*1 Please see some postings below. Note the new form
   ALso note the new QUESTION and ANSWER FORMAT
   Send in your questions. This is your email list.

*2 See below for posting on subject

*3 Over the next year or so we will be writing modules for
   the 2-4 dozen basic Rashi skill competencies needed for
   learning Rashi. These modules will then be gathered into
   a workbook which can be used at home or in schools In
   the meantime each of these modules is usable in actual
   schools or home-schooling situations.

QUESTION
-----------
Hi.  I think there may be something incorrect on your comment for Gn01-02a on
your first Parsha page.  I'm gentile and my knowledge of the Hebrew language is
very weak, but I noticed that you wrote

that  do NOT occur in any other verses, nor are there
other words from the same root."

However, in Deuteronomy 32:10, the word "uvetohu" which is tohu preceded by a
vav and a beth appears.  I only knew this from reading a commentary at the
University of Utah.  Does this verse give any more insight into tohu and bohu
than bereishis 1:2?

I think you can use this information.

Sincerily,

ANONYMOUS

ANSWER
-------

ANONYMOUS
Hi. Thank you for your inquiry. Allow me to answer it

First: You being a gentile is irrelevant. You're question
is valid and should be answered.

There are in fact a dozen or so verses where EITHER
TOHU or BOHU occur in the bible. THere is even one
verse where the phrase TOHU vAVOHU occurs (Jer4-23)

However the JEREMIAH verse does not differ in content
from the Genesis verse. Both speak about the EARTH
being TOHU VAVOHU. I can infer from both that TOHU
VAVOHU mean some type of desolation but I cannot
infer any further details. The reason I cannot infer
any further details is because the CONTEXT is the
same (the earth is TOHU VAVOHU) in both verses.

It is for this reason that I said there ARE NO OTHER
VERSES...By this I meant there ARE NO OTHER VERSES
WITH DIFFERENT CONTEXTS (WHICH WOULD ALLOW INFERENCE)

Think about it this way....suppose you wanted to know
the meaning of the word RED. You might look up all
verses using RED. If 10 verses had the phrase THE RED
SUNSET you would not count this as 10 occurences but
rather as one.

In other words I count distinctness by the possibility
of INSIGHT AND NOVELTY. Two verses with EARTH IS TOHU
VAVOHOU therefore LOOK the same.

Bottom line: We know TOHU VAVOHU means DESOLATION but
we cannot infer anything else from other verses.

I hope this answers your question (It will be posted
in Rashi is SImple as we encourage questions)

Please feel free to ask further questions.

Thank you

In passing we analyze the phrase SORER AND MOREH
in todays digest. In this case WE CAN infer items
from other verses. Please see
http://www.RashiYomi.com/dt21-18a.htm or
http://www.RashiYomi.com/h15n2.htm

Russell Jay Hendel; Moderator Rashi-is-Simple

*1 Again Mem-Resh-Hey has been translated REBELLION
   Sin-Resh-Hey has been translated as DEVIATE-REBELLION
   Technically both roots are translated as REBELLION
   However the verses show that S-R-H has a connotation
   of DEPARTING from the true path.*10

*2 The full verse is ..WHO GO TO EGYPT WITHOUT ASKING ME
   In other words unlike REBELLION (M-R-H) which consists
   of violating an order DEVIATE-REBELLION (S-R-R) consists
   of violating the good and established path of existing
   customs and laws(In this case they should have consulted
   with God before making a political alliance)

*10 The related root Sin-Resh-Hey means to DEVIATE.
   Technically S-R-H and S-R-R are distinct
   roots one of which means DEPART and one of which
   means REBELLION. Therefore we have emphasized the
   inference from verses (rather than roots) to infer
   that S-R-R has nuances of DEVIATION. This seems to
   be the proper approach

*1 Note how the OTHER-VERSE phrase WISE JUDGES is more explicit
   than the current verse which states WILL JUDGE RIGHTEOUSLY
   (That is since they must judge RIGHTEOUSLY they must have
   the wisdom to judge properly)

*2 In this case the current verse which states explicitly
   PLAcE JUDGES IN ALL CITIES is clearer than the OTHER
   VERSE which simply says that the Judges should be
   KNOWN to YOU

*3 As the next list in this posting shows the word TRIBES
   in Dt16-18 is so to speak extra
   -------------------------------------------------------------
   TYPICAL VERSE  The land which God gives to you
   Dt16-18        The land which God gives to you to your tribes
   -------------------------------------------------------------

   However this extra phrase TO YOUR TRIBES does NOT justify
   reattaching the phrase to another part of the verse
   -------------------------------------------------------------
   Place judges [TO YOUR TRIBES] in the land which God gives you
   -------------------------------------------------------------

   THerefore I derive the TRIBAL REQUIREMENT
   from the explicit verse in Dt01-13 that judges
   should be appointed THAT ARE KNOWN TO YOUR TRIBES. Thus
   indeed Rashi-is-Simple*10

*10 The Leibowitz-Boncheck school explain Rashis by extra words
   Since TO YOUR TRIBES is extra, therefore, they argue,
   Judges must be assigned BOTH by CITY and TRIBE.

   The approach of this email list is different. True, the
   phrase to your tribes is extra but this extraness does
   NOT justify rearranging the verse.

   In other words the EXTRANESS of TO YOUR TRIBES may
   be bothering Rashi but it is NON-INTUITIVE to rearrange
   the verse in response to this EXTRANESS.

   The approach in this email list which we have taken is
   to give an explanation which makes Rashi appear
   SPONTANEOUS and LOGICAL--an other verse says explicitly
   PICK JUDGES WHO ARE KNOWN TO YOUR TRIBES. This derivation
   from an other verse is clear, punchy and to the point.

   As to the literal reading of Rashi (who suggests
   rearranging the verse) I would simply take the same
   approach we have always taken in this list---the
   rearrangement is simply a mnemonic not the real reason
   Indeed, why should we accuse Rashi of overlooking an
   explicit verse which states that Judges should be
   by tribes.

   Thus this Rashi is an excellent illutration of the
   difference in approach between Dr Leibowitz and
   Rabbi Boncheck vs this list.

*1 Hence Gn26-20a "And they BICKERED with him about the ownership"

*2             The Hitpael form means to CHALLENGE (that is to
             BRAG thru interacting with someone else. Here is
             the Rashi).

    Ex08-05a Moses said to Pharoh...'you want the frogs removed
             ...well pick an exact time for their removal and
             if my God doesn't remove them by then you can brag
             how you outsmarted me'

*3  The hitpael form means --ie TO WALK WITH SOMEONE*3
    to FOLLOW HIS WAYS (eg so when used with God it
    means to follow a Godly life--(Rashi further
    distinguished between WALK TO and WALK OF...but
    we have explained this on Gn06-09c)

*4 See Isa12-1,Ps2-12 for verses that show that A-N-F means
   anger

*5 That is, you get picky on everything the
   person does--you allow, the person
   you are angry with, no way out---every attempt at
   apology is met with more anger (So you are
   INTERACTIVELY angry)

*6 The Hitpael form would
   mean to INTERACTIVELY PREPARE---TO PREPARE AS
   A COMMUNITY. Thus on Nu11-18a Rashi says to the
   community, "Prepare yourself for Gods punishment
   for the way you have complained"

   Note that this root can also, besides meaning to
   prepare, can also mean to DESIGNATE (as e.g.
   designating an animal for a sacrifice)

*7 The original meaning of the root
   is to prune grapes from a vine.

   Hence in the Kal Mode it can also mean to HARASS
   To eg continuously bicker away at somebody till
   he gives in.

   The clearest proof of this is Jer6-9 "And they
   will HARASS (Ayin-Lamed-Lamed) away at the Jews
   the way a grape-vine is pruned (Ayin-Lamed-Lamed)"

*8 In the hitpael mode Ayin-Lamed-Lamed would mean
   to interactively harass---I guess the closest
   meaning would be 'to sport' with someone.

   The difference between HARASS and SPORT is that
   in HARASS you just want to eat away at someone.
   By contrast, when you SPORT with someone you
   don't just harass someone but you also provoke
   them into fighting with you.

   Rashi actually brings Lam1-12 and Lam1-22 to
   vs Ex10-02 Jud19-25 Nu22-29a to support this
   distinction. Thus Jud19-25 should be translated
   THEY SPORTED WITH HER ALL NIGHT (vs they HARASSED
   HER ALL NIGHT)

*9             Rashi gives the following example

             eg When a father wishes to bless his son or friend
             he will say 'May you be blessed like Abraham'

             Similarly in Dt29-18a we could interpret it as

             'The person who sins fancies himself as a blessing
             to his people; he thinks he is a leader leading them
             to peace.'

   COMMENT: Note how this intepretation answers the question in
   Rashi on Dt29-28a: The NATION is punished for the deeds of the
   INDIVIDUAL because the NATION INTERACTED WITH him and put up
   with him See a similar theological Rashi on Lv20-05