Rashi-Is-Simple Mailing List
(C) Dr Russell Jay Hendel, 1999
Http://www.Shamash.Org/Rashi
Volume 1 Number 17
Prodcued Mar, 12 1999
Topics Discussed in This Issue
------------------------------
v0312-Administrivia
v2a25-2 VERB+FOR ME = ACTIVITY done PERSONALLY
v2a32-13 No "problem in verse"; Rashi simply gives nuances.
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
v0312-Administrivia
*** ARCHIVES UPDATED*****
The Rashi Is Simple archives are now COMPLETE. Volume 1,
Numbers 1-17 are
all there.
You can download them by going to
URL: http://www.shamash.org/ListArchives/Rashi-Is-Simple
You can also download them by going to
URL: Http://www.shamash.org/Rashi
Although these are HTML files they contain ONLY 2 LINES OF HTML
at the beginning and end and can be erased.
My next major project will be to go back and rewrite the FORM of
volume 1 numbers 1-15 so that it conforms to the new improved form
we just started (visually
explanations up front; lists in back
lists use wrap around so they can be read as English sentences
lengthy and technical parts are CLEARLY indicated as such
so that the reader may skip them at their leisure
IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE:
In this posting we give a good example of
how Rashi dealt with a whole chapter
of Midrash Rabbah. We also show how
Rashi does NOT have to start with
WHAT IS BOTHERING RASHI or WHAT IS THE PROBLEM
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v2a25-2 And take a donation FOR ME
------
RASHI TEXT:
----------
* Take FOR ME = A DONATION (vs say a TAX or GIFT)
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
----------------------------------------
* RULE: Every VERB can be made PERSONAL by adding FOR ME.
As {LIST1} below shows certain verb pairs
differ in that one is more personal.
Thus CHATTING is TALKING in a more personal manner. Similarly a
PERSONAL TRIP is more personal than a BUSINESS trip. Similarly a
DONATION is more personal than say a TAX or admissions fee (e.g.
when you go to a museum you give a suggested donation vs an
admission fee..the difference is one of tone...it is more personal)
If the verse had said "Take for me" it would denote a TEMPLE TAX.
Indeed, we do find a flat temple tax of 1/2 a Shekel (2-30-11).
In Chap 25 by contrast there is an emphasis on the VOLUNTARY nature
of the gift. In fact besides explaining the phrase FOR ME in the
verse Rashi was undoubtedly looking at the TYPES of gifts made for
the temple...some were voluntary and some were taxes. {LIST2}
summarizes the 3 types of temple taxes.
Hence it wasn't a TAX (which is collected by force).It
also wasn't a gift (which you volunteer to give). It rather was a
donation (A requested gift!!!). {LIST3} summarizes these nuances.
Finally {LIST4} is a very nice example of 8 verbs of talking, 3
of which mean chatting and 5 which are impersonal and business
like. Thus when Jacob said "My brothers; where do you come from"
he was being personal. Hence the "said to them"="chatting".
By contrast when the shepards replied "We're from CHARAN" they
were giving the bare minimum of speech and just talking (1-29-4..)
In summary Rashi simply wanted to emphasize that there was a
personal element in the building of the temple. We also see this in
2-35).
{LIST5} gives a modest list of VERBS+FOR ME which are explained
by Rashis in this way.
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
------------------------
*
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
----------------------------------------------------------
* {LIST1} {Of verb pairs where one is more personal}
VERB1 VERB2 COMMON DENOMINATOR DIFFERENCE
----- ----- ------------------ ----------
Talk Chat Communication Personal
Personal trip Business trip Trip Personal
Tax Donation Requested giving Personal
* {LIST2} {Of donations used in making the temple}
DONATION FUNCTION AMOUNT PERSONAL / TAX
----------------- ------ --------------
Silver sockets for walls 1/2 Shekel Flat Tax
Animals for sacrifices 1/2 Shekel Flat Tax
Maintenance/Repairs/Build Voluntary Donation
COMMENT:
--------
So besides commenting on the FOR ME Rashi had to point out that
the BUILDING-REPAIR-MAINTENANCE money was UNLIKE the other two
donations and voluntary.
* {LIST3} {TYPES OF TRANSFERS OF PROPERTY}
TERM REQUESTED DO YOU WANT TO GIVE
---- --------- -------------------
TAX YES NO
GIFT NO YES
DONATION YES YES
THEFT NO NO
* {LIST4} {The 8 communications between Jacob & Shepards (1-29-4..}
VERSE SPEAKER STATEMENT PERSONAL ELEMENT
----- ------- --------- --------------------
1-29-4 Jacob Brothers,where are you from Personal-Brothers
1-29-4 Shepard We're from Charan
1-29-5 Jacob Do you know Laban Personal-Common frnd
1-29-5 Shpards We know
1-29-6 Jacob How is he? Personal greeting
1-29-6 Shpards Fine! Here is his daughter*
1-29-7 Jacob Techincal--when to water*
1-29-8 Shpards Technical--when to water*
NOTES:
------
* Why isn't this statement of the Shepards "Here is his daughter"
considered personal. Also why did Jacob start talking business
like after this (Technical mumbo jumbo about when to water
sheep).
It would appear to me that there is a hidden nuance in the
Shepard comment of 1-29-6 "Oh...You probably are visiting to
get some girls...well here is his daughter if that is what
you want".
In other words it was said cynically.
At this cue Jacob stopped acting personal...he was caught so to
speak seeking a girl...so he started acting professional and
business like and stopped his personal chatty approach.
Again we would suggest translating HE SAID TO THEM as CHATTING
TO THEM while the others would be translated as talking.
I am surprised that major commentators like Rashi did not pick
up these glaring discrepancies between these 8 communications.
Despite some of the subtleties after reviewing the list the
reader should have a "Feel" for the nuance of "FOR ME".
* {LIST5} {Modest list of Rashis on FOR ME}
VERSE VERB CONCEPT? STATEMENT
----- ---- --------- ---------
2-25-2 Take DONATION vs TAX Donation for temple
2-25-8 Build HOUSE vs BUILDING Make a house for me
2-18-27 Trip PERSONAL vs BUSINESS Went for personal reasons*
4-13-2 Send SPIES vs SURVEYORS Send spies to scout land
NOTES:
-----
* Rashi says he went to convert his family
CROSS REFERENCES:
----------------
*
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
----------------
*
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
--------------------------------------------------------------
* VERB+PREPOSITION
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v2a32-13 Remember (the Jews) for the sake of the Patriarchs
------
RASHI TEXT:
----------
* The Jews rebelled 10 times but Abraham was tested 10 times.
Therefore for his sake forgive them.
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
----------------------------------------
ABSRACT: If a person brought home 10 roses for his wife on his 10th
anniversary then while we would all understand the MEANING of what
he did we would nevertheless not fully APPRECIATE its NUANCES. If
we were told that he compared her to a rose all the time then the
appreciation of the gift would be enhanced. So too Rashi here is
not bothered by anything but wishes to ENHANCE the APPRECIATION
of nuances in the text. He does this by citing the 1st of a whole
chapter (44 in Shmoth Rabbah) of such attempts listed in the Midrsh
Rashi encouraged workbook methods and wanted students to follow suit
and try and develop their own methods. (It should be clear that
Rashi did not really attach much significance to the example he
picked since he asked God to forgive the 10 sins of the Jews for
the sake of the 10 tests of Abraham...BUT THE JEWS HADN"T YET DONE
THE 10 SINS...THIS WAS THE BEGINNING OF THEIR JOURNEY..HENCE AS I
SAID RASHI JUST PICKED THE 1st of MANY BRAITHOTH TO ADVOCATE
WORKBOOK METHODS that others should attempt to learn).
[FOR THOSE WHO JUST WANT A SHORT EXPLANATION THE ABOVE WILL SUFFICE
* Several important points emerge in the analysis of this Rashi
First: There is no "problem in the verse". Rashi is "not bothered
by anything." The verse is perfectly normal---"Remember the
Patriarchs whom you swore to multiply the Jewish people...(and
hence forgive them)." The meaning of the verse is clear.
Second: Although the MEANING of the verse is clear its APPRECIATION
can be enhanced. An analogy will help. Suppose a father tells his
son to buy some milk at the local grocery. Then we BOTH UNDERSTAND
the fathers request and we also APPRECIATE it---we have all either
asked or been asked to such things and we can be empathic with the
request. Hence, there is no need to comment on it.
BUT: Suppose a husband brings home his wife a bouquet of 10 roses
on his 10th aniversay. We PERFECTLY understand what the husband
did. But we may not fully APPRECIATE it. To fully appreciate it
various peopl might make comments:
* Oh..it was 10 roses because it was his 10th aniversary
* Oh..it was roses because he proposed with roses
* Oh..it was roses because he always compares her to a rose
The purpose of such comparisons is NOT to explain the MEANING of
the incident but rather to enhance its APPRECIATION. Our
perception of the anniversary gift DEEPENS if we bring these
facts.
In summary certain comments are NOT to give MEANING to but to
enrich APPRECIATION of nuances. They do not fall into the classical
quartic classification of PESHAT, DERASH, REMEZ, SOD.
Similarly with this verse. It is clear what Moses is doing in his
prayer---he is using the concept of "merits of the ancestors" in
his petition. Rashi simply wanted to enhance our APPRECIATION.
Third: Before proceeding to explain what Rashi did, we take light
notice of the fact that according to our ROOT+PREPOSITION principle
* TCR ETH = REMEMBER
* TCR L = REMEMBER FOR THE SAKE OF
Nevertheless this is not Rashi's point and I have not developed any
lists for this. (For the simple meaning of the verse is that Moses
is asking God to REMEMBER the Jews for the SAKE of the Patriarchs.
Fourth: In summary we have so far mentioned 3 things:
* There is nothing wrong with the verse
Nothing is bothering Rashi
* Rashi is not trying to explain MEANING
Rashi is trying to give APPRECIATION to NUANCES
* There is support for this in the verses
REMEMBER FOR
Fifth: We must now explain Rashi. Rashi says that Moses argued
that the 10 tests of Abraham corresponded to the 10 rebellions
of the Jews. There are TWO approaches to this.
LITERAL APPRAOCH: This is what Rashi believed. He believed that
the MAIN thrust of Moses argument was to make the above 10 to 10
trade. Or equivalantly, EVEN if Rashi encouraged the APPRECIATION
of nuances nevertheless the above is the best argument.
WORKBOOK APPROACH: Rashi did NOT believe what he wrote AT ALL.
He simply took it as an example. Rather he brought it to ENCOURAGE
the EXERCISE of NUANCE analysis.
So when I conduct a Chumash class I treat verses like this as
follows: I ask everyone to come up with their OWN nuances. The
students usually find this a good exercise to appreciate the verse.
Furthermore even a small class will usually come up with some
interesting associations.
Getting back to Rashi, which will it be: Was he advocated WORKBOOKS
or was he advocating LITERAL or BEST NUANCES.
Surprisingly I have strong evidence AGAINST the LITERAL approach
and therefore I advocate the workbook approach.
How can I be so sure? Because THE JEWS HAD NOT YET REBELLED AGAINST
GOD 10 TIMES. This was THE BEGINNING OF THE 40 YEARS. It would look
very peculiar if on their 1st sin Moses prays: "Well Look God not
only should you forgive them for this sin but you should forgive
them for their next 8-9 sins because their 10 sins correspond to
his 10 tests"
You don't ask forgiveness based on the fact that you will do the
crime again.
Furthermore an even more GLARING REFUTATION of the LITERAL APPROACH
is the fact that God did NOT forgive them for their 10 sins. Indeed
it says EXPLICITLY in 4-14-22 that God would NOT forgive them for
their 10 sins while it says here in 2-32-14 that God DID forgive
them.
So Rashi couldn't have possibly believed that Moses prayed for
this since
* their other 8-9 sins had not yet happened
* they were not forgiven for their 10 sins.
I think this totally destroys the literal approach---Rashi could
not POSSIBLY have believed that this was the main thrust of
Abrahams argument. He also couldn't have possibly believed
that this was the best argument.
So Rashi gave this nuance---10 tests for 10 sins---to simply
encourage people to make associations (Between the Patriarchs
and the prayer) so as enhance nuance appreciation of the verse.
Still--why did Rashi pick such a bad example?
The answer lies in WHERE he obtained the example. Chapter 44 of
Midrash Rabbah is SOLELY devoted to explaining nuances of this
verse. There are 10 Braitoth. Rashi picked the Braithah 4 which
is the FIRST BRAITHAH that connects the PRAYER SPECIFICALLY TO
THE AVOTH.
Since we have advocated NUANCE appreciation I will now bring
a short summary of these 10 BAITHOTH.
{The 10 Braitoth--Why mention Patriarchs in prayer-SR 44}
BRAITHAH IDEA
-------- ----
1 Ps 80-9 "You have saved a grape vine from Egypt"
Just as the LIVE grape vine sustains itself on
the DEAD wood so do the LIVING sustain themselves
in their prayers by referring to the righteous
who are DEAD
2 Ecc-4-2 "And I praised the dead from the living"
This teaches that in prayer it is preferable to
refer to the dead over the living
3 Prv-11-21 "Hand to hand they will not get away
with it". Thru a clever a pun ("Hand"=YD can
also mean MYD = "Immediately") the Midrash
suggests that one should not ask for reward
for his good deeds immediately (That way his
descendants can use them for atonement)
NOTICE HOW THE FIRST 3 BRAITHAHS DO NOT DEAL WITH THE PATRIARCHS
4 Abraham passed 10 tests. The Jews sinned 10
times. Forgive them for Abrahams sake.
5 Moses cited the 3 patriarchs corresponding to
the possible punishments that God wanted to
give. If God wanted to give
PATRIARCH INCIDENT PATRIARCH DEATH BY
------------- --------- --------
Thrown into furnace Abraham Fire
Offered as sacrifice Isaac Sword
Exile to Egypt Jacob Exile
So remembering the Patriarchs and what they went
thru would enable God to forgive the Jews
6 Moses argued that when the Patriarchs are
resurrected they will ask where all the children
God promised them are. Hence God should forgive
them
7 Just as Abraham wanted to spare SDOM if 10
righteous people could be found so too Moses wanted
the Jews spared if 10 people could be found:
The 10 people are:
Moses
Aaron Elazare EiThaMar Pinchas
Joshua Calev
Abraham Isaac Jacob
8 Chazal counted 5 expressions of wrath:
AF CHAYMAH KETZEFH HSMD SCT
Moses then suggested 5 personalities to offset
these expressions of wrath:
God Moses Abraham Isaac Jacob
9 Moses argued that God remembers Good deeds for
1000 generations and it had only been 7 since
the Patriarchs lived
10 Moses argued that God swore by HIMSELF (in contrast
to heaven and earth) and therefore the oath was
eternal--the oath he took to the Patriarchs was that
he would multiply them like the stars of heaven
As can be seen there is RICH array of suggestions for the
association between the Patriarchs and Moses Prayer. Some of these
association are quite clear and detailed (e.g. the relation between
suffering, 3 modes of death, and the 3 death sentences that the
Patriarchs survived.)
Again we mention our opinion that
* Rashi chose the 1st of the Braithoth that mentions
the patriarchs
* He couldn't have seriously believed this braithah
since you wouldn't ask God to forgive the
Jews because of the sins they had not yet
made for the sake of the 10 tests of Abraham
and besides God did not forgive them after
they had made the 10 tests
* Rashi advocated workbook methods and wanted everyone
to try and guess associations themselves.
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
------------------------
* Again we emphasize that some popular approaches to Rashi begin
with "What is bothering Rashi" or "what is the problem in the
verse".
There is NO problem in the verse and nothing is bothering Rashi.
Rather he just wanted to help us appreciate nuances.\
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
----------------------------------------------------------
*
{The 10 Braitoth--Why mention Patriarchs in prayer-SR 44}
BRAITHAH IDEA
-------- ----
1 Ps 80-9 "You have saved a grape vine from Egypt"
Just as the LIVE grape vine sustains itself on
the DEAD wood so do the LIVING sustain themselves
in their prayers by referring to the righteous
who are DEAD
2 Ecc-4-2 "And I praised the dead from the living"
This teaches that in prayer it is preferable to
refer to the dead over the living
3 Prv-11-21 "Hand to hand they will not get away
with it". Thru a clever a pun ("Hand"=YD can
also mean MYD = "Immediately") the Midrash
suggests that one should not ask for reward
for his good deeds immediately (That way his
descendants can use them for atonement)
NOTICE HOW THE FIRST 3 BRAITHAHS DO NOT DEAL WITH THE PATRIARCHS
4 Abraham passed 10 tests. The Jews sinned 10
times. Forgive them for Abrahams sake.
5 Moses cited the 3 patriarchs corresponding to
the possible punishments that God wanted to
give. If God wanted to give
PATRIARCH INCIDENT PATRIARCH DEATH BY
------------- --------- --------
Thrown into furnace Abraham Fire
Offered as sacrifice Isaac Sword
Exile to Egypt Jacob Exile
So remembering the Patriarchs and what they went
thru would enable God to forgive the Jews
6 Moses argued that when the Patriarchs are
resurrected they will ask where all the children
God promised them are. Hence God should forgive
them
7 Just as Abraham wanted to spare SDOM if 10
righteous people could be found so too Moses wanted
the Jews spared if 10 people could be found:
The 10 people are:
Moses
Aaron Elazare EiThaMar Pinchas
Joshua Calev
Abraham Isaac Jacob
8 Chazal counted 5 expressions of wrath:
AF CHAYMAH KETZEFH HSMD SCT
Moses then suggested 5 personalities to offset
these expressions of wrath:
God Moses Abraham Isaac Jacob
9 Moses argued that God remembers Good deeds for
1000 generations and it had only been 7 since
the Patriarchs lived
10 Moses argued that God swore by HIMSELF (in contrast
to heaven and earth) and therefore the oath was
eternal--the oath he took to the Patriarchs was that
he would multiply them like the stars of heaven
CROSS REFERENCES:
----------------
* Shmoth Rabbah 44
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
----------------
*
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
--------------------------------------------------------------
* MORAL REASONS
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*