*10 The explanation of the list should be clear
- The first column gives the NUMBER of the RASHI RULE used
All Rashi rules may be found with examples at
http://wwww.Rashiyomi.com/workbook.htm

- The second column gives the LIST ID (eg LIST210z) which
contains many examples of a particular Rashi technique and
includes the example presented in the third column

- The third column gives a lightning summary of the Rashi
with particular emphasis on the Rashi rule used. Thus
if all you see in the 3rd column is
------------------------------------
Aaron BLESSED=THE PRIESTLY BLESSING
------------------------------------
This means that
-- the verse states that Aaron BLESSED
-- but an OTHER VERSE indicates which BLESSING
Aaron gave (He gave the Priestly Blessing)

If the reader is now curious (s)he can review LIST210z
which shows many other examples of the OTHER VERSE method.

*1 Lv11-10a

*10 The method of interpreting this table should be
clear. The root GLH means to UNCOVER. The root
ShGL means a STRIPPER. We perceive the etymology
of STRIPPER(shgl) as--THAT(=shin) UNCOVERS(=glh)
Here the word THAT is used in the sense of A
PARTICULARLY GOOD EXAMPLE. The other examples in
this list should be clear.

*1 There are two approaches to 4 letter roots. Sometimes we
try and see them as 2 two letter roots and sometimes we try
and see them as a 3 letter root with an extra letter. Thus
ASTR is explained in the Talmud as ASR. Rav Hirsch stuck to
the 3 letter approach even in obvious cases--thus he takes
MMZR from MZR a rare word in Job.

Similarly Rashi cites a controversy on AVRAYCH:
-- A double 2 letter approach would yield:
AVRAYCH=Gentle(Rc) Father(Av)
-- A 3 letter approach would yield:
AVRAYCH=Kneel (Brch) to me (Aleph)


*2 Note the poetic lisence in e.g.
SRAF =  BIRD(AF) POT (SiR)= Something for Bird nests
This type of small poetic lisence is common in etymologies
and makes their study difficult

*3  Note the finer nuances in some translations. For example ZLAF
occurs rarely in TNACH and its meaning is inferred from its
context. The RDQ in his book of ROOTS says its meaning is SOME
TYPE OF FRIGHT....this could go well with the verse cited by
RDK: "fright has overtaken me"

But perhaps a BETTER translation is
feeling worthless and tired So that the verse with
ZLAF would mean WORTHLESSNESS & FATIGUE HAS OVERTAKEN ME
Then again perhaps there is no way to see which translation
is better

*4 Rashi Gn41-43b

*5 Rashi Gn41-45

*6 Rashi Gn49-12a

*7 The following may help:
- PRCh means to FLY; in connection with fish it could
refer to swimming throughout the water

- SN can mean THORNBUSH or BRANCHES (Songs07-09). I
therefore suggest it means SHRUB like.

So SN-PR would refer to SHRUB-LIKE(SN) protrusions by
which a fish FLYES (PR) - SNPR.

*1 The 2 Rashis on Gn25-29a Gn25-29b both describe
property disputes on the wells, Hence the two roots
- Ayin-Shin-Kaph=Withold wages
- Ayin-Sin-Kaph=dispute


*2 Biblical money has the following analogy with English
------------------------------
Penny    = Perutah
Quarter  = Kesitah = 1/6 Dinar
Dollar   = Dinar
5 Dollar = Selah = 4 Dinar
------------------------------
We of course use poetic lisence to translate Kesitah as
a Quarter (since it really is a sixth)

*3 This is an example of naming by APPEARANCE
See LIST810b for further examples

*1 Rashi supplements this explanation by
citing verses where RKA means to
FLATTEN OUT(eg Isa42-05,P136-07,
2S22-43, Ez06-11,Ex39-03, Nu17-04,
Jr10-09--in all these verses RKA
means to flatten out/crush)

*2 Perhaps the punchiest example is the following
- PENTAGON - named by form
- U.N. ----- named by function

*3 - STATURE is an attribute of HUMANS
- HEIGHT is an attribute of OBJECTS

*1 Ex13-20 Jews journeyed from Succoth after Exodus
Ex12-27 Exodus: Jews go from Raamsayth to Succoth
Nu33-05 Exodus, Then Raamsayth, THen Succoth

The point is that Nu33-05 makes it clear that
there were 3 places
- Exodus FROM Egypt
- TO Raamsayth
- TO Succoth.

Ex13-20 only mentions 2 of the places
Ex12-27 makes it sound like they left EGYPT, ie
they left RAAMSAYTH.

It is in fact common for places to have multiple
names. So Nu33-05 illumines that there were 3
distinct places

*2 Also see Ex30-11:16 which prohibits DIRECTLY
counting people. Instead, we must count the
COINS of each person and from this infer
the total count.

*3 Nu17-05 further illumines by calling it a MEMORIAL
Thus we have SYMBOL MEMORIAL BANNER.

Since NAYS means BANNER it refers to anything
that ATTRACTS attention such as SYMBOLS or
MIRACLES

*4 In this example the Hebrew word TaMid can mean
either CONTINUAL or CONTINUOUS depending on context.

*1 The preceding chapter and paragraphs speak about the
requirement to observe the law

*2 The actual verse Lv09-15 states
-------------------------------------------
Make the nation sin offering LIKE THE FIRST
-------------------------------------------

By referring to Lv09-08 we learn that the phrase
LIKE THE FIRST means LIKE THE FIRST SIN OFFERING --
THE ONE OFFERED FOR THE PRIEST (Since there were
2 sin offerings--one for the PRIEST and one for
the NATION)

*1 Rashi states the following: "If MOTHERS make mistakes it
is because they raise children; if SINGLE women make
mistakes it is because they try to pick people up"
Rashi should be perceived as giving ILLUSTRATIONS of
why being without children is disgraceful for women

*2 Jacob did not NEED permission to leave with HIS wife
But his father-in-law would perceive it as STEALING
his daughter.

*3 Gn27-41 states that Esauv hated Jacob for stealing the
blessing. Gn27-44 states that after a few years this
hatred would subside. Hence Gn33-09 with its statement
I DONT NEED YOUR MONEY confirms these other 2 verses.

*4 Rashi is NOT commenting on the MERE coincidence that
Shimon and Levi are called BROTHERS in two places.
-Gn49-05 talks about Shimon and Levi KILLING and
PLUNDERING
-Gn34 also talks about SHIMON and Levi KILLING
and plundering.
Thus the cross reference is clear. The accident
that they are called BROTHERS in both places
simply spices up the correspondence.

*5 There are many verses which explicitly confirm
Lv06-05b - that the DAILY UP OFFERING must be
the first offering of the day and the last (any
other offerings must be offered strictly inbetween
them). Here is a partial list of verses where this
principle is enunciated
Nu28-15,23,24,31 Nu29-06,11,16,22,25...Lv03-05*10

*10 Lv06-05b only speaks about THE UP..but in light
of these other verses the word THE clearly refers
to the DAILY UP.

Rashi(following the Talmud) further declares
--------------------------------------------
We also derive from this verse (Lv06-05b) That:
Just as no offering can be offered BEFORE
the DAILY UP (the DAILY UP must be the FIRST)
so no offering can be offered AFTER the
EVENING DAILY UP (the EVENING DAILY UP must
be the LAST).
--------------------------------------------

My own opinion is that Rashi simply indicates
a derivation by analogical logic (not by
verse derivation). In other words since all
the other verses state
----------------------------------------
this offering must be offered AFTER (AL)
the MORNING DAILY UP
----------------------------------------
we infer (by LOGIC, not by VERSE) that
the EVENING DAILY UP should have a similar
status (no offering offered AFTER)