#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (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: Ex26-15b
RASHIS COVERED: Ex26-15b Ex26-16a Ex26-16b Ex26-17a Ex26-17b
Ex26-17c Ex26-18a Ex26-22a
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
===============
Material in this section was based on the Book
>THE MISHKAN and the HOLY GARMENTS< by Rabbi Shalom
Dov Steinberg, translated by Rabbi Moshe Miller
(Produced by the Toras Chaim Institute Jerusalem 5752)
The pictures in this book inspired the pictures I use
below. The citations of controversies of interpretations
by various authorities is assumed to come from this book
unless I indicate another external source
WARNING--FIXED WIDTH FONT NEEDED
================================
The FIGURES in these and future postings require you to
set your NOTEPAD, WORD, or BROWSER to FIXED WIDTH FONTS,
COURIER 10 or COURIER NEW 10. If you do not set this
it will be difficult for you to read this as the pictures
will come out jumbled.
VERSE Ex26-15b Ex26-16a The walls of the Temple shall be
----- from >STANDING CEDAR WOOD<
RASHI: >STANDING<: The wood boards are used to make the wall by
----- standing the wood >VERTICALLY< (Figure 1)
not by laying the wood >HORIZONTALLY< (Figure 2)
FIGURE 1: Constructing a wall VERTICALLY
========================================
ExPLANATION
===========
Lay out 20 beams in a row
Each beam is 1.5 x 10
Then the >height< = 1 x 10 =10
the >base< = 1.5 x 20 = 30
(Note: only 10 beams not 20 are shown)
|
|
|
|
10 cubits |
|
|
|
|
|__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
FIGURE 2: Constructing a wall HORIZONTALLY
==========================================
ExPLANATION
===========
Lay out 3 beams in a row
10 times on top of each other
Then the base = 3 x 10 = 30
Height = 10 x 1 = 10
1 |__________ __________ __________
10 10 10
COMMENT:
=======
Rashi lays down a principle on the first Rashi of this chapter.
The principle is that every comment of his comes to chose
between two competing interpretations.Thus this first Rashi
shows us that the wall is constructed VERTICALLY not HORIZONTALLY
(FIGURE 1 vs FIGURE 2)
VERSE Ex26-16b Each beam was
----- 10 cubits >LONG< and
1.5 cubits >WIDE<
RASHI: The actual dimensions was 10 x 1.5 x 1.
----- That is the >HEIGHT< of the beams was 10
The >WIDTH< of the beams was 1.5
And the >DEPTH< of the beams was 1
Rashi teaches that the >HEIGHT< of the beams corresponded
to the >HEIGHT< of the walls while
the >WIDTH< of the beams corresponded
to the >LENGTH< of the walls.
Thus the verse teaches
us that the 10 beams were laid out by >WIDTH< (FIGURE 3)
not by >DEPTH< (FIGURE 4)
FIGURE 3: LAYING 10 beams by >WIDTH< EXPLANATION
========= ===========
20 beams 20 beams x 1.5 = 30
Depth=1 |__ __ __ __ ___
1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5|1.5
|1.5
|1.5
__ __ __ __ ___|1.5
1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
FIGURE 4: LAYING 10 beams by >DEPTH< ExPLANATION
========= ===========
20 beams 20 beams x 1 = 20
Depth=1.5 |__ __ __ __ ___
1 1 1 1 1 |1.5
|1.5
|1.5
__ __ __ __ ___|1.5
|1 1 1 1 1
VERSE Ex26-17a Each beam shall have >TWO HANDLES<,
-----
RASHI: There are 4 issues in this Rashi,
------ many controversies, and even some corrupt texts.
We shall explain everything simply from the verses
as well as resolve all controversies.
OVERVIEW
========
Each board had 2 handles coming out of its bottom.
The handles were placed in silver sockets
Thus the Temple wall consisted of 20 boards each
standing on silver sockets.
We now present the 4 issues discussed in this Rashi
ISSUE 1:The Boards were 10 cubits high. The bottom was
------- 1.5 cubits wide x 1 cubit thick.
The >HANDLES< were made by cutting away the
bottom till 2 handles were left.
The issue facing Rashi is >WHERE< the handles
were and >WHAT< was cut out.
SOLUTION: Theoretically one could simply cut the
--------inside of the boards leaving two HANDLES at the very end
(See Figure A). These two handles would slip into
the silver sockets. However this method would leave a space
between the boards.
FIGURE A:
=========
THE BOARDS
1.5 Cubits wide = 6 Quarter-cubits
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
#1 The Boards would be cut out in 1 place
at #1
_ ______ __
| | | | The boards could then SLIP into the
| | | | silver sockets as shown.
| | | |
|__| |__| Notice in FIGURE A how there was
leftover space without wood (at the
2 edges of the silver sockets)
THE SILVER SOCKETS
However the text explicitly states >The boards
shall be twin like on bottom and perfectly going up
to the top<.(Ex16-24) This is interpreted to mean that
there should be no spaces between each pair of boards.
Hence, the handles must be made by cutting
BOTH INSIDE and ALSO AROUND each handle(See Figure A).
This allows the boards to slip into the sockets
without any leftover space.
FIGURE B:
=========
THE BOARDS
1.5 Cubits wide = 6 Quarter-cubits
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
#1 #2 #3 The Boards were cut out in 3 places
at #1, #2 and #3
__ ___ __
| | | | The boards could then SLIP into the
| | | | silver sockets as shown.
| | | |
|__| |__| Notice in FIGURE B how there was no
leftover space without wood
THE SILVER SOCKETS
NOTE
====
Our interpretation of Rashi is based on the Hebrew book,
Nachalat Yaakov who interprets Rashi as we have
(he re-interprets The words >QUARTER boards< in Rashi to refer to
>quarter-cubits<--this is actually a textual emendation
of Rashi as we have it).
Ramban, Mizrachi, Gur Aryeh and
Sefer Hazikaron interpret Rashi differently. However our
interpretation is consistent with the simple Biblical
text that requires that the boards fit snugly into the sockets.
ISSUE 2: Were the board handles tapered?
=======================================
Rashi states in his commentary >CUT THE BOARDS INSIDE TO
PRODUCE THE HANDLES<. Rashi also states >CUT THE BOARDS ON
THE OTHER 3 SIDES<.
The Rashi phrase >CUT THE BOARDS ON THE OTHER 3 SIDES< has
suggested to some commentaries (eg Rabbi Abraham ben Rambam)
that the handles were tapered!
Ramban dissents.Be that as it may: The simple meaning of the
text is that the handles gave structutal support and hence
there would be no need to taper them down.
However our interpretation of Rashi can easily account for
Rashis language >CUT THE BOARD ON THE OTHER 3 SIDES< without
invoking any need to interpret it as tapering the boards.
Figure C shows the bottom view of the boards
FIGURE C:
========= METHOD 1 METHOD 2
K K C C K K # C C C C #
K # C C # K # C C C C #
K # C C # K # C C C C #
K K C C K K # C C C C #
BOTTOM VIEW OF BOARDS---1.5 CUBITS x 1 CUBIT
FIGURE IS SHOWN IN UNITS OF QUARTER-CUBITS
The handles came out of boards at the placed marked #
The handles were made by cutting out the boards at the place
marked C(Cut)Rashis point was that if method 2 was used--if
only the Center of the board was cut---then the handles would
fit into the sockets but there would be space left over between
the wood boards(As shown in FIGURE A above)
Hence Rashi advocated Method 1: The boards were cut in the
center at the placed marked C. But the boards were also cut
>ON THE OTHER 3 SIDES AROUND THE HANDLE< at the places marked
>K<. (See FIGURE B Above).This enabled the boards to slip SNUGLY
into the silver sockets without any leftover space
ISSUE 3: VERSE Ex26-17b WERE THERE BOLTPINS JOINING THE BOARDS
==============================================================
Ramban interprets this verse, Ex26-17, to mean the
boards had boltpins. The verse states
>Each board had two handles LADDER LIKE ONE WITH THE OTHER--
this applied to the whole temple<
Rashi interprets >LADDER LIKE ONE WITH THE OTHER<
to refer to the two handles that fit into the silver sockets.
These handles fit in the same way ladder rungs fit into
the sides of the ladder. FIGURE B from above, and reproduced
below illustrates this.
FIGURE B:
=========
THE BOARDS
1.5 Cubits wide = 6 quarter-cubits
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 These two handles resembled RUNGS OF A LADDER
0 0 They slid into the sockets the same way
0 0 a ladder is constructed
0 0
#1 #2 #3 The Boards were cut out in 3 places
at #1, #2 and #3
__ ___ __
| | | | The boards could then SLIP into the
| | | | silver sockets as shown.
| | | |
|__| |__|
THE SILVER SOCKETS
DISCUSSION
==========
We now present 3 arguments from the Biblical text
supporting Rashi over Ramban We then present the text
of the Baraitha supporting the Ramban. We then show
a straightforward interpretation of this Baraitha which
does not necessitate the Rambans explanation. Here are
the 3 methods by which to defend Rashi
First of all Rashi was referring to one of the methods
of making a ladder:
* You take two boards (for the ladder sides);
* carve holes in them (for the rungs)
* Place the rungs in the wholes of one board(one side)
* Place the other side on the rungs
* If necessary place tops and bottoms for additional
structural support
Thus when Rashi interpreted the verse as >LADDER LIKE< he
wasnt just being punny. He was referring to a known
constructional method. This argument would be supportive for
Rashi over Ramban since the verse had to indicate the
construction method.
A second support for Rashi over Ramban is the verse itself
>Each board had two handles LADDER LIKE ONE WITH
THE OTHER--this applied to the whole temple< (Ex26-17)
Clearly the adjectival phrase >LADDER LIKE ONE WITH THE OTHER<
refers to the HANDLES and not to the boards.
A final support for Rashi over Ramban is the fact that there
were already four connecting features to the boards
--the cross board at the lower quartile
--the cross board at the 3rd quartile
--the center board
--the golden rings on top
There is no need to create an exotic interpretation of a
verse to indicate a 5th connective.
Based on the above it would appear that Rashis interpretation is
the simplest. However the Ramban, (like any good Rishon) did
not just invent this interpretation The Ramban based himself on
the following Beraita d'Melechet HaMishkan which states
>The were two boltpins which projected from each board, above
and below. These were made of wooden dowels. Corresponding to
the boltpins, there were two holes on the adjacent beam into
which the boltpins of the first beam were inserted<
So Ramban simply follows the Beraita!
However the Beraitha seems to contradict the 3 arguments we
presented above. Consequently I reinterpret the Beraitha based
on an obscure Gemarrah in Shabbath which states that the boards
were marked by pencil marks to facilitate pairing them during
reconstruction.
For example even though the boards were standing, there were
TWO ways to stand them (top to bottom and bottom to top). To
preserve the unique way of standing them the Temple constructers
used natural wooden knot marks on the board. Wherever they found
a knot mark they pencilled a circle on the opposite board. Then
why they went to reconstruct the Temple they could use these
circles and pair them with the knot marks. Such a procedure
is consistent with the language in the above Baraitha--so it
is not >WOODEN DOWELS THAT WENT INTO SOCKETS< that the Baraitha
is talking about but rather >WOODEN KNOT MARKS< that CORRESPONDED
to >PENCILED SOCKET LIKE CIRCLES<.
Based on this interpretation of the Baraitha I believe we can
accept Rashi over the Ramban
ISSUE 4: Did the silver sockets have bases
-------
SOLUTION: The Ralbag and Minchah Belulah argue that the silver
--------sockets had to have bases to protect the wooden boards
from the elements. But Rashi and Rabbi Abraham ben Rambam would
appear to hold that the silver sockets had no bases(so the boards
went thru and rested on the ground). Indeed, if the sockets had
bases then the boards would be the temple height & would be
higher than 10 cubits.
I would simply answer based on Ex26-29 that the boards were
overlayed with Gold! According to Rashi even the insides of the
boards that faced each other and were not visible were overlayed
with Gold. Hence we can argue that the bottom of the boards were
overlayed with Gold. But then the question raised by the Ralbag
and Minchah Belulah would be answered---the boards were overlayed
with Gold and hence protected from the ground.So it would appear
that Rashi and Rabbi Abraham Ben Abraham were correct -- there
was no bottom (but the boards were overlayed)
This concluded the 4 issues raised in connection with this
Rashi as well as the Biblical texts and interpretations used
to defend Rashi.
VERSE Ex27-17c >Every board has 2 handles, ladder like,
----- ONE TO EACH OTHER<
RASHI: The phrase >ONE TO EACH OTHER< means that the 2 handles
-----on each of the 48 boards were >SYMMETRIC<--both of them
occupied the same relative position--neither of them protruded
more to the inside or outside.
(I might have argued that to the contrary, the important thing
was for the boards to be visible; how they fit into the silver
sockets was irrelevant; for even if some handles were more
inward and some more outward, nevertheless the outer appearance
of the temple would remain the same and the boards would
still have structural support)
Hence the verse explicitly tells us that the handles also, even
though they were not visible to the outside, and the silver
sockets, had to all possess a symmetry in their
>INNER< positioning.
VERSE Ex26-18a Ex26-22a
----- >Make 20 boards on the southern SIDE (PAYAH)<
RASHI Rashi explains that the Hebrew word >PAYAH< can equally
----- mean >CORNER< or >SIDE< In these verses
it means >SIDE< and not >CORNER<.
It might appear as if the best method of defending Rashi is
to create a LIST of meanings of >PAYAH<. However in this case
it is best to examine the >INTERNAL COMPARISON< of the verses
which uses several words some of which CLEARLY mean
>CORNER< and some of which clearly mean >SIDE<. Here is the
list of verses
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ex26-18 on the SOUTHERN SIDE (PAYAH) make 20 boards
Ex26-20 On the TZYLAH on the NORTHERN SIDE (PAYAH) make 20 boards
Ex26-22 on the WESTERN SIDE (YERECH)make 6 boards
Ex26-23 On the KTZH in the SIDE (YERECH)make 2 boards
*1 *2 *3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES
=====
*1 The Hebrew >PAYAH< corresponds to the Hebrew
>Tzaylah< which means >SIDE<
*2 The Hebrew >KatZeh< uses the preposition >IN<
because it means >CORNER (So the verse reads >On the corner
IN the western side<) By contrast the preposition >ON<
is used with the word >SIDE< (>On the southern SIDE<)
*3 The Hebrew word >YERECH< means >THIGH< and corresponds to
the concept of >BACK SIDE<. It means >SIDE< since it
corresponds to directions like SOUTH NORTH WEST;also
YERECH is contrasted to KATZEH which means CORNER
Rashi explains that the entrance was in the >EAST<
so that it is proper to call the >WEST< the >THIGH<
or back side.
{END OF LIST}
Thus it should be clear from context that
* The Hebrew >Tzaylah, Payah< means >SIDE< not >CORNER<
* KatZeh means >CORNER<
Notice how this determination could be inferred WITHOUT
A DICTIONARY. That is, in this case it is the internal
structure of the verses which illuminates meaning.
TO BE CONTINUED
RASHI RULE USED: PICTURES
---------------------------------------------------
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 9 Number 13
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
Volume 9 Number 13