Recent Activity on Sefaria פעילות אחרונה בספריא

Yavni יבני Bar-Yam בר-ים added a connection between Ruth Rabbah, Petichta 1 and Sefat Emet, Exodus, Vaera 26:2

11 minutes ago
Yavni יבני Bar-Yam בר-ים added a connection between Psalms 50:7 and Sefat Emet, Exodus, Vaera 26:2

12 minutes ago
Yavni יבני Bar-Yam בר-ים added a connection between Deuteronomy 18:15 and Sefat Emet, Exodus, Vaera 26:2

13 minutes ago
Yavni יבני Bar-Yam בר-ים added a connection between Bereshit Rabbah 92:7 and Sefat Emet, Exodus, Vaera 23:3

26 minutes ago
Ben Rock translated Cassuto on Exodus 33:23:1 history »
Version: Sefaria Community Translation (English)

And after I have passed, then I will remove my hand and you will see my back, and you shall not see my face. It is evident here that this is said metaphorically: you are only able to see my actions and recognize from them some of my attributes, but my very essence you cannot comprehend.

42 minutes ago
Sefaria Education published a new Source Sheet, Get Inspired by Sheets.
2 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Teshuvot Rashi 89:1 history »
Version: Teshuvot Rashi vol. I, New York, 1943 (Hebrew)

ראיתי בתשובות רש"י: נראה לר' דאין מקבלין מים מבנו קטן בן ה' או ו' שנים. דבעיא כח דגברא וליכא.

4 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Or HaChaim on Genesis 49:14:3 history »
Version: On Your Way (Hebrew)

ויט שכמו לסבול צער העוה"ז ויהי למס פירוש שהיה הוא עצמו מם עובד פירוש שפינה עצמו לעבוד ה' ועשה עצמו כמםס הניתן כן נתן עצמו להיות עובד עבודת הקודש העריבה והנעימה:

4 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Ketzot HaChoshen on Shulchan Arukh, Choshen Mishpat 72:2:1 history »
Version: Shulhan Arukh, Hoshen ha-Mishpat; Lemberg, 1898 (Hebrew)

שמשכנו בשעת הלואה. במשנה למלך פ"י משכירות ז"ל עיין בתשובת מוהריט"ץ סימן י"ב ואחר המחילה טעה בזה שהוא סבור דכל משכון שבא אחר הלואה מיקרי משכנו שלא בשעת הלואה להתחייב באונסין לפי אותן הסוברים דשלא בשעת הלואה חייב באונסין וזה אינו אלא במשכנו לבסוף ע"י בית דין ששסם הוזהר המלוה להחזיר כסות יום ביום ושם הוא דאמר ר"י בעל חוב קונה משכון ולדעת רש"י ודעימי' היינו להתחייב באונסין אבל במשכון הבא ליד המלוה ברצונו כך הוא שעת הלואה או אחר ימים לכולי עלמא אין בו אלא ש"ש ואלו דברים ברורים הם וממה שתפסו גדולי המחברים בספריהם משכנו שלא בשעת הלואה בא לכלל טעות שהם תפסו לשון קצרה ופירושו כמ"ש ☜ונוראות נפלאתי הלא הדבר מבואר להדי' בפ"ו ממלוה דאפילו מדעת הלוה צריך להחזיר כסות יום ביום כל שמשכנו שלא בשעת הלואה ז"ל א' הממשכן את חבירו בבית דין או שמשכנו בידו בזרוע או מדעת הלו' אם איש עני הוא כו' מחזיר לו הכר בלילה ואת המחרישה ביום בד"א שמשכנו שלא בשעת הלואה אבל אם משכנו בשעת הלואה אינו חייב להחזיר לו כלל וכ"כ בשלחן ערוך סימן צ"ז וכיון שמבואר הדבר דצריך להחזיר הרי אית לי' דינא דמשכנו שלא בשעת הלוא' ועליו נאמר ולך תהיה צדקה ודר"י אם אינו קונה משכון צדקה מנין ואם כן לדע' רש"י ודעימי' חייב באונסין ודברי מוהריט"ץ ברור וכן נראה מדברי הש"ך דיכול לומר קים לי כדעת רש"י דחייב באונסין ע"ט שכתב במשכנו שלא בשעת הלוא' ברשות ע"פ בית דין או מדעת הלוה עיין שם וזה ברור. אמנם דעת הר"ר יוסף הלוי נראה דשלא בשעת הלואה נמי לא קנה מדר"י אלא ע"פ בית דין דוקא אבל מדעת הלוה לא והובא דבריו בנימוקי יוסף פרק קמא דמציעא ז"ל ולענין מודה במקצת ורוצה ליתן משכון למלו' באותו מקצת אי מקרי הילך כתב הר"ר יוסף הלוי דלא מיקרי הילך והביא ראי' מדאמר פרק קמא דקידושין התקדשי לי במנה והניח לה משכון עלי' אינה מקודשת מנה אם כן משכון אם כן והרנב"ר ביאר הדברים כנגד החולקים ופי' כיון דקיימא לן דמלוה אינו קונה כו' נמצא שהמשכון הזה אינו נקנה באותו מלוה דכי אמרינן בעל חוב קונה משכון ה"מ במשכנו בשעת הלואה משום דקנו לי' מעותיו כו' וא"נ במשכנו שלא בשעת הלואה קנו לי' משום דאתי לידי' בגוביינא דבי דינא וגזירת הכתוב הוא דקני לי' כדר"י כו' אבל כשנותן לוה למלוה משכון שלא בשעת הלואה כיון דמלוה אינו קונה במה קנאו מלוה שמא תאמר אף על פי שמלוה אינה קונה לו קנאו במשיכה שכשם שאלו הקנהו למלוה לגמרי נקנה במשיכה כן כשהקנהו לו בתורת משכון משיכה קונה לו זו היא שלמד הרב רבינו יוסף מההי' דפרק קמא דקידושין שאין המטלטלין נקנין במשיכה למשכון בעלמא כיון שאין כח במעות הראשונו' לקנות הלכך משכון לאו הילך הוא עד כאן לשונו. ומבואר מדבריו דאינו קונה משכון אלא או בשעת הלואה דמעות קונה או שלא בשעת הלואה וע"י בית דין דכיון דבגובייר דבי דינא אתי לידי' גזירת הכתוספות דהוי כאלו הגבהו בית דין אבל שלא בשעת הלואה דליכ' מעות דמלוה אינו קונה וגוביינא דב"ד ליכא אע"פ שנותן לו המשכון מדעתו לא קני דמשיכה אינו קונה למשכון כיון דגוף החפץ לא קני אלא למשכון ולמשכון לא שייך משיכה. ולכאורה תיקשו מהא דמוקי פלוגתא דנכרי שהלו' לישראל על חמצו דפליגי בדר"י עיין שם פ' כ"שסמשמע בשעת הלואה וכדכתבו הפוסקי' דתנן נכרי שהלו' לישראל על חמצו ואם כן נכרי במה קני למשכון דהא משיכ' למשכון לא קני ומעות אינו קו.נ' בנכרי מדישראל בכסף נכרי במשיכ' וכדאי' בבכורות משו' דהיכא דלא שייך משיכ' קונ' בכסף וכמ"ש בהגהת אשר"י פ' הזהב עיין שם ואם כן במשכון דלא שייכא משיכה קונה בכסף וכ"כ בלוקח עובר כיון שלא שייכא משיכה בעובר קונה בכסף: ועיין פ' הזהב (בבא מציעא דף מ"ח) קרא ומתנית' מסייע לריש לקיש קרא דכתיב וכיחש בעמיתו בפקדון או בתשומת יד או בגזל או עשק את עמיתו תשומת יד אמר רב חסדא כגון שיחד לו כלי להלואתו עושק כגון שיחד כלי לעושקו וכי אהדרי' קרא כתיב והי' כי יחטא ואשם כו' ואלו תשומת יד לא אהדרי' מ"ט לאו משום דמחסרא משיכ' עיין שם ולפי מ"ש דמשכון דלא קני במשיכה נקנה בכסף אם כן גם לריש לקיש ראוי לקנין ככסף וכמו לר' יוחנן במציאה ומתנה דליכא כסף קונה במשי' וכמה שכתבו תוספות בע"ז פ' השוכר ע"ש. וא"ל דלא הוי יחוד כלי אלא אם מקנהו לגמאי דהא מבואר בתוספות פ' נערה דלמשכון נמי מהני יחוד כלי עיין שם ד"ה מאי לאו שהקשו כיון דבעינן יחוד כלי ואחר שגבה כבר והוא כופר פשיט' דממון הוא ותירצו שנתנו בתורת משכון. וכיון דמהני יחוד כלי למשכון ולמשכון לא שייכא משיכ' וקונה גם לר"ל בכסף וכמ"ש ואולי הוא סובר דלא מהני יחוד כלי אלא כשמקנהו לגמרי אבל הא קשיא לי בשיטת הר"ר יוסף הלוי דסובר דלא מהני כלל משיכה למשכון כיון דאינו מקנה לו גוף החפץ אלא למשכון ומשום הכי צריך קנין מאבראי או קנין כסף בשעת הלואה או קנין ע"י בית דין שלא בשע' הלואה אבל אם הלוה נותן מדעתו לאחר הלואה לא מהני כיון דמשיכ' לא מהני וכסף לא מהני דהא ה"ל מלוה אם כן הא דאמרינן בפרק קמא דקידושין דף ח' במשכון דאחרים מקודשת משום דר' יצחק היכי זוכה האשה במשכון שנותן לה המקדש בשלמא המקדש קני לה בשעת הלוא' בכסף או לאחר הלואה בגוביינא דב"ד אבל האש' אין לה במשכון אלא משיכה וכיון דלא מהני קנין משיכה במשכון כיון שאינו זוכה בגוף החפץ היכי קונה האשה ואין לומר כיון דהמקדש נותן לו כל זכותו דהא אכתי לדידה ליכא אלא משיכה ומשיכה לאו קנין הוא במשכון. ועוד קשה דהא תני בפ' אלו מציאות השב תשיב אין לי שמשכנו ברשות שלא ברשות מנין ת"ל השב תשיב וכן פרק קמא דתמורה פריך לרבא דאמר כל מה דאמר רחמנא לא תעביד אי עביד לא מהני והרי משכון דרחמנא אמר לא תבא אל ביתו לעבוט עבוטו ותנן מחזירין את הכר בלילה ומשני אמר לי' רבא שאני התם דאמר קרא השב תשיב והרי מבואר דקונה משכון אפילו שלא ברשות בית דין ובמה קני לה הא משיכה לא מהני וגוביינא ליכא אע"כ. דמהני משיכה למשכון אפילו שלא ברשות ומכ"ש ברשות הלוה וצריך עיון ☜ולכן מחוורתא כדברי הרמב"ם דבע"ח קונה משכון בין בזרוע בין מדעת הלוה והא דאמרינן הניח לה משכון אינה מקודשת כבר כתבו בתוספות והרא"ש משום דא"י לשעבד נכסיו אלא אם כן נתחייב גופו בתחלה והרמב"ן והרשב"א כתבו משום דאגיד גבי' ומשום הכי ניחא דבמשכון דאחרים מקודשת דלא שייכ' הני טעמי אבל לפי טעמא דהר"י מג"ש אם כן גם במשכין דאחרים מה"ט לא תיהני:

4 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Ritva on Kiddushin 8b:1 history »
Version: Chiddushei haRitva, Munkatch, 1908. (Hebrew)

איתיביה רבא לרב נחמן קדש' במשכון מקודשת ופרקינן התם במשכון דאחרים וכדרבי יצחק דא"ר יצחק מנין לב"ח שקונה משכון. פי' לענין שאינו נעשה מטלטלין אצל בניו ואין שביעי' משמטתו וה"ה דלא סגי ללוה במחילת החוב עד שיחזיר לו משכונו כדאיתא לקמן בפירקין וכיון דאית ליה למלוה קנין וזכות במשכון זה מקדש בו את האשה ולא מבעיא לאחר שהחליטוהו לו ב"ד בפרעון חובו או שהרהינו אצלו ולא פדאו דהא פשיט' דדידיה הוא אלא אפילו קודם לכן דאע"ג דקי"ל בפ' כל שעה כרבא דאמר מכאן ולהבא היא גובה ואי אקדיש מלוה או זבין לא עביד כלום ואפילו החליטוהו לו ב"ד לזמנו שאני הכא במשכון דאית ליה קנין בגויה מדר' יצחק ובדידיה אי זבין מלוה או אקדיש דבריו קיימין למפרע כשיחלטוהו לו ב"ד הילכך באשה מקודשת לו מעתה ואפילו פדאו לוה בזמנו דשאני קדושין מזביני והקדש דכל היכא דבשעת קדושין איכא הנאת פרוטה וסמכה דעתה עליה מקדשא ביה תדע דהא לקמן אמרינן דלכ"ע אית להו מתקדשת במלוה דאחרים אלא דפליגי במלוה דאחרים אם יש לה הקנאה במלוה על פה א"נ אי סמכא דעתה או חיישה למחיל' מדשמואל וכיון שכן הכא במלוה על המשכון שיש לה הקנאה ואין המלוה יכול למחול ללוה אחר שמכרו או נתנו לכ"ע סמכא דעתא ומיקדשת ביה ואע"ג דבמלוה דידה אינה מתקדשת שאני התם דדעתה אזוזי וליתנהו בעולם כדפי' לעיל אבל במלוה דאחרים ודאי דעתה אההיא הנאה ולא אזוזי וכ"ש כשיש עליה משכון דדעתה אזכיה שזוכה במשכון וכיון דאית ליה ביה קנין מדרבי יצחק זכיא ביה ומקדשה ביה והא דנקט במלוה על המשכון דאחרים א"ע"ג דה"ה דמתקדש' במלוה דאחרים בלא משכון כדאיתא לקמן משום דבמלוה שאין עליה משכון פליגי תנאי ובמלוה על המשכון מודו כ"ע דהא מצי מקני ולא מצי מחיל נקט הכי. והא דר"י איתא בין במשכנו בשעת הלואתו בין במשכנו שלא בשעת הלואתו ואע"ג דקר' מיירי במשכנו שלא בשעת הלואתו כ"ש אידך במשכנו לו מדעתו וכבר פירש' אותה בפ' השוכר את האומנין:

4 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Rosh on Ketubot 2:1:2 history »
Version: Vilna Edition (Hebrew)

גמ' טעמא דאיכא עדים הא ליכא עדים הבעל מהימן ואף שבועה דאורייתא לא בעי אע"פ שהיא תובעת מאתים והוא מודה לה במנה. ולא חשבינן ליה כמודה מקצת משום דהוה ליה כהודאת שיעבוד קרקעות דכתובה שיעבוד קרקע היא. ואפילו לבתר דתקינו דכתובה גובה ממטלטלי לפי שאינו יכול לומר פרעתי כרבי יוחנן דאמר הטוען אחר מעשה ב"ד לא אמר כלום. הלכך האי מנה דמודה ביה הוה ליה הילך כיון דאין לו טענה ליפטר הימנו ואאידך מנה הוה ליה כופר הכל ופטור משבועה. והכי איתא בירושלמי דפרקין דגרסינן סלעים דינרים ונמחקו אין פחות משנים מכאן ואילך מלוה אומר חמש ולוה אמר שלש. בן עזאי אומר הואיל והודה מקצת הטענה ישבע. וחכמים אומרים אין ההודאה ממין הטענה. פי' שההודאה בקרקעות היא. נהי נמי דשטרא לית בה אלא שנים מ"מ כיון שהודה בשלישי הוי כאילו נכתב בשטר והכפירה הוי במטלטלין. ובעי עלה הא אם ההודאה ממין הטענה יהא חייב והכא כמי שההודאה ממין הטענה כלומר שהרי אין לה שטר והיא טוענת מאתים והוא אומר מנה. ופריק כ"ע מודו שהוא חייב לה מנה פירוש שאינו יכול לכפור באותו מנה שהטוען אחר מעשה ב"ד לא אמר כלום הלכך כאילו יש לה שטר על אותו מנה () ושעבוד קרקעות הוי והיא תובעת ממנו מאתים והמוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה. ומתני' אתיא כרבן גמליאל משום דהוי ברי וברי. ואלמנה נמי חשבינן טענת היורשין ברי כיון דטענינן ליתמי כל מה דמצי אבוהון למיטען: ¶

4 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Megalleh Amukkot on Torah, Chayei Sara 13 history »
Version: Lublin, 1884 (Hebrew)

אופן הב' ע"פ פסוק (איוב יד) אדם ילוד אשה קצר ימים ושבע רוגז הענין מי שהוא מסטרא דנוקבא הוא מב' ענינים הא' שהוא קצר ימים כמו שאירע לדוד שהי' נפל לפי שהוא מסיטרא דנוקבא כמ"ש אני עבדך בן אמתך. גם חבקוק שאמר לה אלישע את חובקת בן את דייקא גם משה על גלגולא קדמאה אמר (במדבר יא) אם ככה את עשה לי תש כחו כנקיבה כי כמו הבל שהוא מסטרא דנוקבא לכן אמרו המלאכים על משה מה לילוד אשה בינינו שידעו גלגולו שהוא מסטרא דנוקבא כמ"ש ותוסף ללדת תלה הלידה באמו וכה"א (בראשית ג) כי היא היתה אם כל חי תלה בה הבנים שהולידה באותו הפעם שניהם ביום א' היו מסטראה אבל שת נולד בדמותו ובצלמו מכלל דעד השתא לא הי' צלמו בעולם ומי שהוא מסטרא דנוקבא הוא מסטרא דדינא קשי' כי (משלי ה) רגליה יורדת מות. גם יצחק היה בן לשרה כדלעיל ז"ש ויצחק בא מבא ר"ל מעת שבא מג"ע שהוא באר מים חיים אז נסתלקה ממנו ההיא נשמתה מסיטרא דנוקבא או מלכות נקראת באר אליהו תחת בורא עתה. וכבר השיב אברהם הנני ביי עתה בני ויקח אברהם את האיל דכר ויטלהו לעולה ליצחק מעלה הי' לו שהיה עתה בנו ז"ש תחת בנו וכן השיב אליעזר לרבקה הוא אדוני ולכן אמר ותהי אשה לבן אדוניך ותרווייהו אתנייהו כי הם ניבאו וידעו שהוא עתה בן לאדוני ואליעזר השיב ג"כ הוא אדוני שעתה נתלבש במדת החסד ז"ש הוא עתה איש חסד אדוני כי אליעזר הוא ענף החסד שעליו שם אל בראשו דעלי' איתמר במשה (שמות יח) אלהי אבי בעזרי והוא ממש עבד אברהם והוא ע"י באר שהוא ג"ע נעשה חי רואי מתחלה הי' קצר ימים עתה לחי רואי מתחילה הי' שבע רוגז עכשיו והוא יושב בארץ הנגב בימין:

4 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Tikkunei Zohar 114a:1 and 6 others »
Version: Tikkunei Zohar - Vocalized (Hebrew)

מִתְחַבְּרִין תַּמָּן בִּצְרוֹרָא דְאַתְכְּלָא. ¶

4 hours ago
6 related »
Shmuel Weissman edited Sanhedrin 16a:2 history »
Version: William Davidson Edition - Vocalized Aramaic (Hebrew)

עוּלָּא אָמַר: רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: בְּבָאִין עַל עִסְקֵי נְחָלוֹת, וְכִתְחִילָּתָהּ שֶׁל אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. מָה תְּחִילָּתָהּ שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד, אַף כָּאן – שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד.

4 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Tosafot on Gittin 36a:13:1 history »
Version: Tanslation by Rabbi Ephraim Piekarski (English)

מי איכא מידי דמדאורייתא משמט1The word משמט means to release. The מלוה is to release the לוה from the obligation of repaying the loan. שביעית ותיקן הלל דלא משמט—Is there such a thing that מן התורה שביעית is משמט and הלל instituted that it is not משמט OVERVIEW After the משנה was cited that הלל instituted a פרוסבול, so that שמיטה will not be משמט, the גמרא asked that how can this be that הלל went against the ~~תורה~~תורה. אביי answered that this follows the ruling of רבי that nowadays שמיטת כספים is only מדרבנן, therefore הלל could have made this תקנה. The גמרא asked (in reverse), if מן התורה there is no שמיטה, how can the רבנן institute שמיטה (and exempt the לוה from paying the מלוה his due). אביי responded that it is merely a שב ואל תעשה, therefore this תקנה is permitted. The גמרא then2See on the עמוד ב'. cites רבא who answered that הפקר בי"ד is הפקר. There is a dispute between רש"י and תוספות whether the answer of רבא is referring to the original question (how could הלל have made a פרוסבול), the view of רש"י;3See רש"י on the עמוד ב' ד"ה רבא. or whether רבא is responding to the second question (how could the רבנן institute שמיטה), which is תוספות view. ------------------------ תוספות explains his view that רבא is responding to the second question; not the current question: השתא לא בעי רבא לשנויי אהך קושיא דהפקר בית דין היה הפקר כדמשני בתר הכי – רבא did not want to answer now on this question (how could הלל uproot שמיטה), as he answered later (on the question how could the רבנן reinstitute שמיטה) that הפקר בי"ד הפקר and therefore הלל could institute that the לוה must pay the מלוה (regardless that מה"ת he does not owe him anything). The reason רבא did not want to answer this now is – משום דקשיא ליה דלא היה לו להלל לעקור שביעית שהיא דאורייתא4Granted that the רבנן (הלל) have the power (technically) to make the לוה pay, because of הפקר בי"ד הפקר, nevertheless in sרבא' view it is inappropriate to uproot the תורה commandment of שמיטת כספים (even though it was for the benefit of society so that people should be willing to loan money). – Because רבא had a difficulty, which is that הלל should not have uprooted the rules of שביעית which is מה"ת – תוספות anticipates the following difficulty: ואף על גב דדרשינן בספרי ואשר יהיה לך את אחיך תשמט ידך (דברים טו5פסוק ג'.) ולא של אחיך בידך- And even though the ספרי interprets the פסוק of ואשר יהיה לך את אחיך תשמט ידך (and whatever you have by your brother,6This indicates an unpaid loan; it is yours (he owes you the money), but it is in his (your brother’s [the לוה]) hand. This you are required to release and not collect. your hand shall release), that this excludes that which your brother has in your hand;7This indicates where the payment of the loan is (not anymore in your brother’s hand, but rather) in your hand, as תוספות continues to explain citing the ספרי. the ספרי continues – מכאן אמרו המלוה חבירו על המשכון8The מלוה has the collateral for the loan in his possession; therefore it is not considered יהיה לך את אחיד (in the hand of the לוה) but rather של אחיך בידך (in the hands of the מלוה). והמוסר שטרותיו לבית דין9When one is מוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד it is considered as if בי"ד is holding the loan, so it is not אשר יהיה לך את אחיך, but rather it is בי"ד את אחיך (see רע"ב מס' שביעית פ"י מ"ב). See רש"י לב,ב ד"ה מוסרני that if he is מוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד, the prohibition of לא יגוש (את רעהו וגו' שמיטה וגו') does not apply since בי"ד is the one who is 'יגוש'. אין משמיטין10It is evident from this ספרי that when the מלוה is מוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד the rules of שמיטה no longer apply, and the תורה allows for this, so by instituting the תקנה of פרוסבול (where he is not actually delivering his שטרות to בי"ד, and so it would not be permitted under the היתר of של אחיך בידך, only through הפקר בי"ד הפקר, nevertheless) it should also not be considered asעקירת שביעית for we see that the תורה allows for the איסור שמיטה to be circumvented (either through מוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד or through the תק"ח of פרוסבול through הפקר בי"ד הפקר [See פנ"י]). See ‘Thinking it over’. – From this the חכמים said if someone lends his friend for collateral or if one delivers his notes of debt to בי"ד the rules of שמיטה do not apply – תוספות replies: מכל מקום לא היה לו לעשות תקנה ללמד לעשות כן11The תורה merely allowed that שביעית be circumvented through המוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד (which not everyone may be willing to do), however by enacting the simpler פרוסבול option, it encourages everyone to circumvent שמיטה. – Nevertheless הלל should not have made such a תקנה to teach people to do this – שביטל בכך השמטת כספים שצותה תורה – For in this manner he nullified the מצוה of השמטת כספים which the תורה commanded.12Therefore רבא gave this answer of הפקר בי"ד on the second question (once we established that שמיטה בזמן הזה is only מדרבנן, and the גמרא asked), how can the רבנן create a שמטה, to which רבא replied הפקר בי"ד הפקר (for we are not tampering with or nullifying a תורה commandment). תוספות now cites פירוש רש"י: ובקונטרס פירש דרבא קאי נמי לשנויי פרכא דהכא – And רש"י explained that רבא is also responding to the first question here (how could הלל uproot a דאורייתא, and the answer is) that since הפקר בי"ד הפקר therefore it is permitted. תוספות responds to an anticipated difficulty:13According to רש"י, since the reason פרוסבול is effective is [because it is like המוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד where it is permitted] since הפקר בי"ד הפקר; why is it necessary for the ספרי to derive the היתר of המוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד from the דרשה of אשר יהיה לך את אחיך, when the reason it is מותר is because הפקר בי"ד הפקר. ודרשא דספרי עיקרה אמלוה על המשכון – For the דרשה of the ספרי from לך את אחיך is mainly referring to a loan for collateral (which שביעית is not משמט since it is של אחיך בידך), but not to המוסר שטרותיו – דמוסר שטרותיו הוי מטעם דהפקר בית דין היה הפקר אלא דאקרא קסמיך לה: For the היתר of המוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד is on account of הפקר בי"ד הפקר and not from the פסוק; rather the פסוק (of לך את אחיך) 14The רבנן, when they ruled that המוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד אין שביעית משמטתו (and when they instituted פרוסבול), wanted to show that this is not a frivolous use of הפקר בי"ד הפקר, so they used this פסוק to show that there is support to this ruling (even) in the תורה. is merely an אסמכתא.15If המוסר שטרותיו is not משמט מה"ת (as the דרשה of the ספרי seems to indicate), then when הלל was מתקן a פרוסבול, he was not literally being עוקר a דבר מה"ת (since it is permitted); the initial question of the גמרא would have to be (as תוספות stated previously) how come הלל taught the people to be עוקר a מ"ע of שמיטת כספים. The answer of הפקר בי"ד הפקר does not apply to this question of why he did it (and not how could he do it). Therefore we must say that according to רש"י were it not for הפקר בי"ד then המסור שטרותיו would be משמט מדאורייתא; it is only because of הפקר בי"ד that המסור שטרותיו (and therefore פרוסבול) are not משמט. See מהרש"א (ארוך) and מהר"ם שי"ף. SUMMARY תוספות maintains that the חכמים would not use the power of הפקר בי"ד הפקר (which is vested in them) in order to be מבטל a מצוה מן התורה (of שמיטת כספים). רש"י maintains that the היתר of מוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד (and subsequently פרוסבול) is based solely on the power of הפקר בי"ד הפקר and the פסוק of לך את אחיך is merely an אסמכתא (in regards to מוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד). THINKING IT OVER What are the differences16See footnote # 10. between המוסר שטרותיו לבי"ד and פרוסבול?17See אמ"ה # 270 and נח"מ.

5 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Beit Yosef, Choshen Mishpat 259:1:1 history »
Version: Tur Choshen Mishpat: Vilna, 1923 (Hebrew)

המוצא את האבידה חייב ליטפל בה להשיבה לבעליה שנאמר השב תשיבם ואם נטלה על מנת לגזלה ועדיין לא נתייאשו ממנה הבעלים עובר משום השב תשיבם ומשום לא תגזול וכו' עד אינו עובר אלא משום לא תוכל להתעלם בפרק אלו מציאות (בבא מציעא כו:) אמר רבא ראה סלע שנפלה נטלה לפני יאוש על מנת לגזלה עובר בכולן משום בל תגזול ומשום השב תשיבם ומשום לא תוכל להתעלם ואף ע"ג דהחזירה (לפני)[לאחר] יאוש מתנה הוא דיהיב ליה ואיסורא דעבד עבד נטלה לפני יאוש על מנת להחזירה ולאחר יאוש נתכוין לגזלה עובר משום השב תשיבם המתין לה עד שנתייאשו הבעלים ונטלה אינו עובר אלא משום לא תוכל להתעלם בלבד. ופי' רש"י לא תגזול לא שייך אלא בשעת נטילה כמו ויגזול את החנית מיד המצרי לא תוכל להתעלם אינו אזהרה אלא לכובש עיניו ונמנע מלהציל הילכך הנוטל ע"מ להחזיר ולאחר יאוש נתכוין לגזלה אין כאן מתעלם אבל השב תשיבם איכא משנטל עד שישיבנה: המתין לה. בשעה שראה אותה ולא נטלה להחזיר עבר בלא תוכל להתעלם שהרי העלים עיניו עכ"ל. ואהא דאמרינן מתנה בעלמא הוא דיהיב ליה ואיסורא דעבד עבד כתבו התוספות וא"ת והלא לאו דלא תגזול מיקרי ניתק לעשה פרק שילוח הקן אם כן כיון דלענין גזילה לא מיקרי מתנה גם השב תשיבם למה לא תיקן ויש לומר דלא קאי אלא על לאו דלא תוכל להתעלם שעבר שלא החזיר קודם יאוש:

5 hours ago
Charles Sheer published a new Source Sheet, Why Did Moshe Identify the Israelites as His Brothers?.
5 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Tur, Yoreh De'ah 94:1 history »
Version: Yoreh Deah, Vilna, 1923 (Hebrew)

 התוחב כף חולבת בקדדה של בשר או איפכא משערינן בכל מה שתחב ממנה בקדרה דלא ידעינן כמה נפיק מיניה וה"ר פרץ כתב שאם הכף של מתכת משערינן בכולו אף מה שלא נכנס ממנו בקדרה משום חם מקצתו חם כולו ואם תחב הכף בקדרה ב' פעמים ולא נודע בנתיים צריך ב' פעמים ס' ואם יש ס' לבטל הכף הקדרה והתבשיל מותרים אבל הכף אסור בין עם בשר בין עם חלב לפי שהיא בלועה מבשר בחלב ואפילו בדיעבד אוסרת אם חזרו ותחבוה בין בבשר בין בחלב כל זמן שהיא בת יומא ואם אין לו ששים הכל אסור בהנאה אפילו הקדרה אך מותר לתת לתוכה פירות או צונן כיון שאינו נהנה מגוף האיסור ואם אין הכף בן יומא הקדרה והתבשיל מותרין והכף אסורה לכתחילה בין עם בשר בין עם חלב ומ"מ בדיעבד אינה אוסרת כיון שלא היתה בת יומא כתב בספר התרומות אע"ג דבשאר איסורים קדרה של איסור ששהתה מע"ל בלא איסור אם הוחמו בה חמין בתוך מעת לעת חשיבא כבת יומא שהרי טעם איסור שבקדרה פלט לתוך המים ולא היו בהן ששים לבטלה דבכולה משערינן ונעשית בת יומא וצריכה מע"ל לאחר חימום המים בבשר בחלב אינו כן שאם בשלו בה בשר ובתוך מע"ל הוחמו בה מים ואחר ששהתה מע"ל לבשול הבשר בשלו בה חלב מותר אע"פ שהוא בתוך מע"ל לחימום המים אע"ג דבשאר איסורים שבתורה איסור הבלוע בהיתר כגון בצלים בלועים מאיסור ובשלם בקדירה של היתר צריך ס' כנגד כל הבצלים ולא סגי בס' כנגד כל הבליעה בבשר בחלב אינו כן שאם בצלים או ירקות שבלועים מבשר ובשלם בקדרה חולבת אם ידוע כמה בשר בלוע בבצלים ובירקות אין צריך אלא ס' כנגד הבשר ולא כנגד כל הבצלים והירקות וכתב ה"ר פרץ יש רוצים להתיר בשר רותח שחתכו בסכין חולבת ע"י קליפה וכדאמרינן גבי בית השחיטה רותח וסגי בקליפה ולא דמי להתם דהתם אין כל הבהמה רותחת אלא מקום בית השחיטה לבד אבל חתיכה שכולה רותחת כשהחותכין אותה בסכין חולבת מתפשט בכולה וכולה אסורה אם אין בה ששים כנגד כל הסכין ודוקא כשהסכין בן יומא אבל אם אינו בן יומא או אינו יודע אם הוא בן יומא אם לאו מסתמא אינו בן יומא דסתם כלים אינן בני יומא אבל קליפה בעי:

5 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Responsa Maharashdam, Yoreh Deah 59:3 history »
Version: She'elot uTeshuvot Maharashdam, Lemberg, 1862 (Hebrew)

צריך אני להודיע לשואל כי לא צדק במה שאמר שזה היה רבית קצוצה שאינו כן דלא הוי אלא אבק רבית וכמ"ש הרמב"ם ז"ל בפי' ז"ל תקנו חכמים שכל הנותן מעות לחברו להתעסק בהם יהי' חצי הממון בתורת הלואה וכו' עד אלא זה המתעסק טורח בחצי של הפקדון מפני מעותיו שלוהו ונמצא באין לידי אבק רבית עכ"ל. הרי א"כ שאין כאן רבית קצוצה אלא איסור דרבנן וענין הדין לענין שאלתינו נראה דבר זה נחלקו בו הפוסקים ז"ל סברת הראב"ד ז"ל היא שכיון שלא נתפרש בשעת מסירת עסק אלא שנעשה סתם חצי ריוח וחצי הפסד שיד בעל המעות על העליונה שאם יש ריוח בשעת חלוקה אינו נותן אלא שכר עמלו שהוא אומר לו אם היה הפסד הייתי מקבל שני חלקים ואם יש הפסד ורואה ששני חלקי ההפס' גדולים ממחצי' השכר א"ל שכרך אתה נוטל וטול חצי ההפסד מפני שהעס' בחזקת בעלים הוא ויתרון חלק ההפסד שהוא נוטל משום שכר המקבל הוא ואם בא השכיר להוציא שכר מרובה מן השוכר עליו להביא ראיה ועיד שהרי רשות בעל המעות להתנות בכל תנאי שירצה ועכשו שלא התנ' בתחלה מתנה בסוף ע"כ אבל הרמב"ם ז"ל פרק ז' מהלכות שלוחים ושותפי' כתב הפך זה שכתב וז"ל ועוד תקנו חכמים שכל הנותן מעות לחברו להתעסק בו ופחתו או הותירו ולא רצ' ליתן שכר עמלו בכל ייום ולא התנו ביניהם שום תנאי שיהיה שכר המתעסק באותו חצי של הפקדון שליש ריוח הפקדון שהוא שתות ריוח כל הממון לפיכך אם הרויחו יטול המתעסק שני שלשי הריוח חצי הריוח של חצי המעות שהם מלוה ושתו' הריוח בשכר שנתעסק בפקדון נמצא הכל שני שלישי הריוח ויטול בעל המעות שליש הריוח ואם יפחתו יטול המתעסק שליש הפחת שהרי הוא חייב בחנצי הפחת מפני שחצי המעו' מלוה ויש לו שתו' בשכרו ואותו החצי של פקדון ונמצ' שנשאר עליו מן הפח' שליש ובעל המעו' יפסי' שני שלישי הפח' ע"כ הרי הראב"ד והרמב"ם ז"ל שני סברו' הפוכות זו מזו שלדע' הראב"ד ז"ל יד בעל המעו' על העליונ' ויד המתעסק על התחתונה ולדע' הרמב"ם ז"ל יד המתעס' על העליונה ויד בעל המעו' על החחתונה ועתה מי הוא בדו' הזה יוכל להכניס ראשו בין ההרים הגבוהים ולא ייר' שמא ירוצו את גלגולתו אמנם כפי האמ' לכאורה היה הדע' נותן להכרי' כדברי הראב"ד אחר שאין איסור הסתמיו' מחצי ריוח ומחצי הפסד אלא מדרבנן אבל מה נעשה שהרמב"ם כותב וקורא טועה למי שסובר דע' הראב"ד ועוד שהרב בעל הטורים י"ד פוס' בפשיטו' כדע' הרמב"ם ז"ל גם תלמידי הרשב"א כתבו סבר' הרא"בד ודחו אותה משום דאפי' תימא דאו האי או האי במשמע מ"מ אית לן למימר דלעולם יד בעל המקבל העסקא על העליונה משום דתפיס וכ"כ הרא"ש ז"ל בתשו' בשם מהר"ם ז"ל וכל היכא דאיכא פלוגת' דרבוות' לא מפקינן ממונא וא"כ מי הוא יערב אל לבו לאפוקי ממונא נגד סברת הרמ"ב"ם ז"ל אפי' היה הוא יחידי נגד סברת הראב"ד ז"ל כ"ש להיות עתה יש אחרונים כתלמידי הרשב"א ז"ל נוכף ע"ז ריב"ה ז"ל דהוי בתראה טובא ומימיו שותים כל ישראל בגלות ספרד וע"כ נראה לי הדין פשוט הלכה למעשה שאם בא בעל המעות להוציא מיד המתעסק שאם יש ריוח אנו ב"ד לא נוציא ממנו כי אם שליש הריוח ואם יש הפסד יוכל המתעסק לומר שאינו רוצה להפסיד אלא שליש ההפסד כי יד המתעסק על העליונה:

5 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Responsa Maharashdam, Choshen Mishpat 230:1 history »
Version: She'elot uTeshuvot Maharashdam, Lemberg, 1862 (Hebrew)

ראובן שכר חנות א' עם מערה בתוכה מתוגר א' בעד ה' שנים לערך ר' לבנים לשנה ונכנס בתוכה ובא ש' וטען עליו כי אביו היה מחזיק בחניות הנז' ושעל כן יתן לו החנות כי הוא יורש זכות וחזקת אביו וע"ז נפלו ביניהם דין ודברים וכדי להסיר מביניהם כל ריב וקטטה נתרצו ובררו ביניהם דיינים ולפניהם טען שמעון כי אביו היה מחזיק בחנות הנז' ושעל כן הוא יורש זכותו וחזקתו וראובן טען כי אמת הוא שאביו היה מחזיק בה אך אמנם זה היה בימי קדם זה לו כמו שמנה שנים או יותר וכבר אבד חזקתו אח' שעברו שלש שנים מאין יושב יהודי זולת תוגרמים והוא זכה מן ההפקר כי לקחה מיד תוגר א' שהיה עומד בתוכה ואחר שמוע הדיינים טענותיה' הדיין המבורר מצד שמעון הסיב פניו אל שמעון ואמר לו דע לך ש' שאין לך זכות כלל בחנות הנז' אם לא שתביא עדים שאתה החזק' בה תוך ג' שנים להכנסת ר' בחנות וכשמוע ש' את דברי הדיין הנז' וכראותו כי אין לו ראיה שהחזיק בה תוך ש"ש הנז' ומה גם שהיה מפורסם לכל באי שער עירו כי לא החזיק בה הנז' אז חרה אפו וחמתו בערה בו והלך אל התוגר בע' החנות וקבל עליו החנות לזמן ה' שנים והעלה השכירות כפלים ת' לבנים לשנה עד שהוצרך ר' להעמיד ולקיים עליו החנות לזמן ה' שנים לאותו ערך שהעלה ש' ת' לבנים לשנה יורנו מורנו מורה צדק הדין עם מי עם ר' או עם ש' על פי טענותיהם הנז' ואם יטעון ש' שהתוגר בעל החנות הוציא לאביו בע"כ מהחנות הנז' ושעל כן לא אבד חזקתו אף אם עברו שלש שנים יודיענו רבנו אם יש ממש בטענותיו זאת ועוד יורנו רבנו אם בני העיר מחוייבי' להחזיק לש' לעבריין אחר שעב' על ההסכמו' וגם לנהוג בו כמוחר' עד יפרע לר' כל מה שהזיקו על הכל יבא דבר אדוננו כי לדברו יחלנו ומה' יהיה משכורתו שלמה:

5 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Teshuva MeAhava Part I 54:5 history »
Version: Teshuva Me-Ahava, Part I, Prague, 1809 (Hebrew)

יען אחר כוונת הלב הן הן הדברים שסיים מהר"מ ז"ל אם נותן הקרן במתנה גמורה כה"ג מותר הוא היתר גמור בכל צד דהנה יאות להתבונן אחרי שמהר"מ לא אסר אלא בעבור שלא קבל הבחור עליו כל האונסין אפילו מגנבה ואבדה אם כן ביותר ה"ל לסיים מעין הפתיחה אבל אם הבחור קבל על עצמו כל האחריות אפילו מגנבה ואבדה כה"ג מותר כאשר הרגיש בזה בעל תה"ד סימן ש"ב ועיין שם ועוד מסתמא יותר ניחא לי' לאדם לקבל על עצמו כל האחריות מלתת הונו מתנה לזולתו באופן שאם ירצה לעכבו הרשות בידו אמנם י"ל גם לאידך גיסא דניחא לי' לתת מתנה גמורה ונכון לבו בטותח בהימניתי' של המקבל מלקבל על עצמו כל האחריות וראה שבחר מהר"מ בהך היתר דרך מתנה שבכה"ג מותר בכל צד אבל אם הוא דרך הלואה נראין כל צדדי' וצדי צדדי' לאיסור אפילו אם קבל על עצמו גם האחריות גנבה ואבדה אלא דבלא קבלת אחריות של גנבה ואבדה הוי ר"ק אחרי שקצב עם הבחור ההוצאה כנראה מפשט לשון מהר"מ ואם מקבל על עצמו גם אחריות של גנבה ואבדה מה גם דנפיק מרבית התורה עכ"פ הוי איסור דרבנן אבל במתנה גמורה אין איסור רבית כלל ולכך בחר מהר"מ ההיתר הזה.

5 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Ritva on Sukkah 2a:5 history »
Version: Chiddushei HaRashba, Sheva Shitot, Warsaw, 1883. (Hebrew)

ושחמתה מרובה מצלתה. פירוש דלא חשיב סככה והא ודאי אפי׳‎ לרבי יהודה היא לכ״ע דלא פליג אלא ברישא בלחוד. וכ״ת והא רבי יהודה לא בעי צל סכך מדקא מכשיר למעלה מעשרים אמה דליכא צל סכך אלא צל דפנוחת כדאיתא בגמרא. י״ל דנהי דלא בעי רבי יהודה שיהא הסכך עושה צל כמות שהוא עכשיו מ״מ בעי שיהא ראוי לעשות צל דבלא״ה לא מיקרי סכך כלל כיון דקליש כולי האי דלא חזי למעבד צל וזה נכון:

5 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman edited Sefer HaBachur, Title Page 1 and 5 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The grammar book of ~~Elijah the Levite the Ashkenazi~~

6 hours ago
5 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:3 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. And as for what I said, that every verb pattern has six tenses, this applies only to the three active patterns; for in the other four the passive does not apply, since they themselves are passive, and in some of them the imperative does not apply either, as will be explained with respect to each one:

6 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 11:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The first kind consists of verbs that are intransitive in the qal stem, and this stem renders them transitive toward a second object. For example: qam (“he rose”) becomes heqim (“he caused [someone] to rise”); yarad (“he went down”) becomes horid (“he brought down”). For this reason this stem was established. Accordingly, it appears most often in the class of verbs with a quiescent middle letter, which is the usual domain of intransitive verbs, as I wrote in the sixth principle. It also appears, though less frequently, with complete verbs, such as from shakhav and rakhav, yielding hishkiv and hirkiv—all of which are transitive toward a second object.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 3:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. Know that nouns with six vowel-points differ from those¶
that sometimes or always have five vowel-points in two respects. The first is this:¶
when those with six vowel-points occur at a pause—¶
that is, at etnaḥta or at the end of a verse—¶
the first segol changes to qamats,¶
as in af lekha ʾareṣ (“to you also belongs the land,” Ps. 89:12),¶
and ʿarum yekhasseh ke-veged (“he covers the naked with a garment,” Ezek. 18:7). Some even change at zaqef, as in¶
yihyeh li ʿeved (“he shall be my servant,” Gen. 44:17),¶
and likewise mitḥareh ba-ʾerez (“competing with the cedar,” Jer. 22:15). Yet there are some that do not change at all,¶
even at etnaḥta or at the end of a verse,¶
such as melekh (“king”), teven (“straw”), and the like.¶
Thus ʾareṣ is found unchanged in four places, and so on,¶
in Proverbs and Psalms;¶
and likewise kesef (“silver”) always changes,¶
except in naḥpah ba-kesef (Ps. 68:14),¶
where it remains with segol at etnaḥta. The general rule is that the accents of Job, Proverbs, and Psalms¶
have different laws, as you will see in the book Tov Taʿam.¶
But those nouns with five vowel-points¶
never change to a qamats at a pause.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 9:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. The second kind consists of verbs that occur in both stems, but in the qal stem they are intransitive, such as shakhan, halakh, and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 10:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And the general rule is this: everything I have stated in this principle and in the preceding one—that any noun of two letters which has an added tav at the end, preceded by a ḥiriq or a shuruq, or which has a quiescent yod at the end, whether it consists of two moving letters, or of one, or whether it has a moving yod after two root letters—belongs to the class of roots whose third radical is he (nḥei lamed-he). Examine this carefully and you will find it to be so.¶
¶
What I said—specifically “after two root letters”—was meant to exclude the sound (i.e., complete/regular) roots and the nḥei ʿayin roots. For when a yod appears in sound roots, it comes after three root letters, as in ḥamishiyyot and the like; and in nḥei ʿayin roots it comes after the first letter, as in bayit, zayit, and so on.¶
¶
I also did not include in this rule every noun that has a final nun preceded by a ḥolam, such as ratzon, kalon, lest you be misled by nouns in which the nun is a root letter, such as aron, adon, and likewise madon, which is from the nḥei ʿayin class, with root letters d-w-n.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 12:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. There are also a few nouns with an initial mem and a ḥolam,¶
following the pattern of roots with a quiescent first yod.¶
Here too there is a distinction: those have a final qamats or a tsere, such as moshav and moqesh,¶
whereas these have a final pataḥ, for example forms derived from¶
roots like radad or rakhakh. These cases are very few.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And know that every verb called “complete” is one in which none of the letters aleph, he, vav, or yod occurs, and which also has no nun at the beginning, and whose last two letters are not identical; for in such a case none of the three root letters will ever be missing. For this reason it is called “complete.”

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Title Page 5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The book HaBachur was established anew,¶
Better than the initial version: ¶
Its author expanded it with fuller substance,¶
Altering its structure for improvement: ¶
He added further good material,¶
And placed within it thoughtful corrections: ¶
In the first there was lentil grain,¶
Now it is entirely choice wheat:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The foundation of grammar is surely examined in my book,¶
for those who know religion and law, the sages of the new age.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. The Pattern Nif‘al ¶
I shall include it within the pattern Paʿal with dagesh.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Nevertheless, for every single verse I will record in the margin the name of the book in which that verse appears.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. The Imperative¶
In the singular it has a sheva,¶
and the he is quiescent at the end,¶
with a tsere before it,¶
as in geleh.¶
In the masculine plural and the feminine singular,¶
the he disappears,¶
as in gelu, geli.¶
In the feminine plural,¶
it is changed into a quiescent yod¶
with a segol before it,¶
as in ‘al Sha’ul be-khinah (2 Samuel 1:24),¶
or sometimes without a yod,¶
as in tse’ena u-re’ena (Song of Songs 3:11).¶
Although tse’ena has the root yatsa,¶
it comes according to the pattern of re’ena,¶
in order to pair the words.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 18 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

So I replied: do not despise it.

6 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

I say that this applies only when the middle root letter has a tsere,¶
as in yatsag, yatsaq, yatsa‘, yatsar, yatsat.¶
Thus you say yatsag gevulot ‘amim (Deuteronomy 32:8),¶
atsigah na ‘immekh min ha-‘am asher (Genesis 33:15),¶
ki atsokh mayim ‘al tsame (Isaiah 44:3),¶
ve-’atsi‘ah She’ol hinnekh (Psalms 139:8),¶
be-terem etzorkha ba-beten yeda‘tikh (Jeremiah 1:5),¶
and va-yatsat esh be-Tsiyon (Lamentations 4:11).¶
In all of these, the tsere is dageshed in place of the yod¶
of the first root letter. But the root yatsa is an exception.¶
Therefore I say hiqifu yemei ha-mishteh (Job 1:5),¶
and likewise lo heniyaḥ adam (Psalms 105:14),¶
for these are dageshed, their roots being naqaf and nuaḥ,¶
and not yaqaf or yanuḥ.¶
I will speak further about this among the quiescent first-letter yod roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Ezekiel 16 and Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 9:7
(automatic citation link)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 26 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Acquire it, David, and labor within it, and you will prosper—¶
like a tree planted by waters, with pleasant roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 9:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. The fourth kind consists of verbs that likewise occur in both stems and are intransitive in both of them; and even here the pi‘el form indicates greater intensity of the action than the qal, such as “u-se‘areikh tsimmeaḥ” (Ezekiel 16), “pittaḥ ha-semadar” (Song of Songs 7:13), which are equivalent to a pataḥ and a tsamaḥ. However, the leading grammarians do not concede that intransitive verbs exist in the pi‘el ha-dagush stem, for this stem was established only for transitive verbs. They therefore say that tsimmeaḥ and pittaḥ belong to the pa‘al stem, with the ḥiriq in place of a qibbuts, and that they are like tsummeaḥ and puttaḥ, just as “va-yisem ba-aron be-Mitsrayim” is like va-yussam.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 11:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. And the general rule is this: ¶
Every noun that you find consisting of two root letters, where the second letter appears in the plural, in pronominal suffixes, and in the feminine form, belongs to the class of doubled roots. Such nouns always have one of the short vowels at the beginning. Even those that are pointed with a qamats according to the tradition—such as yam (“sea”) in “the Salt Sea” (Genesis 14:3), or tam (“perfect”) in “perfect and upright” (Job 1:1), and the like—when they appear in the plural, with suffixes, or with the feminine ending, they become a pataḥ-vocalized, as in temimim, temah. Those with a tsere appear with a ḥiriq, such as shen → shino, ḥen → ḥano. Those with a ḥolem appear with three vowels, as from ḥoq: ḥuqqo, ḥuqqai, ḥuqqam. And when the middle radical is pointed with a sheva, then the first radical takes a ḥatef-qamats, as in “You guided them in Your strength” (Exodus 15:13), and likewise ḥuqqekha, ḥuqqekhem, as Rashi explained on “my strength and song is Yah” (Exodus 15:2). However, Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra rightly challenged him there—see his commentary.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And likewise a pronominal word of the first person with the first person, for example: atta poqed, ani poqed, attem poqedim, anachnu poqedim, att poqedet, atten poqedot; and so too in the passive.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And the principal one is the vav, and its usage is in two ways.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. And for the most part, when the yod is written,¶
the e-i-t-n letters take a hiriq¶
and the middle root letter has a pataḥ,¶
as in einaq, yinaq;¶
e’irash, yirash;¶
eitav, yitav;¶
eishan, yishan.¶
And there are cases that come with a dagesh¶
in place of the quiescent yod,¶
as from yatsaq: atsokh ruḥi ‘al zar‘ekha;¶
and from yatsar: be-terem etzorkha.¶
And they called these “roots deficient in the first letter yod”¶
and not “roots quiescent in the first letter yod”,¶
for in the future tense they proceed according to the manner¶
of roots deficient in the first letter nun,¶
as I explained regarding roots deficient in the first letter nun.¶
And although I have searched throughout all my books of grammar¶
to find a reason for this,¶
I did not find one.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And likewise the Participle¶
It is with a pataḥ for this same reason,¶
as in sav, sovavim, and so on.¶
Even those that are with a qamats according to the Mesorah,¶
such as tam ve-yashar (Job 1:1),¶
from which we say yihyu temimim (Exodus 20:24);¶
but tsaddiq tamim (Genesis 6:9),¶
which has a qamats, is singular,¶
while its plural is temimim,¶
following the pattern of ḥasid, ḥasidim. Thus there is no difference between the past tense¶
and the participle in the masculine singular¶
except according to the sense of the context,¶
as in tam ha-kesef (Genesis 47:18),¶
which is past tense,¶
and bar levav (Psalms 24:4),¶
which is a descriptive participle. But in the feminine there is a difference:¶
the past tense has penultimate stress,¶
as in ha-misgav ve-ḥattah (Jeremiah 48:1),¶
whereas the participle has final stress,¶
as in ve-lashon rakkah (Proverbs 25:15).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 12:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The first kind is when the corresponding qal stem is intransitive, as in qam, from which comes huqam. Its meaning is the same as that of the pu‘al stem—namely, that it indicates an action performed upon it by another.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 33 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

May He grant us merit to compose many books without end,¶
and may He magnify Torah and make it glorious.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Future¶
In this pattern, the e-i-t-n letters appear with a sheva, like its prototype,¶
and the first root letter has three dots, as in the past tense,¶
as in efkod, yifkod, and so on.¶
But when the middle root letter is a guttural or a resh,¶
the kubuts changes to a ḥolam throughout the entire pattern,¶
as in ki lo forash (Numbers 15:34),¶
and umarak ve-shataf (Leviticus 6:21),¶
as will be explained in the chapter on poetry, in the ninth poem.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Third Principle. On the elucidation of noun patterns that take the segol vowel:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 13:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And in the Name of Him who is One, and none beside Him, I begin the Second Treatise.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 23 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

and I myself am named Bachur, therefore I called it HaBachur.”

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The Pattern Paʿal¶
This pattern for the most part follows the manner of the strong roots,¶
as in qillel, qillalta, and the like,¶
and there is no need to explain it.¶
But sometimes it follows the manner of the Paʿal pattern¶
of roots quiescent in the middle letter,¶
in which the final root letter is doubled in place of the dagesh;¶
only that in these cases the vowels are with pataḥ,¶
as in ve-romem taḥat le-shoni (Psalms 66:17),¶
asher ‘olal li (Lamentations 1:12). But roots quiescent in the middle letter take a tsere,¶
as I wrote above,¶
and thus we say from ramam:¶
romemu Hashem Eloheinu (Psalms 99:9),¶
aromem, yeromem, and so on.¶
And likewise from bun:¶
bonen, bonenu. The reason is that since the last two letters are identical,¶
it was difficult in their view to place a dagesh in one of the doubled letters,¶
for it would appear as though there were three identical letters in succession,¶
since the dagesh indicates a doubled letter, as I explained.¶
Therefore they sometimes dropped the dagesh¶
and placed in its stead a quiescent vav.¶
As a result, doubt arises in some of these verbs¶
whether they belong to the class of roots quiescent in the middle letter¶
or to the class of doubled roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Twelfth Principle. On the elucidation of the five other verb patterns in the category of doubled verbs:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 34 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Amen:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Past ¶
Throughout, the first root letter has three dots, as in pakad, pakadta, and so on; ¶
in all other vowels it follows the pattern of its prototype.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 12:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. The letter mem may be added¶
at the beginning of nouns.¶
For the most part it is pointed with a ḥiriq,¶
followed by a silent sheva,¶
and the final vowel is a qamats,¶
as in mishkan, miqdash. Sometimes it appears with a ḥolam,¶
as in mizmor and mikhlol.¶
When a guttural letter follows the mem,¶
the mem is pointed with a pataḥ,¶
as in maʾakhal and maḥshof. Even without a guttural,¶
such forms may occur,¶
and in those cases they usually appear¶
with doubling in the plural and with suffixes,¶
as in mitʿam, midbar, maḥmad.¶
Thus one says:¶
mitʿamo, midbaro, maḥmადო,¶
mitʿamim, marbadim, maḥmadim. There are also a few doubled forms¶
with a ḥiriq,¶
as from misgav, yielding misgavi.¶
All such doubled forms¶
have pataḥ as their final vowel,¶
but forms ending in a qamats or a ḥolam¶
never take doubling.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 6:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. Likewise, with plural pronominal suffixes,¶
all of the suffix forms are pronounced with a sheva at the beginning,¶
such as devarav, ziqnav, devarekha, ziqnekha,¶
except for those whose suffix ends with a mem or a nun.¶
In those cases it is necessary to lighten the vowels¶
and to change the qamats or tsere into a sheva;¶
this would then result in two shevas,¶
as in *dvarhem*, *zqenhem*—which is impossible. Therefore the first sheva is changed to a ḥiriq,¶
and one says divreihem, ziqneihem, and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 2:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. For example, when the first vowel is a qamats, as in¶
davar (“word”), gadol (“great”), qaṣir (“harvest”),¶
and zaqen (“elder”): in the singular construct state you say¶
dvar, gdal, qṣir, zqan; with singular pronominal suffixes:¶
dvaro, gdalo, qṣiro, zqano; in the plural:¶
dvarim, gdolim, qṣirim, zqenim; and with plural pronominal suffixes:¶
dvarav, gdolav, qṣirav, zqenav. But in the plural construct state they appear with a ḥiriq,¶
as in dvare, gdale, qṣire, zqene.¶
I will reveal the reason for this later in this treatise, in Principle Six.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:17 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Now I shall begin the section on nouns, and I will explain all the patterns.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Seventh Principle. On the elucidation of the vowel patterns of the qal and Nif‘al forms in the category of verbs with a weak middle letter, such as kum:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 7:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Seventh Principle:¶
On the elucidation of pronominal suffixes.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 1:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. Likewise, nouns from roots whose first radical is a quiescent yod, ¶
such as shanah (“year”), deʿah (“knowledge”), and ʿeṣah (“counsel”), ¶
in all of which the initial yod of the root drops, ¶
and which have the feminine he at the end, ¶
are measured according to the pattern ʿalah. ¶
¶
Similarly, nouns from roots with a quiescent middle radical, ¶
such as ʾor (“light”) and yom (“day”), ¶
are measured according to the pattern pul; ¶
and sir (“pot”) and qir (“wall”) according to the pattern pil; ¶
and zar (“stranger”) and ṣar (“narrow / enemy”) according to the pattern pal.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

8. The Pattern Hif‘il — The Past¶
Throughout, the he appears with a ḥolam in place of the root yod,¶
as in hoshiv, hoshavta, and so on.¶
And likewise throughout the entire pattern,¶
the prefixed letters at the beginning take a ḥolam:¶
in the participle moshiv,¶
in the infinitive and the imperative hoshiv,¶
and in the future oshiv, yoshiv, toshiv. Except in the passive,¶
where the mem is always with a shuruq or a kubuts¶
in every passive form, whether of strong roots or of those not strong¶
(as in mufqad, mushav).¶
And a few cases are found where the mem has a ḥataf-qamats,¶
as in shesh mashzar (Exodus 26:1),¶
zoveaḥ mashḥit (Malachi 1:14). And the vocalization of the middle root letter in this entire pattern¶
is the same as in the strong roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 4:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The fourth principle. An elucidation of nouns whose middle radical is quiescent ʿayin, which occur without the addition of any extra letter:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The Pattern Qal¶
In the past tense, the first root letter has a qamats,¶
as in qam, to indicate the quiescent vav,¶
even though it is not the usual function of qamats to indicate a vav¶
(that role properly belongs to a ḥolam).¶
Here it was changed to a qamats¶
in order to make this Qal form conform to the other Qal past tenses,¶
in all of which the first root letter has a qamats,¶
except for doubled roots, as will be explained in the Twelfth Principle of this treatise. And an aleph is found written after the qamats¶
in the word ve-qa’am sha’on (Hosea 10:14),¶
where it is quiescent.¶
And it appears as mobile in the word ve-ra’amah ve-yashvah (Zechariah 14:10),¶
and these two alephs stand in place of a vav. Likewise in the third-person plural and feminine,¶
the first root letter has a qamats¶
and the stress is penultimate,¶
to indicate the quiescent vav,¶
as in qamu, qamah.¶
But in the other persons,¶
the first root letter has a pataḥ,¶
as in qamta, qamti, and so on.¶
This is because of the quiescent sheva¶
that belongs to every Qal past tense:¶
if the first root letter were with a qamats,¶
the sheva would not be quiescent but mobile,¶
as will be explained in the chapter on poetry, in the eighth poem. And the past tense also comes with a tsere¶
according to the pattern Paʿal,¶
as in ka’asher met Aharon (Deuteronomy 32:50),¶
ki metu kol ha-anashim (Exodus 4:19),¶
and likewise kenim anakhnu (Genesis 42:11),¶
madua‘ atem lanim neged ha-ḥomah (Nehemiah 13:21).¶
And according to the pattern Pu‘al:¶
ha-boker or (Genesis 44:3),¶
ki oru ‘einai (1 Samuel 14:29),¶
and similar cases are few.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 13:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Thirteenth Principle. On the elucidation of the meaning of the hitpa‘el stem:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Patterns Paʿal and Puʿal¶
Behold, I have now reached the place where I said at the beginning of the First Treatise¶
that I would prove that the so-called quadriliteral pattern does not exist at all.¶
Know that some grammarians have said concerning the words¶
to’khelehu esh (Job 20:26),¶
meloshni ba-seter (Psalms 101:5),¶
le-mishpati etḥannan (Job 9:15),¶
that they belong to a quadriliteral pattern,¶
because of the ḥataf-qamats on the first root letter,¶
which they take to stand in place of a ḥolam¶
to indicate a quiescent vav after the first root letter.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 12:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. There is a further difference: just as nouns with a quiescent middle letter¶
(naḥei ʿayin) normally change from a qamats to a sheva, as you already know,¶
these do not undergo such a change. For example, from nagan one says magen, magenim, mageney.¶
The qamats does not change. The reason is that it stands in the place of a dagesh;¶
therefore it cannot change, just as I have said repeatedly,¶
that forms which function as if they were dagush do not change.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 3:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Third Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the vowels of the patterns Hif‘il and Paʿal¶
for strong roots, and their identifying signs.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Psalms 37:23 and Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:8
(automatic citation link)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Perfect (Past) — throughout it, the first root letter (peh) is vowelled with qamats,¶
except in the forms of the masculine and feminine plural, in which the qamats changes to a sheva¶
because of the mem and nun at the end, and the accent is on the final syllable (milra‘),¶
as in paqadtem, paqadten. This is the rule for every word whose first vowel is a qamats:¶
when it is lengthened by an added syllable and the accent falls on the final syllable (milra‘), the qamats reverts to a sheva. The middle root letter (‘ayin) is vowelled with pataḥ in all forms,¶
except in the masculine and feminine singular third person, where it has a sheva na‘,¶
as in paqdu, paqedah. The reason is that if it were vowelled with pataḥ, it would have to be followed either by a sheva naḥ¶
or by a dagesh, as is the rule after every short vowel.¶
But here a sheva naḥ is impossible:¶
for the plural requires a following vav with shuruq,¶
and for the feminine singular an he with preceding qamats. Nor is a dagesh possible, for one cannot say paqdu or paqedah with a dagesh,¶
since this conjugation is called qal, meaning “light,” that is, without dagesh.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3.¶
And the general rule is this:¶
the pattern Paʿal in this class has the first root letter vocalized with a ḥolam¶
to indicate the quiescent vav, which is the middle root letter;¶
and the final root letter is doubled in place of the dagesh,¶
and it is vocalized with a tsere,¶
as in bonen, qomem.¶
And all the additional prefixed letters at the beginning¶
are with a sheva, following the rule of the pattern Paʿal.¶
In this manner the pattern Paʿal appears,¶
and there is no difference among these forms¶
except according to the sense of the context. Thus konenu ḥitzam (Psalms 11:2)¶
is from the pattern that I call Paʿal;¶
mitz‘adei gever konanu (Psalms 37:23)¶
is from the pattern Paʿal;¶
ḥillalah yado (Job 26:13)¶
is from the pattern Paʿal;¶
and lifnei gva‘ot ḥullalti (Proverbs 8:25)¶
is from the pattern Paʿal,¶
as I wrote above.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 24 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The introduction is concluded

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 3:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. There are also nouns that always appear with five vowel-points,¶
such as sefer (“book”), ʿegel (“calf”), ʿesev (“grass”),¶
ḥelev (“fat”), and ḥeleq (“portion”).¶
Most of these contain ḥet or ʿayin. But a noun whose first vowel is segol¶
and whose second vowel is tsere¶
is never found at all,¶
as I hinted at the beginning of this principle.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 13:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. And those nouns that consist of four distinct letters ¶
(i.e., without any letter being doubled) are very numerous, ¶
such as kaftor, sefarad, garzen, barzel, ¶
gizbar, serafad, tifsar, and the like. ¶
You already know that final qamats and tsere vowels ¶
undergo change, and you will observe—by studying the regular ¶
roots and learning from those nouns of three letters—that ¶
for the most part they all follow the same pattern.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 13:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. There are also nouns in which a tav is added at the end¶
and the vowel before it is a ḥiriq,¶
such as gofrit, sheʾerit, reʾshit, ḥamishit, and the like.¶
These too form their plural with a mobile yod,¶
following the pattern found in the Talmud, such as ḥamishiyyot,¶
and accordingly one should say reʾshiyyot.¶
This is especially the case for those whose third radical is he,¶
as I will explain in the Fourth Treatise,¶
Principle Seven.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 19 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And concerning this I said in my poem:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 8:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And know that just as there are verbs in the qal stem that are sometimes transitive and sometimes intransitive, as I have written, so too in this stem there are nif‘al forms that are sometimes transitive and sometimes intransitive. For example: “u-ve-navi nishmar” (Hosea 13) is transitive, whereas “ve-‘Amassa lo nishmar” (II Samuel 14) is intransitive, its meaning being that he did not guard himself. Likewise, “ve-nimkar bi-gneivato” (Exodus 22:2) is transitive, meaning that the court sold him, whereas “ve-nimkar lakh” (Leviticus 25:39) is intransitive, as the Sages of blessed memory explained—that he sells himself because of his distress.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Future¶
The e-i-t-n letters take a qamats, as with roots quiescent in the middle letter;¶
but the difference between them is that in these¶
the first root letter most often has a ḥolam,¶
as in ve-ḥannoti et asher aḥon (Exodus 33:19).¶
Likewise in the plural:¶
teshalu lah (Ruth 2:16),¶
yeronnu yoshvei sela‘ (Isaiah 42:11).¶
And likewise yesovu, tesovu, tesovi;¶
and in the feminine plural tesovnah,¶
because of the many vowels the quiescent letter drops.¶
And likewise in the imperative sovnah,¶
as in ve-hineh tesovnah alumoteikhem (Genesis 37:7),¶
and u-farashav lo yedakkenu (Isaiah 28:28). But roots quiescent in the middle letter¶
most often have a shuruq, as I wrote there.¶
And there are those who say that the e-i-t-n letters¶
come with a dagesh, as in yatom and the like;¶
I will speak of these in the discussion of the Nif‘al pattern that follows.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introductory Poem 6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And into four chief treatises I will divide it, to clarify the required subjects.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

However, the true rule is that the e-i-t-n letters of this pattern¶
ought always to come with a pataḥ,¶
as in lo yimmad (Hosea 2:1),¶
yiddal kevod Ya‘aqov (Isaiah 17:4).¶
And when the middle root letter is vocalized,¶
it is doubled, as in yitammu ḥatta’im (Psalms 104:35),¶
nishessu ha-batim (Zechariah 14:2). And when the first root letter is guttural,¶
the e-i-t-n letters take a tsere,¶
as in ve-al taḥat (Deuteronomy 1:21),¶
ve-al aḥateh ani (Jeremiah 17:18).¶
And sometimes this occurs even without a guttural,¶
as in va-eqal be-‘eineha (Genesis 16:5),¶
va-tiq‘a kaf yarekh (Genesis 32:25). There are also lightened forms,¶
such as yidmu ka-even (Exodus 15:16),¶
va-yitammu yemei bekhi (Deuteronomy 34:8),¶
where the expected forms would be yidmu, yitammu.¶
And there are those who say that these are from Qal,¶
from forms like va-yidom and va-tetom,¶
as I wrote above.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Until now I have spoken in general about the root categories, the verb patterns, and their actions:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 3:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And in the other persons, a pataḥ appears in place of the hiriq ¶
to lighten the vocalization, because of the multiplicity of vowels, ¶
as in hifkadta, hifkadti, and so on.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 13:5 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. Moreover, there are verbs that occur only in the hitpa‘el stem, such as hitpallel, hitḥannen, and the like. These are to be interpreted as though they belonged to the qal stem. This is a major principle: any verb that is found only in one of the stems other than qal is to be explained as though it were from the qal stem. Thus nishba‘ (“swore”) and nilḥam (“fought”) in the nif‘al, and hishkim (“rose early”) and hishlikh (“cast”) in the hif‘il, are all to be understood in this manner, as I have explained in each of those cases.

6 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 5:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And since the participles and the passive forms are in the nature of nouns, the letters mesheh and kholav, which are used with nouns, are also used with them, as will be explained in the chapter on the particles.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 13:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. [Printer’s error: The seventh stem is called the hitpa‘el stem.] I have already said that it is both a parent and a derivative—that is, both active and passive—because its actions are performed by the subject upon himself and not upon another, as in “ve-hitqaddishtem ve-hiyitem qedoshim” (Leviticus 20:7), meaning: you shall make yourselves holy. This is its essential meaning, and so too is the meaning of the nif‘al stem in its second kind, as I wrote in its proper place; see there.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 9:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Behold, there are found in this stem verbs that have no parallel in any of the other stems, namely verbs that indicate the reversal of an action. For example, “ve-dishnu et ha-mizbe’aḥ” (Numbers 4), which means the removal of the ashes; likewise, “tevu’ati tesharresh” (Job 30), meaning the uprooting of the roots; and “mesa‘ef pu’arah be-ma‘aratsah” (Isaiah 10), meaning the removal of the branches — and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 4:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. But when the second vowel is not segol,¶
as in ʾotsar (“treasury”), kokhav (“star”),¶
ʿolel (“child”), and the like,¶
the initial ḥolam does not change at all.¶
As for the qamats or tsere at the end,¶
I have already written the manner of their change¶
in the Second Principle, Section Two. Now, I wrote concerning nouns of six vowel-points,¶
in the Third Principle, Section Seven,¶
that because of ḥet or ʿayin¶
the final segol changes to pataḥ;¶
know that the same rule applies here as well,¶
as in ʾoraḥ (“path”) and kovaʿ (“helmet”),¶
so one says ʾorḥo, kivʿo, and so forth. But when the middle radical is one of the gutturals,¶
the ḥatef qamats moves under the middle radical,¶
and the first radical takes a qamats,¶
as from ʾohel (“tent”):¶
va-yeṭ ʾaholah (“and he pitched his tent,” Gen. 35:21);¶
and from toʾar (“appearance”):¶
mah toʾaro (“what is his appearance?” 1 Sam. 28:14). Yet sometimes the first radical remains with a ḥolam,¶
as in toʾaro mi-benei ʾadam¶
(“his appearance more than that of men,” Isa. 52:14).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fifth Principle. On the elucidation of the category of verbs missing the first letter nun, such as nagash:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And there is also a pattern in which the e-i-t-n letter has a pataḥ¶
and a dagesh follows it,¶
as in va-yasev Elohim (Exodus 13:18),¶
ki titammu derakhekha (Job 22:3).¶
And one also finds va-yasovu penehem (Judges 18:23),¶
va-yasovu et ha-aron (1 Samuel 5:8),¶
where the samekh and the bet are doubled,¶
contrary to the usual practice,¶
in order to absorb one letter;¶
the expected form would have been va-yasovu.¶
And the feminine plural forms are with a sheva,¶
as in va-teḥilnah sheva shenei ha-ra‘av (Genesis 41:54).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 3:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Past¶
Throughout, the he appears with a ḥataf-qamats,¶
as in hakkēret minḥah;¶
or with three dots, as in¶
ve-hishlikh mekhon miqdasho (Daniel 8:11).¶
In forms where the first root letter is quiescent¶
and where the middle root letter is quiescent,¶
the he comes with a shuruq,¶
as in va-Yosef hurad (Genesis 39:1).¶
For these three vowels are siblings,¶
and they frequently replace one another,¶
especially in the patterns Paʿal and Hif‘al.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:19 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And even with the prefix letters b-k-l-m,¶
the additional heʾ appears,¶
as in be-haqhel ha-ʿedah¶
(Numbers 17:7). Only in a few places is the heʾ lacking,¶
such as be-ʿatef ʿolel¶
(Lamentations 2:11),¶
le-ʿanot mipnei¶
(Exodus 10:3),¶
and u-ve-khashlo ʾal yagel libbekha¶
(Proverbs 24:17).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Proverbs 10:22 and Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 11:6
(automatic citation link)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Psalms 103 and Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 11:6
(automatic citation link)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 1:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Behold, I have already written in Treatise One, Principle Three, ¶
that all grammarians agreed to measure all verbs ¶
according to the pattern paʿal.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 11:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. The fourth kind consists of verbs that are intransitive in the qal stem and also in this stem, such as “u-Far‘oh hiqriv” (Exodus 14:10), and “va-ya‘teq mi-sham” (Genesis 12:8), which are equivalent to qarav and ‘ataq. Ibn Ezra said that the object is omitted in these cases: in “u-Far‘oh hiqriv” the object maḥanehu (“his camp”) is lacking; and likewise in “va-ya‘teq mi-sham” the object oholoh (“his tent”) is lacking; and so too in other places. And there are verbs in this stem that in one context are intransitive and in another are transitive, such as “heḥepir Levanon qamal” (Isaiah 33:9), which is intransitive, but “yav’ish ve-yaḥpir” (Proverbs 10:22; 23:5), which is transitive; likewise “ve-khen et ha-‘ir lo hirḥiqu” (Genesis 44:4) is intransitive, whereas “hirḥiq mimennu et pesha‘einu” (Psalms 103) is transitive. Similarly, “ki ya‘ashir ish” (Psalms 49:17) is intransitive, while “birkat Hashem hi ta‘ashir” >(Proverbs 10) is transitive. And behold, this stem too produced a derivative, which is called the hof‘al stem.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 6:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Sixth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of a preliminary rule¶
concerning pronominal suffixes of nouns.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 6:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Know that all of these final he letters mark the feminine form. The proof is that they are accented on the final syllable, and furthermore that the he changes to a soft tav in the construct state and with pronominal suffixes, as is the rule for a feminine he, for example: mitsvot Hashem (“the commandments of the Lord”), minḥat Yehudah (“the offering of Judah”), mitsvato (“his commandment”), taʾavato (“his desire”). ¶
¶
A few cases are found in which the he is merely an added letter, such as from ʿalah (“to go up”), maʿalah (“ascent”), and similar forms. These are accented on the penultimate syllable, as I explained in the Third Treatise, Principle Eight, Section Two.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Twelfth Principle. On the elucidation of the function of the Hof‘al pattern:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Title Page 7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Praise to the Most High Name

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 3:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. The second difference is this:¶
those nouns with six vowel-points sometimes take a ḥiriq¶
and sometimes a pataḥ with a singular pronominal suffix,¶
as I wrote above.¶
But those with five vowel-points always take a ḥiriq,¶
and even with guttural letters the ḥiriq usually does not change,¶
as in:¶
from ʿesev (“grass”) → ʿisvot harim (“the grass of the mountains,” Prov. 27:25),¶
and from ʿeqev (“heel”) → ʿiqvot meshikhekha (“the footsteps of Your anointed,” Ps. 89:52). Some, however, change to a segol,¶
as in ḥelqo, ʿeglo, ḥelvo;¶
and in the plural construct:¶
ḥelqe, ʿegle, ḥelve, and the like.¶
By this method you can distinguish these from those.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. And likewise the Imperative¶
For the singular and the plural it has a tsere;¶
and in the other forms with a hiriq,¶
as in haqem, haqimu, haqimi, haqemnah.¶
And sometimes they drop the he of the pattern¶
from the infinitive and the imperative,¶
as in nitsav la-riv Hashem (Isaiah 3:13),¶
and ‘omed la-din ‘amim (ibid.),¶
which correspond to le-hariv, le-hadin.¶
And in the imperative likewise, as sim koh (Genesis 31:37),¶
lin poh (Judges 19:9). And with the addition of a final he,¶
as in binah hagiye,¶
therefore the word has penultimate stress.¶
And for the plural, they are most often found¶
with the loss of the he,¶
as in simu, sikhu, shiru, sithu, gilu, linu,¶
all of them with penultimate stress.¶
And likewise for the feminine,¶
as in shiti libbekh (Jeremiah 31:20),¶
lini ha-laylah (Ruth 3:13). And the dropped he is also found in the past tense,¶
as in binoti ba-sefarim (Daniel 9:2),¶
in place of hevinoti.¶
And likewise in digum rabim and digum (Jeremiah 16:16),¶
which they say is like ve-ha-digum;¶
see the Book of Composition.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 4:8 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3.¶
It is known that in this entire pattern the tav of Hitpa‘el¶
normally comes before the first root letter, as I have written.¶
But when the first root letter is one of the letters zayin, samekh, shin, or tsadi,¶
it has other rules. With a samekh and a shin, the tav comes after the first root letter,¶
as in va-yishtamer ḥuqqot ‘Omri (Micah 6:16),¶
and va-yistabbel he-ḥagav (Ecclesiastes 12:5). With a tsadi, it changes into a tet,¶
as in u-ma nitzṭaddaq (Genesis 44:16). And with a zayin, it changes into a dalet,¶
as in hizdamaneton le-me’amar (Daniel 2:9).

6 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. And as for what I said, that each number has three persons, this applies only in the past and in the future. But the other tenses have only one person, for the participle and the passive have only the third person.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5.¶
And know that the middle root letter in the past tense,¶
in the third-person masculine singular,¶
is qamats in all of them,¶
as in galah, niglah, gullah, higlah—all alike.¶
And in the future it is with segol,¶
as in egleh, yigleh, tigleh, yugleh, hugleh, and so on. Likewise, the participle in the masculine singular has a segol,¶
and in the feminine singular it has a qamats.¶
And so too in the passives,¶
except for the passive of the Qal pattern,¶
as I wrote above in section three. And all the infinitives,¶
when they appear with the prefixed letters bekholam,¶
have a final tav and a ḥolam before it.¶
And all the imperatives are with a tsere,¶
as in geleh, higleh, galleh, hugleh, and so on.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Passive ¶
and the imperative do not exist in this pattern. ¶
The infinitive, which is found only rarely in it, ¶
likewise has three dots under the first root letter, ¶
as in ganav, ganavti. ¶
And in forms where the final root letter is quiescent, ¶
it bears all its affliction, as in et kol ‘anvato; ¶
and there is no more. ¶
Moreover, forms with the prefixed letters bekholam are not found in it.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Future ¶
It too follows the manner of roots quiescent in the middle letter, ¶
as in asham va-esha’af (Isaiah 42:14), ¶
yitom peryo (Ezekiel 47:12), ¶
va-yidom Aharon (Leviticus 10:3). ¶
¶
Now there is a great dispute concerning these dageshim, ¶
for some say that they belong to Qal, ¶
bringing proof from va-ekhatt etto taḥon (Deuteronomy 9:21), ¶
which is certainly from Qal, as shown by otto; ¶
and others say that they belong to Nif‘al, ¶
on account of the dagesh which indicates the nun of Nif‘al. ¶
¶
But I say that some of them are from Qal ¶
and some of them are from Nif‘al, ¶
and according to the context and the intent ¶
you should determine them. ¶
I have no need to elaborate further.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. ¶
And take this rule firmly in hand for every verbal pattern in which the participle ¶
appears with the addition of a mem: ¶
the letters e-i-t-n are vocalized as in Hif‘il, with a reduced vowel under the middle root letter; ¶
and there I will reveal to you the reason.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 9:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Know that this third stem is also a parent stem and is called pi‘el ha-dagush, for the middle root letter (‘ayin ha-po‘el) is always geminated in it; and it is of four kinds:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4.¶
And know that in this class there is no difference between verbs that belong¶
to the pattern Nif‘al and those that belong to the pattern Paʿal,¶
for both of them have a dagesh in the middle root letter:¶
in Nif‘al because of the loss of the root nun,¶
and in Paʿal as the identifying sign of the pattern. As in ve-lo nikar shoa‘ lifnei dal (Job 34:19),¶
which is a past tense of Nif‘al;¶
and nikar elidam ito (1 Samuel 23:7),¶
which is a past tense of the pattern Paʿal.¶
And so in every place you will recognize,¶
according to the sense of the context,¶
which form is Nif‘al and which is Paʿal.¶

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:16 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. And verbs in which the first and third root letters are identical are not found at all among the complete verbs. The word ye‘al‘u dam (Job 39:30) does not have the root ‘ala‘, as I shall explain in the book HaHarkavah. But among roots that are not complete, such cases are found, such as hayah and natan, and a few others. They are found more frequently among nouns, especially with the letter shin, such as shemesh, shoresh, shalosh.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

8. ¶
Know that the first-person forms (medabber baʿado), singular and plural,¶
sometimes appear with an added heʾ at the end,¶
as in ʾazkerah ʾElohim¶
(Psalms 77:4),¶
nishleḥah ʾanashim¶
(Deuteronomy 1:22). The third-person forms (nistarim and nimtzaʾim)¶
sometimes appear with an added nun at the end,¶
as in lemaʿan yilmadun,¶
shamor tishmerun. The rule governing this heʾ and nun¶
applies to all the conjugations (binyanim)¶
and to all the root-categories (gizrot), [First edition:¶
and to all the gizrot except those of naḥei lamed-heʾ,¶
in which an additional heʾ does not occur,¶
unless the root heʾ is replaced by yod,¶
as in va-ʾehemiyah¶
(Psalms 77:4).]

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Second Principle. On the elucidation of the vowel patterns of the Pi‘el and Pu‘al forms of complete verbs, and their identifying signs:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Isaiah 53:5 and Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:7
(automatic citation link)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 10:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. And those nouns whose vowels are two segols, such as ʿateret,¶
follow the same pattern as the nouns with six vowel points.¶
See what I have written about this in the Third and Fourth Principles.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And the passive has a qamats,¶
as in ve-hu meḥullal mi-pesha‘einu (Isaiah 53:5).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 3:2 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The Pattern Hif‘il¶
The past tense throughout has a he with a hiriq at the beginning,¶
as in hifkid, with stress on the final syllable.¶
[But hifkidu and hifkidah are both stressed on the penultimate syllable.] (The hiriq under the middle root letter occurs only in the masculine singular,¶
the masculine plural, and the feminine plural,¶
as in hifkid, hifkidu, hifkidah, and they are penultimately stressed;¶
but hifkidu and hifkidah are both penultimately stressed.)

6 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:18 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Completed, completed.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 12:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. The letter he is not found as an added prefix ¶
at the beginning of complete nouns, ¶
except in two nouns only, namely ¶
ravah and shama. ¶
From ravah we find the form ¶
harvakhah, ¶
and from shama we find ¶
lehashma‘at oznayim ¶
(Ezekiel 24:26). ¶
Aside from these, no other examples occur among complete nouns. ¶
¶
However, among nouns that are not complete, ¶
additional occurrences are found, ¶
as will be explained in their proper places. ¶
At the end of nouns, by contrast, ¶
three kinds of he are found: ¶
some are root letters, ¶
some mark the feminine, ¶
and some are merely added letters, ¶
as I explained in Principle Eight.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 13:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. There are also nouns that contain an alef at the beginning ¶
or a nun at the end, concerning which there is disagreement ¶
as to whether these letters are root letters or merely added. ¶
Examples include avnet and chashman, ¶
and likewise argaman. ¶
There are many such cases. ¶
Some say that the alef and the nun in these words are added letters, ¶
the alef as in ezroaʿ, ¶
and the nun as in zikaron.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Second Principle. ¶
On the elucidation and vocalization of the conjugation Piʿel ha-dagush¶
and of Piʿel from the complete roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise, Subject 1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

On the elucidation of the noun patterns,¶
divided into thirteen principles:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Second Principle. On the elucidation of the cause of the change in the vowel points of nouns, which vowel points change, and into which vowel points they change:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 6:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Sixth Principle. On the elucidation of the infinitive and the imperative:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Title Page 1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The grammar book of Elijah the Levite the Ashkenazi

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The Qal conjugation is so called because it has no additional letter as a distinguishing sign beyond the three root letters, and it also contains no dagesh.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:28 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

13. Nevertheless, know that the vav does not have the power to convert the future into a past already completed, except in very few places. For example: “va-yishlaḥ Yitzḥaq et Ya‘aqov [va-yishma‘ Ya‘aqov el aviv ve-el immo] va-yelekh Paddanah Aram” (Genesis 28:7). These are equivalent to “had already sent,” “[had already heard],” and “had already gone,” as Rashi of blessed memory explains there; see there.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 7:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. And the essential function of this qal stem is to indicate one who performs an action upon another. In the Ashkenazic tongue: di tetige gatung. That is to say, most of the verbs in this stem are transitive verbs. And we may say that for this reason the language assigned to every verb three root letters: two of them are required for the action itself—for no verb consists of fewer than two letters—and the third letter indicates the one to whom the action is directed. ¶
¶
Therefore, verbs of the class with a quiescent middle letter are indeed intransitive verbs, since they have only two active letters, such as qam, shav, sar, rats, ram. And thus most complete verbs are transitive, though a few are found that are intransitive, such as halakh, yashav, ‘amad, shakhan, yashen, shakhav, saḥaq, ka‘as, bakhah. ¶
¶
And there are signs by which these may be recognized: namely, that neither the passive form nor the nif‘al stem applies to them; likewise, none of the words that indicate a direct object can follow them, such as et, oto, oti, otkha, and the like. Nor do they combine with pronominal suffixes, such as yeshiveni, ‘amadeni, ‘amadahu, and similar forms. Yet the truth is that in all these signs there are exceptions to the rule.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. The Imperative ¶
In the singular it sometimes comes with the loss of the root he, ¶
as in Paʿal: ¶
tsav et benei Yisra’el (Numbers 28:2), ¶
gal me-‘alai (Psalms 119:22). ¶
In Hif‘il: ¶
heref mimmeni (Deuteronomy 9:14), ¶
harbeh kavseni (Psalms 51:4), ¶
shekhav ‘al mishkavkha ve-hitḥal (2 Samuel 13:5). ¶
¶
But in Qal and in Nif‘al, ¶
the imperative never comes with the loss of the he.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 15 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Let my book be called by the name Bachur;¶
may it gladden both God and humankind.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Infinitive¶
It has a he with a qamats in order to distinguish it from the past tense,¶
and the first root letter has a tsere,¶
as in haqem.¶
But with the prefixed letters bekholam it takes a hiriq,¶
as in behakim, kehakim, and so on.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fourth Principle. On the elucidation of the six times called “actions,” and I will explain them in pairs, beginning with the past and the future:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 2:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. As for those nouns whose second vowel is a segol,¶
such as sefer (“book”), ʿegel (“calf”), ʿesev (“grass”),¶
and the like, they will be explained in the next principle.¶
They are found with four vowel-points,¶
that is, with two tseres, as in¶
Helel ben Shaḥar (“O morning star, son of the dawn,” Isa. 14:12)¶
and tevel ve-yoshveha (“the world and those who dwell in it,” Ps. 24:1),¶
and they do not pluralize and do not take pronominal suffixes. But tevel hu (“it is a perversion,” Lev. 18:23),¶
where tevel is used in the sense of abomination,¶
is pointed with six vowel-points.¶
And the mnemonic is:¶
“Four things are small upon the earth” (Prov. 30:24),¶
“Six things the LORD hates” (Prov. 6:16),¶
and the discerning will understand.¶
(Another sign is that every tevel meaning “earth”¶
is accented on the final syllable.) A few nouns are found where the first vowel is qamats¶
and the second is segol,¶
such as ʾaven (“iniquity”), mavet (“death”), and ʿavel (“injustice”).¶
In all of these the middle radical is vav,¶
and therefore they should be counted among roots with a quiescent middle vav,¶
as I will explain in the fourth treatise, Principle Four, Section Five.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:19 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Participle ¶
mitkonen. ¶
The infinitive and the imperative are hitbonen, like the past tense. ¶
The future tense is etbonen, yitbonen, titbonen, and so on.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The First Principle. On the division of the roots of the Holy Tongue into eight parts:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 8 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And this is the poem that I composed for the second edition (added in the printed version):

6 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 8:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And there are nif‘al forms that are not found in the qal stem, such as nishba‘, nilḥam, nish‘an, nizhar, nikhna‘, and the like. These are explained as deriving from qal, as will be clarified at the end of the thirteenth principle.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:20 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And the distinct form of expression for each one is conveyed either by its vowel pattern or by the addition of one or two letters to the three root letters, such as the letters t-h-i-m-u-n at the end of the past forms, and the letters e-i-t-n at the beginning of the future forms:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Tenth Principle. On the elucidation of feminine nouns that appear in the singular with a tav at the end:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And the pattern that is both active and passive is called Hitpa‘el.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Sixth Principle. On the elucidation of the category of verbs with a weak first letter aleph or yod, such as amar and yashav:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:15 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. And know that it is the way of Scripture to speak in the past tense in place of the future, and this occurs most often in prophetic speech, for the matter is clear before the Omnipresent as though it had already been done.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 5:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fifth Principle. On the explanation of the participles and the passive forms:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:8 and Song of Songs 5
(automatic citation link)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 9:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

a. Know that nouns which appear in the feminine plural are, for the most part,¶
formed with a tav at the end, and the letter before it is pointed with a¶
ḥolam together with a quiescent vav, such as ṣedāqōt,¶
berākhōt, ḥokhmōt, and the like. In the construct state, for example:¶
ṣidqōt Hashem — “the righteous acts of the LORD” (Judges 5:11),¶
birkat avikha — “the blessing of your father” (Genesis 49:26). But in ḥokhmōt śārōtehā — “the wisdom of her princesses” (Judges 5:29),¶
the vowel becomes a pataḥ, because of the presence of a guttural letter.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Infinitive (in Ashkenazic language: azn-bet-tiyete art; in German: Infinitiv) The first root letter (peʾ) takes a qamats, as in paqod. This occurs when the infinitive is in construct with the past or future, as in shamor tishmeron and halokh halakhta. When it is used in place of a command, the same rules apply (see my discussion in the first treatise, Sixth Principle). With prepositions, the qamats changes to a sheva, and sometimes this occurs even without prepositions, as in: "et avod ha-nisharim" (Deuteronomy 7:20) "et sefod ve-et raqod" (Ecclesiastes 3:4) The middle root letter (‘ayin) is vowelled with a cholem, and with prepositions it is pronounced with a chirik. The letter immediately following the preposition is soft, as in: ba-paqod and la-paqod. After a mem, a dagesh is added, as in mi-paqod. This rule compensates for the absence of the final nun in certain forms, as will be explained further in the chapter on poetry, Song 5.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 11:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. And I will now explain the difference between them by way of an example. ¶
¶
Suppose there are Reʾuven and Shimʿon who together own a single maidservant. ¶
Of her we say: “This is their maidservant,” ¶
that is, shifḥatam, belonging jointly to Reʾuven and Shimʿon. ¶
¶
But if each of them owns one maidservant, ¶
we say of them: shifḥotam (“their maidservants”). ¶
¶
And if each of them owns two or three maidservants, ¶
we say of them: shifḥotehem (“their maidservants” in the fuller plural). ¶
¶
I have already resolved to compose a separate book ¶
in which I will explain all the grammatical remarks ¶
made by Rabbi Shelomo Yirḥi of blessed memory ¶
in his commentary on the Torah, ¶
if the blessed Name should prolong my life.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 13:3 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Know that at the end of nouns the letter nun is very often added.¶
Most commonly, the first radical is pointed with a ḥiriq, as in¶
zikaron (“remembrance”) and shilton (“rule”),¶
and the final syllable takes a qamats, as in¶
pishtan (“flax”) and ḥartzan (“grape-stone”). There are also a few cases in which the first syllable has a ḥaṭaf-qamats¶
or a qubbuts, such as qorban (“offering”) and shulḥan (“table”).¶
These form their feminine plural with -ot, for example¶
qorbanot and shulḥanot. Many nouns, however, have a final nun that is part of the root itself;¶
these belong to the class of four-letter nouns, such as hashman and¶
darban, and I will discuss them in the following treatise,¶
in the Thirteenth Principle. There are also many nouns of this type that are geminated,¶
such as zikaron and shibaron,¶
and likewise some in which the middle radical has a sheva,¶
for example kalshon and qamshon,¶
though such geminated forms are relatively few.

6 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

9. ¶
Know that there are verbs whose future forms¶
sometimes appear with a ḥolam at the end¶
and sometimes with a pataḥ,¶
as in va-yishbot ha-man with a ḥolam¶
(Joshua 5:12),¶
and lamah tishbot ha-melakhah with a pataḥ¶
(Nehemiah 6:3). There are also verbs that are always open with a pataḥ,¶
and most of these are intransitive verbs (peʿalim ʿomdim),¶
such as yishkav, yirkav, yishman,¶
yeshurun va-yivʿat¶
(Deuteronomy 32:15). But those that take a ḥolam¶
are for the most part transitive verbs (peʿalim yotzʾim),¶
except when the ʿayin of the root is an ʿayin or a ḥet,¶
in which case they are always open with a pataḥ,¶
whether they are transitive or intransitive,¶
such as yishmaʿ, yishlaḥ. Likewise, when the ʿayin of the root is an ʿayin or a ḥet,¶
as in tishḥaq lamo, tilʿag le-khol ha-goyim¶
(Psalms 59:9),¶
they are exceptions, even though they are intransitive verbs. Also among the exceptions are¶
va-yinahem ʿalav¶
(Isaiah 5:30),¶
and mah ʾezʿam lo zaʿam Hashem¶
(Numbers 23:8). All of these rules apply equally to the imperative,¶
for the future and the imperative share the same vowel-patterns,¶
as I wrote above in section 7.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introductory Poem 1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And this is the poem that I composed in Rome the capital:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Second Principle. On the elucidation of the differences between each and every one of the eight divisions mentioned.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:14 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

9. ¶
Likewise, on the basis of a single attested form, ¶
one may construct the entire verbal paradigm. ¶
¶
For example, from the word: ¶
hissamtaḥta kol ’oyevav (Psalms 89:43), ¶
we may also construct: ¶
¶
• the participle: mesammiḥ, ¶
• the passive: mesummaḥ, ¶
• the infinitive and imperative: sameaḥ, ¶
• the imperfect (with prefix letters): ’esammeaḥ, yesammeaḥ. ¶
¶
“May the LORD our God gladden us ¶
through His anointed servant.” ¶
Amen, selah.

6 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 9:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And there are nouns that are feminine in the singular, marked with a final ¶
he, yet form their plural with yod–mem at the end, following the pattern ¶
of masculine plurals. Thus, for example: from shanah (“year”) comes ¶
shanim; from nemalah (“ant”) comes nemalim; and similar cases. ¶
¶
Likewise, some masculine nouns occasionally form their plural according to ¶
the feminine pattern, such as av → avot, and bor → borot, and others ¶
like them. ¶
¶
And there are nouns that occur in both ways, that is, sometimes with a ¶
masculine plural and sometimes with a feminine plural, such as: ¶
from ḥagor come ḥagurim and ḥagurot; ¶
from dor come dorim and dorot. ¶
¶
All of this will be explained properly in the chapter on measures.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:16 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The first part has been completed, namely the section on the verbs.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 9:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Know that there are many nouns of this class in which the final he¶
is transformed into a quiescent yod at the end of the word,¶
with a ḥiriq before it.¶
They fall into four types. The first type has an initial qamats, such as tsali and qali.¶
In the construct state the vowel reduces to sheva,¶
as tsli and qli,¶
and in the plural one says aniyyim, neqiyyim. The second type has an initial sheva, such as shevi, peri,¶
meri, and keli.¶
Sometimes these shift to a segol in pause,¶
as meri, keli,¶
or to a tsere, as in ḥatsi.¶
With suffixes one says shivkha, merkha, telikha,¶
or with ḥiriq shivyo, neshikha,¶
and in the plural shivhem, shivkhem,¶
perim or perhem.¶
See Radak under the pattern paʿi. The third type has an initial ḥolam, such as ḥoli, ʿoni,¶
tsori, and ḥeri.¶
In the construct state and with suffixes¶
they revert to a ḥataf-qamats,¶
as ḥolyo,¶
even though the final vowel is not a segol,¶
as I explained in the Third Treatise,¶
Fourth Principle, Section Two.¶
They are also found with a ḥataf-qamats¶
even without construction,¶
as in “all sickness” and “what burning.” The fourth type has an initial segol,¶
such as meshi, peti, and qeri.¶
With suffixes the yod becomes mobile,¶
as kerim.¶
Rabbi Solomon ibn Gabirol also said in one of his poems¶
“garments of meshim,” meaning “their silk.”

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 2:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that a letter can never be quiescent at the beginning of a word. ¶
Therefore, nouns of this class appear at the beginning of a word in the same manner as complete roots, for example: from *amar* comes *omer*; and from *akhal* come *okhel* or *akhilah*. ¶
¶
They are also found with an added mem at the beginning, such as *ma’amar* and *ma’akhal*, with the aleph remaining sounded. ¶
Likewise, in the middle of a word the letter does not become quiescent, as in: from *sha’al* come *she’elah* or *mish’al*.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 8:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Eighth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the patterns of feminine nouns.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 23 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Within it are proofs strong as lions,¶
and sharp against the wolves of confusion.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And there is yet another proof that this pattern stands in place of Paʿal:¶
for its participle and its passive are formed with a mem with sheva at the beginning,¶
and likewise the prefixed letters bekholam¶
and the letters e-i-t-n are all with a sheva,¶
in accordance with the rule of every Paʿal pattern.¶
And the difference between the participle and the passive¶
is that the participle has a tsere,¶
as in meshovev netivot (Isaiah 58:12).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 10:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Know that pi (“mouth of”) does not belong to this class, for its root is peh, which consists of only two letters, on the pattern of seh. It is one and the same form both in the construct state and with a pronominal suffix referring to the speaker himself. That is to say, there is no difference between pi Hashem (“the mouth of the Lord”) and pi ha-medabber aleikhem (“the mouth of the one speaking to you”). ¶
¶
Strictly speaking, it ought to have been piy, but because of the heaviness of two yods, one of them was dropped. According to the context, you will recognize in each place whether it is a construct form or a pronominal suffix.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fourth Principle. Here I shall begin to analyze the six tenses, which are called pe‘ulot (“actions”), and I shall explain them two by two, beginning with the past forms and the future forms:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. And there are seven verb patterns: three active ones, called “fathers,” and three passive ones, called “derivatives.”

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And this rule shall be the law and practice of the book: I shall adhere to everything that proceeds according to the rule and law of grammar, and my words will not be merely statements of the rule in the abstract, saying, “the law is thus.” And if one or two words are found that alter the order of the rule and depart from the general principle, I shall not give them attention — especially those words which the grammarians have called irregular or compound. I have already begun to compose a small book, and before it has even come into being its name has been called the Book of Composition; there all matters of the irregular and the compound will be explained clearly and thoroughly, and I have no concern with them in this book. All this is in order not to enlarge its size, lest one who sees it become weary upon looking at its appearance and the height of its stature.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 6:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. And likewise, the command to the second person may appear in the language of the future, as in most positive commandments, such as tispor lakh (Leviticus 25), ta‘aseh li (ibid. 26), and the like. It also appears in the language of the past with the vav of conversion, such as ve-ahavta et Hashem (Deuteronomy 6), ve-‘anita ve-amarta (ibid. 26), and similar cases. Those that appear in the true imperative form are few, such as kabbed et avikha (Exodus 20:12), shema‘ Yisrael (Deuteronomy 6). But negative commandments never appear except in the language of the future, such as lo tirtsaḥ, lo tinaf, lo tignov (Exodus 20:13). One does not say lo retsaḥ, lo ne’af, lo gnov, because the imperative never follows any of these words: al, lo, pen, asher, et, lema‘an, ba‘avur, and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Tenth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the vocalization of the class of roots quiescent¶
in the final letter he, such as galah.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Seventh Principle. On the elucidation of the suffixes and the letters that are used in suffixation:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 1:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Know that nouns which are geminated (i.e., marked by a dagesh)¶
do not undergo vowel change, as explained in the Third Treatise,¶
Principle Five, Section One.¶
Accordingly, nouns deficient in the first radical¶
that pattern with quiescent lamed behave in the same way,¶
such as makkeh and matsah,¶
whose roots are nakah and natsah,¶
and whose final he marks the feminine. By contrast, qatsar ha-matsah (“the covering is too short”)¶
has the root yatsaʿ.¶
Some nouns have a final he that is truly part of the root,¶
such as matteh;¶
the proof that the he is radical is that it is preceded by a segol.¶
This will be explained further in this Treatise,¶
Principle Six. Likewise, among nouns deficient at the end we find mattan,¶
and among those deficient at both ends mattet.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 7:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. And remember that the mem and the tav that appear at the beginning of these forms are always vocalized with pataḥ, even without the presence of a guttural letter. One additional case is found with an added alef at the beginning, as in aḥoti be-ozneikhem (“my utterance in your ears”), whose root is ḥavah. ¶
¶
The general rule is this: any noun that you find with an initial mem or tav vocalized with ḥiriq or pataḥ, and with the following letter bearing a sheva, and which is not from the class of complete roots (that is, it does not contain three fully vocalized radicals), belongs to the class of roots whose third radical is he (naḥei lamed-he). ¶
¶
Only two exceptions are found with an initial tav bearing sheva, namely ta‘alah and tela’ah.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 9:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. ¶
And likewise, this class is interchanged in many places ¶
with roots quiescent in the final letter he; ¶
and I have no need to elaborate further.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:17 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Passive. ¶
It does not exist here, as you already know.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 13:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. There are also quadriliteral nouns whose plurals appear with¶
a dagesh. These are those whose final vowel is a pataḥ.¶
For example, from ḥashmal the plural is ḥashmalim,¶
and likewise “like the appearance of ḥashmal”¶
(Ezekiel 8:2), where the lamed is doubled.¶
Similarly, from genaz (storehouse, treasury) we say¶
genazkha, genazkim.¶
Likewise from saraʿaf (as in “my anxious thoughts”),¶
all are open-vowel forms.¶
And from “princes shall come out of Egypt”¶
(Psalms 68:32), we derive ḥashman.¶
This is the word after which I named this book,¶
which I composed in Rome, in the year of Rome,¶
as explained in the introduction.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 3:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. And the general rule is this: any noun of this class that you find with an added mem at the beginning, vocalized with a qamats, and which in its four inflectional forms takes either a mem or a tav with sheva, belongs to the class of nouns with a quiescent middle letter (nḥei ʿayin). There are two such nouns that appear with an added tav at the end, namely nofet and bōshet. I have already informed you, in the Third Treatise, Principle Eleven, Section Five, that a tav of this kind appears with a dagesh when pronominal suffixes are attached, as in levashtakha and levōshet. Accordingly, one should likewise say nofeti, noftekha from nofet. There is also one example with an added mem at the end, namely reqem.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 5:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

9. Know that five of them are always accented on the final syllable, whether with the vav or without it, namely: paqad, paqdu, paqedah, paqadtem, peqadten. And two are always accented on the penultimate syllable, whether with the vav or without it, namely: paqadnu and u-paqadt. And two of them, without the vav, are always accented on the penultimate syllable, but with the vav are sometimes accented on the penultimate syllable and sometimes on the final syllable, namely: paqadta and paqadti, as I have written.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fifth Principle. On the elucidation of the passive participles:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 7:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. You can see that the first letter in all of them has a sheva,¶
and the second has a qamats,¶
except for those whose suffix ends with a mem or nun,¶
in which the qamats of the middle radical changes to a sheva.¶
This is because of the greater number of vowels they contain¶
in comparison with the others. Here are the plural suffix forms from dvarim (“words”):¶
dvarav,¶
devarekha,¶
dvarai,¶
dvareihem,¶
devarkhem,¶
dvareinu,¶
dvareha,¶
devarekh,¶
dvareihen,¶
devarkhen.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 7:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The first stem is the parent stem qal, so called because of its lightness, for it has neither a dagesh nor any added letter as its identifying sign. For all the other stems—both the parent stems and their derivatives—each has a distinct sign, whether a dagesh, or the addition of one or two letters together with a dagesh, as you will see in the table of stems, God willing.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 1:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. Know that every noun you find with an initial mem bearing a pataḥ ¶
and followed by a dagesh is a noun deficient in an initial nun. ¶
There are also two such nouns with an added he at the beginning ¶
and a dagesh following it, ¶
such as ruaḥ ve-hatsalah (“relief and deliverance”) ¶
and hakkarat penehem (“the recognition of their faces”), ¶
whose roots are natsal and nakhar. ¶
¶
There are also two nouns of this class that appear ¶
without any added letter at the beginning, ¶
namely si and sig, ¶
as in ya‘aleh la-shamayim si’o (“his height rises to the heavens”) ¶
and ve-khi sig lo (“and when he mocks him”), ¶
whose roots are nasa and nasag. ¶
However, no general rule can be derived from these, ¶
for they are very few.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:27 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And likewise the vav that converts the future into the past generally converts it into an imperfect past, such as va-yomer and va-yedabber, which are explained as “was saying” and “was speaking.” In the Ashkenazic tongue: er zogte, er redite. Except in certain cases, when a completed past precedes it, in which case it too takes that sense. For example: “ki me‘at asher hayah lekha lefanai va-yifrotz la-rov va-yevarekh Hashem otkha” (Genesis 30:30). Here they are equivalent to paratz and berakh, on account of the word hayah that precedes them.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And any root in which one of its three root letters is missing or weak is called “defective in pe,” or “weak in pe,” or in ‘ayin, or in lamed.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. Know that when you wish to convert a past form into a future form, you place a vav with sheva at its beginning.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:16 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. The Future¶
Here too the letters e-i-t-n come with a qamats,¶
as in avin, yavin, and so on.¶
And it would have been proper for them to be with a tsere,¶
like the mem of the participle,¶
according to the rule I gave for the pattern Paʿal of strong roots¶
(in this treatise, in the Second Principle, section four).¶
But they come with a qamats in order to distinguish them¶
from the future tense of Qal in roots quiescent in the first letter yod,¶
which are with a tsere, as in eshav, yeshav, and so on.¶
Therefore they vocalized the e-i-t-n here with a qamats,¶
like the e-i-t-n of Qal in this class. But there the first root letter has a shuruq,¶
as in aqum, yaqum,¶
whereas here it has a hiriq,¶
as in aqim, yaqim, and so on,¶
or sometimes a tsere, as in yaqem.¶
And when the conversive vav comes with them,¶
the tsere returns to segol,¶
as in va-yaqem, va-yeshev,¶
and this is because they are penultimately stressed.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. ¶
And know that, for the most part, this loss occurs only with the conversive vav, ¶
as in Qal: ¶
va-yiven Elohim (Genesis 2:22); ¶
in Nif‘al: ¶
va-yiqar Elohim (Numbers 23:4); ¶
in Paʿal: ¶
va-yetsav Elohim (Genesis 2:16); ¶
in Hif‘il: ¶
va-yifen zanav el zanav (Judges 15:4); ¶
and in Hitpa‘el: ¶
va-yitgal betokh aholoh (Genesis 9:21). ¶
¶
And your mnemonic sign is: ¶
ha-nissah davar elekha tila’eh (Job 4:2) with the he, ¶
and immediately after it is written ¶
tavo elekha ve-til’eh (ibid. 4:5) with the loss of the he. ¶
¶
And only a few are found without the conversive vav, ¶
such as al tifen el minḥatam (Numbers 16:15), ¶
sod aḥer al tegal (Proverbs 25:9), ¶
ya‘as Hashem ‘immakhem (Ruth 1:8), ¶
and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introductory Poem 7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Thirteen principles in each one — that is, fifty-two in total.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Pattern Paʿal¶
Its identifying sign is a dagesh in the middle root letter throughout the entire pattern,¶
like its prototype.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. The Participle¶
(in Ashkenazic language: di gegen-vertige layt; in Latin: praesens). The first radical (peʾ) takes a ḥolam in all three persons,¶
and the second radical (ʿayin) takes a tsere only in the singular,¶
as in poqed. In the other forms it changes to a sheva (vocalized sheva: naʿ), according to its regular rule,¶
as in poqedim, poqedah, poqedot. Know that the feminine form generally comes with a final tav and two segolim before it,¶
as in poqedet.¶
More rarely, it appears with a final heʾ, as in: halekhah hi (Jeremiah 3:6),¶
hi shafṭah et Yisraʾel (Judges 4:4). I shall speak further about this in the Third Treatise, Principle Five, Section Two.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 21 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

A very pleasant book — today I have given it birth.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:20 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And this rule applies to all the verb patterns of the category of complete verbs, except for the third-person masculine and feminine forms of the Hif‘il pattern, which are for the most part accented on the penultimate syllable, as will be explained.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 9:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. The third kind consists of verbs that likewise occur in both stems and are transitive in both of them. The only difference between them is that in the pi‘el stem they indicate greater force and continuity of the action than in the qal stem, such as shalakh and shillaḥ, shavar and shibber, and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 4:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And likewise the Imperative¶
It always appears with the he;¶
but in the future tense the he drops, as in the participle,¶
and the letters e-i-t-n are vocalized with a hiriq,¶
as in the pattern Qal and in the pattern Nif‘al.¶
And for the most part the middle root letter has a tsere,¶
as in ethalekh lifnei Hashem (Psalms 116:9);¶
and in a few cases with a pataḥ,¶
as in al tit’hader lifnei melekh (Proverbs 25:6).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The passive patterns are: Nif‘al, Pu‘al, and Hof‘al.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 7:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The seventh principle. An elucidation of nouns whose third radical is quiescent he, which occur with an added tav or mem at the beginning, and with a tav at the end:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Know that when there is no other past verb preceding it, it is a vav of conversion; but if there is, then it is a vav of conjunction. One verse serves as a sign: “mi pa‘al ve-‘asah” (Isaiah 41:4), and the discerning will understand. Likewise, the two vavs in “ve-qara zeh el zeh ve-amar” (Isaiah 6:3) are both vavs of conversion, since it is written before them “va-ereh et Hashem,” which is a past verb on account of the vav with qamats in va-ereh.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Infinitive ¶
As in lo ukhal qum (Lamentations 1:14).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fourth Treatise ¶
On the elucidation of the noun patterns that are not complete, and it too is divided into thirteen principles: ¶
The First Principle. On the elucidation of nouns missing the first letter nun:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 22 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

I gathered within it concise rules,¶
both new and old, pleasing and clear.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 3:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Many are also found with a pataḥ¶
even without the presence of a guttural,¶
such as from regel (“foot”) → raglo (“his foot”),¶
and from gefen (“vine”) → gafno (“his vine”), and the like. However, in all the other types of change,¶
they all follow the pattern of nouns with two qamats vowels.¶
That is, just as you say from davar:¶
dvarim, dvare, dvarav,¶
so you say from beged:¶
bgadim, bgade, bgadav;¶
and from ḥesed:¶
ḥasadim, ḥasde, ḥasdav.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:19 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

completed.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 6:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The sixth principle. An elucidation of nouns whose third radical is quiescent he (naḥei lamed-he):

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 8:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. The reason for this is that the first qamats changes to a sheva;¶
therefore it is necessary to change the first sheva into a ḥiriq,¶
as I wrote in the Sixth Principle.¶
But the other patterns do not change,¶
as in ḥokhmah → ḥokhmato,¶
gezela → gezalato,¶
ʾakhilah → ʾakhilato,¶
and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. And if someone should ask: but behold, the verbs yekhasseh and yi‘ofef that precede them are future forms — we reply that it is the way of Scripture to place the future in the place of the past when speaking of something that regularly or continually occurs. For example: “ve-ed ya‘aleh” (Genesis 2:6), “‘al pi Hashem yaḥanu” (Numbers 9:20), and that entire passage.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

In the year five thousand two hundred and seventy-seven from creation, the Lord stirred the spirit of a wise and understanding man in all knowledge, noble, precious, glorious, Prince Aegidius of Viterbo, may his glory be exalted, who sought to find pleasant words and upright writing in the books of our holy language. And to me, I his servant, the youngest of the grammarians, Elijah the Ashkenazic Levite, he called and said to me: "What are you doing here, Elijah? Arise now and make a book that gives beautiful words in the grammar of the holy language. For all the grammar books that I have seen do not suffice to fulfill my desire or to quench my thirst for grammar, for there are some of them that are long, multiplying words without benefiting this wisdom, and there are some of them that are brief, leaving out things necessary for it. And you—gird your loins like a man and choose from between the two extremes the middle way. And tell the hidden things of wisdom in the grammar of the language, in matters that have not been written and yet deserve to be written. Compose from them a book so that the many may benefit from it, and it will stand as a banner for peoples, and to it nations will seek and find rest for their souls.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fifth Principle. On the elucidation of the noun patterns of the remaining vowel points in general:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 4:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The Past¶
Throughout, it has a he with a hiriq, followed by a tav with a quiescent sheva,¶
and after it three root letters.¶
The first root letter has a pataḥ throughout the entire pattern,¶
and the middle root letter takes a dagesh, as in hitpaqed.¶
But when it is one of the guttural letters or a resh,¶
it takes a qamats, as in hitpa’er ‘alai (Exodus 8:5),¶
and hitbarekh bilvavo (Deuteronomy 29:18), and similar cases.¶
And all its reading and vocalization follow the pattern Paʿal with a dagesh.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 3:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. Know that there are some of these “six-vowel” nouns ¶
that at times appear with only five vowel-points. ¶
For example, neder (“vow”): ¶
five of its forms occur with five vowel-points, ¶
and the rest with six. ¶
Likewise sekhel (“understanding”): ¶
five of its forms occur with six vowel-points, ¶
and the remaining forms with five. ¶
Many others of this kind exist, ¶
and they are known on the basis of the tradition. ¶
¶
I will present all of these in my larger work, ¶
which I have not yet begun, ¶
though thirty years ago—before it was even born— ¶
I already called it by name: ¶
Sefer ha-Zikhronot (“The Book of Remembrances”).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And if you wish to use them with the other persons, it is necessary to add a pronominal word of the second person together with the second person.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 4:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Participle¶
It is formed with the addition of a mem with a hiriq at the beginning,¶
followed by a tav with a quiescent sheva.¶
Here too they dropped the he,¶
for it would properly have been mehitpaqed,¶
just as I wrote regarding the e-i-t-n letters in the pattern Hif‘il.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 10:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And some grammarians say that even in the future tense one should not use the pu‘al and hof‘al stems except in two persons, since the first-person forms are lacking from them. They say this because only one such form is found in Scripture, namely “mi-beten la-qever uval” (Job 10:19), which is a future form from the hof‘al stem of a verb with a quiescent initial yod. But it seems to me that for this reason one should not refrain from using them. For how many words do we use by way of reasoning even though they are not found explicitly in Scripture—and all the more so in cases like these, where at least one instance is found in Scripture. Why, then, should we not use them?

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Genesis 29:6 and Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:4
(automatic citation link)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:21 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

10. And know that the three third-person forms — paqad, paqdu, and paqedah — have a special rule: when they are joined to a short word, or to a word that is accented on the penultimate syllable, they themselves also shift to penultimate stress. For example: “qara laylah” (Genesis 1:5), “ve-sha’al lo” (Numbers 27:21), “ve-qare’u lo” (Deuteronomy 25:8), “bagdu bah” (Lamentations 1:2), and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. The Participle¶
Throughout, the first root letter has a qamats,¶
and there is no difference between the participle¶
and the past tense in the masculine singular,¶
as in ba aḥikha be-mirmah (Genesis 27:35),¶
which is past tense,¶
and anokhi ba elekha be-‘av he-‘anan (Exodus 19:9),¶
which is a participle. But in the feminine there is a difference:¶
the past tense has penultimate stress,¶
as in ve-Raḥel ba’ah (Genesis 29:9),¶
whereas the participle has final stress,¶
as in ve-hinneh Raḥel bito ba’ah (ibid., v. 6). And it also comes with a tsere according to the pattern Paʿal,¶
as in met atah;¶
and according to the pattern Pu‘al,¶
as in tov tovim.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. The Infinitive¶
It has a he with a qamats and a tsere,¶
as in ha-meq basaro (Zechariah 14:12).¶
And it comes with a tsere even with the prefixed letters bekholam,¶
as in le-ḥal, le-hadeq;¶
but katat le-hadeq (2 Chronicles 34:7)¶
has a pataḥ in place of a tsere on the first root letter.¶
This is not so with roots quiescent in the middle letter,¶
which have a ḥiriq,¶
as in le-haqim, le-hashiv.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2.¶
And know that all the other patterns come according to the manner of the strong roots,¶
and the aleph does not become quiescent in them;¶
only that the vowels change in some of them because of the aleph, which is guttural.¶
And likewise with the other guttural letters aleph, ḥet, he, ‘ayin,¶
the hiriq of the nun of Nif‘al and of the he of Hif‘il¶
changes to segol¶
(and the letter following the nun or the he takes a ḥataf-segol),¶
as in ne’ekhal, he’ekhil,¶
as will be explained in the chapter on poetry, in the thirteenth poem. And there are also roots whose first letter is aleph¶
that come in full form even in the pattern Qal,¶
such as from asaf and asar,¶
where one says e’esof and e’esor.¶
The reason is that since these are not used frequently,¶
they were not strict about them.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 5:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The fifth principle. An elucidation of nouns whose third radical is quiescent aleph (naḥei lamed-aleph):

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 10:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that just as, in the participle, the feminine singular form ¶
appears in two patterns — poqedah or poqedet, ¶
mefaqedah or mefaqedet, and likewise for all similar forms — ¶
and although, for the most part, they occur in the pattern poqedet, ¶
as I explained earlier (in Treatise Two, Principle One, Section Four), ¶
so too nouns in the feminine gender occur in these same two patterns. ¶
¶
Nevertheless, in the majority of cases they appear with a final he, ¶
as I explained above in Principle Eight. ¶
In the following principle I will explain some of the distinctions ¶
between these two patterns.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. ¶
And there is one root whose first root letter is lamed ¶
whose infinitive, imperative, and future tense ¶
for the most part follow the pattern of roots deficient in the first letter nun. ¶
This is the root laqach. ¶
From it you say the infinitive qaḥat, be-qaḥat, laqaḥat; ¶
and the imperative qaḥ, qḥu, qḥi, and so on.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 17 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

In ten pleasant languages this poem is spoken:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that the past and the future are the foundations of all the actions, and by means of them a person can suffice and speak in their place for all the other actions. Thus it is the way of Scripture to use them in place of the participle, the infinitive, and the imperative, as will be explained.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:15 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

12. The Pattern Hitpa‘el ¶
This entire pattern appears in full form, ¶
as from yalad: va-yityaldu (Numbers 1:18), ¶
and from ya‘ats: va-yitya‘atsu (Psalms 83:4). ¶
And sometimes the yod is changed into a mobile vav, ¶
as from yada‘: be-hitvada‘ Yosef (Genesis 45:1), ¶
and from yada: ve-hitvada ‘alav (Leviticus 16:21).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introductory Poem 3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Come to me and I will teach you the rules of the Holy Tongue, which have new aspects.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fifth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the class of roots deficient in the first root letter,¶
such as nigash.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fourth Principle. On the elucidation of nouns with a weak middle letter that appear without an added letter:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 7:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Seventh Principle. In this I shall begin to explain the meanings of the seven stems, and in it the meaning of the qal stem alone will be explained:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

For example, from shamar: “ve-shamar Hashem” (Deuteronomy 7:12), which is equivalent to ve-yishmor. Likewise, “ve-shamru benei Yisrael” (Exodus 31:16) is equivalent to ve-yishmeru.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 13:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The First Treatise is concluded, in the Name of God, the First and the Last.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 3:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

8. Furthermore, all of these are accented on the final syllable (milraʿ), ¶
whereas all the forms with pataḥ are always accented on the penultimate ¶
(milʿel), like those with six and five vowel-points. ¶
By this as well they are distinguished from those with two qamats vowels, ¶
for those are always accented milraʿ, ¶
such as zahav (“gold”), davar (“word”), and ʿashan (“smoke”), ¶
though there are a few exceptional cases.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And the general rule is that all forms of speech are divided into four parts: singular masculine, plural masculine, singular feminine, and plural feminine.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The vav becomes weak only in the middle, such as kum, shuv, and the like; but at the beginning or at the end a root vav is not found.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Ninth Principle. On the elucidation of the plural forms of feminine nouns:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6.¶
And to me the reason appears to be this:¶
because the letters tsadi and samekh are close to one another¶
in point of articulation and pronunciation,¶
especially when the tsadi is not dageshed,¶
so much so that many people do not distinguish between them,¶
and especially all the people of France.¶
For if we were to say from yatsav, yatsaq, and yatsag:¶
etsav, etsaq, tetsag,¶
according to the rule of roots quiescent in the first letter yod,¶
it would sound as though it were esav, yesag, tesag.¶
Therefore the tsere was dageshed in order to strengthen its pronunciation. And this is a great rule in grammar:¶
when a dagesh comes in place of a missing letter,¶
that word is called one of the deficient roots;¶
but when one of the full vowels comes in its place,¶
that word is called one of the quiescent roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 13:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And know that this occurs only with intransitive verbs. In some of these you are permitted to form such usages even if they are not found explicitly in Scripture; however, take care not to do so with transitive verbs. The general rule is that this stem never acts upon another. Pay no heed to false claims that it is found in places where it is transitive, such as “ve-khol keli ‘ets titḥatta’u” (Numbers 31:20), “ve-hitnaḥaltem et ha-’arets” (Numbers 33:54), and the like; for these can readily be interpreted in a manner in which the subject acts upon itself, and there is no need here to elaborate further.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 12:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that the additional letters found in nouns are six in number, ¶
and their mnemonic is ha’emaneti. ¶
Sometimes they are added at the beginning, ¶
sometimes at the end, ¶
and sometimes at both the beginning and the end. ¶
However, they are added only to nouns that are derived from verbs, ¶
as will be explained in the chapter on categories, ¶
in the second category. ¶
I will now explain them one by one in the remaining principles, ¶
that is, each principle corresponding to one of the three root letters.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fourth Principle. On the elucidation of noun patterns whose first vowel is a holam:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 10:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Principle Ten. An explanation of feminine nouns that appear in the singular¶
with a final tav:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. The Pattern Nif‘al¶
The Past¶
Throughout, the nun appears with a quiescent vav as a ḥolam¶
in place of the root yod,¶
as in noda‘, noda‘at, noda‘ti, and so on.¶
Likewise in the participle: noda‘, noda‘im, and so on. But in the rest of the pattern the vav is mobile,¶
and all its vocalization is like that of the strong roots,¶
as from yada‘: hoda‘.¶
And the e-i-t-n forms are oda‘, yoda‘. And the aleph is always with a hiriq, contrary to the usual rule,¶
for its normal vowel is generally segol;¶
yet this form never comes with a segol,¶
and I do not know the reason for this.¶
And the yod was changed to a vav¶
because the dagesh is perceived more clearly in a vav¶
than in a yod.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Sixth Principle. On the elucidation of an introductory rule concerning noun suffixes:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 12:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. Know further that an added alef ¶
does not occur at the end of nouns ¶
in the Hebrew language. ¶
In the language of the Targum, however, ¶
it commonly appears, ¶
as in malka, avda. ¶
¶
Nevertheless, there are cases ¶
where alef is a root letter at the end, ¶
such as kise and pele; ¶
these belong to the class of roots ¶
whose third radical is alef ¶
(nḥei lamed-alef), ¶
and I will explain them there. ¶
¶
There are also cases ¶
where alef appears in place of he, ¶
as in kematra laḥats ¶
and karan li mara.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 11:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And the example is from zakh. ¶
If you wish to know from which class it comes, place at its end a letter of plurality, or of a pronominal suffix, or the feminine he, and you will find: zakkim, zakkav, zakkah. ¶
All of these take a dagesh; therefore they belong to the class of doubled roots. ¶
¶
And from ḥag you say ḥaggim, ḥaggo; all with a dagesh, so they too are from the doubled class. ¶
¶
But from dag you say dagim, dagah, with the gimel remaining soft. ¶
Therefore it is from the class of quiescent roots. ¶
¶
And I have already given you a sign in this treatise, in the Eighth Principle, by which you may distinguish quiescent middle-letter roots from quiescent final-letter roots. ¶
I explained there that quiescent middle-letter roots never change their vowel. ¶
¶
Thus, since you say dagim, dege ha-yam (“the fish of the sea”), where the qamats changes to a sheva, it follows that it is from the class of quiescent final-letter roots, and its root is gadah. ¶
¶
But from ger you say gerim, garu, and the tsere does not change. ¶
Therefore it belongs to the class of quiescent middle-letter roots, and its root is gur.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Passive¶
The mem has a shuruq, as is its rule,¶
as in muqam, muqamim, and so on.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Into four principal treatises I shall divide it,¶
to clarify and explain the matters under discussion.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

It is also important to know that most future forms in this class sometimes appear with the loss of the root he. In Qal: egal, yegal, tegal, negal, with a ḥiriq or segol on the middle radical and penultimate stress (mil‘el).¶
There are also forms with the letters of e-i-t-n in a tsere, as in al tifan (Numbers 16:15) and va-teta‘ ba-midbar Be’er Sheva‘ (Genesis 21:14). In Nif‘al: egal, yegal, tegal, negal, with a sheva on the middle radical and a pataḥ elsewhere. In the patterns Pa‘al and Pu‘al, the loss of the he does not occur. In Hif‘il: egal, yegal, tegal, negal, with a segol on the middle radical. In Hitpa‘el: etgal, yitgal, titgal, nitgal.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And this is the introduction that I composed in Rome:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Foreword to Mantua Edition 1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Said Elijah the Levite the Ashkenazi:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And behold, I divided the substance of this book into four treatises — that is, two on verbs and two on nouns. I divided each treatise into thirteen principles, corresponding to the thirteen principles of our holy faith. Thus these four treatises contain fifty-two principles, whose sign is אליה״ו.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 8:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. The general rule is this: ¶
the feminine he at the end of nouns has two identifying signs. ¶
The first is that a qamats always appears before it. ¶
The second is that the accent must fall on that letter which bears the qamats, ¶
that is, the word must be accented on the final syllable (milraʿ). ¶
¶
If either of these two signs is lacking, ¶
then the he is not feminine, ¶
but is merely an added letter or a root letter. ¶
Thus in: ¶
qara laylah (“He called the light night,” Gen. 1:5), ¶
naḥalah Miṣrayim (“the brook of Egypt,” Num. 34:5), ¶
ʾarṣah Seʿir (“toward the land of Seir,” Gen. 32:3), ¶
and the like— ¶
in all of these the accent does not fall on the final syllable, ¶
and therefore the he is an added letter, not a feminine ending.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 27 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And even if you lack silver for its price,¶
take it—give a pledge instead.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 5:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. ḥeṭʾ (“sin”) also belongs to this pattern. It would properly have been ḥaṭaʾ, but it has been lightened, just as a sheva is lightened from the pattern paʿal, as I explained earlier. Now the ḥet of ḥeṭʾ has a tsere, following the pattern of those nouns with five vowels. Therefore, with pronominal suffixes the ḥet comes with a segol, as in ḥeṭo and ḥeṭam, as explained in the Third Principle of the First Treatise, Section Six; and in the plural ḥeṭaʾim. But in the phrase derekh ḥaṭaʾim (“the way of sinners”), it is an adjective belonging to the class of doubled forms, which do not change. Accordingly, in the construct state and with plural suffixes one says ḥaṭaʾei, as in ḥaṭaʾei (“sinners of”) and ʿami u-ḥaṭaʾeha yashmid (“He will destroy my people and its sins”).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. And likewise the Imperative¶
It is with a tsere,¶
as in haḥel rash (Deuteronomy 2:24).¶
The other forms are doubled,¶
as in hassevu, hassevi ‘einekh (Song of Songs 6:5),¶
all with penultimate stress,¶
for otherwise the dagesh could not occur.¶
And in the feminine plural: hassevnah.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The tsere vowel indicates the presence of a yod; and according to the opinion of some, a weak yod does not occur in the middle of verbs, and at the end it never occurs as a root letter according to everyone.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 24 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

All the books of grammarians before it¶
are like barren fields, without sweetness.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Therefore, remember this: wherever you find written “the pe of the verb,” or “the ‘ayin of the verb,” or “the lamed of the verb,” whether in verbs or in nouns, it means the first letter, the second letter, or the third letter respectively. I shall speak further about this in the discussion of noun patterns at the beginning of the Third Treatise.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 8:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. And the second kind consists of nif‘al forms that are acted upon by themselves; this is the largest category within nif‘al. In this respect its meaning is truly like that of the hitpa‘el stem. Thus we find that the Scripture uses them interchangeably, as in “al tittam’u be-khol elleh” (Leviticus 11), which is equivalent to tit-tetamm’u; and afterward it says, “ki be-khol elleh nitme’u ha-goyim” (Leviticus 11), which is from the nif‘al stem. Likewise, Onkelos translates every expression of nif‘al in the language of hitpa‘el, and so too Rashi, as he explains on “va-titkas” (Genesis 24:44). And similarly, “sheteh gam attah ve-he‘arel” (Habakkuk 2:16). Imperatives also occur in nif‘al of this kind, and their meaning is like that of hitpa‘el, such as “hishamer lekha” (Genesis 31:24), “hippared na me-‘alai” (Genesis 13:9), which are equivalent to hishtamer and hitpared.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 8:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that there are additional nouns from this class that appear with a feminine he at the end. ¶
Some of them have the first radical with a qamats, such as safah, manah; ¶
and some with a tsere, such as me’ah, pe’ah. ¶
All of them change to a sheva at the beginning, according to their rule.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Thirteenth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of some of the rules¶
concerning the compound classes of roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. There are two kinds of verbs: one is intransitive, and the other is transitive.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And behold, you should surely know that the Christians divided the Book of Samuel, the Book of Kings, and the Book of Chronicles, each into two parts. Therefore, in every place where you find written in a reference “Samuel” with the letter bet above it, Samuel ב׳, it means Second Samuel, beginning from “And it came to pass after the death of Saul” and onward. Likewise, “Kings ב׳” means Second Kings, beginning from “And Moab rebelled” and onward. And similarly, “Chronicles ב׳” means Second Chronicles, beginning from “And Solomon strengthened himself” and onward.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 11:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Eleventh Principle. On the elucidation of the meaning of the hif‘il stem:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And thirteen principles to each one—¶
that is, fifty-two in total.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Know that the third-person masculine singular (the “hidden” form) is found in three patterns:¶
pa‘al, pa‘el, and pa‘ul.¶
All three occur together in a single verse: “And Moses lo yakhól entered the Tent of Meeting,¶
for the cloud shakhán was upon it,¶
and the glory of the Lord malé the Tabernacle”¶
(Exodus 40:35). In all the other forms of the perfect tense, the conjugations follow the regular paradigms.¶
Thus, just as from shamar one says shamárti, shamárta, shamárnu, and so forth,¶
so from khafáts one says khafátsa, khafátsi, and the like. The only exception is the masculine and feminine third-person forms:¶
when they occur in pause, they return to their original vowel with a tsere,¶
as in khafétsu and khafétsa. However, roots whose final letter is an alef retain a tsere in all forms of the perfect,¶
as I shall mention later. The pattern pa‘ul has ḥolam in all forms of the perfect,¶
except for the masculine and feminine third-person forms, where it has a sheva,¶
as in yakhlu and yakhla.¶
When these forms occur in pause, they return to a ḥolam, as in: “to bring forth the lice, but they lo yakhólu”¶
(Exodus 8:14).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 13:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. The letter tav is added at the beginning of nouns.¶
In most cases it is pointed with a pataḥ, even without the presence of a guttural,¶
and it is followed by a sheva naḥ.¶
The final vowel is most often shuruq, as in¶
tamrud, tamruq, and taʿanug. A few forms are found with ḥiriq or tsere, such as¶
talmid, tavrik, tarshish, and tashbits.¶
There are also cases in which the tav is pointed with a ḥiriq,¶
as in tidhar. In addition, there are nouns that have tav both at the beginning¶
and at the end, such as talbushet and tifʾeret.¶
All of these forms are accented on the penultimate syllable (milʿel).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

For example, the Book of Joshua has thirty-four sedarim, Jeremiah has thirty-one sedarim, and so with all of them — the greater according to its greatness, and the smaller according to its smallness.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And now I shall speak of them in detail. First of all, you must know that every verb in the Hebrew language — whether it is complete or not complete — has three root letters. The grammarians have already agreed to measure every root according to the pattern pa‘al, and they called the first letter of every root pe, the second ‘ayin, and the third lamed.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. The Passive¶
And the infinitive and the imperative:¶
for the most part the middle root letter has a shuruq.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And the second is called the vav of conversion, and it converts past forms into future forms, and future forms into past forms, as I shall explain here.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

However, the form of the third person that is the same for masculine and feminine applies only in the past tense alone, such as paqdu.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Future¶
It comes in two forms. The first, which is the more common,¶
has the e-i-t-n letters with a shuruq¶
and a following light consonant,¶
as in leḥem yuddaq (Isaiah 28:28),¶
‘al kamots yusav,¶
u-mivtsarekha yushad (Hosea 10:14),¶
ke-hitmokh shoded tushad (Isaiah 33:1).¶
These have a dagesh together with a quiescent vowel,¶
contrary to the normal rule. The second form has three dots (qibbuts)¶
together with a dagesh,¶
as in yukkat sha‘ar (Isaiah 24:12),¶
mi-boqer la-‘erev yukkatu (Job 4:20).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 7:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And know that there are roots which are sometimes transitive and sometimes intransitive. For example: “hafakh libbam lisno ‘ammo” (Psalms 105:25) is transitive, for its meaning is that the Holy One, blessed be He, turned their heart. But “ve-ish Yisrael hafakh” (Judges 20:41) is intransitive. Likewise, “asher ḥalaq Elohekha la-‘ammim” (Deuteronomy 4:19) is transitive, whereas “ḥalaq libbam” (Hosea 7) is intransitive — and there are others besides these.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 8:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that nouns that appear in the feminine form¶
are for the most part marked by a final he,¶
with the letter before the he bearing a qamats,¶
and the accent of the word falling on that letter with a qamats,¶
as in: ṣedaqah (“righteousness”), ḥokhmah (“wisdom”),¶
gezela (“robbery”), ʾakhilah (“eating”),¶
simlah (“garment”), ʿavodah (“service”),¶
melukhah (“kingship”), behalah (“terror”). In the construct state, the final he changes to tav,¶
and the qamats changes to a pataḥ;¶
but the other vowels do not change at all,¶
except in those forms that follow the pattern paʿalah,¶
such as ṣedaqah and berakhah (“blessing”). Thus, in the construct state one says¶
ṣidqat Hashem (“the righteousness of the LORD,” Deut. 33:21)¶
and birkat Hashem (“the blessing of the LORD,” Gen. 39:5).¶
The kaf takes a light dagesh,¶
in accordance with the rule of the letters begad kefat¶
after a silent sheva in most cases;¶
but with a pronominal suffix, as in birkato,¶
the kaf is unaspirated (rafuyah),¶
and likewise ṣidqato, and so forth.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 1:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Likewise, for nouns that come from defective or quiescent root classes,¶
they assigned them the pattern paʿal as well.¶
That is to say: whenever a letter of the noun is missing or quiescent,¶
they likewise remove or quiet a corresponding letter from the pattern paʿal. For example, maṭṭaʿ (“planting”) and massaʾ (“burden”):¶
since the root nun is missing in them, and since they have an added mem at the beginning,¶
they said that they belong to the pattern maʿal. Likewise maṭṭarah (“purpose”) and mattanah (“gift”),¶
in which the first radical of the pattern paʿal drops when prefixed by one of the¶
letters b-k-l-m, and which have an added mem at the beginning¶
and the feminine he at the end.¶
Thus mattanah is measured according to the pattern maʿalah.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 12:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. However, with feminine forms they are numerous, ¶
and they are useful for identification, since they are ¶
dageshed in the middle radical (ayin), such as ¶
megillah and meḥittah; ¶
and with an added tav, such as tefillah and taḥannah. ¶
There is also a single example with an added mem at the end, ¶
namely ḥinnam, derived from the root ḥanan.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

11. The Pattern Pu‘al ¶
The he appears with shuruq, ¶
as in va-Yosef hurad; ¶
and likewise with roots quiescent in the middle letter, ¶
as in huqam; ¶
and with doubled roots, as in hutav. ¶
In all three, the he has shuruq, ¶
and there is no difference between them in vocalization. ¶
¶
However, in the other persons of the past tense ¶
there is a difference between the doubled roots ¶
and the roots quiescent in the first letter yod ¶
and those quiescent in the middle letter vav.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. ¶
To this I reply and say that it is true that konen, qomem, and shovev ¶
have a doubled final root letter; ¶
but they belong to the pattern Paʿal with dagesh. ¶
And since the vav is quiescent, ¶
it is impossible to place a dagesh in it, ¶
for a dagesh never occurs in a quiescent letter. ¶
Therefore they doubled the final root letter in place of the dagesh, ¶
and said konen instead of kon. ¶
The proof of this is that even in Hitpa‘el in this class ¶
they doubled the final root letter in place of the dagesh, ¶
and said hitkonen instead of hitkon. ¶
Likewise in Paʿal, which also requires a dagesh, ¶
they said be-ein tehomot ḥullalti (Proverbs 8:24) ¶
instead of ḥullalti; ¶
and me-Hashem mitz‘adei gever konanu (Psalms 37:23), ¶
which is from the pattern Paʿal in this class, instead of konu; ¶
and likewise yimolal ve-yavesh (Psalms 90:6), ¶
from the pattern Paʿal of this class. ¶
¶
And those who say that these are formed on the pattern yaqomem, yashovev, ¶
from a quadriliteral pattern, ¶
would need to say that they are intransitive verbs. ¶
But this is not my view, ¶
for the law of this entire pattern is that it is transitive. ¶
And this too supports my position, ¶
for it stands in place of Paʿal, ¶
which is always transitive, as I wrote in its principle.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 11:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that most nouns derived from doubled roots come with the loss of one of the doubled letters, in the same manner as verbs of doubled roots. As a result, only two letters remain, such as dal, tal, sal, taf. Most of these are vocalized with pataḥ, while some are vocalized with a qamats, as determined by tradition. Many are also found with a ḥolam, such as oz, ḥom, ol, qor, and others with a tsere, such as ḥen, shen, tsel. All those with a qamats and a tsere follow the same patterns of inflection as nouns with a quiescent middle letter (nḥei ayin) and those with a quiescent final letter (nḥei lamed), as I have already shown you in their respective weights and governing principles.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

O master of words, what need have you today¶
of the seventy elders, or of Aaron and Hur?

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 11:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The fifth stem is also a parent stem and is called hif‘il, and it too is of four kinds:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. The Patterns Hif‘il and Hif‘al ¶
With roots deficient in the first letter nun, ¶
both patterns are identical in their vocalization to the strong roots, ¶
except that the root nun is missing ¶
and a dagesh appears in the middle root letter in its place ¶
throughout the entire pattern.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that all the roots of the Holy Tongue are divided into two kinds of verbs; and each verb into six root categories; and each root category into seven verb patterns; and each verb pattern into six tenses:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 7:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Now, the seven letters that are used at the beginning of nouns ¶
have the mnemonic m-sh-h and k-l-b. ¶
And since, because of them, the vowel-points of nouns do not change, ¶
there is no need to explain them here. ¶
Their rules will be explained in the chapter on the servile letters.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 5:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And the passive form is also called a participle, for its action has been effected in the present time, and it is composed of the past and the participle. For example, when you say “the house is banui,” it implies that it has already been built and is still standing. This is the difference between it and the past passive, for when you say “the house was nivne,” it is possible that it has since been destroyed or burned. Thus, the passive form too is like an adjective; and the difference between it and a true adjective is the same as the difference between the participle and the adjective, as I have written.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:18 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. The Pattern Hitpa‘el ¶
I have already written above, under the pattern Paʿal in this principle, section two, ¶
that its rule is to appear with a doubled final root letter ¶
in place of the dagesh, ¶
as in hitbonen, hitbonanta, and so on.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 1:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. And just as they did with verbs, so they did with nouns.¶
For example, they measured ʾereṣ (“land”) according to the pattern paʿal,¶
and ḥakham (“wise”) according to the pattern paʿal.¶
Likewise, nouns that have an additional letter at the beginning or at the end,¶
such as mishmar (“guard”), are measured according to the pattern mifʿal;¶
zikaron (“remembrance”) according to the pattern paʿalon;¶
and tifʾeret (“glory”) according to the pattern tifʿelet.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 3:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Future¶
The letters e-i-t-n appear with a ḥataf-qamats,¶
to indicate the identifying sign of the pattern,¶
as in kalil tuqṭar (Leviticus 6:15).¶
And if the first root letter is a guttural,¶
the first root letter is vocalized with a qamats¶
and the middle root letter with a ḥataf-qamats,¶
as in ya‘amod ḥai (Leviticus 16:10),¶
yeḥoram kol rekhusho (Ezra 10:8).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Thirteenth Principle. On the elucidation of the function of the Hitpa‘el pattern:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 3:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

(In the first edition: vav) The Participle, the Passive, and the Imperative do not occur in it.¶
And the small amount of Infinitive found in it is likewise with a ḥataf-qamats,¶
and the middle root letter (the ʿayin ha-poʿal) in a tsere, as in:¶
ve-ha-melaḥ lo himlaḥt (Ezekiel 16:4),¶
ve-ha-ḥotel lo ḥittalt (ibid.).¶
And with an added he: redah and hashkēvah (ibid. 32:19).¶
And with the prefix letters be-kholam it is not found at all.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And know that there are also three letters that are used at the beginning of past tense, whose mnemonic is shaveh; and I shall speak about them further in the chapter on the shimusim (particles).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 8:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And the general rule is that for all nif‘al forms of this kind there is no difference between them and the hitpa‘el stem. For example: “yiqqavu ha-mayim ve-tera’eh ha-yabbashah” (Genesis 1:9); likewise “va-yera Hashem” (Genesis 18), “va-yinnaḥem Hashem” (Genesis 6), “shavat va-yinnafash” (Exodus 31:17–18), “el beito va-yeḥanak” (II Samuel 17:23). All of these are to be understood as though they were from the hitpa‘el stem.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 2:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. Know that the second vowel never changes¶
except when it is a qamats, tsere, or segol.¶
Qamats and tsere change to a pataḥ in the singular construct,¶
as I wrote above;¶
and all three change to a sheva in the plural construct¶
and in some plural pronominal suffixes,¶
as I will explain in Principle Six. But in the other types of change they do not change at all,¶
except for a segol,¶
as I will explain in Principle Three.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:18 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And I shall give you one general rule for all nine forms of the past tense, by which you may know which is accented on the penultimate syllable and which on the final syllable:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Third Principle. On the elucidation of nouns with a weak middle letter that appear with an added letter:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. ¶
The entire past tense has the first radical (peʾ) with a ḥiriq,¶
and the second radical (ʿayin) open with a pataḥ,¶
except for the third-person masculine singular,¶
in which the ʿayin is for the most part with a tsere,¶
as in ʾizzen, ḥiqer, tiqqen. It is also found with a pataḥ,¶
as in va-ʾibbed ve-shibber beriḥeha¶
(Lamentations 2:9),¶
and similar cases are few. The third-person masculine plural and the feminine singular¶
have a sheva naʿ, as is its rule under a letter with a dagesh,¶
as in piqqedu, piqqedah.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Seventh Principle. On the elucidation of nouns with a weak final letter lamed–he that appear with an added mem at the beginning and a tav at the end:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Eighth Principle: ¶
A discussion to prove that the pattern Paʿal in this class ¶
is the pattern that some grammarians have called “quadriliteral.”

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 13:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

(The book HaBachur is completed:)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Imperative¶
qum, qera;¶
and likewise the passive.¶
But we cannot form it from qum, for it is an intransitive verb;¶
rather, we form it from sum, which is a transitive verb,¶
and we say sum, sumim,¶
as in ‘al pi Avshalom haytah shumah,¶
shumah, shumot. And thus the infinitive and the imperative are found with a ḥolam¶
following the manner of doubled roots,¶
as in qum yaqumu devarai,¶
por hitporerah erets,¶
mot hitmotetah erets.¶
And the imperative likewise,¶
as in ve-shuv elai ne’um Hashem,¶
mol et benei Yisra’el.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 8:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The second stem is called the nif‘al stem, and it is of three kinds:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

8.¶
And know that there are four roots whose final letter is he¶
that never becomes quiescent.¶
Your mnemonic for them is taganakh,¶
that is: tamah (to be astonished),¶
gavah (to be high),¶
ganah (to reproach),¶
kamah (to yearn). Therefore they are vocalized with a qamats and a pataḥ¶
like the strong roots,¶
and not like roots quiescent in he,¶
which always have two qamats.¶
Accordingly, the open forms take a mappiq¶
to indicate their completeness. Thus, from gavah:¶
va-yigbah Hashem Tseva’ot (Isaiah 5:16),¶
ya‘an ki gavhu benot Tsiyon (Isaiah 3:16). From kamah:¶
kamah lekha vesari (Psalms 63:2);¶
and one may say kamahte, kamahati,¶
even though such forms are not attested. From nogah:¶
lo yigah sheviv esho (Job 18:5). From tamāh:¶
hemah ra’u ken tamahu (Psalms 48:6),¶
al titmah ‘al ha-ḥefets (Ecclesiastes 5:7),¶
with a mappiq. But va-yitmahmehah (Genesis 19:16),¶
and likewise hitmahmehu and tamahu (Isaiah 29:9),¶
belong to the root mahmah,¶
which is quadriliteral;¶
therefore they are not included among the four mentioned above. And there is a dispute concerning¶
va-telah erets Mitsrayim (Genesis 47:13),¶
whether its root is la’ah or lahah;¶
from it comes ke-mithlahleh ha-yoreh (Proverbs 26:18).¶
But this controversy does not concern me,¶
for I do not engage in hidden matters.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 6:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. And know that, for the most part, the infinitive does not appear except with b-k-l-m, except when it is adjacent to a past or a future tense, such as halokh halakhta (Genesis 31:30), amor amarti (I Samuel 2:30), shamor tishmerun (Deuteronomy 11:22), abbed te’abbedun (Deuteronomy 12:2), and the like. In such cases it comes to indicate the intensification of the action, and it is usually placed before the verb, though in a few places it comes after it, such as vayevarekh barukh (Joshua 24:10), and similar cases. But when it is used with the imperative, it always comes after it, as in shim‘u shamoa‘ (Isaiah 6:9) and the like — and this is to indicate an even greater strengthening of the command.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The active patterns are: qal, Pi‘el, and Hif‘il.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 7:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that there are nouns from this class that occur with an added mem at the beginning and a tav at the end, such as maskit and marbit; and others with a tav both at the beginning and at the end, such as tavnit and takhlit.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And further, I divided each principle into smaller parts and marked them in the manner of א ב ג ד ה ו, and so on; the benefit of this is well known and needs no explanation.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Third Treatise ¶
On the elucidation of the noun patterns of complete nouns, and it too is divided into thirteen principles: ¶
The First Principle. On the elucidation of what is meant by the term “pattern,” and how nouns are patterned:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And there are three kinds of weak verbs: those with a weak first letter, those with a weak second letter, and those with a weak third letter — making six root categories in all.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:17 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

8. And know that for the second person singular and the first person singular there is one sign by which to distinguish the vav of conjunction from the vav of conversion. This is as follows: when they occur with the vav of conjunction, they are generally accented on the penultimate syllable, just as they normally are even without a vav. For example: “ve-akhaltí ḥattat ha-yom” (Leviticus 10:19), “ve-dibbartí ‘al ha-nevi’im” (Hosea 12:11). These are past forms with penultimate stress. But when they occur with the vav of conversion, they generally shift to final stress, as in: “ve-shamartá et kol ḥuqqav” (Exodus 15:26), “ve-dibbartá mishpatai” (Jeremiah 1:16). And this applies in all verb patterns and in all root categories, except for verbs with a weak final lamed–aleph or he, which always retain penultimate stress, whether with the vav or without it, such as ve-qarata, u-matsata, u-vanita, u-fanita, and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 8:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The eighth principle. An elucidation of nouns from the class whose third radical is he (naḥei lamed-he) that come without any additional letter at the beginning, and that end with a feminine he.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 2:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Know that you already understand the alternation of a qamats and a tsere at the end of words. ¶
Such nouns are also found with an added tav, for example toshav → toshavim. ¶
However, for the most part, those which have tav at the beginning appear with a feminine he at the end, such as toledah and tokhaḥah. Likewise, among nouns with quiescent final radicals one says torah and todah, derived from the roots yarah and yadah. ¶
There are also forms with tav both at the beginning and at the end, such as to‘elet and tokhelet. ¶
A few are found with a mem at the beginning and a he at the end, such as mo‘etsah and morashah. The rule is: any noun that you find with a mem or a tav at the beginning and vocalized with a ḥolam belongs to the class of nouns whose first radical is a quiescent yod. ¶
There are two exceptions to this rule, namely morakh (“faintness”) and ma‘al (“trespass”), which belong to the class of doubled roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 13:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. There are also doubled nouns of five letters, that is, forms in which both the ‘ayin and the lamed of the root are doubled. ¶
Examples are: from yaraq comes yeraqraq; ¶
from adom comes adamdām; ¶
and from asaf comes asafsuf, and similar forms.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Tenth Principle. On the elucidation of the vowel patterns of the category of verbs with a weak final letter lamed–he, such as galah:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Piʿel conjugation is identified by a dagesh ¶
in the ʿayin of the root throughout the entire conjugation.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 9:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And when they enter the pi‘el stem, they become transitive toward a second object, as in ohel shikken (Psalms 78), ‘arom hilləkhu beli levush (Job 24). Their meaning then corresponds to that of the hif‘il stem acting upon a second object, as I shall explain in its proper place.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 10:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. Know that these feminine nouns occur only in these two patterns: ¶
either with two segol vowels, or with a ḥolam followed by a ¶
segol before the feminine tav. ¶
The same holds when a prefixed mem is added, as in ¶
migʿeret and mishqolet, ¶
and likewise when a prefixed tav is added, as in ¶
taḥboshet and tifʾeret. ¶
In all such cases, the vowel before the ḥolam or the segol ¶
never changes, whether or not a dagesh follows it.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 4:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Pattern Hitpa‘el ¶
Its identifying signs are a he, a tav, ¶
and a dagesh in the middle root letter — ¶
thus there are three identifying signs.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Ninth Principle. On the elucidation of the function of the Pi‘el pattern:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. The Participle¶
In the singular it is like the past tense;¶
but in the other forms the qamats changes to a sheva,¶
as in navon, nevonim, and so on.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Come to me, and I will teach you the rules¶
of the holy tongue, set forth with new clarity.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 9:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that the nouns which come with a he as an essential root letter are few, such as gaʾeh (“proud”) and ram (“exalted”), as in “the proud and exalted” (Isaiah 2:12), and goh, as in “it went out from his body” (Job 20:25). ¶
They also occur with a segol, as in gaʾeh meʾod (“very proud,” Jeremiah 48:29), and reʿeh David (“David’s companion,” 2 Samuel 15:37). In the plural one says geʾim (“the proud”) and reʿim. ¶
From gaʾeh with a qamats comes geʾe yonim (“the pride of the oppressors,” Psalms 123:4), with a mobile yod. ¶
Likewise, from goh the waw is transformed into a mobile yod in construct forms, as in begviyyat ha-aryeh (“in the carcass of the lion,” Judges 14:8), and the plural is gviyyot (“corpses,” Psalms 110:6).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:16 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

11. The Participle. It too has an additional prefixed nun, like the past tense,¶
but the second radical (ʿayin) takes a qamats in all forms,¶
as in nifqad, nifqadim, nifqadah,¶
as in ruaḥ nishberah¶
(Psalms 51:19). It is always accented milraʿ.¶
But the form ʾaḥat me-henah lo nishberah¶
(Psalms 34:21),¶
which is accented milʿel,¶
is a past tense feminine form,¶
and it occurs in this way only in a pause (hefseq). Outside of a pause it takes a sheva,¶
as in nishberah qiryat tohu and similar forms¶
(Isaiah 24:10)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2.¶
However, the future tense for the most part comes with the loss of the nun¶
and a dagesh in the middle root letter to indicate it,¶
as in anash yigash;¶
and all of them are with a pataḥ or with a ḥolam,¶
as in epol, yipol.¶
A few are found that come in full form,¶
as in ve-torotav yintseru (Psalms 105:45),¶
ha-yintor le-‘olam (Jeremiah 3:5). But when the middle root letter is a guttural,¶
it always comes like the strong roots,¶
as in lo tina’af,¶
and ve-leḥem setarim yin‘am (Proverbs 9:17),¶
ha-yinaq pere (Job 6:5). Except for a few that come with the e-i-t-n letters in tsere¶
in place of the nun,¶
as in mi yiḥet ‘alenu (Jeremiah 21:13),¶
and va-tehom kol ha-‘ir (Ruth 1:19),¶
whose roots are naḥat and naham.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 9:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

9. The ninth principle. An elucidation of nouns from roots with a quiescent final he that come with a root he at the end:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

9.¶
Nevertheless, know that those future forms which I wrote about in the pattern Qal,¶
in which the e-i-t-n letters sometimes take hiriq¶
with the root yod written,¶
likewise for the most part occur in this pattern as well¶
with the yod written,¶
but with a tsere before it. Thus from yatav it is said¶
va-le-Avram heitiv ba‘avurah (Genesis 12:16);¶
from yanaq:¶
ve-tinaq lakh et ha-yeled (Exodus 2:7);¶
from yaman:¶
im ha-smol ve-eimanah (Genesis 13:9);¶
and from yalal:¶
espedah ve-eililah (Micah 1:8).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:18 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And the two numbers are the singular and the plural.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 6:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that nouns whose third radical is quiescent he usually occur with an added mem or tav at the beginning. They are vowelled with a ḥiriq, followed by a quiescent sheva, as in mitsvah, minḥah, tiqvah, and tikhlah. When a guttural letter follows, the vowel is a pataḥ, as in maḥatsah, maḥtah, and taʾavah.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4.¶
And if the middle root letter is one of the letters RaʿA,¶
then in most cases the dagesh is removed,¶
and the vowel is transferred to the letter before it.¶
If that vowel is a hiriq, it is changed to a tsere;¶
and if it is a pataḥ, it is changed to a qamats,¶
as I will explain in the chapter on poetry, in the ninth poem.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 5:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. [Printer’s error: And now I shall give you a few rules by which you may recognize when these forms stand in place of a participle (in the Ashkenazic tongue: di gegenwertige leit), or in place of an adjective (in the Ashkenazic tongue: dat itel vort). This is as follows: when you find in them one of the letters of bekholam, then they are adjectives and not participles, such as “Ahitofel ba-qoshrim” (II Samuel 15:31), “ka-nosheh ka-asher nashah bo” (Isaiah 24:2), “le-‘oseh orim” (Psalms 136:7), “mi-shomerim la-boqer” (Psalms 130:6), and the like. All of these are adjectives, for these four letters are not used with verbs but only with the infinitive, since it too is in the nature of a noun; and for this reason some grammarians call it the shem ha-po‘el (verbal noun). But when the letters shoheh, which are also used in past and future forms, are used with participles, then it is possible that they are either participles or adjectives.]

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 11:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Know that feminine nouns in plural,¶
when they take pronominal suffixes,¶
may appear with either of the two plural markers:¶
with yod, the marker of masculine plurality,¶
or with tav, the marker of feminine plurality.¶
Thus one says¶
tsidqotav, tsidqotekha, and the like. Likewise, even those nouns which in the singular¶
take pronominal suffixes with a dageshed tav,¶
as explained above,¶
appear in the plural pronominal forms¶
with a soft tav,¶
such as milḥamotav and mishmerotav.¶
The reason for this is the presence of the ḥolem,¶
after which a dagesh cannot properly occur.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 2:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. The general rule is this:¶
any noun from a complete root whose first vowel is a qamats¶
will change to a sheva in all four of the changes mentioned above.¶
The same rule applies when the first vowel is a tsere. The only difference between them is this:¶
a qamats changes to a sheva in every noun,¶
regardless of what the second vowel may be;¶
but a tsere changes only when the second vowel is a qamats.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 8:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Eighth Principle. On the meaning of the nif‘al stem:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:20 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

12 (First edition: 13). The Imperative It always appears with an added heʾ,¶
as in hippared naʾ me-ʿalay¶
(Genesis 13:9).¶
But the future does not require the heʾ,¶
because the ʾe-i-t-n< letters at the beginning¶
produce a strong dagesh. The general rule is that in this conjugation¶
the nun, the heʾ,¶
and the letters of ʾe-i-t-n<¶
all take a ḥiriq,¶
even the alef of ʾe-i-t-n<¶
(for the most part),¶
as in ʾanokhi ʾishavaʿ¶
(Genesis 21:24). This is not the case in qal,¶
as I explained earlier.¶
And the first radical (peʾ)¶
always has a dagesh with a qamats,¶
except when the peʾ is one of the guttural letters¶
ʾalef–ḥet–ʿayin–resh,¶
in which case the heʾ¶
and the letters of ʾe-i-t-n<¶
take a tsere,¶
as in heʾasef, yeʿavor, and the like,¶
as will be explained in the chapter¶
“Shirah,” in the ninth song.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise, Subject 1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

On the elucidation of the differences between each binyan and the others, with respect to the vowel patterns and the additional letters unique to each, which serve as identifying signs by which one may distinguish them from one another—whether complete or incomplete—and it, too, is divided into thirteen principles.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Second Principle. On the elucidation of nouns with a weak first letter aleph or yod:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 4:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Passive ¶
It does not occur in this pattern.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The Pattern Qal ¶
The he is divided into four forms. ¶
The first is that it appears quiescent at the end, ¶
as in galah. ¶
The second is that it disappears, ¶
as in galu. ¶
The third is that it is changed into a yod, ¶
as in galiti, and so on. ¶
And with the prefixed letters bekholam, ¶
the first root letter is vocalized as in the strong roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Third Principle. On the elucidation of the three names assigned to the three root letters, and on the elucidation of the definition of complete verbs and those that are not complete:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Sixth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the class of roots quiescent in the first letter,¶
aleph and yod, such as amar and yashav.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 12:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Twelfth Principle. On the elucidation of the meaning of the hof‘al stem:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 30 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And whoever wishes to know the time and its details—¶
let him take this into his hand.

6 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. The aleph may be weak at the beginning or at the end of verbs. For example, at the beginning, from akhal one says okhal, yokhal, tokhal, and at the end, as in qara, qarata, and so on. However, it does not appear in the middle of a verb, as in sha’ag, sha’al, and other similar forms.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:17 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Pattern Hif‘al ¶
I have already written about it among the roots quiescent in the first letter yod ¶
in this treatise, in the Sixth Principle, section eleven.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. ¶
And know that there are roots whose first root letter is yod ¶
that behave according to the class of roots deficient in the first letter nun; ¶
and they are called roots deficient in the first letter yod, ¶
and not quiescent first-letter yod roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introductory Poem 8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

May my book, called HaBachur, bring joy to God and to mankind.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Imperative¶
As in yir’u et Hashem qedoshav (Psalms 34:10),¶
with the aleph quiescent;¶
for the shuruq of the vav belongs to the resh,¶
and the aleph is quiescent in order to distinguish it¶
from the verb of seeing,¶
since it is said:¶
ki lo yir’ani ha-adam va-ḥai (Exodus 33:20). And from yarah one says yereh or yorah;¶
and with the prefixed letters bekholam:¶
lirot be-mo ofel.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Two syllables and a peg; and two syllables; two syllables and a peg, and two syllables.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Eleventh Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the vocalization of the patterns Qal and Nif‘al¶
in the class of doubled roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 1:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that all nouns whose first radical nun is deficient¶
(ḥaserei peʾah-nun) appear with an added mem at the beginning.¶
This mem is always vocalized with a pataḥ, and a dagesh¶
follows it, in order to indicate the missing nun.¶
Thus, for example: mattaʿ (“planting”), whose root is nataʿ,¶
and massaʿ (“journey”), whose root is nasaʿ.¶
Likewise mabboʿa (“spring”) and mabbul (“flood”),¶
whose roots are navaʿ and naval. These nouns also occur with the feminine he ending,¶
such as mappēla (“downfall”) and mattara (“target”),¶
and with a tsere, such as maggēfa (“plague”)¶
and massēkha (“molten image”), and the like. The same rule applies to nouns deficient in an initial yod,¶
for their grammatical treatment is identical to that of¶
nouns deficient in an initial nun,¶
as explained in the Second Treatise,¶
Principle Six, Section Six.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Eighth Principle. On the elucidation of the noun patterns of feminine nouns that come with the feminine he:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:15 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The first is that every instance of “identical” that I have mentioned means identical for masculine and feminine, and this is not the case here:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The intransitive: such as halakh, amad, yashav, and the like — for the action remains within the subject performing it and does not pass from it to another.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And a verb that has a nun at the beginning is called from the category of the defective roots, as will be explained in its category; and a verb that has one of the letters aleph, he, vav, or yod is called from the category of the weak roots. And I shall now explain the manner of their weakness.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. The Future. ¶
(In Ashkenazic: di mit-künftige layt) You already know that its identifying sign is ʾe-i-t-n at the beginning,¶
and that the vowel-patterns of the future follow those of the imperative. Take this rule firmly in hand for all the verb-forms,¶
in all the root categories (gizrot):¶
add the letters ʾe-i-t-n to the imperative,¶
and you will obtain the future form. In this conjugation, the letters of ʾe-i-t-n¶
always take ḥiriq. [First edition:¶
And there is always a sheva naḥ after the ʾe-i-t-n,¶
except for alef, which takes a segol,¶
as in ʾefqod,¶
because it is a guttural.]

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And each tense is divided into two genders, and each gender into two numbers, and each number into three persons, and each person has its own distinct form of expression. And now I shall explain each and every one:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 2:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Nouns whose first radical is a quiescent yod are, for the most part, formed with an added mem or tav at the beginning, and are vocalized with a ḥolam, as in motsa and moshav, with a qamats at the end. ¶
They are also found with a tsere at the end, such as mo‘ed and moqesh. Know that those which have a qamats in the singular will also retain a qamats in the plural, for example: from moshav and motsa one says moshavim and motsa’ot. ¶
But those which have a tsere will take a sheva in the plural, such as mofet and moqesh, yielding mofetim and moqshim. All of these are accented on the final syllable (milra‘).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Twelfth Principle. On the elucidation of nouns that have an added he, aleph, or mem at the beginning or at the end:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 4:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fourth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the noun patterns¶
whose first vowel is ḥolam.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. The Future¶
The e-i-t-n letters take a qamats to indicate the vav of the middle root letter,¶
as in aqum, yaqum, and so on.¶
And the vav with a shuruq is not the middle root letter,¶
but rather a connective vav,¶
as in efqod, yifqod, and so on. And there are those who say that it is a root letter,¶
and their proof is from yaqumu, taqumu;¶
for if the vav were not a root letter,¶
we would say yaqmu, taqmu,¶
following the pattern of yifqedu, tifqedu,¶
which have no vav.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 12:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that nouns which occur with an added mem at the beginning¶
are, for the most part, vocalized with a qamats on the first letter,¶
following the pattern of nouns with a quiescent middle letter (naḥei ʿayin).¶
However, there is a distinction between them: Those nouns of the naḥei ʿayin class typically have ḥolam in the final syllable,¶
such as maqom, makhon, malon. By contrast, these nouns take either a qamats or a tsere in the final syllable,¶
such as masakh and magen.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Ninth Principle. On the elucidation of the vowel patterns of the category of verbs with a weak final letter lamed–aleph, such as qara:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. And as for what I said, that each person has a distinct form of expression, this applies only to the second person and the third person. But the form of expression of the first person is the same for masculine and feminine in all verbs and in all suffixes, such as ani, anachnu, and likewise all ni and nu found among the suffixes.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:23 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

12. Be it well known to you that in the languages of the nations there are three kinds of past tense: the simple past, the imperfect past, and the pluperfect (past already completed).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Title Page 6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Printed in Isny the city in the year¶
from the creation of the world 302 according to the small count¶
in the month of Sivan¶
[Note: This refers to the Hebrew year 5302, corresponding to 1542 CE. Isny was a German city where Hebrew books were printed in the 16th century.]

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 12:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Twelfth Principle: ¶
An elucidation of nouns in which an additional letter is added beyond the three root letters.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 10:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The tenth principle. An elucidation of nouns from the class of roots with a quiescent final he (naḥei lamed-he) that consist of two letters:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 7:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. There are also forms on this pattern in which the final vowel is shuruq. This occurs specifically when there is a tav at the beginning, as in tarbut (“increase”) and taznut (“licentiousness”). A parallel case is found with an initial mem, as in matsotekha (“those who contend with you”), whose singular form is matsah. The expected form would have been mintsah, since its root is natsah. A similar formation is found in the language of the Mishnah, malkot (“lashes”), derived from the root laqah.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 1:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The first principle. An elucidation of nouns whose first radical nun is deficient (ḥaserei peʾah-nun).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 5:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that nouns whose first vowel is shuruq are few, ¶
such as minnim and ʿugav (“strings and pipe,” Ps. 150:4), ¶
ʿagil and kumaz (Num. 31:50). ¶
With ḥatef qamats there is only a single example, ¶
namely maʿaseh yedei ʾoman (“the work of the hands of a craftsman,” ¶
Song 7:2). ¶
¶
Thus there remains for me to explain only pataḥ, ḥiriq, ¶
and the “three-point” patterns. ¶
I will give you one general rule sufficient for all of them, namely: ¶
since these three are small vowels, ¶
it is proper that a dagesh follow them, ¶
as will be explained to you in the chapter on prosody, Song Five. ¶
¶
Therefore, nouns with a doubled consonant do not change, ¶
such as ʾabbir (“mighty”), kabbir (“great”), ¶
gannav (“thief”), and sullam (“ladder”). ¶
Thus in the construct state one says ¶
ʾabbir ha-roʿim (“the mighty of the shepherds,” 1 Sam. 21:8), ¶
kabbir koaḥ (“great in power,” Job 36:5), ¶
and with pronominal suffixes ¶
ʾabbiro, kabiro. ¶
There are, however, a few exceptional cases that do undergo change.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Infinitive The first root letter has a qamats, and the middle root letter has a ḥolam,¶
with a quiescent he at the end when the infinitive is not joined to a prefixed letter (bekholam) and when it is attached to verbs,¶
as in ra’ah, ra’inu, ‘asah, ya‘aseh lo. When it is not attached to a verb, the final he takes a sheva,¶
as in ra’oh fanekha lo filalti (Genesis 48:11),¶
‘asoh tsedaqah u-mishpat (Proverbs 21:3).¶
Likewise, after verbs, as in hiskalta ‘asu (Genesis 31:28). When the infinitive is joined to a prefixed letter (bekholam),¶
the he changes to a quiescent vav,¶
with an added tav at the end, as in be-galot, ke-galot, and so on.¶
It is also found without any prefix, as in galot ha-aretz (Judges 18:30), and similar forms, which are rare. One instance is found joined to a verb with the added tav,¶
as in heyot ehyeh kamokha (Psalms 50:21), and it has no parallel.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 4:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And now I shall turn to explain the defective roots, ¶
and afterward the quiescent roots, ¶
and afterward the doubled roots, briefly.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The transitive: such as shamar, paqad, harag, and the like — for the action passes from the subject to another. In many respects the intransitive verbs differ from the transitive ones, as will be explained briefly in this work.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Psalms 118 and Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 6:8
(automatic citation link)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 32 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

On Tuesday, the 23rd of Marḥeshvan, year 317 according to the minor count,¶
in the house of Messer Venturin Rofenileio,¶
by the scribe, our teacher Rabbi Meir,¶
son of Rabbi Ephraim of blessed memory, of Padua.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 6:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. And with regard to the speaker speaking about himself, the imperative does not apply at all, for a person does not command himself. Yet sometimes the imperative appears in the language of request and supplication, especially when directed toward the Exalted Name, as is frequently found in the Book of Psalms. And sometimes the words na or anna are added to indicate entreaty, such as selaḥ na (Amos 6), anna Hashem hoshi‘a na (Psalms 118). The imperative is also sometimes found in the language of irony or sharp exhortation, such as semaḥ baḥur be-yaldutekha (Ecclesiastes 11:9), bo’u Beit-El (Amos 4:4), and the like — though such cases are few.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 9:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. And sometimes the vav is written, and sometimes it is not written. ¶
This is called male (plene) or ḥaser (defective) spelling, according to ¶
the Mesorah. ¶
¶
Likewise, masculine plurals are sometimes found without a yod. ¶
For example, ha-tanninim (“the sea creatures”) occurs three times in Scripture ¶
with defective spelling; and tsaddiqim (“the righteous”) is written throughout ¶
the entire Torah without an additional yod. And there are very many similar cases. ¶
¶
[In the Mantua edition: “as I will explain in my work *Masoret ha-Masoret*, ¶
if God wills.”]

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 17 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The second: because it is composed for every young man to study in the days of his youth, and his latter end will be good.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introductory Poem 2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

I cry out and also call to men — youths together with elders, and even the aged.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 10:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The fourth stem is called the pu‘al stem. It is a derivative of pi‘el and has only one meaning: it is always passive, effected by another—namely, its parent, the pi‘el stem, from which it receives its form. For this reason it too is geminated like its parent. ¶
¶
For example, if you say of the parent sipper, kipper, you say of the derivative suppar, kuppar. And note that the agent—the one who tells or the one who makes atonement—is not mentioned; that is, it is not specified whether the doer is male or female, singular or plural. Therefore it is called a stem in which the name of the agent is not mentioned.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Patterns Paʿal and Puʿal¶
With roots deficient in the first letter nun, know that because these two patterns¶
always have a dagesh in the middle root letter, as you already know,¶
they therefore come in this class only in full form.¶
For there is no way to drop the nun and place a dagesh in the middle root letter in its stead,¶
since it is already dageshed;¶
and two dageshim cannot occur in a single letter.¶
Nor can one dagesh indicate two things.¶
Therefore, they always appear in full form.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:15 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Pattern Hitpa‘el ¶
I have already included it within the discussion of the pattern Paʿal, ¶
and there is no need to repeat it.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:18 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

(First edition: 12.) The Infinitive It appears with the loss of the nun of the conjugation,¶
and the first radical (peʾ) is always dageshed¶
to indicate the missing nun.¶
For this reason it was necessary to place an additional heʾ¶
before the peʾ,¶
as in aḥarei hipared Lot¶
(Genesis 13:14). This is in order to strengthen the dagesh,¶
since a strong dagesh cannot occur¶
at the beginning of a word,¶
as will be explained in the chapter¶
“Shirah,” in the fifth song.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The third is where the first root letter is yod ¶
and the final root letter is he, ¶
such as yarah, yarita, and the like. ¶
In these, the yod follows the rule of roots quiescent in initial yod, ¶
like yashav, ¶
and the he follows the rule of roots quiescent in final he, ¶
like galah, galita, ¶
except for the infinitive and the imperative, ¶
which come in full form with the first root letter expressed.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

These are those roots in which the last two letters are identical, ¶
such as sabab, shalal, gazaz, and the like. ¶
And the other kinds of doubling I have already discussed ¶
in the First Treatise, in the Third Principle, section six.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:15 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. And as for one who claims that there exists another verb pattern called “quadriliteral,” such as shofet, shofateta, and so on — I will respond to this under the category of verbs with a weak middle letter in the Second Treatise, the Eighth Principle. There I will demonstrate with clear and correct proofs that this is not fitting to be called a verb pattern in its own right.

6 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 13:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. There are also nouns of five letters in which no letter is doubled, ¶
such as shaʿatnez and tsefarʿadeaʿ and similar forms. ¶
Some say that these are compound words: ¶
shaʿatnez = shaʿuʿ, taʿui, and nuz ¶
(as taught in Torat Kohanim, Kedoshim 4:18, and Yevamot 5b); ¶
tsefarʿadeaʿ = “one who knows the frog,” meaning one who knows the croak. ¶
Likewise, there are four-letter words such as pilegesh and pelag, ¶
and ishah. ¶
But it is more correct to say that these are words borrowed ¶
from Egyptian, Babylonian, or Persian. ¶
As a general rule, I tell you: ¶
every word of five letters is not originally from the holy language. ¶
Thus also patshagen, ¶
adarkemonim, ¶
achashteranim, ¶
achashdarpanim, ¶
and similar words, ¶
as I will explain in the introduction to the Book of Composition.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The Past ¶
okhel, okhelet; ¶
loshen, loshenet; ¶
shofet, shofetet — ¶
thus, according to them, there are four root letters. ¶
So far is their claim. ¶
¶
But I say that no proof should be brought from these three, ¶
for they are found only in these instances alone, ¶
and one does not establish a verbal pattern on their account. ¶
Rather, they belong to the class of anomalous or compound forms, ¶
as will be explained in the Book of Composition, ¶
each one in its proper place.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Eleventh Principle. On the elucidation of the vowel patterns of the qal and Nif‘al forms in the category of doubled verbs:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 4:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. ¶
And it seems to me that no proof should be brought from hizdamaneton, ¶
for two reasons. ¶
First, because it is an Aramaic word. ¶
Second, because in the Masoretic tradition it is found as: ¶
written hizdamaneton, read hizdamaneton; ¶
and it is one of the two words that are read with a dalet but not written with it. ¶
It thus appears that they were in doubt whether the dalet ¶
ought to be written or not. ¶
And although we find that the masters of the Talmud were accustomed to do so, ¶
saying nizdaman lo tsevi, nizdaqen ha-din, ¶
this is not done in the Hebrew language, ¶
for thus our Rabbis of blessed memory said: ¶
the language of Scripture is one thing, ¶
and the language of the Mishnah is another ¶
(Avodah Zarah 58b).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 6:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Here it is necessary for me to set before you a great rule¶
concerning the law of sheva, for it is a principle and foundation¶
in the use of pronominal suffixes, especially with complete roots. You already know that two shevas can never occur one after the other¶
at the beginning of a word.¶
And I have already informed you, in the Second Principle, Section Two,¶
that qamats and tsere change to a sheva¶
at the beginning of every noun.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And likewise they divided the other books of the twenty-four into sedarim.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:22 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

11. And know that in the future tense there is another sign by which to distinguish the vav of conjunction from the vav of conversion. This is that the vav of conjunction is pointed with a sheva, as I hinted above in section 4; but the vav of conversion is governed to be pointed with a pataḥ and followed by a dagesh, such as va-yomer, va-tomer, va-nomer. And since the aleph does not accept a dagesh, the vav before it is pointed with a qamats. All of this will be explained well in the chapter mentioned above, God willing.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 22 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Since for every young man it is good and also choice,

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 7:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. Know that pronominal suffixes attached to nouns ¶
always indicate possession, ¶
that is, the noun is the property of the one to whom the suffix refers. ¶
In the Ashkenazic tongue this is expressed as mein, dein, zain, and the like; ¶
and in the vernacular languages as mio, tuo, suo, ¶
or di me, di te, di quello, and so forth. ¶
Thus ʿavdo (“his servant”) and ʾamato (“his maidservant”) ¶
mean “a servant belonging to him” and “a maidservant belonging to him.” ¶
¶
But pronominal suffixes attached to verbs indicate the object acted upon, ¶
as in peqado, peqadkha, peqadani. ¶
In the Ashkenazic tongue: ikh, dikh, mikh; ¶
and in the vernacular languages: mi, ti, quello, and the like. ¶
That is to say: “he visited him,” “he visited you,” “he visited me,” ¶
as I will explain to you clearly in the chapter on pronominal suffixes.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 4:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And those with a qamats or a tsere do not change at all, and the reason for this will be explained to you in this treatise, Principle Eight. Likewise, those with a ḥiriq or a shuruq mostly do not change. The exceptions are as follows: ʿir (“city”) forms its plural with a mobile yod, as in ʿirim and ʿirot; shoq (“leg” or “thigh”) forms its plural with a mobile vav, shoqim; and from qots (“lock of hair”) comes qotsotav. Likewise, from dud (“pot”) we find the forms sirōt and dudim.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The he becomes weak only at the end of a verb, such as galah, asah, and the like. But at the beginning or in the middle it does not become weak, as in harag, bahal, and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 8:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. And those cases in which the final he is a root letter ¶
belong to the class of roots whose third radical is he ¶
(nḥei lamed-he), ¶
as I will explain in the Fourth Treatise, ¶
Principle Seven, Sections Two and Three. ¶
There I will give you rules by which you may distinguish ¶
a merely added he from one that is truly part of the root.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:16 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. And there are six tenses, which are six actions: past, participle, passive, infinitive, imperative, and future.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 13:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. There are also doubled nouns of four letters in which the lamed (the third radical) is doubled, such as ra‘anan, sha’anan, ḥakhlil, and similar forms. ¶
Some of these also appear with a feminine he, for example sha‘arurah, ¶
and with an added yod, as in sha‘aruriyah.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 2:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Second Principle:¶
On elucidation of the causes for the change of vowel-points in nouns,¶
which vowels are subject to change,¶
and into which vowels they change.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. ¶
And the general rule is this: ¶
all types of compound roots whose first letter is yod ¶
never come with the loss of the first root letter, ¶
neither in the infinitive nor in the imperative, ¶
except for the roots yatsa and nasa, ¶
which do come with the loss of the first letter. ¶
¶
Thus, from yatsa: ¶
tset, be-tset, ke-tset, and so on. ¶
And from nasa: ¶
set, ke-set, be-set, and so on; ¶
sa, se’u, and the like. ¶
¶
And the future forms of yare are: ¶
ira, yira, with a quiescent yod; ¶
and from yarah: ¶
ireh, yireh, and so on. ¶
And with the loss of the he: ¶
ir, yir, and the like, ¶
following the pattern of ¶
va-yif be-gadlo (Ezekiel 31:7).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 3:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Pattern Hif‘al ¶
Its identifying sign is the addition of a he, like its prototype.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And it came to pass when I heard his words, for they were pleasing, that I rose to fulfill my desire and hastened to comply with him. I resolved to make this book small in size and rich in quality, with concise rules that are useful and necessary for anyone who comes to learn the ways of the Holy Tongue, without lengthening my discussion with matters already written by the grammarians before me, for all books of grammar are full of them. Rather, my main intent in composing this work is to write certain rules and matters in which no one preceded me, as well as some of the good things written by the distinguished grammarians, scattered in various places throughout their books — here a little and there a little. I shall gather them, explain them, and make from them rules and principles whose remembrance will be easy for students. ¶
¶
And this shall be your sign: in every place where I explain or introduce something from my own mind, you will find the image of a hand touching its lip from the outside, pointing with a finger as if to say, “See here — something new is being introduced to you.”

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 12:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

12. The twelfth principle. ¶
An elucidation of nouns derived from doubled roots that occur with an added mem or tav at the beginning.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And know that in the third-person masculine and feminine, ¶
the he sometimes changes into a mobile yod, ¶
as from ḥasah: ¶
tsur ḥasyo bo (Deuteronomy 32:37), ¶
bakh ḥasyah nafshi (Psalms 57:2), ¶
following the pattern of paqdu, paqedah.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 20 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

I praise the Lord God and bow down,¶
to the Creator of light and the One who brings on evenings.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 3:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that you will not find a noun whose first vowel is a segol¶
unless the second vowel is also segol,¶
such as beged (“garment”), qever (“grave”),¶
ḥesed (“kindness”), ʿeved (“servant”), and the like.¶
These constitute the greater part of nouns¶
and are called “nouns of six vowel-points.”¶
They are always accented on the penultimate syllable¶
and do not change at all in the singular construct state,¶
as in beged pishtim (“a linen garment,” Lev. 13:47)¶
and ḥesed ʾEl (“the kindness of God,” Ps. 52:3). With a singular pronominal suffix,¶
the first segol changes to a ḥiriq¶
and the second to a sheva,¶
as in bigdo (“his garment”) and qivro (“his grave”).¶
But ḥasdo (“his kindness”) and ʿavdo (“his servant”)¶
take a pataḥ,¶
because of the gutturals ḥet and ʿayin.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Genesis 27:1 and Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:5
(automatic citation link)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Genesis 24:1 and Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:5
(automatic citation link)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 21 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

He granted me understanding to compose a book on grammar;¶
its words are sweet nectar, pleasant as honey.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. Know that the patterns pa‘al and pa‘ul¶
generally occur only with **intransitive verbs**,¶
such as zaqén (“was old”), malé (“was full”),¶
ḥadélu (“they ceased”), and qamélu (“they withered”). From malé, however, transitive forms are also found.¶
Likewise, all verbs whose roots are from the class¶
naḥei lamed–alef and are intransitive¶
appear in the pattern pa‘al,¶
such as tamé (“was impure”) and yaré (“feared”).¶
The root yatsa (“went out”) is an exception. The vowel sheva under a qamats is characteristic here,¶
and only a few complete roots that are transitive¶
appear in this pattern, such as ḥafáts, aháv, and akhál. The pattern pa‘ul, by contrast,¶
is always derived from **intransitive verbs**,¶
such as yakhól, yagór, and qatón,¶
as in the verse: “Qatón have I become from all the kindnesses”¶
(Genesis 32:10). Therefore, these verbs have neither a participle¶
nor a passive form,¶
as I explained in the First Treatise,¶
Principle Five, Section Four.¶
Instead, the **adjectival form** appears in place of both,¶
using the perfect-tense pattern. Thus:¶
“And Abraham was zaqén, advanced in days”¶
(Genesis 24:1) — this is an adjective. “But it came to pass when Isaac had zaqén,¶
and his eyes were dim”¶
(Genesis 27:1) — here it is a perfect verb. “And Moses lo yakhól” — this too is a perfect verb. No adjectival form of yakhól is found in Scripture,¶
yet our Rabbis of blessed memory used it adjectivally,¶
saying eno yakhól (“he is unable”),¶
enam yekholím (“they are unable”). All other verbal forms in this category¶
follow a single consistent pattern,¶
and there is no distinction among the three patterns.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Passive ¶
It occurs only in complete form, ¶
as in ve-at shadud (Jeremiah 4:30), ¶
and ve-shallaḥ retsutsim (Isaiah 58:6), ¶
and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Thirteenth Principle. On the elucidation of nouns that have an added nun, tav, or yod at the beginning or at the end:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 19 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

[A peg and two movements; and a peg and two movements in the opening and the closing.]

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

12. Be it well known to you that in the languages of the nations there are three kinds of past tense: the simple past, the imperfect past, and the pluperfect (past already completed).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 3:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. The Imperative¶
For the singular, the middle root letter has a tsere,¶
as in hafqed et ha-Levi’im (Numbers 1:50).¶
But when it appears with the addition of a he at the end,¶
the middle root letter takes a hiriq,¶
as in ha’azinah, haqshivah.¶
And the plural and the feminine singular always take a hiriq,¶
as in hifkidu, hifkidi.¶
And for the feminine plural, hafqednah;¶
and this is said by way of reasoning,¶
for it is not found in Scripture.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2.¶
And the class of roots quiescent at both ends is of three kinds. The first is where the first root letter is aleph¶
and the final root letter is he,¶
such as avah, afah.¶
Here the aleph follows the rule of roots quiescent in initial aleph,¶
and the he follows the rule of roots quiescent in final he. The second is where the first root letter is yod¶
and the final root letter is aleph,¶
such as yatsa, yatsata, and the like.¶
These take a tsere according to the Paʿal pattern.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 6:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that the letters used with infinitives are b-k-l-m; and it goes without saying that the vav is also used with them, for such is its usage with all verbs, nouns, and particles — except with the word o (“or”), and with the word aval (“but”), and with the word asher when its beginning is the interrogative he, as I shall explain in my book HaHarkavah in the discussion of the word ve-he’ezniḥu.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Past ¶
huggash, huggashta, and so on. ¶
It has no participle, passive, or imperative. ¶
The infinitive is huggash, as in haggēd haggēd li (Ruth 2:11), ¶
and with the prefixed letters bekholam it is not found. ¶
The future tense is uggash, yuggash, and so on.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And besides their division of the Five Books of the Torah into fifty-two portions, they further divided them into sedarim, saying: the Book of Genesis has twelve portions and forty-three sedarim; the Book of Exodus has eleven portions and twenty-nine sedarim; and so with all of them.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 13:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that there are doubled nouns of four letters—meaning that between the two doubled final radicals, the first radical of the root appears again. ¶
Thus, from barar comes barburim; ¶
from baqaq comes baqbuq; ¶
from tsalal comes tsaltsel; ¶
from qadad comes qodqod, and similar forms.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. The Pattern Nif‘al¶
In the past tense, in the three concealed persons,¶
the vowel is a qamats,¶
and the first root letter is vocalized in one of three ways,¶
just as the Qal pattern of strong roots appears as¶
Pa‘al, Pe‘al, or Pu‘al,¶
as I explained there. The open forms are, for example:¶
ve-naqal (2 Kings 3:18),¶
ve-nasav ha-gevul (Numbers 34:4),¶
ve-ḥam ha-shemesh ve-namas (Exodus 16:21).¶
And it would have been proper for them to have two qamats¶
because of the pause,¶
but instead they take what is called pataḥ de-sifra;¶
the rule of pataḥ de-sifra will be explained¶
in the Book of Mesorah of the Mesorah,¶
in the tenth treatise, with God’s help. The other persons are doubled,¶
as in nasovu ‘al ha-bayit (Genesis 19:4),¶
nesavotem, nesavunu, and so on.¶
Those with a tsere are, for example:¶
namas betokh me‘ai (Psalms 22:15),¶
nesavah elai (Ezekiel 26:2).¶
Those with a ḥolam are found only in the plural,¶
as in ve-nagolu ke-sefer ha-shamayim (Isaiah 34:4),¶
nagozu ve-‘avar (Nahum 1:12). And we may posit the singular forms nagol, nagoz,¶
following the pattern of namukh,¶
which is found in the words of our Sages,¶
whose root is makhakh,¶
as in va-yimokhu ba-‘avonam (Psalms 106:43). All three patterns appear in the other past forms¶
according to one rule:¶
nesavot, neqalot, niglot,¶
all with a doubled final root letter¶
to indicate the doubling.¶
And a few are found in a lightened form,¶
such as ve-navkah ruaḥ Mitsrayim (Isaiah 19:3),¶
ve-raḥavah ve-nesavah (Ezekiel 41:7),¶
naqtah nafshi ba-ḥayyai (Job 10:1),¶
where the expected forms would be navkah, nesavah, naqtah.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:19 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

9. Know that five of them are always accented on the final syllable, whether with the vav or without it, namely: paqad, paqdu, paqedah, paqadtem, peqadten. And two are always accented on the penultimate syllable, whether with the vav or without it, namely: paqadnu and u-paqadt. And two of them, without the vav, are always accented on the penultimate syllable, but with the vav are sometimes accented on the penultimate syllable and sometimes on the final syllable, namely: paqadta and paqadti, as I have written.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. The Pattern Hif‘il — The Past¶
It comes in two forms, and in both the prefixed he has a tsere.¶
In the first, the first root letter also has a tsere,¶
as in ve-hesav lev melekh Ashur (Ezra 6:22),¶
heḥel ha-negef (Numbers 17:11),¶
he‘ez ish rasha‘ (Proverbs 21:29).¶
In the second, the first root letter comes with a pataḥ,¶
as in he-mar Shaddai li me’od (Ruth 1:20),¶
he-qel artsah Zevulun (Isaiah 8:23). Likewise, the third-person masculine and feminine¶
appear in these two patterns with a tsere,¶
as in hesebu elai et ha-aron (1 Samuel 5:10),¶
ve-ha-massa’ah heḥelah (Judges 20:40);¶
and with a pataḥ, as in hemakku, hemakkah.¶
But all the other past forms follow the manner of¶
roots quiescent in the middle letter,¶
except that here they are doubled,¶
as in hesivota et libbam (1 Kings 18:37),¶
ve-hizkita bor kappi (Job 9:30),¶
whereas roots quiescent in the middle letter are light,¶
as in ve-heshivota, ve-heshivoti, and so on. And if the first root letter is guttural,¶
the prefixed he is vocalized with a pataḥ,¶
as in heḥeloti Sha’ul lo (1 Samuel 22:15).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 12:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. And you already know that nouns whose final vowel is a qamats¶
change to apataḥ in the construct state,¶
as in miqdash Hashem tameʾ,¶
mishkan Hashem,¶
mikol maʾakhal Parʿoh. Some also appear with a feminine he at the end,¶
with the mem pointed with a ḥiriq, a pataḥ, or a segol,¶
as in milḥamah, mamlakhah, memshalah.¶
In the construct state one says¶
milḥemat Kenaʿan,¶
mamlekhet ʿOg,¶
lememshelet ha-yom. This pattern is also found outside the construct,¶
as in misgeret ṭofaḥ,¶
et ha-migʿeret,¶
or with a ḥolam,¶
as in mishqoleth and maḥagoreth.¶
I have already written their rules¶
in Principle Ten. There are also nouns that appear¶
with an added mem at the end,¶
such as pitʾom and shilshom,¶
though these are few.¶
But the mem that appears at the end of nouns¶
to indicate the plural,¶
as in devarim and zekharim,¶
is not called an added letter¶
but a functional one.¶
It is preceded by a full ḥiriq,¶
that is, with a yod.¶
When such a noun enters the construct state,¶
the mem drops away¶
and the yod remains by itself,¶
and the preceding letter is pointed with a tsere,¶
as in zeqenei and divrei.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 9:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4.¶
And all the other patterns proceed in this same manner,¶
except that in them a tsere most often appears¶
before the quiescent aleph in the past tense,¶
when it occurs,¶
and likewise in the first-person forms,¶
as in niqre’ta, niqre’ti,¶
malle’ta, malle’ti,¶
himtza’ta, himtza’ti.¶
And I have already written to you¶
that many roots quiescent in the first letter aleph¶
come according to the pattern with a tsere,¶
and all of them are intransitive verbs,¶
such as male, sane, yare, and the like;¶
see there.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The First Treatise ¶
On the elucidation of the root categories of verbs, and it is divided into thirteen principles: ¶
The First Principle. On the division of all the roots of the language into eight parts:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 3:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The third principle. An elucidation of nouns with a quiescent middle letter (ayin) that occur with an added letter:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. And likewise in the future tense there ought to have been twelve forms of expression; but since the two first-person forms are also the same in it, there remain only ten forms of expression. And although the forms of the feminine third person and the feminine second person come in the same form — for the word tifqadnah serves for both — nevertheless it is not considered identical, for two reasons:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 6:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. Know, that no prefixed particle ever comes at the beginning of the imperative, except for the vav alone. And although I have already said that the imperative applies only to the second person, I now say that one may also issue a command to the third person — but in the form of the future tense, such as ya‘aseh Par‘oh ve-yafqed peqidim (Genesis 41:34), and many similar cases.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:15 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And only a few are found in which the first two letters are identical, and these follow the pattern of the complete verbs. For example, from dedeh one says eddaddeh (Isaiah 38:15); and from shashah, “veshishitem et ha-eifah” (Ezekiel 45:13). There are almost no others among verbs, but they are found more frequently among nouns, such as “darakh kokhav mi-Ya‘akov” (Numbers 24:17), “u-mashoaḥ ba-basar” (Jeremiah 22:14), “be-vavat ‘eino” (Zechariah 2:12), and the like — though they are few.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. The Imperative¶
It too appears with the loss of the yod,¶
as in shev, shevu, and so on.¶
(In the first edition: and with the addition of a final he, shevah;¶
and in pause with a tsere, redah;¶
and when joined by maqqef or adjacent to a short word, with a segol and penultimate stress,¶
as in lekh na.) There is no difference between this imperative¶
and the imperative of roots deficient in the first letter nun;¶
therefore be careful not to confuse them.¶
But the e-i-t-n letters distinguish between the two classes:¶
for in roots deficient in the first letter nun,¶
the e-i-t-n letters are vocalized with a hiriq¶
and a dagesh follows, as in yigash, tigash, and so on;¶
whereas in this class they take a tsere,¶
which is a full vowel indicating the quiescent yod that is not written,¶
as in eshav, yeshav, and so on. And there are cases where the yod is written with a tsere,¶
as in eilekh sholel (Micah 1:8),¶
[ha-smol ve-eimanah (Genesis 13:9)],¶
and similar cases are few.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 1:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. Likewise, when these quiescent forms appear with an added letter, ¶
such as maqom (“place”) and malon (“lodging”), ¶
they are measured according to the pattern mepul. ¶
Similarly, tavnit (“form”) and tarmit (“deceit”) are measured ¶
according to the pattern tifʿit. ¶
¶
So it is with all nouns from all root classes. ¶
But be very careful when assigning a pattern, ¶
to know which letter is a root letter and which is a functional (servile) letter, ¶
lest it become a snare to you, as it is written, ¶
“for it will be a snare to you” (Exod. 23:33). ¶
¶
This is especially important with verbs. ¶
For example, in “And I find more bitter than death” (Eccl. 7:26), ¶
the word moṣeʾ is measured according to the pattern poʿel, ¶
for it is a participle of the qal stem from the root maṣaʾ (“to find”). ¶
But in “He brings forth the wind from His treasuries” (Ps. 135:7), ¶
the word moṣiʾ comes from the root yaṣaʾ (“to go out”), ¶
and it is a participle of the hifʿil stem, ¶
and its pattern is moʿal.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 6:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. However, many cases are found in which the final he is a root letter. In such cases it is always preceded by a segol, as in miqneh, miqreh, and mishneh. If the first radical is a guttural, as in maḥaneh (“camp”) or maʿaseh (“deed”), the same rule applies. By this they are distinguished from the feminine he and from an added he, for those always have qamats before them. Moreover, these forms do not change in the construct state or with pronominal suffixes, except that the segol changes to a tsere, as in maḥaneh Dan (“the camp of Dan”) and mirʿeh ʿadarim (“a pasture of flocks”). However, when a tav is added at the beginning, a root he is never found. And with pronominal suffixes the he always drops away, as in miqnehu, mishnehu, maʿasehu. Likewise with suffixes using vav for the masculine, as in yadehu (“his hand”) and raglehu (“his foot”). In forms such as miqni, miqnekha, miqnam, and the like, the he is absent in all of them.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:5 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And in the Second Treatise, in the Sixth Principle, section 6, I shall explain the difference between the defective roots and the weak roots:

6 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:24 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

However, in the Holy Tongue all three appear in a different manner, and according to the context each one is explained in one of these three ways. I shall now give you an example from the word paqad as it appears in Scripture in all three senses. “paqad ‘avonekh bat Edom” (Lamentations 4:22) — this is a completed past. In the Ashkenazic tongue it is expressed as er hot gedokht, and in the vernacular tongue as visito.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2.¶
But the participle and the passive occur only in complete form,¶
as in mesovev, mehallel.¶
Therefore, everything that you find in the pattern mefu‘al with a tsere,¶
or mefu‘al with qamats,¶
such as meshovev netivot (Isaiah 58:12),¶
me‘onen u-menachesh (Deuteronomy 18:10),¶
ve-hu meḥullal mi-pesha‘einu (Isaiah 53:5),¶
u-meromam ‘al kol berakhah (Nehemiah 9:5),¶
belong to the class of roots quiescent in the middle letter,¶
and not to the doubled roots.¶
This is also the view of R. Abraham ibn Ezra¶
in his book Ṣaḥut.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:15 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And in the future tense it comes with a dagesh,¶
as in eqach, yiqach, tiqach;¶
the dagesh stands in place of the lamed of the first root letter.¶
No other lamed is found to drop except this one,¶
and this is because of the frequent use of this root.¶
And sometimes even the dagesh itself is dropped,¶
and this occurs only when the middle root letter has a sheva,¶
as in va-yiqḥu elekha (Numbers 19:2),¶
and ve-eqḥah pat leḥem (Genesis 18:5).¶
In both of these the qof is soft,¶
just as from the root nasa‘ it is said¶
va-yis‘u and va-yaḥanu (Numbers 33:6),¶
and va-yis’u oto banav (Genesis 50:13),¶
where the samekh and the shin are soft¶
because of their frequent use. And there are those who say that the language of “taking” has two roots,¶
laqach and naqach:¶
the past tenses and participles come from laqach and naqach,¶
and the future tenses from naqach,¶
just as the language of “going” likewise has two roots,¶
halakh and yalakh:¶
the past tenses and participles come from halakh,¶
and the future tenses from yalakh,¶
as in elekh, yelekh, and so on.¶
But the first explanation is the more correct.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And ever since I came of age, I have wondered why they did not do the same in Israel — to mark at the beginning of each seder and seder, in the manner of א ב ג ד ה ו, and so on, just as the masters of the Mesorah arranged them.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise, Subject 1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

On the elucidation of the root categories of verbs, and it is divided into thirteen principles:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:19 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And there are three persons: the third person, the second person, and the first person speaking for himself.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:26 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

“For ki paqad Hashem et ammo” (Ruth 1:6) is a past already completed, for it is as though it said “had already attended to.” In the Ashkenazic tongue it is expressed as er hatte gedokht, and in the vernacular tongue as avia visitamo.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 13:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The thirteenth principle. An elucidation of nouns consisting of four or five letters.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Foreword to Mantua Edition 2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

At the age of forty I was, when time sent me forth from Venice and I came to Rome. There I was questioned concerning the composition of this book, and in it I responded to matters as my heart saw fit. And behold, the Lord has preserved my life since then for thirty years, and now I am as one of seventy years, yet even today I remain strong — as my strength was then, so is my strength now — to go forth and come back in the battle of grammar, Scripture, and tradition. For since that time, other views have arisen within me, and new understandings that I did not previously know. In addition to this, from that day onward I discovered that I had omitted certain matters that were worthy of being written, yet I did not write them; and I also wrote things that I wish I had not written — I regret having done so. This should not be wondered at, for we find the same among our Rabbis of blessed memory, who said something in their youth and later retracted it in their old age, as we find that Rava retracted his view in that matter, and likewise Rav Ashi retracted what he had said in the first edition, and the law follows the later edition, as stated at the end of the chapter ‘One Whose Dead Lies Before Him.’ And just as their thoughts were, so are my thoughts; and I am no better than my forefathers. Therefore I resolved with my heart to print this book a third time, to add to it and to remove from it. In this way I shall improve the latter kindness beyond the former, so as not to go after young students teaching them false premises, invalid proofs, and unsound rules — which the students who come after them would then learn, resulting, God forbid, in the desecration of the Divine Name. Therefore, in this version I shall correct what is distorted, straighten what is crooked, repair what is flawed, and remove stumbling blocks from the path of my people. Thus God will be with me. And so I shall begin this introduction as it stands.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 12:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. The second kind is when the corresponding qal stem is transitive; in that case this stem receives the action by means of an intermediary. For example, “hokhrat minḥah va-neseḵ” (Joel 2:14). Here there are three participants: the locust, the vine, and the offering. The locust is the one that cuts off; the vine is cut off; and as a result the offering is cut off. And all the remaining rules governing the hof‘al stem are the same as those governing its counterpart, the geminated pu‘al, as I have explained in its proper place.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introductory Poem 4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The foundations of grammar are indeed examined in my book, for those versed in law and judgment, wise and incisive.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Participle¶
For the singular, it is like the past tense, except that the middle root letter¶
takes a qamats, as in pakad.¶
The plural is pekadim, and so on,¶
as I explained in the First Treatise, in the Tenth Principle.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. The Participle¶
In the masculine singular it appears with a qamats,¶
as in ‘im navar titbar (2 Samuel 22:27),¶
and with a tsere,¶
as in lev namas (Nahum 2:11),¶
naqal me-hyotekha li (Isaiah 49:6).¶
In the other forms it follows these two patterns with a dagesh,¶
as in anaḥnu nimmaqim (Ezekiel 33:10);¶
and likewise one should say nimasim with a dagesh, and so on.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The First Principle. On the vowel patterns of the Qal and Nif‘al binyanim in the complete verbs, and their identifying signs.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

8. ¶
There is also found a single five-letter form from the class of verbs ¶
with a final ה (lamed-he), namely: ¶
yefifita mibnei adam (Psalms 45:3), ¶
whose root is y-p-h (“beautiful”). ¶
In it, both the first and the second radicals are doubled, ¶
and it belongs to the qal stem. ¶
¶
By contrast, ḥamarmar belongs to the pa‘el stem. ¶
Nevertheless, it is also possible to derive from it its corresponding ¶
parent stem, and to say: ¶
ḥamarmar, ḥamarmarta, ḥamarmarti, ¶
for the grammarians have stated that from every root for which a ¶
derived stem exists, one may construct its parent stem — and likewise ¶
the reverse. ¶
¶
Thus, from: ¶
yiqqaḥ na me‘at mayim (Genesis 18:4) ¶
and ¶
yitten mayim ‘al zera‘ (Leviticus 11:38), ¶
both of which are in the pa‘el stem, ¶
we may derive their parent hif‘il forms and say: ¶
ha-leqiḥa, ha-netina.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And those used in the future tense are the letters e-i-t-n, and they always appear at the beginning. However, there is no need to elaborate on their usage here, for you will see it in the table of verb patterns that I shall compose, God willing.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 5:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Some are found on the pattern paʿal, such as tsama and tsava, and some on the pattern poʿal, such as guma and sova. There is one that appears with a doubled consonant, namely kisse (“throne”). It does not change in the construct state, but with pronominal suffixes the tsere changes to a sheva and the doubling falls away, as in kiso and kisakha. In the plural it appears in the feminine form, as in kisaʾot.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Know that every root whose middle letter is a vav is quiescent¶
in all patterns,¶
as from qum one says qam, qamta, and so on.¶
Except when the final root letter is he,¶
in which case the vav is mobile in all patterns,¶
as from avah: otah nafshi (Micah 7:1);¶
from qavah: qiviti Hashem (Psalms 130:5);¶
from ravah: harveh et ha-aretz (Isaiah 55:10);¶
from tsavah: tsiviti otkha (Exodus 29:35);¶
and from ‘avah: ‘ivvatah veshti (Esther 1:16).¶
In these, the vav never becomes quiescent. And there are five roots whose final letter is not he¶
in which the vav never becomes quiescent,¶
and they are:¶
gava‘, shava‘, ‘avat, ‘aval, ‘avar. However, gava‘ appears only in the pattern Qal,¶
as in ki gava‘ Aharon (Numbers 20:29),¶
and va-yigva‘ va-yamot (Genesis 25:17).¶
And shava‘ is found only in the pattern Paʿal with a dagesh:¶
shava‘, shava‘ta, shava‘ti.¶
And ‘avat is found in Paʿal, Nif‘al, and Hitpa‘el,¶
as in le-‘avvet adam (Lamentations 3:36),¶
ben na‘avot ha-mardut (1 Samuel 20:30),¶
and ve-hit‘u oto anshei ha-ḥayil (Ecclesiastes 12:3).¶
And ‘aval and ‘avar are found only in Paʿal,¶
as in mi-kaf me‘avel ve-ḥometz (Psalms 71:4),¶
ha-shoḥad ye‘aver ‘einei ḥakhamim (Exodus 23:8). All the rest are quiescent vav roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

But know that this loss occurs only in verbs ¶
for which no imperative is found in the pattern Qal, ¶
such as those I mentioned; ¶
for we cannot say sumu, shukhu, shotu, golu, lonu. ¶
Likewise, in most of them the future tense is not found in Qal, ¶
so that one does not say avon, ashor, ashot, ashum, ashush, agol. ¶
And the other actions of the pattern Qal are not found in them either, ¶
except for a few cases, ¶
such as asher shar la-Hashem (Psalms 7:1), ¶
ki shet li Elohim (Genesis 4:25), ¶
binah le-re‘i (Psalms 139:2), ¶
and similar cases, which are few. ¶
¶
But verbs in which both Qal and Hif‘il are found, ¶
for the most part—such as qam, shav, sar, ba, ¶
from which are found heqim, heshiv, hevi— ¶
the imperative never comes with the loss of the he, ¶
for we cannot say qemu, shevu, sirru, bi’u, and the like.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 11:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. The second kind is when the qal stem is transitive toward a second object, and this stem makes it transitive toward a third. Thus, from the root akhal, which is transitive toward a second object, we say he’ekhīl, which is transitive toward a third. For example, “ha-ma’akhilkha man”: here there are three participants—the Holy One, blessed be He, who causes to eat; Israel, who eats; and the manna, which is eaten.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Therefore, when I bring an example from Scripture, I will not multiply citations for it, but will establish the matter by the testimony of one or two verses.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Infinitive and the Imperative¶
They come with a ḥolam¶
in order to distinguish them from roots quiescent in the middle letter,¶
which have a shuruq.¶
The infinitive: sov et ha-har ha-zeh (Deuteronomy 2:3).¶
The imperative: sov demeh lakh (Song of Songs 2:17),¶
sovu Tsiyon (Psalms 48:13),¶
sovi ‘ir (Isaiah 23:16),¶
with penultimate stress.¶
(And therefore a dagesh comes after the ḥolam,¶
even though it does not normally follow a long vowel.¶
This will be explained to you further in the chapter on poetry.)

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Tenth Principle. On the elucidation of nouns with a weak final letter lamed–he that are of two letters:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The Pattern Qal¶
It appears in full form up through the future tense;¶
and in the future tense the root aleph becomes quiescent,¶
as in yomar, tomar, nomar.¶
But in first-person singular, the aleph is dropped¶
and a quiescent vav comes in its place, as in omar el Eloah;¶
this is so that two alephs should not come together,¶
that is, to avoid saying a’omar. And when yomar, tomar, nomar come with the conversive vav,¶
the pataḥ returns to a segol and the stress shifts to the penultimate,¶
as in va-yomer, va-tomer, va-nomer.¶
And when they come again without it,¶
they return to their original rule with a pataḥ and final stress,¶
as in yomar, tomar;¶
except for va-ya‘an Iyov va-yomer and similar cases,¶
all of which are penultimately stressed.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fourth Principle. On the elucidation of the vowel patterns of the Hitpa‘el form of complete verbs, and its identifying signs:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Twelfth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the five remaining verbal patterns¶
in the class of doubled roots.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 18 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The third: because it is a distinctive appellative name, and is called by the name HaBachur.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Eleventh Principle. On the elucidation of the function of the Hif‘il pattern:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 4:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. The Infinitive ¶
It is like the past tense, ¶
and the he does not drop, ¶
even when combined with the prefixed letters bekholam.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Second Principle. On the elucidation of the differences between each and every one of the eight divisions mentioned:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:15 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And remember this rule and treasure it,¶
for it is good,¶
and no one has preceded me in it.¶

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 7:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. You will observe that with the letters b-k-l-m ¶
(the servile letters), ¶
the first letter is pointed with sheva, ¶
except in those forms whose suffix ends with mem or nun, ¶
in which case it is pointed with ḥiriq, ¶
so that two shevas do not occur at the beginning of the word, ¶
as I wrote in the preceding principle. ¶
¶
And with b-k-l-m a yod appears before the suffix letter ¶
to indicate the plural.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. The Pattern Nif‘al — The Past¶
In the third-person forms, the nun has a qamats,¶
in the three forms of the concealed persons,¶
as in navon, navonu, navonah.¶
But in the other persons, the qamats changes to a sheva, as is its rule,¶
and the ḥolam changes to a shuruq,¶
as in ki nivniti, nifuneti, nidkheti.¶
This is in order that two ḥolam vowels should not occur together.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 2:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that there are four causes that bring about changes ¶
in the vowel-points of nouns, and their mnemonic is SRNK: ¶
construct state, pluralization, femininity, and pronominal suffixes. ¶
¶
The vowel-points that change in nouns are four: ¶
qamats, tsere, segol, and ḥolam, ¶
and the mnemonic for them is QTS–Ḥ. ¶
The sheva also changes in one of these cases, ¶
but it is not counted among them, ¶
since it is not considered a vowel, ¶
as will be explained in the chapter on prosody, in Song Six.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that although I said that in every root category there are seven verb patterns, this applies only to the division of transitive verbs. But the class of intransitive verbs has only three active patterns, for the passive patterns are not needed for them, since they themselves are already passive, as I have already hinted in section 2. Only a few are found that appear in the Nif‘al and Hitpa‘el patterns, as will be explained in the Eighth Principle:

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Turn to your discourse, to the foundation of grammar;¶
behold, this book is called Ha-Bachur.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 8:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And you should know that imperatives never occur in this kind, for we cannot say hissaref, higganev, hillaked, or hishaver. Rather, they occur in the second kind, and the reason for this will be explained to you in the discussion of the pi‘el stem (Principle 10, section 2).

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

To those who ask the book, ‘To whom do you belong?’¶
it will reply: ‘To Elijah—Bachur is his byname.’

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 3:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Third Principle:¶
On the elucidation of nouns that are vocalized with a segol.

6 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 2:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The second principle.¶
On the elucidation of nouns with a quiescent first radical aleph or yod.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 11:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

11. The eleventh principle. In explanation of nouns from doubled roots that occur with the loss of a letter:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

8. The Pattern Huf‘al¶
In the past tense, the prefixed he has a shuruq,¶
as in husav,¶
as I wrote above concerning roots quiescent in the middle letter.¶
The remaining forms have a doubled middle root letter,¶
as in husavot, husavoti, and so on.¶
But roots quiescent in the middle letter are light,¶
as in hushavta, hushavtem levadkhem (Isaiah 5:8).

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:25 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

“And Hashem paqad et Sarah” (Genesis 21:1) is an imperfect past — that is, it is like “was attending to.” In the Ashkenazic tongue it is expressed as er rakhte, and in the vernacular tongue as visitava. But according to the explanation of Rashi, of blessed memory, it is a past already completed; see there.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Tenth Principle. On the elucidation of the function of the Pu‘al pattern:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 13:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. There are also nouns in which a tav is added at the end but not at the beginning.¶
In these, the letter immediately before the tav is pointed with a shuruq,¶
and the first radical has pataḥ, as in¶
malkhut, gevahut, mardut, and shaḥrut. There are also cases in which the first radical has a ḥiriq,¶
such as refuʾut, shiflut, and ʿiqshut.¶
Others have a sheva on the first radical followed by a ḥiriq,¶
as in yedidut and meridut. The proper plural of all these forms should be made with a mobile yod,¶
that is, with the masculine-style plural ending.¶
Thus, just as from malkhut we find the plural malkhuyot,¶
so too one should say kilyot, ʿiqshuyot, and gevahuyot.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 10:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. And likewise with the hof‘al stem, which is derived from the hif‘il stem, for the law governing both of them is the same: they always receive their action from another. For this reason, neither of them has an imperative, for how could one command another in a passive form derived from transitive verbs, as I have written in this treatise in the eighth principle? And all the more so, they have no active form. Even the participle does not occur in pu‘al except in a few places where it functions as an adjective, such as “ve-ha-seneh einennu ukkal” (Exodus 3:2), “la-na‘ar ha-yullad” (Judges 13:8). These are adjectival forms, as is evident from the qamats vowel; and one cannot say that they are past tense forms with a qamats because of the end of the verse, for if that were so it would have had to say “ve-ha-seneh lo ukkal,” since the word ein is used only with nouns and not with verbs. Likewise, the he of the definite article in the word ha-yullad proves that it is not a past tense verb, for the definite article is never used with verbs. Therefore we must say that these are adjectival participles. In the hof‘al stem, however, neither participle nor adjective is ever found. The infinitive too is found in neither of them except in a few places, and never with the letters bekholam, as will be explained to you in the second treatise, principle two. Thus there remain in them only the past and the future.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

(First edition: 2) The Participle and the Passive They always appear with an added prefixed mem with a sheva at the beginning.¶
In the participle there is a pataḥ after it,¶
as in mefaqed.¶
In the passive there are three vowels after it,¶
as in mefuqqad.¶
Your mnemonic for this is MPMʾP. The second radical (ʿayin) of the root,¶
in the singular participle,¶
takes a tsere,¶
and in the other forms it takes a sheva naʿ,¶
as in mefaqed, mefaqedim, and so forth. In the passive, in all forms,¶
the ʿayin takes a qamats,¶
as in mefuqqad, mefuqqadim, and so forth.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 2:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. As for those nouns whose first vowel is a tsere¶
and whose second vowel is a qamats,¶
such as levav (“heart”), ʿenav (“grape”),¶
and shaʿar (“gate”), and the like:¶
the tsere changes to a sheva in all four of the changes,¶
and the qamats changes to a pataḥ in the singular construct only. Thus:¶
levav, ʿenav, shaʿar;¶
levavo, ʿenavo, shaʿaro;¶
levavot, ʿenavim, shaʿarot. But when the second vowel is not a qamats,¶
the initial tsere does not change,¶
as in ʾefod bad (“a linen ephod,” 2 Sam. 6:14)¶
and ʾevus bar (“a manger of grain,” Prov. 14:4);¶
ʾefodo, ʾevuso.¶
Likewise, in all four of the changes, it does not change.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. The Future¶
The e-i-t-n letters come with a qamats, as with roots quiescent in the middle letter,¶
yet they are distinguished from them,¶
for in these the first root letter has a tsere,¶
as in aḥel gadlekha (Joshua 3:7),¶
yaqel et yado (1 Samuel 6:5),¶
whereas in those it has a ḥiriq,¶
as in aqim, yaqim. And when they come with the conversive vav,¶
the tsere returns to a segol,¶
because the stress shifts to the penultimate,¶
as in va-yigal et ha-even (Genesis 29:10),¶
va-yideq le-‘afar (2 Kings 23:6).¶
In this respect they resemble roots quiescent in the middle letter,¶
as I wrote there.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 7:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that every noun has ten pronominal suffixes, ¶
and the letters used for them are six, whose mnemonic is “the suffixes.” ¶
Here are the ten suffixes in order, using davar (“word”) as the example: ¶
¶
dvaro (“his word”), ¶
devarkha (“your [m.sg.] word”), ¶
devari (“my word”), ¶
dvaram (“their [m.] word”), ¶
devarkhem (“your [m.pl.] word”), ¶
dvarenu (“our word”), ¶
dvarah (“her word”), ¶
devarakh (“your [f.sg.] word”), ¶
dvaran (“their [f.] word”), ¶
devarkhen (“your [f.pl.] word”).

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5.¶
There are also cases that come with a ḥolam,¶
as in ve-al taqots.¶
And likewise in the Masoretic tradition:¶
bal yaḥus, taḥum with ḥolam,¶
except for one case with a shuruq,¶
lo taḥus ‘einam;¶
and every aḥus like it is with a shuruq.¶
And in pause, the future tense always comes with a ḥolam,¶
as in yeḥi Re’uven ve-al yamut,¶
and u-sheloshim shanah va-yamot. But when they are not in pause,¶
the ḥolam returns to a ḥataf-qamats,¶
especially with the conversive vav,¶
as in va-yaqam Avraham va-yishtaḥu le-‘am ha-aretz,¶
and va-yiqots Mo’av.¶
And likewise without the conversive vav,¶
when joined to a short word,¶
as in yeshev na appekha ve-ḥamatkha,¶
teshev na nefesh ha-yeled. And the second qamats in all these cases¶
is called a ḥataf-qamats;¶
this will be explained to you in the chapter on poetry,¶
in the eleventh poem.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 6:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. And as I have already said, the infinitive has no inherent tense; nevertheless, when it appears with b-k-l-m it does carry some indication of time. For with the bet and the kaf it most often indicates past time, as in binsōa‘ ha-aron (Numbers 10:35), kishmoa‘ ‘Esav (Genesis 27:34), which mean “when it traveled,” “when he heard.” And with the lamed and the mem it most often indicates future time, as in lishmor et derekh (Genesis 3:24), middabber ‘im Ya‘aqov (Genesis 31:29), which refer to the future. Thus far I have spoken concerning the infinitive; and now I shall speak concerning the imperative.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

10. The Nifʿal Conjugation It has an additional nun prefixed at the beginning,¶
and it is light like its parent (qal),¶
in that it has no dagesh as its identifying sign.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 5:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. Nevertheless, there is a distinction between them. The shem ha-po‘el, which is the participle, can be applied only to a person at the time he is performing that action; whereas an adjectival noun can be applied to a person who possesses that quality even at a time when he is not performing the action. For example, from gonev (“stealing”) and gannav (“thief”): gonev is said of a man at the moment he is stealing, but gannav is an adjective describing a man whose way it is to steal; and even at a time when he is sleeping, he is called a gannav. This is what Rashi of blessed memory explains regarding “ve-im ma’en attah le-shalleaḥ” (Exodus 9:2); see there.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Participle¶
The mem has a tsere, like the he of the past tense;¶
but in the other forms the tsere changes to a sheva, as is its rule,¶
as in meqim, meqimim.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 25 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

It is better than fine gold, than gold of Ophir,¶
and than all the merchandise of traders.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 10:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

But know that the first segol never changes to a ḥiriq,¶
but only to a pataḥ, as in ʿatarato, tifʾarato, and the like—¶
just as in regel → raglo, and similar forms.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:15 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Be strong, and let us be strengthened.¶
May the scribe not be harmed.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Thirteenth Principle. On the elucidation of nouns of four or five letters:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. The Past¶
sav:¶
the first root letter has a pataḥ,¶
in order to distinguish it from roots quiescent in the middle letter,¶
in which it is a qamats;¶
and also because of the dagesh that follows it in the other forms,¶
as in sabbot, sabboti, and so on.¶
For if the samekh were with a qamats,¶
the dagesh could not occur afterward,¶
since a dagesh does not come after a qamats.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

I cry out and call to all people—¶
to youths, to elders, and to the aged as well.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 5:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fifth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the noun patterns¶
of the remaining vowel classes in general.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 9:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Ninth Principle. On the meaning of the pi‘el stem with dagesh:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Ninth Principle. On the elucidation of nouns with a weak final letter lamed–he that appear with a root he at the end:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Pattern Hif‘al¶
Throughout, the he appears with a ḥataf-qamats,¶
for the dagesh is more clearly perceived after a kubuts¶
than after a ḥataf-qamats.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:13 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Thirteenth Principle. On the elucidation of some rules from the compound root categories:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 1:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The First Principle: ¶
On explaining what is meant by the term “pattern” ¶
and how nouns are measured.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. The Future. ¶
(In Ashkenazic: di mit-künftige layt) You already know that its identifying sign is ʾe-i-t-n at the beginning,¶
and that the vowel-patterns of the future follow those of the imperative. Take this rule firmly in hand for all the verb-forms,¶
in all the root categories (gizrot):¶
add the letters e-i-t-n to the imperative,¶
and you will obtain the future form. In this conjugation, the letters of ʾe-i-t-n¶
always take ḥiriq. [First edition:¶
And there is always a sheva naḥ after the ʾe-i-t-n,¶
except for alef, which takes a segol,¶
as in ʾefqod,¶
because it is a guttural.]

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And one of the verb patterns is both a father and a derivative — that is, from one perspective it is active, and from another perspective it is passive, as will be explained.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:15 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Past. ¶
Throughout, the prefixed nun takes ḥiriq at the beginning ¶
and a following sheva naḥ, ¶
and the second radical (ʿayin) is open with pataḥ, ¶
as in nifqad, nifqadet. ¶
¶
All of its vocalization follows the patterns of its parent, ¶
the qal conjugation.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 11:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. The third kind consists of verbs that are not found in the qal stem at all, such as hishkim, hishlikh, and the like. Their meaning nevertheless corresponds to that of this stem, as will be explained at the end of the thirteenth principle.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. ¶
A verb of five letters is found only in a single instance, namely ¶
ḥamarmar, as in: ¶
panai ḥamarmaru bekhi (Job 16:16), ¶
and in pause: ¶
me‘ai ḥamarmaru. ¶
In this form both the middle and final root letters are doubled ¶
after the three original root letters, for its root is ḥmr. ¶
¶
However, forms such as ¶
libbi saḥarḥar (Psalms 38:11) ¶
and ¶
hafakhpakh darko (Proverbs 21:8) ¶
are adjectival nouns, not verbs, ¶
like yeraqraq (“greenish”) or admadam (“reddish”).

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 11:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. ¶
And now know that there are doubled roots ¶
which sometimes appear as if they were strong roots, ¶
such as sabab, shalal, gazaz, ¶
sabbavta, shallalta, gazzazta, and the like, ¶
and there is no need to explain them. ¶
¶
But for the most part they appear with the loss of one of the doubled letters, ¶
and the remaining one is doubled with a dagesh to indicate it, ¶
as in sabbot, sabboti. ¶
And we must say that the letter that is lost is the middle root letter, ¶
and the one that is doubled is the final root letter; ¶
for if it were the reverse, ¶
the dagesh would have no power to indicate it, ¶
since a dagesh always indicates what is missing before it, ¶
not what comes after it. ¶
Understand this and remember it, ¶
for it is a great principle in grammar.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 4:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. But they are not found with the minor vowels. Most of them do not undergo any change, and those that do change do so in different ways. For example, from yom (“day”) the plural and its pronominal forms come with a qamats, as in yamim, yamav, and so forth. Likewise from rosh (“head”) come rashim, rashav. Apart from these, there are no others.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Exodus 20:8 and Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 6:4
(automatic citation link)

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 3:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Participle¶
It is formed with the addition of a mem with a pataḥ at the beginning;¶
and the passive with a kubuts;¶
and after both of them there is a quiescent sheva,¶
as in mafqid, mufqad.¶
Its mnemonic sign is mefaʿal–mefuʿal.¶
And in every participle the middle root letter has a long hiriq,¶
and in every passive it has a long qamats.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 6:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. Know that the letter most commonly used with the infinitive is the lamed, as in lishmor, lizkor, and the like. And even when the infinitive appears without b-k-l-m, its meaning is usually as though it were with the lamed, such as hiskalta ‘asoh (Genesis 31:28), re’oh faneikha (Genesis 48:11), which are equivalent to la‘asot, lir’ot. And every infinitive that appears in place of an imperative, such as zakhor et yom ha-shabbat (Exodus 20:8), shamor et ḥodesh ha-aviv (Deuteronomy 16:1), and the like, should be interpreted as though it were lizkor, lishmor. In that case they function exactly like true imperatives, such as zekhor, shemor. And in the other stems, aside from the qal stem, there is no difference in writing or in reading between the infinitive when it appears without b-k-l-m and the singular imperative; and this will be explained to you further in the thirteenth principle of the second treatise.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 11:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. And I will give you a sign by which you may recognize which nouns belong to the class of those with a quiescent middle letter (nḥei ayin), which to those with a quiescent final letter (nḥei lamed), and which to the doubled roots. ¶
¶
This is the rule: nouns of doubled roots ought, by their nature, to appear with a dagesh, in order to indicate the doubling of the two identical letters. However, it is impossible to place a dagesh forte on one of them when it stands at the beginning of a word, since a dagesh forte never occurs at the beginning of a word. This will be explained to you in the chapter on Shirah, in Song Eight.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise, Subject 1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

On the elucidation of the patterns of nouns that are not complete, and it is also divided into thirteen principles:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 11:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that nouns whose feminine ending is a final he,¶
when they take pronominal suffixes,¶
change that he into a soft tav.¶
Thus from tsedaqah one says¶
tsidqato, tsidqati, tsidqatam, and so in all cases. But those nouns whose ending is an original tav¶
appear in all singular pronominal suffixes¶
with a dageshed tav.¶
Thus from ateret and tiferet one says¶
aterato, tiferato, ateratam, tiferatam.¶
By this rule you may distinguish the two classes. Accordingly, forms such as milḥamto (“his war”)¶
and mishmarto (“his charge”) show that their absolute forms are¶
milḥemet and mishmeret.¶
For if the absolute forms were milḥamah and mishmerah,¶
their pronominal forms would be milḥamato and mishmerato¶
with a soft tav. And those nouns that have a merely added a final he¶
behave differently in pronominal forms:¶
from miqneh one says¶
miqneka, miqni, and the like;¶
but in the other suffixes the he becomes vocalized,¶
as in miqnehu, miqneha, miqnehem, miqnehon.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

4. ¶
And the class of roots deficient at both ends ¶
is found only in the root natan. ¶
In the past tense, the final nun is dropped, ¶
as in natata, natati. ¶
In the imperative and in the future, ¶
the initial nun is dropped, ¶
as in ten, etten, yitten, and so on. ¶
¶
In the infinitive, sometimes both ends are dropped, ¶
as in aḥel tet (Deuteronomy 2:25), ¶
be-tet Hashem (Numbers 5:21), ¶
where the expected form would have been be-tent, ¶
on the pattern of be-gashet. ¶
And the past tense is also found with the loss of both ends ¶
in the expression ¶
va-oyevai titta li ‘oref (2 Samuel 22:41).

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 5:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. Know also that the vowel following an initial sheva¶
does not change except when it is a qamats,¶
as in ketav (“writing”), yaqar (“precious”), and the like.¶
I have already explained, in the Second Principle, Section Two,¶
the manner in which qamats changes. And when these forms come into the plural construct state,¶
the initial sheva changes to a ḥiriq,¶
as in kitvei and yiqrei.¶
The reason for this I will explain in the next principle.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 12:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. The letter alef is found as an added letter¶
in many places, and for the most part¶
it is vocalized with a segol,¶
as in etsba, esgav, eshkol, egrof.¶
Sometimes it appears with a pataḥ,¶
as in avnet, avrekh, akhziv.¶
After the letters of amanati¶
there is always a resting sheva. Some nouns in which alef appears¶
have it as a root letter;¶
these belong to the class of four-letter nouns,¶
and I will discuss them¶
in the next treatise, Principle Thirteen. Know further that most nouns¶
formed with an added letter¶
from among the letters of amanati¶
do not take the feminine he ending,¶
except in a few rare cases,¶
such as mishmerah, tifarah,¶
and very few others.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:10 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. ¶
And the class of quadriliteral roots—that is, roots of four letters, ¶
such as ve-sha‘asha‘ yonek (Isaiah 11:8)— ¶
is a compound of roots quiescent in the final letter ¶
and of doubled roots. ¶
The final he of the root has fallen away, ¶
and the first and middle root letters have been doubled, ¶
for its root is sha‘ah. ¶
Likewise toratekha sha‘asha‘ti (Psalms 119:70): ¶
both are from the pattern Paʿal. ¶
And in Paʿal, in the plural, ¶
tasha‘asha‘u (Isaiah 66:12); ¶
and in Hitpa‘el, ¶
be-ḥuqotekha eshta‘asha‘ (Psalms 119:16). ¶
¶
There are also two roots of four letters that are distinct, ¶
meaning that no letter in them is doubled, ¶
namely karbel and karsam, ¶
as in yekharsmenah ḥazir mi-ya‘ar (Psalms 80:14), ¶
and ve-David mekharbel (1 Chronicles 15:27). ¶
¶
As for the forms ratpesh and parshu, ¶
our Rabbis of blessed memory said ¶
that they are compound words: ¶
ratpesh = ratov + pash; ¶
parshu = perush + ziv.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 4:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that when the first vowel is ḥolam,¶
it changes to a ḥatef qamats with singular pronominal suffixes,¶
in the plural, in the construct state, and with pronominal suffixes—¶
but only on the condition that the second vowel is a segol¶
and not some other vowel. Thus with nouns such as ʾozen (“ear”), qodesh (“holiness”),¶
and ḥodesh (“month”), and the like, one says:¶
ʾozno, qodsho, ḥodsho;¶
ʾoznayim;¶
ʾozne;¶
ʾoznav, and so forth. But in the singular construct state they do not change,¶
as in ʾozen Aharon (“the ear of Aaron,” Exod. 29:20),¶
and qodesh Hashem (“holy to the LORD,” Lev. 19:8),¶
and similar cases.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 9:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Infinitive ¶
qera; ¶
and with the prefixed letters bekholam: ¶
be-qera, ke-qera, le-qera, mi-qra. ¶
And it sometimes comes with an added tav, ¶
following the manner of roots quiescent in the final letter he, ¶
as I will explain in the next principle, ¶
as in le-vilti qerot lanu (Judges 8:1), ¶
and le-fi melot le-Bavel (Jeremiah 29:10).

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 3:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that most nouns with a quiescent middle letter (ayin) occur with an added mem, vocalized with a qamats, such as maqom, malon, manos. ¶
In the construct state and with pronominal suffixes, this qamats properly changes to a sheva, as in maqom → meqomo, malono, menusi, in accordance with the rule for complete forms. For this reason, those who recite in the hymn Adon Olam the phrase “hu nissi u-menusi” with the mem of menusi in qamats are mistaken, for its correct vocalization is menusi with a sheva, as required by the transformation of a qamats to a sheva in pronominal forms. ¶
Indeed, we similarly find misgavi and menusi. However, in the metrical structure of that poem this form cannot stand, since a yated (metrical peg) is required there, and a shuruq followed by sheva does not constitute a yated. Therefore, the correct reading must be u-menos li. Yet cantors have grown accustomed to saying “hu nissi u-menusi, manat kosi” in order to preserve the rhyme. When such nouns occur with a feminine he ending, the mem always takes a sheva and is followed by a shuruq, as in meshuva, melukha, mevukha. ¶
Likewise, this pattern appears with an added tav at the beginning, as in tequma, teluna. But without a feminine he ending, this pattern never appears with an added mem or tav.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 5:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And indeed, according to the intent of the context, a person can understand in which place they function as a participle and in which place as an adjective. For example: “ha-shomer aḥi anokhi” (Genesis 4:9) is an adjective — in the Ashkenazic tongue: er hiter. “ha-shomer emet le-‘olam” (Psalms 146:6) — in the Ashkenazic tongue: der da hot; and so in all such cases.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 9:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Imperative ¶
qera, with the aleph quiescent; ¶
but in the other forms it is mobile, ¶
as in qer’u, qer’i, qer’na. ¶
And it also comes with the loss of the he, ¶
as in qer’an lo va-yokhal laḥem (Exodus 2:20); ¶
and the aleph is quiescent in the word ¶
qer’an li Mara (Ruth 1:20).

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fifth Principle. On the elucidation of nouns with a weak final letter lamed–aleph:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 4:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that there are nouns belonging to this class that occur without any added letter, and these consist of only two letters. In all of them, the first radical is pointed with one of the five “major” vowels: • with a qamats, as in: zar, tsar, raʿ; ¶
• with a tsere, as in: ger, tsad, ʿed; ¶
• with a ḥiriq, as in: sir, qir, ʿir; ¶
• with a ḥolam, as in: ʾor, yom, tov; ¶
• and with a shuruq, as in: shur, dor.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Seventh Principle. In it I will begin to explain the functions of the verb patterns, and in it the function of the qal pattern alone will be explained:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 9:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Ninth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the class of roots quiescent in the final letter aleph,¶
such as qara.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. The Participle¶
In the singular, the he is quiescent,¶
and it is usually preceded by a segol,¶
as in goleh,¶
in order to distinguish it from roots quiescent in aleph,¶
which take a tsere, as in qore,¶
as I wrote in its principle.¶
And when it is joined to a short word¶
or to a word with penultimate stress,¶
it too takes a tsere¶
[and then it has penultimate stress],¶
as in va-yehi boneh ‘ir (Genesis 4:17),¶
‘oseh fele (Exodus 15:11),¶
and many similar cases,¶
which are counted according to the Masoretic tradition. And the feminine singular has a qamats before the he,¶
as in Ester ‘asah (Esther 2:18).¶
And in the masculine and feminine plural,¶
the he disappears,¶
as in golim, golot.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 9:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The first kind consists of verbs that are exclusive to this stem alone and do not occur in the qal stem. Their meaning corresponds to that of a transitive qal verb acting upon another, such as dibber, miher, tsivvah, and the like.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The signs are completed. And in the name of Him Who dwells in eternity: ¶
I shall begin the book, which gives beautiful words. ¶
Completed, completed, ¶
completed.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 4:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Fourth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the vowels of the pattern Hitpa‘el¶
for strong roots, and its identifying signs.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Hosea 9:8 and Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:2
(automatic citation link)

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 3:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

7. Know that for all of these nouns with six vowel-points,¶
when the third radical is ḥet or ʿayin,¶
the second segol changes to a pataḥ,¶
as in ṣemaḥ (“plant”), peraḥ (“flower”),¶
shevaḥ (“praise”), shevaʿ (“seven”), revaʿ (“quarter”). But if the second radical is ḥet or ʿayin,¶
then both segol vowels change to pataḥ,¶
as in shaḥal (“lion”), naʿar (“youth”),¶
baʿar (“brutish”), naḥal (“stream”),¶
shaḥar (“dawn”), and the like. However, paḥam (“coal”), gaḥal (“ember”),¶
and kaḥash (“deceit”) belong to the class of doubled patterns.¶
That is to say, if the ḥet were not present,¶
they would follow the pattern of ganav (“thief”) or shabbat (“Sabbath”).¶
The proof is that they do not change in the plural,¶
for we say geḥalim, banim, keḥashim,¶
since doubled nouns do not undergo change,¶
as I showed in Principle Five.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:2 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The Pattern Qal¶
The past tense, the participle, and the passive appear in full form,¶
and the infinitive as well, for the most part,¶
as in nafol tipol lefanav (Esther 6:13),¶
halokh ve-naso‘a.¶
Likewise, the imperative for the most part appears in full form,¶
as in natsor banai,¶
and lifnei hitgalla‘ ha-riv netosh (Proverbs 17:14),¶
and nidru ve-shallemu (Psalms 76:12),¶
naflu ‘alenu (Hosea 9:8). But there are a few roots in which the nun is missing in the infinitive,¶
and in its place an additional tav appears at the end;¶
these are nagash, naga‘, nata‘, nafaḥ,¶
and there are almost no others,¶
as in be-gishat Yisra’el (Numbers 8:19),¶
laga‘at bakh (2 Samuel 14:10),¶
lifḥot ‘alav (Ezekiel 22:20),¶
‘et lita‘at (Ecclesiastes 3:2). But know that these forms occur only with the prefixed letters bekholam;¶
without bekholam they never occur with the loss of the nun¶
and the addition of a final tav.¶
And likewise in the imperative, the nun is missing in some of these,¶
as in gash hal’ah (Genesis 19:9),¶
ve-ga‘ el ‘atsmo (Job 2:5),¶
u-feḥi ba-harugim (Ezekiel 37:9).¶
And from nashal: shal na‘alekha.¶
But from nata‘ it is not said ta‘.¶

7 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 12:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Hitpa‘el ¶
For the most part it comes in complete form, ¶
as in hitpallel, hitḥannen, and the like. ¶
But sometimes it comes according to the manner of roots quiescent ¶
in the middle letter, ¶
as from madad: ¶
va-yitmoded ‘al ha-yeled (1 Kings 17:21); ¶
and from galal: ¶
mitgalel ba-dam (2 Samuel 20:12), ¶
and similar cases.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 3:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Eleventh Principle. On the elucidation of the suffixes of feminine nouns whose ending is he or tav, and on the elucidation of the difference between them:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 2:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

But the letters he and ḥet, although they generally do not receive a dagesh,¶
do not have the power to cause the dagesh to drop into the preceding letter,¶
as in shaher, kḥer, maher.¶
Instead, they appear with tsere, as in nahalta ve‘ozekha (Exodus 15:13),¶
and similar cases are few.¶
Likewise, in the pattern Hitpa‘el, as in mityahadim, mitlaḥashim,¶
they appear with a pataḥ.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 8:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The first kind is a derivative of the transitive qal stem; that is to say, it receives the action directly from its parent, the qal. For example, if you say of the parent akhal (“he ate”), you say of the derivative ne’ekhal (“it was eaten”). Likewise: nilkad, nisraf, nishbar, or nishbah, as in “im ganov yigganev” (Exodus 22:9), “sarof yissarfu” (II Samuel 23), and many similar cases. All of these are passives effected by another. The meaning of this kind is exactly the same as that of the pu‘al stem, for there is no difference between “ve-gunnav mi-beit ha-ish” (Exodus 22:6) and ve-nignav, nor between “ve-hinneh shoraf” (Leviticus 10:16), which is from the pu‘al stem, and nisraf.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 9:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Ninth Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the plural forms of feminine nouns.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 9:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. ¶
And the letters e-i-t-n are vocalized as in the strong roots, ¶
and the aleph is quiescent when it stands at the end of the word, ¶
as in eqra, yiqra, and so on. ¶
But when another letter follows it, it is mobile, ¶
as in yiqre’u, tiqre’u, tiqre’i. ¶
Yet in the feminine plural it is quiescent, ¶
as in tiqre’na milḥamah (Exodus 1:10).

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

With it comes a tongue of pure gold and a mantle;¶
speech upon the lips, pleasant all around, without flaw or breach.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Third Principle. On the elucidation of the vowel patterns of the Hif‘il and Hof‘al forms of complete verbs, and their identifying signs:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Sixth Principle. On the elucidation of nouns with a weak final letter lamed–he:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Pattern Qal¶
It comes in full form up through the infinitive, the infinitive included,¶
when it is joined to verbal forms,¶
as in yarad, yaradnu, yashuv, eshav.¶
But when it is not joined to verbal forms,¶
it appears with the loss of the yod and with the addition of a final tav,¶
as in shevet, redet, da‘at, and similar forms;¶
and this occurs even without the prefixed letters bekholam,¶
as I wrote above.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 29 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And the Redeemer of Israel will rejoice in God,¶
with Michael and Ishmael, the pleasant ones.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 11:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. Know that nouns which are already in the plural,¶
such as shifḥot (“maidservants”) and tsidqot (“righteous deeds”),¶
may take pronominal suffixes for the third person¶
in two different ways. The first way is with a mem of the suffix¶
following the plural ending vav–tav,¶
as in shifḥotam and tsidqotam. The second way is with a he following the plural ending¶
vav–tav,¶
as in shifḥotehem and tsidqotehem. However, forms such as shifḥatam and tsidqatam¶
are pronominal forms of the singular feminine,¶
as I explained above. This is what Rabbi Shelomo Yirḥi (Rashi) explained¶
regarding the verse¶
va-tikhl telunatam (Numbers 17:25).¶
These are his words:¶
“There is a distinction between telunatam and telunotehem:¶
telunatam refers to a single complaint,¶
whereas telunotehem is a noun in the singular form,¶
even if there are many complaints.”¶
Up to here are his words. However, the rabbi did not explicitly explain¶
the grammatical difference between¶
telunatam and telunotehem.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 31 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

completed and completed—praise to the eternal God.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 10:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that there are nouns of this class that appear without any additional letter, and in them the final he of the root is lacking. As a result, they consist of only two letters. Some of them always take a qamats, some always take a pataḥ, and some are sometimes with a qamats and sometimes with a pataḥ. These are determined by tradition, such as: av (father), yad (hand), dag (fish), qav la-qav (“line upon line”), tsav la-tsav (“command upon command”). All of these intermingle with the classes of roots with a quiescent middle letter (naḥei ʿayin) and with doubled roots. In the following principle I will give you signs and rules by which you may distinguish these from one another. There are also some that are pointed with a ḥiriq and a quiescent yod. These are nouns derived from roots whose middle radical is one of the letters vav or yod. Thus, from the root ravah comes ri, as in “even the pure ones” (af beri); from naḥah comes ni, as in “a lament from among their sons” (min benehem qinah); from tsiyah comes tsi, as in “a mighty fleet” (tsi adir); and from kavah comes ki, as in “instead of beauty” (taḥat yofi). In all of these cases, the yod stands in place of the root he, and the middle radical is absent.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 10:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. The Passive ¶
In it the he is changed into a mobile yod in all forms, ¶
and its vocalization is like that of the strong roots, ¶
as in galuy, geluyim, and so on.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 2:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. The fundamental change of a tsere and a qamats is into a sheva,¶
especially when they occur in the first letter of the word.¶
But when they occur in the second letter, they revert to a pataḥ,¶
as in davar → dvar-Hashem (“the word of the LORD,” Jer. 1:2),¶
and from zaqen → zaqan beto (“the elder of his house,” Gen. 24:2). Likewise, in some singular pronominal suffixes they remain unchanged,¶
as in devarekha, devarakh;¶
but they change to a sheva in some plural suffixes and in the construct state,¶
as in devarai, devarakhem, devarakhen,¶
as you will see later in Principle Seven.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 1:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

3. And the six root categories are: complete, defective, and doubled.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Seventh Principle:¶
On the elucidation of the class of roots quiescent in the middle letter vav.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Sixth Principle. On the elucidation of the infinitive and the imperative:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The yod becomes weak only at the beginning, such as from yada, one says eda, yeda; eshev, yeshev.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 5:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that an action being performed now, in the present time, is called the action of the participle, and it is composed of the past and the future. For example, when you say “Reuben is okhel,” it implies that he has already begun to eat and will still eat. Now, the Holy Tongue has no special verb that indicates this present time, for what we call the participle is in truth called the shem ha-po‘el (the active noun), and it is in the form of an adjective.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 1:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Eighth Principle. On the elucidation of the function of the Nif‘al pattern:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 7:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Infinitive¶
and the imperative come with a he with a hiriq at the beginning¶
and a dagesh following it, as with the strong roots,¶
as in hakhon.¶
And likewise akhon, yakhon, takhon, nakhon, and so on.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 5:8 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Past¶
higgish, which properly would have been haniggish;¶
and likewise the participle magish,¶
the passive mugash,¶
and the infinitive and the imperative hagish with a tsere;¶
higgishu, higgishi with hiriq.¶
Likewise with the prefixed letters bekholam, it is with a hiriq,¶
as in behaggish, kehaggish, and so on.¶
The e-i-t-n forms are agish, yagish.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:13 and 2 others »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And for each of these there are three persons: second person, third person, and first person. Accordingly, in each tense there should have been three forms for the masculine plural, three for the feminine singular, and three for the feminine plural. But since in the past tense the three persons are the same for masculine and feminine, as will be explained, there remain in it nine forms of expression.

7 hours ago
2 related »
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 13:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that the letter nun is not added at the beginning of nouns, ¶
except in a few cases that are proper names, ¶
such as Naftali, Nimrod, and the like.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 7:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Therefore I shall give a sign by which one may easily distinguish them, and it is this: for every verb before which the word mah (“what”) can properly be placed is a transitive verb, such as mah shamar, mah akhal, mah shatah, and the like. But with intransitive verbs it is not appropriate to say mah, for it is not possible to say mah yashav, mah ‘amad, mah yashen, mah bakhah.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 16 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Book HaBachur. And this is for three reasons. The first: because this book is choice and good, wholly fine flour, with no refuse in it.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 11:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Principle Eleven.¶
An elucidation of the pronominal suffixes of feminine nouns¶
that end in he or tav,¶
and an explanation of the difference between them.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 4:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Twelfth Principle. On the elucidation of nouns from the category of doubled roots that appear with an added mem or tav at the beginning:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 2:5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And only a few are found in which the mem is vocalized with a shuruq, such as musar and mutsaq. ¶
There are also forms found without any added letter and with a feminine he, such as shanah, ‘etsah, de‘ah, and ledah. ¶
In the construct state, the tsere in these forms changes to a sheva, and the qamats changes to a pataḥ, as explained in the First Treatise, Second Principle. There are also two forms found without the feminine he, namely tse (as in “say to him, go out”) and bul (as in “the produce of the mountains”). ¶
Their roots are yatsa and yakhol.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introduction 20 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Brothers and also companions, hear my words with attention.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 8:4 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And what they further said is that there are found in this class ¶
true quadriliteral forms, ¶
such as from bun one says bonen: ¶
the quiescent vav is the middle root letter, ¶
and afterward there are two nuns, ¶
which they take to be the two final root letters. ¶
Thus there are, according to them, four root letters, ¶
and therefore they are called true quadriliterals. ¶
So far is their claim.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 9:9 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. And know that this occurs only with verbs that are derived from nouns, such as those I have mentioned, and as I shall further explain in the chapter on the categories. Moreover, you are not permitted to form such verbs from every noun-derived verb at will, but only from those that are found in Scripture. And this stem as well produced a derivative, which is called the pu‘al stem.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Introductory Poem 5 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

Shall I not bring hidden matters to light within it, and disclose the treasured teachings of the commentators?

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 1:7 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. The Passive Participle The first radical (peʾ) takes a qamats in the singular,¶
as in paqud.¶
In the other forms it changes to a sheva,¶
according to its rule, as I explained above with the past tense. In all of them the second radical (ʿayin) takes a shuruq,¶
as in pequdim, pequdah, pequdot.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Index 2:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Second Treatise ¶
On the elucidation of the differences between each verb pattern and the others with respect to the vowel points, and I will explain them as well in pairs: ¶
The First Principle. On the elucidation of the vowel patterns of the qal and Nif‘al forms of complete verbs, and their identifying signs:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 6:14 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And this difference lies in the dagesh, ¶
as will be explained in this treatise, ¶
in the Twelfth Principle, section eight.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 2:6 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And there are four roots on the pattern paʿal that, in the construct state,¶
remain on the pattern paʿal. They are:¶
yerekh (“thigh”), katef (“shoulder”), gader (“wall”),¶
and gazel (“robbery”). For example:¶
yerekh Yaʿaqov (“the thigh of Jacob,” Gen. 32:25),¶
katef ha-mizbeaḥ (“the shoulder of the altar”),¶
gader avnav (“the wall of its stones,” Prov. 24:31),¶
and gazel aḥ (“the robbery of a brother,” Ezek. 18:18).

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Fourth Treatise 5:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. Know that most of these nouns have three full vowels, such as kela, pela, geva, and tena. They follow the pattern of the regular (complete) nouns, sometimes taking a ḥiriq with pronominal suffixes, as in kelao and pelao, and sometimes a pataḥ, as in tenaʾkha.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Third Treatise 6:3 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

2. The same rule sometimes applies in the middle of a word as well.¶
Therefore, whenever a noun begins with a sheva,¶
or when a sheva arises because of one of the four changes¶
that I explained at the beginning of the Second Principle,¶
and that sheva is followed by a qamats or a tsere,¶
and then another cause occurs that requires the qamats or tsere¶
to change into a sheva,¶
so that two shevas would come to stand at the beginning of the word—¶
which is impossible—¶
the first sheva therefore changes into a ḥiriq. For example, from dvarim (“words”) and zqenim (“elders”):¶
when they come into the construct state, the final mem drops,¶
as will be explained in this treatise in Principle Eleven.¶
It then becomes necessary to lighten the vowels¶
and to change the qamats or tsere into a sheva, as is their rule.¶
This would result in two shevas at the beginning of the word,¶
which is impossible.¶
Therefore the first sheva is changed to a ḥiriq,¶
and one says divrei and ziqnei.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added a connection between Jonah 1:5 and Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:11
(automatic citation link)

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Concluding Poem 1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

This song I made in Rome at the end of the first edition:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 13:11 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

6. ¶
Moreover, many forms derived from the class of doubled roots ¶
are also found following this same pattern, ¶
with the first root letter doubled after the middle root letter, ¶
for example: ¶
¶
From galal: ¶
ve-gilgaltikha min ha-sela‘im (Jeremiah 51:25). ¶
¶
From qalal: ¶
ve-hu lo fanim qilqel (Ecclesiastes 10:10). ¶
¶
From salal: ¶
salselah ve-teromemekha (Proverbs 4:8). ¶
¶
All of these are found only in the pattern Paʿal. ¶
Likewise, from the class quiescent in the middle letter: ¶
hinneh Hashem metaltelkha taltelah gaver (Isaiah 22:17), ¶
whose root is tul, ¶
as in va-yatilu et ha-kelim (Jonah 1:5). ¶
¶
And those forms which the grammarians call “quadriliteral” ¶
because of the doubling of the final root letter, ¶
such as from shuv: meshovev, ¶
and from qum: mekomem, ¶
I have already demonstrated to be from the pattern Paʿal; ¶
there is no need to elaborate further here.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 12:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The sixth stem is called the hof‘al stem, and it is a derivative of hif‘il; therefore it too has the prefixed he like it, and it is of two kinds:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 4:12 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

5. And if you ask: how shall I know whether it is the vav of conjunction or the vav of conversion?

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 10:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Tenth Principle. On the elucidation of the meaning of the pu‘al stem:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 3:1 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

The Third Principle. On the elucidation of the three terms applied to the three root letters, and on the definition of complete verbs and those that are not complete:

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, Second Treatise 9:2 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

1. The Pattern Qal¶
Throughout, it comes with a quiescent aleph and a qamats before it,¶
except in the third-person plural and feminine,¶
where the aleph is mobile,¶
as in qar’u, qar’ah.¶
And in the participle and the passive,¶
the aleph is quiescent only in the singular;¶
in the other forms it is mobile,¶
as in qore, qor’im,¶
[qaru, qeru’im], and so on.

7 hours ago
Shmuel Weissman added Sefer HaBachur, First Treatise 2:16 history »
Version: Trans. Craig Feinstein, 2026 (English)

And the second reason is that their meaning is not the same: for one applies to the third-person feminine plural, and the other to the second-person feminine plural. Likewise, even though two distinct forms are made from tifqod, they are not called identical, for one is for the second person and the other for the third person; and one is not substituted for the other. Therefore, they are not called identical.

7 hours ago

Older Activity »