amalek's actions.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>עתק&#8206;</b><fn>See N. Netzer, "המענה לשון: העתקה מומלצת" in "מעט מן האור: פרשת לך-לך" &#8206;(2010).</fn> – In Tanakh this root means to move from one place to another (as in "וַיַּעְתֵּק מִשָּׁם הָהָרָה", <a href="Bereshit12-8" data-aht="source">Bereshit 12:8</a>),<fn>See similarly <a href="Bereshit26-22" data-aht="source">Bereshit 26:22</a>,&#160;<a href="Iyyov9-5" data-aht="source">Iyyov 9:5</a> or <a href="Iyyov14-18" data-aht="source">Iyyov 14:18</a>.</fn> or to advance,<fn>As such the related word "עתיק" means old or ancient, advanced in years.</fn> whereas today it refers to copying. The change is not fundamental, however, as copying is in effect moving text from one place to another.&#160; Such usage is already attested to at the end of the Biblical period, in <a href="Mishlei25-1" data-aht="source">Mishlei 25:1</a>, "גַּם אֵלֶּה מִשְׁלֵי שְׁלֹמֹה אֲשֶׁר הֶעְתִּיקוּ אַנְשֵׁי חִזְקִיָּה".&#8206;<fn>For another example where the word does not refer to the moving of a tangible object, see Iyyov 32:15, "חַתּוּ לֹא עָנוּ עוֹד הֶעְתִּיקוּ מֵהֶם מִלִּים" meaning and "words departed from them".</fn> As such, the semantic shift is simply a narrowing of the original meaning.<fn>See Shadal on Bereshit 12:8.</fn></li>
 +
<li><b>רגז</b> – Today, this root relates primarily to anger. See, though,&#160;<multilink><a href="RashbamBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Bereshit 45:24</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> who notes that in the Hebrew sections of Tanakh it takes the meaning of "tremble" or "agitate",<fn>See, for example, <a href="Yoel2-10" data-aht="source">Yoel 2:10</a>, <a href="Tehillim18-8" data-aht="source">Tehillim 18:8</a>, <a href="Tehillim77-19" data-aht="source">Tehillim 77:19</a>, and <a href="Iyyov9-6" data-aht="source">Iyyov 9:6</a>.</fn> and is often paired with fear,<fn>See, for example, <a href="Shemot15-14" data-aht="source">Shemot 15:14</a>, <a href="Devarim2-25" data-aht="source">Devarim 2:25</a>, <a href="ShemuelI14-15" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 14:15</a>, and <a href="Yirmeyahu33-9" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 33:9</a>.</fn> not anger.<fn>In Biblical Hebrew anger is expressed via the terms: חרון אף, קצף, or חמה.</fn> He suggests that it is only in the Aramaic sections of Ezra (5:12) and Daniel (3:13), that the root relates to anger or fury.</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li><a href="Bereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Bereshit 45:24</a> – This difference in usage might lie at the core of the debate between commentators over the meaning of Yosef's words to the brothers, "אַל תִּרְגְּזוּ בַּדָּרֶךְ".&#160; While&#160;<multilink><a href="RashiBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Bereshit 45:24</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary45-24" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary45-24" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 45:24</a><a href="IbnEzraTehillimSecondCommentary66-7" data-aht="source">Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherSecondCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther Second Commentary 1:2</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> suggest that Yosef is warning the brothers not to be angry with one another,&#160;<multilink><a href="RashbamBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Bereshit 45:24</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="RambanBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Bereshit 45:24</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> claim that Yosef is telling the brothers not to fear robbers en route home.&#160; See <multilink><a href="ShadalBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalBereshit45-24" data-aht="source">Bereshit 45:24</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink><fn>See also the Sefer HaShorashim of both Ibn Janakh and Radak.</fn> who attempts to defend both readings, suggesting that the root "רגז" simply means tremble, and can thus take on the secondary meaning of any strong emotion.</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>שופט</b> – In modern Hebrew, a "שופט" serves solely in a judicial capacity.&#160; In Biblical Hebrew, however, the verb "לשפט" might also refer to the execution of judgement, and the noun form has the broader connotation of "governor" or "savior" as well.<fn>For an analysis of how the root "שפט" is used throughout Tanakh and a discussion of the role played by the Shofetim, see M. Rozenberg, "The Šofetim in the Bible", Eretz-Israel: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies 12 (1975): 77-86.</fn></li>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li><b>נִין וָנֶכֶד</b>&#8206;&#8206;<fn>For a comprehensive discussion of the evolution of the terms, see Sh. Sharvit,&#160; "הנין יהנכד - מן המקרא ללשון ימינו" in 'עיוני מקרא ופרשנות ח (Ramat Gan, 2008): 165-174.</fn>&#8206;&#8206;&#8206;&#8206;&#8206; – This pair of words appears three times in Tanakh, always in this order.&#160; As such, in context, the terms would appear to mean child and grandchild respectively,<fn>See, for instance, the translation of Onkelos or Targum Yonatan.</fn> or perhaps refer more generally to descendants (with no differentiation between the terms).<fn>See, for example, the Septuagint and R"Y Ibn Janach.</fn> Grandchildren and great-grandchildren (the third and fourth generations) are instead referred to as "שלש" and "רבע".&#8206;<fn>See Bereshit 50:23, Shemot 20:4, Shemot 34:7, and Devarim 5:8</fn>&#160; In Modern Hebrew, in contrast, נין and נכד no longer take on the general connotation of "descendant", and the chronological order is reversed and moved down a generation, with נכד referring to a grandson and נין referring to a great-grandson.</li>
+
<li>The difference in meaning might influence how one perceives the various "שופטים" of Sefer Shofetim. Were they religious leaders, judges, or simply warriors who took vengeance on Israel's enemies?&#160; See&#160;Hoil Moshe on Shofetim 10:4</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>שזף</b> - Though today this root relates to suntanning, in Tanakh it means to see or look upon.<fn>The root only appears three times total. See&#160;<a href="Iyyov20-9" data-aht="source">Iyyov 20:9</a> where it is parallel to the word "תְּשׁוּרֶנּוּ" (which means to behold or regard) and&#160;<a href="Iyyov28-7" data-aht="source">Iyyov 28:7</a> where it is paired with an eye.&#160; [In both verses there is no mention of the sun or reference to skin.]</fn> The modern usage most likely stems from the verse, "אַל תִּרְאוּנִי שֶׁאֲנִי שְׁחַרְחֹרֶת שֶׁשְּׁזָפַתְנִי הַשָּׁמֶשׁ" (<a href="ShirHaShirim1-6" data-aht="source">Shir HaShirim 1:6</a>), which literally means "for the sun has looked down upon me"<fn>See&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraShirHaShirimFirstCommentaryLexical1-6" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShirHaShirimFirstCommentaryLexical1-6" data-aht="source">Shir HaShirim First Commentary Lexical 1:6</a><a href="IbnEzraEstherSecondCommentary1-2" data-aht="source">Esther Second Commentary 1:2</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> and the commentaries&#160;<multilink><a href="AttributedtoRashbamShirHaShirim1-6" data-aht="source">attributed to Rashbam</a><a href="AttributedtoRashbamShirHaShirim1-6" data-aht="source">Shir HaShirim 1:6</a><a href="Attributed to Rashbam" data-aht="parshan">About Attributed to Rashbam</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="AttributedtoRYosefKaraShirHaShirim1-6" data-aht="source">R. Yosef Kara</a><a href="AttributedtoRYosefKaraShirHaShirim1-6" data-aht="source">Shir HaShirim 1:6</a><a href="Attributed to R. Yosef Kara" data-aht="parshan">About Attributed to R. Yosef Kara</a></multilink>.</fn> but nonetheless results in the beloved's becoming tanned.</li>
 +
<li><b>שיכול ידיים</b> – Today this phrase refers to crisscrossing one's arms.&#160; The term comes from <a href="Bereshit48-14" data-aht="source">Bereshit 48:14</a>, when Yaakov puts his right hand on Ephraim's head and his left on Menashe's, with the verse stating "שִׂכֵּל אֶת יָדָיו". Perhaps, surprisingly, though, many commentators<fn>See, for example, Onkelos, Rashi, Ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor Shor and Chizkuni.</fn> do not think that the word "שִׂכֵּל" refers to the physical positioning of Yaakov's arms, but to the word "שֶׂכֶל", explaining that Yaakov "acted in wisdom".<fn>D. Sperber (דף שבועי לפרשת "ויחי" תשע"ז, אוניברסיטת בר-אילן) suggests that this reading is actually polemical in nature, a reaction to Christian understandings where Yaakov's blessing and crossing of his arm was taken to as a typology of the Cross. However, given that every other occurrence of the root "שכל" in Tanakh relates to wisdom, it is possible that the commentators are simply attempting to apply the common meaning to this verse as well.</fn>&#160;<multilink><a href="RashbamBereshit48-14" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamBereshit48-14" data-aht="source">Bereshit 48:14</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot48-14" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagYehoshua8-31" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 8:31</a><a href="RalbagBereshitBeurHaMilot48-14" data-aht="source">Bereshit Beur HaMilot 48:14</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> are exceptional, relating the word to the root "סכל", which is generally understood to mean foolish but might also take the connotation of crooked.<fn>Ralbag points to David's prayer, "סַכֶּל נָא אֶת עֲצַת אֲחִיתֹפֶל" (<a href="ShemuelII15-31" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 15:31</a>) and the similar formulation in <a href="Yeshayahu44-25" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 44:25</a>, "מֵשִׁיב חֲכָמִים אָחוֹר וְדַעְתָּם יְסַכֵּל".</fn></li>
 +
</ul><ul>
 +
<li><b>שִׂמְלָה</b> – This word has narrowed in meaning over the years, from referring to a garment appropriate for either a man or woman,<fn>See <a href="Bereshit37-34" data-aht="source">Bereshit 37:34</a>,&#160;<a href="Bereshit41-14" data-aht="source">Bereshit 41:14</a> or&#160;<a href="Bereshit44-13" data-aht="source">Bereshit 44:13</a> where it is used in reference to males specifically. or&#160;<a href="Shemot3-22" data-aht="source">Shemot 3:22</a> and&#160;<a href="Shemot19-14" data-aht="source">Shemot 19:14</a> where it associated with both men and women.</fn> to one worn only by women.<fn>See N. Netzer, in his column, "מענה לשון: על תְּאונה, שִמלָה ומכשפה" in "מעט מן האור: פרשת משפטים" &#8206;(2010), who suggests that the change in usage might have been influenced by the word's usage in <a href="Devarim22-5" data-aht="source">Devarim 22:5</a>, "וְלֹא יִלְבַּשׁ גֶּבֶר שִׂמְלַת אִשָּׁה".</fn></li>
 +
<li><b>צרפ</b> – In Tanakh, this root means to purify or refine.<fn>See, for example, Yeshayahu 1:25, 48:10, , Yirmeyahu 6:29 and 9:6, Malakhi 3:3.</fn>&#160; Today, the root also means to join.&#160; In some ways the two meanings are opposites, as refining generally means getting rid of impurities, and is a process of separation rather than attachment.</li>
 +
<li><b>Body parts as metaphors</b> – Though both Biblical and modern Hebrew have various body parts act as metaphors, they disagree regarding what is expressed by each part:</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li><b>לב</b> – In Tanakh the heart, rather than the brain, is home to thought and the intellect.<fn>See, for example, <a href="Devarim29-3" data-aht="source">Devarim 29:3</a>, <a href="Yeshayahu44-18" data-aht="source">Yeshayahu 44:18</a>, and <a href="Tehillim19-15" data-aht="source">Tehillim 19:15</a>.</fn></li>
 +
<li><b>כליות, כבד and מעיים</b> – In Tanakh, it is the kidneys, intestines, and liver, which are home to emotions and affections.<fn>See&#160;<a href="Yirmeyahu12-2" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 12:2</a>,&#160;<a href="Yirmeyahu31-19" data-aht="source">Yirmeyahu 31:19</a>, <a href="Mishlei23-16" data-aht="source">Mishlei 23:16</a>, <a href="Eikhah1-20" data-aht="source">Eikhah 1:20</a> and <a href="Eikhah2-11" data-aht="source">Eikhah 2:11</a>.</fn></li>
 +
</ul>
 +
<li><b>Directions and orientation</b> – In modern times, people tend to orient themselves to the north, and so one's left would be to the west and one's right would be to the east.&#160; In the Ancient Near East, in contrast, people oriented themselves towards the sun, and hence to the east.&#160; Thus, in Tanakh, "קֶדֶם" (literally: forward) is not north, but east, "אָחוֹר" (literally: backward) is west, "יָמִין" is south, and "שְׂמֹאל" is north.</li>
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
 
</category>
 
</category>

Latest revision as of 13:08, 7 October 2024

Changing Meanings

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Overview

All languages evolve, and semantic shift can sometimes result in a word's modern meaning being radically different than its original usage.  Hebrew is no exception, as is said, "לשון התורה לחוד ולשון נביאים לחוד ולשון חכמים לחוד" (Tosafot Kiddushin 37bKiddushin 37bAbout Ba'alei HaTosafot). Words might take on one meaning in Torah, another in the Prophets and yet another in Rabbinic or modern Hebrew.  Often, one's familiarity with the contemporary usage of a word influences the way one interprets Tanakh, as one might not recognize that a word's definition might have evolved, becoming more narrow, more expansive, or changing totally.  Below is a listing of many terms whose meaning has shifted, with examples of how the changing definitions might have influenced different understandings of the Biblical text.

Within the Biblical Period

There are several words whose meaning might have changed from one period within Tanakh to another:

  • אֲבָל – The meaning of this word has shifted over time, from meaning "indeed" or "verily" in the earlier books of Tanakh1 to meaning "but" in later books such as Daniel, Ezra and Divrei HaYamim.2
  • בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל – The connotation of this word has changed slightly over time, becoming more expansive in meaning. In Sefer Bereshit3 and the opening verses of Sefer Shemot4 the term refers to the literal sons of Yaakov, whereas afterwards it refers to the nation of Israel.  The turning point might be Shemot 1:9, which uniquely states "עַם בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל",‎5 perhaps to clarify that the people have become a nation.6  There are a couple of cases in which the meaning of the term is ambiguous:
    • "לֹא יֹאכְלוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה" (Bereshit 32:33) – See the debate in Bavli Chulin 100bChulin 100bAbout the Bavli whether this refers to a prohibition Yaakov's sons accepted upon themselves or whether this was first commanded to the nation at Sinai and placed in Sefer Bereshit only to provide the reasoning behind the command.7
    • "וַיַּשְׁבַּע יוֹסֵף אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל... וְהַעֲלִתֶם אֶת עַצְמֹתַי" (Bereshit 50:25) – It is ambiguous from this verse whether Yosef is speaking to his brothers or all their descendants (the nation). The difference relates to a larger question: Did Yosef assume that after his death, the family would immediately return to Canaan and take his bones with them, or was Yosef aware the nation was to remain in Egypt for centuries and was requesting that the nation remember him when redeemed?8
  • דֶּגֶל‎9 – ShadalBemidbar 1:52About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto asserts that the original meaning of this word is not flag or banner, but rather military unit.10 As such, when Sefer Bemidbar states that the nation camped "אִישׁ עַל דִּגְלוֹ" or traveled "לְדִגְלֵיהֶם" the verses are emphasizing the nation's military organization, not the fact that they had military flags. He claims that it is only later that the word came to also refer to the standard that marked the unit.11 Thus, in Shir HaShirim 2:4, the beloved uses the secondary meaning, saying: "וְדִגְלוֹ עָלַי אַהֲבָה", that her lover's banner is his love for her.12
  • דָּת – ShadalDevarim 33:2About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto points out that the word "דָּת" is a Persian loan word, first appearing as an independent word in the Book of Esther, where it means law or decree. The term appears only once earlier in Tanakh, in Devarim 33:2, but only as part of a larger term "אשדת". The word is written as just one word "אשדת" but read as if written "אֵשׁ דָּת". This has led commentators to debate the term's meaning:
  • חֹדֶשׁ – It is possible that in Torah, "חֹדֶשׁ" refers to the full month,13 while it is first in the Prophets that it also takes on the additional meaning of "Rosh Chodesh", the first of the month specifically.14 See, though, R. Moshe ibn ChiquitillaShemot Second Commentary 12:2About R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla who claims that the primary meaning of "חֹדֶשׁ" in Torah is "Rosh Chodesh".15  The different possibilities might affect one's reading of several verses:
  • עצר/ת – R. D"Z HoffmannVayikra 23:33About R. David Zvi Hoffmann asserts that in Torah this root means to restrain.  The holiday immediately following Sukkot and the last day of Pesach are given this name as they are days in which one is restrained from engaging in work and other activities.20  Only later did the word take the additional meaning of gathering, as such days tended to be days of gathering.
  • שַׁבַּת – It is possible that it is first in Prophets that the word "שַׁבַּת" refers to the seventh day of the week,21 while in Torah it refers to either a state of cessation,22 or the full week.23 When Torah speaks of the seventh day, it instead uses the terms "יּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי"‎24 or "יוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת".‎25
    • The meaning of the word has important implications for the debate regarding the meaning of the phrase "מִמׇּחֳרַת הַשַּׁבָּת" in Vayikra 23:15, and hence the dating of both the bringing of the Omer offering and Shavuot.  See MiMachorat HaShabbat for discussion.
  • שָׂטָן – In earlier books of Tanakh26 this word refers to a human adversary or enemy, and not to a celestial (or demonic) being. In the later books of Zekharyah and Iyyov, in contrast, the word is used to refer to a celestial being, though it is not clear if the word "שטן" is a proper name (Satan),27 or if it is simply a way of referring to an "adversarial" or "prosecuting" angel. In several instances, commentators debate whether the term takes on the earlier or later meaning:28
  • רֹאֶה, נָבִיא, חֹזֵה – Tanakh itself attests to the changing terms used to describe a prophet.  See Shemuel I 9:9, " כִּי לַנָּבִיא הַיּוֹם יִקָּרֵא לְפָנִים הָרֹאֶה". The different terms might reflect varying conceptions of the prophet's main role.  Was he primarily a "seer", fore-teller of the future, or a spokesman,30 someone whose job it was to relay the word of Hashem or rebuke the people?

Biblical vs. Rabbinic Hebrew

There are many words whose usage might have changed from the Biblical period to the Mishnaic period:

  • אֶגְרֹף31 – This word appears in only two places in Tanakh (Shemot 21:18 and Yeshayahu 58:4), making it difficult to define. In his Sefer HaShorashim,32 RadakSefer Hashorashim, גרףAbout R. David Kimchi notes that while the word means fist in Rabbinic Hebrew, in Tanakh it refers to a clump of earth,33 connecting it to the word "עָבְשׁוּ פְרֻדוֹת תַּחַת מֶגְרְפֹתֵיהֶם" in Yoel 1:17.34 RambanShemot 21:18About R. Moshe b. Nachman and R. D"Z HoffmannShemot 21:18About R. David Zvi Hoffmann, disagree, allowing for the possibility that the meaning of the word has not changed over time, and that in Tanakh, too, it means fist.35
    • "וְהִכָּה אִישׁ אֶת רֵעֵהוּ בְּאֶבֶן אוֹ בְאֶגְרֹף" (Shemot 21:18) – According to Radak's reading, "בְּאֶבֶן" and "בְאֶגְרֹף" are somewhat parallel terms, and the verse is simply giving two similar examples of external objects used to smite. According to Ramban, the verse is setting up a contrast, declaring that whether one smites with a tool that is likely to kill or one which is not, the same law applies.
  • אמה – In Tanakh, the word אמה means either maidservant (when spelled without a dagesh)36 or a unit of measure (when spelled with a dagesh).37 In Rabbinic Hebrew, it may be used to refer also to the forearm itself.
  • בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת – As opposed to Rabbinic Hebrew, where "בדק הבית" refers to Temple maintenance or repairs, and "בדק" is understood in terms of inspection or fixing41 (as in the root's verbal form),42 in Tanakh "בֶּדֶק" means a crack or fissure,43 and "בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת" refers to the breaches of the Mikdash.44 As such, when speaking of maintenance in Tanakh, the term is always accompanied by the verb "לחזק".
    • The change in meaning was a key factor in the debate over the authenticity of the so-called Yehoash Inscription. The relevant part of the inscription reads, "ואעש את בדק הבית", a usage which would have been anomalous in the time of Yehoash where בדק meant breaks rather than repairs.45
  • בָּיִת – In Tanakh, this root generally refers to either a physical house46 or receptacle,47 or a family or household.48 In Rabbinic Hebrew it is also understood more narrowly to refer specifically to a wife.49
  • גּוֹי‎50 – Though the Sages use this word to refer to a non-Jew,51 in Tanakh it simply means nation, and can even refer to the Nation of Israel.52 In his Sefer HaShorashim, RadakSefer HaShorashimAbout R. David Kimchi attempts to explain the change in usage, suggesting that when the Sages wanted to identify a person as a non-Israelite but did not know his nationality, they would refer to him as simply "גוי", so as to say that he was from a different nation.53 This later usage has influenced the midrashic interpretation of the following verse:
    •  "לָקַחַת לוֹ גוֹי מִקֶּרֶב גּוֹי" (Devarim 4:34) - Though the simple meaning of the verse is that Hashem took the nation of Israel out from Egypt, Pesikta Rabbati15About Pesikta Rabbati54 notes that Israel is referred to as a "גוי" because she behaved like a non-Jew (not being circumcised in Egypt).

Biblical vs. Modern Hebrew

Many modern Hebrew words might take on different meanings than their Biblical counterparts:

  • אָחֻז – The meaning of this word has become narrower with time. In Tanakh it refers to taking a part from a whole, but not necessarily one from one hundred.109 It is first in modern times that it comes to mean percent specifically.110
  • אֶמֶת – In modern Hebrew אמת stands in contrast to שקר and means truth.  In Biblical Hebrew, however, the meaning of the word is broader and includes also the connotation of being steadfast or faithful,111 with "אֶמֶת" being synonymous with "נאמנות".‎112 RadakSefer HaShorashimAbout R. David Kimchi even suggests that the original root of the word is "אמן" where the nun was dropped.113
    • The two possible Biblical meanings of the word are highlighted when comparing two instances of the phrase "תּוֹרַת אֱמֶת".  In Malakhi 2:6, the context "תּוֹרַת אֱמֶת הָיְתָה בְּפִיהוּ וְעַוְלָה לֹא נִמְצָא בִשְׂפָתָיו בְּשָׁלוֹם וּבְמִישׁוֹר הָלַךְ אִתִּי" might suggest that the phrase refers to truth or honesty.114 In Tehillim 119:142, "צִדְקָתְךָ צֶדֶק לְעוֹלָם וְתוֹרָתְךָ אֱמֶת, the parallel to "לְעוֹלָם" might instead support the meaning "steadfast", that Hashem's laws are constant and unchanging.
  • אֶפֶס – It is relatively recent that the word "אֶפֶס" is used to express the number zero,115 but it is not difficult to see how the modern word might have stemmed from the Biblical "אֶפֶס".  In Tanakh the root relates to cessation.  As such, in noun form it can mean nought116 or it might refer to the ends of the earth (as in the phrase "אַפְסֵי אָרֶץ").117  [In Tanakh the word might also express "but",118 qualifying a previous statement.]119
  • אֶקְדָּח‎120 – This word refers to a handgun in modern Hebrew, a usage obviously not found in the Biblical period.  The word appears only once in Tanakh, in Yeshayahu 54:12, "וְשַׂמְתִּי כַּדְכֹד שִׁמְשֹׁתַיִךְ וּשְׁעָרַיִךְ לְאַבְנֵי אֶקְדָּח".
    • As the root "קדח" relates to burning or fire,121 the phrase "אַבְנֵי אֶקְדָּח" is understood by most commentators to refer to a fiery or sparkling stone such as a carbuncle.122  As such, when looking for a word to describe a pistol (something which "fires stones"), Ben Yehuda raised it as a possibility.123  Rashi Yeshayahu 54:12About R. Shelomo Yitzchakibrings an alternative understanding of the phrase, suggesting that the verse speaks of a "מקדח", a hollowed out stone.  This, though, is taking an anachronistic understanding of the root "קדח", as it is first in Rabbinic Hebrew that the root "קדח" takes on the meaning to bore a hole.124
  • בטח – Y. Etsion125 suggests that though today this root is associated with stability and means to trust and rely upon another, it is possible that originally in Tanakh, like in Arabic today, it meant to fall (and only from there also to lean upon or to trust).126  There are several verses in which the traditional understanding of "trust" is difficult, yet the definition of "fall" is appropriate:
  • בִּירָה – Though today, "בִּירָה" is used to refer to a capital city, in Biblical Hebrew the word generally means simply palace or fortress,128 related to the Akkadian "birtu".
  • בקר – Today this root can mean both to visit and to criticize, inspect or oversee.  In Tanakh it generally takes the connotation of inquiring or inspecting/discerning rather than visiting.
    • There is one verse, though, which can sustain also the later meaning of visit, though it is not suggested that the root etymologically means that.  In Tehillim 27:4, the psalmist expresses the wish that he be able to dwell in Hashem's Temple and "וּלְבַקֵּר בְּהֵיכָלוֹ".  See Radak and Ibn Ezra that the connotation is that He wishes to inquire of God or contemplate His laws.  Rashi, though, connects the word to the noun "בוקר", morning, and suggest that the author requests "to appear in the sanctuary (or perhaps: visit) every morning".
  • דּוֹד‎131 – Though today "דּוֹד" can refer to an uncle on either the mother or father's side, see RashiYirmeyahu 32:12About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki132 who notes that in Tanakh, the term is reserved for a father's brother.133  [It also takes the meaning of beloved, as in Shir HaShirim]. 
    • See Yirmeyahu 32:12 where Rashi attempts to explain how Chanamel can be referred to as both Yirmeyahu's cousin and uncle,134 rejecting the possibility raised by some that he was Yirmeyahu's cousin on his father side and his uncle on his mother's side, claiming, "לא מצינו בכל המקרא אח האם קרוי דוד".‎135
    • See also RadakAmos 6:10About R. David Kimchi136 on Amos 6:10, who raises the possibility that the hapax legomenon "מסרף" in the phrase "דּוֹדוֹ וּמְסָרְפוֹ" might refer to an uncle on the mother's side (suggesting that the words דוד and מסרף are a pair).137
  • "דָּת" – The word "דָּת" is a Persian loan word,138 which appears predominantly in Sefer Esther, and consistently means "law" or "decree".139 This stands in contrast to the word's prevalent usage today where it means "religion".140
  • חֹזֶה – While today this word refers to a contract, in Tanakh it refers to a prophet, or more literally a "seer". The modern usage might stem from Yeshayahu 28:15, "כָּרַתְנוּ בְרִית אֶת מָוֶת וְעִם שְׁאוֹל עָשִׂינוּ חֹזֶה" where the definition "prophet" is somewhat difficult and the parallel to "בְרִית" implies that "חֹזֶה" might mean an agreement:
  • חשל – This root appears twice in Tanakh, once in Devarim 25:18, "וַיְזַנֵּב בְּךָ כׇּל הַנֶּחֱשָׁלִים אַחֲרֶיךָ" where it refers to weary stragglers and once in Daniel 2:40, where the Aramaic means to shatter or be beaten (by a hammer or the like).146 In modern Hebrew, in contrast, the word takes on an almost opposite meaning: to forge or strengthen. The contemporary usage likely stems from the Aramaic, where to "crush by a blow" evolved into "forge",147 and from there to "strengthen".
  • להתחתן (חתן)‎148‎‎ – In Tanakh, in contrast to modern Hebrew, the parties who are "מתחתן" are the חֹתֵן (father149 of the bride) and the חָתָן (son-in-law)150 or the חֹתֵן (father of the bride) and the father of the groom,151 not the husband and wife. The verb "להתחתן" is not used to describe the forming of the marital relationship between the bride and groom152 as it was the father of the bride and not the bride herself who was the active party in the marital contract. This betrays the nature of marriage in Tanakh as the formation of an alliance153 rather than a bonding of love.
  • יָרֵא אֱ-לֹהִים – Today, this phrase is used to refer to a person who is a believing, God-fearing Jew, and focuses on the person's relationship to Hashem.  In Tanakh, though, it might also be used in the context of interpersonal relations, referring to someone's moral or ethical conduct.154 ShadalShemot 1:15About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto suggests that the term might refer to anyone who fears even a false god, for someone who fears such a higher authority will have some sense of morality.  The difference in meaning might affect how one reads several stories:
    • The Midwives – As the midwives are said to have "feared God" (Shemot 1:17), whether one understand the phrase to refer to having belief in Hashem or having a sense of morality will influence whether one suggests that they were Egyptian or Hebrew. See Who are the Midwives.
    • Amalek - In speaking of Amalek's attack, Devarim 25:18 states, "וְאַתָּה עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ וְלֹא יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים".  Commentators debate whether the description "יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים" refers to Amalek or Israel, and, if the former, whether it describes the Amalekites' lack of ethics or disregard for God. See Annihilating Amalek.
  • "יְרַקְרַק אוֹ אֲדַמְדָּם"– In modern Hebrew the doubling in each of these words signifies a lighter shade of the color (greenish rather than green). There is a dispute as to whether this is true in Tanakh as well. While Ibn EzraVayikra 13:49About R. Avraham ibn Ezra writes, "וזה הכפל לחסרון", explaining, "ואדמדם – כמו כן קל האדמומית", the Sifra13:49About the Sifra Vayikra declares the opposite, explaining ירקרק to refer to "יָרֹק שֶׁבַּיְּרֻקִּים".
  • כן – Though this word appears hundreds of times in Tanakh, it never means "yes" as it does in modern Hebrew, but rather "thus" (כך)155 or veritably / right (נכון).156 In Biblical Hebrew there is actually no equivalent of the word "yes".  A positive reply is instead expressed by repeating the verb mentioned in the question.  For example, in answer to Yaakov's question, "הַיְדַעְתֶּם אֶת לָבָן בֶּן נָחוֹר", the people do not say yes, but "יָדָעְנוּ" (Bereshit 29:5).‎157
  • כַּעַס – The meaning of this word has become narrower over time.  Today, it means "anger" but in Tanakh it also takes the connotation of sorrow and pain. See, for example, Shemuel I 1:6, 15, Tehillim 6:8 or Kohelet 1:18. In some cases it is debated whether anger or sorrow is implied:
    • Kohelet 7:3: "טוֹב כַּעַס מִשְּׂחוֹק כִּי בְרֹעַ פָּנִים יִיטַב לֵב" – According to several commentators158 the verse is exhorting that it is better to get angry and rebuke one who does wrong than to be lighthearted about the wrong-doing. Others,159 though, connect the verse to the previous one (טוֹב לָלֶכֶת אֶל בֵּית אֵבֶל מִלֶּכֶת אֶל בֵּית מִשְׁתֶּה) and suggest that it, too, is stressing that sorrow (rather than happiness) leads to reflection and is ultimately good for the heart.
  • לֶחֶם160– The meaning of this word has become narrower over time. Whereas today it refers specifically to bread, in Tanakh it can also refer to any food or meal.161 As bread was the staple of the diet, all foodstuffs could be spoken of in terms of "לֶחֶם".‎162  This general understanding exists in English as well, in the term, "breaking bread," which refers to sharing a meal.
  • מִדְבָּר – In modern Hebrew a "מדבר" is defined as an area with a hot, dry climate and less than 250 mm of precipitation a year. RadakYehoshua 8:15Yirmeyahu 12:12About R. David Kimchi163 points out that in Tanakh, in contrast, the term refers to grazing land, unfit for agriculture but well suited for shepherding.  He suggests that the word "מִדְבָּר" might relate to the root "דבר" meaning to lead (or shepherd).
    • The difference in meaning affects how one thinks about the forty years in the wilderness.  Did the nation trek through barren, arid land, with intense heat and almost no water,164 or were the conditions considerably better, with pasture for their livestock?165  See Life in the Wilderness.
  • מוֹקֵד – The modern meaning of this word, center or focus, appears to have nothing in common with its Biblical counterpart which means fire.166  Y. Etsion suggests that the choice can be understood in light of the etymology of the English word focus. In Latin, "focus" originally referred to an oven or fireplace, but in the 17th century was adopted to refer to the center of a lens, the site where the suns rays concentrate enough to produce enough heat to ignite a fire. From here the word's meaning slowly moved to refer to any center.  When modern linguists were looking for an appropriate Hebrew translation for the word focus, they looked to מוקד as a fitting choice.
  • מַחֲמָאָה – This word appears only once in Tanakh, in Tehillim 55:22.  It is likely the source of the modern "מחמאה", meaning compliment, though the Biblical usage of the word might be somewhat different.  In the verse, the phrase "חָלְקוּ מַחְמָאֹת פִּיו" is parallel to "רַכּוּ דְבָרָיו מִשֶּׁמֶן", leading RadakSefer HaShorashim, אמןSefer HaShorashim, גויSefer HaShorashim, חמהBereshit 32:33Yehoshua 8:15Tehillim 55:22About R. David Kimchi and the commentary attributed to RashbamTehillim 55:22About Attributed to Rashbam to suggest that "מַחְמָאֹת" relates to חמאה, meaning butter or cream. The verse is saying that the person's speech was "smoother than cream".‎167  It speaks of false flattery rather than sincere compliments.
  • מֶשֶׁק‎168– Today this word refers to running a farm, household or even to the economy as a whole, which leads many to naturally assume that the phrase "וּבֶן מֶשֶׁק בֵּיתִי הוּא דַּמֶּשֶׂק אֱלִיעֶזֶר" in Bereshit 15:2 refers to one who was in charge of administering Avraham's household. The word "מֶשֶׁק", though, is a hapax legomenon and its original meaning is unclear:
  • נוֹרָא – This word has shifted in connotation, from primarily meaning "awesome" in the Biblical era172 to meaning "awful" in the modern period. The shift might relate to the few exceptional cases in Tanakh where the word takes the negative connotation, dreadful.  See the descriptions of the wilderness in Devarim 1:19Devarim 8:15 or Yeshayahu 21:1.
  • נִין וָנֶכֶד‎‎173‎‎‎‎‎ – This pair of words appears three times in Tanakh,174 always in this order.  As such, in context, the terms would appear to mean child and grandchild respectively,175 or perhaps refer more generally to descendants (with no differentiation between the terms).176 In modern Hebrew, in contrast, נין and נכד no longer take on the general connotation of "descendant", and the chronological order is reversed and moved down a generation, with נכד referring to a grandson and נין referring to a great-grandson.177
  • נַעַר – Though in modern Hebrew this word refers to a youth rather than an infant or adult, in Tanakh, it might refer to any of the three.178
  • נפש – In modern Hebrew this word has a range of meanings including soul or pysche, a person or life, the seat of appetite, emotion or desire, and breath. These meanings all exist in Biblical Hebrew, but it is possible that originally the word had a much more concrete meaning, neck or throat,180 stemming from the Akkadian "napistu", and it was only later that it took on all the secondary meanings above.181
  • נצל – The הפעיל form of this verb (הציל) has maintained the meaning of to save or deliver until today, but the meaning of the פיעל and התפעל forms might have changed over time:
    • The פיעל form appears in four places in Tanakh, but its meaning is ambiguous.  Based on the context, in three cases (Shemot 3:22, Shemot 12:35-36, and Divrei HaYamim II 20:25) the word appears to mean to strip or despoil,182 while in a fourth case it appears to mean to "save".  Both possibilities stand in contrast to the modern usage of "to exploit". See Reparations and Despoiling Egypt for how the different understandings might affect how one reads the command to borrow / ask for vessels from the Egyptians.
    • The התפעל form of "נצל" appears only once, in Shemot 33:6 where it appears to mean remove from one's self.183 Today, in contrast, the word means to apologize.  Y. Etsion184 notes that the connotation of the verb has changed over the years. In medieval times it was used in the context of defending one's self against others' arguments (rather than acknowledging guilt),185 and it meant to save one's self or cast off blame (thus, somewhat in keeping with the Biblical usage of the term). Only in modern times does it refer to the taking responsibility for one's actions and expressing regret for them.
  • עָיֵף – Today this word refers to being tired, while in Tanakh186 it has a broader meaning, also referring to one who is thirsty (or hungry).187 The two meanings might be connected as thirst/ hunger is often connected to weariness. The less well known usage might shed new light on verses which can sustain both meanings:
  • עתק‎188 – In Tanakh this root means to move from one place to another (as in "וַיַּעְתֵּק מִשָּׁם הָהָרָה", Bereshit 12:8),189 or to advance,190 whereas today it refers to copying. The change is not fundamental, however, as copying is in effect moving text from one place to another.  Such usage is already attested to at the end of the Biblical period, in Mishlei 25:1, "גַּם אֵלֶּה מִשְׁלֵי שְׁלֹמֹה אֲשֶׁר הֶעְתִּיקוּ אַנְשֵׁי חִזְקִיָּה".‎191 As such, the semantic shift is simply a narrowing of the original meaning.192
  • רגז – Today, this root relates primarily to anger. See, though, RashbamBereshit 45:24About R. Shemuel b. Meir who notes that in the Hebrew sections of Tanakh it takes the meaning of "tremble" or "agitate",193 and is often paired with fear,194 not anger.195 He suggests that it is only in the Aramaic sections of Ezra (5:12) and Daniel (3:13), that the root relates to anger or fury.
  • שופט – In modern Hebrew, a "שופט" serves solely in a judicial capacity.  In Biblical Hebrew, however, the verb "לשפט" might also refer to the execution of judgement, and the noun form has the broader connotation of "governor" or "savior" as well.197
    • The difference in meaning might influence how one perceives the various "שופטים" of Sefer Shofetim. Were they religious leaders, judges, or simply warriors who took vengeance on Israel's enemies?  See Hoil Moshe on Shofetim 10:4
  • שזף - Though today this root relates to suntanning, in Tanakh it means to see or look upon.198 The modern usage most likely stems from the verse, "אַל תִּרְאוּנִי שֶׁאֲנִי שְׁחַרְחֹרֶת שֶׁשְּׁזָפַתְנִי הַשָּׁמֶשׁ" (Shir HaShirim 1:6), which literally means "for the sun has looked down upon me"199 but nonetheless results in the beloved's becoming tanned.
  • שיכול ידיים – Today this phrase refers to crisscrossing one's arms.  The term comes from Bereshit 48:14, when Yaakov puts his right hand on Ephraim's head and his left on Menashe's, with the verse stating "שִׂכֵּל אֶת יָדָיו". Perhaps, surprisingly, though, many commentators200 do not think that the word "שִׂכֵּל" refers to the physical positioning of Yaakov's arms, but to the word "שֶׂכֶל", explaining that Yaakov "acted in wisdom".201 RashbamBereshit 48:14About R. Shemuel b. Meir and RalbagYehoshua 8:31Bereshit Beur HaMilot 48:14About R. Levi b. Gershom are exceptional, relating the word to the root "סכל", which is generally understood to mean foolish but might also take the connotation of crooked.202
  • שִׂמְלָה – This word has narrowed in meaning over the years, from referring to a garment appropriate for either a man or woman,203 to one worn only by women.204
  • צרפ – In Tanakh, this root means to purify or refine.205  Today, the root also means to join.  In some ways the two meanings are opposites, as refining generally means getting rid of impurities, and is a process of separation rather than attachment.
  • Body parts as metaphors – Though both Biblical and modern Hebrew have various body parts act as metaphors, they disagree regarding what is expressed by each part:
    • לב – In Tanakh the heart, rather than the brain, is home to thought and the intellect.206
    • כליות, כבד and מעיים – In Tanakh, it is the kidneys, intestines, and liver, which are home to emotions and affections.207
  • Directions and orientation – In modern times, people tend to orient themselves to the north, and so one's left would be to the west and one's right would be to the east.  In the Ancient Near East, in contrast, people oriented themselves towards the sun, and hence to the east.  Thus, in Tanakh, "קֶדֶם" (literally: forward) is not north, but east, "אָחוֹר" (literally: backward) is west, "יָמִין" is south, and "שְׂמֹאל" is north.