This chapter continues the genealogies of the descendants of Judah, and in it we repeatedly encounter the very phenomenon we have already noted: the text mentions an individual and recounts his descendants - without having previously mentioned who he is or where he came from. The Malbim reiterates this fundamental principle: Ezra transcribed his account from the comprehensive genealogical register, yet he did not copy the entire pedigree, but only the distinctive, renowned, and prominent figures, leaving out the rest. For this reason, the text sometimes appears abruptly truncated to us - because it was indeed excised from another source, where everything was recorded in far greater detail.
וּכְלוּב אֲחִי שׁוּחָה הוֹלִיד אֶת מְחִיר הוּא אֲבִי אֶשְׁתּוֹן׃ - And Chelub the brother of Shuhah begot Mehir, who was the father of Eshton.
Here too, the text did not previously mention Chelub in the genealogical order, yet it recounts his lineage nonetheless. You will see this in many places throughout this book, which abbreviates lineages and omits many intermediate details. The Malbim explains that Chelub was of the descendants of Ashhur, and he is Chelub the brother of Shuhah who fathered Mehir. And why does the verse specify "the brother of Shuhah" without us knowing who Shuhah was? Because in the original genealogical register, the succession of generations was detailed at length down to Shuhah and Chelub his brother; Shuhah's lineage was spelled out there, followed by "and Chelub the brother of Shuhah" - and anyone reading that original register clearly understood who was being discussed. Ezra, who selectively abridged only what was relevant to our subject, bypassed everyone who was not of primary significance and began directly with Chelub.
וְאֶשְׁתּוֹן הוֹלִיד אֶת בֵּית רָפָא וְאֶת פָּסֵחַ וְאֶת תְּחִנָּה אֲבִי עִיר נָחָשׁ אֵלֶּה אַנְשֵׁי רֵכָה׃ - And Eshton begot Beth-rapha, and Paseah, and Tehinnah the father of Ir-nahash; these are the men of Rechah.
"The father of Ir-nahash" - Ir-nahash was the name of a city, and Tehinnah was its governor or founder. "These are the men of Rechah" - the descendants of Eshton settled in a place called Rechah; others explain that "the men of Rechah" was a family name, similar to "the Rechabites" and the like. Radak explains "the father of Ir-nahash" along the lines of "the father of Kiryat-yearim": the city was populated by his descendants, and therefore it was named after the father - and likewise here, the city was settled by the descendants of Nahash and called Ir-nahash. And what is meant by "the men of Rechah"? Radak does not attempt to find an explanation, but writes that they were called this for a reason known among them, and so too writes the Malbim: for a reason known to them. In other words, the verse did not elaborate on why they were called by this name.
וּבְנֵי קְנַז עׇתְנִיאֵל וּשְׂרָיָה וּבְנֵי עׇתְנִיאֵל חֲתַת׃ וּמְעוֹנֹתַי הוֹלִיד אֶת עׇפְרָה וּשְׂרָיָה הוֹלִיד אֶת יוֹאָב אֲבִי גֵּיא חֲרָשִׁים כִּי חֲרָשִׁים הָיוּ׃ - And the sons of Kenaz: Othniel and Seraiah; and the sons of Othniel: Hathath. And Meonothai begot Ophrah; and Seraiah begot Joab, the father of Ge-harashim, for they were craftsmen.
Once again, the text mentions descendants without having introduced the father - we have not heard of Kenaz until now, yet the verse lists his sons. Othniel the son of Kenaz was the first Judge in Israel. The Malbim explains that the sons of Kenaz were also from this same family, adding: "In my opinion, to preserve the straightforward meaning of the verses and resolve all the difficulties that strained the commentators" - that is, to resolve the question of how Kenaz suddenly appears without any mention of his lineage - it appears that from Ashhur came the first Kenaz, and he fathered Jephunneh. Therefore, Caleb is called "the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite," referring back to his descent from this first Kenaz. Notice: Jephunneh was both the son of Kenaz and the father of Kenaz, as he fathered two sons - Kenaz and Caleb.
With this, apparent contradictions from other passages are resolved. It is written: "And Othniel the son of Kenaz, the brother of Caleb, took it" - and who is "the brother of Caleb"? Kenaz. The intention is not that Othniel is the brother of Caleb, but that Othniel is the son of Kenaz, and Kenaz is the brother of Caleb. For Jephunneh, the son of the first Kenaz, named one son Kenaz and the other son Caleb. All of this, the Malbim notes, Ezra did not need to recount for us in detail, as this lineage was already well known to us from the Torah and from the Book of Joshua.
The verse now details the descendants of the two brothers, Kenaz and Caleb. The sons of Kenaz son of Jephunneh were Othniel and Seraiah. The sons of Othniel were Hathath and Meonothai, and Meonothai fathered Ophrah. Although "Meonothai" might seem unconnected to what precedes it, it is actually the continuation of the previous verse - following the approach of the Malbim and the Vilna Gaon explained earlier, where the name is understood as if written twice, or as if it says "and Meonothai, who fathered Ophrah." Seraiah, Kenaz's second son, fathered Joab, from whom came the inhabitants of Gei Harashim (the Valley of Craftsmen), and the place was named after their craft, "for they were craftsmen." In the Book of Nehemiah it is mentioned in connection with the descendants of Benjamin, because by the days of Nehemiah the Benjamites had already settled there, but at that earlier time it was called Gei Harashim. The Radak also explains "father of Gei Harashim" like "father of Kiriath-jearim." And what are charashim (craftsmen)? Artisans in stone, wood, and iron - there is a woodcarver, an ironsmith, and a stonemason; the term refers to a professional craftsman who creates and sculpts in wood, iron, or stone.
וּבְנֵי כָּלֵב בֶּן יְפֻנֶּה עִירוּ אֵלָה וָנָעַם וּבְנֵי אֵלָה וּקְנַז׃ - And the sons of Caleb the son of Jephunneh were Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the sons of Elah: Ukenaz.
Chazal teach that Caleb son of Jephunneh is identical to Caleb son of Hezron. Why was he called "son of Jephunneh"? Because he turned himself away (shippinah atzmo) from the counsel of the Spies - Yefuneh being derived from pinui (turning away). And if one should ask: Has the lineage of Caleb son of Hezron not already been recorded, so why return to the beginning? The commentary attributed to Rashi answers: Do not wonder at this, for such is the manner of this Book - it records a partial genealogy, skips over a family, and later returns to take up the family it had passed over.
"And the sons of Elah: Ukenaz" - the commentary attributed to Rashi explains that the vav of "Ukenaz" is part of the name itself, just as we have seen in several places where Rashi explains that an initial vav or definitive heh at the start of a name is an essential part of the name itself. The Malbim explains that here the text begins listing the sons of Caleb the brother of Kenaz, the second son of Jephunneh. Caleb had sons from four wives, whom the text enumerates in the subsequent verses. The sons from the first wife - whom the verse does not name at all - were Iru, Elah, and Naam, and the son of Elah was "Ukenaz."
Why does the verse say "And the sons of Elah" in the plural regarding only one son? The Malbim explains that in the genealogical register from which Ezra copied, other sons were listed, but Ezra did not transcribe them because they were not prominent or well known; nevertheless, he preserved the original phrasing - "and the sons of" rather than "and the son of" - to indicate that there were indeed other sons. Following this line of reasoning, one might suggest that the vav of "Ukenaz" is actually a conjunction (vav hachibur) retained from the original list, which had read "and the sons of Elah: So-and-so and So-and-so and Kenaz," and Ezra omitted the former names while retaining the last. However, this textual oddity may be precisely what compelled the commentators to conclude that his proper name was indeed "Ukenaz," for otherwise, the text before us ought to have simply said "and the sons of Elah: Kenaz."
וּבְנֵי יְהַלֶּלְאֵל זִיף וְזִיפָה תִּירְיָא וַאֲשַׂרְאֵל׃ - And the sons of Jehallelel: Ziph, and Ziphah, Tiria, and Asarel.
וּבֶן עֶזְרָה יֶתֶר וּמֶרֶד וְעֵפֶר וְיָלוֹן וַתַּהַר אֶת מִרְיָם וְאֶת שַׁמַּי וְאֶת יִשְׁבָּח אֲבִי אֶשְׁתְּמֹעַ׃ - And the son of Ezrah: Jether, and Mered, and Epher, and Jalon; and she conceived Miriam, and Shammai, and Ishbah the father of Eshtemoa.
Anyone looking for original biblical names will find an abundance here: Ziph, Ziphah, Tiria, Asarel, Jalon. And even Miriam, which here is the name of a male, as will be explained.
The Malbim explains that here we move to Caleb's second wife, whose name was Jehallelel, and her sons were Ziph, Ziphah, Tiria, and Asarel. This is an innovative reading (chiddush), because the straightforward impression would be that these verses refer to males, as is the consistent pattern throughout the chapter - "Eshton fathered," "and the sons of Kenaz," "and Meonothai fathered" - whereas here, according to the Malbim, "and the sons of Jehallelel" refers to a woman.
"And Ben-Ezrah" - this does not mean the son of a person named Ezrah (and certainly not Ezra the Scribe, who is the author compiling this genealogy, and the name here is spelled with a heh), but rather "Ben-Ezrah" was his actual name, just like "Ben-hanan" and "Ben-zoheth," which are also proper names. Incidentally, the surname "Ibn Ezra" is not, as people mistakenly think, merely the common contemporary patronymic meaning "son of," but was a fixed family name, much like Ibn Shaprut and similar names. Jether, Mered, Epher, and Jalon were all sons of Jehallelel, that second wife.
"And she conceived Miriam, and Shammai, and Yishbach" - this is an unusual phrasing, for the typical biblical phrasing is "and she bore" (vatelled). The Malbim explains: It says "and she conceived" (vattahar) because she conceived all of them in a single pregnancy, and therefore it spoke in terms of conception rather than birth. The Radak, in contrast, explains that "and she conceived" is equivalent to "and she bore." Do not be surprised by this, for we say "the blessings of my parents (horai)" - those who conceived me (horuni), rather than "yoladai" (those who gave birth to me); this shows that the language of conception is sometimes used in place of giving birth. However, Radak does not explain why Scripture deviated from its usual phrasing here.
Radak differs from Malbim here on another point as well: in his view, this refers to the wife of Mered, who bore him Miriam and Shammai, and not to Yehallelel, the wife of Caleb. Furthermore, Miriam, says Radak, was a son just like the others mentioned - she conceived the son named Miriam, and Shammai, and Yishbach. Do not be surprised at this, for many names serve for both males and females, such as Abijah (the wife of Chetzron), Ephah (Caleb's concubine), and many others. We find the same in our own times: Yonah - among Ashkenazim, Rav Yonah (a man), and among Sephardim, Mrs. Yonah (a woman); Simchah - among Sephardim a woman's name, and among Ashkenazim Rav Simchah, a man's name.
וְאִשְׁתּוֹ הַיְהֻדִיָּה יָלְדָה אֶת יֶרֶד אֲבִי גְדוֹר וְאֶת חֶבֶר אֲבִי שׂוֹכוֹ וְאֶת יְקוּתִיאֵל אֲבִי זָנוֹחַ וְאֵלֶּה בְּנֵי בִּתְיָה בַת פַּרְעֹה אֲשֶׁר לָקַח מָרֶד׃ - And his Jewish wife bore Yered the father of Gedor, and Chever the father of Socho, and Yekuthiel the father of Zanoach; and these are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took.
"And his Jewish wife" - this is Caleb's third wife. She bore Yered the father of Gedor, and Chever the father of Socho, who were the leaders of those towns; "the father of Socho" - the father of the city called Socho, and Yekuthiel the father of the city called Zanoach. The commentary attributed to Rashi enumerates the list of cities in the Book of Joshua: Yokdeam, Zanoach, Chalchul, Beth-zur and Gedor, Yarmuth and Adullam, Socho and Azekah - and regarding each one explains who its "father" was, meaning that the city descended from his children, or that he founded it, or that he was its chieftain and the city was named after him.
"And these are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh" - the commentary attributed to Rashi explains that the vav creates a division here and splits the verse: up to "Yekuthiel the father of Zanoach," it refers to the sons of his Jewish wife, and from here onward a new subject begins - the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took. And who is Mered? This is Caleb, as Chazal taught: he rebelled (marad) against the counsel of the spies.
Radak explains that "the Jewish wife" (ha-Yehudiyyah) comes to exclude a non-Jewess, for immediately afterward Scripture speaks of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, who was not born Jewish but was a convert; therefore it said "and his Jewish wife" - that is, the one of distinguished lineage. Regarding the title "father of" (avi): some explain it as meaning master, that he was the master of all those cities, as Pseudo-Rashi explains. But Radak says it is more correct to interpret it literally, that these are the names of the people born to them - Chever was the father of a person named Socho, and Yekuthiel was the father of a person named Zanoach, not the father of the cities.
Radak raises a question: Why would Scripture identify the father by the name of his son? Among the Arabs this is indeed the practice - "Abu" So-and-so - but among us the practice is the reverse, always "the son of So-and-so." He answers: when the son was famous and prominent, the father is called by his name. For I may not know the father, while the son's name is widely known, and people say: "Do you know who So-and-so is? That is the father of So-and-so, the father of the prime minister, the father of that rabbi" - and through this I recognize him. Therefore: "Chever the father of Socho."
Radak notes that Chazal expound all of these names - Yered, the father of Gedor, Chever - as referring to Moshe Rabbeinu. Here an essential principle must be emphasized: when studying Scripture, the very first step is to understand what is written according to the peshat, the plain meaning. Often the peshat is completely different from what we learn in the Gemara and Midrashim, and the homiletic interpretations (derashot) of Chazal become so fixed in our minds that we forget that Scripture has a peshat distinct from the derash. For example: "Your destroyers and your demolishers shall depart from you" (Yeshayahu 49:17). Everyone understands it homiletically: "from within our own midst emerge all those who destroy and demolish." But that is not the peshat. The peshat is a reassuring prophecy: that all the destroyers and demolishers will depart from us. When someone says, "I've had enough here, I'm moving to Silicon Valley" - very good, that is the fulfillment of the verse! All the detractors and blasphemers who move away to America or anywhere else, that is the fulfillment of the prophecy: they depart from us and will no longer bother us. Yet people give a derashah, focus on it, and forget the peshat. It is always vital to first understand what the verse actually says, and only then explore where Chazal took the matter.
According to the derash, "bore" (yaldah) here means that she raised: "and these are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh" - meaning she raised them, though she did not give birth to them. Accordingly, "his Jewish wife" refers to a woman who Judaized and converted, for it refers to Bithiah. Incidentally, it is a common error to pronounce Pharaoh's daughter's name as "Batya" - it is actually Bithiah (Bityah), meaning the daughter of the Almighty (Yah). How do we know this? Scripture has vowels (nikkud), even if the Gemara does not, and in Scripture it is vocalized as Bithiah (Bityah). And as for "bore" meaning raised, this is just as it says, "and she bore him after Avshalom" (I Melachim 1:6) - meaning she raised him along the same lines as Avshalom. Thus, the terminology of childbearing can signify child-rearing, which is also the basis for why a Torah scholar's disciples are considered like sons: since he raises them in Torah, they are regarded as his children.
The Malbim explains that "his Judean wife" (HaYehudiyah) was Kalev's third wife - the first was not mentioned by name, the second was Yehallelel, and the third was named HaYehudiyah. Do not be surprised that a name begins with the letter Hei, for there are many such names, like HaTzelelponi and others. And she bore Yered the father of Gedor. The Malbim notes that there were three distinct cities here: Beit Gedor, Geder, and the Gedor mentioned here (and some say Gederah), and these are three separate locations.
"And these are the sons of Bityah" - Bityah was Kalev's fourth wife, whom he married later. The Malbim notes that we do not know with certainty whether "Pharaoh" here was an Israelite whose name was Pharaoh or the king of Egypt; Chazal in Megillah 13a explain that she was the daughter of the king of Egypt, but according to the plain sense of the text this is not strictly necessary, and it is possible that an Israelite was named Pharaoh. Do not wonder at this, for we find people named Yishmael, as well as names like Alexander who was a gentile king, and so forth.
וּבְנֵי אֵשֶׁת הוֹדִיָּה אֲחוֹת נַחַם אֲבִי קְעִילָה הַגַּרְמִי וְאֶשְׁתְּמֹעַ הַמַּעֲכָתִי׃ - And the sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Nacham, were the father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa the Maacathite.
וּבְנֵי שִׁימוֹן אַמְנוֹן וְרִנָּה בֶּן חָנָן וְתִילוֹן וּבְנֵי יִשְׁעִי זוֹחֵת וּבֶן זוֹחֵת׃ - And the sons of Shimon were Amnon, and Rinnah, Ben-Chanan, and Tilon; and the sons of Yishi were Zocheth, and Ben-Zocheth.
The Malbim explains that the verse "And these are the sons of Bityah the daughter of Pharaoh whom Mered took" connects directly to the following verse. For the text did not specify who "these" were - and one cannot say they are those mentioned earlier, since those were born to his wife HaYehudiyah. Rather, the continuation of the verse means: whom Kalev "took" [as a wife], and her children were Mered and the wife of Hodiah. That is, one was a son named Mered, and the second was a daughter born to Bityah, who married a man named Hodiah. Note that Hodiah here is a man's name, even though today it is commonly a woman's name.
In this way, according to the Malbim, it is resolved why Hodiah is mentioned without prior introduction - because he is a descendant of Bityah the daughter of Pharaoh. The Radak explains simply: even though Hodiah was not mentioned previously, Scripture now details his descendants, as is the recurring style of this book; and from his wife, who was the sister of Nacham, he had the father of Keilah the Garmite and Eshtemoa the Maacathite.
The Malbim further explains that in the genealogical register from which Ezra copied, it was recorded that the sons of Bityah were Mered, Hodiah, Shimon, and Yishi, and there the genealogy of each was detailed at length. Here, it mentions the sons of Hodiah from several wives - that is, Hodiah had multiple wives, and Ezra omitted them because they were not prominent or well known, mentioning only the distinguished and celebrated sons he had from his wife, the sister of Nacham. And what is "HaGarmi"? It is a personal name: the father of Keilah was called HaGarmi, that was his name. "And Eshtemoa the Maacathite" - meaning he was a leader and prominent figure in the city of Maacah. Do not be surprised that "HaGarmi" with a Hei is a person's name, for we have seen many such examples above, like HaTzelelponi.
Likewise, the sons of Shimon were among the descendants of Bityah, and Shimon himself is not mentioned because he was not prominent, but rather only his sons are recorded. "Ben-Chanan" - here too, just like "Ben-Ezra," this was his actual personal name. Similarly, the sons of Yishi were heads of families among the descendants of Bityah, and in "Ben-Zocheth" - the word "Ben" is part of the proper name itself, not an attribution to his father.
בְּנֵי שֵׁלָה בֶן יְהוּדָה עֵר אֲבִי לֵכָה וְלַעְדָּה אֲבִי מָרֵשָׁה וּמִשְׁפְּחוֹת בֵּית עֲבֹדַת הַבֻּץ לְבֵית אַשְׁבֵּעַ׃ - The sons of Shelah the son of Yehudah were Er the father of Lecah, and Ladah the father of Mareshah, and the families of the house of them that wrought fine linen, of the house of Ashbea.
Here Scripture returns to the root - to Yehudah himself. Until now we have discussed Peretz, Zerach, Chetzron, and many other names, but Shelah - regarding whom Yehudah had said, "Lest he also die like his brothers," and to whom Tamar was not given - we have not yet traced his lineage. The commentary attributed to Rashi explains: since his genealogy was not traced until now, it is traced here; and out of honor for David, Scripture gave precedence to the sons of Tamar, Peretz and Zerach, from whom David was descended. Now, having recorded all the families of Peretz, it begins to trace the families of Shelah who lived in that generation.
"The families of the house of linen-workers" - according to the commentary attributed to Rashi, they were experts in crafting the tapestries of the Beit HaMikdash, and this was their craft. Radak, on the other hand, explains that they were families who worked with flax; and the bütz (fine linen), as Malbim notes, refers to the precious and exquisite linen - garments of fine linen. According to this, it has nothing to do with the Beit HaMikdash at all, but rather with experts in the linen craft.
וְיוֹקִים וְאַנְשֵׁי כֹזֵבָא וְיוֹאָשׁ וְשָׂרָף אֲשֶׁר בָּעֲלוּ לְמוֹאָב וְיָשֻׁבִי לָחֶם וְהַדְּבָרִים עַתִּיקִים׃ - And Yokim, and the men of Cozeba, and Yoash, and Saraf, who ruled over Moab, and Yashubi-Lechem; and these are ancient matters.
The commentary attributed to Rashi explains that all these names - Yokim, the men of Cozeba, Yoash, Saraf, and Yashubi-Lechem - were all sons of Shelah. And who are Yoash and Saraf? Our Sages expounded: these are Machlon and Chilyon, and this is the meaning of "who ruled over Moab" - that they married Moabite women and became their husbands (ba'alim). And what is meant by "and these are ancient matters"? These are not additional names, but rather the verse means to say: Do not think that since I began tracing genealogies from people of our own generation, these too are later figures; know that everyone I have mentioned here from the lineage of Shelah are ancient figures, from times of old.
Radak notes that there are many homiletic expositions (derashot) regarding these names, but according to the peshat, they were all sons and grandsons of Shelah. The "men of Cozeba" were all his descendants, and it is very likely that Cozeba is Chezib, as in "and he was at Chezib when she bore him," meaning sons who were born in Chezib. Yoash and Saraf were also his sons, and "who ruled over Moab" according to the peshat means that they fought against Moab and became their masters, from the root ba'al (master or lord). "Yashubi-Lechem" is a single name, not two - that was the name of one of his sons.
And what does "and these are ancient matters" mean according to Radak? It means that what I told you - that Yoash and Saraf ruled over Moab - even though you will not find this written in the books of the Prophets, these are matters well-known through received tradition, transmitted (ne'etakim) from person to person. One should know that atikim here does not mean copying in our modern sense; in Lashon HaKodesh, ne'etak denotes transferring or moving from place to place, as in "a stone was moved (ne'etkah) from its place," or "a rock will be removed (ve-ye'etak) from its place." When one passes something on to another, it is transferred from one to the other, and from this later came the term leha'atik in the sense of copying. So too with the title Attik Yomin ("Ancient of Days") used for the Holy One, Blessed be He, which we have mentioned several times - not in the sense of old, nor in the sense of a copy, but in the sense of being detached and removed from the framework of days, transcendent over time. Here too, the verse means to say: even if you do not know from history of Yoash and Saraf ruling over Moab, go and ask - these matters have been handed down and transmitted from generation to generation.
Malbim explains that "Yokim" was a family name, and regarding "and these are ancient matters," he brings two explanations: either that this account is ancient and they had an old oral tradition concerning it, or that the details of the episode were transcribed (ne'etaku) into a special book that Ezra possessed - and according to this, it is indeed from the root of transcription and copying.
הֵמָּה הַיּוֹצְרִים וְיֹשְׁבֵי נְטָעִים וּגְדֵרָה עִם הַמֶּלֶךְ בִּמְלַאכְתּוֹ יָשְׁבוּ שָׁם׃ - These were the potters and the inhabitants of Neta'im and Gederah; they dwelt there with the king for his work.
To whom does "these" (heimah) refer? Radak suggests that it very likely refers back to the men of Cozeba, Yoash, and Saraf mentioned earlier. They were the well-known potters (yotzerim), craftsmen of earthenware vessels, and they lived outside the city in the area of plantations, that is, in an area where plants were cultivated and the land was farmed, and there they manufactured the pottery - hence yotzer, as in "like clay in the hand of the potter." And it is possible, Radak adds, that the soil in that place was well-suited for pottery-making, and there they lived, planting gardens and erecting fences.
And what is the meaning of "with the king for his work"? The commentary attributed to Rashi notes: just as it says in Parashat Mishpatim, "if its owner was with him, he shall not pay," meaning that the owner was with him in his work - plowing alongside him in the field with that very animal that died. So too here, "with the king" means that they performed the king's work; just as they were with the king in outdoor matters, in planting and fencing, they dwelt there because that was where their work lay, and they performed the king's work as well.
Malbim takes a similar approach: they were craftsmen in pottery and fashioned shapes into every stone, and all of this is encompassed by the term yotzer, which stems from shaping a form (tzar tzurah) - even a stonecarver is called a yotzer, since he shapes a form in stone. So too, "What does a carved image (pesel) avail that its maker (yotzro) has carved it?" - pesel means to sculpt or carve, not making from clay but cutting away and carving down. And why is it called pesel? Because to reach the inner form, one must remove the refuse (pesolet) on the outside. A master sculptor was once asked how he managed to sculpt such extraordinary statues. He replied: I do not sculpt what is inside; I merely remove the excess stone. What is inside is already there; the entire art lies in knowing what is excess and what is not.
The Malbim further explains that they were also craftsmen in planting trees - "those who dwell among plants" - and also in sheepfolds, meaning their craft spanned inanimate matter, vegetation, and living creatures, all varieties of crafts. He adds that it is very possible that "Neta'im" and "Gederah" do not refer literally to plantings and enclosures, but are place names, like modern-day Gederah. Because they were skilled in planting and livestock enclosures, the locations were named Neta'im and Gederah after them, and there they performed the king's work.
In this section, we saw the book's consistent approach: Ezra transcribes from the great genealogical record only the prominent and distinguished figures, which explains why certain names appear without introduction - Keluv the brother of Shuchah, Kenaz, and Hodiyah. We learned the Malbim's reconciliation of the lineage of Kenaz, Yefuneh, Calev, and Otniel; Calev's four wives (the first unnamed, Yehalelel, the Yehudiyah, and Bityah); the dispute between the Malbim and the Radak regarding "and she conceived" and the identity of "Miriam" as a son; the proper nouns in which the word "Ben" or the definite article "Heh" is an integral part of the name; the genealogy of the sons of Shelah, who were preceded by Peretz out of honor for David; the meaning of "and these matters are ancient" as a tradition passed down from person to person; and the craftsmen - the potters, the dwellers of Neta'im and Gederah - who performed the king's work. And throughout it all, the vital principle: first and foremost to understand the peshat (plain meaning) of the text, and only then to see where Chazal took the verses in their midrashic expositions.