[Avodah] ___melech, ____malach

[Zev Sero via Avodah]

On 03/09/2016 08:58 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 06:49:00PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
> : Melachim I 2:10 doesn't say that he died...
>
> But Chazal do. Tripping on a staircase ust before the end of Shabbos.
> And Adam gives him only 70 of his years. But never mind that, Shelmo
> makes him a funeral.

The pasuk says he "lay with his fathers".  But he didn't "die".  Whatever
"vayomos" means, it happens to everyone but not to him or to Yaacov.
Chazal don't say any different.   In fact it's Chazal who point out to
us that "Yaacov Lo meis".

> For that matter, Yaaqov is embalmed.

And the gemara points that out and asks whether it was for nothing,
and answers yes, it was for nothing.  They imagined that he had died
but he hadn't.    Me, I wonder why someone who hadn't died but had
both expired and lain with his fathers (in Yaacov's case both of these
expressions are used, while Dovid apparently didn't expire either)
wouldn't need embalming, lamenting, or burying.  Why was it for nothing
merely because he hadn't died.  But that is what the gemara asks and
answers, so apparently these things are not necessary without death.
Which answers your question about Shlomo too; he imagined that his
father needed a funeral, but he really didn't.


> Taking that maamar as literal doesn't fit the pasuq or oter maamarim.

Which ones?


> That is thin basis for positing miracles of that proportion.

What miracle did I posit?  All I derived from it is that David is
still a king and will be a king in the future.  That's not a miracle.

-- 
Zev Sero               All around myself I will wave the green willow
zev at sero.name          The myrtle and the palm and the citron for a week
                And if anyone should ask me the reason why I'm doing that
                I'll say "It's a Jewish thing; if you have a few minutes
                I'll explain it to you".