Rashi-Is-Simple Mailing List
(C) Dr Russell Jay Hendel, 1999
http://www.shamash.org/rashi
Volume 3 Number 21
Produced Oct, 08 1999
Topics Discussed in This Issue
------------------------------
v1-1-5 1st,2nd,3rd used in SEQUENCES.1,2,3 used in SETS
v1c4-9 How to study grammar with Rishonim.3 rules for HAY
v1b1-14 FULL spelling=ALL parts.DEFICIENT spelling=SOME parts.
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
***************************
*** 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: v1-1-5
v1-1-5 & There was evening & morning Day One
RASHI TEXT:
v1-1-5 Why does it say Day ONE, TWO, THREE vs
the more obvious FIRST DAY, SECOND DAY, THIRD DAY..
Because this was the day of ONENESS when only God
existed (since the Angels were not created till
the second day). This is the way this is explained
in Genesis Rabbah
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
This Rashi is a peach in elegance---like a glittering gem
this Rashi illustrates both WHAT TO DO and WHAT NOT TO DO
when learning Rashi. Let us first give the simple explanation.
As {LIST1} shows there are 2 ways to COUNT. If I count a SET--
for example, a set of stones---I count, 1,2,3,4---
2-28-17:20, the four stones on the Priestly Breastplate is a good
example.
By contrast if I count a SEQUENCE--for example the months of
the year--I count 1st month, 2nd month etc. 3-23 is a good
example of this.
Therefore, if Genesis 1 was talking about the SEQUENCE with which
the world was created it should have said 1st day, 2nd day etc
But if Genesis 1 is simply talking about the 7 COMPONENTS of
creation (like the 4 component stones in the priestly breastplate)
then it should say day 1, day 2 etc.
We conclude that the 7 days of creation refer to 7 components of
creation without SEQUENCE. Thus for example, it is not necessary
that the creation of herbage (day 3) precede the creation of the
sun, moon and starts (day 4).
Thus the essence of Rashis comment is that DAY ONE represented
ONE component of creation. We have already on v1-1-4 explained
that 1-1 speaks about the creation of prophecy not the creation
of the physical world. A very rough description of what was
created on the 1st day is
>HEAVEN vs EARTH or
>LIGHT vs DARKNESS--
in other words
>SPIRITUALITY vs MATERIALISM.
So Rashi is simple & is observing that
>belief in Spirituality (God)
is a component/prerequisite to prophecy
(We could say more but we suffice with the basic idea. We also point
out that if it had said
>the FIRST DAY
instead of
>Day One
then the implication would be that
>the general heaven and earth template were created on day 1
>each item (sun, fields, animals) was fixed on later days
Thus day 1 would stand out only as a preparation. However by using
the language DAY ONE vs FIRST DAY we are emphasizing that
PURE SPIRITUALITY itself was created (HEAVEN, LIGHT) and the
separation of SPIRITUALITY from MATERIALISM (EARTH, DARKNESS) is
a prerequisite to prophecy).
For a discussion of the FORM of Rashi as well as commom pitfalls
in reading Rashi please see the COMMENTS ON RASHIS FORM section.
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
There are 4 common fallacies when reading Rashi and these
are all present in this Rashi.
1) GENERALIZING RULES OF RASHI TO ALL CASES
--------------------------------------------
It appears that Rashi is saying that it should ALWAYS count
1st, 2nd 3rd etc. But as {LIST1} shows, 1,2,3 is a perfectly
valid way of counting.
2) TEACHING RASHI STARTS WITH THE 'PROBLEM'
-------------------------------------------
THere is a common belief that Rashi MUST start with the PROBLEM.
In this case Rashi SEEMS to identify the problem as
>It should have said 1st, 2nd 3rd
3) SOLVING PROBLEMS IN RASHI WITH WORD GAMES
--------------------------------------------
It appears that Rashi is solving his problem of ONE vs
FIRST by playing a word game---
>Day one = Day of oneness
God was one on Day one. But of course this is rediculous.
Indeed
>One
is an adjective while
>Oneness
is an abstract noun. How could they be the same?
4) MAKING A DICHOTOMY BETWEEN PSHAT and MIDRASH
-----------------------------------------------
People who think that
>Rashi is asserting that it should always say 1st,2nd...
>Rashi is asserting that DAY ONE = DAY OF ONENESS
are now faced with the problem that ONE does not equal ONENESS
and not all lists are counted 1st, 2nd, 3rd. To solve this
problem one invents a dichotomy between TRUE pshat and Rashis
midrash. Midrash, we are told, is Pshat "on a different level"
But all this is unnecessary. Corresponding to the above 4 fallacies
we have 4 helpful rules by which Rashi should be learned
1) Using LISTS to understand Rashi
-----------------------------------
All Rashis may be resolved with
lists. {LIST1} clearly shows that both forms
>1st 2nd 3rd as well as
>1 2 3
are used in counting. The phrase
>DAY ONE
signifies that this is not the BEGINNING of creation but one ASPECT
of it---namely the SPIRITUAL vs the MATERIAL (LIGHT vs DARKNESS).
2) Use STYLE not "THE PROBLEM" to understand Rashi
----------------------------------------------------
There is no
>PROBLEM
in 1-1-5. Also
>Nothing is bothering Rashi
For as {LIST1} shows, both 1st, 2nd, 3rd as well as 1,2,3 are normal
styles. Both of them have meanings and both of them fit 1-1-5.
Rashi simply is noting that one style is used vs the other and
exploring the implication of it.
3) Rashi can express his main thought with a PUN vs ABSTRACTION
----------------------------------------------------------------
We have seen throughout this list that Rashi frequently expresses
his thoughts in the forms of puns---thus instead of simply saying
that day one represents
>pure spirituality(HEAVEN,LIGHT) vs physicality(DARK,EARTH)
Rashi simply says that it was a day of ONENESS for God (who is
purely spiritual).
Rashi also points out that even Angels are mixtures of physicality
and spirituality. For example, the most famous of all angels, Moses,
led an ordinary material life till he gave the Torah. Thus Moses
was a mixture of spirituality and physicality.
4) Rashis main point derived from LISTS; reader must do some work
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Once I know from {LIST1} that 1-1 speaks about 7 components of
creation I can then ask WHICH POINT? I can then tie this idea
into the rest of the Rashi.
From the point of view espoused in v1-1-4 that 1-1 is speaking about
the creation of prophecy, not the creation of the physical world
we could simply say that day one is the most important component
of prophecy that a prophet needs, namely
>day one = the belief in God, a purely spiritual being.
Clearly prophecy cannot happen without that. Once we understand this
main point we can appreciate the various puns that Rashi used. Very
often Rashi uses WORKBOOK methods and demands that the reader
participate in the completion of the main or subsidiary points.
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
{LIST1} {Usage of FIRST (RISHON) vs ONE(1) in Lists. Lists
where SEQUENCE is important is enumerated as
FIRST, SECOND, THIRD. Lists that are perceived as
SETS are enumerated ONE, TWO THREE. Thus the months
of the year, the apportionments of a lottery or
the events of a sequence of days use the language
FIRST, SECOND, THIRD. By contrast the set of stones
in the Choshen, or the rivers from a garden use
the language ONE, TWO THREE}
VERSE TOPIC 1-1st?
========== ======================================= ======
1-32-17:19 The agents Jacob sent to Laban First
4-7-12:83 The 12 offerings of one prince per day First
2C25-9:31 The lot apportionment of Temple service First
3-23-1:44 The months of the year First
2-28-17:20 The 4 stone insets in the Choshen One
1-2-11:14 The 4 rivers from Gan Eden One
1-1-1:35 The 7 days of creation One
CROSS REFERENCES:
v1-1-4 We show there how the phrase
>SPIRIT OF GOD
always refers to prophecy and that 1-1 refers to the
creation of prophecy not the creation of the physical world
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
My brother the honarable Neal Hendel called me as I
finished writing this and advised me that the above
explanation seems to contradict the well known midrash
that
>Adam was created last to instill humility in him
>Since we can always tell a person, 'don't think
>so highly of yourself--the insects preceded you
>in creation.'
However I answered my brother with the famous story
in the Aramean war in which it appeared that the
Arameans outnumbered the Jews. Elishah the prophet
asked that the eyes of the person who asked this
question be "opened" and he saw that the Jews
outnumbered the Arameans because of all the
Angels accompanying them (2R6-15:24). In other
words the Jews/Prophets are always in a minority
while the Arameans which functioned like a herd
of insects are in the majority. It is this majority
vs minority that causes humility. In other words
prophets should have humility because
>prophets are in the minority and
>the insect-like-herds of people are
>in the majority
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
SYNONYMS
SQL {Database query comments for those who know Database theory}:
SELECT Verses FROM Bible WHERE Verses.List = True
SORTBY Verses.Word = 1
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v1c4-9
v1c4-9 Am I my brothers keeper
RASHI TEXT:
v1c4-9
The text begins with the hebrew letter HAY,
punctuated with a CHATAF PATACH. This indicates
that the phrase is interrogative
>Am I my brothers keeper?
All HAYS with CHATAF PATACH have similar meaning.
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
Rashi Is Simple. He is merely giving a grammatical rule. We brought
this Rashi down to show
>how to understand Rashis on grammatical rules
>what type of research goes into making these postings
If I asked a 3rd grader
>How do you make questions in Hebrew
they would probably answer
>You use a HAY with a CHATAF PATACH.
But as {LIST1} shows there are at least 5 ways to make questions in
Hebrew which divide into 3 main groups. The groups of {LIST1}
are presented in {LIST2}
1) The normal case; Use HAY + CHATAF PATACH (Ha Shomayr 1-4-9)
2) Before a Guttural letter (Aleph, Hay,Chet, Ayin)--Use HAY+PATACH
(HA ACHAYCHEM 4-32-6)
3) Before a word beginning with a Svah--Use HAY+PATACH+DAGESH
(HA-Smaynah 4-13-20)
Corresponding to case 2 we have 3 subcases
2a) Before Aleph, Hay, Ayin, Cheth---Use HAY + PATACH (HA ACHAYCHEM)
2b) Before a CHETH+KAMATZ---Use HAY + SEGOL (4-13-18 HeChazak)
2c) A RESH is NOT treated like a guttural letter (Ha Rafeh 4-13-18)
Corresponding to case 3 we have various exceptions
3a) Before a word beginning with a Shvah--HAY + PATACH + DAGESH
3b) Exceptions---HAY + PATACH without the Dagesh (HAVSOD Job15-8)
Finally when Case 3 and 1 conflict we have
2a and 3a) Before a word beginning with a guttural shvah--HAY+PATACH
(HA AMINON 2s13-20)
We have left out of the above discussion the rules governing the
secondary accents placed on these letters.
Further comments may be found in the COMMENTS ON RASHIS FORM SECTION
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
Rashi simply gave the MAIN RULE. Using WORKBOOK
methods he asked the reader to find the OTHER CASES.
Note that Rashi comments on the interrogative Hay in 3 places.
---In v1b3-11 and v1c4-9 Rashi comments on CASE 1
---In v4-32-6 Rashi comments on Case 2
Normally there would be a 3rd Rashi commenting on Case 3. However
case 3 has many exceptions and therefore Rashi left it out. Thus
we see Rashis method
>For each case of the grammatical rule...
>Rashi made a comment in one place
>Cases for which there are exceptions were left out by Rashi
We should explain why Rashi gave two examples of Case 1
(v1c4-9,v1b3-11). On v4-32-6 I conjectured that Rashi commented
on v1b3-11 because this is the 1st time that the interrogative
hay occurs. However that would not explain why Rashi repeated
himself in v1c4-9. It appears to me that Rashi commented on
v1c4-9 because of the VERY NEXT statement Kayin makes in 1-4-13
>My sin is to big to bear
Rashi comments on this that it is not a confession but a question
>My sin is to big to bear?
Thus Rashi had to indicate that
>The rhetorical nature of 1-4-13 is inferred from MEANING
By contrast
>The rhetorical nature of v1c4-9 is inferred from FORM
I would like to use this simple Rashi to show the type of
work that goes into making a Rashi is Simple posting.
I first became aware of the INTERROGATIVE HAY on v4-32-6. At that
time I did not know how many other cases there were. So I
simply posted v4-32-6 and kept the topic on my mind. Then over the
next few months I gathered both Rashis and examples till I had
developed {LIST1}. When I came to v1c4-9 I was prepared to explain
the whole story. There is still some research to be done---why
for example are there exceptions to case 3--perhaps they have some
pattern.
Finally I indicate the type of work that goes into making a LIST.
One has to be intellectually honest. For example Job15-8 falls into
case 3 (HAY before a letter beginning with a Shvah). There are
some manuscripts that
>Place a dagesh in the Samech to MAKE the text fit the rule
>HBBSOD...
One must however check sources. The MINCHAT SHAI mentions that
there are good manuscripts where there is no DAGESH
>HAVSOD
The MINCHAT SHAI cites the RDQ who in turn cites other examples.
These other examples, exceptions to the DAGESH subrule, must
be placed in the list. Finally I checked the Great Allepo codex
to be certain that the correct text in Job15-8 is
>HAVSOD
When you multiply all this work for EACH verse
>classifying verses with interrogation
>checking commentaries (Minchat Shai, RDQ)
>Checking the Allepo Codex
>Checking where Rashi explained the interrogative Hay
by the number of verses, you begin to appreciate how a LIST is made
I also had to construct {LIST2} which summarizes {LIST1}
I conclude with 4 important comments on learning
1) Why not look it up in a grammar book?
----------------------------------------
Because not all grammar books contain all cases. Even the
good ones may omit some subcases. Furthermore YOU may discover
the underlying pattern in the exceptions. Finally some grammar
books are based on faulty manuscripts. Now that we have the
Aleppo we can make accurate rules.
2) Why not use a CD ROM?
------------------------
They can help but they don't have a MEANING component.
So if I searched for all
>words beginning with HAY + CHATAF PATACH
I would know Case 1 but no other cases.
If I searched for all
>words beginning with HAY
I would have thousands of cases and it would be difficult to
study (It is easier to simply read the Bible).
The proper search is on all
>phrases ASKING a question that begin with HAY
but it is not presently possible to do such a search by computer
3) Why should I study Grammar? Is it Talmud Torah?
--------------------------------------------------
Yes, it is talmud torah. The study of Grammar has the
same components as other talmudic study, namely
> looking thru many cases
> studying rishonim,acharonim (RDQ, RASHI,MINCHAT SHAI..)
> discerning Patterns, making chidushim
> making distinctions (eg guttural, shvaith...)
> dealing with conflicting rules (eg Case 2+Case 3)
I have found that people who study Grammar regularly will find
that their study of Talmud improves.
4) But it takes to long to study grammar?
-----------------------------------------
That is correct---you cannot do it overnight. But as I showed if
you keep a topic on your mind for a few months you can end up
solving it.
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
{LIST1} {List of the 3 main methods of indicating a question
The list of cases is presented in {LIST2}}
WORD CASE NOTE Rashi? VERSE
============ ==== ==== ====== ======
HA ACHAYCHEM 2a *1 Rashi 4-32-6
HA CHIYITHEM 2a *1 4-31-15
HA HAYMIR 2a *1 Jer2-11
HA AL AYLEH 2a *1 Is57-6
HE CHAZAK 2b *1 4-13-18
Ha RAFEH 2c *1 4-13-18
Ha YESH 1 *1 4-13-20
Ha MIN 1 *1 Rashi 1-3-11
Ha SHOMAYR 1 *1 Rashi 1-4-9
HA-BEMACHANIM 3a *1 4-13-19
HA-SMAYNAH 3a *1 4-13-20
HA MAT 3b *1 4-13-18
HA MAT 3b *1 1-30-15
HA VSOD 3b *1 Job15-8
HA AMINON 2-3 *1 2S13-20
FOOTNOTES
*1 We use the following notation
HA = HAY + PATACH
Ha = HAY + CHATAF PATACH
HE = HAY + SEGOL
HA-= HAY + DAGESH IN FOLLOWING WORD
{LIST2} {LIST of cases for the INTERROGATIVE HAY}
DESCRIPTION RULE EXAMPLE VERSE CASE
=============== ===================== =========== ====== ====
Ordinary Case HAY + CHATAF PATACH Ha Shomayr 1-4-9 1
Before Guttural Hay + PATACH HA ACHAYCHM 4-32-6 2a
Before CH+Kmtz Hay + Segol HE CHAZAK 4-13-18 2b
Before Resh Hay + Chataf Patach Ha Rafeh 4-13-18 2c
Before Shva Hay + PATACH + DAGESH HA-Smaynah 4-13-20 3a
Before Shva Hay + Patach HAVSOD Job15-8 3b
CROSS REFERENCES:
v1b3-11
v4-32-6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
GRAMMAR
SQL {Database query comments for those who know Database theory}:
SELECT FROM Bible WHERE
Phrase.Top = 'Hay' and
Phrase.Meaning.Interrogative = True
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v1b1-14
v1b1-14 Let there be LIGHTS in the firmament
v1-1-28 be fruitful, fill the earth and conquer it
v1b6-2 And the Judges saw that the girls were beautiful
RASHI TEXT:
v1b1-14 The Hebrew word for LIGHT is spelled DEFICIENTLY
without all VVs---the DEFICIENT SPELLING
shows deficiency in the creation of the 4th day.
The SunLight doesn't fully solve all earths
problems. As an example, they (in Talmudic
times) would pray that Diptheria not happen to
the children.
v1-1-28 The Hebrew word for conquer is spelled deficiently
It appears to say
>And you (singular) will conquer her
(That is the man conquers the woman)
A second (preferable) explanation is that the
conquest of earth by people is a DEFICIENT conquest,
not all people conquest. In particular usually men
conquest while women usually stay home and do not
conquest (And since women don't conquest they are
not commanded on being Fruitful and multiply since
they don't have the means to support )
v1b6-2 The word BEAUTIFUL is written deficiently indicating
a verbal form--Beautify. When the women would
beautify themselves for their weddings, the Judges
would come in and have relations with them first.
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
This Rashi deals with the thorny issue of
>DEFICIENT and FULL spellings.
First let me explain what the terms mean and then let me exlain the
reasons for it.
Every word has vowels and unseen sounds. For example the English
word
>LEGS
could equally have been spelt
>LEHGS
A spelling like
>LEHGS
is called
>FULL
because ALL letters are there. By contrast a spelling like
>LEGS
is called
>DEFICIENT
because some letters that could be there are not.
In Hebrew FULL and DEFICIENT usually refers to the presence or
absence of VVs (corresponding to the OH sound).
Many grammarians ignore the treatment of full and deficient
spellings. However there are several Rashis that use a consistent
rule to deal with them. There are basically two approaches, which
we summarize with examples in {LIST1}
APPROACH 1
----------
The
>VERB FORM approach
states that the word should be interpreted as a verb.
We have already seen an example of this on v4f22-5. The
adjective MOL (opposite) was spelled deficiently. Rashi
explains that therefore MOL should be read as a verb, ML
to OPPOSE.
Similarly on 1-6-2 the word TVOTH, normally an adjective
meaning PRETTY or GOOD or BEAUTIFUL is spelled deficiently.
Rashi interprets this to mean that therefore TV should
be read as a verb TV, to BEAUTIFY or to JEWELERIZE or TO
PUT MAKEUP ON. TV can mean to put on Jewelery as in 2Kings9-30
>and she PUT MAKEUP on her face.
To make the verse flow smoothly we would have to interpret KI as
>KI = WHEN
So the whole verse would read
>And the Judges (waited) to see the girls WHEN they
>JEWELRIED themselves and then took whomever they wanted
Rashi picks a good picturesue example and states they especially
did this at wedding ceremonies(have relations with the woman
before conducting the ceremony).
APPROACH 2
----------
The
>FULL DEFICIENT APPROACH
applies to COLLECTIVE NOUNS (Nouns with many parts). A
good example might be the LEGS of a table. The
rules are that a
>FULLY SPELLED FORM
indicates that the
>Object is full (all 4 legs are there)
By contrast the
>DEFICIENTLY SPELLED FORM
indicates that the
>OBJECT is deficient (eg possibly 3 legs are there)
Some standard talmudic examples are the deficient spellings
of
>Altar Horns in 3-4
and
>Succah in 3-23-42:43
The Talmud uses this to show that a succah can have 3 walls
(in other words, the Succah is DEFICIENT, 3 vs 4 walls)
or that sprinklings on only 3 of the altar horns would
suffice (even though you have to sprinkle on all 4).
Applying this principle to the deficient spellings in the verses
we are studying we see that
---JACOB=Symbol of Exile is spelled FULL in 3-26-42. Hence
we use the FULL MEANING OF THE EXILIC experience (which
includes ALL components of EXILE including the FINAL redemption)
---AND CONQUER THE WORLD---the word CONQUER is spelled deficiently
in Hebrew indicating that the CONQUEST would be DEFICIENT--not all
people would participate. In particular, women usually do not get
involved in the conquest of the world while men do.
---The GREAT LIGHTS---this reference to the sun in 1-1-28 is
spelled deficiently. Now the sun gives to the earth
>crops
>food
>warmth
>seasons
Nevertheless despite the great beneficience of the sun its gifts
are DEFICIENT...there is still deficiency in the world.
Rashi simply gives a nifty example of this deficiency, the existence
of disease (and Rashi mentions the practice of praying to avoid this
disease on Wednesdays the day of creation of the sun).
Further comments may be found on COMMENTS ON RASHIS FORM. We should
add in passing that ALL FULL and DEFICIENT spellings should be
interpreted this way. The fact that it is not in standard grammar
books does not mean that there are not alot of examples and and
that it isn't a rule. We should all strive to enrich our knowledge
of Grammar and midrash as much as possible since this leads to
the greatest possible application of principles to Torah.
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
We make two comments
1) Rashi prefers the 2nd explanation to the first
-------------------------------------------------
Clearly on 1-1-14 Rashi did not seriously believe that men are
suppose to 'conquer' women (After all, Rashi was a Frenchman).
The serious and mature explanation is the second one that
>the group conquest is DEFICIENT
>not all people conquer
>women do not conquer.
Rashi adds a caveat that women aren't obligated to reproduce
but neither he nor the Talmud learns this from the deficient
spelling. Rather the Talmud learns quite simply, it says
>"reproduction and conquest"
in the same verse. Those who can conquest (men) should reproduce
while those who can't support their children (=can't conquest=
women) aren't obligated to reproduce.
In other words the comment on the exemption of women from
reproducing was a comment, not on the deficient spelling but
on the multiple verbs in the verse.
2) Do not be picky/literal on Rashi's examples
----------------------------------------------
Rashi interprets v1b6-2 as
>And the Judges saw when the women would Jewelery themselves
>and then took whomever they wanted
It is NOT necessary to say that this happened only at weddings.
If two people were going steady and the woman was jewelerying
herself then the judges might take her then also. In other
words,
>taking women at weddings
is only a GOOD example of how evil people were. Rashis main point is
>TVOTH=a verb not adjective (beautify themselves)
>KI = WHEN not BECAUSE
So the whole verse means that the Judges
>saw women when they beautified themselves
3) Rashi uses PUNS
------------------
The main point of v1b1-14 is that SUNLIGHT is DEFICIENT and
therefore there is DEFICIENCY in the world.
Rashi expresses this with a cute pun---MORAH spelled deficiently
is the word for DIPTHERIA. The real point however is that the
sun, although giving crops and food and warmth nevertheless is
deficient and cannot give everything to the world---there is
deficiency in the world and this deficiency manifests itself
in disease.
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
{LIST1} {Of words spelled FULL or DEFICIENT in the Bible.
There are 2 approaches. The
>VERB FORM approach
states that the word should be interpreted as a verb.
The
>FULL DEFICIENT APPROACH
applies to COLLECTIVE NOUNS (Nouns with many parts). A
good example might be the LEGS of a table. The
rules are that a
>FULLY SPELLED FORM
indicates that the
>Object is full (all 4 legs are there)
By contrast the
>DEFICIENTLY SPELLED FORM
indicates that the
>OBJECT is deficient (eg possibly 3 legs are there)
Some standard talmudic examples are the deficient spellings
of
>Altar Horns in 3-4
and
>Succah in 3-23-42:43
The Talmud uses this to show that a succah can have 3 rules
or that sprinklings on only 3 of the altar horns would
suffice (even though you have to sprinkle on all 4).}
VERSE WORD Verb-Full Explanation of Full-Deficient
======= ====== ========= ==========================================
1-6-2 TVOTH Verb Form Judges took women when they jeweleried
4-22-5 MMLI Verb Form They are sitting in military formation
3-26-42 YAKOOV Full FULL JACOB=All aspects of exile(redemption
1-1-28 MOROTH Deficient Suns beneficience is deficient(disease)
1-1-14 CVSHUA Deficient DEFICIENT conquest;not everyone(not women)
CROSS REFERENCES:
v3a26-42 Explanation of Fully spelled YAAKOV
v4f22-5 Explanation of Deficiently spelled MMLI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
USAGE
SQL {Database query comments for those who know Database theory}:
SELECT Words FROM Bible WHERE
WORD.Spelling <> TheoreticalWord.Spelling
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (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 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*