Yaakov, davening early maariv and hovering on Shabbos

There is a great Chasam Sofer I noticed this week, parashas Vayeitzei. Forget about the angst regarding whether we really say the Avos kept the Torah, and just sit back and enjoy the fabulous construction. See the pesukim here.

"ויפגע במקום, and he reached the place [J: where ויפגע is classically darshened as meaning tefillah and מקום is classically darshened as referring to Hashem; and Yaakov here was seen as having instituted Maariv] -- see Magen Avraham in Orach Chaim siman 267 seif katan 1 [J: about davening Maariv of Shabbat on Erev Shabbat, like Rav, because Maariv was instituted corresponding to the burning of the leftover limbs and fats]. This was Erev Shabbat Kodesh close to nightfall, and therefore he davened Maariv before the sun set [בא השמש, as the pasuk says] for the limbs and fats of Erev Shabbat may not be brought on Shabbat.

And behold, Elifaz took his money, all that he had [J: as per a Midrash that he robbed him after pursuing him on Esav's command], based on the idea that one may give his purse to a non-Jew [J: on Erev Shabbat, so that one is not carrying it on Shabbat].

Therefore [J: because we see from these two acts that he was keeping the Shabbat], he saw in his dream וּפָרַצְתָּ יָמָּה וָקֵדְמָה וְצָפֹנָה וָנֶגְבָּה, and you shall spread west, east, north and south. For anyone who keeps Shabbat, he is granted an inheritance without limits.

Therefore he set up a matzeiva and poured oil upon it, for שמן, oil, with its lettered spelled out in full, is שין מם נון, which is the gematria of שומר [J: the ש and מ and ו are in both, and then, to get the ר, which is 200, see that there are 3 נ worth 50 each, a מ worth 40, and a י worth 10]. And מצבה spelled out in full is מם צדיק בית הא, which is gematria שבת [J: namely, the ב and ת are in both, and then, to get to the ש of שבת, which is 300, you have ק, which is 100, two מ and two י for the next 100, then צ for 90 + the ד and א and ה for 10, for a sum of 300]. And so, you have שומר שבת.

And it appears that until now, Yaakov did not make use of the Holy Name to perform the act of traveling [J: quickly, קפיצה, as per the midrash that here was kefitzat haderech] higher than 10 tefachim , for he worried that perhaps he would have to depend on others, and one who depends [on others] is forbidden to make use of the holy names, as is stated in Yerushalmi Yoma.

However, now, it was stated to him in his dream כִּי לֹא אֶעֱזָבְךָ, 'for I will not abandon you', and this is [J: what Yaakov says in his vow on awaking] וְנָתַן-לִי לֶחֶם לֶאֱכֹל, וּבֶגֶד לִלְבֹּשׁ, 'and He gives me bread to eat and clothing to wear', as Rashi explains

[J: namely,

and He will give me bread to eat: As He said, “for I will not forsake you,” for if one must seek bread, he is called “forsaken,” as it is said, (Ps. 37:25): “and I have not seen a righteous man forsaken and his seed seeking bread.” [from Gen. Rabbah 69:6]

ונתן לי לחם לאכול: כמו שאמר (פסוק טו) כי לא אעזבך, והמבקש לחם הוא קרוי נעזב, שנאמר (תהלים לז כה) ולא ראיתי צדיק נעזב וזרעו מבקש לחם:

]

and he was promised that he would not have to depend on other people. Therefore [J: as in the conclusion of his vow], וְהָיָה ה לִי לֵאלֹהִים, that he would make use of the Names. And therefore [Bereishit 29:1] וַיִּשָּׂא יַעֲקֹב רַגְלָיו, to explain, that based on the Name used for kefitza he lifted up his feet from upon the ground, and traveled on Shabbat higher that 10 tefachim, in accordance with the opinion that there is no techum Shabbat higher than 10 tefachim."

End quote of Chasam Sofer. This is as described for Eliyahu Hanavi in Eruvin 43a, see my discussion. Note how the term קפיצה is used there in Eruvin. Does קפיצה mean swift travel or hovering travel? It is interesting how these interplay here.

Also interesting to me was the neatness of the two gematriot. They were both regular, in that both used the full spellings of the letters of the words; and in finding that two items possessed identical gematria, one could first find the matching letters, and then, having eliminated those, the remaining letters formed a multiple of 100. I think this is an artefact of it being produced by a human using his natural, though remarkably astute, faculties. This is the sort of gematria one might come up with, using skills of pattern recognition. Whereas other gematriot with arbitrary matches on every single letter to add up to arbitrary sums might be much harder, without the aid of books or programs which point out correspondences. Maybe. I haven't made a study of it, but I wonder if there might indeed be some signature to the type of calculations involved in various human-produced gematriot.

Guys rule in Tazria

I post the following not because I agree with it -- I don't -- but to make the point that sometimes Torah thoughts are colored by cultural attitudes of the time. In the Midrash Rabba on Tazria, in Baal HaTurim on the parsha, and much more clearly in the following gematria tapestry by Rabbenu Ephraim ben Shimson (a student of the Rokeach, from the 12th and 13th century), there is a decided anti-female and pro-male bias, which cannot be adequately addressed by apologetics. Perhaps we may realize that these remazim are simply supports after the fact, and prove nothing.

"Isha Ki Tazria: אשה is the same gematria as דבש [honey], and this is what Shlomo Hamelech hinted at in his wisdom (in Mishlei 25:27), 
אָכֹל דְּבַשׁ הַרְבּוֹת לֹא-טוֹב; . It is not good to eat much honey [... so for men to search out their own glory is not glory].

[Re: eating too much honey] That whoever is drenched in sexual congress, his years are shortened, his teeth fall out, his eyelashes fall out, a bad odor exudes from his mouth and underarms, the hair of his legs increases, and many maladies come upon him aside from these.

Veyalda Zachar: זכר [male] in gematria is ברכה [blessing]. הבת [the daughter] in gematria is ארור [accursed]. That is to say that the male progeny is an addition of blessing while the daughter reduces the money of her father.

Another interpretation: זכר should be parsed as זה כר [this is the kikar], that is to say, this one brings his loaf with him. נקבה [female] is נקי בה. [J: I am not sure. Clean of it?]

The questioner asks: Why for a female child does she [the mother] sit impurity twice as much as for a male child. [That is, 14 days instead of 7 days?] And the answer is that the birth of a male child is joy, so that she does not bleed out such an abundance of blood. But by a female child, because of her great anguish and as a cause for concern about herself, she pours forth a lot of blood. And in accordance with the increase or decrease of the blood are the days of impurity and impurity. And some say that she keeps [seven days] for her own impurity and [an additional seven] for the impurity of her daughter, which are in sum fourteen days."

It was not easy living in medieval times. And a son who will work and support his parents in their old age was looked at as a blessing. A daughter who would not do so, and indeed would be a draw of money, in the form of a dowry, would be looked at as not such a blessing. And in accordance with this perception were the derashot constructed.

Is Chuck Hagel an Amalekite?

From the always silly Rav Fish, some troubling news about Chuck Hagel:

• Chuck Hagel:
• can be spelled in Hebrew צ'ק איגל [using a silent H].  צ'ק is the same letters as קץ, while איגל is the gematria of דם [blood]. 
• And his father has German heritage. 
• And he was born in North Platte, Nebraska, signifying מצפון תפתח הרעה. 
• Also, this can be spelled נור ת, meaning "the fire of Tav" - the 400 men of Esav and Amalek
• He worked at Firestone Tires, again "fire".  Also, פַיֶירְסְטוֹן is the gematria of משיח בן דוד.

This stuff always reminds me of the uncanny similarities of the Lincoln and Kennedy assassinations:

Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.

Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.

The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters.

Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.

Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.

Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.

Both were shot in the head.

Lincoln's secretary, Kennedy, warned him not to go to the theatre.
Kennedy's secretary, Lincoln, warned him not to go to Dallas.

Both were assassinated by Southerners.

Both were succeeded by Southerners.

Both successors were named Johnson.

Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.

John Wilkes Booth was born in 1839.
Lee Harvey Oswald was born in 1939.

Both assassins were known by their three names.

Both names are comprised of fifteen letters

Booth ran from the theater and was caught in a warehouse.
Oswald ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theater.

Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.

A month before he was shot, Lincoln was in Monroe, Maryland. 

 See Snopes' debunking of this. For instance, this paragraph:

The coincidences are easily explained as the simple product of mere chance. It's not difficult to find patterns and similarities between any two marginally-related sets of data, and coincidences similar in number and kind can be (and have been) found between many different pairs of Presidents. Our tendency to seek out patterns wherever we can stems from our desire to make sense of our world; to maintain a feeling that our universe is orderly and can be understood. In this specific case two of our most beloved Presidents were murdered for reasons that make little or no sense to many of us, and by finding patterns in their deaths we also hope to find a larger cosmic "something" that seemingly provides some reassuring (if indefinite) rhyme or reason why these great men were prematurely snatched from our mortal sphere.

Yes, the "frum" approach is to counter this with the assertion that, since Hashem controls the world (down to every falling leaf), there are no coincidences.

But even if we grant that every factoid was set in place by Hashem, the corresponding of the millions of little facts to establish a meaningful relationship is something done by humans. Rabbi Fish's last name is Fish, and I would assert that his methodology is fishy. Just because I, a human being, established a connection between the last name (a matter established by God) and the adjective "fishy" (also a matter established by God), that does not mean that God intended the correspondence to have meaning.

Even in pesukim, directly authored by God, not every human interpretation reflects Hashem's intent. The pasuk says Naaseh Adam Betzalmeinu, and a midrash states that Moshe objected that the human heretics would use this as proof of multiple gods. Hashem said that if humans want to err, let them err. Hashem wanted to make a homiletic point about the importance of consulting others.

If you line up any two historical events, or any two persons, there will be millions of factiods associated with them. And by the rules of large numbers, there will be a number of factiods from each set which match. To then point out the similarities reveals absolutely nothing.

And misusing gematria, synonyms, and multiple alternate spellings (e.g. spell Hagel with an aleph rather than a heh) to arrive at a predetermined outcome is bittul Torah in every sense of the word.

Eliezer makes a netilas yadayim and hamotzi

Summary: But how does the Baal HaTurim know to add these additional details to the midrash?

Post: In parashat Chayei Sarah, perek 24, Eliezer says the following to Rivkah's family:

33. And [food] was set before him to eat, but he said, "I will not eat until I have spoken my words." And he said, "Speak."

לג. [ויישם] וַיּוּשַׂם לְפָנָיו לֶאֱכֹל וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא אֹכַל עַד אִם דִּבַּרְתִּי דְּבָרָי וַיֹּאמֶר דַּבֵּר:

in his short commentary, Baal HaTurim writes about how Eliezer sensed that Betuel poisoned his food, and gave an excuse that he could not eat until, as was his custom in his master's house, he said the blessings of Netilat Yadayim and Hamotzi. Thus, לֹא אֹכַל עַד אִם דִּבַּרְתִּי. He figured that that would protect him from the poison, just as a cup of [wine of] blessing [of Birkat HaMazon] combines to good but not to bad [in terms of sheidim]. And indeed, he was saved, when the angel switched the plates of food, thus offing Betuel.

Here is the Baal HaTurim inside:

Birchas Yitzchak, R' Yitzchok Horowitz (a previous Melitzer Rebbe) writes:


 ויאמר לא  אוכל  עד אם  דברתי  דברי .  כתב  הבעל  הטורים  שאליעזר
 לא  רצה  לאכול  עד  שיברך  ברכת  על  נטילת  ידים  והמוציא
 לחם  מן  הארץ ,  וזה  שאמר  עד  אם  דברתי  דברי .  ויש  להבין  איך
 משמע  מזה  שרצה  לברך  שתי  הברכות  האלו .  ונראה  לומר  דלכאורה
 יש  לדקדק  למה  נכתבו  תיבות  אם  דברתי  שמשמע  על  העבר ,  אם
 דברתי  כבר ,  ולא  אמר  אם  אדבר  דברי .  אבל  באלו  התיבות  נרמזו
 הברכות  האלו ,  כי  דברת״י  בגימטריא  תרי״ו  וזה  כמספר  ״המוציא
 לחם  מן  הארץ״ .  ואם  נחשוב  שתי  התיבות  א״ם  דברת״י  המה
 בגימטריא  תרנ״ז  ועם  האותיות  עוד  ז׳  הרי  הם  בגימטריא  תרס״ד
 וזהו כמספר  התיבות  ע״ל  נטיל״ת  ידי״ם  ועם  הכולל  עוד  אחד
 ג״כ  עולה  תרס״ד .  ( ושמחתי  כי  נראה  שזהו  כמעט  מה  שכיוון
 הבעה״ט  הקדוש  ז״ל  בזה ) .ש


וגם יש  לומר  כי  הלשון  אם  דברתי  שמשמע  אם  שאדבר  קודם  וזה
 בדברים  השייכים  לומר  בתחלה  כי  הדין  הוא  כי  הברכות
 צריכים  לברך  עובר  לעשייתן . . .ש


Thus, he cites the Baal HaTurim that:

Eliezer did not wish to eat until he blessed al netilas yadayim and hamotzi lechem min ha'aretz, and that this is the implication of לֹא אֹכַל עַד אִם דִּבַּרְתִּי דְּבָרָי. And there is to understand how it is implied from this that he wished to bless these two blessings. And it appears to say that apparently, there is to analyze why the words אִם דִּבַּרְתִּי are written, which imply the past, 'if I had already spoken', and he did not say 'if I will speak my words.' But with these words are hinted these blessings, for דִּבַּרְתִּי is in gematria 616, and this is the same as the number of המוציא לחם מן הארץ. And if we consider the two words אִם דִּבַּרְתִּי, they are in gematria 657, and with the [seven] letters [of the two words] there are another 7, such that it is, in gematria, 664. And this is the same as the gematria of the words ע״ל  נטיל״ת  ידי״ם, with an encompasser [for the word itself], an additional 1, which sums to 664. (And I rejoiced because it seems that this is almost just what the holy Baal HaTurim za'l intended in this.)

And there is also to say that the language אִם דִּבַּרְתִּי implies 'if I have already spoken', and these are words which are appropriate to say beforehand, for the law is that the blessing require one to bless before that to which they apply.

I think it is doubtful that this was Baal HaTurim's true intent, as much as it would give great joy to the Birkas Yitzchak. The Baal HaTurim does not shy away from gematria, but he also does not leave the derivation (or secondary derivation of already darshened facts) out. The Baal HaTurim could have readily given those gematriot. Also, playing around with word selection (out of the greater phrase), adding the number of words or adding 1 to a number, one can often jiggle gematriot to get them just right.

Here is what I think is the most likely basis for specifically these two berachot. There was already the midrash, found e.g. in Bereishit Rabbati, about Betuel (or Lavan) trying to poison Eliezer. And we can find that in the disappearance of Betuel from the narrative, among other things. And וַיּוּשַׂם can be takes to refer to sam, poison. (And there is a krei and ketiv in place on the word.) He finds a clever additional support based on the other use of the term in Tanach.

Now, he said "I can't eat until I have spoken my words." And the very next pasuk,

34. And he said, "I am Abraham's servant.

לד. וַיֹּאמַר עֶבֶד אַבְרָהָם אָנֹכִי:

Thus, Baal HaTurim can derive that it has to do with something religious, that he is the servant of Avraham. We already have from elsewhere that Avraham kept the entire Torah, even unto eruv tavshilin. So it makes sense to make this into a ritual matter.

And what ritual matter involves speaking prior to allowing oneself to eat? The obvious answer is al netilas yadayim and hamotzi. As to why two blessings, well, that encompasses what one says before eating. Plus, we can look to the plural of דְּבָרָי.

I don't think we need to find any difficulty in the phrasing of עַד אִם דִּבַּרְתִּי, 'until I have spoken'. This seems perfectly natural on a peshat level. And we don't need to ask 'What is bothering Baal HaTurim?' This seems to me like a retrojection of a specific attitude towards drash onto the Rishonim, such as the Baal HaTurim and Rashi. Rather, there are surely textual irregularities which sparked the initial midrash, but Baal HaTurim is acting as an artist here, creatively painting in additional colors and details by clever reinterpretation of various pesukim. One need not find difficulties in each of this Biblical pre-texts which compel Baal HaTurim, almost against his will, to reinterpret the verse in this new way.

Of course, Birchas Yitzchak himself is creatively adding layers, not of details but of further support to the details Baal HaTurim already provided. And there is room for that. Even so, I don't think that these derivational details reflect Baal HaTurim's initial intent.

Is Rabbi Asher Dahan a gilgul of Pinchas?

{Note: This was written to make a point, and is tongue-in-cheek. No, I don't really think Dahan is a gilgul of Pinchas.}

According to recent news, R' Asher Dahan, who murdered R' Eleazar Abuchatzera, has no regrets, and believes that he is the gilgul of Pinchas. Some have scoffed at this, but in fact, it makes perfect sense.

After all, we know from the autistics that the gemara about children and lunatics having ruach hakodesh is to be regularly applied. Someone who stabs another person in the heart and claims he is a gilgul of Pinchas is surely a lunatic. Therefore, he must have ruach hakodesh. And just as we believe the autistics about their being gilgulim, so should we believe Asher Dahan.

It goes further than that. When Pinchas killed Zimri, he stopped the magefa, a terrible judgement and punishment upon all of klal Yisrael. And indeed, the brother of the murder victim, Baba Baruch, confirms that this is so:

“Harsh punishments were decreed on the people of Israel, and he wanted to nullify them,” said the slain rabbi's brother, Rabbi Baruch Abuhatzeira, also known as the Baba Baruch, speaking at Rabbi Abuhatzeira's funeral.

He added, “As he nullified many harsh decrees for us...We ask you, Rabbi Elazar: go before the Throne of Glory and pray there for the people of Israel. Pray for the entire family. Pray for your sons, your daughters, your grandchildren and wife,” Rabbi Baruch continued. He said, “There is much to say, but the mind is confused.”

Rabbi Shlomo Amar, the Chief Sephardic Rabbi of Israel, made similar comments to Arutz Sheva on Friday.

“Who knows what kind of decree G-d's people was under? And [Rabbi Abuhatzeira] was strong for us, and he bore the atonement for our generation,” Rabbi Amar said.

More than that. Over at Yeranen Yaakov, he brings various gematrios from comments at Kikar Shabbat finding evidence to this murder in the Torah. And also at Yeranen Yaakov, Rav Amnon Yitzchak brings a nice gematria -- indeed, those posts inspired this post:

Rav Amnon Yitzhak said that perhaps it was due to non-kosher songs and singers.  He said that the siman in Shulhan Aruch that has to do with the destruction of the Beit Hamikdash and not listening to music is Siman 560, which is also the gematria of the murderer (without the א in his last name).  He added that the death of Tzaddik atones if we act in the ways of the Tzaddik, and since Baba Elazar was careful with guarding his eyes, we too should be more careful in these matters.

The transcript, available at Life In Israel, shows more certainty and intemperate language than that.

With this great insight, that gematria can help us discover new facts, we can certainly prove that Asher Dahan was a gilgul of Pinchas. Who did Pinchas kill? Zimri ben Salu. Who did Asher Dahan kill? Baba Elazar.

Looking to gematria, we discover the following amazing fact:
רבי אלעזר אבוחצירה = 842
זהו גילגולו של זמרי בן סלוא = 842

and
אשר דהאן = 561
פנחס בן אלעזר = 558 + counting the three words in 'Pinchas ben Eleazar' = 561

More than that, Rabbi Amnon Yitzchak blamed our songs for the murder. And this is certainly connected with the gilgul of the deceased, Zimri, meaning 'my song'. And Zimri was the son of Salu, while Baba Elazar was the grandson of Baba Sali.

This does not mean that Dahan acted appropriately. According to the Ishbitzer:

[Pinchas] judged Zimri as no'ef b'alma (sexually corrupt.) However, the depth of the foundation of the matter was hidden from him, for Cosbi was his [Zimri's] soulmate from the six days of creation, as explained in the writings of the Rabbi Isaac Luria, z"l. Owing to this Moshe Rabeynu didn't become involved and sentence Zimri to death. Pinchas' response in this action is thus compared to a child, meaning that he didn't know the depth of the situation, seeing only through human eyes and no further. Nevertheless, the blessed God loved him and agreed with him, for in Pinchas's mind he had done a great and self-sacrificing act in his zealotry.

100 blessings a day, but how many letters in the pasuk?!

In parshat Ekev, a famous pasuk {Devarim 10:12}:

יב וְעַתָּה, יִשְׂרָאֵל--מָה ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ, שֹׁאֵל מֵעִמָּךְ: כִּי אִם-לְיִרְאָה אֶת-ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ לָלֶכֶת בְּכָל-דְּרָכָיו, וּלְאַהֲבָה אֹתוֹ, וְלַעֲבֹד אֶת-ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ, בְּכָל-לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל-נַפְשֶׁךָ.

12 And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all His ways, and to love Him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul;

The gemara in Menachot 43b reads:

תניא היה רבי מאיר אומר חייב אדם לברך מאה ברכות בכל יום שנאמר (דברים י) ועתה ישראל מה ה' אלהיך שואל מעמך

It is not necessarily relevant, since there is not always a precise correspondence between the actual pasuk and the pasuk as cited in the gemara, especially where writing a word malei is an aid to pronunciation, but note how shoel is spelled with a vav. This may indeed be relevant.

This derasha seems at odds with the spirit of the pasuk. The pasuk is coming to basically say (IMHO) that rachmana liba ba'i, Hashem basically wants us to follow in his ways, love him, do what is right in accordance with what he has commanded. To darshen it to impose an extra ritual requirement of 100 blessings that one must say each day seems at odds with the theme of the pasuk. And there might be a great answer to this, which will increase our understanding and appreciation of the meaning of berachot. Regardless, the standard understanding of this derivation is that מה is to be reread as מאה, such that Hashem is asking of you 100. And those are the 100 blessings.

Baal Haturim offers other derivations, but I often like to point out that his approach is to find extra derivations encoded in gematria, roshei teivos, and the like, to further support and discover what was already known and derived by Chazal using more standard midrashic methodology.

Here, Baal Haturim points out several additional derivations of this law. First, that using A"t Ba"sh, a cypher in which you fold the aleph beis over itself, such that aleph, the first letter in the beginning, matches the last letter tav; and beis, the second letter, matches shin, the second to last letter. If you take the word מה, the mem matches to yud and the heh matches to tzaddi. Thus, יצ. Yud is 10 and tzaddi is 90, for a total of 100.

Second, that there are 100 letters in the verse. And note that he also cites the pasuk with שואל having a vav.

Third, the word ממך is mem + mem + kaf = 40 + 40 + 40 = 100.

There are "problems" with these derivations. Firstly, there is no word ממך in the pasuk! If I understood Baal Haturim's third point correctly, he was trying to make such a derivation based on gematria of a non-existent word. The word in the pasuk is מעמך. (But in the dibbur hamatchil he had it right! It is possible I am making some catastrophic error here in understanding this derivation. Help will be much appreciated.)

{Update: As DovBear pointed out to me in private correspondence, based on his Mikraos Gedolos, the Baal Haturim is likely referring to another pasuk, in Micha 6:8:

ח הִגִּיד לְךָ אָדָם, מַה-טּוֹב; וּמָה-ה' דּוֹרֵשׁ מִמְּךָ, כִּי אִם-עֲשׂוֹת מִשְׁפָּט וְאַהֲבַת חֶסֶד, וְהַצְנֵעַ לֶכֶת, עִם-אֱלֹהֶיךָ. {ס}

8 It hath been told thee, O man, what is good, and what the LORD doth require of thee: only to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God. {S}

While earlier in his comment Baal Haturim did speak of sheol mimcha, he likely is directly or indirectly referring to this pasuk in Michah. Thus, Hashem is doresh "mimecha", which is gematria 100.

}

But secondly, he claims that there are 100 words in the pasuk, while there are only 99! This is related to an earlier post on parshablog, which discussed a Rashi which appeared to darshen a word for being chaser yud, when we had it malei. Here, it would seem that Baal Haturim has an extra letter. And that letter would be the vav in shoel. But even so, didn't he just drop out the ע from מעמך. We would need still another letter, if so! {Note: As per the update, that it referred to a pasuk in Micha, this last objection is no objection.}

At any rate, here is what Minchas Shai writes:

וְעַתָּה יִשְׂרָאֵל מָה ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ שֹׁאֵל מֵעִמָּךְ -- The Baal Haturim writes that there are 100 letters in this verse, corresponding to the 100 blessings. And so too in the Aruch, entry מאה {thanks, Z!}, 100. Also, the Rav Ibn Yarchi in sefer Hamanhig in the name of Rabbenu Yaakov מ"כ that he found in the masoretic notes that this verse is in its entirety possessed of 100 letters, and that shoel is malei {such that that extra vav would bring it from 99 to 100}. End quote. And so wrote the Ramban in his commentary to sefer Yetzirah, page 23, that so wrote the kabbalist, the rav, R' Y"T {Yom Tov ben Avraham Asevilli} za"l, in the sefer called Kesem Paz, in the name of the rav, Rabbi Eliyahu the kabbalist, that the word שואל is malei {vav}, and that the count of 100 is in this verse, end quote.

However, in our sefarim it is chaser; and so wrote the Rama, za"l: שאל מעמך is chaser, and just like it is ושאל אוב וידעוני. And so too wrote the rav, Rabbenu Bachta in his sefer Kad Hakemach, letter Bet, Beracha, and this is his language:

And further, you will find in this verse 99 letters, and with the addition of the aleph which {Chachmeinu} za"l said "do not read it mah but meah", it will sum up to 100.

I have also seen one who wished to add a vav to {the beginning of} the word לָלֶכֶת in the verse in order to complete the count, and wrote that so it {=the verse} is written in the sefer of Rabbi Yosef Tov Elem. And one should not rely on this at all.

There is indeed a difference between your typical malei and chaser, in which we can follow the gemara and say that anan lo bekiin bemeleios vachaseiros, and that such differences do not invalidate a sefer Torah, and adding or subtracting a connective vav in the beginning of a word.

It also might be useful to see the sefer Hamanhig inside. Beside the masoretic tradition being cited, of 100 letters in the pasuk, we also see other efforts to arrive at 100, such as the atbash cypher, or adding the aleph from Chazal's derasha to make the word 100. It seems that this masoretic note did not necessarily conform even to his sefer Torah, and so these various methods of deduction and/or arriving at 100 were required. This might be true as well of Ramban and others. Indeed, perhaps it was even so of the Baal Haturim, who gives two other methods of reaching 100, one of which is atbash; perhaps he only wrote this 100 count according to those who had such a count, but wrote in brief. On the other hand, he makes no note of dispute in this pasuk, and the dibbur hamatchil has שואל with the vav present.

Should one put stock in this alternate masorah, that there are 100 letters and the שואל is malei? I don't think so, because even that masoretic note seems aware of the variant, by saying that שואל is malei and that brings the number of letters to 100. This seems congnizant of the alternative, and that saying that it is malei "helps out" in the "problem" of getting to 100 to bolster the derasha. And if so, it is choosing one variant (or creating it?) for this very purpose. Meanwhile, the text with only 99 letters is more "difficult" since it does not support the derasha in this extra way, and requires Rabbenu Bachya's explanation of adding the aleph to make it work. Lectio difficilior thus favors the 99 letter verse to be more original.

There is also the Yerushalmi (I don't recall where) which says that if given two Torah variants, to prefer the chaser over the malei as the likely more original.

The bitter waters operating with gender equality

In parshat Naso, both adulterer and adulteress get what is coming to them. In Bemidbar 5:22:

כא וְהִשְׁבִּיעַ הַכֹּהֵן אֶת-הָאִשָּׁה, בִּשְׁבֻעַת הָאָלָה, וְאָמַר הַכֹּהֵן לָאִשָּׁה, יִתֵּן ה אוֹתָךְ לְאָלָה וְלִשְׁבֻעָה בְּתוֹךְ עַמֵּךְ--בְּתֵת ה אֶת-יְרֵכֵךְ נֹפֶלֶת, וְאֶת-בִּטְנֵךְ צָבָה.	21 then the priest shall cause the woman to swear with the oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman--the LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to fall away, and thy belly to swell;
כב וּבָאוּ הַמַּיִם הַמְאָרְרִים הָאֵלֶּה, בְּמֵעַיִךְ, לַצְבּוֹת בֶּטֶן, וְלַנְפִּל יָרֵךְ; וְאָמְרָה הָאִשָּׁה, אָמֵן אָמֵן.	22 and this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, and make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to fall away'; and the woman shall say: 'Amen, Amen.'

Rashi writes:

causing the belly to swell and the thigh to rupture [This refers to] the belly and thigh of the adulterer, or perhaps only those of the adulteress? [However,] when Scripture says “causes your thigh to rupture and your belly to swell” (verse 21), those of the adulteress are stated [thus here it must refer to the adulterer]. — [Sotah 28a and Sifrei Naso 1:65]

This idea that it applies to the male adulterer is thus a traditional Jewish one; and it also makes us see the justice of the situation, for otherwise the suspected adulteress dies while her lover gets off without harm.

If we would not resort to this midrashic explanation of the miracle, one could imagine that he would not escape his due punishment; for her miraculous punishment would indicate her guilt, and if we don't understand the double Amen to apply to another man, then he has been shown to be guilty as well. Of course, this is not the way the halacha has been established; I am merely pointing out how this sense of justice could have been catered to in a different scenario.

The derivation of this midrash has to do with duplication (pasuk 21 and 22), as well as dikduk. Because there is a seeming eschewing of possessive pronouns, which would indicate gender. Thus, יְרֵכֵךְ and בִּטְנֵךְ in pasuk 21 for the woman, but לַצְבּוֹת בֶּטֶן וְלַנְפִּל יָרֵךְ with no possession in pasuk 22. And so the midrash is free to run with this and apply it to the man, the adulterer.

Baal Haturim likes to take traditions which have been derived using other mechanisms and further support them with gematrias. Thus, he writes:

The word הַמְאָרְרִים is equal to 2 X Ramach. This shows that it enters into all the limbs of both the woman (as one) and the man (as another). He further connects it to another fairly common textual feature, that in the word "hi" (meaning "she") there is a vav, as if it were "hu" (him). Thus it refers to him, the adulterer. One a peshat level, this is a relic of the development of the imot hakeriah, and does not bear any special import.

There is a difference between taking an existing derasha from Chazal and supporting it with a gematria (thus perhaps adding extra inspiration for those who like and believe in gematrias) on the one hand, and coming up with new derashot with little or no support from Chazal, on the other. Can gematria be the basis of a novel derasha? Such examples are few. But by way of illustration, here are all the places in Tanach words occur with the value 496 (which is 248 X 2):

Text	Strong's	First Occ.
ויפת	H3315 Yepheth / Japheth	Gen 7:13
וישקף	H8259 shaqaph / look	Gen 19:28
המאכלת	H3979 ma'akeleth / knife	Gen 22:6
כתמול	H8543 temowl / times	Gen 31:2
ומתן	H4976 mattan / gift	Gen 34:12
יפות	H3303 yapheh / fair	Gen 41:2
נמות	H4191 muwth / die	Gen 42:2
צרור	H6872 tserowr / bundle	Gen 42:35
בצפרדעים	H6854 tsephardea` / frog	Exo 8:2
לגלגלת	H1538 gulgoleth / poll	Exo 16:16
וכליתיך	H3615 kalah / consume	Exo 33:5
וסלת	H5560 coleth / flour	Lev 7:12
	H8263 sheqets / abomination	Lev 11:11
מטמאתו	H2932 tum'ah / uncleanness	Lev 14:19
מכלות	H3615 kalah / consume	Lev 26:16
לשמעון	H8095 Shim`own / Simeon	Num 1:6
המאררים	H0779 'arar / curse	Num 5:18
ומררים	H4844 meror / bitter	Num 9:11
מתנו	H4191 muwth / die	Num 14:2
תמנו	H8552 tamam / consume	Num 17:13
מלכתו	H4438 malkuwth / kingdom	Num 24:7
בנחלתו	H5159 nachalah / inheritance	Num 36:9
ועדתיו	H5713 `edah / testimonies	Deu 6:17
וכסית	H3680 kacah / cover	Deu 23:13
תלינו	H3885 luwn / lodge	Jos 4:3
פיות	H6366 peyah / edge	Jdg 3:16
התיכונה	H8484 tiykown / middle	Jdg 7:19
וכעת	H6256 `eth / time	Jdg 13:23
מנות	H4490 manah / portion	1Sa 1:4
כלותם	H3615 kalah / consume	1Sa 15:18
תמלוך	H4427 malak / reign	1Sa 24:20
ומלכת	H4427 malak / reign	2Sa 3:21
ככלותך	H3615 kalah / consume	2Sa 11:19
תסוכי	H5480 cuwk / anoint...8,	2Sa 14:2
והתיכנה	H8484 tiykown / middle	1Ki 6:6
מתאנה	H0579 'anah / deliver	2Ki 5:7
עדותיו	H5715 `eduwth / testimony	2Ki 17:15
ויתכס	H3680 kacah / cover	2Ki 19:1
מלכות	H4438 malkuwth / kingdom	1Ch 12:23
ונפשכם	H5315 nephesh / soul	1Ch 22:19
מתנדב	H5068 nadab / offered	1Ch 29:5
ומנת	H4521 menath / portion	2Ch 31:3
ותנם	H5414 nathan / give	Neh 4:4
לויתן	H3882 livyathan / leviathan	Job 3:8
ולכתם	H3800 kethem / fine	Job 31:24
סביבותיו	H5439 cabiyb / round	Psa 18:11
מוקשים	H4170 mowqesh / snare	Psa 64:5
האכלתם	H0398 'akal / eat	Psa 80:5
כסיתו	H3680 kacah / cover	Psa 104:6
ופתי	H6612 pethiy / simple	Pro 19:25
וטמאתם	H2930 tame' / unclean	Isa 30:22
תכלמו	H3637 kalam / ashamed	Isa 45:17
יתכסו	H3680 kacah / cover	Isa 59:6
וחטאותינו	H2403 chatta'ah / sin	Isa 59:12
תאמנה	H0539 'aman / believe	Isa 60:4
ממותי	H4463 mamowth / death	Jer 16:4
וימתם	H4191 muwth / die	Jer 52:27
והכינתה	H3559 kuwn / prepare	Eze 4:3
והודעתה	H3045 yada` / know	Eze 22:2
המאתים	H3967 me'ah / hundred	Eze 45:15
מאחזתם	H0272 'achuzzah / possession(s)	Eze 46:18
אתיעטו	H3272 ye`at (Aramaic) / counsellor	Dan 6:7
שקוץ	H8251 shiqquwts / abomination	Dan 12:11
כמלקוש	H4456 malqowsh / latter	Hos 6:3
כלמות	H3639 kelimmah / shame	Mic 2:6

Will we now go to each of these instances and give an explanation having to do with two people's Ramach Eivarim? Must we? I would doubt it.

Thus, the general Baal Haturim-type gematria is not the same as looking at a pasuk, or looking at the world, and saying that X must be so because the gematrias add up. For example, the Barack Hussein Obama is the same gematria as Yishmaelim, so Obama is a closet Muslim. I do not believe that Baal Haturim would subscribe to such nonsense, as much as we occasionally disagree of the validity of his own methodology.