#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
-----------------------------------------------------------
| Rashi is Simple Version 2.0 |
| (C) Dr Hendel, Summer 2000 |
| http://www.RashiYomi.Com |
| PERMISSION to reprint WITH this header if NOT for profit |
------------------------------------------------------------
VERSE: Dt33-02a
RASHIS COVERED: Dt33-02a Dt33-02c Dt33-03a Dt33-04a Dt33-05a
Dt33-05b Dt33-05c Ex21-08d
COMMENT: We are soon beginning Genesis again. I wanted to end the
Poetry thread we have been doing by emphasizing that in these
Rashis it is CONTEXT not MEANING that determines meaning. I also
wanted to emphasize that CONTEXT can override DICTIONARY meaning.
Finally I wanted to emphasize that we can use CONTEXT to decide
between otherwise legitimate competing interpretations of verses.
Let us look at these verses from this perspective.
RULE: One of the 13 principles of Biblical interpretation of
Rabbi Ishmael is the principle of >CONTEXT<--that meaning can
be inferred from >CONTEXT<. In particular many poetic passages
outline 3-7 >STAGES< in the development of an idea. Therefore
the proper guidelines for intepreting these poetic verses is to
{LIST1}
6 Guidelines in interpreting Poetic verses
GUIDELINE
1. Identify the >UNIFYING PRINCIPLE< in the poetic structure
2. Identify the >STAGES< developing this unifying principle
3. Construct a >PARALLELISM< between the STAGES & the VERSES
4. Next, try and recognize the >WORDS< that >YOU< do >KNOW<
4. Review all >POSSIBLE MEANINGS< of the words in the verses
5. Let the >PARALLELISM< determine which meaning to be use
EXAMPLE
The VERSE discussed is Dt33-02:04
1. UNIFYING PRINCIPLE: The main idea in these verses is that
the Jews are totally devoted in their relationship to God
2. STAGES: The 4 stages in achieving >Total devotion to God<
or in describing any relationship of total devotion is
{LIST2}
4 Stages in achieving a harmonious devoted relationship
STAGE
YOU >SEEK< PARTNER
YOU >FIND< PARTNER
PARTNER >LEARNS< YOUR >WAY OF LIFE< FROM YOU
PARTNER >ACCEPTS< YOUR >WAY OF LIFE<
3: PARALLELISM:
{LIST3}
4 Stages that lead to a >DEVOTED RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD< and
the verses in Dt33-02:05 describing these stages. The footnotes
show that it is CONTEXT not the dictionary which determines
MEANING.
=========================================================
STAGE VERSE (Dt33-02:05)
==================== ======================================
God >SEEKS< others*1 God tried to give the Torah to Esauv*2
God >FINDS< Jews*1 All tribes accepted the Torah*3
Jews >LEARN< Torah Moses gave us the Torah eternally*4
Jews >ACCEPT< God God is King in Israel at all time*5
NOTES:
*1 Rashi on Dt33-02a explicitly notes the structure of these
verses: The first two describe the actions of >GOD< while
the last 2 describe the actions of the >JEWS<. So Rashi was
indeed very much aware of CONTEXT and STRUCTURE.
*2 This idea, that God offered the Torah to Esauv is normally
seen as midrashic and fanciful. But we can ultimately defend
this as pure simple meaning.
Let us first give a reasonable interpretation of this verse.
It explicitly says in an OTHER VERSE, Dt02-05 >For I(God) have
given Mount Seir to Esauv<. In other words, Dt02-05 identifies
that National occupations (such as Esauvs occupation of Mount
Seir) comes from prophetic orders of God.
I think this sufficient to explain the Rashi. For Rashi is
simply saying: >Look God gave prohesies to all the nations--to
Esauv God gave territoriality; but to the Jews He gave the Torah<
In other words the emphasis is that in the context of God making
prophetic promises it is only the Jews who accepted the Law while
the other nations only wanted territory.
(This is the essence of Rashis point. Rashi probably conjectured
that just as God gave Mount Seir to Esauv (& Israel to the Jews)
so too he offered the Torah to both the Jews and Esauv but only
the Jews accepted the Torah. However if the reader just wants to
deal with what is explicitly said, we have Dt02-05 which shows
that we are contrasting the prophesies to Esauv, which promise
only territory vs the prohpesies to the Jews, which promise the
Torah)
*3 In the remaining 3 footnotes we show how CONTEXT, not the
dictionary determines meaning. Everyone knows that the Hebrew
word >AM< primarily means nation. However in certain rare cases
>AM< can refer to >any large gathering< or >any well knit unit<.
The fact that Rashi prefers to translate >AM< as >TRIBES< (>all
the TRIBES accepted the Torah<) is due to CONTEXT---it is stage
2 in a devoted relationship when one FINDS the partner. Hence
Rashi must interpret Gn33-03 as referring to acceptance of the
Torah by the Jews. Here are the supporting verses from RADACK
besides those Rashi brings
{LIST4}
Verses where the Hebrew word >AM< means >UNIT< or
>LARGE GATHERING<. These examples come from RADACK. Rashi
ingeniously brings Gn35-11 where the cognate words >GOY< which
usually means >NATION< in fact means & refers to the >TRIBE<
of BENYAMIN.
==============================================================
VERSE Text of Verse: The CAPPED word translates >AM<
======== ===============================================
Ex21-08d He shall not sell the slavegirl to another FAMILY
Joel2-2 A big and huge ARMY (cf Joel2-11)
Jud18-6 & They came to LAYISH and saw the CITY dwelling there
Neh9-24 The Jews conquered the 7 STATES of Canaan
4. The verse says >Moses commanded us the Torah, an inheritance
to the nation of Jacob<. Notice how every >WORD< has a clear
meaning. Also notice how the >SENTENCE< itself is also understood
However the >CONTEXT< is not clear--->HOW< does this sentence
>FIT IN< with the rest of the paragraph? It is this >CONTEXT<
which Rashi wishes to give. Rashi derives the meaning from the
OVERALL CONTEXT of the paragraph. Rashi uses the method of DOUBLE
PARSHAS to highlight the difference.
{LIST5}
================================================================
Alignment of the 2 halves of Dt33-04
*a *b
The Torah was commanded to us
An inheritance (to) the Congregation of Jacob
================================================================
NOTES
*a) by calling the Torah an >INHERITANCE< the verse emphasizes
that the Torah was accepted eternally. In other words we did not
just learn Gods ways once but rather we CONTINUALLY learn them.
This theme is echoed in the next verse also.
*b) By first using the word >US< and only then using the phrase
>Congregation of Jacob< the verse emphasizes that we achieved
our relationship with God by learning the Torah.
*5) Again the >WORDS< in the verse have clear meaning; similarly
the >SENTENCE< has clear meaning---it says >And thus there was
a King in Israel, when(ever) the leaders have a Gathering<. But
it is the >CONTEXT< of this sentence in the paragraph--->HOW< it
fits into the rest of the paragraph---that Rashi clarifies.
Indeed, recall the 4 stages of a >DEVOTED RELATIONSHIP<;
(a) SEEKING a partner; (b) FINDING a partner; (c ) the partner
LEARNS your way of life; (d) the partner ACCEPTS you. Hence,
Dt33-05 must therefore be interpreted as referring to the Jews
>ACCEPTING< God as their permanant partner.
Hence, Rashi (Dt33-05a) interprets >And there was a King, God,
in Israel< since this fits the context (By contrast Ibn Ezra
translates >And there was a king, Moses, in Israel<) Notice how
the Ibn Ezra gives a correct interpretation of the >SENTENCE< but
the Ibn Ezra does not give a correct interpretation of the
>PARAGRAPH< For his interpretation of this verse as referring
to Moses does not fit into the paragraph.
Hence, also Rashi (Dt33-05b, Dt33-05c) emphasizes the >ETERNAL<
nature of the Jews acceptance of God since this fits into the
context. The emphasis on the eternal nature can also be derived
from an alignment of the verse parts.
{LIST6}
=============================================================
Alignment of the two halves of Dt33-05
*a *b
& there was King (God) in Israel
when the leaders gathered
=============================================================
NOTES
*a The parallel structure suggests that Gods Kingship exists
in both SPACE (in Israel) and TIME (when the leaders gathered)
and hence hints at the eternal nature of Gods kingship. As
previously indicated the emphasis on ETERNAL relationship comes
from the structure of the paragraph. Similarly the word
>AND THERE WAS< can be perceived as hinting at emphasis.
*b The concept that the gatherings were done by leaders
serves to indicate that it was a proper gathering (rather
than a spontaneous response of a herd)
SUMMARY: We have seen many strange translations above. Rashi
translates >AM< as >TRIBE<. Similarly Rashi emphasizes the
>ETERNAL< nature of the God-Jew relationship in Dt33-04:05.
Finally Rashi emphasizes that it is God who achieves Kingship.
Other explanations are possible. Rashi himself brings down a
translation where >AM< refers to >NON JEWISH NATIONS<. Similarly
Ibn Ezra translates Dt33-05 as referring to Moses Kingship.
Rashi would not dispute that his explanations are >rare<.
Rather Rashi would assert that his explanations are the only
explanations that are consistent with the >CONTEXT< of the
entire paragraph. In other words, while the other explanations
may be consistent with the >WORDS< and >SENTENCE< they are
NOT consistent with the overall >PARAGRAPH CONTEXT<. Hence
Rashis translation is the only simple meaning.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: To my younger sister for introducing me to the
idea of explanations of >WORDS<, >SENTENCES< and >PARAGRAPHS<.
(For those in the know this is an old joke on the difference
between Psalms, Proverbs, and Job)
RULE USED: EXAMPLE9
---------------------------------------------------
WARNING: The following additional references may be too wordy
However they frequently contain additional information & lists
The hyperlinks only work on the main website
Volume 7 Number 24
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
Volume 7 Number 24