Tanach · Rishonim on Tanach · Ibn Ezra · Torah
Ibn Ezra on Genesis 2:23/אבן עזרא על בראשית ב׳:כ״ג
אויאמר. אז אמר זאת הפעם מצאתי עזר כנגדי כמוני כי ממני היה ודבר לילית דרש:
1AND THE MAN SAID. Then Adam said, “This time I have found a help meet like me for me, for this being came out of me.” The tradition concerning Lilith is a homily.89, Vol. I., p. 65.
בולזאת. בעבור זאת, וכן "אמרי לי אחי הוא" (בראשית כ יג)
2Le-zot (she) means because of this.90 in front of a word usually means to. Zot means this. Thus le-zot should be rendered to this. However, I.E. points out that the lamed may also mean because. The meaning of our verse then is: because of this; i.e., because she is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh she shall be called woman, Say of me: (li)91. Here, too, li does not mean to me but about me or of me. He is my brother (Gen. 20:13) is similar.
גודגשות שי"ן "אשה" תמורת היו"ד הנח הנעלם שהוא באיש, ויתכן שסבת דבור אשה דגוש ולא רפה, שלא יתערב עם "אישה" שהוא בעלה כי פעם יהסרו הראות הה"א, ונשים מן אנוש ואנשים,
3[WOMAN.] The shin in the word ishah (woman) receives a dagesh in place of the inaudible yod which is found in the word ish (man).92 makes up for the yod which is missing in ishah (woman). However, it is possible that ishah (woman) receives a dagesh to distinguish it from ishah (her husband) for at times the dagesh in the suffixed pronominal heh in ishah (her husband)93 is sounded there is no doubt that the speaker intends to say her husband. is not pronounced. The plural nashim (women) is derived from the words enosh (man) and anashim (men).94 and a tav to the singular. However, the word for women (nashim) is not formed in this manner. It is not the word for woman (ishah) plus the plural ending, hence I.E.’s comment.
דוטעם יקרא על שֵם.
4[SHALL BE CALLED.] This refers to the name of the woman.95. Yikkare (shall be called) is masculine and cannot refer to the woman. It refers to shem (name) which is masculine.
הולא נדגש קו"ף "לֻקָחָה זאת" להקל על הלשון והוא מהבנין הכבד, ואם לא נמצא
5[SHE WAS TAKEN.] The dagesh is omitted in the kof of lukachah (she was taken) in order to simplify its enunciation. This word is a pu’al conjugation even though we do not find it conjugated in the pi’el.96 is the passive of pi’el. Thus if we find a word in the pu’al we would expect to find it in the pi’el. However, the root lamed, kof, chet is not found in the pi’el, hence I.E.’s comment. According to Hebrew grammer a dagesh is placed in the second radical of a pu’al.
ווטעם והיו לבשר אחד כאלו הם, או שידמו כאשר היו וי"א שיולידו אחר (צ"ל אחד) והוא רחוק:
6[AND THEY SHALL BE ONE FLESH.] This means they shall live together as if they were one flesh, or let them once again be one flesh.97 Some say they will be one flesh through the child they will produce. However, this interpretation is farfetched.98