|
Are you busy? Visiting us for only a minute or two? Then read our weekly Rashi gems! This feature was started Nov 2007. Each week we will solve a Rashi that everyone thought was unsolvable. Not all Rashis are made equal --- -- Some can be explained easily -- Some can be explained routinely -- But the Rashi gems require ingenuity Click below to read this weeks Rashi gems All gems will be archived on this page. |
| Sep 4-th 2010 | An exciting feature of reading any book, certainly the Bible, is meeting new concepts. There is a linguistic challenge to such confrontations. How does the book convey something that you never spoke about before. Very often it uses poetic techniques to try and suggest or evoke the idea. In this week's Rashi, the Bible tries to convery the ideas of sin by passion and habitual sin. To convey these thoughts the Bible borrows the rather good examples of thirst and full from the sphere of eating. Read More... |
| Aug 30-th 2010 | Academic scholars criticize the Talmudic Rabbis for reading interpretations into the text that are not there. In this Rashi newsletter I have tried to show that this never happened. One approach, frequently used in this newsletter, are the Rabbi Ishmael Style rules: For example, a verse may say one things, but the verse indicates a requirement of generalization! When the Rabbis generalize the verse they are not substituting the generalization for the original meaning but rather adding a new layer of meaning which the Torah required by virtue of its style rules. Read More... |
| Aug 16-th 2010 | Many people incorrect that the simple and homiletic meaning of biblical texts are two distinct items. Not so!! Todays gem studies the phrase all levites. I would argue that the simple meaning of all naturally requires extension and generalization! Read More... |
| Jul 20 th 2010 | Many people think that Psychology is a modern subject. However the Bible frequently uses psyhological categories in dealing with people. For example, the Hebrew word VaTayRagNu means to paranoically mistrust. Paranoia in turn is often accompanied by projection of one's mistrust on the other party. In this week's parshah the Jews paranoically project their hatred of God onto God himself. Read More... |
| Jul 12th 2010 | In our website we teach that there are 30 universal rules which explain all Midrash. But if the rules are universal how do we account for controversy among the commentators? The response is that all commentators agree on these rules but they apply them in different ways. The charming Rashi in today's example illustrates such a controversy. The Rashi also shows a rare application of Biblical law to city planning and beautification. Read More... |
| Jul 1st 2010 | Did you know that the Hebrew root Shin-Mem-Resh, Shamar can mean eyebrows, wine dregs, prison guards, strong rocks,thorns, to guard, night watchman, be cautious, professional standards. Can you see the underlying thread. See this weeks Rashi digest to find out the unifying feature behind these nine meanings!!!! Read More... |
| Jun 20 th 2010 | English translations are sometimes overly simplistic, ignoring the richness of nuance beauty in the Hebrew language. For example the Hebrew Lamed-Kuph-Cheth is frequently translated as take. But Lamed-Kuph-Cheth can equally mean marry, buy, persuade, take. Such different nuances paint the biblical text in different colors. Read More... |
| Jun 13 th 2010 | Since the Bible is written by God we tend to attach deep significance to every word. We do not expect deviations from truth (in the Bible) for the sake of discretion and etiquette since we think of discretion and etiquette as something humans do. Yet when Datan and Aviram criticize Moses they angrily say You lied to us - have not brought us to a land of milk and honey - do you think they are fools that you can blind their eyes Here the words they and their are euphimisms for ourselves and our eyes. Read More... |
| Jun 8th 2010 | The simple approach is to write a plural subject with a plural predicate and a singular subject with a singular predicate. However, Biblical Hebrew can sometimes delicately combine single and plural pronouns simultaneously so as to nuance subtle hints. For example, the Bible speaks about an offering brought for many sins as well as for one sin - hinting and nuancing to the great sin of Idolatry which is one sin equal in affect to all sins! Read More... |
| May 23rd 2010 | Biblical research is a young dynamic field where most things are not understood. Most people think the opposite. They think that since the Bible has been around 4000 years everything is known. So if you ask most people what the Hebrew word Aleph-Caph, Ach means they will tell you indeed, certainly. That is indeed how most scholars - Jewish and non-Jewish translate it. But in fact Ach means the exact opposite: Ach means probably, usually, most of (most of the time). Read More... |
| May 4th 2010 | We all know there is a biblical commandment to blow the Shofar, the ram's horn, on Rosh Hashana. Did you also know that there is a Biblical commandments to commemorate and remember the Akaydah of Isaac for whom a Ram was substituted.A simple alignment of verses forcefully shows this interesting fact. Read More... |
| Apr 17th 2010 | One of my contributions to understanding Rashi is the use of modern visual formatting to explain Rashi. The indentation and parallel alignment of two Biblical paragraphs immediately suggests that they deal with two alternatives rather than being sequential. That is, the visual formatting conveys the Rashi method about the relative meaning of the two texts. This is a powerful Rashi explanatory tool. This tool is useful in this weeks parshah - examinations are performed every 7 days and it is important to list alternatives at each point of time - pure vs. impure. Read More... |
| Apr 12th 2010 | Why do we want the Temple rebuilt? To offer sacrifices? But then why do we want sacrifices renewed? The surprising answer is that what we want is a renewal of prophecy. The sacrifices with their fire rich symbolism facilitate the prophetic fire visions. Hence we find that people who sought prophecy offered sacrifices to achieve this prophecy. Read More... |
| Mar 28th 2010 | Verse Lv06-02 is a beautiful example of a verse with Rashi derivations. One Rashi derivation seeks to extend the verse's laws to all elevation offerings; another Rashi derivation seeks to limit the types of elevation offerings to which the laws apply while a third Rashi derivation seeks to extend the types of elevation offerings to which the laws apply. It is exciting to see three competing forces in the verse. We attempt to clearly identify the precise textual support for each of the three derivations. Read More... |
| Mar 12th 2010 | Most people think puns are sort of silly; they don't represent real literary appreciation. But in fact there are two schools of thought even in the secular literature. One school of thought believes that puns can be intended by the author. Puns are a technique like any other grammatical technique. A favorite Biblical pun is the use deliberate misspelling with deficient letters to poke fun at a person's deficiencies. In this week's Parshah the Bible ranks out the Tribal governors for their tardiness in giving donations! Read More... |
| Mar 2nd 2010 | Most people are unaware that the Biblical Sacrificial laws symbolically encode vast domains of psychology - how to deal with interpersonal relations, how to be happy and satisfied, how to deal with the critical emotions of guilt and thankfullness. This weeks Rashi deals with the symbolism of the waive-raise ceremony and is important in dealing with the emotions of contentment and satisfaction. Read More... |
| Feb 21st 2010 | One technique of Rashi we may loosely call the database approach, the gathering of multiple sources on a single theme. In this week's Rashi we gather several disparate sources on Temple funding. The collection of verses shows a 3 pronged approach to taxes involving different purposes for their use as well as both voluntary and obligatory taxes. Possibly Rashis such as this has relevance to modern fund raising techniques. Read More... |
| Feb 14th 2010 | The Bible describes the appearance of God at the revelation as And under his feet was a work of saphire bricks Since God is not physical such statements always have symbolic meaning. What do they symbolize? We show how to treat such symbolic items. Read More... |
| Feb 7th 2010 | Did you know that the Hebrew word Kaph Yud, Ki can mean because, when, if, that, rather, perhaps, lest. Even if you do know this can you cite verses where these usages occur? Read More... |
| January 30th 2010 | Rashi, and later Rabbi Hirsch, believed that the Hebrew letter Aleph indicated that the rest of a root referred to a person, animal, or plant. For example lamed means to while Alpeh-Lamed is e.g. the animal to which other turn, the ram. It similarly refers to God, and the oak. Read More... |
| January 10th 2010 | Although Rashi was the King of Commentators, and although some of his comments are extremely deep, frequently we find a Rashi which is the result of simple research. Today Rashi studies a verse where a person has two names: Yether, Yithro. Rashi points out the simple fact that the person in question has in fact 7 names. Today this Rashi could be discovered by simple database manipulations. Read More... |
| December 25th 2009 | The standard translation of the Ayshet Chayil hymm which we recite every Friday night is a woman of valor. However Rashi suggests a skilled woman would be a better translation. The error of translating Chayil as having to do with bravery, strength, and valor arises from the military context in which it traditionally appears. But war requires both strength and skill. The translation Chayil means skill sheds light on many verses. Read More... |
| December 21st 2009 | On the verse which states that Jacob slept in that place Rashi states But he had not slept previously for the 22 years that he learned in the Talmudic Academy of Shem and Ever. How does Rashi derive this from the text. We can actually show that the simple intended meaning of the text implies that a) There was a 22 year gap between Jacob leaving his father and arriving at Laban, b) During those 22 years he was involved in spiritual activities, c) he was so involved that he neglected sleep during those 22 years. This is an exciting Rashi since we are able to derive so much from the simple meaning of the text. Read More... |
| December 2nd 2009 | Were men and women given equal economic opportunity in ancient times? More specifically how do you achieve equity. After all if men and women inherit equally, and, if additionally, women typically marry into other families and share their wealth with their husbands, then women will often get "twice" (their share and their husbands) On the other hand if you don't give women anything they are left helpless or forced into marriages they don't want. What then is the equitable solution. The Biblical response is a balance between dowries and inheritance with pluses and minuses on both side. This weeks parshah gives us a glimpse of this balance and of the pluses and minuses. Read More... |
| November 22nd 2009 | The Patriarch Isaac was thrown out of a city because he was amassing too much wealth. Clearly he had many friends in the city (Otherwise he could not have made money) He ingeniously dealt with the problem of how to meet the expulsion order and maintain close ties by resettling away from the city at a strategic water source. That way old friends would have the opportunity to continuously bump into him. This ingenious strategic device facilitated a treaty later on between the Patriarch Isaac and the leaders of the city who in fact expelled him! Read More... |
| November 10th 2009 | One of the challenges of translation between different languages is capturing precise nuances of terms and not watering them down. A good translation should be crisp, fresh, and detailed. The Hebrew eden is frequently translated as delight, pleasure. However a careful study of its usage shows that it refers to pleasures coming after an initial period of work - for example the pleasure-accomplishment of raising children or of mature marital relations. Read More... |
| November 3rd 2009 | A simple rule of grammar that is not widely recognized is the rule governing transforming nouns to verbs: For example to flower, to hammer, to dust, to tent... . Notice how each of these verb forms has a slightly different relation to the noun - to dust means to remove dust while to flower means to create flowers. Read More... |
| October 28st 2009 | We think of the Rabbi Ishmael rules as technical exegetical rules that clarify legal rulings. One of the innovations of the Weekly Rashi newsletter is the application of the Rabbi Ishmael style rules to narrative portions of the Bible. In this weeks Parshah we see a punchy use of the Contradiction method: A person is described as having two parents, implying to Rashi, his parents engaged in wife swapping! Read More... |
| October 21st 2009 | It is well known that many Rashi comments are based on comparisons of aligned text. The nuances inferred from the minor differences illuminate ideas. Sometimes this type of analysis is seen as picky. Therefore a Rashi based on alignment that gives broad descriptions of fundamental human problems is welcome. Todays Rashi describes the three types of periods during which women experience anguish and is as relevant in a modern setting as in Biblical times. Read More... |
| September 6th 2009 | An exciting but overlooked aspect of Biblical interpretation is the skillful use of translations that capture nuances. For example, as in English, there are a variety of synonyms that describe various levels of anger: heated-up anger, impatient anger, biting anger. Such nuanced translations help us better appreciate the Biblical text. Read More... |
| September 6th 2009 | One skill competency needed to understand the Bible is focused literal interpretation. One must learn how to read the text for what it says and not inject extraneous items. However an equally important skill is the capacity to generalize. If the Bible says Don't mislead a blind person on the road we can't, says the Talmud, be picky. Rather we must interpret this generally. Don't mislead blind people and also don't give bad advice to people who have sight. The point here is that giving bad advice is Biblically prohibited just as misleading blind people. Read More... |
| August 30th 2009 | The Bible states When in your midst is found a kidnapper.... Rashi says when found means when found through 2 witnesses. But how did Rashi know this? Trying to explore the meaning of the Hebrew word for found or looking for grammatical nuances in the passive use when found do not reveal anything. Frequently when a Rashi eludes understanding from the perspective of meaning or grammar use of the reference method - seeking clarification from other verses - is extremely helpful. In this case, we have explicit verses stating that conviction can only take place through investigation (finding!) of 2 or more witnesses. Read More... |
| August 23rd 2009 | The concepts of reward and hereafter are well known. Many people erroneously think these concepts are Rabbinic and post-Biblical. Not so. The Bible in numerous places discusses reward for the commandments. Furthermore, some of these rewards are natural for example, people who respect their parents will obviously receive favors and rewards in this world. A complete list is presented at the link below. This list gives insights into the so-called Talmudic conception of reward which however in reality was based on the Biblical conception. Read More... |
| August 16th 2009 | The purpose of this website is to present the rules which govern all Rashi and Talmudic exegesii. But how then can we explain the presence of differing views. The answer is that we have presented the underlying commonality in all controversy. In fact that is an innovation of this website that despite all the controversy in the Talmud there is an underlying commonality. So if one verse says Do sanctify the firstborn while another verse says Don't sanctify the firstborn there is one Rashi rule governing this, contradiction and there are three possible methods of resolution. However different Talmudic authorities can use the same resolution method and arrive at different answers. Read More... |
| August 9th 2009 | A famous Rashi studying the verse Dt07-12 In the heels of doing my commandments ....and you will be blessed states You will be blessed even if you observe insignificant commandments which people step on with their heels. This is certainly far fetched and other commentators have offered alternative explanations. Click the link below to see a simple explanation based on the underlying paragraph which mentions reward for observing both serious commandments like the prohibition of intermarriage and simple commandments like the commandment of Mezuzah. Read More... |
| August 2nd 2009 | The climax principle asserts that Biblical lists are presented in climactic order from lowest to highest. But Dt06-05 presents the following list of ways to Love God: with one's emotions, soul, money. Shouldn't however money be at the beginning of the list rather than at the end. Read below to find the startling answer. Read More... |
| August 2nd 2009 | Is Biblical grammar understood? Do we know (almost) all rules? Many people think so. However Rashi continually shows rules we didn't fully know. In today's example we illustrate a very deep principle first metnioned by the Malbim that a Biblical three-letter root can have its meaning changed by the connective preposition used with it. Hence the phrase chose from dynamically obtains a new meaning, select. Read More... |
| July 19th 2009 | A famous Talmudic statement states that This was the method of learning in the wilderness. God taught Moses, Moses then taught Aaron, Aaron then taught his sons, his sons then taught the tribal elders and the tribal elders then taught the nation. In this way the Torah taught was reviewed 4 times. Where do such traditions come from? Are they in the text? Are they read into the text (to justify an emphasis on learning)? Surprisingly this 4-fold sequence can be explicitly inferred from the Biblical text. Read More... |
| July 12th 2009 | Do you believe that the ancient Israelites used a genealogical based system for important community appointments? Most people do. But this is not so: a) The High Priest was not selected exclusively by genealogy; b) The Tribes were not created exclusively by Genealogy; c) The Tribal subbranches were also not created exclusively by Genealogy! Read More... |
| July 5th 2009 | What do Foxes, feet, and trails have in common? Answer: They are all meanings of the Hebrew root, Shin-Ayin-Lamed, Shual. Another translation approach sees the 3 meanings as foxes, holes, and hollows. Which one is right? And what do all these words have in common. Click here to find out! Read More... |
| June 20th 2009 | People sometimes ask me about my view that there are 30 Rashi rules. They can be semi-mechanically applied to verses and you can derive all Rashis. Doesn't such as attitude imply that differing views can't exist.? My answer is that the same Rashi method can have two possible applications allowing differences of opinion. An example occurs in this weeks Parshah: The Biblical color Tauv-Caph-Lamed-Tav, Techeleth coming from the root Caph-Lamed-Hey, CLH meeaning completion can be interpreted in two way: (1) The dark blue hues indicating the completion of the day or (2) the light azure blue hues indicating the end of line of vision of the horizon. Read More... |
| June 15th 2009 | Rashi does not exclusively teach Jewish law. Sometimes Rashi will teach character traits and moral behavior. Noach for example is praised for 4 things: a) righteousness b) perfection c) walking before God and d) being a true man. But when God speaks to him he only mentions two things: a) Righteousness and c) walking before God. Rashi explains this to be proper etiquette: You don't mention all a person's praise to his face. Read More... |
| June 4th 2009 | When discussing the suspected adulteress the Biblical verse speaks about a possible adultery that was concealed from the eyes of the husband. Rashi commenting on the underlined phrase observes The husband can't suspect his wife if he is blind because he doesn't have eyes to be concealed from. Such exegesii appear homiletic and picky until we review other verses discussing ignorance. Such verses simply say it was concealed from him. It emerges that Rashi was commenting, not on the phrase, but rather on the aligned comparison of this and similar phrases. Read More... |
| May 24th 2009 | Rashi states that dots over a word indicate the text can be read without the word there and still be true. In my article on Biblical Formatting I have interpreted this to mean that the Biblical dotting is equivalent to the Modern Strikeout. So if the text says The Levite census counted by Moses and XX Aaron XX was such and such then the dotting /strikeout on Aaron indicates that he was stricken from the counting (Because he was a priest not a levite). Many people regard such Rashis as fanciful. It is therefore useful to see all examples of strikeouts in the Torah and see how Rashi following the Midrash consistently interprets Biblical dotting this way. Such a review gives credibility to the method of interpretation and makes it appear more natural. Read More... |
| May 17th 2009 | Most people are familiar with the harsh prohibition against idolatry. A closer examination shows that the Bible had diverse prohibitions: a) a prohibition against worship b) a prohibition against manufacture even if you don't worship and c) a prohibition against bowing stones even if done to God. Read More... |
| May 12th 2009 | Many Rashis deal with problems of meaning, grammar or verse comparisons. However some Rashis are modern in flavor performing broad database inquiries, noticing patterns and obtaining generalizations. By gathering all verses requiring charity we find that the Jewish conception of charity has a variety of forms including outright giving, lending, and support with varying degrees of participation. Read More... |
| May 5th 2009 | A beautiful example of the difference between a casual and scholarly reading of the Torah occurs when the synonym method is used. It is easy to translate Lv19-15 as Don't do injustice. But Rashi uses a greater acuity of translation: Don't be red-taped By using the finer translation Rashi enables giving more guidance -It is not just injustice which should not be done - you should also, even if you are being just, not be red taped. Read More... |
| April 27th 2009 | Rashi occasionally presents symbolic interpretation. For example Rashi states that leprosy is a punishment for chatter/slander symbolized by the chattering birds and that the atonement for slander is to take a hyssop and cedar symbolizing that an arrogant cedar like person should lower himself like a hyssop. Such explanations look fanciful. However we show that these explanations can be placed in a modern psychological setting. Read here for a beautiful application of these symbolic interpretations including an illustrative story from the Chafetz Chaim's life. Read More... |
| April 5th 2009 | In all languages words are sometimes named in a charming manner. A charming pithy example may be found in the Hebrew word for describing the donning of a turban: Hebrew refers to donning a turban as bandaging a turban. Here an activity, donning a turban, is named by the form of the action. This is similar to the English surfing the web, or brainstorming. Read More... |
| April 1st 2009 | Whether you believe in the symbolic (Ramban) or historical (Rambam) approach to sacrifices everyone acknowledges that the sacrifices are filled with beautiful symbols. But what does salt symbolize. After all we did our bread in salt to remind us of the use of salt in the sacrifices. So salt must be important. Rav Hirsch notes that salt symbolizes both destruction and preservation Rav Hirsch concludes that the underyling symbolic unity is steadfastness. Read More... |
| Mar 24th 2009 | Most of us think we are advanced and that we know Hebrew grammar and consequently there is no need, today to learn Grammar from Rashi. But Rashi's grammatical focus frequently was on anomalies. For example today's Rashi shows how it is perfectly legitimate to treat the same word with two different genders in the same sentence! Read More... |
| Mar 17th 2009 | A popular view is that Hebrew word pairs which differ in minor punctuation are identical in meaning. Rashi however consistently saw such word pairs as having different meanings. The different meanings can nicely be illustrated using punchy English translations. In this vein Rashi translates the Hebrew LAMmah vs. la-MAH (a difference in accent placement) as why vs. to what end respectively. Read More... |
| Mar 8th 2009 | Why did the Jews, after having personally seen God at the Decalogue, turn around and worship idols. One strong view is that they didn't believe in idolatry but worshipped idols for the sex that went along with it. How then can this be prevented in the future? The Torah urges Priests to bring oxen during their consecration ceremony. Oxen symbolize continuous productivity (similar to oxen ploughing fields). By having things to continuously do we counteract boredom and avoid sin. Read More... |
| Mar 3rd 2009 | Todays gem is philosophical. Very often we view a job or task in terms of the method needed to accomplish it. We live a world of automation and methods are held in high esteem. However the Torah felt that the person not the method was most important. No matter how well you understand something a skilled person-expert can always add more. This philosophic point is indicated in the Torah by referring to the person, the embroiderer rather than the method, embroidered. Read More... |
| Feb 22nd 2009 | The Hebrew letter Vav can mean and or or. Isn't it important though, in certain laws to know if you are requiring a meaning of and or or? This Rashi as illuminated by a beautiful Malbim gives a simple method to tell when vav means and and when it means or. Read More... |
| Feb 15th 2009 | Rashi, on the verse And I, God, have carried you on the wings of eagles cryptically states This refers to the night of the exodus when all Jews quickly journeyed to Raamsayth (even though it was far away) and exited Egypt from Raamsayth. Such a Rashi appears flimsy, homiletic, and exaggerated. But the verse is not the cause of the Rashi comment. Rather Rashi knew about the Jews journeying to Raamsayth from a totally different source. Read More... |
| Feb 8th 2009 | A challenge in interpreting Biblical Hebrew is to precisely capture nuances. Traditionally we translate Moses' complaint to the people who were asking for water as Why do you test God. Rashi points out that the word for test has an added terminal NUN. Therefore, says Rashi, the proper translation is Why do you doubt God. Moses was accusing them of making complaints for the sake of complaints without any expectation of an answer! Read More... |
| Feb 1st 2009 | Many people think Talmudic exegesis is read into the text. Todays example shows that the prohibition of doing work on holidays, whether by you or by anyone else follows rules of grammar and style that hold in all languages. Read More... |
| January 25th 2009 | Many people know that the Biblical D-B-R, A-M-R connote harsh and soft forms of communication. We have advocated a translation approach using comparable terms in other languages whose nuances connote these terms. We would translate D-B-R, A-M-R as cite and say respectively. It immediately follows that cite or giving a citation is a harsher form of communication than plain discussion. Read More... |
| January 17th 2009 | Link Corrected! We frequently find psychological and exhortative content in Rashi (Moosar). In this week's parshah we find modern type advice to female victims of sexual abuse. Jethro's daughters had been abused by the shepards. They became withdrawn from all men. The Torah shows Jethro, a priest, acting as guidance counselor. He encourged his daughters not to take out on good men what abusive men have done. His therapy leads to a cure and a marriage. Read More... |
| January 11th 2009 | A well known justification for the practice of "sitting and learning" but being supported by other people is the Biblically described partnership of Yissachar and Zevulun - Rejoice Zebulun in your going out to [to business] and [Rejoice] Yissachar in your tents [of learning]. However an examination of the Biblical text shows that Yissachar did have employment - he was in agriculture!; Zebulun-Yissachar were a partnership with Zebulun marketing Yissachar's products. Read More... |
| January 3rd 2009 | A common view is that the Biblical chok refers to a law without reason. However Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch interprets the various Rashis otherwise. chok refers to an absolute law whose application does not vary based on need - but of course the reasons for the law are there but they simply don't allow altering it. Read More... |
| December 28th 2008 | In the middle ages artists could not use the name of God on stage. So instead they resorted to mention of Greek gods. This practice - substitution of the profane for the sacred is used by Joseph who was trying to intimidate with a false oath and couldn't use the name of God. Read More... |
| December 20th 2008 | Joseph's interpretation of the master baker and maitre de of wine are well known. The key point of interpretation is that the 3 items symbolized 3 days. What is less known is how the rest of their dreams ties in with the interpretations. For example the bakers holed bread baskets are an apt symbol for a dead body being exposed and vulnerable (holed.) Read More... |
| December 6th 2008 | Almost all school children know that Jacob who thought he was marrying Rachel, only by morning, found out that he had married Leah. By morning? Certainly even rif-rafs in slums know who they are spending the night with? Yes, the sages do say that Rachel gave Leah her secret codes between her and Jacob. But again, even drunk rif-rafs in slums can recognize their wives' voice. What really happened? We suggest that Jacob knew he was marrying Leah - Rachel taught Leah what Jacob liked in flirting. So Jacob found in Leah what he wanted in Rachel and hence aquiesced to the marriage.A fter the marriage however Leah resumed to her oldself and Jacob realized he was fooled! Read More... |
| November 23rd 2008 | Most people think that bowing is a sign of either an acknowledgement of power or else worship. But bowing can also be used in the Bible as the equivalant of a simple thank you or a hello. Read More... |
| November 9th 2008 | God ordered Hagar to call her child Ishmael, God Hears. But the Torah tells us that Abraham called the child Ishmael. Why did Abraham named the child if the order was given to Hagar. One explanation is that Hagar told Abraham the order who then implemented it. But a deeper reason is that Abraham's prayers were also heard - he too wanted Hagar back and hence he also praised God-Hears. Read More... |
| November 2nd 2008 | Verse Gn29-03 simply says that Shem and Yefet covered up their naked father. Why then does Rashi, following the Midrash, startingly say: Shem instigated the action while Yefet simply tagged along and acquiesed? Such statements strike the untrained reader as imposed on the text to justify preconceived notions of Biblical personalities. Not so. Rashi was always grammatical and following lines of straightforward interpretation. In this case the verse when literally translated states And he took, Shem, and Yefet also... and hence the Rashi comment that Shem instigated the behavior. This translation is based on a routine rule of grammar. Read More... |
| October 13th 2008 | The verse says ...Moses spoke to the nation...place your heart on all that I say... Rashi comments: Torah study requires listening, seeing and placing of ones heart. The verse only mentions place your heart; where did Rashi get seeing / hearing. The simple answer is that not all Rashis focus on a particular verse. Rashi here, uses the broad database method which reviews all Torah verses regarding learning. Read More... |
| October 7th 2008 | Hebrew conjugations allow roots to take on a rich variety of nuances. For example the Hebrew root Nun-Caph-Resh can mean (1) recognize in the causative construction, (2) foreign in the passive construction, and (3) disguise in the interactive construction. Read More... |
| September 28st 2008 | Did you know the Bible uses puns? Do you think the puns are arbitrary - not really intended by the Author but read into the text by the reader? In this week's Parshah we have a deliberate pun - the pun uses a deliberate misuse of grammatical conjugations. The verse is suppose to say that God will return the exiles to (Israel) but instead, the verse, deliberately slips, and says God (Himself) will return from exile. Read More... |
| September 21st 2008 | The traditional translation of a verse is you will be sold for slaves... but no one buys you. Using 4 Rashi comments spanning different methods we arrive at the following translation you will fawn the appearance of slaves but no one will buy you because they prefer to kill you. Note the freshness of the alternative translation. It is instructive to see how the different Rashi methods give rise to this translation. Read More... |
| September 14th 2008 | The verse says A just weight you will have. Simple enough. Remarkably Rashi distorts this and interprets A just weight? [Then] you will have [much]. Remarkable!! Yet, even more remarkably Rashi is based on the simple meaning of the text. There are two verses on weights? The other verse, through its nuances, indeed suggests If you avoid false weights then the nation will be need very many just weights and types of weights [because of all the assets you will acquire.]. Read More... |
| September 7th 2008 | Does the Bible have nothing to say about reward and punishment? Rashi makes a database inquiry on which commandments mention reward. The database inquiry shows half a dozen commandment where reward is mentioned. Using this database inquiry Rashi is able to generalize and assert that all commandments are rewarded with increased quality of life. Read More... |
| September 1st 2008 | The Bible says "You will eat it [firstborn animals] before God " But the Talmud says This doesn't mean you should eat it, since we know it is a priestly gift eaten by the priests. Rather the verse should be translated "One eats if before God." But how can the Talmud uproot the simple meaning of the text which says you should eat it. The answer to this is very deep. The future conjugation form, using a prefix Tauv, doesn't have to indicate the future as we were taught in grade school. Rather it can also refer to the habitual present as exemplified in the verse one eats it before God... Read More... |
| August 27th 2008 | The Biblical "know" is famous Idiom. We tend to translate "And Adam knew his wife." We claim that a more accurate translation is familiar, appreciate. Thus we translate Adam was familiar with his wife and she became pregnant? Doesn't that sound better? We also translate many other verses with the Hebrew root Yud-Dalet-Ayin as meaning familiar / appreciate: For example Appreciate Afresh: That not your children who did not see God's revelation but you yourself saw it..." Read More... |
| August 27th 2008 | Rashi cites an ancient Midrash that the laws of Shabbath, the laws of honoring one's parents, and the laws of the red heiffer were given before Sinai. Remarkable? Is this fancy or the simple meaning of the text. Well...we do find explicit commands on the Sabbath before Sinai. But what about the Red Heiffer and ones parents. Rashi, using a skillful advanced database query shows that there are only two commandments in the Torah which add the phrase "as God [Already] commanded you," and they are Honor Ones parents and the laws of the red heiffer. Read More... |
| August 10th 2008 | Many people believe that modern psychology has introduced a host of new concepts by which to describe and analyze human personality. Attempts to see these modern concepts in the Bible seem forced. It is therefore refreshing to find a Rashi which explicitly identifies the concept of projection: The Jews, we are told, said that God hates us because, as Rashi explicitly states, They projected their own hatred of God onto Him. Read More... |
| August 3rd 2008 | The Bible speaks about "inheritance falling to a person." Rashi explains "Because lots, which determined inheritance, were typically done by placing tags in a jar, overturning it and letting them fall. Simple enough. But why does Rashi add: "Also...because the angels of the ancient Canaanites were made to fall before Moses." Why add this? Rashi already gave a simple linguistic explanation? Why add anything else? Actually, both explanations are needed and are part of the simple meaning of the word. This is a general trend in naming things. Can you think of another famous example? Read More... |
| July 27th 2008 | What does rattle, cymbal, doubt and wander have in common? The question is not really that hard to answer: You play cymbals by rattling them. Also we are all familiar with the metaphoric use rattle to indicate emotional doubt. Finally a wandering person is like an unsettled particle of dust that is being rattled. One of Rashi's jobs is to alert us to such multiple meanings. But Rashi can become fun if we see two prophets both punning in the same way. The unexpected use of identical double meanings by two prophets reinforces the perception that these words are culturally related by pun. It also adds a dimension of fun and cuteness to Biblical reading that some people don't expect to find. Read More... |
| July 20th 2008 | Some Rashi's, in fact, some Talmudic statements, just look indefensible. For example the Succoth offerings on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th are expressed in almost identical phraseology (except for the numbers that change). There are about 6 differences in the 30 word paragraph which is repeated 6 times. Three of these 6 differences involve the Hebrew letters Mem Yud Mem which spell water. The Talmud says "This is the source for the water libation ceremony." This certainly appears homiletic. However, Rav Hirsch explains this homily as nothing but solid grammar. "The mem indicates a plural; similarly the yud (Niscah vs Nisacheha) indicates a plural. So the Bible clearly requires a plurality of libations - the usual one and the water libation." Read More... |
| July 13th 2008 | Very often people mistakingly think Rashi's comments are politically derived. However closer analysis shows that there is a grammatical basis. The Bible tells us that a political alliance of Moab and Midyan sought help from Balak. Rashi comments "but Midyan left the alliance." This appears politically driven - only one nation sought to destroy the Jews. Furthermore Midyan was the nation of Moses'' father in law who praised God. However Rashi aligns two verselets - Moab and Midyan came and Moab stayed over Rashi further aligns the adjectives in these verselets elders of Midyan with Princes of Moab. Rashi concludes that the Midianites were divination scholars and concluded that Balak was a fake since he needed time to think. Rashi probably also noted that in Chapter 25 Midian was involved in the marital-affair attack on the Jews which resulted in a death toll of 24000. Read More... |
| June 29th 2008 | The bible uses a repeating aligned phraseology in prohibiting the Levites from participation in obtaining land in Israel: a)You shall not inherit the land b) you will have no apportionment with them. So Rashi and Raavad simply enough state a) Levites do not get a cut of Israel on the initial Joshuan conquest and b) Levites do not apportion in future conquests. Remarkably Rambam (Shmitah Yovail, 13:7) says they do take apportionment in future conquests. But the Rambam accepts the dual nuances of the alignment. This is a beautiful example for those who wish to complement their Chumash-Rashi learning with advanced Talmudic analysis. Read More... |
| June 23rd 2008 | The Bible speaks about violating all the commandments of the Torah. Ramban, simply enough, explains this as a sin of asserting that the Torah no longer applies to us. Very natural! Rashi, however explains this law as referring to the grave sin of idolatry - one sin that is equal to the whole Torah. Sounds sermonic. Certainly not the simple meaning. Unexpectedly, Rashi can be made the simple meaning of the text for the Biblical text explicitly and simultaneously refers to violating all commandments of the Torah and this (single) sin. In other words Rashi was forced to follow the Biblical language and seek one sin that is all sins. Read More... |
| June 15th 2008 | Two verses are almost the same. How should they be approached? What should one do with their differences? Restrictive approach: Do the differences only apply to the verses they are in? Shared approach: Or, should the two verses be viewed as one theme sharing all details with different details being mentioned in different verses but the law applying equally to all cases? And how does one decide such questions? Thru tradition? Or does the biblical text provide help? Rashi deals with these questions as he discusses two verses - one states that blemishes invalidate priests while the other states that age invalidate Levites. A rare and catchy restrictive word alerts Rashi to the conclusion but age does not invalidate priests! Read More... |
| June 15th 2008 | Can symbolic intepretations ever be justified? Or should they be regarded as particular point of view? One method of justification is to use a theme approach - can the symbolic interpretation be explained as emanating from one theme which is then developed. Such an approach gives credibility. Rashi applies the theme approach to gifts of the princes. The theme is human prophetic history. Rashi then shows how simple numerical associations then translate the prince gifts as speaking about the great moments in human prophetic history: Adam, Noach, the Patriarchs, the 10 commandments, etc. Read More... |
| June 1st 2008 | The Bible states that when dismantling the Temple the altar had a cover placed over it with the altar utensils placed on top of the altar. Simple enough. But out of apparently nowhere Rashi says "The altar was accompanied by a live coal which was covered by a copper pan." Enigmatic Rashis like this always arouse skepticism: Is this the simple meanig of the text? Is it a tradition? Was it a 'nice' exegetical idea pegged on to the text? Surprisingly many of these Rashis are in fact the simple meaning of the text - they can be derived in a straightforward manner using simple grammatical principles. In this case an alignment of the five altar utensils with the four altar utensils placed on the altar cover naturally suggests the Rashi comment. Read More... |
| June 1st 2008 | The Bible states that when dismantling the Temple the altar had a cover placed over it with the altar utensils placed on top of the altar. Simple enough. But out of apparently nowhere Rashi says "The altar was accompanied by a live coal which was covered by a copper pan." Enigmatic Rashis like this always arouse skepticism: Is this the simple meanig of the text? Is it a tradition? Was it a 'nice' exegetical idea pegged on to the text? Surprisingly many of these Rashis are in fact the simple meaning of the text - they can be derived in a straightforward manner using simple grammatical principles. In this case an alignment of the five altar utensils with the four altar utensils placed on the altar cover naturally suggests the Rashi comment. Read More... |
| May 26th 2008 | The Bible states that if we observe God's commandments then God will walk with us. But what exactly does that mean. Rashi cryptically explains I will walk with you in Paradise and you will not tremble from me. But again what does that mean? Has Rashi contributed to the understanding? Very often an enigmatic Rashi can be solved using an OTHER VERSE, even if Rashi does not explicitly mention it. In this case we know that Moses' grade of prophecy was conversational and not symbolized by the traditional burning fiery confrontation. Perhaps this illuminates Rashi: God will give the observant Jews the conversational prophecy level and not the burning-fire level. Read More... |
| May 18th 2008 | Only 5 commandments state "Observe this and fear God." Why? What is so special about these 5 commandments? Which are these five commandments? It turns out that the fear of man is the reason for observance of many commandments (such as the prohibitions of murder and theft). Gratitude is anothere strong reason for commandments such as the obligation to say grace after meals. But there are 5 commandments which are only observed because Someone is watching us above? Read More... |
| May 11th 2008 | The verse says "Observe the Succoth holiday on the 7th month during the harvest season." Rashi states: "The underlined phrase during the harvest season. indicates a requirement to make leap years so that Succoth coincides with the harvest season. Rashis like this turn people off - true, the verse has an extra phrase and it does hint towards a Succoth-harvest connection, but why make a fuss over it? Actually however Rashi's real reason for requiring a leap-year holiday connection is because of an explicit commandment in another verse - watch the Springtime Months when you make Passover. Read More... |
| May 5th 2008 | The verse says: "Eat the peace offering today and the day after;" But Rashi says "This teaches that the priest must slaughter with the intent of eating today and the day after." Doesn't this look strange? The verse says nothing about intention. But Rashi can be simply explained using the multi-verse grammatical rule: The previous verse IS speaking about intention and the two verses together tell us to INTEND to EAT the peace offering today and tomorrow. Read More... |
| Apr 14 2008 | HAPPY PASSOVER TO ALL. Many Rabbis believe that there is a fifth son - the apathetic Jew who does't CARE to ask. Actually however, the so called fourth son - WHO CAN NOT ASK - should really be the APATHETIC son since YoDayAH in Hebrew can equally mean CAN KNOW or CARES TO KNOW. The son who can't ask is classified as the SIMPLE SON. Furthermore the 4 sons define 4 DIMENSIONS of learning and enable Rabbis and teachers to classify Jewish children by personality type similar to modern personality learning theories such as the MYERS-BRIGGS. Read More... or, shorter version... |
| Apr 7 2008 | Many people believe that the Torah is written in a narrative-legal style. By contrast databases are perceived as something modern. The following Rashi shows how to take narrative text, convert it into traditional database form but still retain the simple expositional style of Rashi. Read More... |
| Mar 31 2008 | Many people think of sacrifices as a concession by God to the times since that is the way most religions worshipped God. You can even find this concession theory echoed in many great religious Jewish thinkers. But does it really make sense that God should devote over 20% of His most holy book, the Torah, to something that is only a concession? Surely there must be something higher hidden in the sacrifices. In fact the sacrifices were symbolic procedures which facilitated prophetic experiences. Today we don't have public prophecy and therefore may be unaware that the sacrifices had anything to do with sacrifices. But the real reason that God gave the sacrifices and that we aspire to the rebuilding of the Temple and restoration of sacrifices is a hidden deep desire to renew prophecy. Read More... |
| Mar 24 2008 | While symbolic associations can be a pleasant past-time, some associations are Biblically declared. One such declared symbolism is the "salt" symbolism. We must, says the Bible, "salt" all offerings. Salt is always used to "preserve status"-e.g. a destroyed land that was salted had its destruction preserved and could not be rebuilt while meat that was salted is preserved and decayed more slowly. The salted offerings symbolize that our relationship with God must be preserved and solidified against all forces of decay! (Rav Hirsch) Read More... |
| Mar 11 2008 | Many people erroneously think that Rashi exclusively devotes himself to grammar,meaning and style. We have made explicit the non-verse methods. They include archaeology, comparative philology, geometry and algebra. . Imagine the surprise when people find a Rashi which can only be understood using the rules for solving 1-variable linear equations. This topic (when expounded by Rashi) is clear lucid and enjoyable and shows a beautiful bonding of Torah and secular knowledge. Read More... |
| Mar 2 2008 | Many people erroneously think of Judaism as lineage-based. People are assigned to positions - priest, prophet, king - based on lineage irrespective of merit. Not so! For example Moses was the youngest and still was chosen as prophet over his older brother. David was youngest and chosen king over his older brothers. Can you think of more examples? Read More... |
| Feb 24 2008 | A very powerful Rashi method is the unified-meaning method. This method shows an underlying natural unity in disparate meanings of a Biblical root. The exposed underlying unity enriches our understanding of Biblical Hebrew by indicating new unexpected nuances. Consequently the method is both poetic and analytic. In today's example we show the underlying unity in: Sand, window, Dance-Flutes, desecrate, sick, corpse. Read More... |
| Feb 17 2008 | A very powerful Rashi method is the unified-meaning method. This method shows an underlying natural unity in disparate meanings of a Biblical root. The exposed underlying unity enriches our understanding of Biblical Hebrew by indicating new unexpected nuances. Consequently the method is both poetic and analytic. In today's example we show the underlying unity in: promotion, lifted, fire, clouds, pray, forgive. Read More... |
| Feb 10 2008 | Rashi frequently appears to simply be giving meaning, But by probing deeper one can see different approaches to meaning. There are 10 Rashi approaches to meaning. One approach seeks an underlying unifying commonality to disparate meanings of the same Biblical root. Today's Rashi finds a surprising unifying thread to FLEE and SUPPORTIVE-CENTER-BOARD. Read More... |
| Feb 3 2008 | Some people don't believe it when I tell them that a true reading of Rashi may require supplementation to existing Rashi text. Today's example is a good illustration. At Gn18-15a Rashis says that the Hebrew word KI has 4 meanings. But there are really 6: IF,BECAUSE,THAT,PERHAPS,RATHER,WHEN. Read here to see verses where these translations are natural and necessary. Read More... |
| Jan 27 2008 | Did you know that the Bible uses anthropomorphic personifications to convey messages: For example "Priests shouldn't ascend to the altar in robes on ramps (but use steps) because the exposure of nakedness might embarass the ramp steps"; Rashi wryly concludes: How must more so that we shouldnt embarass fellow humans. Read this gem for half a dozen such examples. Read More... |
| Jan 20 2008 | The Bible says "The Jews ate the Manna 40 years." But in actuality they ate it for "40 years lest one month." A simple explanation is that "ate 40 years" means "approximately 40 years." But lo and behold Rashi explains differently: "The cakes the Jews ate the first month tasted like Manna?" Why? What possessed Rashi? Read here to find out. Read More... |
| Jan 13 2008 | Rashi explains Ex12-03 "If the family is too small for the lamb" simply, to mean, "if the number of people in the family are to small to eat the whole lamb" Fine! Why does Rashi add additional explanations based on puns. Read here a fundamental Rashi approach making these added explanations natural. Read More ... |
| Jan 6 2008 | Gems needn't be profound. Today we present some adult humor from Rashi. How can a person be the son of his brother? Read here for the cute answer! Read More ... |
| Jan 1 2008 | Avimelech, when confronted by God for engaging a married woman, protested "I am INNOCENT and VIRTUOUS." God responded "I know you are INNOCENT" Rashi says that God implied "But you are not VIRTUOUS." Why? Is such an inference forced or optional. Read here to find how you, the reader, also make such inferences every day. Read More ... |
| Dec 24 2007 | 12 people spied Israel. The Bible explicitly speaks about the stop-over in Chevron. Why did Rashi say that 'Only CALEB went to Chevron?" Was Rashi peeking ahead at the defection of the other 10 spies and playing politics to make Caleb look better? Read here for a simple straightforward solution. Read More... |
| Dec 17 2007 | Pharoh's daughter's maidens saved Moses. But Rashi cites the queerest Midrash: 'Her hand stretched forth several feet' The Biblical text doesn't say that! Read how this Midrash is the simple meaning of the text. Read More .... |
| Dec 8 2007 | The verse says God is with him which simply means He was successful. Why did Rashi twist the meaning and interpret it to mean He mentions God's name frequently. Read More... |
| Dec 1 2007 | You know of Joseph's 2 dreams: a) The standing sheaves and b) the stars. Did you know about his 3rd dream? Read More.... |
| Nov 25 2007 | How dare Rashi accuse Leah of causing her daughter's rape because she was forward in her own personal life? Or did he really blaim her? Read More.... |
| Nov 19 2007 | If Jacob married the wrong wife why didn't he know immediately? Why did he only find out next morning? Who really tricked him? Read More.... |
| Nov 11 2007 | The verse uses the plural CONCUBINES. How can Rashi speak about "a deficient spelling indicating one concubine"? Read More... |
| Nov 4 2007 | Does Lot eating Matzoh justify Rashi thinking it was Passover? Read More... |