#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (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: Gn41-34a

RASHIS COVERED: Gn41-34a Ex13-18c

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
===============
To Ruth Shain and Harry Rashbaum and anonymous
members of my Shomrey Emunah Rashi class for some very insightful
comments on a difficult Rashi contradiction



RULE
====
The Hebrew root >Chet-Mem-Shin< has a fundamental meaning of
>FIVE<.

{LIST}
The 5 meanings of >Chet-Mem-Shin< (Courtesy of Radack)
======================================================
MEANING    VERSE     TEXT OF VERSE
========   ========  ===========================================
Five       Gn46-02   He took >FIVE< of his brothers
Fifty      2Kn01-09  A General of >50< people
Fifth      Lv05-16   He shall return the theft & a >FIFTH<(fine)
Fifth Rib  2Sam2-23  Avner hit him on the >FIFTH< rib
Armed*1*2  Jos01-14  And you will go armed before your brothers

NOTES
=====
*1 The semantic relation between >FIVE< and >FIFTY<,>FIFTH<
   and >FIFTH RIB< are all clear. Less clear is the relation
   between >FIVE< and >ARMED<.

   The most cogent suggestion is that >ARMED PEOPLE< wear their
   gun-belt around their >FIFTH RIB< (The way McGarrett used to
   do it on Hawaii-5-O). Other suggestions are that the standard
   weapon gear had 5 weapons (like a Swiss army knife).


*2 The word >CHAMUSHIM< occurs in only 4 verses:
        Jos1-14 Jos4-12, Jud7-11, Ex13-18
   Note how in the first 3 cases it clearly means >ARMED<
{END OF LIST}



SIMPLE INTERPRETATION OF VERSES
===============================
* Gn41-34a would be translated
 >Joseph taxed Egyptians 20% to prepare for the 7years of famine<
*Cf a similar 20% tax in Gn47-24
*A 20% bracket is a reasonable bracket for a starving nation


Ex13-18 would be translated >And the Jews left Egypt armed<




THE OTHER VERSE
===============
Rashi however interprets Ex13-18 as >Only a FIFTH of the Jews
left Egypt< since 80% of the Jews died in Egypt. Such massive
deaths at a time of redemption can be normal. For example


{LIST}
Punishments of the Jews frequently resulted in losses over 50%
==============================================================
VERSES      SITUATION OF PUNISHMENT    PERCENT DYING
=========   =======================    ========================
Zach13-07   In the PreMessianic Era    67% of the Jews will die
Isa06-13    In the first exile         90% of the Jews will die
Ex13-18     In the Egyptian Exile      80% of the Jews died
Nu14        Wilderness rebellions      50% of Jews died(all men)
{END OF LIST}

Rashi deviated from the meaning that >CHAMUSHIM< has in
all other verses without exception(See the list above). True,
his suggested interpretation is consistent with the >ROOT<
of the word which means >FIVE<. But this translation
nevertheless differs from the translation of EVERY other
occurence of the word CHAMUSHIM.

The reason Rashi made such a startling deviation is because
of the explicit statement in the previous verse Ex13-17
>And when God took the Jews out of Egypt He avoided Philistine
land since the Jews might regret the redemption if they saw war<

Hence, argues Rashi, if the Jews, a slave people, were so weak
that seeing war would make them regret the redemption then
it certainly would be inconsistent to give them arms!

This is the essence of Rashis argument. And because of it he
interprets Ex13-17 as meaning >That a FIFTH of the Jews left
Egypt<

Here is an analogy that I gave my Shomrey Emunah class:
The statement >Arafat is a MODERATE< would
normally mean that he is a reasonable person. This is the
usual meaning of >MODERATE<. However >IN CONTEXT< the sentence
has a different meaning: It means >Arafat is not as extreme
as Chamas<. Thus this simple example shows us that >CONTEXT<
can override >TYPICAL GRAMMATICAL MEANING<. In a similar manner
although >CHAMUSHIM< means >ARMED< nevertheless in the context
of speaking about a slave people who were afraid of war it
must mean >20%---one fifth<.



SUMMARY
=======
* Gn41-34a is translated >Joseph taxed the Egyptian 20%<
* Ex13-18 is translated >20% of the Jews left Egypt<
*Rashi translates Ex13-18 in this manner because of the >CONTEXT<
 which is talking about a slave people.





COMMENTS
========
COMMENT-1
---------
Harry Rashbaum pointed out that there are levels of fear
where you are afraid of other people but you are not afraid
to bear arms. Hence both interpretations of Ex13-18 would
be admissable: >The Jews left Egypt armed< or >20% of the
Jews left Egypt<. This is consistent with Rashi presenting
both interpretations. (My traditional approach is to
emphasize only Rashis second interpretation).


COMMENT-2
---------
As I already indicated my students found the idea that >CONTEXT<
could override >UNIVERSAL MEANING< strange. For that reason
I came up with the analogy of >Arafat is a Moderate<. The word
>MODERATE< always means reasonable; but in this sentence
>CONTEXT< demands a different interpretation.


COMMENT-3
---------
Ruth Shain of my Shomrey Emunah class suggested the following
ingenious translation to the Rashi on Gn41-34

----------------------------------------------------------------
The aramaic translation translates >CHMSH< as >PREPARE<;
this is similar to the [suggested Aramaic] translation of Ex13-18
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Ruths contribution was to add the bracketed words:
[Suggested Aramaic] by which she suggests that Rashis suggests
that although the Aramaic translation on both these verses
is >PREPARE< nevertheless >Just as I (Rashi) Disagreed with
the Aramaic translation on Ex13-18 and translated it is as 20%
so too do I disagree with the Aramaic translation on this verse
and translate it as 20%<



COMMENT-4(Summary)
---------
Using the above idea of Ruth we have 3 approaches to these two
verses

3 APPROACHES               Ex13-18            Gn41-34
========================== ================== ===================
SIMPLE DICTIONARY APPROACH Jews left ARMED    Joe taxed Egypt 20%
ARAMAIC APPROACH           Jews left PREPARED Joe PREPARED Egypt
Rashis final decision      20% of Jews left   Joe taxed Egypt 20%

This idea of Ruth to view Rashi on Ex13-18 as presenting 3
translations and Rashi on Gn41-34 as presenting 2 translations
makes Rashi consistent.




COMMENT-5 (Simple Meaning vs Midrashic Meaning)
---------
Harry Rashbaum and I have had an ongoing (and lively) discussion
on the difference between the >SIMPLE< meaning and >MIDRASHIC<
meaning in my Shomrey Emunah Rashi class

This posting enables us to discuss the difference.

The >SIMPLE< meaning refers to a meaning of the verse >BY ITSELF<
If I just used the dictionary I would interpret >CHAMUSHIM< as
>ARMED<.

The >MIDRASHIC< meaning is incorrectly translated as >HOMILETIC<
The proper translation of >MIDRASHIC< is >IN CONTEXT<


Let us go back to our analogy of >Arafat is a moderate<. The
simple meaning of the sentence is that Arafat is reasonable.
But that is rediculous. As I once told Ruth Shain only
Schizophrenics interpret sentences >BY THEMSELVES<. The proper
method of interpretation is >IN CONTEXT<. In Context Arafat
is simply less extreme than Chamas. This is both the
Midrashic and the true interpretation of this sentence.




COMMENT-6
---------
Finally one anonymous member of my Shomrey Emunah class brought
up the problem: how we regard each interpretation of Rashi. She
said she was taught that the first explanation of Rashi has
problems which is why Rashi brings a second explanation.

Everyone agrees with this. My approach is that the second
interpretation is final. However the approach of the Lubavitcher
Rebbe may he rest in peace is that there are problems with both
approaches which is why Rashi brings both (instead of just one)
Harry Rashbaum gave a defense of this approach to Rashi above
by noting that some people are afraid of war but not of weapons

Finally I have defended my approach that the second interpretation
is alway final by suggesting that Rashi was empathic with a
beginning student who only used the dictionary. Rashi also wanted
to present the real meaning which is why he gave the 2nd
interpretation

RASHI RULE USED: OTHER VERSES
---------------------------------------------------
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 18


#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
Volume 8 Number 18