Tias posted:

If this is too weird just say so, but.. Are there arguments that making golems aren't dangerous?

quote:

Some Orthodox Jews believe that the Maharal did actually create a golem. The evidence for this belief has been analyzed from an Orthodox Jewish perspective by Shnayer Z. Leiman.

Genesis 2:9 posted:

And from the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that was pleasing to the sight and good for food, with the tree of life in the middle of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and bad.

Genesis Rabbah 13:1 posted:

Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai Said: Three things are of equal importance, and these are them: earth, humankind, and rain. Rabbi Levi Bar Hiyya said: And these three are from three letters, to teach you that if there's no earth there's no rain, and if there's no rain there's no earth, and without either of them there's no humankind.

Genesis 2:10-11 posted:

A river issues from Eden to water the garden, and it then divides and becomes four branches.
The name of the first is Pishon, the one that winds through the whole land of Havilah, where the gold is.

Genesis Rabbah 16:2 posted:

“The name of one is Pishon…” (Bereshit 2:11) This is Migdal Pishtan and its waters flow abundantly. “…that is the one that encompasses all the land of Havilah…” (ibid.) There was not yet a place called Havilah, and it says that the river encompasses it? That is strange! Rather, “tell the end from the beginning…” (Yeshayahu 46:10) “…where there is gold,” (Bereshit 2:11) gold there certainly was. “And the gold of that land is good…” (Bereshit 2:12) R’ Yitzchak said ‘happy is he in whose house it is, happy is he in whose company it is.’ R’ Abahu said ‘the Holy One gave a great good to His world – a man breaks a gold piece into smaller pieces, and he can buy many things with it.’ Resh Lakish said ‘the world was not fit to use gold, why was it created? For the Holy Temple, as it says “And the gold of that land is good…” like that which it says “…this good mountain and the Lebanon.” (Devarim 3:25) “…there is the crystal and the onyx stone.” (Bereshit 2:12) R’ Ibo said ‘you think this is referring to the crystal of apothecaries? Let another verse clarify it for you “…and its appearance was like the appearance of crystal.” (Bamidbar 11:7) Just as this refers to a precious stone, so too that refers to a precious stone.’

Genesis 2:12-13 posted:

(The gold of that land is good; bdellium is there, and lapis lazuli.)
The name of the second river is Gihon, the one that winds through the whole land of Cush.

Genesis 2:14 posted:

The name of the third river is Tigris, the one that flows east of Asshur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

Berakhot 59b posted:

And Rami bar Abba said that Rav Yitzḥak said: One who sees the Euphrates River near the bridge of Babylonia recites: Blessed…Author of creation. The Gemara adds: And now that the Persians have rerouted the course of the river, one only recites the blessing from Beit Shavor upriver. Downriver, it no longer flows as it did at creation, so there one does not recite the blessing: Author of creation. Rav Yosef said: One only recites the blessing from Ihi Dekira upriver. And Rami bar Abba said: One who sees the Tigris on the bridge of Shabistana recites: Blessed…Author of creation.

The Gemara proceeds to explain the names of these rivers. What is the source of the name Ḥidekel [Tigris]? Rav Ashi said: Its name is an acronym derived from the fact that its waters are sharp [ḥadin] and light [kalin] and therefore good for drinking. What is the source of the name Perat [Euphrates]? It is so named because its waters are fruitful [parin] and multiply [ravin]; there are many fish in it.

As for the Tigris River, Rava said: The inhabitants of the city Meḥoza are sharp because they drink the water of the Tigris; they are red because they engage in conjugal relations in the daytime; and their eyes move constantly because they live in dark houses.

Ketubot 10b posted:

GEMARA: What is the relationship between the term almana and its meaning, widow? Rav Ḥana of Baghdad said: A widow is called an almana after the maneh, one hundred dinars, which is the sum of her marriage contract. The Gemara asks: With regard to a widow from betrothal, whose marriage contract is two hundred dinars and not a maneh, what is there to say? The Gemara answers: Since they called this widow from marriage almana, this widow from betrothal they also called almana.

The Gemara asks: That explains the use of almana in the terminology of the Sages. However, with regard to the term almana that is written in the Torah, what is there to say? The rabbinic ordinance that the marriage contract of a widow is a maneh was not yet instituted. The Gemara answers: The Torah employs the term almana because the Sages are destined to institute the sum of a maneh for her in her marriage contract. The Gemara asks: And is a verse written for the future? The Gemara answers: Yes, indeed it is, as it is written: “And the name of the third river is Tigris; that is it which goes toward the east of Asshur” (Genesis 2:14). And Rav Yosef taught: Asshur, that is Seleucia. And did that city exist when the Torah was written? Rather, the Torah is referring to that city because it was destined to exist in the future. Here too, the Torah employs the term almana because a widow was destined to have a marriage contract of a maneh instituted for her.

Genesis 2:15 posted:

The LORD God took the man and placed him in the garden of Eden, to till it and tend it.

Genesis 2:16-18 posted:

And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you are free to eat;
but as for the tree of knowledge of good and bad, you must not eat of it; for as soon as you eat of it, you shall die.”
The LORD God said, “It is not good for man to be alone; I will make a fitting helper for him.”

Pirkei d'Rabbi Eliezer 12 posted:

ADAM IN PARADISE
WITH love abounding did the Holy One, blessed be He, love the first man, inasmuch as He created him in a pure locality, in the place of the Temple, and He brought him into His palace, as it is said, "And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it" (Gen. 2:15). From which place did He take him? From the place of the Temple, and He brought him into His palace, which is Eden, as it is said, "And he put him into the garden of Eden to dress it" (ibid.). Perhaps thou wilt say: To plough (the fields) and cast out the stones from the ground. But did not all the trees grow up of their own accord?

Perhaps thou wilt say: There was some other work (to be done) in the garden of Eden, (such as) to water the garden. But did not a river flow through and issue forth from Eden, and water the garden, as it is said, || "And a river went out of Eden to water the garden" (Gen. 2:10)?

What then is the meaning of this expression: "to dress it and to keep it"? (The text) does not say "to dress it and to keep it" except (in the sense) of being occupied with the words of the Torah and keeping all its commandments, as it is said, "to keep the way of the tree of life" (Gen. 3:24). But the "tree of life" signifies only the Torah, as it is said, "It is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon it" (Prov. 3:18).

And (Adam) was at his leisure in the garden of Eden, like one of the ministering angels. The Holy One, blessed be He, said: I am alone in My world and this one (Adam) also is alone in his world. There is no propagation before Me and this one (Adam) has no propagation in his life; hereafter all the creatures will say: Since there was no propagation in his life, it is he who has created us. It is not good for man to be alone, as it is said, "And the Lord God said, It is not good for man to be alone; I will make him an help meet for him …" (Gen. 2:18).

Rabbi Jehudah said: If he be worthy she shall be an help meet for him; if not, she shall be against him to fight him.

Yevamot 63a posted:

And Rabbi Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “I will make him a helpmate for him [kenegdo]” (Genesis 2:18)? If one is worthy his wife helps him; if he is not worthy she is against him. And some say a slightly different version: Rabbi Elazar raised a contradiction: It is written in the Torah with a spelling that allows it to be read: Striking him [kenagdo], and we read it as though it said: For him [kenegdo]. If he is worthy she is for him as his helpmate; if he is not worthy she strikes him.

The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yosei encountered Elijah the prophet and said to him: It is written: I will make him a helpmate. In what manner does a woman help a man? Elijah said to him: When a man brings wheat from the field, does he chew raw wheat? When he brings home flax, does he wear unprocessed flax? His wife turns the raw products into bread and clothing. Is his wife not found to be the one who lights up his eyes and stands him on his feet?

Mors Rattus posted:

The idea that women are the deciders of the worth of men is an interesting one; it is also one which the rabbis seem uninterested in pursuing further, however.

paradoxGentleman posted:

Hi! First of all, this is very interesting and I can't wait to hear more.
Second of all, there seems to be a problem with the first post. There's a part that goes like this:

ářŕůéú ářŕ IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED

I take it those are supposed to be the original letters and they didn't register properly for some reason?

Genesis 2:19 posted:

And the LORD God formed out of the earth all the wild beasts and all the birds of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that would be its name.

Chullin 27b posted:

The Gemara relates an excerpt of an exchange between a Roman government official and Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai. And furthermore, the official asked Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai: One verse states: “And God said: Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creeping animals, and birds will fly” (Genesis 1:20); apparently birds were created from the water. And it is written: “And from the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every bird of the air and brought them unto the man to see what he would call them” (Genesis 2:19); apparently birds were created from the land.

Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said to him: They were created from the mud. He saw his students looking at each other, wondering. He said to them: Does it trouble you that I dismissed my enemy with a flimsy pretext? Actually, it is from water that birds were created. And why does the verse state that they were formed from the ground and that God brought them to Adam? In other words, why are they mentioned in the second verse? It is not because they were actually formed from the ground, but only because they were brought to Adam so that he would call them names.

And some say that Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai spoke to that officer with a different formulation, i.e., he said to him that the birds were created from the water. And he stated the first formulation, that the birds were created from the mud, to his students, because it is written: “And from the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every bird of the air” (Genesis 2:19). According to this explanation, the birds are mentioned there not only because Adam called them names, but also because they too were created from the ground.

Genesis Rabbah 17:4-5 posted:

... Said R’ Acha: In the hour that the Holy One came to create the human, He ruled [together] with the ministering angels. He said to them: “Let us make a human [in our image]”. They said to him: This one, what good is he? He said: His wisdom is greater than yours. He (God) brought before them beast and animal and bird. He said to them:

This one, what is his name? and they didn’t know. He made them pass before Adam. He said to him: This one, what is his name? [Adam] said: This is ox/shor, and this is donkey/chamor and this is horse/sus and this is camel/gamal. And you, [He said], what is your name? [Adam] said to him: I? It would be right/yafeh to be called Adam, since I was created from the ground/adamah. And I, [God said], what is my name? He said to him: It would be right for you to be called my Lord /Adonai, since you are lord/adon to all the creatures.

Genesis 2:20 posted:

And the man gave names to all the cattle and to the birds of the sky and to all the wild beasts; but for Adam no fitting helper was found.

Genesis 2:21 posted:

So the LORD God cast a deep sleep upon the man; and, while he slept, He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that spot.

Eruvin 18a-b posted:

Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: Adam was first created with two [deyo] faces, one male and the other female. As it is stated: “You have formed me behind and before, and laid Your hand upon me” (Psalms 139:5). Similarly, it is written: “And the tzela, which the Lord, God, had taken from the man, He made a woman, and brought her unto the man” (Genesis 2:22). Rav and Shmuel disagree over the meaning of the word tzela: One said: It means a female face, from which God created Eve; and one said: Adam was created with a tail [zanav], which God removed from him and from which He created Eve.

The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says that tzela means face; it is understandable that it is written: “You have formed me [tzartani] behind and before.” However, according to the one who says that tzela means tail, what is meant by the verse: “You have formed me [tzartani] behind and before”?

The Gemara answers that this verse is to be understood as bearing a moral message, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ami, as Rabbi Ami said: Behind means Adam was created at the end of the act of creation; and before means that he was first for punishment.

The Gemara asks: Granted, it is understandable that Adam was behind, or last, in the act of creation, meaning that he was not created until the sixth day, Shabbat eve. However, before, or first, for punishment, what does this mean? If you say that he was punished first because of the curse pronounced in the wake of the sin involving the Tree of Knowledge, there is a difficulty. Wasn’t the snake was cursed first, and afterward Eve was cursed, and only at the end was Adam cursed?

Rather, this refers to the punishment of the Flood, as it is written: “And He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, both man and cattle, creeping things and fowl of the heaven” (Genesis 7:23). This indicates that the punishment began with man.

The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was originally a face or side of Adam; it is understandable that it is written: “Then the Lord God formed [vayyitzer] man” (Genesis 2:7). Vayyitzer is written with a double yod, one for Adam and one for Eve. However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is conveyed by spelling vayyitzer with a double yod?

The Gemara responds: This is interpreted homiletically, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi, as Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said: This comes to emphasize that which one says to himself in every circumstance: Woe unto me from my evil inclination [yetzer] if I perform the will of my Maker, and woe to me from my Maker [Yotzri] if I perform the will of my inclination.

The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, it is understanable that it is written: “Male and female, He created them, and blessed them, and called their name Man in the day when they were created” (Genesis 5:2), which indicates that from the very beginning of their creation, He fashioned two faces, one for the male and the other for the female. However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is the meaning of the verse: “Male and female, He created them”?

The Gemara answers: It can be explained in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Abbahu, as Rabbi Abbahu raised a contradiction between the verses: On the one hand it is written: “Male and female, He created them,” in the plural, and on the other hand it is written: “So God created man in His own image, for in the image of God He created him” (Genesis 1:27), in the singular. At first, the thought entered God’s mind to create two, and ultimately, only one was actually created.

The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, it is understandable that it is written: “And He took one of his sides and closed up the flesh in its place” (Genesis 2:21). However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is meant by the verse: “And He closed up the flesh in its place”?

Rav Zevid said, and some say it was Rabbi Yirmeya, and some say it was Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak: It was necessary to say that the fleshed closed up only with regard to the place of the incision.

The Gemara challenges the other opinion: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail; it is understandable that it is written: “And the Lord God built the tzela” (Genesis 2:22), as it was a completely new building. However, according to the one who said that Eve was a complete face or side, what is the meaning of: “And He built”? What needed to be built?

The Gemara responds: This must be interpreted homiletically, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya, as Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya interpreted homiletically the verse: “And the Lord God built the tzela.” This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, braided for Eve her hair, and then brought her to Adam, as in the coastal towns, they call braiding hair building.

Alternatively, the verse: “And the Lord God built,” can be understood as a description of Eve’s basic shape, as Rav Ḥisda said, and some say it is taught in a baraita: This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, built Eve like the structure

of a storehouse. Just as a storehouse is built wide on the bottom and narrow on top, in order to hold produce without collapsing, so too a woman is created wide on the bottom and narrow on top, in order to hold the fetus.

The Gemara cites an exposition of the end of the previously cited verse: “And brought her unto the man” (Genesis 2:22). This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, was Adam the first man’s best man, attending to all his wedding needs and bringing his wife to him. From here we learn that a greater individual should serve as a best man for a lesser individual and should not feel bad about it as something beneath his dignity.

The Gemara asks: And according to the one who says that Eve was a face or side of Adam, which one of them walked in front? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It is reasonable to say that the male walked in front, as this is proper behavior, as it was taught in a baraita: A man should not walk behind a woman on a path, even if she is his wife. If she happens upon him on a bridge, he should walk quickly in order to catch up to her and consequently move her to his side, so that she will not walk before him. And anyone who walks behind a woman in a river, where she has to lift up her skirt in order to cross, has no share in the World-to-Come.

Sanhedrin 39a posted:

The Roman emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: Your God is a thief, as it is written: “And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man and he slept; and He took one of his sides, and closed up the place with flesh instead” (Genesis 2:21). The daughter of the emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: Leave him, as I will respond to him. She said to her father: Provide one commander [dukhus] for me to avenge someone’s wrongdoing. The emperor said to her: Why do you need him? She said to him: Armed bandits came to us this past night, and took a silver jug [kiton] from us, and left a golden jug for us. The emperor said to her: If so, would it be that armed bandits such as these would come to us every day. She said to him: And was it not similarly good for Adam the first man that God took a side from him and gave him a maidservant to serve him?

The emperor said to her: This is what I was saying: But if it is good for Adam, let God take his side from him in the open, not during the time of his deep sleep, like a thief. She said to him: Bring me a slice of raw meat. They brought it to her. She placed it under the embers, and removed it after it was roasted. She said to him: Eat from this meat. The emperor said to her: It is repulsive to me. Although he knew that this is how meat is prepared, seeing the raw meat made it repulsive to him. She said to him: With regard to Adam the first man as well, had God taken her from him in the open, she would have been repulsive to him. Therefore God acted while Adam was asleep.

A Wild Animal posted:

I would like to hear more about the Karaites. During the Shoah, they successfully argued to the Nazis that they were not Jewish; and thus escaped the Genocide that claimed so many of the Jews of Crimea. Yet I understand that the Karaim are considered Jewish by most other Jewish Groups. This is all that I know of their culture, and it is a Fascination.

Mors Rattus posted:

The big difference is that the Karaim accept only the Written Law - that is, the actual text of the Torah - and not the Oral Law that accompanies it and makes up quite a lot of Jewish tradition. They also aim for the most clear, obvious and literal meaning of the Written Law as possible, whereas other Jewish traditions will do things like say 'okay so this whole kid and its mother's milk thing comes up three times without context, it clearly has to mean something besides the literal.'

Mors Rattus posted:

I'll be trying to get this going again, hellworld has...not made it easy to want to sit down and type a lot.

The big difference is that the Karaim accept only the Written Law - that is, the actual text of the Torah - and not the Oral Law that accompanies it and makes up quite a lot of Jewish tradition. They also aim for the most clear, obvious and literal meaning of the Written Law as possible, whereas other Jewish traditions will do things like say 'okay so this whole kid and its mother's milk thing comes up three times without context, it clearly has to mean something besides the literal.' The Karaim also reject rabbinical authority, and believe it is the duty of every person to study Torah individually and reach their own decision on its meaning.

They still accept the idea of interpretation and interpretative halakha, but only if it agrees with the straightforward meaning of the Law. They are on some matters stricter in general than other Jews and in some matters more lenient. The fact that their practice and tradition are in many ways quite different is one way they were able to convince people they were a different religion in order to escape some oppressions; it didn't always work, but you can't really blame them for trying. (They also track birth Judaism patrilineally rather than matrilineally.)

quote:

E: The status of Karaites as Jews or not is also, sadly, a matter of debate in Israel these days, from what I've found. A number of Orthodox rabbis want to argue that they don't count as Jews; the Karaites in Israel disagree.

lifg posted:

What do they think of "God created man in his own image"?

Mors Rattus posted:

I'll be trying to get this going again, hellworld has...not made it easy to want to sit down and type a lot.

The big difference is that the Karaim accept only the Written Law - that is, the actual text of the Torah - and not the Oral Law that accompanies it and makes up quite a lot of Jewish tradition. They also aim for the most clear, obvious and literal meaning of the Written Law as possible, whereas other Jewish traditions will do things like say 'okay so this whole kid and its mother's milk thing comes up three times without context, it clearly has to mean something besides the literal.' The Karaim also reject rabbinical authority, and believe it is the duty of every person to study Torah individually and reach their own decision on its meaning.

They still accept the idea of interpretation and interpretative halakha, but only if it agrees with the straightforward meaning of the Law. They are on some matters stricter in general than other Jews and in some matters more lenient. The fact that their practice and tradition are in many ways quite different is one way they were able to convince people they were a different religion in order to escape some oppressions; it didn't always work, but you can't really blame them for trying. (They also track birth Judaism patrilineally rather than matrilineally.)

E: The status of Karaites as Jews or not is also, sadly, a matter of debate in Israel these days, from what I've found. A number of Orthodox rabbis want to argue that they don't count as Jews; the Karaites in Israel disagree.

Mors Rattus posted:

Lady Disdain posted:

I just read this whole thread in one sitting. I hope you decide to continue it at some point.

I've personally always wondered if disagreeing with the commentaries makes me a bad jew. I mean, the bits the rabbis don't agree on are obviously up for debate, but the bits that are generally agreed upon, can I go "nah, that's not how I think it is."

Genesis 2:15 posted:

The LORD God took the man and placed him in the garden of Eden, to till it and tend it.

quote:

ויקח AND HE TOOK — He took him with kind words and induced him to enter (Genesis Rabbah 16:5).

quote:

The meaning of "to work it"is to provide water for the garden. "To guard it" from animals and to ensure that they do not enter the garden and sully it. Some explain that "to work it" means "to fulfill the command [no to eat from the tree], but this cannot be correct because a 'command' is not called 'work'.

Genesis 2:16-17 posted:

And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you are free to eat;
but as for the tree of knowledge of good and bad, you must not eat of it; for as soon as you eat of it, you shall die.”

quote:

Ad-noy Elokim commanded. Hashem would not have commanded Adam to begin with if he possessed no intelligence. Moreover, he obviously possessed the intellect to give names to the other creatures. It was only knowledge of good and evil that he lacked.

Genesis 2:18 posted:

The LORD God said, “It is not good for man to be alone; I will make a fitting helper for him.”

quote:

לא טוב היות וגו IT IS NOT GOOD etc. — I shall make an help meet for him in order that people may not say that there are two Deities, the Holy One, blessed be He, the only One among the celestial Beings without a mate, and this one (Adam), the only one among the terrestrial beings, without a mate (Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer 12).

Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer 12 posted:

WITH love abounding did the Holy One, blessed be He, love the first man, inasmuch as He created him in a pure locality, in the place of the Temple, and He brought him into His palace, as it is said, "And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it" (Gen. 2:15). From which place did He take him? From the place of the Temple, and He brought him into His palace, which is Eden, as it is said, "And he put him into the garden of Eden to dress it" (ibid.). Perhaps thou wilt say: To plough (the fields) and cast out the stones from the ground. But did not all the trees grow up of their own accord?

Perhaps thou wilt say: There was some other work (to be done) in the garden of Eden, (such as) to water the garden. But did not a river flow through and issue forth from Eden, and water the garden, as it is said, || "And a river went out of Eden to water the garden" (Gen. 2:10)?

What then is the meaning of this expression: "to dress it and to keep it"? (The text) does not say "to dress it and to keep it" except (in the sense) of being occupied with the words of the Torah and keeping all its commandments, as it is said, "to keep the way of the tree of life" (Gen. 3:24). But the "tree of life" signifies only the Torah, as it is said, "It is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon it" (Prov. 3:18).

Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer 12 posted:

And (Adam) was at his leisure in the garden of Eden, like one of the ministering angels. The Holy One, blessed be He, said: I am alone in My world and this one (Adam) also is alone in his world. There is no propagation before Me and this one (Adam) has no propagation in his life; hereafter all the creatures will say: Since there was no propagation in his life, it is he who has created us. It is not good for man to be alone, as it is said, "And the Lord God said, It is not good for man to be alone; I will make him an help meet for him …" (Gen. 2:18).

quote:

עזר כנגדו A HELP MEET FOR HIM — (כנגדו literally, opposite, opposed to him) If he is worthy she shall be a help to him; if he is unworthy she shall be opposed to him, to fight him (Yevamot 63a).

Yevamot 63a posted:

And Rabbi Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “I will make him a helpmate for him [kenegdo]” (Genesis 2:18)? If one is worthy his wife helps him; if he is not worthy she is against him. And some say a slightly different version: Rabbi Elazar raised a contradiction: It is written in the Torah with a spelling that allows it to be read: Striking him [kenagdo], and we read it as though it said: For him [kenegdo]. If he is worthy she is for him as his helpmate; if he is not worthy she strikes him.

The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yosei encountered Elijah the prophet and said to him: It is written: I will make him a helpmate. In what manner does a woman help a man? Elijah said to him: When a man brings wheat from the field, does he chew raw wheat? When he brings home flax, does he wear unprocessed flax? His wife turns the raw products into bread and clothing. Is his wife not found to be the one who lights up his eyes and stands him on his feet?