*1 The Genesis Rabbah Chapter 3, Braiitha 7 states
>God had created many worlds before this one
>He however destroyed them and it is only
>this world that pleased him.
The Midrash Rabbah learns this from various sources
but the PAST PERFECT verbs brought here are the main
source. (For example the Midrash also learns this from
the phrase
>1-1-31 & God saw all he had made and
>BEHOLD it was good
which has the connotation of
>BEHOLD it was good this time but not the
>previous times
While this is supportive it is not conclusive. The
main argument is from the PAST PERFECT verbs as
indicated above

Although the TEXT of the Genesis Rabbah 3:7 does not
seem to indicate that the creation of previous worlds
is derived from the PAST PERFECT nevertheless I found
an explicit statement of this connection between the
PAST PERFECT and the creation of previous worlds in
the Soncino Translation of the Zohar, 16a.


*2 Rashi suggests that the PAST PERFECT (HAD DONE) allows
>rearranging the sequence of chapters
thereby indicating
>causal links.
For example the natural sequence
>1-2-26:28 Intimacy
>1-4-1 Pregnancy/birth
>1-3 Snake gets Eve to sin/expulsion from Paradise
is changed to
>1-2-26:28 Intimacy
>1-3 Snake gets Eve to sin/expulsion from Paradise
>1-4-1 Pregnancy birth


The changed sequence suggests a
>CAUSAL LINK
between
>INTIMACY & SIN OF SNAKE
In other words, because Adam and Eve were cohabiting before
everybody the snake (a nickname for a slimy person) desired
her and plotted to kill Adam (by having Eve give him the
forbidden food) whereby he could marry her. Although this
appears speculative it is bolstered by the use of the PAST
PERFECT which allows a rearrangement of order.

Similarly the sequence

>1-18:19 The 3 angels
>1-18 prophecy that Sarah will give birth
>1-19 Destrucion of Sedom/Saving of Lot
>1-21-1 Sarah gave birth
>1-20 Abduction of Sarah
>1-20-14:18 Sarah saved; Abraham prays for Avimelech

is reversed to

>1-18:19 The 3 angels
>1-18 prophecy that Sarah will give birth
>1-19 Destrucion of Sedom/Saving of Lot
>1-20 Abduction of Sarah
>1-20-14:18 Sarah saved; Abraham prays for Avimelech
>1-21-1 Sarah gave birth

The changed sequence suggests a
>CAUSAL LINK
between
>Abraham praying that Avimelech should give birth
>Abraham-Sarah having a child

Chazal in fact say
>Whoever prays for his friend
>gets answered first (if he needs the same thing)


*3 1-25-29:34 describes Esauv coming home hungry and asking
Jacob for food who in turn asks Esauv to sell him the birthright.
The verses (without proper translation) appear to say that Jacob
only gave the weary Esauv food AFTER he sold his birthright. In
other words he blackmailed him into selling his birthright.

However with the proper translation the verses says
>Esauv asked for food
>Jacob asked for the birthright
>Jacob HAD ALREADY given food to Esauv.

Thus there was no blackmail. It is curious that some major
midrashim do not mention this (I in fact learned the
interpretation of this verse from my 8-th grade Chumash
Teacher, Rabbi Nathan Belitsky who taught us at an early
age that there were grammatical methods to refute slander
on Biblical characters).


*4 In other words we read the verses that
>1-12-34 the Jews exodused form Egypt
>1-12-35 they loaned silver/gold vessels
>1-12-36 they HAD ALREADY been loaning vessels

I would imagine the simple interpretation is that eg
>as slaves they loaned utensils
>they acted like they lost them
>"I lost what you gave me; can you spare me another"
>and because God HAD ALREADY given them grace
>they ended up loaning more vessels


*5 This simple but elegant example was provided by Harry
Rashbaum in my Shomray Emunah Rashi class


*6 See LIST690b for a discussion

*7 To indicate the ordinary past the Bible uses
- the Hebrew letter VAV followed by
- the future tense
All examples in the above list use the pure past which
according to Rashi means HAD ALREADY (PAST PERFECT)

*8 See LIST313t and Rashi Gn19-09b and Gn19-11a. Rashi
interprets the text Gn19-06:11 as follows

We now read the verses Gn19-06:11 as follows
------------------------------------------------------------
- Lot left the house to dissuade the Sedomites from rape
- Lot closed the door of the house
- The crowd did not listen---they tried to break in
- The Angels brought Lot into the house
- While bringing Lot in some people entered the ENTRANCE
- But Angels (re)closed the [DOOR]
- Because the angels [HAD ALREADY BLINDED] the Sedomites in
the doors [ENTRANCE]
------------------------------------------------------------
Rashi makes his inferences based on
- the contrast of DOOR vs ENTRANCE
- use of the past perfect (HAD ALREADY BLINDED

*9 Here is the structure of the Dt10-01:10
-----------------------------------------------
Dt10-01:05 God told me to make 2nd tablets-
I did so and placed them in Ark

(Dt10-06:09 We journeyed; Aaron died;
Levites separated for God)

Dt10-10 I HAD STAYED in mount 40 days
-----------------------------------------------

Rashi:
-------
Dt10-10, I HAD STAYED IN MOUNT, refers to
BEGINNING/OPENING of chapter Dt10-01:05 when God told
me to make second tablets.

*11

Gn29-08 states
---------------------------
They SAID
We can't [feed the flocks]
until the flocks GATHER
and OVERTURN the stone
---------------------------

We have translated this
sentence using conventional
English. Technically speaking
the capitalized verbs
- GATHER
- OVERTURN
refer to the SIMPLE PRESENT.
The SIMPLE PRESENT is very often
used do describe a HABITUAL ROUTINE
(For example: I GO TO SHULE EVERYDAY)
even thought this ROUTINE extends over
PAST PRESENT and FUTURE. English uses
the SIMPLE PRESENT even when connected
with the word UNTIL.

However in Hebrew when a ROUTINE HABIT
is described with UNTIL we use the
ABSOLUTE FUTURE
- UNTIL the flocks WILL GATHER (Yay OSe Fu)

In English a routine habit consisting
of a sequence of events is described
with the SIMPLE PRESENT. For example
----------------------------------
EVERY DAY I go TO SHULE AND daven.
----------------------------------
In Hebrew the sequence in a routine
is indicated by a PREFIX VAV+FUTURE
---------------------------------
Until the flock
- WILL GATHER (Yay O Se Fu)
- and THEN TURN THE STONE (Ve GolleLu)
----------------------------------

EXAMPLE 3: Gn29-15b
-------------------
Gn29-15 states
------------------------
Laban SAID to Jacob
Because you are my brother
you SHOULD WORK for nothing?
Rather tell me your wages
-------------------------

We have translated this
using conventional English:
The conjugation SHOULD
is called a MODAL--it indicates
something EXPECTED vs something
that WILL ABSOLUTELY HAPPEN.
Another example of the modal is
- you SHOULD give to charity

The Hebrew text conjugates this
modal using the PREFIX VAV+PAST
conjugation.

In other words the three Rashis
reviewed here extend
the construction of
- VAV PREFIX + PAST
to indicate either
- the future
- sequence in a simple present describing routine
- modal.

*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 Rashi, Lv26-17h points out that the phrase
-------------
PLACE MY FACE
-------------
means
--------------
FULL ATTENTION
--------------
whether
- for good, to reward
- for bad, to punish.

*2 NOTE: The Hebrew word HEAD can mean both
- BEGINNING
- TOP
However in this verse
- the HEAD OF THE CLIFF contrasts with
- the VALLEY in MOAB
Hence HEAD means TOP

*3 A MOUTH LOTTERY refers to a lottery where you stick your
hand in and select an item WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO SEE THE
ITEMS (In an open-box lottery you can see what you are
picking even though you see backs of cards. In a MOUTH
LOTTERY the box is covered except for a small MOUTH).
The MOUTH LOTTERY is more secure and fairer.
Hence the Rashi

The name MOUTH LOTTERY is because the box has only
a small mouth preventing you from seeing what is
inside.
---------------------------------------------------
MOUTH LOTTERY means that the LOTTERY speaks and says
this belongs to so and so
---------------------------------------------------

Of course, Rashi did not believe that LOTTERIES speak.
Rather Rashi refers to the SECURITY and FAIRNESS of
the lottery. In other words
- MOUTH LOTTERY refers to a small MOUTH on LOTTERY box
(not to a physical voice on the box)
- Since the MOUTH LOTTERY is secure it is AS IF it
screams and points to a correct fair choice

*4 Rashi is NOT explaining the meaning of the INDIVIDUAL WORDS
- GOOD
- PROPER
Indeed, GOOD can mean SOCIALLY GOOD also (See Gn26-29)
Therefore we have interpreted this Rashi as an example
of the IDIOM method.

*5 These five examples show various idiomatic meanings of
the INFINITIVE of the verb TO SAY: TO SAY can mean
- TO SAY BACK: Request for response
- TO SAY OVER: To Transmit
- TO SAY OVER AND OVER: Rumor
See LIST955m for a separate summary

*6 Thus in Dt18-01
-------------------------------------
The PRIEST-LEVITES shall not inherit
from the conquest of Israel
-------------------------------------
the phrase PRIEST-LEVITES means
PRIESTS OR LEVITES.

Another occurrence of this phrase
occurs in Dt17-18.

In Dt17-09a Rashi does state
------------------------------------
The PRIESTS who are no longer Levites
------------------------------------

But I understand this to mean
------------------------------------
PRIESTS by itself means PRIESTS but
not Levites while LEVITES by itself
could mean LEVITES but not Priests--
PRIEST LEVITES means PRIESTS OR LEVITES*10
-------------------------------------

*7 Besides the fact that this sounds OK (WENT BY JOURNEYS=
STAYED BY SAME HOTELS) the verse gives support
---------------------------------------------
HE WENT BY HIS JOURNEYS...UNTIL HE RETURNED
TO HIS ORIGINAL PLACE WHERE HE BUILT AN ALTAR
---------------------------------------------

*8 In other words if
- the King slept with Sarah and then
- returned her to Abraham
perhaps he "had enough of her" and just "wanted to play."

But if he gives her a monetary gift then
- it is recognized that a miracle happened and his return
- is an apology for taking her.
- Hence the money prevents people EYEING Sarah(looking at
her as a 'rejected woman.'
This is covered in two Rashi (Gn20-16a Gn20-16b) which
are better understood as one Rashi.

*10 Dt17-09 states
---------------------------------------
[If you have a legal question then]
ask the PRIEST-LEVITES, the Judges of
the day
---------------------------------------

The law PREFERS that the great Sanhedrin
court in Jerusalem consist of PRIESTS.
Levites are a second choice (and Israelite
scholars are a third choice).

So it appears that Rashi's comment
--------------------------------------
Priests but not Levites
--------------------------------------
is literal.

But in Dt18-01 the prohibition of inheriting
conquested Israelie land applies to EITHER
Priests OR Levites.

Similarly I would interprtet Dt17-09 to mean
that EITHER Priests or Levites should preferably
be on the Great Sanhedrin. That is the Biblical
law.

But Rabbinically---since Priests are more
involved with the Temple there is a preference
for Priests to be elected to the great court
vs. Levites. This preference however is rooted
in logic not in the verse. The IDIOM, PRIEST-LEVITES
means PRIESTS or LEVITES as shown.

*11 See LIST854c for further examples where LEFT OR RIGHT
means a LITTLE bit. Rashi's actual language is
---------------------------------------------------
If you dont consent to the marriage then I will either
- go to the RIGHT (RASHI: The Ishmaelites)
- or the LEFT (RASHI: Lot-ites)
---------------------------------------------------

But in light of the examples in LIST854c this
Rashi should not be taken literally! Rather
Rashi should be interpreted broadly
----------------------------------------
My master prohibited marriages to Canaanites
So if you dont consent to the marriage
I will go to OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS OF ABRAHAM
- such as ISHMAEL his son
- or LOT his nephew
-----------------------------------------

There is temptation to interpret
-LEFT=LOT=weakness=(He committed incest with daughters)
-RIGHT=STRENGTH=Ishmael

However this SPECIFIC and FOCUSED interpretation of
LEFT and RIGHT is unsupported by the many other
examples in LIST854c below.

Notice this use of LISTS. We are only justified in
reading into Rashi what can be obtained from LISTS
We are not justified in reading extra!

Finally for those into Talmudic flavor note that
- all the other verses speak about LEFT/RIGHT
- Gn24-49 speaks about LEFT OR RIGHT (Hebrew Aleph-Vav)
Perhaps then the ALEPH VAV gives extra emphasis
But 2S02-19 shows that LEFT/RIGHT and LEFT OR RIGHT
both mean the same thing---A LITTLE BIT

*12 See LIST854m

*1 These are the only three Biblical verses with the phrase
UNTIL THAT IF.

The phrase UNTIL THAT is translated as UNTIL
The phrase UNTIL THAT IF seems to mean based on the
context of the above verses UNTIL COMPLETION

For example the conquest of the land was a process
that took much time.  Therefore the Gadites are
promising to be in the army UNTIL COMPLETION of
the conquest.

*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