#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (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: Gn43-32a
RASHIS COVERED: Gn43-32a Gn28-11d
RULE
====
There are many verses where
---the >MEANING< of the verse is clear
---the >GRAMMAR< and >SYNTAX< are clear
Nevertheless, Rashis commentaries focuses on
--->MORAL REASONS/LESSONS or INFERENCES< from the verse.
Although the meaning of a verse is clear and unambiguous
nevertheless inferences are countless. We should therefore
regard Rashi as simply teaching us one of the many inferences
and/or reasons. We need not seek anything >BOTHERSOME< in the
verse.
EXAMPLE 1
=========
Perhaps the most famous such Rashi is the Rashi (Ex20-23b) which
explains the Biblical prohibition of having steps in the temple
(All staircases in the Temple had to be ramps).
The verse explains >because if there were steps your nakedness
would be exposed to the staires<
This simply means that the Temple had a high standard of holiness
Rashi comes along and gives a moral inference >If the Torah cared
about the feelings of stones, that they shouldnt be exposed to
human nakedness, how much more so should we care about the
feelings of people and be sensitive not to hurt them<
Now clearly Rashi did >NOT< believe that stones had feelings.
Rather Rashi used metaphors and parables as a vehicle for
moral teaching.
This is the proper method and attitude towards learning these
Rashis. Let us now apply this to a controversy between the
Rashbam and Rashi
EXAMPLE 2
=========
BACKGROUND
----------
The Bible is describing how Jacob camped out for the night.
The Torah says
------------------------------------------------------------------
Gn28-11>He took from the stones of the place &placed by his head<
Gn28-18>He took **1* the stone*2 ***3******* placed by his head<
------------------------------------------------------------------
*1 *2 *3 As the Rashbam notes the meaning of the above 2 verses is
clear: There were many stones where he camped and he took
one to surround his head.
Rashi however states that >the stones of the place fought
with each other: which one would have the merit to
have the Patriarchs Jacobs head on them<
Certainly Rashi does not believe that stones fight with
each other any more than he believes that stones have
feelings!! Rather Rashi is using the differences in
the above two verses to hilight a moral norm: When a
great person comes to a place he should always be
cognizant of the fact that ordinary people (symbolized
by stones) will want to honor him---a great person
should always let as many people as possible honor him.
In summary
---the verse simply means there were many stones & Jacob chose 1
---but the difference in the verses motivates us to sensitivity
on peoples feelings.
---Both Rashi and Rashbam would agree on these two facts. That
is Rashi would agree that Rashbam gave the simple meaning of
the text while Rashbam would agree that Rashi gave a
legitimate moral inference from the text.
---Thus there never was a controversy between Rashi and
Rashbam on this verse!
EXAMPLE 3
=========
Gn43-32 says that >it was disgusting for Egyptians to eat with
Jews<.
Without a commentary I would say that the Egyptians were racist.
Rashi however cites the Aramaic translation that gives a reason
>The Egyptians worshipped Sheep while Jews eat sheep<
(Note that a similar logic is mentioned by Moses in Ex08-22)
Again Rashi teaches us moral values: People dont just hate--
they have reasons for what they do and these should be sought out
{LIST}
The following list of examples of Rashis that teach moral
norms may be found on the Rashi website. Simply visit
http://www.RashiYomi.Com/ and click on the BY-RULE link.
Then go down to the BY-RULE pulldown. Now scroll down till
you see the category >REASONS/IMPLICATIONS< Here are
some sample Rashis
==========================================================
VERSE MORAL LESSON TAUGHT
======== ================================================
Gn36-33a Bad neighborhoods bring bad habits
Gn48-02a Show respect to All Kings, even evil ones
Lv19-34a Don't see your own blemishes in your friends
Nu03-38a It is good to live near Righteous people
Nu07-01b Who gets credit--Worker? or Manager?(Answer:Manager)
Dt04-25a The NEW take risks; the OLD are conservative
Lv20-16a Why are animals punished for their crimes?
Nu35-14a Why were refuge cities unfairly allocated ?
Dt01-03a When is the best time to Rebuke people
Dt24-15a >The worker risks his life< Why?
{END OF LIST}
COMMENTS: [Added December 31, 2000]
=========
We have asserted above that in this verse there is no controversy
between Rashi and Ramban. The following two comments support this
COMMENT 1
---------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Gn28-11>He took from the stones of the place &placed by his head<
Gn28-18>He took **1* the stone*2 ***3******* placed by his head<
------------------------------------------------------------------
One additional way of approaching these two verses is to use
the methods of Rabbi Ishmael. In particular these two verses fit
into the paradigm of >two contradictory verses<.
We have shown 5 methods that are used to resolve contradictions.
A summary with about two dozen examples may be found at URL
http://www.RashiYomi.Com/ri-14.htm.
The second of these methods is to perceive the two verses as two
>STAGES< (ie two different times). So Gn28-11 would speak about
the >MANY< stones that were available for Jacob to select from
>BEFORE< sleeping. Gn28-18 would speak about the >ONE< stone
that Jacob had selected >AFTER< he got up.
This is >EXACTLY< what Rashbam does. It follows that this
approach of Rashbam is consistent the methods of Rabbi Ishmael
which Rashi himself followed. Thus we have support that Rashi
agreed with Rashbams approach
COMMENT 2
---------
The biggest objection I receive to my alleged reconciliations
of controversies is that I am >reinterpreting< verses. Who gives
me the right to do this?
But this also is not a question. We recently completed a whole
series on >MISSING BIBLICAL SENTENCE PARTS<. According to this
principle Biblical verses >ARE< interpreted using common sense,
not grammar. For example Ex10-05 says >And the locusts covered
the covered the ground and THEY could not see the gound<
Grammatically this means that the >LOCUSTS< couldnt see the
ground. Why not add to the miracles of Passover? Why not say
that God gave Orev human like eyes that couldnt see.
The point is that it is logic not grammar that dictates the
meaning of the verse. Thus the real meaning of the verse is
>And the Orev covered the ground and they (PEOPLE) couldnt
see the ground<
In a similar manner on our verse in Genesis. Of course the
verse says that >He took from the stoneS of the place<. But
using logic instead of Grammar we would say >He selected
one stone from many stones<
The complete series on >MISSING SENTENCE PARTS< may be found
at http://www.RashiYomi.Com/miss-6.htm
I hope these two comments lend credibility to the thesis
that Rashi Rashbam and Chazal really agreed on this verse.
RASHI RULE USED: REASONS/IMPLICATIONS
---------------------------------------------------
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 17
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
Volume 8 Number 17