Rashi-Is-Simple Mailing List
(C) Dr Russell Jay Hendel, 1999
http://www.shamash.org/rashi/
Volume 2 Number 20
Produced Jul, 02 1999
Topics Discussed in This Issue
------------------------------
Administrivia
v2q19-13 Why does the Bible use double verbs: eg GIVE GIVE charity
v4z5-13 Summary of Biblical use of DOUBLE NOUNS(EricSimons question
v4b18-19 A worldly, salted convenant: SALTED=UNCHANGING
v2a22-25 Why does the Bible use Double verbs: eg GIVE GIVE charity
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
ADMINISTRIVIA
We are having alot of postings on DOUBLE NOUNS and DOUBLE VERBS.
If you have any additional questions on this let me know. I have
summarized the long posting from last time answering Eric Simons
question. I have also dealt with the concept that the Torah speaks
in human language which is often cited to mean that we don't have
to interpret Midrashim. This is not true--I provide relevant
concepts, Rishonim and examples to butress my explanation. Again
if you have questions on this specific topic (REPEATED NOUNS/VERBS)
please send them in.
***************************
*** READING TIPS ***
***************************
IF YOU ARE IN A HURRY WE RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS:
* VERSE:
* RASHI TEXT:
* BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
"HOW DO I FIND QUICKLY A SPECIFIC SECTION?"
ANSWER: Use your FIND menu
For example: FIND VERSE:
takes you to the beginning of the next section.
Similarly
FIND NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
takes you to the brief explanation of Rashi.
"IS THERE AN EASY WAY TO GO TO EACH VERSE AND POSTING?"
Yes. Use your FIND menu.
"FIND #*#*#*#" takes you to the next posting
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v2q19-13
From: "Gilbert ISSARD"
To: rjhendel@juno.com
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 10:06:10 +0200
Subject: Objet : Re: rashi is simple, v1n1
Russell,
thank you for your mail. I would greatly appreciate to be on your mail
list.
Following your last mail dated 6/28 you explain the generalization that
derives from the repetition of a noun. Could you explain and detail
v2-19-13 in which there is a double repetition of verbs ? I did not find
rashi on this verse very clear.
[Moderator: Gilbert thank you for your very interesting question. I
deal with about a dozen double verb verses today and show the basic
principles. Unfortunately I also still do not understand v2-19-13.
However I will try and have it completely answered within a week
or two. The fact that this verse does not fit into the list
presented later on in the digest shows what a good question it is!!]
Regards,
Gilbert
*****************************************
Ce message a ete controle par 2 antivirus
*****************************************
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE v4z5-12
v4z5-12 A Man a Man when he suspect his wife
I just wanted to summarize the intricate posting we had last week on
the DOUBLE NOUN issue raised by Eric Simon. This is only a summary
Those who want complete details should read the entire posting.
SUMMARY:
1) DOUBLE NOUNS should be interpreted as follows: The 2nd noun
refers to some OTHER case. This is usually implemented by
EXTENDING the obvious meaning of the noun 'EVEN to some other
case'.
2) Here are applications of this principle to the double noun
A MAN A MAN which occurs about half a dozen times in the Bible:
3-17-8 A MAN A MAN who offers a sacrifice outside the temple
EVEN if two people held the limbs and offered it together
(Note that this explanation does not apply to the similar
verse in 2-17-3)
3-18-6 A MAN A MAN should not commit forbidden sexual relations
EVEN a non jew to a jewess
3-20-9 A MAN A MAN who curses his parents
EVEN a women, or bisexual child
4-5-13 A MAN A MAN who suspects his wife
EVEN if he is in prison (& not in a position to suspect her
the courts suspect her)
Note the great variety and inconsistency on these interpretations.
In fact the law mentioned on 4-5-13 is not held. The law learnt
from 3-20-9 is learnt from other places. So we can easily see why
Rashi left out all commentary on these verses..there is no consensus
But Rashi did want to communicate the IDEA that DOUBLE NOUNS
should be interpreted as EXTENSIONS. He had before him 4 midrashim
to use on 4-5-13:
a) A MAN A MAN--Priest or Israelite
b) A MAN A MAN--whether he be naturally picky or not
c) A MAN A MAN--even if he is in prison
d) A MAN A MAN--The adulterous double crosses both her husband
and God (Who is called a MAN of war)
Rashi chose interpretation (d) not necessarily because he didn't
believe the others but rather because it CLEARLY illustrates
the principle that each of the double nouns refers to ANOTHER
type of NOUN/OBJECT.
We will have many more DOUBLE NOUN Rashis on Chumash and will deal
with them at the proper time.
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v4b18-19
v4b18-19 ...A Salted, Worldly Treaty..
v4c18-19 ...A Salted, Worldly Treaty..
v4d18-19 ...A Salted, Worldly Treaty
RASHI TEXT:
v4b18-19 "WORLDLY" others benefit from it
v4c18-19 "SALTED" -- The treaty never "rots"
v4d18-19 "TREATY"--The treaty with Aaron is a treaty that is
strong and lasting
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
The chapter,4-18,is speaking about the TREATY God made between God &
Aaron. The terms of the treaty are that Aaron serves God in the
Temple and God provides Aaron with the 24 priestly gifts enumerated
in this chapter.
The Bible describes this treaty with 3 words
---Treaty
---Salted
---Wordly
Rashi explains all 3 words.
TREATY is normally used to denote an agreement between 2 parties
that they both SERIOUSLY intend to keep. {LIST1} provides some
standard examples.
As {LIST2} shows, on the one had SALT is used to denote the
DESTRUCTION of land, while on the other hand it can also be used
to denote TASTINESS in food. For example Jeremiah describes a land
as SALTED and UNIHABITABLE (Jer17-6). By contrast Elishah healed
a poor water supply by symbolically using salt which gave it taste
(2R2-19:23). Similarly Job speaks about using salt to give secondary
food good taste (Job6-6).
These verses look contradictory---destruction vs tastiness. Rav
Hirsch points out that the common denominator is UNCHANGEABLENESS
IN THE PRESENCE OF EXTERNAL FORCES. Hence, if a land has been
destroyed, then salting it will prevent the natural growth process
of rejeuvenation. By contrast, if a food has a good taste then
salting it will prevent the natural process of food decay. In both
cases salt acts as a preservative--something that preserves the
status quo and prevents further change.
Hence if TREATY denotes the intention of both sides to keep an
agreement then SALTED denotes the affirmation that the agreement
will not change--it will be kept even if new things come up.
Finally if TREATY denotes an intention to keep an agreement and
SALTED denotes that the agreement will be under all circumstances
then a SALTED WORLDLY TREATY denotes that the agreement will help
not only the two parties who contracted it but will also help
the whole world. Indeed, usually when two people make a business
deal they are the only two people benefiting. But when God made a
treaty with Aaron it was to help not only God and Aaron but also
to help other people (For Priests typically give family, social and
personal advice and help people).
In conclusion Rashi Is Simple---the treaty is described with
3 words and Rashi explains each of the three words: TREATY
denotes agreement, SALTED denotes unchangeableness even in new
circumstances, and WORLDLY denotes that many people (besides
God and the Priests) will benefit.
This completes the explanation of this Rashi. The typical reader
may safely stop here. But for the more interested reader we cite
a delicious novelty of Rav Hirsch using the symbolism of SALT.
Sacrificial law, according to Rambam, states, that on the one hand
ALL Sacrifices must be salted but on the other hand only in
Minchah offerings does a lack of salt invalidate the offering (In
other offerings, it is preferred to have salt but in its absence
the offering is OK).
Why the difference? Because the animal offerings symbolize personal
situations (each animal symbolizes a different aspect of the
personality--oxen are leaders, sheep are followers, birds symbolize
poverty etc). On the other hand, Minchah (Meal) offerings symbolize
our personal POSSESSIONS. An animal offering is a statement that we
dedicate our PERSONALITY to God while a Michah offering is a
statement that we dedicate our WEALTH to God.
But then we immediately understand that on the one hand every
dedication to God must be salted---must receive an affirmation
of unchangeableness even in new circumstances; on the other hand
it is only in dedicating our wealth to God that salt is essential---
because the most common cause of people leaving religion is because
of monetary matters--"if I were a rich man, I would observe but now
I have to....". Personality types do not normally lead people astray
from religion, while money does. Consequently, salt MUST occur at
every Minchah offering because we must realize that dedicating our
wealth to God must be unconditional and without strings.
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
We should mention the obvious fact that SALTED is connected to the
fact that most treaties have a "treaty meal" which symbolizes the
friendship of the two parties. By salting the treaty meal we
affirm that the treaty is tasty to both parties.
However as Rav Hirsch points out SALT is used both for TASTINESS
and DESTRUCTION. The punchiest word we could find would be LOCK IN.
A treaty denotes that both parties have LOCKED IN to the agreement.
Indeed every treaty has tasty parts---aspects which the parties look
to. The treaty also has destructive parts---committments which
restrict the individuals (eg I have a contract to work for somebody
and can't quit; or Aaron has a contract to work for God and can't
lead a secular life). Thus concept of LOCK IN or UNCHANGEABLENESS
catches both the tasty and restrictive aspects and is preferred.
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
{LIST1} {A partial list of treatys in the Bible. A treaty
denotes a serious agreement between 2 parties to do
certain things}
VERSE TEXT Who Who
====== ==================================== ===== ======
1-9-13 Rainbow treaty not to destroy world*1 God Noach
1-15-18 The treaty of cuts(Israel to Jews) God Abrham
1-17-11 Circumcision treaty*1 God Abrham
1-21-27 Beer Sheva Treaty(water rights) Abrhm Avmlch
1-26-28 Party Treaty(Agree to peace) Isac Avmlch
FOOTNOTES
*1 Note that not all treaties have a meal. Some treaties are just an
agreement with a symbol
{LIST2} {Verses with the word SALT. SALT can mean BOTH to preserve
destruction as well as to preserve taste. The common
denominator is preservation. Interestingly SALT only occurs
17 times in the entire Bible with 1/6 of the occurences
referring to sacrifices *1}
VERSE TEXT PRESERVATION OF..
========= =========================== ======================
Jer17-6 A salted uninhabited city Destruction
5-29-22 Salted tarred city Destruction
2R2-20:23 Salt the waters(give taste) Taste
Job6-6 Salt "secondary foods" Taste
2-2-13 Salt all sacrifices*1 General Preservation*1
FOOTNOTES
*1 As explained above since sacrifices symbolize coming near
to God, salting sacrifices is an affirmation of unchangeableness
in coming near to God--we preserve our nearness to God in all
circumstances (whether good (taste) or bad (destruction)--ie
whether the nearness to God restricts our life or enhances it
CROSS REFERENCES:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
See Rav Hirschs commentary on 3-2-13 where he develops
the symbolism of salt.
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
WORD MEANINGS
NEW MEANINGS | SYMBOLS
WORD MEANINGS
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v2a22-25
v2a22-25 If you take a security security deposit..
v5-13-16 hit hit this city
v5a15-10 Give Give to the poor
v5b15-8 Give Give
v5c15-8 Give him What he needs
RASHI TEXT:
v2a22-25 SECURITY (ChaBaL) (vs MShKoN=Security) refers to a
security deposit that is taken AFTER the time of the loan
as for example when the lender requests payment and the
borrower can't pay and offers a security at the time of
request.
The double SECURITY SECURITY means that you give him back
his security each evening,even 100 times. Why? Because God
gives you back your soul every night; so too you should give
back hit deposit every day/night.
v5-13-16 HIT HIT this city: You are suppose to kill
the inhabitants by sword. But if you lack a sword you can
use any other means of death.
v5a15-10 GIVE GIVE..even 100 times (according to
what the poor person needs)
v5b15-8 If you can't GIVE him then LOAN him
v5c15-8 Give him what he needs (but not if he is rich)
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
The Bible frequently uses a double-verb form--eg not just GIVE
but GIVE GIVE (NATHON TTAYN). In these double verb forms one
of the verbs is usually an INFINITIVE while the other is an
ordinary verb. The Talmud gives a list {LIST1} of about a dozen
double verb verses.
Thus there are 3 questions to ask:
---Why the infinitive
---Why the double verb
---What is the reason for the laws inferred from the double verb.
But we have already dealt with all these topics.
The INFINITIVE {LIST2} denotes ONGOING ACTIVITY independent of time.
Hence in all these verses it would denote ONGOING activity which is
done again and again (Such as giving charity to the same poor person
again and again--even 100 times).
The DOUBLE NOUN theme has been dealt with several times {LIST3}.
The SECOND noun is normally taken to refer to SOME OTHER noun--
something we hadn't thought of. Using the DOUBLE NOUN as an analogy
these verses,with DOUBLE VERBS,refer to some other aspect of the
underlying activity of the verb. For example, if PUT HIM TO DEATH
means put him to death by the SWORD then PUT HIM TO DEATH PUT HIM
TO DEATH means to put him to death by ANY death penalty.
{LIST1} compactly summarizes the application of these two themes
to the dozen examples of double verbs brought down in the Talmud
Finally, we have left to deal with the question of WHY. If I gave
money to a poor person (a shnorer) and he didn't have enough
intelligence to use the money profitably and make himself a business
why do I have to keep on giving him money every day he comes?
Rashi answers this by giving a MORAL REASON. After all, God puts up
with us and returns our soul to us every morning after we sleep and
this is so even though many people do not deserve it. So too we
should give charity as often as necessary.
This is the main explanation of Rashi and the ordinary reader may
stop here. The more interested reader can read our explanation of
why, of the dozen verses, Rashi only commented on 3 or 4 verses,
and why on these particular 3 or 4. This explanation occurs in the
COMMENTS ON RASHIS FORM section.
Besides explaining why Rashi only commented on these 3 or 4 verses
we have two additional items left to explain:
---How does Rashi know that ChBAL refers to securities taken AFTER
the time of loan while AVOT and MShCON refer to securities taken
AT the time of loan
---How do we deal with the alternative talmudic opinions that not
everything on {LIST1} should be explained. According to
this opinion the DOUBLE VERB is a Biblical idiom and has no
special meaning. Doesn't this BIBLICAL IDIOM approach ("The Bible
speaks using 'human phrases'") contradict the whole thesis of this
list?
The answers are straightforward. To find out why Rashi explained
2-22-24:26 to taking security after the time the loan was given
rather than at the time of the loan we look at two items:
--the grammatical structure of 2-22-24:26 and
--the unified meaning of CHVAL
Rashi compared the grammatical structure of 5-24-10:13 vs
2-22-24:26. In one case it says 'IF you loan ...IF you take
a security deposit'; in the other case it says 'IF you loan
do not go into the house to take..'
The double IF denotes two acts: First I gave the loan and then
when I asked for repayment I took a security. The single IF
by contrast does not emphasize when the deposit was taken.
However, the main support that CHVL refers to a security taken
after the time of the loan comes from the UNIFIED MEANING of the
root CHVL {LIST4}. The meanings have a connotation of DEVELOPMENT
OVER TIME.For example BIRTHPANGS are not pains you get at conception
or during pregnancy but come later on at birth. Similarly
Songs 2:15---'wolves destroying vineyards'---
doesn't mean any type of destruction but rather
a destruction over time...for the wolves don't immediately
destroy the vineyard...rather they destroy the vineyard
by eating and eating over a period of time. These
meanings all come from ROPE which is something you pull
up bit by bit over time. We apply this OVER TIME concept
to the SECURITY and therefore ChVL would mean a SECURITY
taken OVER a period of time....That is it is taken after
the time of loan (say when the borrower is asked for the
money and can't return it). Further details are presented
in the footnotes to {LIST4}.
This completes our explanation of how Rashi knew that CHVL
referred to security deposits taken after the time of the loan
Let us now deal with the more serious problem of the fact that
there SEEMS to be a Talmudic opinion that the Torah speaks in
human phraseology (which would contradict the whole idea of this
list).
But the answer to this is straightforward. There **is** a minority
talmudic opinion like that; but according to that opinion NO
items on {LIST1} should be interpreted. A few of these non
interpretations filter down to us as actual law (that is,
in some verses with double verbs, the laws inferred from these
double verbs are not held today).
But this opinion is clearly a minority opinion,because, most of
the laws derived from Biblical literary analysis are held as
laws today. Furthermore Rashi supplied the missing explanations
to those verses with double verbs where the Talmud omits an
explanation because it claims that 'this doubleness is just
an idiom and nothing can be learned from it--the Torah is simple
employing human phraseology when using the double verb'.
Here is how Rashi supplied the missing explanations---
Both in 5-15-8 and 5-15-14 it refers to GIVING charity
(to poor or slaves). The double verb is interpreted to mean
ANY type of giving (EVEN if the slave didn't give you a profit
and EVEN if the poor person is rich).
The minority opinion rejects these laws. In fact, on 5-15-14
the minority opinion holds that you do not give a slave gifts
when he leaves if you incurred a loss from him while he
worked for you. However there is no indication that this
minority opinion rejects ALL the laws on {LIST1}. It only
rejects this particular law--that you give gifts to a slave
from whom you incurred losses.
Rashi therefore supplements {LIST1} by a midrash not in
the LIST. This Rashi on 5-15-8 could equally apply to
5-15-14 and would explain how the minority opinion would
learn 5-15-14.
Rashi interprets 5-15-8--GIVE GIVE TO THE POOR--to mean
ANY TYPE OF GIVING--IF NOT THRU CHARITY THEN THRU LOANS.
We can now apply this Rashi to 5-15-14---if you incurred
a loss from a slave then give him a LOAN when he leaves
but do not give him GIFTS.
(In passing I mention an attempt to learn from GIVE GIVE--
that we should give charity to ANY person, even a rich person.
True, there is one opinion that rejects this, but as Tosafoth
points out they do not reject this because they don't learn
from double verbs but rather they reject learning that we
give charity even to a rich person because 5-15-8 explicitly
continues 'give give him WHAT HE IS MISSING' (so a rich person
who is not missing should not be given).)
But that doesn't mean we don't learn anything from the phrase
GIVE GIVE. It simply means we learn something else--namely GIVE
CHARITY or GIVE A LOAN.
In summary: All double verbs according to all opinions teach
something. The classical example would be 5-15-8 or 5-15-14.
According to one opinion it means GIVE to the slave whether
you earned a profit or not while according to the other opinion
it means GIVE or LOAN. Tosafoth also agrees with this (Tosafoth
considers there to be two verses where we don't learn anything
because the verse negates the possibility of learning a double
meaning---one of these two verses is 5-15-8/5-15-14 where the
phrase ALL HIS NEEDS negate learning GIVE TO HIM WHETHER RICH
OR POOR---but our way of interpreting Rashi answers this
question of Tosafoth in a more satisfactory way--at any rate
Tosafoth explicitly agrees that in 99% of the cases double verbs
teach us something).
The above is an important principle since it encourages us to
research and interpret all Biblical phrases.
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
As we have indicated several times Rashi had a database mind. He
had before him all midrashim and all verses with double verbs.
He had 3 lessons to teach and he carefully selected the 3 best
verses to teach them.
He chose 5-13-16 HIT HIT to learn HIT BY WHATEVER MEANS---since
this is the classical approach to DOUBLE VERBS (the 2nd one means
something different than the first). He chose this verse since
the infinitive does not have a blatant meaning here (you can't say
HIT even 100 times). So there is only one lesson to learn.
He chose 5-15-8 GIVE GIVE even a 100 times since of all commandments
CHARITY is the most pleasant one to repeatedly perform (In other
words if Rashi had eg said RETURN LOSS ARTICLES 100 times there
might be some resistance...people feel more comfortable giving
charity 100 times).
There is a further point here: The GIVE GIVE verse is the one
verse where the concept of EVEN 100 TIMES is not only quantitative
but qualitative. For you must give even 100 times to the same
poor person. You must also give even to 100s of TYPES of poor
people--your poor relative, your cities poor, your countries poor,
fellow Jews in other countries that are poor etc.
He chose 2-22-25 to teach moral lessons (God gives us back
our soul each night hence you should give back a borrowers
items each day/night) since they both involve a periodic
returning in time (eg Telling us to give charity 100 times
is only partially analogous with God returning our souls...
Telling us to give back nightclothes/dayclothes is more
analogous with God returning our soul).
Finally as indicated Rashi explained 5-15-8 to deal with the
minority talmudic opinion that certain double verbs should
not be interpreted. So Rashi shows that even according to
these opinions they should be interpreted (but in a different
way)
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
{LIST1} {List of verses that have double verbs (courtesy of
the Babelonian Talmud, Baba Metzia 31). Each verse
has some word repeated twice--one of the verbs is
an infinitive and the other is the normal form
of the verb. This list gives the lesson derived
from each: The infinitive means ongoing activity
and means it should be done even 100 times; the
double verb is interpreted like all double nouns
--the second verb is different than the 1st and
denotes that the activity of the verb is done
EVEN in other circumstances (See {LIST3} for the
treatment of double nouns)}
VERSE TOPIC DOUBLE
WORD INFINITIVE DOUBLE VERB
====== ============= ====== ========== ========================
5-22-1 Lost articles return 100 times without owner knowledge
5-22-7 Take birds*1 let-go 100 times even not for food *1
3-19-17 Rebuke sinner rebuke 100 times even a student to Rabbi
2-23-5 Help unload*2 unload 100 times even if owner can't help
5-22-4 Help reload*2 reload 100 times even if owner can't help
4-25-21 Death penalty die 100 times*3 even with other deaths*3
5-13-16 Hit city hit Long war*3 even with other deaths*3
5-24-13 Security return 100 times even if court sanctioned
2-22-25 Security return 100 times even if court sanctioned
5-15-8 Charity open up100 times even if from other cities
5-15-10 Charity give 100 times even if from other cities
5-15-14 Slave freeing Give Alot *4 even if you didn't profit
FOOTNOTES:
*1 This refers to finding birds in a nest. If you want the young
birds (for food) then you must let the mother bird go (and even
if she returns) you must repeatedly let her go. From the double
verb the talmud learns that this LETTING-GO law applies even
if you took it not for food but rather say for a sacrifice (I might
not think the mother has to be let go since she could be used for
a sacrifice also).
*2 The Biblical law requires that if you see a fellow Jew with
a loaded donkey then you must help him unload the donkey (to rest
it) and then you must also help him reload the donkey when he
wants to go back on his journey (So there are two obligations:
Loading and Unloading).
*3 There is no Talmudic derivation on the infinitive of placing
to death. But of my own accord I extended the "100 times" theme
to the death penalty---e.g. if you performed the execution and
he still didn't die you would have to perform the execution again
(till he dies)
*4 The Talmud notes that certain opinions did not hold this as
law. That is, if you lost money from the slave (during his work
by you) then you are NOT obligated to give him presents when
he leaves you. These opinions hold that the double verb form
is a Hebrew Idiom with no special meaning. According to these
opinions that the double verb is a Hebrew Idiom with no special
meaning we would NOT learn ANY of the laws in this list.
But we do use most of the laws on this list. So Rashi was faced
with a problem: How do the people who hold that the
infinitive and double verb have special meaning deal with those
verses where the Talmud left no record of a new law learned from
the double infinitive because of the other opinions that the Torah
spoke in human terms?
Rashi actually answers this question on the sister verse
to 5-15-14, which is 5-15-8.
It says there to GIVE GIVE to the the poor and then repeats
'GIVE GIVE (HaaVAYT) his needs.' Now the verse EXPLICITLY states
only give him WHAT HE NEEDS (So if he doesn't need anything you
need not give him). Rashi therefore interprets the double-verb
to mean GIVE HIM ANY WAY YOU CAN... If you can't give him charity
then give him a loan (as e.g. a rich man who isn't eligible for
charity--he should be given a loan).
This Rashi on 5-15-8 can now be applied to 5-15-14.
According to those opinions that you only give gifts to a
slave when he leaves PROVIDED you didn't lose money
then you would still be obligated to give him a loan (so he can
start off in life).
By applying the Rashi of 5-15-8 to 5-15-14 we accomplish our initial
goal of learning laws from EVERY double verb on the list.
{LIST2} {Of INFINITIVES translated as GERUNDS}
VERSE GERUND TEXT
----- ------ ----
2Sam3-15 WALKING And her husband walked with her, WALKING
2Sam3-15 CRYING and CRYING...
Isa22-13 KILLING And he behold there is partying: The
Isa22-13 SLAUGHTERING KILLING of ox and the SLAUGHTERING of
Isa22-13 EATING sheep, the EATING of meat and the DRINKING
Isa22-13 DRINKING of wine-{the mentality of...} EATING and
Isa22-13 EATING DRINKING because tomorrow we die anyway.
Isa22-13 DRINKING
5-16-1 WATCHING The WATCHING of the Spring shall enable
the passover to happen in the Springtime
5-27-1 WATCHING*1 The WATCHING(Commemoration) of the
commandments shall be...by the building
of stones....and writing the laws on them
Isa42-24 WALKING ..They didn't want the WALKING in my ways*2
Isa3-16 WALKING WALKING and TIPTOEING is their gate*3
1-12-9 WALKING And Abraham journeyed, WALKING and
JOURNEYING southward
Jer2-2 WALKING While WALKING,call out to the Jerusalemites
"Thus says God...I remember your walking
after me in a desert..."*4
FOOTNOTES
*1 Rashi EXPLICITLY identifies the INFINITIVE on this verse as
"LIKE THE PRESENT" (i.e. a GERUND--Rashi uses the old french)
*2 Isa42-24 can EITHER be translated with INFINITIVE or GERUND
INFINITIVE: They did not want TO WALK in my ways
GERUND: They did not want the WALKING in my ways
*3 Perhaps a better translation would be "They walked by
WALKING and TIPTOEING" (i.e. They walked in a WALKING-TIPTOEING
GATE)
*4 Note that the Radack here dismisses the verbal form as a
COMMAND or INFINITIVE. I suppose the ultimate question in all these
translations is HOW natural is the use of the Gerund...I tried
to pick verses where the gerund seems natural...in this verse
Jer2-2 I think there is a symbolic pun...."While walking call out."
....In other words Jeremiah's WALKING is SYMBOLIC of the Jews
WALKING in the desert...that is why he was commanded to give this
Divine utterance WHILE WALKING (normally Divine utterances were
given while standing,in an atmosphere of more respect)--I picked
this example to show the possible richness in using Gerunds and
how they might shed additional light on meaning
{LIST3} {Of Repeated nouns in the same verse (Courtesy of Malbim)*1}
THE NOUN REFERS APPLICATION
TO TWO OBJECTS OF THIS
VERSE REPEATED NOUN THAT ARE SIMILAR PRINCIPLE
(Is in Caps) THESE 2 OBJECTS ARE OF TWO OBJECTS *2
----- ------------- ------- -----------
3-1-5 Offer BLOOD Blood in vessel Even spilled blood
Throw BLOOD Blood spilled on floor can be thrown
on altar (not just
blood properly
collected)
3-27-14 Sanctify HOUSE House=House These sanctify/
3-27-15 Redeem his HOUSE House=Possesions redeems laws apply
Either to a house
or a house with
possessions
3-23-32 On EVE of 9th Eve = After Sunset Don't eat on the
From the EVE Eve = During Sunset day prior to Yom
Kippur right up
to sunset. Rather
start the fast
prior to sunset
FOOTNOTES:
* 1
See Chapter 15 of Malbims beautiful Morning Star for a long list of
verses with double nouns--Morning Star occurs at beginning of his
commentary on Leviticus.
* 2
Nouns are never repeated if you can use a pronoun or suffix. There
are a variety of methods of treating double nouns. One of them being
that each noun refers to a DIFFERENT item (as shown in the list
below). In general repetition denotes EMPHASIS. The emphasis can
be by limitation or even by extension. For example, BLOOD BLOOD
denotes ANY blood even if it was spilled out of the temple vessel
HOUSE HOUSE denotes ANY aspect of the house (including its contents).
{LIST4} {The list of meanings of root ChVL courtesy of RDQ. All
meanings have a connotation of development over time.
For example BIRTHPANGS are not pains you get at conception
or during pregnancy but come later on at birth. Similarly
Songs 2:15 doesn't mean any type of destruction but rather
a destruction over time...for the wolves don't immediately
destroy the vineyard...rather they destroy the vineyard
by eating and eating eating over a period of time. These
meanings all come from ROPE which is something you pull
up bit by bit over time. We apply this OVER TIME concept
to the SECURITY and therefore ChVL would mean a SECURITY
taken OVER a period of time....That is it is taken after
the time of loan (say when the borrower is asked for the
money and can't return it). Further details are presented
in the footnotes *1}
MEANING VERSE TEXT FOOTNOTE
======== ========== ======================== ========
Security 2-22-25 If you take a security
Destory Songs 2:15 DESTROY (vineyards) *2
Pains Hos13-13 BirthPangs *3
Portion 5-3-4 60 cities the ARGOV portion *4
Plot Prv24-6 Thru plotting make a war *5
Group 1S10-10 A Group of Prophets to him *6
FOOTNOTES:
*1 As mentioned above the contrast of 2-22-24:26 vs 5-24-10:13
shows that the double if (IF you loan..IF you take a security)
could refer to 2 points in time (First you loan and then you
take the security)
*2 The connotation is that they don't destroy the vineyards
immediately. But over time as they eat more and more the
vineyards cannot replenish at that pace and get destroyed
*3 Obviously conception and pregnancy are not painful. Birth
pangs come after a period of time.
*4 The RDQ interprets this to mean ROPE. But about 80% of the
verses refer to actual portions. The RDQ lumps the following
meanings together: ROPE, PORTION (Because it is measured
with a rope), SEA CAPTAIN (Because he uses ropes on his boat)
At any rate the fundamental meaning of rope would denote
pulling something up bit by bit---the dimension of time. This
is particularly true on a sailboat
*5 Plotting denotes mental activity that develops bit by bit
We have some similar terms in English---WEAVE a tale, STRINGS
attached etc
*6 A Group is an informal group---their relationship develops
over time---there is nothing formal but they begin to borrow
and share with each other (In a formal agreement both parties
know what they can take immediately)
CROSS REFERENCES:
v1n1 v1n2 v1n4 v1n19 All deal with DOUBLE NOUNS
v2n10 v1n12 deal with INFINITIVES
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
We amusingly acknowledge the STONE translation of the Chumash
These double verbs are translated in 3 ways!!!!
--some are not translated at all
--some are translated as SURELY (You shall SUREY do such & such)
--in one case it is translated correctly as REPEATEDLY (even
100 times)
I also acknowledge my students in my Lower Merion Synagogue
Rashi shiur who have brought this topic up several times and
have made many valuable points.
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
DOUBLE PARSHAS | UNIFIED MEANING | MORAL REASONS
GRAMMAR | INFINITIVE
DOUBLE NOUN
DOUBLE NOUN
EXTRA SENTENCE
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
COMMUNICATIONS
--------------
Send via email SUBMISSIONS/responses/contributions to
rashi-is-simple@shamash.org
If you want your communication published anonomously (without
mentioning your name) simply say so (and your wishes will be
respected). All other submissions (whether thru Shamash or ANY
of my email addresses are made with the understanding that
they can be published as is or with editing)
NOTATIONAL CONVENTIONS
----------------------
e.g. v5b2-1 means as follows:
The "v" means verse
The "5" means Deuteronomy--the 5th book
The "2" means The 2nd chapter
The "1" means The 1st verse
The "b" means The second rashi on that
verse ("we rounded mount
Seir)
Similarly v5-2-1 would mean Dt 2:1 and probably refer to all
Rashis. (These conventions start with issue 14---beforehand
the notation is similar and will be updated retroactively
in the future)
Asterisks (*,#) in a list usually refer to footnotes that follow it
Parenthesis with the word List and a number--[LIST3] refers to
LISTS in the LIST section of each posting.
THE WEB SITE
------------
To review all past issues as well as to see all principles go to the
web site HTTP://WWW.Shamash.Org/Rashi/Index.Htm. You can download all
past issues from this website.
THE ARCHIVES
------------
Alternatively to get PAST ISSUES goto
http://www.shamash.org/listarchives/rashi-is-simple/
To retrieve a specific past issue email to listproc@shamash.org and type
in the body of the message: get rashi-is-simple rashi-is-simple.v#.n#
Issues 5,10,12 are not located here but can be retrieved from the
web site.
SUBSCRIBE & UNSUBSCRIBE
-----------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE send mail to listproc@shamash.org and type in the body
of the message: unsubscribe rashi-is-simple email-address.
To SUBSCRIBE send email to listproc@shamash.org, and type in the body
of the message: subscribe rashi-is-simple email-address FName LName
OUR GOALS
---------
RASHI-IS-SIMPLE
* will provide logical explanations to all 8,000 Rashis on Chumash.
* the preferred vehicle of explanation is thru list of verses and exceptions
* These postings will be archived in Shamash in Quartuplet
-- By Volume and Number
-- By Verse
-- By Grammatical Rule
-- By quicky explanation
* Rashi-Is-Simple should prove useful to
layman, scholars, rabbis, educators, and students
* Although this list is orthodox we welcome all logical
--explanations
--contributions
--modifications
--questions
--problems
provided they are defended with adequate examples.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
----------------------
For further information on the character of this list
* read your welcome note from Shamash
* read PESHAT and DERASH: TRADITION, Winter 1980 by Russell Hendel
End of Rashi-Is-Simple Digest
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*