Dictionary:Changing Meanings/0

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:
• Adopting the later meaning of "law" back to this verse, RashiDevarim 33:2About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki and R"Y Bekhor ShorDevarim 33:2About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor assume that the verse is referring to the Torah which was given amidst the fire. ShadalDevarim 33:2About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto, though, claims that the word has no connection to"דת".  It is instead related to the noun "אשדה", meaning slope, and like many other words in the verse refers to a location.
• 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:
• "בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁלִישִׁי" (Shemot 19:1) – 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, R. Moshe ibn ChiquitillaShemot Second Commentary 19:1About R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla, RalbagShemot Beur HaMilot 19:1About R. Levi b. Gershom and ShadalShemot 19:1About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto all suggest that "בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁלִישִׁי" means the third "new moon" rather than the "third month"¹⁶ and that the verse is stating that the nation arrived in Sinai on the first of Sivan.
• "וּבְרָאשֵׁי חׇדְשֵׁיכֶם" – Most understand the phrase "רָאשֵׁי חׇדְשֵׁיכֶם" in both Bemidbar 10:10 and Bemidbar 28:11 to refer to the new moon, the "head" (ראש) of the month (חדש). R. Moshe ibn ChiquitillaShemot Second Commentary 12:2About R. Moshe ibn Chiquitilla, though, assumes that it refers to the first of the new moons¹⁷ (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.¹⁸
• זֹאת עֹלַת חֹדֶשׁ בְּחׇדְשׁוֹ"‏‎‎" (Bemidbar 28:14)¹⁹ – Compare Ibn EzraBemidbar 28:14About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor Shor,Bemidbar 28:14About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor 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.
• 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 Tanakh this word refers to any adversary or enemy, and not to a demonic being.²⁶  In the later books of Zekharyah and Iyyov, in contrast, the word is used as a proper noun (prefaced by a definite article) and appears to refer to an independent supernatural figure, Satan.²⁷ In several instances, commentators debate whether the term takes on the earlier or later meaning:²⁸
• "הַפְקֵד עָלָיו רָשָׁע וְשָׂטָן יַעֲמֹד עַל יְמִינוֹ" (Tehillim 109:6) – Contrast Ibn EzraTehillim Second Commentary 109:6About R. Avraham ibn Ezra 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 RadakTehillim 109:6About R. David Kimchi who assumes the verse is speaking of Satan who will act as his enemy's prosecutor.
• "וַיַּעֲמֹד שָׂטָן עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיָּסֶת אֶת דָּוִיד" (Divrei HaYamim I 21:1) – Ibn EzraTehillim Second Commentary 109:6About R. Avraham ibn Ezra and RadakDivrei HaYamim I 21:1About R. David Kimchi have the same dispute regarding this verse.²⁹
• 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:

• אֶגְרֹף ‎³¹ – 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.
• See the dispute in Bavli SotahSotah 12bAbout the Bavli regarding the meaning of the phrase "וַתִּשְׁלַח אֶת אֲמָתָהּ וַתִּקָּחֶהָ" in Shemot 2:5, where one opinion suggests that the daughter of Paroh extended her arm, rather than sending her servant, to retrieve Moshe.³⁸ Ibn Ezra Shemot First Commentary 2:5About R. Avraham ibn Ezrarejects this possibility noting both the missing dagesh³⁹ and the fact that this usage is not found in Tanakh: "אמה מדה היא, כי הזרוע לא תקרא אמה".‎⁴⁰ 
• 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
• See Sifra Vayikra16:32About the Sifra Vayikra and Mishna Yoma 1:1Yoma 1:1About the Mishna who adopt this later meaning to Vayikra 16, explaining, "וְכִפֶּר בַּעֲדוֹ וּבְעַד בֵּיתוֹ" to mean "and he will atone for himself and his wife".
• See also Lekach TovShemot 1:1Esther 4:14About R. Toviah b. Eliezer and ChizkuniShemot 1:1Shemot 22:2About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach on Shemot 1:1 who understand the phrase "אִישׁ וּבֵיתוֹ בָּאוּ" to refer to Yaakov's sons and their wives. See, though, Ibn EzraShemot Second Commentary 1:1About R. Avraham ibn Ezra who argues against this reading, noting: "אין בית בכל המקרא אשה".
• 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).

• דָּמִֽים – In Tanakh this word is related to blood or life whereas in Mishnaic Hebrew it also takes the meaning of "money".⁵⁵
• The later usage might have influenced the interpretation of RashbamShemot 22:1About R. Shemuel b. Meir and ChizkuniShemot 22:2About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach to Shemot 22:1-2 who understand the phrases "אֵין/יש לוֹ דָּמִים" to mean "תשלומי דמים", perhaps combining the Biblical and Rabbinic usage of the term. 
• Cf. Ibn JanachSefer HaShorashim (דם)Sefer HaShorashimAbout R. Yonah ibn Janach who explains similarly, claiming that the verse in Shemot and the parallel phrase "אֵין לוֹ דָּם" in Bemidbar 35:27 both mean ransom. He further claims that the phrase in Tehillim 72:14, "וְיֵיקַר דָּמָם בְּעֵינָיו" means not life but value or worth.

• ה״א הקריאה – Contrast Ibn EzraBemidbar 15:15Esther Second Commentary 1:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra on Bemidbar 15:15 who claims that there is no such thing as a "ה״א לקריאה" in Biblical Hebrew⁵⁶ with Ibn BalaamBemidbar 15:15About R. Yehuda ibn Balaam who suggests that though rare, it does exist.   As examples, Ibn Balaam points to Bemidbar 15:15, Yirmeyahu 2:31, Mikhah 2:7 and Shir HaShirim 8:13.
  
• חותן/חותנת and חם/חמות‎‎ ‎‎‎ – RadakSefer HaShorashim, חמהAbout R. David Kimchi⁵⁷ notes that Biblical Hebrew distinguishes between a father-in-law on the husband and wife's side, using distinct terms for each.  The wife's father is referred to as a חותן,‎⁵⁸ while the husband's father is referred to as a חם.‎⁵⁹ Rabbinic Hebrew, in contrast, does not preserve the distinction and uses the terms חם and חמות to refer also to the parents of the wife.⁶⁰  For further discussion, see חֹתֵן / חֹתֶנֶת.
• מַלְאָךְ – In Biblical Hebrew "מַלְאָךְ" refers to any type of messenger,⁶¹ not specifically an angel. Divine messengers are singled out by the terms "מַלְאַךְ אֱלֹהִים" or "'מַלְאַךְ ה".‎⁶²  In Rabbinic Hebrew, in contrast, "מַלְאָךְ" takes on the much more specific connotation of "angel".⁶³ Tanakh's broader definition of the word allows for ambiguity and in several cases, commentators debate what type of messenger is referred to:
• See the discussion in Avraham's Guests – Angels or Men regarding the identity of the "מלאכים" / "אנשים" in Bereshit 18-19.
• See also Ralbag Shofetim 6:11Shofetim 13:16Bereshit Beur HaMilot 16:7Bereshit Beur HaMilot 21:17Bereshit Beur HaMilot 32:2About R. Levi b. Gershomregarding the "מלאך" who appeared to Hagar in both Bereshit 16 and 21, those who meet Yaakov in Bereshit 32:2, and those that appeared to Gidon and to Manoach's wife and many others.  In each case Ralbag suggests that the verse refers to a prophet of Hashem.⁶⁴
• מַס – Hoil MosheShemot 1:11Bemidbar 31:28About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi points out that "מַס" in Tanakh refers to a labor tax rather than a monetary one,⁶⁵ noting that the Biblical term for a monetary tribute is "מנחה" or "מכס".
• This relates to a dispute among commentators regarding how to understand the role of the "tax officers" mentioned in Shemot 1:11. Though many assume this refers to those who oversaw the forced labor, RalbagShemot Beur HaMilot 1:11About R. Levi b. Gershom suggests it refers to collection of a fiscal payment (as per the later usage of the word).  Ralbag opines that only those who could not afford the monetary fine were forced to labor for Paroh. See discussion in Who was Enslaved in Egypt and how the various readings lead to vastly different perspectives on the severity of the enslavement.
• מָקוֹם – Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 28:11Esther First Commentary IntroductionAbout R. Avraham ibn Ezra notes that in Tanakh, the word "מקום" never refers to Hashem and always connotes a location.  It is only the Sages who use the term to refer also to Hashem due to His omnipresence.⁶⁶
• This leads Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 28:11About R. Avraham ibn Ezra to reject the Midrashic interpretation⁶⁷ that the phrase "וַיִּפְגַּע בַּמָּקוֹם" in Bereshit 28:11 means that Yaakov prayed to Hashem.
• Ibn EzraEsther First Commentary IntroductionAbout R. Avraham ibn Ezra similarly objects to those who explain⁶⁸ that Esther 4:14, "רֶוַח וְהַצָּלָה יַעֲמוֹד לַיְּהוּדִים מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר", refers to Hashem's salvation.⁶⁹
• נֵס – In the Rabbinic period this word refers to a miracle,⁷⁰ while in the Biblical period it takes the meaning of a banner / ensign (or flagpole) .⁷¹  Though at first glance it seems as if the two definitions are totally unconnected, an understanding of the role of miracles in Tanakh suggests that the shift in meaning might be natural. In Tanakh, miracles are viewed as wondrous actions that are meant to serve as signs, as per the Biblical term "אוֹתֹת וּמֹפְתִים" used to refer to the plagues and wonders in Egypt. Hence, "נֵס" too can refer to both an ensign and a miracle.⁷²
• "וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ ה' נִסִּי" – The change in meaning might underlie the dispute regarding the meaning of the name "ה' נִסִּי" in Shemot 17. Adopting the later usage, RashiShemot 17:15Esther 3:8Esther 10:3About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki⁷³ explains that the altar is supposed to recall the miracle performed by Hashem, while RashbamShemot 17:15Devarim 3:11Esther 1:2Esther 3:8About R. Shemuel b. Meir,⁷⁴ applying the Biblical usage of the word, says that the name refers to how Hashem's staff served as a banner during the war.
• עוֹלָם – Ibn EzraKohelet 3:11Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7About R. Avraham ibn Ezra notes that throughout Tanakh the word "עוֹלָם" is a marker of time, connoting a long duration or eternity. It is only in Rabbinic sources⁷⁵ that the word takes on the extra meaning of "world".⁷⁶ [In Tanakh, the word used to describe the world is "תֵּבֵל".]
• As such, he claims that when explaining verses which can sustain both meanings (see, for instance, Tehillim 66:7, Tehillim 89:3,⁷⁷ Mishlei 10:24-25, Eikhah 3:6, Kohelet 3:11, Daniel 12:7),⁷⁸ the prevalent meaning of "eternity" should be adopted.
• עַם הָאָרֶץ – In Rabbinic Hebrew this term refers to an individual who does not have much Torah knowledge or is not careful in keeping the laws of purity or tithing.⁷⁹  In Tanakh, in contrast, the term does not have a derogatory meaning and refers to a group rather than an individual, speaking of those living in the land. It is debated whether the term refers to the poorer masses or specifically to the higher classes.⁸⁰
• עֶרֶשׂ – Y. Etsion⁸¹ points out that in Tanakh, this word is almost always paired with "מִטָּה"‎⁸² and its synonyms "מִשְׁכַּב" or "יָצוּעַ"‎⁸³ and is generally associated with adults, implying that it refers to a normal-sized bed or couch. This stands in contrast to the Rabbinic period where the word also takes the specific meaning of a crib or cradle, like the modern ערש or עריסה.
  
• The difference in meaning might have influenced the various understandings of Devarim 3:11, which points to the gigantic proportions of Og by describing his bed: "עַרְשׂוֹ עֶרֶשׂ בַּרְזֶל... תֵּשַׁע אַמּוֹת אׇרְכָּהּ". While RambanDevarim 3:11About R. Moshe b. Nachman appears to read the verse as referring to a normal bed, R"Y KaraDevarim 3:11About R. Yosef Kara and RashbamDevarim 3:11Esther 3:8About R. Shemuel b. Meir, adopting the later usage, assume that it speaks of Og's crib.⁸⁴ The various possibilities have obvious ramifications for just how big Og was.
• צְדָקָה‎⁸⁵ – Though, in Rabbinic sources, the word צדקה refers to charity and giving of alms, R"Y KaraDevarim 24:13-14About R. Yosef Kara notes that it never takes this meaning in Tanakh, but rather refers to justice or righteousness.⁸⁶ ["צְדָקָה" is, thus, often paired with the word "משפט".]⁸⁷  Cf. MalbimYeshayahu Beur HaInyan 59:17About R. Meir Leibush Weiser that, at least when used in reference to Hashem, "צדקה" refers to actions done out of loving kindness and mercy rather than out of justice. Thus, though he does not think the word takes the meaning of "alms" in Torah, he does think it can refer to acts of bounty or mercy.⁸⁸  In several cases this dispute is evident in the interpretation of verses.  For example:
• "חָטָאתִי הַפָּעַם י״י הַצַּדִּיק וַאֲנִי וְעַמִּי הָרְשָׁעִים" (Shemot 9:27) – Contrast R"Y Bekhor ShorShemot 9:27About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor who explains that Paroh is saying that Hashem acted justly in punishing him, with Shemot Rabbah 12:212:215:31About Shemot Rabbah who has Hashem acting in kindness, by warning the Egyptians of the upcoming plague.
• "וְהָאֵל הַקָּדוֹשׁ נִקְדָּשׁ בִּצְדָקָה" (Yeshayahu 5:16) - Contrast R"Y KaraYeshayahu 5:16About R. Yosef Kara, Ibn EzraYeshayahu 5:16Amos First Commentary 6:10Esther First Commentary IntroductionEsther First Commentary 1:2Shemot Second Commentary 1:1Shemot Second Commentary 12:2Shemot Second Commentary 19:1Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7Esther Second Commentary 1:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra and RadakYeshayahu 5:16About R. David Kimchi who assume that "צְדָקָה" here is parallel to the word "משפט" found in the beginning of the verse, with TanchumaKedoshim 1About the Tanchuma who thinks it refers to Hashem's mercy and defense of Israel.⁸⁹
• צַדִּיק – In Rabbinic sources the word צדיק often refers to one who is extraordinarily righteous.  In Tanakh, though, it is possible that the word simply means innocent or just, but not exceptionally so.⁹⁰ The difference might affect one's understanding of several verses:
• Was Noach (an "אִישׁ צַדִּיק") saved because he was extremely virtuous, or was he simply the only upright, innocent individual of the time? See Ramban Bereshit 6:9Bereshit 6:9Bereshit 45:24About R. Moshe b. Nachman.
• Was Avraham asking that Hashem not destroy the righteous of Sedom, or only that He not collectively punish the innocent? For discussion, see Avraham's Prayer for Sedom.
• רֹב – In contrast to Mishnaic and modern Hebrew where "רוב" means "most" or a "majority",⁹¹ in Tanakh the word consistently means abundance or many.⁹² 
• The change in meaning might have influenced Bavli MegillahMegillah 16bAbout Bavli Megillah's reading of Esther 10:3, "כִּי מׇרְדֳּכַי הַיְּהוּדִי מִשְׁנֶה לַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ וְגָדוֹל לַיְּהוּדִים וְרָצוּי לְרֹב אֶחָיו".  The Bavli suggests that the verse is highlighting that only most were pleased with Mordechai, while others were not. Contrast Hoil MosheShemot 1:11Bemidbar 31:28Esther 10:3About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi who explains the verse to mean: "ורצוי לאחיו הרבים". See Mordechai's Legacy – ורצוי לרב אחיו for more.
• שְׁאוֹל – Tanakh never speaks of distinct afterworlds for the righteous and wicked, and instead uses one term, "שְׁאוֹל", to refer to the place to which all the dead go,⁹³ being synonymous with either death itself, a grave, or perhaps the "underworld".⁹⁴  By Mishnaic times, a distinction between an afterworld for the righteous (גן עדן) and wicked (גיהנום) already exists and the term "שְׁאוֹל" comes to refer to the latter.‎⁹⁵
• See Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 37:35About R. Avraham ibn Ezra on Bereshit 37:35 who argues on these grounds against the Vulgate's translation of this verse which defines "שְׁאוֹל" as "hell".
• שֵׁכָר – See Hoil Moshe Bemidbar 28:7About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazion Bemidbar 28:7 who suggests that the word "שכר" in Tanakh refers to a strong wine rather than an alcoholic beverage made of wheat (as per its later usage).⁹⁶
• שקע – This word did not undergo a change in meaning from Biblical to Mishnaic times, but one of context. In both eras it means to sink, but only in the later period does it refer to the setting of the sun.⁹⁷ Tanakh never uses the formulation "שקיעת החמה", but instead consistently employs variations of "בָא הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ".‎⁹⁸ Y. Etsion⁹⁹ suggests that the difference relates to changing conceptions of sunrise/sunset. Does one think of the sun as coming in and out of its abode, or as rising and sinking into the sea (as it might appear from the perspective of one on earth)?
• תּוֹרָה‎¹⁰⁰ – In Rabbinic Hebrew the word "תּוֹרָה" refers to the Five Books of Chumash or a Torah scroll. In Tanakh, the term is more general, referring to a set of instructions, teaching, or law.¹⁰¹ The difference in meaning might affect how commentators interpret several verses:
• "וְכָתַבְתָּ עֲלֵיהֶן אֶת כׇּל דִּבְרֵי הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת" (Devarim 27:1-8) – Commentators dispute what was written on the stones: the entire Torah, only the laws, the Decalogue, or the blessings and curses mentioned in the unit. See the differing opinions of R. Yosef Bekhor ShorDevarim 27:3About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, Ibn EzraDevarim 27:2Amos First Commentary 6:10Esther First Commentary IntroductionEsther First Commentary 1:2Shemot Second Commentary 1:1Shemot Second Commentary 12:2Shemot Second Commentary 19:1Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7Esther Second Commentary 1:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra in the name of R. Saadia, and RalbagYehoshua 8:31Shemot Beur HaMilot 19:1Bereshit Beur HaParashah 32:33About R. Levi b. Gershom.¹⁰²
• "תוֹרַת חֶסֶד עַל לְשׁוֹנָהּ" (Mishlei 31:26) – On a simple level, this phrase might be translated: "And a law of kindness was on her tongue", meaning that the woman of valor is guided by ways of kindness.  Bavli SukkahSukkah 49a-bAbout Bavli Sukkah, though, understands the verse to refer to the Torah itself, questioning what it means to have a "Torah of Chesed" and concluding that the phrase refers to one who learns (or observes) Torah for its own sake. 
• תשובה – Though in Tanakh one can "return to Hashem"¹⁰³ or "turn away from Hashem"¹⁰⁴ the noun form "תשובה" is never used in this context. It, instead, refers to either a physical return from one place to another,¹⁰⁵ a reply,¹⁰⁶ or the turn of the year.¹⁰⁷ In Rabbinic Hebrew, in contrast, the noun form is often used to refer to a spiritual return¹⁰⁸ (repentance) and phrases like "לעשות תשובה", "בעל תשובה" or "לחזור בתשובה" appear.

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:
• "וּבְאֶרֶץ שָׁלוֹם אַתָּה בוֹטֵחַ וְאֵיךְ תַּעֲשֶׂה בִּגְאוֹן הַיַּרְדֵּן" (Yirmeyahu 12:5) – See RashiMishlei 14:16About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki that the analogy might mean that if Yirmeyahu is already falling in peaceful territory, what will he do in enemy territory?¹²⁷
• "חָכָם יָרֵא וְסָר מֵרָע וּכְסִיל מִתְעַבֵּר וּבוֹטֵחַ" (Mishlei 14:16) – Rashi Mishlei 14:16Esther 10:3About R. Shelomo Yitzchakiand RadakSefer HaShorashimMishlei 14:16About R. David Kimchi 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.  RalbagYehoshua 8:31Mishlei 14:16About R. Levi b. Gershom, 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.
• 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".
• The later usage of the term has influenced many to understand the phrase "שׁוּשַׁן הַבִּירָה" throughout Megillat Esther to mean "Shushan, the capital city".¹²⁹ See, though, Ibn EzraEsther First Commentary 1:2Esther Second Commentary 1:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra (and R. Bachya Kad HaKemachAbout R. Bachya b. Asherin 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.¹³⁰
• 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
  
• 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 Esther 3:8. While RashiEsther 3:8About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki and RashbamEsther 3:8About R. Shemuel b. Meir asserts that Haman is complaining that the nation does not keep the king's laws, not paying taxes or participating in the army, MalbimEsther 3:8About R. Meir Leibush Weiser presents Haman as pointing to the different religious beliefs of the nation.
• 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:
• See ShadalYeshayahu 28:15About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto¹⁴¹ 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.¹⁴² He compares it to the term "הַגָּלוּי" (an open contract) in Yirmeyahu 32:11.¹⁴³ Contrast RashiBereshit 15:2Bereshit 45:24Shemot 2:5Shemot 2:6Shemot 17:15Yeshayahu 28:15About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki who suggests that "חֹזֶה" of this verse stems from a totally different root, the word "מָחוֹז",‎¹⁴⁴ meaning place or edge.¹⁴⁵
• 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:
• The modern understanding stems from OnkelosBereshit 15:2About Targum Onkelos and RashiBereshit 15:2About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki's explanation of the verse which connects "משק" with the root "נשק", as in Bereshit 41:40's: "אַתָּה תִּהְיֶה עַל בֵּיתִי וְעַל פִּיךָ יִשַּׁק כׇּל עַמִּי".‎¹⁶⁹ However, R. D"Z HoffmannBereshit 15:2About R. David Zvi Hoffmann, in contrast, suggests that "משק" is related to "משך" and refers to one who acquires, i.e. an inheritor.¹⁷⁰ He compares the verse to Zephanyah 2:9, "מִמְשַׁ֥ק חָר֛וּל", which he understands to mean "the acquisition of the "חרול". A third possibility is raised (and rejected) by ShadalBereshit 15:2About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto in the name of the scholar Quatremère who associates the word with "משקה", suggesting that Eliezer was a "שר המשקים", or butler.¹⁷¹
• 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 1:19, Devarim 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
• Familiarity with the later meaning is likely what lies behind RashiShemot 2:6About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki and Ibn EzraBemidbar 15:15Bemidbar 28:14Devarim 27:2Yeshayahu 5:16Shemot Second Commentary 2:6About R. Avraham ibn Ezra's questioning of why baby Moshe is referred to as a "נער", a question which assumes that an infant cannot be a "נער".  [Rashi, thus, suggests that his voice was like that of a "נער" and Ibn Ezra proposes that he was big-boned.]¹⁷⁹ Contrast RambanShemot 2:6About R. Moshe b. Nachman who points out that this is simply normal Biblical usage of the word.
• 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:
• "הַלְעִיטֵנִי נָא מִן הָאָדֹם הָאָדֹם הַזֶּה כִּי עָיֵף אָנֹכִי" (Bereshit 25:30) – Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 25:29About R. Avraham ibn Ezra and R"Y Bekhor ShorBereshit 25:29-30About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor 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 Sale of the Birthright – A Fair Deal.
• "וְאַתָּה עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ" (Devarim 25:17-18) – Though many assume that "עָיֵף" in this verse is parallel to "יָגֵעַ", RashiDevarim 25:18About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki and Ibn EzraDevarim 25:18About R. Avraham ibn Ezra suggest that the verse refers to Israel's thirst, noting that Amalek attacked when the nation was in Refidim, without water. See Annihilating Amalek for how this reading might impact one's understanding of the immorality of Amalek's actions.
• 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.
• Bereshit 45:24 – 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".  While RashiBereshit 45:24About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki and Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 45:24Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7Esther Second Commentary 1:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra suggest that Yosef is warning the brothers not to be angry with one another, RashbamBereshit 45:24About R. Shemuel b. Meir and RambanBereshit 45:24About R. Moshe b. Nachman claim that Yosef is telling the brothers not to fear robbers en route home.  See ShadalBereshit 45:24About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto¹⁹⁶ 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.
• 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.

¹ See, for example, Bereshit 17:19, Bereshit 42:21 and Shemuel II 14:5 (and see Rashi there, who explains "אבל – בקושטא").

² See, for instance, Daniel 10:7, Divrei HaYamim II 1:4, or Divrei HaYamim II 33:17.

³ See Bereshit 42:5, Bereshit 45:21 and Bereshit 46:5.

⁴ 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 or is referring to events after the brothers' death.

⁵ 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".

⁶ See R. HirschShemot 1:1Shemot 1:9About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch on Shemot 1:1 and 9 who implies this.

⁷ Compare also R"Y Bekhor ShorBereshit 32:33About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, RadakBereshit 32:33About R. David Kimchi and RalbagBereshit Beur HaParashah 32:33About R. Levi b. Gershom's reading of the verse.

⁸ See the third approach in Yosef's Economic Policies for discussion of whether the brothers had originally planned to return to Canaan immediately after the famine and its repercussions eased.

⁹ See D. Curwin's Balashon blog, "degel" for further discussion.

¹⁰ See also Onkelos Bemidbar 1:52About Targum Onkeloswho translates, "טִקְסֵיהּ", which Shadal claims is related to the Greek "taxis", meaning order and group.

¹¹ 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.

¹² See RashiShir HaShirim 2:4About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, 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  Cognates and Loanwords for the suggestion that "דגל" relates to the Akkadian dagalu, meaning to look or gaze, and that the lover is saying, "his gaze upon me is loving".

¹³ 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 Shemot 40:2, where it is accompanied by the clarification, "בְּאֶחָד לַחֹדֶשׁ") or gives the date. Variations of the term "ראש חדש" appear three times in Torah (Shemot 12:2, Bemidbar 10:10 and Bemidbar 28:11), but the meaning of the term is debated. [See discussion below.]

¹⁴ See, for instance, Shemuel I 20:5, Melakhim II 4:23, Yeshayahu 1:13, Yeshayahu 66:23, Yechezkel 45:17, and Tehillim 81:4.  Interestingly, in Nach (as opposed to Torah) the phrase "ראש חדש"' never appears, though the synonymous term "יוֹם הַחֹדֶשׁ" is used in Shemuel I 20:34 and in Yechezkel 46:1-6.

¹⁵ See ShadalShemot 19:1About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto 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.

¹⁶ In this case the reading is also influenced by the fact that the verse does not mention a specific date within the month. Bemidbar 20:1 is a similar verse, mentioning that the nation arrived in the Wilderness of Tzin "בַּחֹדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן" without specifying a date. Seder Olam Rabbah9About Seder Olam Rabbah explains that here, too, the verse refers to Rosh Chodesh.

¹⁷ 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.

¹⁸ 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.

¹⁹ See also the similar phrase "עֹלַת הַחֹדֶשׁ" in Bemidbar 29:6.

²⁰ 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.]

²¹ See Melakhim II 4:23, Yeshayahu 1:13, Yeshayahu 56:2 or Yeshayahu 66:23.

²² 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.

²³ See, for example, Vayikra 23:15.

²⁴ See, for example, Bereshit 2:2-3, Shemot 16:26, Vayikra 23:3.

²⁵ See, for example, Shemot 20:8-10, Shemot 31:15, or Vayikra 24:8.

²⁶ See, for example, Shemuel I 29:4, Shemuel II 2:19, Melakhim I 5:18, and Melakhim I 11:14. The first appearance of the word is in Bemidbar 22, where we are told that Bilam is greeted by a messenger (מַלְאַךְ) of Hashem "לְשָׂטָן לוֹ".  Commentators debate whether a human or angelic messenger is referred to, but even those who assume it was supernatural, do not equate him with the Satan. See RashiBemidbar 22:22About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki who describes him as a "מלאך של רחמים".

²⁷ ShadalIyyov 1:6About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto 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".

²⁸ In both these sources the word "שָׂטָן" does not take a definite article, which might be a factor in the debate.

²⁹ In this case the meaning of the word is further clouded by the fact that in the parallel verse in Shemuel II 24:1, the incitement of David is attributed to Hashem and not to a "שטן" at all.

³⁰ 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.

³¹ For a full discussion of the evolution of this word, see Y. Etsion, "אגרוף - מגרפה?"

³² For a discussion of the various places in which Radak notes semantic shift from Biblical to Rabbinic times, see N. Netzer, "מלשון מקרא ללשון חכמים - עיונים סמנטיים במילונות העברית בימי־הביניים", Tarbiz 64:3-4 (1992): 449-464. Netzer notes that Radak notes such changes in language usage much more frequently than do authors of earlier lexical works such as Ibn Janach.

³³ Other commentators similarly suggest that it refers not to a fist but to an external object. In Shemot, OnkelosShemot 21:18About Targum Onkelos translates it as "כורמיזא" (a stick), RashbamShemot 21:18Esther 3:8About R. Shemuel b. Meir suggests a type of stone or brick, and Ibn EzraShemot First Commentary 21:18About R. Avraham ibn Ezra more generally says that it might refer to a hard substance (though he also raises the specific possibility of a clump of earth).

³⁴ However, as this word, too, is rare, and appears only here, its exact meaning is also debated. RadakYoel 1:17About R. David Kimchi and Ibn EzraYoel First Commentary 1:17About R. Avraham ibn Ezra assumes it means dirt, but Targum YonatanYoel 1:17About Targum Yonatan (Neviim) explains that it means "מִגוּפָתְהוֹן", the tops of barrels. Later, in Rabbinic and modern Hebrew a "מגרפה" refers to an agricultural tool (a shovel and rake).

³⁵ R. Hoffmann suggests that it is connected to the root "גרף" which means to gather in the hand. This verb, though, appears only once in Tanakh, in Shofetim 5:21, "נַחַל קִישׁוֹן גְּרָפָם". From context, it would seem to mean sweep or shovel away, and could be thus be related either to a hand or to the earth which is being removed.

³⁶ See Bereshit 21:10 or Bereshit 30:3.

³⁷ See, for example, Bereshit 6:15 or Shemot 25:10.

³⁸ The different possibilities relate to the question of how many people were aware of Moshe's true identity. If Paroh's daughter alone retrieved the baby, perhaps even the maidservants were unaware of his Israelite origins.

³⁹ Others, such as RashiShemot 2:5About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki and R"Y Bekhor ShorShemot 2:5About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, note this as well.

⁴⁰ ShadalShemot 2:5About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto makes the same point, but suggests one possible exception, the description of the size of Og's bed in Devarim 3:11, "עַרְשׂוֹ עֶרֶשׂ בַּרְזֶל הֲלֹה הִוא בְּרַבַּת בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן תֵּשַׁע אַמּוֹת אׇרְכָּהּ וְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת רׇחְבָּהּ בְּאַמַּת אִישׁ". He notes, though, that even in this verse the phrase "אַמַּת אִישׁ" might refer to the measurement rather than an actual arm.

⁴¹ See, for instance, Mishna ShekalimShekalim 5:6About the Mishna or Mishna TemurahTemurah 7:2About Mishna Temurah.

⁴² In Tanakh itself the verbal form appears only once, in Divrei HaYamim II 34:10 where it is parallel to the root "לְחַזֵּק".

⁴³ See Melakhim II 12:6-9, Melakhim II 22:5, and Yechezkel 27:9.

⁴⁴ See RadakSefer HaShorashim, בדקAbout R. David Kimchi who speaks about the change in meaning and connection between the verbal and noun forms of the word, suggesting that a fissure is referred to as a "בדק" because it is found as a result of inspection.

⁴⁵ See discussion in E. Greenstein, "The So-Called Jehoash Inscription: A Post Mortem," The Ancient Near East Today 4:2 (2016).

⁴⁶ See, for example, Bereshit 12:15, Bereshit 19:2, Bereshit 24:23 or Bereshit 33:17.

⁴⁷ See, for instance, Shemot 25:27, Shemot 26:29, Melakhim I 18:32, and Nechemyah 2:3.

⁴⁸ See, for example, Bereshit 7:1, Bereshit 35:2 or Bereshit 36:6.

⁴⁹ See, for example, Bavli Shabbat 118bShabbat 118bAbout the Bavli.

⁵⁰ See the discussion on the contrast between the Biblical and Rabbinic usage of this word in Y. Heinemann, דרכי האגדה (Jerusalem, 1954): 113.

⁵¹ See Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot 12:43, Mishna Avodah Zarah 2:6Avodah Zarah 2:6Avodah Zarah 4:8About the Mishna and 4:8Avodah Zarah 2:6Avodah Zarah 4:8About the Mishna, Tosefta Berakhot 6:18Berakhot 6:18About the Tosefta.

⁵² See, for instance, Bereshit 18:18, Bereshit 46:3, Devarim 26:5 or Yehoshua 4:1.  See also the debate in Sifre Devarim 32:28 regarding Devarim 32:28.  ShadalDevarim 32:43About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto goes further to suggest that even the plural form "גויים" in Devarim 32:43 might refer to the Nation of Israel.

⁵³ See Y. Etsion, "גוי", who offers a different explanation.  Since already in Tanakh the plural form "גויים" refers to Gentile nations, eventually the singular form of the word was used to refer to an individual gentile.

⁵⁴ See Chizkuni similarly, "שאף אתם הייתם גויים כמוהם כדכתיב ואומר אליכם איש גלולי עיניו השליכו".

⁵⁵ See, for instance, Mishna Maaser Sheni 1:5, Mishna Bava Metzia 5:3 and 5:9, and Mishna Bava Batra 2:7.

⁵⁶ He writes, "כי לא ימצא בלשון הקדש, כי אם בלשון חכמים."

⁵⁷ See also the discussion in Y. Etsion, "החתן, הכלה והחותנת".

⁵⁸ See, for example, Shofetim 19:4-9  It is possible that the term might refer also to a brother-in-law (or even another relative) as the term relates to the individual who contracts the marriage. [See Ibn Janach.] This bears on the identity of "חֹתֵן מֹשֶׁה" who is mentioned in many verses, but with reference to different individuals. See Yitro – Names and חֹתֵן / חֹתֶנֶת for elaboration.

⁵⁹ See, for instance, see Bereshit 38:13, Bereshit 38:25 and Shemuel I 4:19-21.

⁶⁰ See, for example, see Mishna Demai 3:6Demai 2:2Demai 3:6About the Mishna, Pesachim 3:7Pesachim 3:7About the Mishna, Yevamot 1:1Yevamot 1:1About the Mishna, and Ketubot 1:5Ketubot 1:5About the Mishna.

⁶¹ See, for example, Bemidbar 20:14, Bemidbar 21:21,Devarim 2:26, or Yehoshua 6:25.

⁶² However, even in such cases, there is ambiguity as to whether an angel or human messenger is referred to.

⁶³ It is possible that the change is usage is related to the increasing prevalence of the word "שליח" in Mishnaic times. This synonym never appears in Tanakh, but by Mishnaic times it is widespread, becoming the preferred word to express a human messenger, allowing for a narrower definition of "מלאך".

⁶⁴ Ralbag's reading is motivated by philosophical concerns, as he rejects the possibility that angels might be corporeal.  See R. Levi b. Gershom for more examples.

⁶⁵ The context of many verses would support this.  See, for instance, Shemot 1:11, Devarim 20:11, Yehoshua 16:10, Melakhim I 5:27, and Melakhim I 9:16 which all explicitly speak of a labor force. See also Shofetim 1:28-35 or Yeshayahu 31:8 which speak of people being taken as "מס".  One possible exception to this usage is Esther 10:1.

⁶⁶ See, for example, Mishna Taanit 1:7, Bavli Shabbat 12bShabbat 12bAbout the Bavli, Bavli Kiddushin 31bKiddushin 31bAbout the Bavli, or the many places which speak of "מצוות בין אדם למקום" such as Sifra Vayikra 16:30, Mishna Yoma 8:9Yoma 8:8-9About the Mishna, and Bavli Rosh HaShanah 17b.

⁶⁷ See Bavli BerakhotBerakhot 26bAbout the Bavli, and more explicitly, Bereshit Rabbah68:9About Bereshit Rabbah and Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer35About Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer.  This understanding is found already in PhiloOn Dreams That They are God-Sent I 63-71About Philo as well. Others understand "וַיִּפְגַּע" to mean "pray" while still maintaining the definition "place" for the word "בַּמָּקוֹם", translating the verse as "And Yaakov prayed in the place".

⁶⁸ See, for instance, Lekach TovShemot 1:1Esther 4:14About R. Toviah b. Eliezer.

⁶⁹ For another example of a rereading of a verse based on the later usage, see R. Shimon in Avot 3:3Avot 3:3Avot 4:11About the Mishna.  He takes the verse כִּי כׇּל שֻׁלְחָנוֹת מָלְאוּ קִיא צֹאָה" בְּלִי מָקוֹם" (Yeshayahu 28:8) out of context, using the later understanding of the word "מקום", to teach that a table which does not have words of Torah (בְּלִי מָקוֹם), is like an altar of the dead, filled with filth.

⁷⁰ See, for instance, Mishna Berakhot 9:1Berakhot 9:1About the Mishna, Avot 5:4-5Avot 5:4-5About the Mishna, Tosefta Yoma 2:4Yoma 2:4About the Tosefta, and Sifra Vayikra 22:3222:32About the Sifra Vayikra.

⁷¹ See Bemidbar 21:8-9, Yeshayahu 5:26, Yeshayahu 13:2. or Yirmeyahu 51:12.

⁷² For further discussion, see D. Curwin's blog, Balashon, "nes and nisayon".

⁷³ See also R. Avraham b. HaRambamShemot 17:15About R. Avraham Maimonides.

⁷⁴ See also R. David Zvi HoffmannShemot 17:15About R. David Zvi Hoffmann.

⁷⁵ See, for instance, Mishna Berakhot 9:2Berakhot 9:2About the Mishna, Mishna Rosh HaShanah 1:2Rosh HaShanah 1:2About the Mishna, and Mishna Chagigah 2:1Chagigah 2:1About the Mishna.

⁷⁶ See M. Kadushin, The Rabbinic Mind (New York, 1972): 293-294, who suggests that this is a result of Rabbinic universalism. See, though, K.A. Fudeman and M.I. Gruber, "Eternal King / King of the World" From the Bronze Age to Medieval Times: A Study in Lexical Semantics", REJ 166:1 (2007): 209-242, who disagree and assume that the semantic shift took place earlier, already at the end of the Biblical period, pointing to Kohelet 3:11 and Daniel 12:7 as examples where the word "עולם" refers to the world.

⁷⁷ Contrast Ibn Ezra with Midrash Tehillim89About Midrash Tehillim, which understands the phrase "עוֹלָם חֶסֶד יִבָּנֶה" to mean that the world will be built on acts of kindness.

⁷⁸ In each of these cases some commentators explain the word to mean "world" and others to mean "of long duration"

⁷⁹ See, for example, Mishna Demai 2:2, Mishna Horayot 3:8 or Mishna Tahorot 7:1.

⁸⁰ See the discussion in HaKetav VeHaKabbalahShemot 5:5About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg on Shemot 5:5 and compare E. Urbach, "עם הארץ", Report: World Congress of Jewish Studies I (1947):362-366, S. Talmon, "תולדות עם הארץ בממלכת יהודה", Beit Mikra 12:3 (1967): 27-55, and A. Brawer, "עם הארץ כפשוטו במקרא", Beit Mikra 15:2 (1970): 202-206.

⁸¹ See his article, "שיר ערש במלונה".

⁸² See, for example, Amos 3:12, Amos 6:4 or Tehillim 6:7.

⁸³ See, for instance, Tehillim 41:4, Tehillim 132:3 or Iyyov 7:13.

⁸⁴ Others raises the possibility that the verse refers to Og's coffin, as this might more accurately describe his height than his bedstead would (as the latter might have been longer than the giant himself).  [See RambamMoreh Nevukhim 2:47About R. Moshe b. Maimon.]

⁸⁵ See the discussion on the contrast between the Biblical and Rabbinic usage of this word in Y. Heinemann, דרכי האגדה (Jerusalem, 1954): 114-115.

⁸⁶ Thus, though there are commandments to give a tithe to the poor, to lend to the needy and to forgive their debts (Devarim 15:1-8), and to support those who have become poor (Vayikra 25:35), no where is this referred to as "giving tzedakah".

⁸⁷ See, for example, Bereshit 18:19, Melakhim I 10:9, and Yeshayahu 1:27 and 5:16.

⁸⁸ In support, one might point to several verses where the word is parallel to "חסד", kindness (see Tehillim 36:11 and 103:17) or "יְשׁוּעָה", salvation (see Yeshayahu 46:13, 51:6, Tehillim 71:15 and 98:2).

⁸⁹ Contrast also Shadal and Malbim on Tehillim 24:5.

⁹⁰ In several verses the word cannot easily be translated as an especially righteous figure.  See, for example, Avimelekh's words "הֲגוֹי גַּם צַדִּיק תַּהֲרֹג" in Bereshit 20:4, Devarim 25:1's warning to judges, "וְהִצְדִּיקוּ אֶת הַצַּדִּיק וְהִרְשִׁיעוּ אֶת הָרָשָׁע" and David's statement regarding Ishboshet, "אַף כִּי אֲנָשִׁים רְשָׁעִים הָרְגוּ אֶת אִישׁ צַדִּיק בְּבֵיתוֹ" (Shemuel II 4:11).

⁹¹ See, for instance: Mishna Yevamot 12:2Yevamot 1:1Yevamot 12:2About the Mishna, "בגדול שהוא יכול להלוך בו או בקטן שהוא חופה את רוב רגלו חליצתה כשרה" and Mishna Ketubot 1:10Ketubot 1:10About the Mishna, "אם רוב אנשי העיר משיאין לכהונה הרי זו תנשא לכהונה".

⁹² For some of many examples, see Yeshayahu 1:11: "לָמָּה לִּי רֹב זִבְחֵיכֶם יֹאמַר י"י", Yirmeyahu 30:14: "מַכַּת אוֹיֵב הִכִּיתִיךְ מוּסַר אַכְזָרִי עַל רֹב עֲוֺנֵךְ עָצְמוּ חַטֹּאתָיִךְ", and in Esther 5:11: "וַיְסַפֵּר לָהֶם הָמָן אֶת כְּבוֹד עׇשְׁרוֹ וְרֹב בָּנָיו".

⁹³ Several verses speak of even the righteous heading to "שְׁאוֹל", implying that it was not understood to refer to hell. See Yaakov's lament in Bereshit 37:35, "אֵרֵד אֶל בְּנִי אָבֵל שְׁאֹלָה", David's prayer in Shemuel II 22:6, "חֶבְלֵי שְׁאוֹל סַבֻּנִי קִדְּמֻנִי מֹקְשֵׁי מָוֶת", Chizkiyahu's prayer in Yeshayahu 38:10, "אֲנִי אָמַרְתִּי בִּדְמִי יָמַי אֵלֵכָה בְּשַׁעֲרֵי שְׁאוֹל פֻּקַּדְתִּי יֶתֶר שְׁנוֹתָי" and Yonah's cry, "וַיַּעֲנֵנִי מִבֶּטֶן שְׁאוֹל" in Yonah 2:3.

⁹⁴ Sheol is consistently described as a place to which one is lowered.  See, for example, "ה' מֵמִית וּמְחַיֶּה מוֹרִיד שְׁאוֹל וַיָּעַל" ,"גַּם הֵם אִתּוֹ יָרְדוּ שְׁאוֹלָה" or "הַעְמֵק שְׁאָלָה אוֹ הַגְבֵּהַּ לְמָעְלָה".

⁹⁵ See, for example, Mishna Sanhedrin 10:3Sanhedrin 10:3About the Mishna, Tosefta Sanhedrin 13:1Sanhedrin 13:1About the Tosefta and Bavli Eiruvin 19aEiruvin 19aAbout the Bavli.

⁹⁶ For discussion of how the word has been used over time, see A. Shemesh, "יין ושכר אל תשת: המונח 'שֵׁכָר' במקרא ובפרשנות הבתר-מקראית", Megadim 42 (2005): 15-25.

⁹⁷ The verb "שקע" appears but six times in Tanakh, referring to water, fire, and countries, but never to the sun.

⁹⁸ See, for example, Bereshit 15:17, Bereshit 28:11, or Shemot 22:25.

⁹⁹ See על שקיעות והשקעות", מעמקים 36, תשע"א".

¹⁰⁰ See the discussion in Y. Heinemann, דרכי האגדה (Jerusalem, 1954): 115.

¹⁰¹ See, for example, its usage in Shemot 12:49, Shemot 16:28 or Vayikra 6:2.

¹⁰² A similar dispute might revolve around the reading/ writing of the "Torah" in Devarim 31:9-11. Here, too, one might dispute both what Moshe wrote and what the king is obligated to read during the hakhel ceremony: the entire Torah, Sefer Devarim or specific teachings therein.

¹⁰³ For a few examples, see Devarim 4:30, Devarim 30:2 or Yirmeyahu 24:7.

¹⁰⁴ See, for instance, Bemidbar 14:43 or Yehoshua 22:16.

¹⁰⁵ See, for example, Shemuel I 7:17

¹⁰⁶ See Iyyov 21:34.

¹⁰⁷ See Shemuel II 11:1 or Melakhim I 20:22.

¹⁰⁸ For a few of many examples, see Mishna Yoma 8:9, Mishna Avot 4:11, or Tosefta Kiddushin 1:11.

¹⁰⁹ See Bemidbar 31:30, where it speaks of taking one out of fifty, and Divrei HaYamim I 24:6 where the word refers to taking an undefined portion.

¹¹⁰ For further discussion, see Y. Etsion "אחוז מזה וגם מזה".

¹¹¹ See, for instance, Bereshit 24:27, Bereshit 24:48-49 (and RashbamBereshit 24:48Esther 1:2Esther 3:8About R. Shemuel b. Meir and Ibn EzraBemidbar 15:15Bereshit First Commentary 24:49Esther First Commentary IntroductionEsther First Commentary 1:2Shemot Second Commentary 1:1Shemot Second Commentary 12:2Shemot Second Commentary 19:1Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7Esther Second Commentary 1:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra there), Bereshit 32:11, Yehoshua 2:12, Yeshayahu 16:5, Tehillim 91:3-4 or Tehillim 132:11.  The context of many of these verses is the keeping of promises.  In many, too, the word "אמת" is paired with "חסד" and might refer to Hashem's steadfast kindness.

¹¹² See the discussion and examples brought by S. Melzer, "משמעויות מקראיות מקוריות", Beit Mikra 18:3 (1973): 303-305.

¹¹³ See Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 24:49Esther First Commentary IntroductionEsther First Commentary 1:2Shemot Second Commentary 1:1Shemot Second Commentary 12:2Shemot Second Commentary 19:1Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7Esther Second Commentary 1:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra similarly, "והמלה מגזרת: אמונה, והתי״ו לשון נקבה".

¹¹⁴ See Ibn EzraBemidbar 15:15Bemidbar 28:14Devarim 27:2Yeshayahu 5:16Kohelet 3:11Bereshit First Commentary 24:49Malakhi First Commentary 2:6Shemot Second Commentary 1:1Shemot Second Commentary 12:2Shemot Second Commentary 19:1Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7Esther Second Commentary 1:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra who suggests that the individual in the verse is not open to bribes, and RadakSefer HaShorashimMalakhi 2:6About R. David Kimchi who says that he is not "אחד בפה ואחד בלב".

¹¹⁵ See the discussion in Y. Etsion, "על האפס".who points out that is only in the last 200 years that the word has been used to express the number zero.

¹¹⁶ See Yeshayahu 40:17 (מֵאֶפֶס וָתֹהוּ נֶחְשְׁבוּ לוֹ), Yeshayahu 41:12 (כְאַיִן וּכְאֶפֶס), Yeshayahu 45:6 (אֶפֶס בִּלְעָדָי אֲנִי ה' וְאֵין עוֹד).  The verbal form similarly means to cease, as in Bereshit 47:15, "כִּי אָפֵס כָּסֶף". Form these examples, it is easy to see why the word would have been chosen to express "zero".

¹¹⁷ See Devarim 33:17, Shemuel I 2:10, or Yeshayahu 45:22.

¹¹⁸ See Bemidbar 13:28, Devarim 15:4, Shofetim 4:9, and Amos 9:8.

¹¹⁹ This connotation might also relate to cessation; the "but" limits or ends what came before.

¹²⁰ For elaboration, see the discussion in Y. Etsion, "בין קדחת למקדחה".

¹²¹ 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, Devarim 32:22, Yeshayahu 50:11, and Yeshayahu 64:1, The noun "קַדַּחַת" similarly means fever. See Devarim 28:22.

¹²² See Ibn EzraYeshayahu 54:12About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, RadakYeshayahu 54:12About R. David Kimchi and ShadalYeshayahu 54:12About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto.

¹²³ In his article, "בין קדחת למקדחה", 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).  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".

¹²⁴ See Mishna ShabbatShabbat 12:1About Mishna Shabbat, Mishna OholotOholot 13:1About Mishna Oholot and Yerushalmi Rosh HaShanahRosh HaShanah 3:6About Yerushalmi Rosh HaShanah. [Today the word is used also metaphorically to refer to someone who is speaks incessantly and is "חופר".]

¹²⁵ See the discussion in his article, "מה בין ביטחון לאבטיח".

¹²⁶ See Melakhim II 18:21, "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".

¹²⁷ 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?

¹²⁸ See Nechemyah 2:8, Divrei HaYamim I 29:1, and Divrei HaYamim I 29:19.

¹²⁹ See, for example, RashbamEsther 1:2About R. Shemuel b. Meir and R"Y NachmiasEsther 1:2About R. Yosef Nachmias on Esther 1:2.

¹³⁰ This distinction might impact one's understanding of several verses in the Megillah:

• Esther 1:5 – The second seven day party might have been only for those in the castle.  If so, in contrast to what is suggested by Esther Rabbah, there were likely very few, if any, Jews in attendance.
• Esther 2:5 – 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.
• Esther 9:6 – This verse might refer to the killing of 500 supporters of Haman in the castle complex itself.

¹³¹ For a discussion of the different usages of this word, see Y. Etsion, "הדודה והדוד".

¹³² See also Sefer HaShorashim of both Ibn Janach and Radak.

¹³³ See also OnkelosBereshit 21:23Vayikra 10:4Vayikra 20:20Vayikra 25:49Bemidbar 36:11About Targum Onkelos who consistently translates "דוד" as אַחְבּוּהִי and דֹדֵיהֶן as אֲחֵי אֲבוּהוֹן.

¹³⁴ See Yirmeyahu 32:7,9 and 12.

¹³⁵ Cf. ShadalShemot 1:15Shemot 2:5Shemot 3:1Devarim 32:43Yirmeyahu 32:12About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto 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.

¹³⁶ Ibn EzraBemidbar 15:15Kohelet 3:11Bereshit First Commentary 28:11Bereshit First Commentary 37:35Shemot First Commentary 2:5Amos First Commentary 6:10Esther First Commentary IntroductionEsther First Commentary 1:2Shemot Second Commentary 1:1Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7Esther Second Commentary 1:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra brings this possibility in the name of R. Yehuda ibn Kuraish, but rejects it. See also Sefer HaShorashim of Ibn Janach.

¹³⁷ 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.

¹³⁸ See discussion above.

¹³⁹ See, for example, Esther 3:14-15, Esther 4:3 or Esther 8:17.

¹⁴⁰ In the Rabbinic period, one might find attestations to both usages.  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.  It is possible, though, that In Bavli Sukkah, too, the phrase literally means that she "changed her laws."

¹⁴¹ See also Ibn Ezra who suggests that "חֹזֶה" should be understood as "ברית חוזה", an agreement like one made by a prophet.

¹⁴² It is referred to as a "חֹזֶה" since it can be seen, as opposed to a sealed contract which cannot be viewed.

¹⁴³ The verse implies that there were two copies of the deed of sale, "הֶחָתוּם" and "הַגָּלוּי", one sealed and one not.

¹⁴⁴ See Tehillim 107:30 and Melakhim I 7:4.

¹⁴⁵ According to him, the verse in Yeshayahu means: "we have set a border beyond which "Sheol" or death cannot pass". Cf. R"E of BeaugencyYeshayahu 28:15About R. Eliezer of Beaugency who explains, "we have set a place to run away from Sheol."

¹⁴⁶ See D. Curwin's Balashon blog, "nechshal" where he discusses the etymology.  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.

¹⁴⁷ One forges metal by beating on it with a hammer.

¹⁴⁸ See also the discussion in Y. Etsion, "החתן, הכלה והחותנת".

¹⁴⁹ See the discussion above that this term might also refer to the brother of the bride, if he is the one contracting the marriage.

¹⁵⁰ See Bereshit 34:9, Shemuel I 18:22-27, Melakhim I 3:1.

¹⁵¹ See Devarim 7:3 and Divrei HaYamim II 18:1.

¹⁵² To describe the groom's taking of a wife, the verbs נשא or לקח are used instead.

¹⁵³ See, for instance, Shelomo's many marriages.

¹⁵⁴ For examples where this usage might be implied, see Bereshit 20:10-11, Shemot 1:17,Vayikra 19:14, 32, Devarim 25:18, and Iyyov 1:1. 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

¹⁵⁵ See, for example, the repeated formula, "וַיְהִי כֵן" throughout Bereshit 1 or variations of the phrase "וַיַּעֲשׂוּ כֵן" in Bereshit 29:26, Shemot 7:10 or Shemot 8:14.

¹⁵⁶ See Bemidbar 27:7, "כֵּן בְּנוֹת צְלׇפְחָד דֹּבְרֹת" or Melakhim II 7:9, "לֹא כֵן אֲנַחְנוּ עֹשִׂים הַיּוֹם".

¹⁵⁷ As another example, in reply to David's questioning in Shemuel I 23:2, "הַאֵלֵךְ וְהִכֵּיתִי בַּפְּלִשְׁתִּים הָאֵלֶּה", Hashem's responds, "לֵךְ וְהִכִּיתָ בַפְּלִשְׁתִּים".  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.

¹⁵⁸ See Kohelet Rabbah and Rashi.

¹⁵⁹ See R"Y KaraKohelet 7:3About R. Yosef Kara, the commentary attributed to RashbamKohelet 7:3About Attributed to Rashbam, and ShadalBereshit 15:2Bereshit 45:24Kohelet 7:3About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto.

¹⁶⁰ For further discussion, see Y. Etsion, "לחם, מלחמה והלחמה".

¹⁶¹ See, for example, Bereshit 31:54, where the word refers to the "זבח" that was just prepared or Shemuel I 14:24, where Shaul makes an oath forbidding all from eating "לָחֶם", and wants to hold Yonatan accountable for tasting even honey.

¹⁶² In Arabic, "לַחְם" refers to meat, perhaps because in the desert, meat, not bread, was the staple food.

¹⁶³ See also RashbamVayikra 16:10About R. Shemuel b. Meir and ShadalShemot 3:1About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto. Cf. R"Y Bekhor Shor Shemot 3:1About R. Yosef Bekhor Shorwho claims the opposite.  On Shemot 3:2, he explains that Moshe went specifically "אחר המדבר" to shepherd, "שבמדבר לא היה מרעה".

¹⁶⁴ This fits the descriptions of desolation in Devarim 32:10 and Yirmeyahu 2:6.

¹⁶⁵ See Bemidbar 20:4-11 which suggests that the nation had livestock throughout the 40 years.

¹⁶⁶ See Tehillim 102:4 and Yeshayahu 33:14 and the verbal form "יקד" which means to burn (see Vayikra 6:2-6, Devarim 32:22 or Yeshayahu 10:16).

¹⁶⁷ According to this reading, the mem is not part of the noun itself, but instead means "more than" (as if written with a tzereh). Others do raise the possibility that the mem 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.  For discussion, see E. Segal-Halevi, "מחמאה - מילה שנוצרה בטעות".

¹⁶⁸ For discussion, see Y. Etsion, ‏."בן המשק הראשון", מעמקים 36, תשע"א

¹⁶⁹ Shadal basically comes to the same conclusion, but thinks the word stems from the root "שקק", meaning to go to and fro.

¹⁷⁰ According to him, then, verses 2 and 3 are parallel.

¹⁷¹ If one takes this meaning, too, it is easy to see how the modern usage might have evolved.

¹⁷² See, for instance, Bereshit 28:17, Shemot 15:11, or Devarim 28:58 where the word has a positive connotation.

¹⁷³ 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.

¹⁷⁴ See Bereshit 21:23, Yeshayahu 14:22 and Iyyov 18:19.

¹⁷⁵ See, for instance, the translation of Onkelos Bereshit 21:23About Targum Onkelosor Targum YonatanYeshayahu 14:22About Targum Yonatan (Neviim).

¹⁷⁶ See, for example, the SeptuagintBereshit 21:23About the Septuagint and R"Y Ibn Janach.

¹⁷⁷ In Tanakh, grandchildren and great-grandchildren are referred to as "שלש" and "רבע" (the third and fourth generations).‎ See Bereshit 50:23, Shemot 20:4, Shemot 34:7, and Devarim 5:8

¹⁷⁸ See Shemot 2:5-6, Shofetim 13:8, Shemuel I 1:22 and Shemuel II 12:16 where it is mentioned in connection to infants.

¹⁷⁹ See also Hadar Zekenim who goes so far as to suggest that the words "וְהִנֵּה נַעַר בֹּכֶה" refer to Aharon rather than to Moshe.

¹⁸⁰ 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.

¹⁸¹ See: L. Durr, "Hebr. נפש = akk. napistu = Gurgel, Kehle", ZAW 43 (1925): 262-269.

¹⁸² In Divrei HaYamim the word is surrounded on both sides by the verb "בזז".

¹⁸³ Cf. "הוֹרֵד עֶדְיְךָ" in the previous verse

¹⁸⁴ See his article, ‏"ארבע לשונות סליחה", מעמקים 31, תש"ע.

¹⁸⁵ See Ramban Bereshit 20:12Bereshit 20:12About R. Moshe b. Nachman, 31:35Bereshit 20:12Bereshit 31:35Bereshit 44:1About R. Moshe b. Nachman or 44:1Bereshit 20:12Bereshit 31:35Bereshit 44:1About R. Moshe b. Nachman where he uses the term in this manner.

¹⁸⁶ See discussion in Y. Etsion, "עייף ולא רוצה לישון".  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.

¹⁸⁷ 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 Yeshayahu 29:8, Yeshayahu 32:2, and Tehillim 63:2.

¹⁸⁸ See N. Netzer, "המענה לשון: העתקה מומלצת" in "מעט מן האור: פרשת לך-לך" ‎(2010).

¹⁸⁹ See similarly Bereshit 26:22, Iyyov 9:5 or Iyyov 14:18.

¹⁹⁰ As such the related word "עתיק" means old or ancient, advanced in years.

¹⁹¹ 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".

¹⁹² See Shadal on Bereshit 12:8.

¹⁹³ See, for example, Yoel 2:10, Tehillim 18:8, Tehillim 77:19, and Iyyov 9:6.

¹⁹⁴ See, for example, Shemot 15:14, Devarim 2:25, Shemuel I 14:15, and Yirmeyahu 33:9.

¹⁹⁵ In Biblical Hebrew anger is expressed via the terms: חרון אף, קצף, or חמה.

¹⁹⁶ See also the Sefer HaShorashim of both Ibn Janakh and Radak.

¹⁹⁷ 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.

¹⁹⁸ The root only appears three times total. See Iyyov 20:9 where it is parallel to the word "תְּשׁוּרֶנּוּ" (which means to behold or regard) and Iyyov 28:7 where it is paired with an eye.  [In both verses there is no mention of the sun or reference to skin.]

¹⁹⁹ See Ibn EzraShir HaShirim First Commentary Lexical 1:6Esther Second Commentary 1:2About R. Avraham ibn Ezra and the commentaries attributed to RashbamShir HaShirim 1:6About Attributed to Rashbam and R. Yosef KaraShir HaShirim 1:6About Attributed to R. Yosef Kara.

²⁰⁰ See, for example, Onkelos, Rashi, Ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor Shor and Chizkuni.

²⁰¹ 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.

²⁰² Ralbag points to David's prayer, "סַכֶּל נָא אֶת עֲצַת אֲחִיתֹפֶל" (Shemuel II 15:31) and the similar formulation in Yeshayahu 44:25, "מֵשִׁיב חֲכָמִים אָחוֹר וְדַעְתָּם יְסַכֵּל".

²⁰³ See Bereshit 37:34, Bereshit 41:14 or Bereshit 44:13 where it is used in reference to males specifically. or Shemot 3:22 and Shemot 19:14 where it associated with both men and women.

²⁰⁴ See N. Netzer, in his column, "מענה לשון: על תְּאונה, שִמלָה ומכשפה" in "מעט מן האור: פרשת משפטים" ‎(2010), who suggests that the change in usage might have been influenced by the word's usage in Devarim 22:5, "וְלֹא יִלְבַּשׁ גֶּבֶר שִׂמְלַת אִשָּׁה".

²⁰⁵ See, for example, Yeshayahu 1:25, 48:10, , Yirmeyahu 6:29 and 9:6, Malakhi 3:3.

²⁰⁶ See, for example, Devarim 29:3, Yeshayahu 44:18, and Tehillim 19:15.

²⁰⁷ See Yirmeyahu 12:2, Yirmeyahu 31:19, Mishlei 23:16, Eikhah 1:20 and Eikhah 2:11.