*1 Is54-09 speaks about the OATH not to repeat the flood. However
we find no OATH not to repeat the flood but we do find a
REPEATED PROMISE (I WILL NOT I WILL NOT). We infer that a
REPEATED PROMISE is equivalant to an oath

*2 Rashi also makes a point that the PAST tense is used here
to indicate a PRESENT activity. This list will be analyzed
in another digest. Right now we are only concerned with
the synonyms for OATH

*3 Rashi-s literal language is
---------------------------------------------
Because of the oath I took to the Patriarchs
therefore I will redeem the Jews
---------------------------------------------

But we have interpreted it to mean
---------------------------------------------
Because of the oath I took to the Patriarchs
therefore I will SWEAR again to redeem the Jews
---------------------------------------------

This translation is consistent with Rashis translation
of THEREFORE as an OATH in Nu20-12c.

*4 Rashi gives more details on this oath and connects it
to Moses prayer. But Rashis basic idea is that I GOD AM ALIVE
is an oath.

*1 Nu16-32 and Nu16-33 together imply that KORACH AND ALL FOLLOWING
HIM DIED ALIVE BY FIRE AND EARTHQUAKE This contradicts Nu26-11
that the sons of Korach did not die

Note that Psalms 45-49 were written by the SONS OF KORACH
showing that they repented

*2 In other words if one of the high priests sons is
qualified for the position he is chosen. If not
a non-descendant (who is qualified) is taken.

Lv16-32c presents this SON-MERIT rule for priests
Dt17-20c generalizes this SON-MERIT rule for Kings.

This interpretation of the text is further
clarified by the ALIGNMENT method.*11

Some further technicalities are noted in note *12

*10 Here is a simple numerical example
Assume 3 people in Egypt
- Bob
- Dan and David Brothers

Assume
- Bob has 1 child
- Dan has 1 child
- David has 2 children

So GENERATION1(GEN1) has 3 units (Bob,Dan David)
And GEN2 has 4 units (1+1+2)

We now have 3 stages

STAGE 1
-------
Each GEN2 person gets same number of units (Say 2 units)
So Bobs child --2 units
-- Dans child --2 units
-- Davids-------4 units to 2 children

STAGE 2
-------
Now the units are coalesced at the family (GEN1) level
- Bob has 2 units(Since he has one child with 2 units)
- Dan-David has 6 units (Dans child 2 units and Davids 4)

STAGE 3
-------
- Bob gives his 2 units back to his child
- Dan-David give there 6 units equally to children so
-- Dans child receives 3 units
-- Davids 2 children receive 1.5 units each (Total of 3)

Here is a time map

--------------------------------------------------------------
EGYPT(GEN1)    CHILDREN   STAGE1      STAGE2       STAGE3
-------------- ---------- ----------- ------------ ------------
Bob            1 child    2/8         2/8          2/8 @child
Dan-brother    1 child    2/8         6/8 brothers 3/8 @child
David-brother  2 child    4/8         6/8 Brothers 3/8 @2 child
---------------------------------------------------------------

Although this may seem complicated it fulfills the 2 verses
- The actual exodus people from Egypt inherit
- The descendants determine inheritance

*11 We align Lv21-10 Lv16-32 as follows

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The priest --------------- ...annointed ...trained replace father
The priest who is advanced ...annointed ...trained --------------
*a         *b              *c           *d         *b
-----------------------------------------------------------------

As the double #b clearly shows there are two criteria
- priest is advanced (bigger than his brothers)
- priest replaces father

These conflicting criteria are resolved using
the RabbiIshmael method of 2 STAGES
- if the son is qualified pick him
- if not pick a qualified non-descendant

*12 Interestingly heridatary appointment is mentioned by
- Slaves (Lv25-41)
- Kings (Dt17-20)
- Priests (Dt18-05)
- Levites (1C23-13)

The Bible EXPLICITLY advances a LINEAGE-MERIT duality
for priests (As shown above by the alignment presented
in footnote #11).

We generalize this to Kings (Rashi Dt17-20c).

We do not apply this to slaves since merit is not involved

We also do not generalize this to Levites since
the Bible explicitly states that they replace the
first-born and hence merit is no longer relevant
(A qualified 1st born could NOT function as a
Levite because the Bible states explicitly that
they were replaced (See eg Nu03-40:43)

*13 There are 4 texts involved as follows
----------------------------------------
Gn37-27 states idea of sale to ARabs
Gn37-28 states Midianites passed but Joe sold to Arabas
Gn37-36 states Midianites sold Joe to Potifar
Gn39-01 states Arabs sold Joe to Potifar
-----------------------------------------

Rashi (Gn37-28a Gn38-28b) resolves these contradictions by
assuming 4 stages of sale:
- Brothers to Arabs (Gn37-27)
- Arabs to Midianites (Hinted at in Gn37-28)
- Midianites to ARabs (resolving Gn37-36, Gn39-01)
- Arabs to Egypt (Gn39-01)

*14 Gn50-10a. Rashi cites an Agaddah from the Talmud. We explain this
Talmudic agaddah here. However we preface our explanation with
the explanation given above
- Recall that Joseph saved the world from famine
- Granaries dried up and GREW THORNS except for Josephs
- Joseph gave food to these people and saved their lives
- One granary that dried up was called the THORNED GRANARY
- The people gave respect to Jacob since it was his belief
- in Josephs dreams which gave Joseph his greatness

The Talmudic Agaddah states
-----------------------------------------------------------
All the kings came and took off their crowns and hung them
on Josephs coffin
-----------------------------------------------------------

We interpret this to mean
---------------------------------------
The kings TOOK OFF THEIR HATS TO JOSEPH
---------------------------------------
This is a familiar English idiom.


The Agaddah states
----------------------------------------------------------
The Arabs and canaanites came to wage war with Josephs
brothers but could not because of Jacobs merit
----------------------------------------------------------

We need not interpret this literally. Very often Agaddah
uses the technique of EXAGGERATION. Recall that
--------------------------------------------------------
Jacobs two sons destroyed an entire Canaanite city;
Also recall that their attempt to murder Joseph led to
selling him to Arabs who brought him to Egypt

There were natural ill feelings.

However when the Arabs and Canaanites saw the greatness
of Jacob---that because he believed in the dream of the
bratty immature Joseph, who was a teenage tattletale and
hung out with rif-rafs, and then had a severe prison term
-- because Jacob believed in the dream, Joseph, despite
his past, grew to greatness and saved the world--

-- When the Arabs and Canaanites saw the greatness of
Jacobian prophecy, they TOOK OFF THEIR HATS TO HIM..since
they realized there was something higher in life..something
that could redeem them from their own low life to a
higher life
----------------------------------------------------------

In summary the Agaddah uses exaggeration -- WANTED TO DECLARE
WAR -- to indicate ill feelings. The Agaddah used metaphor--
TOOK OFF THEIR HATS--to indicate respect. All this is based
on the fact that Jacobs belief in Josephs dreams made him
what he became.

*1 BETTER goes with THAN (BETTER THAN). Verse is saying that
a little RESTFULNESS is better than alot of TOIL and
FRAGMENTATION

*2 Same phrase

*3 The Hebrew word Caph-Pay, PALM, is contrasted with
Cheth-Pay-Nun suggesting that Cheth-Pay-Nun is bigger
than the Caph-Pay. Hence we have translated Cheth-Pay-Nun
as HANDFULL

*4 Other verses where Cheth-Pay-Nun means HANDFUL are
Pr30-03, Ez10-02, Ez10-07, Lv16-12, Ex09-08a

*1 Note the same metaphor in English: FLOWER=FLOWERY SPEECH
ORATORY connotes speech which can sink into a person and PRODUCE
new thoughts (like plants).

In general PLANTS are used metaphorically to indicate types of ideas:
So we have
- LEAF = word
- TREE = advice (Because advice are ideas that YIELD fruit)
- BRANCH = paragraph of thought
The preceding list is due to Rav Hirsch

*1 Ex28-11b

*2 Ps45-02

*3 Rashi Ex06-06d (Note: The same idiom applies in English)

*1 'Bury IN the cave' also occurs in Gn49-29
*2 RDK also suggests 'They came TO Joseph to buy food' using
an inversion of the sentence
*3 The verse (in my opinion) could also read
>The Medanim sold him TO the Egyptian (Empire)
*4 RDK points out that the preposition ON can mean both
>ACCOUNT OF / CONCERNING        >PHYSICALLY ON
RDK also gives 3 mores meanings
>ETH
>BECAUSE + ON
>B when it means WITH (But these are all covered here)

*5 In other words he quieted the people by beginning
>Is this the only thing that Moses did to us
At that point they quieted expecting to hear more complaints
He then continued
>He took us out of Egypt
>gave us the Manna
>So he can help us conquer Israel

*10 This list presents meanings of the word EL.
The SOURCES for these meanings come from the
- Ramban on this verse;
- Rashi on a variety of verses (you have to laboriously
read thru all Rashis);
- RDK in the book of ROOTS.

The last column in the table, entitled, WHO, cross references the     Rishon involved
--R=Rashi,
--N=RambaN,
--K=RadacK--thus "RNK"

Here is an example of our notation:The RNK on
Lv18-18 means that ll 3 Rishonim, Rashi, Radack
and Ramban use Lv18-18 as an example  that EL can mean WITH}


*11 This posting corrects an incorrect posting in
http://www.rashiyomi.com/h24n12.htm and at
http://www.Rashiyomi.com/ex06-24c.htm

A colleague Gilad Gevaryahu asked for an explicit
statement that LAMED can have other meanings like
TO, ON, IN, WITH, FROM, ACCOUNT of etc.
I incorrectly thought Ex04-26c identifies LAMED as
meaning ALEPH LAMED. But in fact of course LAMED means
AYIN LAMED. Since Gilad asked the question I gave him
credit for the answer...but the truth is the incorrect
answer was made by me and the question was made by him.

My previous comments to Gilad about the meaning of
one-letter prefixes stands. A full answer to Gilad would
require finding a set of verses with LAMED meaning TO ON
IN WITH FROM.  The correct place for Ex04-26c is in the
list of meanings of AYIN-LAMED.

My comments on one letter prefixes are as follows:
- Radak explicitly identifies prefix Mem with the
full word Men-Nun (And by analogy this identification
of prefix with word could extend to Aleph Lamed)
- Phonetically the Nun in Mem-Nun drops and is converted
to a Mem+Dagesh. Similarly the initial Ayin would
drop from Ayin-Lamed (Another precedent for dropped
Alephs would be the pair Esh-Ta-Yim vs ShTa-Yim)
- Radak discusses Lamed on the last page of Michlol but
does not seem to mention the Lamed-El correspondence
- Radak discusses El in Michlol several pages earlier
but does not equat El and Lamed (Similarly in his
book ROOTS he does not equate them)
- The equality of Mem and Mem-Nun is mentioned both
in ROOTs and in MICHLOL (Last words in book).
- Perhaps the strongest proof occurs in root
Aleph-Lamed-Hay in ROOTS. Although Radak does
not equate Aleph-Lamed with Prefix Lamed
nevertheless he does equate Aleph-Lamed with
prefix Mem and Prefix Beth. This seems clear
and explicit evidence that Radak equated
prepositional connectives with one letter
suffixes.

*1 Almost the same as FLEE FOR YOUR LIFE
The point is FLEE CONCERNING LIFE, NOT MONEY

*2 Note how Rashi translates
- RUACH as meaning EMOTIONS not WIND
- AL as meaning CONCERNING not ON

Hence Rashi translates the verse as
- God aroused(in Himself) emotions CONCERNING the flooded
- land

But why does Rashi avoid the obvious translation
- God made a wind come over the land

Rashi-is-Simple: The land was covered with 60 feet
of water. So a wind could NOT come over the land
(because it was covered). Hence Rashi interprets
the verse as EMOTIONS CONCERNING THE FLOODED LAND

*3 Actually this verse is a little more complicated
- NECK is a universal symbol for BACKBONE & STEADFASTNESS
- CRY ON always, in the Bible, means CRY CONCERNING
- CRY OF always, in the Bible, means MOURNING

Hence the verse should be translated as follows--
-Benjamin and Joseph CRIED CONCERNING each others
-steadfastness (that they each remained loyal to
-each other)

See http://www.Rashiyomi.com/gn45-14a.htm
for a complete and delightful discussion

*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.

All lists may be found at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/lists.htm