Rating: 
Summary: Buy it !!!
Review: 1. Excellent traduction 2. Genealogic trees 3. Excellent quality edition 4. The best Jumash I haver ever seenI fully recomend you.
Rating:
Summary: Want to understand Torah?
Review: Beginning to learn Torah can be an overwhelming journey. I knew I wanted to know more but just picking up a book to read the literal translations confused me. This version has commentaries that explain the text. I have found it especially helpful in understanding things that are commonly challenged. For example: "An eye for an eye..." It is explained that the meaning was never meant to be literal. It is meant that the value of what was lost should be compensated. This chumash is very user friendly. All the best on your path of torah and mitzvot!
Rating:
Summary: Want to understand Torah?
Review: Beginning to learn Torah can be an overwhelming journey. I knew I wanted to know more but just picking up a book to read the literal translations confused me. This version has commentaries that explain the text. I have found it especially helpful in understanding things that are commonly challenged. For example: "An eye for an eye..." It is explained that the meaning was never meant to be literal. It is meant that the value of what was lost should be compensated. This chumash is very user friendly. All the best on your path of torah and mitzvot!
Rating: 
Summary: BUY THIS CHUMASH
Review: excellent torah here, with full hebrew text, english text, aramaic[onkelos] translation of the hebrew ,and full text of rashi,along with lots of commentary [from mishnah,talmud etc]
Rating:
Summary: BUY THIS CHUMASH[TORAH]
Review: great version of the torah[5 books of moses] with complete onkelos aramaic text[aramaic translation of the hebrew] and full rashi commentary of the torah along with lots and lots of commentary from talmud mishnah etc] great buy
Rating:
Summary: Best Hebrew-English Chumash Available!
Review: Handsome edition, with lucid contemporary translation. This is fast becoming the most popular English-language Chumash for synagogue and home use, and it's easy to see why. With illustrations, cross-references, and haftorahs included in this nicely-bound single volume, it's a thrill to see a work of this quality available... This makes a fine bar/bat mitzvah gift, or even a wedding present, as it's an essential addition to any Jewish home (even one that has another Chumash/Bible already). As well, for non-Jews studying the Torah in the original or seeking an introduction to Jewish interpretive tradition, there are plenty of commentaries, illustrations and footnotes to make your study a meaningful experience.
Rating: 
Summary: Author attribution
Review: I am pleased to see my book on your list, but the author is incorrectly listed as 'Pentateuch'. This is actually a Greek word for the text. I am in fact the author. Thank you. God
Rating:
Summary: A good Chumash
Review: I often read the Artscroll Chumash commentary after having read the Parsha in Hebrew in Hertz which I find easier to read. I often learn from the Artscroll Commentary and appreciate it. It does use a wide variety of traditional sources. It lacks Hertz's breadth , willingness to encounter the world outside, effort to see Tannach through non- Jewish eyes always. Its translation too reflects this tendency to insularity which I believe costs the Jewish people a great deal. Again I learn from this Chumash, appreciate its excellent presenting of traditional Torah knowledge including reading of Midrashim. But I think it lacks Hertz's broadmindedness and Hirsch's magnificent sublimity .It is a more down- to - earth kind of work. I cannot help but feeling it reflects a certain change which from my point- of - view is regrettable in the Jewish world, a change from being ready to intellectually challenge and meet with others, to one in which we hide within our own insularity.
This is a good Chumash but I can imagine in my mind the Jewish people creating a far better one.
Rating:
Summary: Fast becoming the new standard Chumash in synagogues
Review: I used to use the Hertz Chumash that is common in most Conservative and Orthodox synagogues. Now when I am in synagogue, I go looking for a Stone Chumash, which I find far superior to Hertz. Unfortunately, others do as well, and the supply is not yet up to the demand. Now I own my own. Not only is the Stone Chumash an easy-to-read translation with fascinating commentaries, it also includes various tables and charts, such as geneology charts and timelines of events, and drawings of items in the Mishkan, which help give the Torah more meaning. For those who want more depth, the Hebrew text includes all of the traditional commentators in the margins.
Rating:
Summary: Pious and comprehensive; not marred by anything
Review: In looking over the reviews of this uniformly excellent volume, I find that there is some misinformation which should be corrected for the sake of potential buyers. The idea that this translation is "biased" toward Rashi is, frankly, laughable. Where is the evidence for this claim? In the admittedly "extensive and well-researched commentary"? Glancing over the commentary from last week's parsha (Vayigash) I find citations from the following sources among others: Ibn Ezra; Rambam; R. Avraham ben HaRambam; Ramban; R. Hirsch; R. Menachem Mendel of Kotzk; R. Bachya; R. Shlomo Ashtruc; Sforno; the Chafetz Chaim; R. Munk; R. Yosef Dov Solovetchik; R. Yaakov Kamenetzky; R. David Feinstein (not to mention the Zohar and other traditional texts cited by title rather than by author). Even this is not a complete list, and it is just silly to say that the commentary is "not reflective of the variety that is present within the tradition of rabbinic Judaism." Nor would it even be correct to say that Rashi's interpretation is given precedence over others' (as would be expected if the translation were controlled by his commentaries). At 45:1, for example, the commentary cites three interpretations, one each from Rashi, Rashbam, and Ramban, without attempting to adjudicate between them. At 46:15 the commentary cites Rashi, then Ibn Ezra's contrary reading, then Ramban's disagreement with Ibn Ezra. And so forth. Of course Rashi is cited fairly often, as are other solidly tradition-based writers who have written extensive commentaries on the text (i.e., those who are said to be "acceptable [from] a Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) point of view," to those whom our friend regards as "religious extremists"). Why this should be an occasion for surprise or alarm, let alone an indication that something is amiss with the _translation_ in this edition of the Chumash, is more than I can fathom. Nor is any other evidence offered that Rashi's interpretations have colored or biased the translation itself. And such evidence is very much needed, if only to establish the credibility of the one mounting the claim in question. To put it bluntly, anyone who levels such a charge had better be a highly competent reader of Hebrew himself. I must therefore suspect that the problem here is with traditional translation and commentary in general. It is exceedingly odd to describe straightforward Orthodox Judaism as "fundamentalism" -- a term much more descriptive of the various "liberal" movements which derisively tagged traditional Judaism as "Orthodoxy" in the first place. At any rate, such comments do tell the customer something important: this volume is faithful to Torah-based Jewish tradition in a way that even the most conservative "liberal" Jews will find uncomfortable. In other words, if you want to study Torah, this Chumash is just exactly the edition you need.
| 
