*1
Rashi (paraphrased) comments
-----------------------------------------------
This is the only verse where FAMILY is used
in reference to animals (Typically FAMILY refers
to PEOPLE). This strange anomolous usage points to
an emphasis:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
God as it were made the animals promise not
to sin and only cohabit within their own species
and family
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-----------------------------------------------

Rashi's comment need not be taken literally (Since
animals are usually inter-specie anyway). Rashi's
point emphasizes the sexual corruption of the flood
It was so corrupt that even animals sinned and therefore
they had to promise not to stick to family life!

*1 Rashi also makes  comments on the  deliberate
misspelling of this word. MISSPELLING is a Biblical
technique. The technical name is METAPLASMUS. Examples
may be found in LIST080a which includes Ex04-02a

*2 Gn15-12:14 ....As the sun set a coma fell on Abraham and
all of a sudden a fear, great darkness, fell on him
and God said...Surely know that your descendants will
be foreigners in a land that doesnt belong to them---
and they will be enslaved -- and they will torture
them 400 years--and also the nation they serve I
will judge and then they will leave with a big reward

Thus THIS night of redemption refers to the redemption
mentioned in the above prophecy (Perhaps there is
also a pun on the darkness)

*3 See LIST210c below

*4 In other words the word THIS makes the contents of the
chapter SPECIFIC and FOCUSED...the  exact language
in the chapter must be used in freeing people from
vows (Normally Biblical language are generalized)

For further details see footnote *10

*5 Thus Rivkah had been praying for children....yet
when she experienced the infants fighting each other
in the womb she asked WHY AM I THIS (That is WHY AM
I PRAYING FOR CHILDREN if I go thru this) and the
answer came back that they would be great nations.

*6 Rashi infers from this that in a court case both litigants
must be present when allegations are stated.

*10
Rashi also makes another point: Moses used the
language THIS IS WHAT GOD SAID while other
prophets used the language THUS SAID GOD (THIS
is more specific than THUS).

For a database layout of introductory prophetic phrases
used by MOSES vs OTHER  PROPHETS see LIST605f & LIST605g

It is clear from this list that this rule is only approximate
and not absolute. Hence we believe  that Rashi rejected
this explanation.

In general we believe that Rashis 1st explanation (when
there are 2 explanations) can be refuted and should not
be accepted

*1 Also Rashi Dt11-25b. It seems reasonable that
- P-Ch-D comes from Poh-Chad - SHARP and would refer to
e.g. getting GOOSE PIMPLES (Sharpnesses in skin) from
fear

- MoRaH comes from Y-R-A = vision = LONG TERM
apprehension over the future.*10


*2 - YOREH seems to comes from HRH to make pregnant. It
would look at the rain as ENABLING the seeds to grow

- MALKOSH seesm to come from LKSH - TO THE HARD(KSH)
GRAIN and would refer to a final softening rain
before the produce. See LIST910i *11


*3 It is hard to absolutely prove that
- A-V-H means FANTASIZE vs
- Ch-M-D means DESIRE ACQUISITION

The verses show that
- A-V-H is an act of the HEART while
- Ch-M-D is focused on ACQUIRING OBJECTS
See LIST955h for further details
(Also see Rashi Gn27-15a Gn03-06c Gn03-06d)

*4 On Dt19-16a Rashi gives an example of REMOVED/FABRICATED
Testimony--when eg witnesses testify to a murder in NY
and other witnesses come stating that the 1st witnesses
were with them in Chicago at the time of witnessing--thus
the murder testimony is totally removed from the real word

*5 Undoubtedly there is probably a subtle difference between
ANIH/SFINH but it is not possible to determine this from
verses. An interesting statistical note is the following
- SFINH occurs ONCE in the  Bible
- ANIH occurs 3 dozen times in the Bible
- But in Biblical times the frequencies were reversed
Hence, Rashi, in explaining the more frequently occurring
ANIH was responding to the rarity of this word IN HIS TIME

*6 - GRASS can refer to MANY or SINGULAR grass
- MEADOW only refers to a WHOLE MEADOW of GRASS


*7 TWK verses Beth (CENTRALLY IN vs IN)
explains several Rashis:
Nu17-21a Gn02-09b Ex24-1a Lv24-10c
Gn01-06b Nu35-34a See LIST955j

*8 Hence
- Ex28-28c TIGHTEN the AYFOD garment
- P031-21  Save me from GANGS(people TIGHTELY together)
- Is40-04  God will smooth the TIGHT mountains
(Rashi explains that TIGHT MOUNTAINS are mountains
close together with deep georges between them)*12

*10 The reader need NOT believe the above etymologies
For frequently Rashi explains synonyms without
reference to etymologies and even without reference
to verses. However some of the above etymologies seem
reasonable and may enrich our appreciation of the
synonyms.


*11 Rashi gives another etymology from the Aramaic.
However in this list we advocate the 2nd explanation
of Rashi over the 1st. Furthermore in this
particular case the 2nd explanation comes internally
from Hebrew while the 1st Rashi explanation INFERS
usage from Aramaic but does not EXPLAIN it.


*12 Rashi translates RKS as UNITE.
I have examined the verses and think the nuances
of TIGHTEN-which is a particular form of tightening
is more precise

Rashi and my analysis apparently override the
RADACK who translates (from context) RKS as meaning
HIGH. Compare
- RAISE the AYFOD (By tightening it)
- Save me from HAUGHTY people
- God will smooth the HIGH mountains


*13 Rashi brings several distinctions on the nuances
between VOWS vs DONATIONS

- VOWS are PERSONAL (eg I will bring...)
- DONATIONS are OBJECT oriented
(eg This material is to Tmpl)

- VOWS come for OFFERINGS
- DONATIONS come for TEMPLE repairs

- VOWS come for personal EXPIATION
- DONATIONS do not come personal EXPIATION

Rashi in fact notes that the word FOR EXPIATION
(Resh-Tzade-Hey) does occur in Lv22-23. However
this is just an accident. The main Rashi point comes
from the VOW:DONATION difference---in English also
- VOW has personal connotation (I undertake..) while
- DONATION has object connotation (this item goes to..)

*1 See Lv26-03. Thus Lv26-03:06 explicitly states that
when we observe, God will remove wild animals. Dt08-02
by contrast, explains that conquest of Israel will
happen slowly FOR IF IT HAPPEEND QUICKLY WILD ANIMALS
WOULD COME (because the Jews moral nature was not
yet  perfected and the protection of Lv26-03:06
does not yet apply) *11

*2 COARSE flour was used in cooking to wash the pot
sides to clear it from rust producing agents and
rotted food particles.

*3 I should mention the Brilliant Malbim who points
out to a repeated object denoting emphasis
-----------------------------------------
She opened it and saw HIM -- a CHILD
-----------------------------------------
Thus the child had a certain regality *12


*4 This distinction is explicitly mentioned in Ex01-10
Pharoh was concerned that the Jewish minority would
align with an Egyptian enemy. Hence he killed the
males. *13

*5 See Lv08-16:21 for Moses acting as a Priest. During
this brief period Moses used the Temple Basin.

*6 First we note that MONUMENTS (MCBA) were made of
1 stone. Compare the following verses
- Gn31-45 Jacob took the STONE and made MONUMENT
- Gn28-18 Jacob took the STONE and made Monument

Next we note that God found the MONUMENT that
Jacob made (and declared to be a house of God),
God found this altar pleasing.
-----------------------------------------------
- Gn31-13 I am the God of Beth El where you made
a monument --[I am with you] Therefore leave
this place
-----------------------------------------------

Finally we compare the following 4 contradictory
verses
------------------------------------------------
Ex20-21:22 You can make altars of EARTH, STONES
Dt27-05    Make altar of stones when coming to Israel
Dt16-22a   Don't make MONUMENT
Dt16-22b   Don't make MONUMENT, hated by God
Gn28-18    Jacob took the stone and made a MONUMENT
------------------------------------------------

In this discussion we treat ALTARS and MONUMENTS
the same. The contradictory verses can be resolved
as follows
- ONE-STONE altars/monuments are
- - prohibited to us and hated by God
- - permitted  to Patriarches and liked by God
- MANY STONE altars/Monuments are permitted*14

*10 Rashis point is strengthened by the abrupt change
of subject
-----------------------------------------------
Nu04-04 This is the job of the KEHATHITES
Nu04-05 The PRIESTS come and cover the articles
...
Nu04-15 ..and AFTERWARDS the KEHATHITES come
-----------------------------------------------

If one just reads Nu04-04 and Nu04-05 by themselves
it appears as if the PRIESTS mentioned in Nu04-05
refer back to the KEHATHITES mentioned in Nu04-04

*11 Interesting Rashi cites a verse in Job rather
than the  explicit Lv26-03:06. Rashi also does
not explicitly mention that he is using the rule
of resolving 2 contradictory cases.
But that IS what Rashi does. It seems rather
straightforward to introduce Lv26-03:06. Rashi
probably  expected the reader to know this verse
since it comes in the great REBUKE---Rashi complements
this verses with complementary verses in Job

*12 Rashis actual language is that
------------------------------------
She saw Gods presence with him
------------------------------------

I have tempered this a bit as follows
---------------------------
She saw the childs regality
---------------------------

I think Rashis point is to explain why
she risked her life to save a Jewish child
This child was different--he had a certain
regality...why not raise him as an Egyptian
He would fit in well with the Royal house

*13 Rashi actually says
------------------------------------------
Pharohs astrologers said that the Jews
have just had a male savior born.
Pharoh therefore decreed the death of
the male Jews
------------------------------------------

However the REAL driving force of Rashi
is the contradictory verses and the
resolution from an explicit verse.

Rashi avails himself of OTHER VERSES
which show that Pharoh always consulted
with his astrologers (eg Ex08-12:15).

Thus Rashi is simply dressing up the
contradiction. The real point of Rashi
is the contradiction and the distinction
between the people(hated all) and the King.
(concerned about security)

*14 Rashi does not give a reason why 1-stone altars
are prohibited but many-stone are ok. I would
suggest that 1-stone altars are so to speak
BLEMISHED altars-altars made on the rush.
Throughout the offering literature blemished items
are considered poor taste. The patriarchs however
were busy converting people frequently. Hence,they
made altars on the go (one stone altars) and this
was liked by God.

*1 Ex31-15b further points out that all holidays which are
referred to as >SABBATH of SABBATH< (Ex31-15, Lv23-32)
have prohibitions of both WORK and EATING. By contrast
all holidays which are only called >SABBATH< (Lv23-23
and Lv23-39) only have a prohibition of Work but not
a prohibition of COOKING. This is fully discussed at
http://www.RashiYomi.Com/h6n12.htm)


*2 This is fully discussed in http://www.RashiYomi.Com/h1n23.htm
Ibn Ezra seems to disagree and state that GReenReen means a
light green (which would contradict this list). But as I
show in that posting, Ibn Ezra retracted what he said in his
commentary on Ps45-03. In fact Ibn Ezra simply points out
that he was testing the consistency of this rule against all
doubled roots. To make a long story short we reviewed all
roots & found possible problems with only 2 verses, Ps38-11
and Songs6-1. However we can properly translate these verses
Ps38-11 would be translated as >My heart FLUTTERS (intense
back and forth motion)<; Similarly Songs6-1 would be
translated as >Dont avoid me simply because I am very
SUNBURNED (an intense form of DAWN-COLOR)

*3 Many of the examples in this list are CONSTRUCTS
e.g. The HOLY of HOLIES. Future additions to this
list will emphasize examples similar to Lv01-08d

*4 So the repeated word MAN must refer to the narrow meaning
of the Hebrew ISH which means A DISTINGUISHED man such
as an Angel or Judge.

*5 In legal terminology the repetition creates ESSENTIALITY
- The wood is on the altar; and MUST be on the altar
- Blood on ear; oil on ear; and the blood MUST come first

*6 In other words the priest can defile himself to a sister
who is REALLY NOT MARRIED (not married and still CLOSE
to her brother the Priest)--thus the priest can defile
himself to a SINGLE and ENGAGED sister but not to a
MARRIED sister

*7 If you review Lv22-17:25 you will find 3-5 repetitions
of the concept that BLEMISHED ANIMALS SHOULD NOT BE
OFFERED (or PLACED ON FIRE) TO GOD. Therefore the
REPETITION applies to ANY PART OF THE OFFERING
PROCEDURE. The main parts of the OFFERING PROCEDURE are
- DEDICATION of the animal
- SLAUGHTER of animal
- RECEIPT of animal blood
- OFFERING ON FIRE of organs*10

*8 In other words only is he is REALLY BLEMISHED = STILL
BLEMISHED (But if he recovered from the Blemish then
the law does not apply and he can offer offerings)


*9 The verse states
----------------------------------------------------
If blood falls on a GARMENT, then wash in the temple
THAT ON WHICH IT FELL
----------------------------------------------------

The capped words indicate a quasi repetition. This
repetition creates emphasis. ONLY the part of the
garment on which the blood is sprinkled need be
washed.

*10 An important point about learning Rashi should be
emphasized. Many Rashi commentators play NUMBER GAMES
- they count FOUR repetitions of DONT OFFER
- they then note FOUR applications of emphasis in Rashi
(to a) Dedication b) Slaughter c) receipt of blood
d) offering

However our approach in this list has always been
conceptual. The REPETITION denotes EMPHASIS. The
EMPHASIS in turn simply includes ALL CASES--ALL PARTS
OF THE PROCEDURE. We think this a mature and satisfying
approach to Rashi.

*11 The whole verselet A STRANGER CANNOT EAT TERUMAH is
repeated.   The simple way of taking it is that
- ONLY strangers are restricted from eating TERUMAH
- ALL other PRIESTS (EVEN SUCh AND SUCH) may eat TERUMAH
The details of the EVEN SUCH AND SUCH are not
necessarily explicitly mentioned and must be guessed
at by those knowledgeable of Jewish law.

Rashi(Lv22-13b) applies the EVEN SUCH AND SUCH (Lv22-13b)
to a Priest whose relative just died and prior
to burial. EVEN THOUGH a BEFORE-BURIAL PRIEST MAY NOT EAT
SACRIFICIAL ITEMS nevertheless he MAY EAT TERUMAH

*12
Note the following repetition
-Lv25-15b buy from colleagues by NUMBER YEARS SINCE JUBILEE
-Lv25-15b sell -------------- by NUMBER YEARS OF PRODUCE

Without the REPETITION I would simply state (as Rashi does)
-----------------------------------------------------------
So eg if your field produces an average yield of $1000 a
year then in year 0 of the Jubilee it would be worth 50,000
because the buyer would expect $1000 x 50 years=50,000;
by contrast in year 40 of the Jubilee it would be worth
10,000 because the buyer only expect $1000 x 10 years=10,000
In other words the
VALUE OF THE FIELD = YIELD PER YEAR x NUMBER OF YEARS
If however a person sold the field for $50,000 in year 40
he would be overcharging for the field and violating a
Biblical law
-----------------------------------------------------------

It is important to emphasize that, as Rashi states
----------------------------------------------------
Whatever other meaning we derive (from the repetition),
these OTHER MEANINGS, are BESIDES the simple meaning
of the text
----------------------------------------------------

Without the REPETITION I would look at the PLURAL WORD
YEARS in the verse and simply state
---------------------------------------------------
Most sales are for YEARS (vs 1 year). Hence the
law is stated using typical examples. However the
law applies EQUALLY whether you sold the field for
one YEAR or many YEARS.
---------------------------------------------------
Here I used the Rashi rule of GENERALIZATION--which
requires that verses are seen as stating laws using
typical examples.

However we dont use the rule of GENERALIZATION when
the verse has some limitation.

Thus using the Rashi rule of REPETITION we see that
- the REPETITION requires EMPHASIS
- the EMPHASIS requires RESTRICTIVE meaning
I therefore infer that
--------------------------------------------------
A sale of land requires a minimum of 2 years.
We infer this from the REPEATED word, YEARS
which indicates AT LEAST TWO YEARS
--------------------------------------------------

To recap:
- It would be a mistake to think that Rashi
arbitrarily picked on the word YEARS and
required all sales to be two years
- Indeed in many cases Biblical laws are
stated using typical examples and generalized
to other cases
- However SINCE there is a REPETITION in the
verse therefore I am justified and required
to interpret the verse literally---a sale
must be for at least YEARS (that is 2 years)


The above is a peachy example of Rashi...it shows
that pickiness and restrictive meaning is only
one tool available to the Biblical student--this
tool may ONLY be used when required. In this
verse it is the repetition that requires it--
without the repetition I would not have come
to this conclusion.

This is fundamental to understanding Talmudic homiletics

*13 You can vow to PROHIBIT a PROHIBITION on something NEUTRAL
but you cannot vow to prohibit an OBLIGATION (Such as
a vow to abstain from the Passover offering which you
are obligated to eat)

*14 Gn09-14b and Gn09-14a are really one Rashi. But this
email list is based on the Davka edition of Rashi,
version 3.0.6. Since there are two boldface words
on Gn09-14 we count them as two Rashis.

Note there is a slight problem with
- interpreting CLOUD A CLOUD=storm without light
- and the verse statement--RAINBOW will be seen

So Rashi adds as follows
-----------------------------------------------
When God PLANS to bring a fierce storm
He will see the rainbow and not go all the way
-----------------------------------------------

*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