#######################################################
#       12 YEAR Ayelet DAILY-RASHI-YOMI CYCLE         #
#                    JUL 4 th, 2004                   #
#          Rashis 2637-2636 Of 7700 (34.2%)           #
#                                                     #
#           VISIT THE RASHI YOMI ARCHIVES             #
#           -----------------------------             #
#       http://www.RashiYomi.Com/thismon.htm          #
#                                                     #
#    Reprinted with permission from Rashi-is-Simple,  #
#  (c) 1999-2004, RashiYomi Inc., Dr Hendel President #
#   Permission to reprint with this header PROVIDED   #
#          it is not printed for profit               #
#                                                     #
#    WARNING: READ with COURIER 10 (Fixed width) FONTS#
#                                                     #
#######################################################


#*#*# (C) RashiYomi Inc. 2004, Dr. Hendel, President #*#*#

VERSE: Lv05-21a
Lv05-21a
(C) Dr Hendel, Jan-04


SUCCINCT SUMMARY
----------------
One of Rashis 5 main goals is the explanation of meaning
the same way a dictionary presents meaning. One method of
explaining meaning was to present a UNIFIED MEANING to a
root with varied meanings.

EXAMPLE Lv05-21a M-A-L
----------------------
We can gather all verses with the Hebrew root M-A-L which
can refer to DESCECRATION of a marriage (adultery)
or DESCECRATION of the God-Man relationship (Idolatry,
intermarriage).

Hence if we find ONE example to the contrary -- Lv05-21a which
speaks about a person who denies money owed -- it is very
reasonable to interpret M-A-L in this verse as applying to
the FALSE OATH-Which is a violation of the God-man relationship-
which the person takes to deny this money.
ITEM DETAIL
RASHI RULE CLASS: WORD MEANINGS
RASHI SUBRULE CLASS UNIFIED MEANINGS
RASHI WORKBOOK PRINCIPLE #7
SEE BELOW LIST862x
List of meanings of root M-A-L=Violation of a deep relationship
LIST862x
(C) Dr Hendel, Jan-04

List of meanings of root M-A-L=Violation of a deep relationship
VERSE TO WHOM NATURE OF SIN
Lv05-15:16 God Temple matters
Nu31-16 God Intermarriage-idolatry*1
Jo07-01 God Violation of oath
Ez20-27:29 God Idolatry - Bamah (Private altars)
Ezra9-1:4 God Intermarriage
--------- ---------- ----------------------------------
Nu05-12 Man-woman Descecrate her marriage(Adultery)*2
--------- ---------- ----------------------------------
Lv05-21a Man-man Denial of moneys owed -- oath*3
COMMENTS
 
*1 Nu31-16 cross references Nu25-01:09 which clearly mentions
both these sins (e.g. Nu25-02)

*2 It would appear from this Husband-wife example(adultery)
that M-A-L refers to a violation of any DEEP PERSONAL
RELATIONSHIP (Such as acts of adultery to man, or
idolatry/intermarriage to God)

*3 This verse is the ONLY example where M-A-L does not seem
to refer to VIOLATION of the GOD-MAN relationship or to
violation of ther marital relationship.For Lv05-21a
speaks about a person who denies money owed, It is therefore
reasonable to interpret M-A-L in this verse as apptlying to
a FALSE OATH (Which is a violation of the God-man
relationship)*10 *11
LONGER FOOTNOTES
 

*10 Rashi citing the Midrash brings additional support: Other
monetary crimes (such as armed robbery, torts, etc) can
involve witnesses and evidence. However the monetary
crimes spoken about in this verse -- keeping lost articles,
witholding wages.... -- are crimes withOUT wintesses
and evidence. Hence the false oath is a violation of
the God-man relationship.

*11 I mention in passing a brilliant Tanakh lecture by
Rabbi Reinman (The author of the book 1 PEOPLE TWO WORLDS,
containing a dialog with a Reform Rabbi).

Rabbi Reinman spoke about the assertion of Radak that
RECHAVAM worshipped idols. Radak derives this from
use of the word M-A-L in 2C12-01:05.

Rabbi Reinman cited various Talmudic passages showing that
Naamah, Rechavams wife was righteous. Rabbi Rineman
then cited 2C12-13:14 to interpret MAL as not
preparing their hearts properly.

However the Radak has a strong case AS SHOWN BY
THE ABOVE LIST. Based on 2C12 which mentions
RECHAVAM REIGNED OVER JERUSALEM THE CITY WHICH
GOD CHOSE TO DWELL IN, I would take a midway
position between RADAK and the TALMUD.

I would suggest that the Jewish sin was restoration
of the private altars (There is precedent for this
in the above list). Hence we immediately see

-Restoration of the private altars is a TEMPLE
violation and would hence justify the term M-A-L

-If all Naamah did was make sure that the Jews
did not worship idols but instead worshipped
private altars then she was indeed Righteous

-Radak would be justified in classifying
RESTORATION OF PRIVATE ALTARS with IDOLATRY
since the sins are similar (But certainly
not identical in severity).

At any rate Rabbi Reinman encouraged detailed
study of Tanakh with Talmud and Rishonim which
of course is warmly welcomed. What we have
added on this email group is advocation of
use of lists.
#*#*#*# (C) RashiYomi Inc., 2004, Dr. Hendel, President #*#*#*#*#