#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (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: Ex10-05b

RASHIS COVERED: Ex10-05b Ex10-11c Ex22-22a Ex32-32a Ex32-32b

COMMENT: We continue the thread of Rashi exposing MISSING
sentence parts. This will probably be completed in a week
or two. It was begun in http://www.RashiYomi.Com/h8n12.htm
Here is a recap of the rule used.


RULE:
=====
Most sentences have at a minimum
--an ACTIVITY (the verb) and
some COMPLEMENT to that activity such as
--a SUBJECT (who did it),
--INDIRECT OBJECT (Where it was done),
--OBJECT (To what was it done).

a) Sometimes however a sentence is MISSING some part.
b) Or equivalantly, a pronoun is used whose reference is absurd


In such cases it is logic not grammar that dictates how the
sentence is read
---------------------------------------------------------------
The traditional method of identifying the SUBJECT of a
sentence (WHO did the activity) is to use the last mentioned
person. So for example if the verse says >As HE(=Joseph)
interpreted so it happens; and HE returned me< then the
grammatically proper way to interpret this verse would be
to suggest that JOSEPH returned them

But there is a second alternative method for interpreting
Biblical verses and that is to use the OBVIOUS SUBJECT, the
person CAPABLE of doing the activities. Thus if it says
that >HE RETURNED ME TO MY JOB but HE HUNG THE OTHER PERSON<
then it must be referring to PHAROH who was in charge and
capable of doing such things.
----------------------------------------------------------------



EXAMPLES (Continued from Volume 8 Number 12)
========
First we present some Rashis pointing out Missing subjects


9) Ex10-05b says
  -----------------------------------------------
  I will bring LOCUSTS tomorrow
  And THEY(the locusts) will cover the ground
  and THEY WILL NOT be able to see the ground
  ------------------------------------------------
RASHI: It sounds like the LOCUSTS cant see the ground
       Actually it is people who cant see the ground



10) Ex10-11c says
  --------------------------------------------------------
  And HE (Pharoh) said..this is not so;only adults may go;
  And HE banished them
  --------------------------------------------------------
RASHI: It sounds like PHAROH banished them
       Actually his staff BANISHED them
  (Not necessarily Pharoh)



Next we point out Rashis showing MACHO language. Recall the
example we gave last time: You might prohibit something and
conclude >IF YOU DARE DO THIS<. Notice how this sentence is
missing a component (eg IF YOU DARE DO THIS THEN I WILL
PUNISH YOU). Such a MISSING SENTENCE HALF (>IF YOU DARE DO
THIS<) is evocative---it evokes in the listener his/her worst
fair (since the listener completes the sentence). Let us
examine two examples from Rashi


11) Ex22-22a
  ---------------------------------------------------------
  Dont torture orphans and widows!
      (If you dare tease an orphan at all!)
  For If they cry out to me I will hear.
  ---------------------------------------------------------
RASHI: There are two IFS in the verse
       The second IF is normal:>IF they pray I will answer them<
       The first IF uses the missing-sentence-half-technique
       >IF you dare torture them<


12) Ex32-32a
13) Ex32-32b says
  --------------------------------------------------
  Please forgive the Jews for making the golden calf
  IF you forgive them
  ElseIf Not erase me from the Torah
  ---------------------------------------------------
RASHI: The first part of the verse uses the technique
       of an IF WITH A MISSING COMPONENT
       >IF you forgive them<
       By which Moses meant, IF ONLY YOU FORGIVE THEM
       HOW WONDERFUL IT WOULD BE

       The second half is normal and shows how upset
       Moses was.

       Rashi adds that Moses wanted to
       be erased from the Torah if God didnt forgive
       the Jews since he regarded the not forgiving
       the JEWS as a failure on HIS part(and he
       didnt want to be embarassed)


Rashi did not invent the idea that Moses was worried about
his embarassment. Rather Rashi derived it from an explicit
OTHER VERSE: Nu10-15
>And if this is the way You (God) treat me (Moses) then
 please Kill me if You will do me one last favor; so that
 I will not see my failure<

So indeed Rashi is Simple


RASHI RULE USED: GRAMMAR
---------------------------------------------------
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 8 Number 14


#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*