Tanach · Rishonim on Tanach · Ibn Ezra · Torah

Ibn Ezra on Exodus 35:5/אבן עזרא על שמות ל״ה:ה׳

אקחו. הפך תנו רק בהיות מ"ם אחר גזרת לקיחה הנה היא כמו נתינה, קחו נא לי מעט מים (מ"א יז י) פי' כי הלקיחה לי היא בעבורי, וככה קחו מאתכם תרומה לד':

1TAKE. The word kechu (take) is the opposite of tenu (give). However, when a mem follows a word from the root lamed, kof, chet,¹¹. Others emend to a lamed not a mem, because I Kings 17:10 reads, kechu li. If this is the case, then the lamed referred to is the lamed in la-Adonai. then it has the meaning of give. The meaning of kechu li (take me) in Take me, I pray thee, a little water (I Kings 17:10)¹² is, take for me,¹³ take on my account. It is the same case with Take (kechu) ye from among you (me-ittekhem) an offering unto the Lord (la-Adonai).¹⁴

בומלת כל נדיב לבו זרה כל אשר נדבו לבו, כמו בגדול זרועך (למעלה טו טז) בזרועך הגדול, זכר רב טובך (תה' קמה ז) זכר טובך הרב ור' ישועה אמר, כי הוי"ו נוסף כמו חיתו שדי (תה' קד יא) בנו בעור (במד' כד ג):

2[WHOSOEVER IS OF A WILLING HEART.] The phrase kol nediv libbo (whosoever is of a willing heart) is irregular.¹⁵, which is an adjective, is in the construct. An adjective does not usually come in the construct. b) Libbo is a declined noun. A declined noun is not usually preceded by a word in the construct (Filwarg). It should be noted that the literal meaning of kol nediv libbo is, whosoever willing of his heart. It should be interpreted as if written kol asher nedavo libbo (all whose heart made them willing). We find the same with bi-gedol zero’akha¹⁶ (by the greatness of), an adjective, is in the construct with zero’akha (Thine arm), which is a declined noun. (By the greatness of Thine arm) (Ex. 15:16), which should be interpreted as if written bi-zero’akha ha-gadol (by Thy great arm); and zekher rav tuvekha (the fame of Thy great goodness)¹⁷ (great), an adjective, is in the construct with tuvekha (Thy goodness), which is a declined noun. (Ps. 145:7), which should be interpreted as if written zekher tuvekha ha-rav (the fame of goodness which is great). Rabbi Joshua says that the vav of libbo is superfluous.¹⁸ (whosoever is of a willing heart). This only eliminates libbo’s irregularity. It does not explain the. irregularity of nediv (Filwarg). It is similar to the vav of chayeto in chayeto¹⁹ is be interpreted as if written chayyat. sadai (every beast of the field) (Ps. 104:11) and the vav of beno in beno²⁰ is to be interpreted as if written ben. be’or (Balaam the son of Beor) (Num. 24:3).

גואחר שהזכיר יביאה. פי' והוסיף לבאר שהיא תרומת ד', וכמוהו רבים, והוא צוה לי אחי (ש"א כ כט):

3[LET HIM BRING IT.] After stating let him bring it, Scripture continues to explain, and goes on to say that the reference is to the Lord’s offering.²¹ appears to be redundant. Hence I.E. notes that it is the style of Scripture to occasionally elaborate. See I.E. on Ex. 2:6; 3:14. There are many such instances, one of them being, and he hath commanded me, my brother (I Sam. 20:29).²² explains and he hath commanded me.

די"א כי נקרא כסף בעבור שתאוה היא לעינים מגזרת נכספה (תה' פד ג), גם נחשת, כי הנשים מנחשות בנחשת:

4[AND SILVER.] Some say that the word kesef (silver) is etymologically related to the word nikhsefah (yearneth) (Ps. 94:3),²³. and that silver is so called because it is a delight to the eyes.²⁴ Nechoshet (brass) is also so called because women practice magic (me-nachashot) with brass (nechoshet).²⁵