*1 Inadvertent violation

*2 (Rashi Lv01-04c) Nothing further is said. From this list
we suggest that UP offerings atone on
inadvertent violation of positive commandments
(Since that is not yet covered in the list)

*1 Rashi does not indicate how he knows that the
cutoff point for ram vs sheep is 2 years.
- Perhaps this is general knowledge which shepards
know (That maturation takes places at two)
- Supportive verses show that a one year old
is still considered a sheep (Eg Ex12-05)

*2 Also Lv07-34a See LIST955p for an analysis
of verses with WAIVE vs OSCILLATE

*1 In these verses the BREASTCAGE is always associated
with WAIVING while the THIGH is always associated
with RAISING/OSCILLATION

*2 Perhaps BREASTCASE would be a better translation

*3 Perhaps CALF would be a better translation

*4 In these verse we find ONE attribute associated
with ONE organ (WAIVE the BREAST vs RAISE THIGH)

*5 In these verses we are explicitly told that
- BOTH the BREASTCAGE and the CALF are
- BOTH WAIVED and OSCILLATED
A peach of a Rashi  (Lv10-15a) states
------------------------------------------------
BREASTCAGE is always associated with the attribute
WAIVED and CALF is always associated with the
attribute OSCILLATED. But the law is explicit--
both organs are both waived and oscillated! Why
then does the association suggest that each organ
receive one activity? We do not know
-------------------------------------------------

In other words the Rashi inference is VALID even
though we don't know all rules. I however have
an ingenious explanation*10

*10 The Peace offering is about God helping us
achieve our desires. That is why the priests
(not the altar fire) eat the BREASTCAGE
and CALF each of which symbolizes desire.

- The breastcage houses the heart the organ
that beats faster during desire

- the calf is the organ of running to activity

The PRIEST teaches us that our desires must be
- sanctified to God (UP/DOWN motion)
- dedicated to people (TO and FRO motion)

However
- the IMMEDIATE desires symbolized by the calf
very often already involve other people and hence
the required emphasis is on involving God

- the LONG RANGE desires symbolized by the
breast cage very often are secret desires
dedicated to God but people are not involved
Hence we are reminded to go TO AND FRO
and involve the community.

However both lessons (Social and Divine)
are needed for both types of desires.

This seems to me to be the simple symbolic
meaning of this well known procedure.

*1 The requirements of MALE and UNBLEMISHED are the same.

*2 The requirements of MALE and UNBLEMISHED are the same.

*3 Note how Lv01-03d adds a requirement
------------------------------------
Bring it to the temple pleasingly for himself
------------------------------------

Hence the Rashi (paraphrased)
------------------------------
Without the ALIGNMENT I would have thought that the
extra phrase
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bring it to the temple pleasingly
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
is simply a casual statement (Such casual statements
do happen in the Torah and are not cause for restriction)
However the ALIGNMENT emphasizes that the statement
is not casual but deliberate. There IS a requirement
for the owner to bring the offering he vowed.
--------------------------------

*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

*3 Rashi Ex11-09a

*4 Rashi Ex11-04a Ex10-29

*5 Dt20-10 explicitly requires a request for peace
The resolution of this contradiction is brought in the
Rashi at Nu21-22a


*6 The repeated Biblical phrase HE SAW...BY HIM, HE SAW...HE RAN
strengthens this interpretation by stages.

*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.

*15
Rashi literally states
---------------------------------------------------
Laban gave Leah to Jacob for the wedding night.
But Jacob and Rachel had personal signs and Rachel
gave these to Leah. So Jacob only fully became aware
at morning that Leah was really Leah
---------------------------------------------------

This Rashi has been interpreted to mean that
- Jacob and Rachel had little contact during the 7 years!
- Jacob had no memory of the women he was in love with!
- Jacob needed special signs to remind him who he was with
- Jacob did not know who he was with on his wedding night!
Remarkable: Even the lowest rif-rafs know who they are
with on a wedding night.

I think a more palatable approach to this Rashi is the
following:
------------------------------------------------------
Traditionally men are in interested in physical
characteristics while women are interested in the person.
The Bible EXPLICITLY states that Jacob loved Rachel
because of her figure and good looks (No mention of
personality!). As is well known men and women can flirt
with each other by glances and smiles. Rachel quickly
found out what Jacob liked and taught Leah how to flirt
with him. Laban told Jacob at the BEGINNING of the 7
years that he couldn't marry the younger daughter
before the older daughter. Jacob was at first relunctant
But when Leah started flirting with him the way he
liked he decided to marry Leah. However after the
wedding night Leah 'had what she wanted' and had no
reason to placate Jacob. She started acting herself.
It was only at this point that Jacob realized he was
double-crossed and not getting the physical flirtations
he wanted from a wife. Laban simply reminded him of
the deal they had made SEVEN YEARS AGO but offered
him Rachel also
-------------------------------------------------------

The above approach to Rashi makes 'sense.' It also
has RELEVANCE. It is well known that INCIDENTS OF THE
PATRIARCHS mirror EXPECTATIONS TO THE CHILDREN. No
Jew really worries about being double crossed in whom
he marries. But it is relevant to religious men to
be aware that women play such games with them--Rachels
will frequently help fellow women like Leah to catch
men. Women think it silly that men are interested in
physical attributes and not in personality. So this
incident as interpreted above has extreme relevance
to us.

*16 Rashi seems to derive this textually. Rashi states
------------------------------------------------
Nu26-59 states
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
...Yocheven who was BORN to Levi IN EGYPT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Her BIRTH was IN EGYPT but her PREGNANCY
was outside of Egypt
------------------------------------------------

However there is no textual basis for making this
emphasis The phrase
----------------------------------------------
who was born to Levi in Egypt
-----------------------------------------------
does not connote that her pregnancy was
outside of Egypt.

Therefore we find it preferable to state that
Rashi's derivation is purely from logic. That
is the only way to resolve the CONTRADICTION
is to assume someone did NOT COME with Jacob
but was in Egypt anyway because they were born
outside of Egypt. Then a search of the Bible
reveals only one possible candidate for this
person: Yocheved.

*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