*1 Professional version has professionally made tables, use of
   bold, shading as well as inside-outside technology
   Professional version will be available SUNDAY

*1 The actual verse states
   ---------------------------------------------
   I am a GAYR (Alien) and TOSHAV (citizen)
   Please allow me to buy a burial plot with you
   ---------------------------------------------

   Of Course, these words, ALIEN and CITIZEN contradict
   each other.  Thus this verse falls under the domain
   of the Rabbi Ishmael rule of two verses that contradict
   each other (See http://www.RashiYomi.Com/ri-14.htm).

   There are two approaches to resolving the contradiction
   between ALIEN and CITIZEN on this verse Both of them
   look at ALIEN and CITIZEN as two stages of the same
   process

   METHOD 1
   --------
   ALTHOUGH I WAS an alien I AM NOW a CITIZEN with you
   and would therefore like to make purchases of property

   METHOD 2
   --------
   Although I am an alien NOW, I WILL BE a citizen in
   the future since God promised me this plot of land

   Thus METHOD 1 contrasts PAST-PRESENT while METHOD 2
   contrasts PRESENT-FUTURE.

   For the life of me I dont see any reason to call
   one method THE PLAIN MEANING OF THE TEXT and to call
   the other meaning A HOMILETIC INTERPRETATION.!

*2 My calling MY LIFETIME, MY ALIEN LIFETIME, Jacob
   sought to indicate that he was a nomadic shepard
   who never became established.

*3 An amazing grammatical insight. Technically speaking
   GARATH BAYTHAH means
   ----------------------------------
   THE PERSON WHO IS INNING WITH ME.
   ----------------------------------

   But Rashi turns this around and suggests that it really means
   ----------------------------------
   The PERSON WHO I AM INNING WITH
   ----------------------------------

   Rashi was prompted to use this causative translation (the
   person who makes me an ALIEN) vs the simple active
   translation (the person who is alien to me--GARATH BAYTHAH)
   because of the SITUATION -- it is simply a fact that the
   Jews were ALIENS in Egypt and not vice versa. Thus Rashi
   derives meaning based on context not on grammatical form.

   For a similar amazing Rashi that bases meaning on context
   not on grammatical form see url
   http://www.RashiYomi.Com/other-20.htm Scroll down to
   Ex13-18c (Example # 11))

   Thus Rashi here was using the method of OTHER VERSES

*4 We can also connect this with our observation that
   grammatical roots beginning with YUD can frequently
   have the same meaning as their last two letters.
   (See URL http://www.RashiYomi.Com/gn49-10d.htm)
   for a long list of such YUD--NonYud root pairs).
   Thus the root YGR has the same meaning of GR: Fear.

*5 According to the Rav Soloveitchick (who cited the
   Chizkuni) Rashi is basing himself on the distinction
   between
   ------------------------------------
   I INNED (GARTI) by Laban
   ------------------------------------
   versus
   ------------------------------------
   I RESIDED (TOSHAV) by Laban
   ------------------------------------

   The word INNED (alien, Garti) shows a feeling of
   uncomfortableness. But Jacob lived 20 years in town,
   married two local women and had a dozen children!
   Therefore if he uses the term INNED it must mean
   that he felt like an alien because of a culture clash
   Jacob observed Jewish Law while Laban was a scoundrel.

   Note further that Rashi EXPRESSED this idea using
   word play. Rashis exact language is
   -------------------------------------------------
   The word GARTI (INNED) has the same letters as
   TARIG (613) the number of Biblical commandments
   This shows that Jacob observed all 613 commandments
   -------------------------------------------------

   As the Chizkuni and the Rav show, Rashi EXPRESSED
   the idea of culture clash using a word-letter play
   But the REASON for the inference (vs the EXPRESSION
   of that inference) is the distinction between INNED
   and RESIDENT.

   As such, Rashi is using the method of SYNONYMS here.

   I am indebted to Rabbi Dr. Chaiim Soloveitchick for
   pointing out in a private conversation how the
   Chizkuni supports his father.

*6 The actual verse says that
   -----------------------------------------------------
   I (God) will also bring on you all the SICKNESSES of
   Egypt that you were AFRAID(Gayr) of
   -----------------------------------------------------

   Rashi interprets the phrase SICKNESSES OF EGYPT to
   refer not (only) to the sicknesses that Jews acquired
   in Egypt but also to refer to the 10 plagues that God
   brought on the Egyptians --- these 10 plagues were
   the SICKNESSES OF EGYPT.

   Rashi explains that even though the 10 plagues were
   brought on Egypt,nevertheless many Jews thought they
   would be punished with them also. In fact Rashi
   cites an OTHER VERSE proving this (Ex15-26)
   ----------------------------------------------------
   If you will (just) listen to the commandments then
   all the sicknesses that I (just) brought on Egypt
   will not be brought on you
   ----------------------------------------------------

   Rashi points out that this verse was said right after
   the 10 plagues and right after they had seen the
   Egyptians drowning. Rashi adds
   ----------------------------------------------------
   It seems reasonable that God promised NOT to bring
   on them the sicknesses that they were afraid of
   ----------------------------------------------------

   I might also point out that it is consistent with
   holocast literature that survivors (like the
   survivors of the 10 plagues) feel guilty or
   anxiety-ridden that it didnt happen to ME.

   Thus Rashi uses here the technique of OTHER VERSES.
   This technique, supported by psychology, enriches
   our understanding of the Jewish fear by showing that
   they were afraid of God and the 10 plagues.

*1 The SENTENCE is declarative (Only one person has sinned!)
   However it would be a mistake to say that the HEY is
   declarative (since then the sentence would have to read
   ------------------------
   HAIsh HAEchad YeCheTaH.
   ------------------------

   Since it reads
   ------------------------
   HAIsh Echad YeChetah
   ------------------------
   we have to interpret the HEY as an EXTRA LETTER.

   Note that Rashis point still stands: the HEY is
   not interrogative since then it would have to read
   with a PATACH (See the next list in this posting for
   illustrations and verses).

   In summary there are not 2, but 3 approaches to this hey
   --------------------------------------------------------
   * DECLARATIVE HEY: Verse should read HoIsh HAEchad YChTa
   * INTERROGATIVE:   Verse should read HaIsh Echad YChTa
   * EXTRA LETTER:    Verse should read HoIsh Echad YChta
   --------------------------------------------------------

   In summary the
   * SENTENCE is not interrogative
   * SENTENCE is declarative
   * HEY is NOT declarative!

   Rather subtle!

*1 There are futher rules discussing where the EMPHASIS of the
question is placed. Normally the QUESTON EMPHASIS is placed on
the first word of the sentence (as in "IS IT STRONG or WEAK")
However the EMPHASIS may alos be in the second part of the
sentence (eg "Will the ruler of the world NOT DO JUSTICE")

*2 Rashis brilliant method of pedagogy is illustrated here.
Rashi cleverly picks exactly one example for each subrule.
Thus Rashi with a few examples covers all cases while most
textbooks give many more examples but only cover a few rules.

*3 These verses have Rashis. there is no Rashi on Nu13-20 but
Rashi brings this example on Gn27-38.

*4 Compare Job15-8, HVSOD, with "V" not "B" (according to Aleppo).
Rashi brought two examples for case 3b--one was to show the
punctuation on the HAY and the other to show the dagesh on
the B.

*5 This example appears to be in error since MEM is not a BGD KFT
letter. Thus we have to find the rule why certain words beginning
with a shva do not have a dagesh. The rule for the BGD KFT DGSHAH
remains true (No DAGESH).


*6 There are 4 other Rashis discussing use of HAYS. In 2 of them
the QUESTION emphais is on the 2nd half rather than the first
half of the verse (Gn29-15a and Gn18-25d), in one of them we have
an unusual usage of the passive (Gn41-38) while in Gn16-13 Rashi
is explaining the use of the word ALSO (Please see the postings
for full details)