#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (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: Gn07-12a

PART 2
======
The following is part 2 in our series on the difference between
Rabbi Ishmael's approach to Chumash (which we follow) and the
methods of Dr Nechama Leibowitz(which we also follow)

BACKGROUND
==========
First some background: There are a variety of Good books on
Chumash and Rashi. Chief among them are the books written by the
late Dr Nechama Leibowitz who has many followers.

Dr LEIBOWITZ's APPROACH
=======================
Dr Leibowitz, following a long tradition, emphasized learning
Rashi by finding the >PROBLEM<. According to her, Rashi is best
understood by finding something >TROUBLESOME< in the verse. Rashi
is then seen as >ANSWERING< this >PROBLEM<.

RABBI ISHMAEL'S APPROACH
========================
By contrast, Rabbi Ishmael, in his study of Bible emphasized
STYLE. Every Biblical sentence or paragraph has a STYLE. This
STYLE determines how the verse-content should be interpreted. For
example, certain STYLES demand a >BROAD LIBERAL< interpretation
of verse-content. Certain other styles demand a
>STRICT-CONSERVATIVE< interpretation of verse content. Thus in
Rabbi Ishmael's approach the interpretation of the verse has
nothing to do with a problem--rather it is dependent on the
STYLE used.

EXAMPLE: Gn07-12a

The verses Gn07-12:17 use a GENERAL-DETAIL-GENERAL >STYLE<.
This style demands a BROAD INTERPRETATION of the DETAILS by
generalizing them

{LIST2}
The verses Gn07-12:17 use a GENERAL-DETAIL-GENERAL >STYLE<.
This style demands a BROAD INTERPRETATION of the DETAILS by
generalizing them
==============================================================
VERSE       STYLE   TEXT
=======     ======= ========================================
Gn07-12     GENERAL THERE WAS A RAIN(FLOOD) FOR 40 DAYS
Gn07-13:16  DETAILS Noahs family (& animals)come to Noahs ark
Gn07-17     GENERAL THERE WAS A FLOOD FOR 40 DAYS


DISCUSSION: Dr Leibowitz s Approach
===================================
We will return to the above GENERAL-DETAIL-GENERAL {LIST} in
a minute. First recall that Dr Leibowitz emphasizes the >PROBLEM<.
In this case the >PROBLEM< is clearly seen by comparing the 2
almost identical verses Gn07-12, Gn07-17. The verses are identical
except for the fact that the >FLOOD< is called >RAIN< in the
first verse. Why?

----------------------------------------------------------
{LIST3}
Comparison & alignment of Gn07-12 and Gn07-17					
=================================================
VERSE                   *1      *2a             *2b
======= ===========     =====   ============    ===========
Gn07-12	There was a	RAIN	on the earth	for 40 days	
Gn07-17	There was a	FLOOD	for 40 days	on the earth	

NOTES
*1 The first verse says >RAIN< while the 2nd verse calls it a
>FLOOD<. Rashi is Simple: First God only brought a >RAIN< in the
hope that they would repent. Then, when they didn't repent God
brought a >FLOOD<.

*2a/2b Notice how the phrases >on the earth< and >for 40 days<
are reversed in order. When God brought the >FLOOD< for
punishment it is emphasized that it was for 40 days, a long time
---a punishment period

RABBI ISHMAEL'S METHOD:
======================
Rabbi Ishmael focuses on the fact that the verses have a
GENERAL-DETAIL-GENERAL style. THEREFORE, we are required to
interpret the verses Broadly.

The verses, Gn07-13:16 state that Noach, his family, and the
animals came to the ark. Now this in and of itself is just a
>DETAIL<. But as Rabbi Ishmael so beautifully points out it is
not just any >DETAIL< but rather it is part of a
GENERAL-DETAIL-GENERAL style. This style demands generalization
and broad interpretation. We already know (Gn06-09) that Noach
was spared from the flood because he was Righteous. Hence we
generalize: >ANYONE WHO BECAME RIGHTEOUS COULD BE SAVED<. It
follows that God offered everyone the right to repent and come
to the ark.


SUMMARY: The driving force behind Rashi is the STYLE which
requires us to understand the reason why Noach was spared and to
generalize it: Noach, and ANYONE ELSE who repented, would be
spared. Rashi simply gives another example of God offering
repentance: First the flood waters came down as Rain and then
they came down as a flood. True, Rashi infers this from the
comparison of verses which first uses >RAIN< and then uses
>FLOOD< but ultimately if Rashi hadn't been asked to explain why
Noach was spared (because he repented) then Rashi would not have
commented on this difference. In other words, the only reason
Rashi notices the difference between RAIN and FLOOD is because
Rabbi Ishmael's rules of STYLE require him to do so. Furthermore
and this is most important even if there had been no difference
in the verses (RAIN vs FLOOD) Rashi would still have been
justified in conjecturing that God first brought down Rain and
only when they did not repent, a Flood.

We will try and bring other Rashis in this
Rabbi-Ishmael-Dr-Leibowitz series. Please visit the website
to read the 1st in the series.

RULE USED: EXAMPLE7
---------------------------------------------------
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 25


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