*1 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.

*1 Actually Rashi only speaks about GOD using the phrase
   GOD OF. But an examination of this list shows that
   the rule applies not only to God but to all DIVINE
   AUTHORITIES (Such as Elijah the prophet and the
   Biblical Authors)

*2 The list clearly shows an anomaly: Why is the phrase GOD OF
   used on ISAAC if he was alive.

   The simplest approach is that because of the Akaydah Isaac
   had reached spiritual perfection and could not sin. Hence
   God used the phrase GOD OF ISAAC in Isaacs life*10

*10 Rashi adds two points to the above explanation
   - Job04-18 God does not even believe in his servants
     nor in his holy ones

     In other words because of mans constant capacity
     to sin God has no trust in Live people

   - Rashi as his traditional approach does not use the
     abstract explanation --- ISAAC WENT THRU THE
     AKAYDAH AND WAS INCAPABLE OF SIN---instead Rashi
     cites Gn26-34--thru--Gn27-01--These verses relate
     how Isaac could tune out evil (Such as his
     daughter-in-laws idolatrous practices)--since
     he could tune out evil he was not subject to
     temptation.  However I would prefer an explanation
     that focuses on the major unifying theme--because
     of the Akaydah Isaac, unlike other righteous
     people became free of sin/temptation.

*1 Thus "whoever see the humiliating Adulterous wife rite"
   will be so shocked that he will abstain from wine

   Similarly "Judah advised his brothers to sell Joseph"
   and so when they regretted it they blaimed him and he
   had to "separate from them."

   Similarly "Sarah died" from the shock that "Abraham
   offered Isaac."

*2 In other words because the snake saw Adam and Eve naked
   therefore he became Jealous and wanted Adam killed so
   he could marry Eve.

   ALthough this sounds a bit wild there is strong supporting
   evidence. Gn04-01 uses the past perfect form
        "And Adam HAD BEEN FAMILIAR with his wife & they had
        a child"
   So the sequence of chapters is
        "Adam was lonely"
        "God makes Eve"
        "Adam and Eve are naked"
        ------------------------"Snake tempts Eve"
        "Adam has a child with Eve"
   Thus the sequence of chapters (Naked--->child) is
   clearly interrupted by the Snake story.

*3 To be technical here are the verses:
   - Gn26-34:35 Esauv takes bad wives which annoy Isaac
   - Gn27-01 Isaac is old and WEAK in sight

   And here are the inferences:
   - The first chapter (ANNOYING WIVES) caused
     the 2nd chapter (EYE WEAKNESS)
   - Rashi discusses the TYPES of EYE WEAKNESS
   --- Maybe the wives worshipped idols and the incense
       made Isaacs physical sight weak OR
   --- More realistically maybe, because they were his
       daughter-in-laws,Isaacs prophetic VISION became
       weak (so he overlooked their flaws)

   This second interpretation (that his prophetic vision
   became weak) is supported by two OTHER VERSES
   -- All of Gn27 deals with how Isaac JUDGED PEOPLE BY
      APPEARANCES not CONTENT. e.g. the Stinging verse

      ------------------------------------------
      But Isaac did not recognize Jacob [merely]
      because his hands were hairy !!(Gn27-23)
      ------------------------------------------

   -- The Bible explicitly states that Isaac identified
      Canaanite wives as of POOR CHARACTER(See Gn27-46
      and Gn28-01:09)

   Thus paradoxically in this case, the interpretation of
   EYE WEAKNESS as LACK OF PROPHETIC INSIGHT seems to be
   the SIMPLE MEANING of the text.

*1 In the merit of our following "Judicial process" we will
   be able to "win wars"

   Similarly after Miryams death there was no water. Thus
   we have that in the merit of "Miryam" the Jews had water


*2 Again a close examination of the BIblical text shows a
   past perfect

        "And God punished Avimelech and his household"
        "And Abraham prayed for Avimelech & his household"
        "But God HAD ALREADY VISITED Sarah with a child"

   In other words Sarah had already had a child.
   The Bible deliberately juxtaposes "sarah having a child"
   with "Abraham praying for Avimelechs household to have a
   child" to teach us
        "That whoever is a kind person and
        prays for others will have their own
        needs met first"

*3 Amalek decided that the death of a righteous person
   would demoralize the people and make winning a war easier

*4 The idea is that one should not seek a wife for ones son
   while one has needs as that makes one vulnerable. People
   who are interested in the son might pressure Abraham to
   marry him for his needs. Therefore the verse emphasizes
   that Abraham had all he needed--he was THEREFORE free to
   select a wife for his son that was compatable with him.*10

*10 Rashi emphasizes the Gematria that BACOL (ALL) equals SON
    It is of course rediculous to assume that Rashi derived
    meaning from such numerical associations (Since there would
    be no consistency in such derivations).

    Rather uses the GEMATRIA, ALL-SON, to emphasize the link
    that only after ones own needs are satisfied should one seek
    a wife for ones son.

    Thus the real derivation comes from the grammatical rule
    of consecutive paragraphs; the gematria is simply a mnemonic

    We have explained other gematrias in Rashi similarly and
    have cited respectable authorities to support our thesis.

*1 On a superficial level Rashi seems to be connecting 2
   verses.

   Avoid idolatry DESPITE your being a slave to a non jew
   (who encourages its violation). Do not think "I will
   worship idols now and when I am free I will go
   back to believing in God" See *10 for a deeper reason

*2 Dt28 gives a long list of curses if the Jews violate
   the commandments.

   Dt29-12 says "You are all STANDING before God today" In
   other words despite the curses for disobediance you are
   still here before God(The implication being that no
   matter how angry God gets he will not destroy you)

   A further support for this theme can come from the
   General-particular-General form

        Dt28    GENERAL:    Curses for disobediance
        Dt29-12 PARTICULAR: You are standing here before God
        Dt29-19 GENERAL:    Curses for disobediance

  Thus the General-Particular-General form shows that Gods
  curses still allow us to "Stand before him"--in other
  words they are educative curses not punitive.


*3 In other words (always) "Observe the Sabbaths"
   DESPITE a request to the contrary "By your parents"

   This can happen if eg your parents ask you to
   desecrate the Sabbath.  You must observe the
   Sabbath even if your parents request to
   the contrary.

   And this can be generalized to all Torah laws(that
   they take precedence over your parents request)


*4 Wear Tzitzith DESPITE the fact that they may have Shaatnez
   Wool and linen together (In the priestly garments made of
   Linen the Tzitzith were made of wool--thus the commandment
   of Tzitzith OVERRIDES the prohibtion of wearing wool and
   linen)

*5 Actually the two verses state as follows
   ----------------------------------------------------------
   We then moved to PEOR [where the Jews sinned with harlots]

   But now Jews [simply] listen to the statutes & commandments
   that I give you this day in order that you shall live
   -----------------------------------------------------------

   Rashi emphasizes that these two verses are linked by contrast
   -----------------------------------------------------
   DESPITE your sins in Peor
   NEVERTHELESS if you simply do Gods word then you will
   earn eternal life
   ------------------------------------------------------

*6 Here is the full Biblical text
   ------------------------------------------------
   Gn23-09 (ABRAHAM) I will pay for a burial plot, full price
   Gn23-11 (EPHRON) NO [No need to pay]
   Gn23-11 (EPHRON) [It is as if] I have given you a gift[Free]
   ------------------------------------------------------------

   There are many ways to explain Rashi: e.g. Rashi explains
   that the word NO means NO-YOU NEED NOT PAY. Similarly
   Rashi explains that the Biblical phrase I HAVE GIVEN YOU
   THE FIELD means IT IS AS IF I HAVE GIVEN YOU THE FIELD

   These explanations are in fact indicated by the filled in
   bracketed phrases [].

   However the primary emphasis in Rashi is that Rashi fills in
   these phrases IN ORDER TO MAKE THE CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES
   FLOW SMOOTHLY. This appears to be the best way to approach
   this Rashi.

*7 That is the verse WHEN JACOB SAW RACHEL HE ROLLED THE ROCK
   has to be CONTRASTED with the previous paragraph that
   normally a whole collection of shepards were needed to
   roll the rock. This contrast shows Jacobs love for Rachel

*10

   On a profound level Rashi sees a unifying theme to this
   whole chapter. The chapter encourages observing the
   shimitah laws which encourage abstaining from agriculture
   once every 7 years so that people can devote themselves
   to God and study. If one violates these laws he is
   progressively punished. Here is the sequence of
   punishments

   {LIST} {Paragraphs in BEHAR}
   -------------------------------------------------------
   VERSE        LAW
   -----------  ------------------------------------------
   Lv25-01:12   Observe the 7 and 50 year Land sabbaticals
   Lv25-13:24   If not you will have to sell your MOVABLES
   Lv25-25:28   If not you will have to sell your LAND
   Lv25-29:34   If not you will have to sell your HOUSE
   Lv25-35:38   If not you will have to           LOAN
   Lv25-39:46   If not you will have to become a  SLAVE
   Lv25-47:54   If not you'll become a  NONJEWISH SLAVE
   Lv26-01:03   If not you'll be tempted to    IDOLATRY
   -------------------------------------------------------


   Thus Rashi does not merely teach juxtaposition of verses
   but he also teaches juxtaposition of ALL paragraphs in
   the chapter. As such this example would belong to the
   next category

*1 Rashi only comments on these paragraphs. But clearly
   the unifying theme of Moses departing applies to all

*1 Perhaps better
   - The Jerusalem Wall had PRESS points - Neh01-03
   - The foetus PRESSED out              - Gn38-29
   - Lest Gods anger PRESS OUT ON THEM   - Ex19-24

*2 Perhaps better
   - The Jews multiplied and PRESS FORWARD   Ex01-12
   - You will PRESS OUTWARD in all directions Gn28-14

*1 The next 5 elements in the list form one whole section,
   Ex33-07:11. Rashi points out use of the subjunctive in
   several of the verbs.


*2  Rashi points out that there wasnt just one war where
    Esauv won this territory. Like many conquests the
    war lasted over a period and was probably still ongoing
    at the time of the Bible. Hence instead of saying
    ESAUV INHERITS IT (PRESENT TENSE)  the Bible says
    ESAUV (WILL) INHERIT it ((FUTURE for PRESENT) since
    the PRESENT activity of INHERITANCE is continuing into
    the future. Thus this example illustrats not the
    SUBJUNCTIVE but rather  ONGOING activity.

*3 --------OPENING THE WELL
   is denoted by the Biblical phrase of
   --------ROLLING the (covering) stone (for the well);

   --------CLOSING THE WELL
   is denoted by the Biblical phrase of
   --------RETURNING the stone

*4 Rashi is making a comment here about the beginning and ending
   of a compound IF statements. Here is Gn29-03
   - WHEN they gathered all the flocks
   - THEN they WOULD
   ---- OPEN the well
   ---- WATER the flock
   -----and CLOSE the WELL

*10 Rashis actual language is that
    -----------------------------------------------
    These PAST/FUTURE verbs denote a PRESENT tense
    -----------------------------------------------
    But that is because Rashi had no words for SUBJUNCTIVE
    or ONGOING activity. So Rashi used the word PRESENT to
    indicate SUBJUNCTIVE or ONGOINGness.


*11 Rashis actual language is:
    --------------------
   THIS  IS A COMMAND
   --------------------

   This seems to be an error since the verse is translated
   as FUTURE(not COMMAND)
   -----------------------
   THEY WILL ALWAYS JUDGE
   -----------------------

   Alternatively the verse can be translated as SUBJUNCTIVE
   -----------------------------------------
   They WOULD JUDGE the nation continuously
   leaving you the hard cases
   -----------------------------------------

*12 Rashi makes 2 points here. First Rashi explains that
   the text is SUBJUNCTIVE (God WOULD speak to Moses)

   Rashi also explains 2 forms of the root to SPEAK
   - SPEAK WITH means a Dialogue between 2 people
   - SPEAK OF means only 1 person does the speaking TO the other

   In this posting we focus on the SUBJUNCTIVE.
   In a future posting we will focus on the two USAGES of SPEAK

*13 Rashi cites a Midrash which SEEMS to interpret the verse
   literally as future
   -------------------------------------------
   God told Moses: Go back to the camp and pray
   for the Jews. Indeed, we are both angry over
   construction of the golden calf. If we both
   remain angry then who will pray for them.
   Therefore YOU go back and pray for them
   -------------------------------------------

   But neither Rashi nor the Midrash could possibly have
   meant to interpret this verse as FUTURE vs SUBJUNCTIVE
   Indeed the whole section, Ex33-07:11 is written in
   the SUBJUNCTIVE as the above LIST shows. Furthemore as
   the above LIST shows this is normal Biblical style.

   The crucial point is that the Midrash is NOT
   commenting on the verb form! Rather the Midrash is
   SUPPLYING A REASON: Why, after talking with God,
   would Moses always return to the camp.

   The Midrash notes so to speak that Moses was angel and human.
   If Moses would stay, as Angel--so to speak on Gods side--then
   the Jewish people would be left without advocate. Therefore,
   Moses would always RETURN TO CAMP--to the HUMAN aspect of
   him. This would enable Moses to pray for
   the Jewish people who needed his support.

   In summary Rashi presents two ideas
   -- a GRAMMATICAL idea: The verse uses the SUBJUNCTIVE
      It should be translated as GOD WOULD SPEAK TO MOSES

   -- a MORAL motif: Moses staying with God was always
      temporary to enable him to go back to the people
      and pray for them.


*14 Note that many other verbs in this section are also
   subjunctive. Rashi frequently used workbook methdods:
   That is, he commented on one example and let the reader
   fill in the rest. We could translate Ex18-22:24 as follows
   ----------------------------------------------------------
   Now, you WILL see/select from the nation good people
   -so that YOU WOULD appoint them as judges over the nation
   -so that they WOULD Judge the nation continuously,
   -the big cases they WOULD bring to you
   -and they WOULD Judge all minor cases
   -If you WILL do this and
   -God WOULD COMMAND you
   -then you WOULD be able to withstand the burden
   -and the entire nation WOULD ARRIVE safely at its destination.
   -------------------------------------------------------------