Animal R'aim of the midrashPurim and Shushan PurimParashat TzavMedrash on Dovid Hamelech riding a Re'eimBabies in the field MidrashWhy does Rashi cite the Midrash of Pharaoh's daughter stretching out her arm?Seven compartments of Gehinnom according to Midrash TehillimExplanation of the midrash of the Donkey of mosheLooking for a midrash about Moshe not being born perfectDid the sea split in Yosef's merit or Avraham's merit?Can 'cruelty to animals' render an animal not kosher?Can you get an animal high?Regurgitating Living Forbidden SpeciesDoes Midrash HaGadol actually say this?

Exposing a company lying about themselves in a tightly knit industry (videogames) : Is my career at risk on the long run?

Derivative of an interpolated function

Reason why a kingside attack is not justified

Reasons for having MCU pin-states default to pull-up/down out of reset

What is the purpose of using a decision tree?

Connection Between Knot Theory and Number Theory

Trouble reading roman numeral notation with flats

Rendered textures different to 3D View

Air travel with refrigerated insulin

Center page as a whole without centering each element individually

Turning a hard to access nut?

How do I prevent inappropriate ads from appearing in my game?

Unfrosted light bulb

"Marked down as someone wanting to sell shares." What does that mean?

Why is implicit conversion not ambiguous for non-primitive types?

A seasonal riddle

How do you say "Trust your struggle." in French?

Capacitor electron flow

What is the meaning of "You've never met a graph you didn't like?"

Calculate Pi using Monte Carlo

Is there a POSIX way to shutdown a UNIX machine?

Is there any common country to visit for persons holding UK and Schengen visas?

Offset in split text content

What should be the ideal length of sentences in a blog post for ease of reading?



Animal R'aim of the midrash



Purim and Shushan Purim
Parashat TzavMedrash on Dovid Hamelech riding a Re'eimBabies in the field MidrashWhy does Rashi cite the Midrash of Pharaoh's daughter stretching out her arm?Seven compartments of Gehinnom according to Midrash TehillimExplanation of the midrash of the Donkey of mosheLooking for a midrash about Moshe not being born perfectDid the sea split in Yosef's merit or Avraham's merit?Can 'cruelty to animals' render an animal not kosher?Can you get an animal high?Regurgitating Living Forbidden SpeciesDoes Midrash HaGadol actually say this?










3















I saw in the book, "The midrash says" by Rabbi Moshe Weissman that the Midrash Socher Tov 22 explains that a creature called R'aim lifted David into the sky (see here for details).



What is this animal R'aim?










share|improve this question
























  • Good question if you look at my answer the same thing (lifting in the sky) happened to Dovid's son Shlomo

    – user15464
    6 hours ago











  • Related: judaism.stackexchange.com/q/77154

    – DonielF
    6 hours ago















3















I saw in the book, "The midrash says" by Rabbi Moshe Weissman that the Midrash Socher Tov 22 explains that a creature called R'aim lifted David into the sky (see here for details).



What is this animal R'aim?










share|improve this question
























  • Good question if you look at my answer the same thing (lifting in the sky) happened to Dovid's son Shlomo

    – user15464
    6 hours ago











  • Related: judaism.stackexchange.com/q/77154

    – DonielF
    6 hours ago













3












3








3








I saw in the book, "The midrash says" by Rabbi Moshe Weissman that the Midrash Socher Tov 22 explains that a creature called R'aim lifted David into the sky (see here for details).



What is this animal R'aim?










share|improve this question
















I saw in the book, "The midrash says" by Rabbi Moshe Weissman that the Midrash Socher Tov 22 explains that a creature called R'aim lifted David into the sky (see here for details).



What is this animal R'aim?







midrash animals






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 18 hours ago









mbloch

26.5k545132




26.5k545132










asked 20 hours ago









Rh HaokipRh Haokip

435111




435111












  • Good question if you look at my answer the same thing (lifting in the sky) happened to Dovid's son Shlomo

    – user15464
    6 hours ago











  • Related: judaism.stackexchange.com/q/77154

    – DonielF
    6 hours ago

















  • Good question if you look at my answer the same thing (lifting in the sky) happened to Dovid's son Shlomo

    – user15464
    6 hours ago











  • Related: judaism.stackexchange.com/q/77154

    – DonielF
    6 hours ago
















Good question if you look at my answer the same thing (lifting in the sky) happened to Dovid's son Shlomo

– user15464
6 hours ago





Good question if you look at my answer the same thing (lifting in the sky) happened to Dovid's son Shlomo

– user15464
6 hours ago













Related: judaism.stackexchange.com/q/77154

– DonielF
6 hours ago





Related: judaism.stackexchange.com/q/77154

– DonielF
6 hours ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















2














Rav Slifkin, though not cited here as such, says it is most likely to be the aurochs.



It is treated fully in the aforelinked encyclopedia (volume 1), but he also addressed it incidentally in this essay.




From all the references in Scripture, we know the following about the re’em: It is similar to domestic cattle, but it is a powerful, dangerous animal, and it possesses two magnificent,
upwards-pointing horns. There is an animal that perfectly matches this description, and is even called rimu in Akkadian: the aurochs, Bos primigenius.



The aurochs (pronounced “oar-ox,” plural aurochses or aurochsen, and also known as the urus) was a huge wild ox that is familiar to few people today, because it became extinct
in 1627.







share|improve this answer

























  • -1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago












  • @רבותמחשבות That is an interesting way to look at it. Is it a viable possibility that the ראם of the midrash was anything other than a very large ראם? If not then doesn't identifying what the type of thing is suffice to identify it in any context and at any scale that doesn't vitiate its identity?

    – WAF
    8 hours ago


















2














The reem (plural: r'aimim) has been described differently in various sources. Bottom line, it is most likely an aurochs.



Wikipedia has a good short summary




A re'em, [has been] variously translated as a unicorn or a wild ox. It
was first identified in modern times with the aurochs by Johann Ulrich
Duerst [...] This has been generally accepted, as it is today even
among religious scholars. It has been translated in some Christian
Bible translations as "oryx" (which was accepted as the referent in
Modern Hebrew) and as "unicorn" in the King James Version, possibly
referring to a one-horned rhinoceros such as Rhinoceros unicornis.




Writing on his Talmudology blog, Dr Jeremy Brown goes through various theories: wild ox, unicorn and rhinoceros. He then concludes it is an aurochs.



The most complete treatment comes from Dr. R Nathan Slifkin in his Torah Encyclopedia of the Animal Kingdom, vol. 1 pp. 278-286. He goes through various proposed translations and explains



  • that it cannot be a rhinoceros since it didn't exist in biblical lands, has only one horn and is not kosher

  • that it cannot be an oryx (reem in Modern Hebrew) as the reem is a dangerous animal while the oryx is shy and elusive - although after the autoch became extinct the name reem became transferred to the oryx

  • that it cannot be a buffalo as they didn't live in biblical lands

  • that it has to be the aurochs, a powerful and huge wild ox that became extinct in 1627. It matches the description in various verses of being huge, having massive horns pointed forwards and upwards, being aggressive and happening to live in the relevant area

See also Theresa Bane in her book Encyclopedia of Beasts and Monsters in Myth, Legend and Folklore.






share|improve this answer

























  • Baruch shekivanti to many of the same facts! And good to see them without the cynicism that crept into mine. I think "aurochs" is singular, with the final "s" like in "ox". And I think "r'aimim" would be plural, as in "קרני ראמים עד ביצי כנים".

    – WAF
    18 hours ago












  • Thanks and yes you are right on the orthograph - I corrected.

    – mbloch
    18 hours ago











  • -1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago












  • @רבותמחשבות if it is an auroch of giant proportion then we are saying the same. In any case, the question was on the Midrash on Tehilim 22:22 which is identified by R Slifkin as an aurochs. There are figure of speech in midrashim as well as Bava Batra 73b and Zevachim 113b but they are based on an exagerated physical description compatible with an aurochs (possibly as it was the largest physical animal in the region)

    – mbloch
    10 hours ago











  • @mbloch I don't agree. Your answer gives the impression that a regular aurochs, the same as is found in Chumash, is the Re'em of the Midrash. If you include that it was a mythical creature, that changes your answer entirely.

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago


















1














See Gittin 68b where Shlomo Hamelech is talking to Athmedius King of Sheidim:




כתיב (במדבר כד, ח) כתועפות ראם לו ואמרינן כתועפות אלו מלאכי השרת ראם אלו השדים מאי רבותייכו מינן א"ל שקול שושילתא מינאי והב לי עיזקתך ואחוי לך רבותאי שקליה לשושילתא מיניה ויהיב ליה עיזקתיה בלעיה אותביה לחד גפיה ברקיעא ולחד גפיה בארעא פתקיה ארבע מאה פרסי על ההיא שעתא אמר שלמה (קהלת א, ג) מה יתרון לאדם בכל עמלו שיעמול תחת השמש (קהלת ב, י) וזה היה חלקי מכל עמלי

Shlomo Hamelech said to Athmedius: "The Passuk writes that "G-d has the power of the Toafos and the Reeim", Toafos are the ministering angels, Reeim are the Sheidim (loosely translated as demons). Shlomo asked:"I understand that angels are great. But Sheidim, why are they greater than us humans"
Athmedius resonded: "let me free from my chains and i will show you the greatness of the Reeim"

So Shlomo let him free from his chains and handed him his ring, Athmedius swallowed SHlomo Alive streched one wing out to heaven and one down to Earth (astronomical proportions) and spat him out 400 pharsangs (about 1600km) away
and then Shlomo was ousted from his Throne and was left with just the clothes on his back and proclaimed: "What does one gain in all his labour under the sun? and this was my portion from all my hard work"




Sheidim have massive proportions as the Gemora mentions earlier 68a מטא דיקלא חף ביה שדייה מטא לביתא שדייה - that any palm tree or house that Athmedius brushed collapsed due to his large proportions so Sheidim could disguise themselves as a hill.(After all did Athmedius not disguise himself as Shlomo haMelech himself? See Gemora further)






share|improve this answer

























  • @רבותמחשבות please don't punish me for my post i am earnestly trying to spread the true definnition of Reeim even though it may not sound as fabulous as others portray...

    – user15464
    7 hours ago











  • ummm - why and how would I punish you?

    – רבות מחשבות
    6 hours ago











  • I guess by down voting, the answer is beautiful

    – Rh Haokip
    2 hours ago


















3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2














Rav Slifkin, though not cited here as such, says it is most likely to be the aurochs.



It is treated fully in the aforelinked encyclopedia (volume 1), but he also addressed it incidentally in this essay.




From all the references in Scripture, we know the following about the re’em: It is similar to domestic cattle, but it is a powerful, dangerous animal, and it possesses two magnificent,
upwards-pointing horns. There is an animal that perfectly matches this description, and is even called rimu in Akkadian: the aurochs, Bos primigenius.



The aurochs (pronounced “oar-ox,” plural aurochses or aurochsen, and also known as the urus) was a huge wild ox that is familiar to few people today, because it became extinct
in 1627.







share|improve this answer

























  • -1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago












  • @רבותמחשבות That is an interesting way to look at it. Is it a viable possibility that the ראם of the midrash was anything other than a very large ראם? If not then doesn't identifying what the type of thing is suffice to identify it in any context and at any scale that doesn't vitiate its identity?

    – WAF
    8 hours ago















2














Rav Slifkin, though not cited here as such, says it is most likely to be the aurochs.



It is treated fully in the aforelinked encyclopedia (volume 1), but he also addressed it incidentally in this essay.




From all the references in Scripture, we know the following about the re’em: It is similar to domestic cattle, but it is a powerful, dangerous animal, and it possesses two magnificent,
upwards-pointing horns. There is an animal that perfectly matches this description, and is even called rimu in Akkadian: the aurochs, Bos primigenius.



The aurochs (pronounced “oar-ox,” plural aurochses or aurochsen, and also known as the urus) was a huge wild ox that is familiar to few people today, because it became extinct
in 1627.







share|improve this answer

























  • -1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago












  • @רבותמחשבות That is an interesting way to look at it. Is it a viable possibility that the ראם of the midrash was anything other than a very large ראם? If not then doesn't identifying what the type of thing is suffice to identify it in any context and at any scale that doesn't vitiate its identity?

    – WAF
    8 hours ago













2












2








2







Rav Slifkin, though not cited here as such, says it is most likely to be the aurochs.



It is treated fully in the aforelinked encyclopedia (volume 1), but he also addressed it incidentally in this essay.




From all the references in Scripture, we know the following about the re’em: It is similar to domestic cattle, but it is a powerful, dangerous animal, and it possesses two magnificent,
upwards-pointing horns. There is an animal that perfectly matches this description, and is even called rimu in Akkadian: the aurochs, Bos primigenius.



The aurochs (pronounced “oar-ox,” plural aurochses or aurochsen, and also known as the urus) was a huge wild ox that is familiar to few people today, because it became extinct
in 1627.







share|improve this answer















Rav Slifkin, though not cited here as such, says it is most likely to be the aurochs.



It is treated fully in the aforelinked encyclopedia (volume 1), but he also addressed it incidentally in this essay.




From all the references in Scripture, we know the following about the re’em: It is similar to domestic cattle, but it is a powerful, dangerous animal, and it possesses two magnificent,
upwards-pointing horns. There is an animal that perfectly matches this description, and is even called rimu in Akkadian: the aurochs, Bos primigenius.



The aurochs (pronounced “oar-ox,” plural aurochses or aurochsen, and also known as the urus) was a huge wild ox that is familiar to few people today, because it became extinct
in 1627.








share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 19 hours ago

























answered 19 hours ago









WAFWAF

17.5k434101




17.5k434101












  • -1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago












  • @רבותמחשבות That is an interesting way to look at it. Is it a viable possibility that the ראם of the midrash was anything other than a very large ראם? If not then doesn't identifying what the type of thing is suffice to identify it in any context and at any scale that doesn't vitiate its identity?

    – WAF
    8 hours ago

















  • -1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago












  • @רבותמחשבות That is an interesting way to look at it. Is it a viable possibility that the ראם of the midrash was anything other than a very large ראם? If not then doesn't identifying what the type of thing is suffice to identify it in any context and at any scale that doesn't vitiate its identity?

    – WAF
    8 hours ago
















-1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

– רבות מחשבות
10 hours ago






-1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

– רבות מחשבות
10 hours ago














@רבותמחשבות That is an interesting way to look at it. Is it a viable possibility that the ראם of the midrash was anything other than a very large ראם? If not then doesn't identifying what the type of thing is suffice to identify it in any context and at any scale that doesn't vitiate its identity?

– WAF
8 hours ago





@רבותמחשבות That is an interesting way to look at it. Is it a viable possibility that the ראם of the midrash was anything other than a very large ראם? If not then doesn't identifying what the type of thing is suffice to identify it in any context and at any scale that doesn't vitiate its identity?

– WAF
8 hours ago











2














The reem (plural: r'aimim) has been described differently in various sources. Bottom line, it is most likely an aurochs.



Wikipedia has a good short summary




A re'em, [has been] variously translated as a unicorn or a wild ox. It
was first identified in modern times with the aurochs by Johann Ulrich
Duerst [...] This has been generally accepted, as it is today even
among religious scholars. It has been translated in some Christian
Bible translations as "oryx" (which was accepted as the referent in
Modern Hebrew) and as "unicorn" in the King James Version, possibly
referring to a one-horned rhinoceros such as Rhinoceros unicornis.




Writing on his Talmudology blog, Dr Jeremy Brown goes through various theories: wild ox, unicorn and rhinoceros. He then concludes it is an aurochs.



The most complete treatment comes from Dr. R Nathan Slifkin in his Torah Encyclopedia of the Animal Kingdom, vol. 1 pp. 278-286. He goes through various proposed translations and explains



  • that it cannot be a rhinoceros since it didn't exist in biblical lands, has only one horn and is not kosher

  • that it cannot be an oryx (reem in Modern Hebrew) as the reem is a dangerous animal while the oryx is shy and elusive - although after the autoch became extinct the name reem became transferred to the oryx

  • that it cannot be a buffalo as they didn't live in biblical lands

  • that it has to be the aurochs, a powerful and huge wild ox that became extinct in 1627. It matches the description in various verses of being huge, having massive horns pointed forwards and upwards, being aggressive and happening to live in the relevant area

See also Theresa Bane in her book Encyclopedia of Beasts and Monsters in Myth, Legend and Folklore.






share|improve this answer

























  • Baruch shekivanti to many of the same facts! And good to see them without the cynicism that crept into mine. I think "aurochs" is singular, with the final "s" like in "ox". And I think "r'aimim" would be plural, as in "קרני ראמים עד ביצי כנים".

    – WAF
    18 hours ago












  • Thanks and yes you are right on the orthograph - I corrected.

    – mbloch
    18 hours ago











  • -1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago












  • @רבותמחשבות if it is an auroch of giant proportion then we are saying the same. In any case, the question was on the Midrash on Tehilim 22:22 which is identified by R Slifkin as an aurochs. There are figure of speech in midrashim as well as Bava Batra 73b and Zevachim 113b but they are based on an exagerated physical description compatible with an aurochs (possibly as it was the largest physical animal in the region)

    – mbloch
    10 hours ago











  • @mbloch I don't agree. Your answer gives the impression that a regular aurochs, the same as is found in Chumash, is the Re'em of the Midrash. If you include that it was a mythical creature, that changes your answer entirely.

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago















2














The reem (plural: r'aimim) has been described differently in various sources. Bottom line, it is most likely an aurochs.



Wikipedia has a good short summary




A re'em, [has been] variously translated as a unicorn or a wild ox. It
was first identified in modern times with the aurochs by Johann Ulrich
Duerst [...] This has been generally accepted, as it is today even
among religious scholars. It has been translated in some Christian
Bible translations as "oryx" (which was accepted as the referent in
Modern Hebrew) and as "unicorn" in the King James Version, possibly
referring to a one-horned rhinoceros such as Rhinoceros unicornis.




Writing on his Talmudology blog, Dr Jeremy Brown goes through various theories: wild ox, unicorn and rhinoceros. He then concludes it is an aurochs.



The most complete treatment comes from Dr. R Nathan Slifkin in his Torah Encyclopedia of the Animal Kingdom, vol. 1 pp. 278-286. He goes through various proposed translations and explains



  • that it cannot be a rhinoceros since it didn't exist in biblical lands, has only one horn and is not kosher

  • that it cannot be an oryx (reem in Modern Hebrew) as the reem is a dangerous animal while the oryx is shy and elusive - although after the autoch became extinct the name reem became transferred to the oryx

  • that it cannot be a buffalo as they didn't live in biblical lands

  • that it has to be the aurochs, a powerful and huge wild ox that became extinct in 1627. It matches the description in various verses of being huge, having massive horns pointed forwards and upwards, being aggressive and happening to live in the relevant area

See also Theresa Bane in her book Encyclopedia of Beasts and Monsters in Myth, Legend and Folklore.






share|improve this answer

























  • Baruch shekivanti to many of the same facts! And good to see them without the cynicism that crept into mine. I think "aurochs" is singular, with the final "s" like in "ox". And I think "r'aimim" would be plural, as in "קרני ראמים עד ביצי כנים".

    – WAF
    18 hours ago












  • Thanks and yes you are right on the orthograph - I corrected.

    – mbloch
    18 hours ago











  • -1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago












  • @רבותמחשבות if it is an auroch of giant proportion then we are saying the same. In any case, the question was on the Midrash on Tehilim 22:22 which is identified by R Slifkin as an aurochs. There are figure of speech in midrashim as well as Bava Batra 73b and Zevachim 113b but they are based on an exagerated physical description compatible with an aurochs (possibly as it was the largest physical animal in the region)

    – mbloch
    10 hours ago











  • @mbloch I don't agree. Your answer gives the impression that a regular aurochs, the same as is found in Chumash, is the Re'em of the Midrash. If you include that it was a mythical creature, that changes your answer entirely.

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago













2












2








2







The reem (plural: r'aimim) has been described differently in various sources. Bottom line, it is most likely an aurochs.



Wikipedia has a good short summary




A re'em, [has been] variously translated as a unicorn or a wild ox. It
was first identified in modern times with the aurochs by Johann Ulrich
Duerst [...] This has been generally accepted, as it is today even
among religious scholars. It has been translated in some Christian
Bible translations as "oryx" (which was accepted as the referent in
Modern Hebrew) and as "unicorn" in the King James Version, possibly
referring to a one-horned rhinoceros such as Rhinoceros unicornis.




Writing on his Talmudology blog, Dr Jeremy Brown goes through various theories: wild ox, unicorn and rhinoceros. He then concludes it is an aurochs.



The most complete treatment comes from Dr. R Nathan Slifkin in his Torah Encyclopedia of the Animal Kingdom, vol. 1 pp. 278-286. He goes through various proposed translations and explains



  • that it cannot be a rhinoceros since it didn't exist in biblical lands, has only one horn and is not kosher

  • that it cannot be an oryx (reem in Modern Hebrew) as the reem is a dangerous animal while the oryx is shy and elusive - although after the autoch became extinct the name reem became transferred to the oryx

  • that it cannot be a buffalo as they didn't live in biblical lands

  • that it has to be the aurochs, a powerful and huge wild ox that became extinct in 1627. It matches the description in various verses of being huge, having massive horns pointed forwards and upwards, being aggressive and happening to live in the relevant area

See also Theresa Bane in her book Encyclopedia of Beasts and Monsters in Myth, Legend and Folklore.






share|improve this answer















The reem (plural: r'aimim) has been described differently in various sources. Bottom line, it is most likely an aurochs.



Wikipedia has a good short summary




A re'em, [has been] variously translated as a unicorn or a wild ox. It
was first identified in modern times with the aurochs by Johann Ulrich
Duerst [...] This has been generally accepted, as it is today even
among religious scholars. It has been translated in some Christian
Bible translations as "oryx" (which was accepted as the referent in
Modern Hebrew) and as "unicorn" in the King James Version, possibly
referring to a one-horned rhinoceros such as Rhinoceros unicornis.




Writing on his Talmudology blog, Dr Jeremy Brown goes through various theories: wild ox, unicorn and rhinoceros. He then concludes it is an aurochs.



The most complete treatment comes from Dr. R Nathan Slifkin in his Torah Encyclopedia of the Animal Kingdom, vol. 1 pp. 278-286. He goes through various proposed translations and explains



  • that it cannot be a rhinoceros since it didn't exist in biblical lands, has only one horn and is not kosher

  • that it cannot be an oryx (reem in Modern Hebrew) as the reem is a dangerous animal while the oryx is shy and elusive - although after the autoch became extinct the name reem became transferred to the oryx

  • that it cannot be a buffalo as they didn't live in biblical lands

  • that it has to be the aurochs, a powerful and huge wild ox that became extinct in 1627. It matches the description in various verses of being huge, having massive horns pointed forwards and upwards, being aggressive and happening to live in the relevant area

See also Theresa Bane in her book Encyclopedia of Beasts and Monsters in Myth, Legend and Folklore.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 17 hours ago

























answered 18 hours ago









mblochmbloch

26.5k545132




26.5k545132












  • Baruch shekivanti to many of the same facts! And good to see them without the cynicism that crept into mine. I think "aurochs" is singular, with the final "s" like in "ox". And I think "r'aimim" would be plural, as in "קרני ראמים עד ביצי כנים".

    – WAF
    18 hours ago












  • Thanks and yes you are right on the orthograph - I corrected.

    – mbloch
    18 hours ago











  • -1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago












  • @רבותמחשבות if it is an auroch of giant proportion then we are saying the same. In any case, the question was on the Midrash on Tehilim 22:22 which is identified by R Slifkin as an aurochs. There are figure of speech in midrashim as well as Bava Batra 73b and Zevachim 113b but they are based on an exagerated physical description compatible with an aurochs (possibly as it was the largest physical animal in the region)

    – mbloch
    10 hours ago











  • @mbloch I don't agree. Your answer gives the impression that a regular aurochs, the same as is found in Chumash, is the Re'em of the Midrash. If you include that it was a mythical creature, that changes your answer entirely.

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago

















  • Baruch shekivanti to many of the same facts! And good to see them without the cynicism that crept into mine. I think "aurochs" is singular, with the final "s" like in "ox". And I think "r'aimim" would be plural, as in "קרני ראמים עד ביצי כנים".

    – WAF
    18 hours ago












  • Thanks and yes you are right on the orthograph - I corrected.

    – mbloch
    18 hours ago











  • -1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago












  • @רבותמחשבות if it is an auroch of giant proportion then we are saying the same. In any case, the question was on the Midrash on Tehilim 22:22 which is identified by R Slifkin as an aurochs. There are figure of speech in midrashim as well as Bava Batra 73b and Zevachim 113b but they are based on an exagerated physical description compatible with an aurochs (possibly as it was the largest physical animal in the region)

    – mbloch
    10 hours ago











  • @mbloch I don't agree. Your answer gives the impression that a regular aurochs, the same as is found in Chumash, is the Re'em of the Midrash. If you include that it was a mythical creature, that changes your answer entirely.

    – רבות מחשבות
    10 hours ago
















Baruch shekivanti to many of the same facts! And good to see them without the cynicism that crept into mine. I think "aurochs" is singular, with the final "s" like in "ox". And I think "r'aimim" would be plural, as in "קרני ראמים עד ביצי כנים".

– WAF
18 hours ago






Baruch shekivanti to many of the same facts! And good to see them without the cynicism that crept into mine. I think "aurochs" is singular, with the final "s" like in "ox". And I think "r'aimim" would be plural, as in "קרני ראמים עד ביצי כנים".

– WAF
18 hours ago














Thanks and yes you are right on the orthograph - I corrected.

– mbloch
18 hours ago





Thanks and yes you are right on the orthograph - I corrected.

– mbloch
18 hours ago













-1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

– רבות מחשבות
10 hours ago






-1 This is not the re'em of the midrash. The re'em of the midrash is a giant mythical creature. (Perhaps even an aurochs of giant proportions)

– רבות מחשבות
10 hours ago














@רבותמחשבות if it is an auroch of giant proportion then we are saying the same. In any case, the question was on the Midrash on Tehilim 22:22 which is identified by R Slifkin as an aurochs. There are figure of speech in midrashim as well as Bava Batra 73b and Zevachim 113b but they are based on an exagerated physical description compatible with an aurochs (possibly as it was the largest physical animal in the region)

– mbloch
10 hours ago





@רבותמחשבות if it is an auroch of giant proportion then we are saying the same. In any case, the question was on the Midrash on Tehilim 22:22 which is identified by R Slifkin as an aurochs. There are figure of speech in midrashim as well as Bava Batra 73b and Zevachim 113b but they are based on an exagerated physical description compatible with an aurochs (possibly as it was the largest physical animal in the region)

– mbloch
10 hours ago













@mbloch I don't agree. Your answer gives the impression that a regular aurochs, the same as is found in Chumash, is the Re'em of the Midrash. If you include that it was a mythical creature, that changes your answer entirely.

– רבות מחשבות
10 hours ago





@mbloch I don't agree. Your answer gives the impression that a regular aurochs, the same as is found in Chumash, is the Re'em of the Midrash. If you include that it was a mythical creature, that changes your answer entirely.

– רבות מחשבות
10 hours ago











1














See Gittin 68b where Shlomo Hamelech is talking to Athmedius King of Sheidim:




כתיב (במדבר כד, ח) כתועפות ראם לו ואמרינן כתועפות אלו מלאכי השרת ראם אלו השדים מאי רבותייכו מינן א"ל שקול שושילתא מינאי והב לי עיזקתך ואחוי לך רבותאי שקליה לשושילתא מיניה ויהיב ליה עיזקתיה בלעיה אותביה לחד גפיה ברקיעא ולחד גפיה בארעא פתקיה ארבע מאה פרסי על ההיא שעתא אמר שלמה (קהלת א, ג) מה יתרון לאדם בכל עמלו שיעמול תחת השמש (קהלת ב, י) וזה היה חלקי מכל עמלי

Shlomo Hamelech said to Athmedius: "The Passuk writes that "G-d has the power of the Toafos and the Reeim", Toafos are the ministering angels, Reeim are the Sheidim (loosely translated as demons). Shlomo asked:"I understand that angels are great. But Sheidim, why are they greater than us humans"
Athmedius resonded: "let me free from my chains and i will show you the greatness of the Reeim"

So Shlomo let him free from his chains and handed him his ring, Athmedius swallowed SHlomo Alive streched one wing out to heaven and one down to Earth (astronomical proportions) and spat him out 400 pharsangs (about 1600km) away
and then Shlomo was ousted from his Throne and was left with just the clothes on his back and proclaimed: "What does one gain in all his labour under the sun? and this was my portion from all my hard work"




Sheidim have massive proportions as the Gemora mentions earlier 68a מטא דיקלא חף ביה שדייה מטא לביתא שדייה - that any palm tree or house that Athmedius brushed collapsed due to his large proportions so Sheidim could disguise themselves as a hill.(After all did Athmedius not disguise himself as Shlomo haMelech himself? See Gemora further)






share|improve this answer

























  • @רבותמחשבות please don't punish me for my post i am earnestly trying to spread the true definnition of Reeim even though it may not sound as fabulous as others portray...

    – user15464
    7 hours ago











  • ummm - why and how would I punish you?

    – רבות מחשבות
    6 hours ago











  • I guess by down voting, the answer is beautiful

    – Rh Haokip
    2 hours ago















1














See Gittin 68b where Shlomo Hamelech is talking to Athmedius King of Sheidim:




כתיב (במדבר כד, ח) כתועפות ראם לו ואמרינן כתועפות אלו מלאכי השרת ראם אלו השדים מאי רבותייכו מינן א"ל שקול שושילתא מינאי והב לי עיזקתך ואחוי לך רבותאי שקליה לשושילתא מיניה ויהיב ליה עיזקתיה בלעיה אותביה לחד גפיה ברקיעא ולחד גפיה בארעא פתקיה ארבע מאה פרסי על ההיא שעתא אמר שלמה (קהלת א, ג) מה יתרון לאדם בכל עמלו שיעמול תחת השמש (קהלת ב, י) וזה היה חלקי מכל עמלי

Shlomo Hamelech said to Athmedius: "The Passuk writes that "G-d has the power of the Toafos and the Reeim", Toafos are the ministering angels, Reeim are the Sheidim (loosely translated as demons). Shlomo asked:"I understand that angels are great. But Sheidim, why are they greater than us humans"
Athmedius resonded: "let me free from my chains and i will show you the greatness of the Reeim"

So Shlomo let him free from his chains and handed him his ring, Athmedius swallowed SHlomo Alive streched one wing out to heaven and one down to Earth (astronomical proportions) and spat him out 400 pharsangs (about 1600km) away
and then Shlomo was ousted from his Throne and was left with just the clothes on his back and proclaimed: "What does one gain in all his labour under the sun? and this was my portion from all my hard work"




Sheidim have massive proportions as the Gemora mentions earlier 68a מטא דיקלא חף ביה שדייה מטא לביתא שדייה - that any palm tree or house that Athmedius brushed collapsed due to his large proportions so Sheidim could disguise themselves as a hill.(After all did Athmedius not disguise himself as Shlomo haMelech himself? See Gemora further)






share|improve this answer

























  • @רבותמחשבות please don't punish me for my post i am earnestly trying to spread the true definnition of Reeim even though it may not sound as fabulous as others portray...

    – user15464
    7 hours ago











  • ummm - why and how would I punish you?

    – רבות מחשבות
    6 hours ago











  • I guess by down voting, the answer is beautiful

    – Rh Haokip
    2 hours ago













1












1








1







See Gittin 68b where Shlomo Hamelech is talking to Athmedius King of Sheidim:




כתיב (במדבר כד, ח) כתועפות ראם לו ואמרינן כתועפות אלו מלאכי השרת ראם אלו השדים מאי רבותייכו מינן א"ל שקול שושילתא מינאי והב לי עיזקתך ואחוי לך רבותאי שקליה לשושילתא מיניה ויהיב ליה עיזקתיה בלעיה אותביה לחד גפיה ברקיעא ולחד גפיה בארעא פתקיה ארבע מאה פרסי על ההיא שעתא אמר שלמה (קהלת א, ג) מה יתרון לאדם בכל עמלו שיעמול תחת השמש (קהלת ב, י) וזה היה חלקי מכל עמלי

Shlomo Hamelech said to Athmedius: "The Passuk writes that "G-d has the power of the Toafos and the Reeim", Toafos are the ministering angels, Reeim are the Sheidim (loosely translated as demons). Shlomo asked:"I understand that angels are great. But Sheidim, why are they greater than us humans"
Athmedius resonded: "let me free from my chains and i will show you the greatness of the Reeim"

So Shlomo let him free from his chains and handed him his ring, Athmedius swallowed SHlomo Alive streched one wing out to heaven and one down to Earth (astronomical proportions) and spat him out 400 pharsangs (about 1600km) away
and then Shlomo was ousted from his Throne and was left with just the clothes on his back and proclaimed: "What does one gain in all his labour under the sun? and this was my portion from all my hard work"




Sheidim have massive proportions as the Gemora mentions earlier 68a מטא דיקלא חף ביה שדייה מטא לביתא שדייה - that any palm tree or house that Athmedius brushed collapsed due to his large proportions so Sheidim could disguise themselves as a hill.(After all did Athmedius not disguise himself as Shlomo haMelech himself? See Gemora further)






share|improve this answer















See Gittin 68b where Shlomo Hamelech is talking to Athmedius King of Sheidim:




כתיב (במדבר כד, ח) כתועפות ראם לו ואמרינן כתועפות אלו מלאכי השרת ראם אלו השדים מאי רבותייכו מינן א"ל שקול שושילתא מינאי והב לי עיזקתך ואחוי לך רבותאי שקליה לשושילתא מיניה ויהיב ליה עיזקתיה בלעיה אותביה לחד גפיה ברקיעא ולחד גפיה בארעא פתקיה ארבע מאה פרסי על ההיא שעתא אמר שלמה (קהלת א, ג) מה יתרון לאדם בכל עמלו שיעמול תחת השמש (קהלת ב, י) וזה היה חלקי מכל עמלי

Shlomo Hamelech said to Athmedius: "The Passuk writes that "G-d has the power of the Toafos and the Reeim", Toafos are the ministering angels, Reeim are the Sheidim (loosely translated as demons). Shlomo asked:"I understand that angels are great. But Sheidim, why are they greater than us humans"
Athmedius resonded: "let me free from my chains and i will show you the greatness of the Reeim"

So Shlomo let him free from his chains and handed him his ring, Athmedius swallowed SHlomo Alive streched one wing out to heaven and one down to Earth (astronomical proportions) and spat him out 400 pharsangs (about 1600km) away
and then Shlomo was ousted from his Throne and was left with just the clothes on his back and proclaimed: "What does one gain in all his labour under the sun? and this was my portion from all my hard work"




Sheidim have massive proportions as the Gemora mentions earlier 68a מטא דיקלא חף ביה שדייה מטא לביתא שדייה - that any palm tree or house that Athmedius brushed collapsed due to his large proportions so Sheidim could disguise themselves as a hill.(After all did Athmedius not disguise himself as Shlomo haMelech himself? See Gemora further)







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 6 hours ago

























answered 7 hours ago









user15464user15464

5,444967




5,444967












  • @רבותמחשבות please don't punish me for my post i am earnestly trying to spread the true definnition of Reeim even though it may not sound as fabulous as others portray...

    – user15464
    7 hours ago











  • ummm - why and how would I punish you?

    – רבות מחשבות
    6 hours ago











  • I guess by down voting, the answer is beautiful

    – Rh Haokip
    2 hours ago

















  • @רבותמחשבות please don't punish me for my post i am earnestly trying to spread the true definnition of Reeim even though it may not sound as fabulous as others portray...

    – user15464
    7 hours ago











  • ummm - why and how would I punish you?

    – רבות מחשבות
    6 hours ago











  • I guess by down voting, the answer is beautiful

    – Rh Haokip
    2 hours ago
















@רבותמחשבות please don't punish me for my post i am earnestly trying to spread the true definnition of Reeim even though it may not sound as fabulous as others portray...

– user15464
7 hours ago





@רבותמחשבות please don't punish me for my post i am earnestly trying to spread the true definnition of Reeim even though it may not sound as fabulous as others portray...

– user15464
7 hours ago













ummm - why and how would I punish you?

– רבות מחשבות
6 hours ago





ummm - why and how would I punish you?

– רבות מחשבות
6 hours ago













I guess by down voting, the answer is beautiful

– Rh Haokip
2 hours ago





I guess by down voting, the answer is beautiful

– Rh Haokip
2 hours ago



Popular posts from this blog

Sum ergo cogito? 1 nng

419 nièngy_Soadمي 19bal1.5o_g

Queiggey Chernihivv 9NnOo i Zw X QqKk LpB