Rashi-Is-Simple Mailing List
(C) Dr Russell Jay Hendel, 1999
http://www.shamash.org/rashi
Volume 3 Number 9
Produced Aug, 20 1999
Topics Discussed in This Issue
------------------------------
v5b25-13 We learn STONE=WEIGHTS from OTHER VERSES
v5b22-8 MAAKEH=FENCE(context); = SACK(Unified meaning)
v5-19-11 4 step process to murder:1)Hate,2)Notice,3)Confront,4)Blows
v5-25-4 Oxen are good examples. Biblical laws apply to all animals
r819a Question on AYKEV(Dan)
r819b Can witnesses be perjured thru inconsistencies in PLACE
r819c Request for Digest on 1-1
r819d Can High Schoolers use the Konkordance
r819e Note on A'S'H' in Psalms (Parness)
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (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: v5b25-13
v5b25-13 You should not have...a STONE & A STONE
You should not have ...a GALLON & A...
RASHI TEXT:
v5b25-13 By "STONE & STONE" the text refers to
WEIGHTS.
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
If the Bible only said DON"T KEEP STONES IN YOUR
HOUSE then we would have to interpret this to mean
that we shouldn't keep stones in our house (Sifsay
Chachamim).
But Rashi uses the technique of OTHER
VERSES. Laws dealing with weights also occur in
3-19-35:36.
In 3-19-35 it says not to have defective
--area measures
--weights
--liquid measures
In 3-19-36 it says to have proper
--scales/stones
--dry measures
--liquid measures
So Rashi is Simple. In our verse 5-25-13 we see by
correspondence that we are talking about
--stones = weights
--dry measures = dry measures.
If one studies these verses one sees the following
correspondences--
Notice how LIQUID MEASURE in 3-19-35
corresponds to LIQUID MEASURE 3-19-36.
Also notice how AREA (2 dimesional) in 3-19-35 corresponds to
DRY VOLUME MEASURE (3 dimensional) 3-19-36. Finally we
conclude that WEIGHTS (3-19-35) corresponds to
SCALES/STONES in 3-19-36 and 5-25-13.
The Laws may be found in Rambam Theft Chapter 7. Both
VOLUME measures and WEIGHT measures have negative and
positive commandments (stay away from defective ones
and keep good ones). VOLUME measures refer to both
VOLUME and AREA and both LIQUID and DRY measures.
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
{LIST1} {Correspondence between various verses dealing
with proper measurement. Notice how LIQUID MEASURE
corresponds to LIQUID MEASURE. Also notice how
AREA (2 dimesional) corresponds to DRY VOLUME
MEASURE (3 dimensional). Finally WEIGHTS
corresponds to SCALES/STONES}
3-19-35 3-19-36 5-25-13:16
============== ====================== ===================
Area scales/stones stones
Weight Dry volume measures Dry volume measures
Liquid measure Liquid Volume measures
CROSS REFERENCES:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
OTHER VERSES
SQL {Database query comments for those who know Database theory}:
SELECT FROM Bible WHERE
Verse between 5-25-13:16 OR Verse between 3-19-35:36 AND
word.meaning "measurement"
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v5b22-8
v5b2-8 When you build a house place a MAAKEH around the roof
RASHI TEXT:
v5b2-8 MAAKEH means a FENCE.
OONKLOS translates it as a SACK (ie the fence
watches that which is in it)
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
Of course Rashi is just translating the meaning of the word
But there is a subtlety here. Rashi brings down OONKLOOS
By so doing Rashi is showing two approaches to translation.
APPROACH 1: You can infer meaning from CONTEXT.
The verse says to place a MAAKEH around the roof to prevent
people from falling. So Rashi is Simple. From Context I infer
that a MAAKEH is a fence.
APPROACH 2: You can infer meaning from COGNATE ROOTS.
The cognate root A-Y-K occurs only 4 times in
the Bible and seems to mean OVERBURDEN. The typical verse
is Am-2-13
>>Behold I OVERBURDEN(AYK) you like the
>>wagon that is OVERBURDENED(AYK) with bundles.
Since AYK occurs 4 times and AKH occurs only once it is preferable
to tie their meanings together (since many LAMED HAY roots
have identical meanings to AYIN YUD roots).
Oonkloos suggests that the underlying meaning is SACK.
--To SACK a wagon would mean to OVERBURDEN it
--To SACK a roof would mean to make it like a SACK/CONTAINER
that can hold things.
In summary Rashi brings us two methodologies---
--context
--unified meanings of cognate roots
by which to approach the translation issue in this verse.
A summary of these approaches is presented in {LIST1}
which contains all verses in the Bible with either of
these roots.
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
{LIST1} {All verses with a root with AYIN and KOOF. The LIST
depicts the underlying UNIFIED MEANING of A-K}
VERSE MEANING FROM CONTEXT APPROACH UNIFIED MEANING
====== ==================================== =======================
Am2-13 Behold I OVERBURDEN you I SACK you
Am2-13 as an OVERBURDENED wagon like a SACKED wagon
Ps55-4 from the OVERBURDENING of the wicked ..the SACKINGS of the*1
Ps66-11 You have OVERBURDENED our Loins you've SACKED our loins
5-22-8 You will make a FENCE for your roof you'll SACK the roof*2
FOOTNOTES
*1 Note that the OOKLOOS approach is more precise here. The wicked
doesn't just OVERBURDEN the person---the wicked SACKS the person
(ie robs/takes things and places them in the thief's sack)
*2 As Rashi explains SACK THE ROOF means to enclose it and make
it like a SACK that can contain
CROSS REFERENCES:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
UNIFIED MEANING | CONTEXT
SQL {Database query comments for those who know Database theory}:
SELECT verse FROM Bible WHERE Verse A*K*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v5-19-11
v5-19-11 And when a person HATES another person
And he AMBUSHES/STALKS him
and he CONFRONTS him
and he LETHALLY SMITES HIM
RASHI TEXT:
v5-19-11 The Torah teaches us a SEQUENCE of actions
if you HATE a person (a minor sin) then
you will come to STALK him and that will lead
to CONFRONTATIONS which will lead
to BLOWS and DEATHS (A serious sin).
This teaches that whoever does a simple sin
may end up doing a serious sin in the end
And the Torah taught this deliberately since
it could have just said
When a person CONFRONTS (intentionally) another person
by AMBUSHING him
and SMITING HIM LETHALLY
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
Rashi Is Simple. He is using the principle of CLIMAX
He is not his usual terse himself.But rather he
CLEARLY AND EXPLICITLY spells out what he is saying.
First he is asserting the principle of CLIMAX--
>>whenever there is a list of 4 or more items then it is
>>justified in interpeting this list as developing in a
>>climatic manner
So the 4 verbs/activities in the verse show a sequence {LIST1}
--hatred
--stalking a person (noticing where he is etc)
--confronting him
--coming to blows.
Second Rashi is pointing out the naturality of the sequence.
No one gets up and kills someone. Rather the natural manner
by which murders happen is that there is hatred, which leads
to excessive pickiness and noticing, which leads
to confrontation which leads to blows and death.
Such sequences are useful to Rabbis and social workers who try
to prevent such fights--using Rashi they can focus on
appropriate middle steps (Perhaps they stop the hatred or if
they can't, they stop them from noticing each other all the time)
Third, Rashi points out that the insertion of this sequence by
the Torah was intentional.
For the main theme of 5-19-11:12 is that when a murder takes
place and the person is judged guilty then he must be executed
by the blood avenger.
The insertion of the whole 4-step sequence (from hatred to
death) was done intentionally to teach us HOW murders
naturally take place.
Thus the Torah functions both LEGALLY and SOCIALLY.
Finally {LIST1} we note that the 4 acts correspond to 4 levels
of intensity
--EMOTIONAL (Hatred)
--PERCEPTUAL (Stalking/noticing/ambushing)
--VERBAL (Standing up for themselves)
--PHYSICAL (blows)
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
{LIST1} {Activities/verbs in 5-19-11 which naturally
lead to murder. The 4 activities of the verse
naturally can lead to murder. Such a list is
useful to Rabbis and social
workers who are trying to prevent murder. Notice how
the 4 activities correspond to the 4 levels of
EMOTION/PERCEPTION/VERBAL/PHYSICAL}
VERB PLACE IN SEQUENCE
==== =================
HATE Just an EMOTION
STALK/NOTICE*1 Just an act of PERCEPTION
CONFRONTATION*2 Just a VERBAL act
BLOWS/DEATH Serious PHYSICAL confrontation
FOOTNOTES
*1 ARV means to ambush. We have translated it here
as STALKING NOTICING which fits more in with the
sequence. At any rate AMBUSHING technically denotes
waiting for someone and taking note of their movements
*2 KAM has about 8 meanings one of which is to "stand up
for yourself"--which in this context I would translate
as CONFRONT.
CROSS REFERENCES:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
CLIMAX
SQL {Database query comments for those who know Database theory}:
SELECT FROM verse WHERE verse = 5-19-11
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v5-25-4
v5-25-4 Do not muzzle an OX while it is threshing
v5-22-10 Don't thresh with an ox-donkey together
RASHI TEXT:
v5-25-4 The Torah just picked a good example.
The prohibition of muzzling while threshing
applies to ANY animal or bird.
And the point of picking an example alltogether
is to exclude prohibiting muzzling a HUMAN PERSON while
threshing.
v5-22-10 "Don't thresh with an ox-donkey together"
The same law applies to ANY two species of animal
and to ANY act of carrying ANY object.
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
We have explained many times that the normal method of
communicating a law in the Torah is thru a good example.
For example (v2-22-17 in v2n19) the laws about OXEN
GORING EACH OTHER (and the consequent responsibility
of paying for the damages) applies to any animals
hurting each other (owners are responsible for damages)
(Also see the explicit statement of this in Rambam
Monetary Torts 1:1)
So too here. The Torah just picked a good example.
The prohibition of muzzling applies to any non human
living creature.
And just as by monetary damages both Rashi (v2a21-28)
and Rambam (Monetary Damages 1:1) both say and use
the same expression ("An Ox was picked as a good
example but the laws requiring renumeration apply
to anybody") so too by the prohibition of muzzling
both Rashi (5-25-4) and Rambam (Hire 13:2) explicitly
state that "An Ox was picked as a good example but
the laws requiring renumeration apply to anybody."
{LIST1} presents many examples. The Torah says that
Female witches must die--but in reality ANY witch
must die (The Torah just picked Females because
the females normally did it). The Torah says that
if a thief was caught in a tunnel burrowing into
a house then the owner is not liable to a death
penalty if he kills him--but in reality no matter
how the thief enters (whether thru a tunnel or
otherwise) the owner is exempt from a death penalty.
(But the Torah just took the normal means of entry
by a thief, namely, thru a tunnel).
For a detailed discussion of RabbiIshmael's laws
as well as for a presentation of HOW the Torah
indicates specificity (since everything must be
generalized) see v1n13 (v2b25-22). v5-22-10
is of course just another example of this principle.33333
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
Rashi seems to advance a new idea here--namely that
when the Torah gives examples even though it intends that
they should be generalized nevertheless the Torah picked
this example so as to limit something. Thus the Torah says
when you muzzle with an ox---and the law generalizes this
to any animal or bird. But the law (that you can't muzzle
a working living thing while threshing) does not apply
to man.
Rashi apparently help this to be true to all Biblical
examples of GENERALIZATION. It is an exciting exercise
to apply it.
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
{LIST1} {List of Biblical laws which are GENERALIZED from the
specific Biblical examples brought down. In each verse
a law is stated as applying to a specific example but
Jewish law generalizes this specific example so that it
applies to all examples. This is one of the 13 principles
of Rabbi Ishamel--the principle of Generalization}
VERSE TEXT GENERALIZATION
========= ====================== ===========================
2-22-17 Female witch dies Any witch dies
2-21-28 Pay for ox damages Any animal damages
2-22-1 Thief caught in tunnel Thief caught in roof/garden
2-21-7:11 Female slave's rights Wifes rights
3-23-24 Succah on Sccth Succah on Passover *1
4-35 Accident murder exiles Accidental wound parents*2
FOOTNOTES
*1 In other words if 3-23-24 had not said ON THIS 7th MONTH SIT
IN THE SUCCAH then I would have required sitting in the succah on
all holidays (like Passover) since it commemorates God taking us
out of Egypt
*2 Rambam 7:15--Without the repeated statement HE IS A MURDERER
it would have been legitimate to generalize and apply the exile-
for-accident laws to any capital crime (like wounding ones parents)
CROSS REFERENCES:
v2-22-17 (v2n19)
v2b25-22 (v1n13)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
RabbiIshmael
SQL {Database query comments for those who know Database theory}:
T1 = SELECT FROM Bible
T2 = SELECT FROM
SELECT FROM T1 Inner Join T2 WHERE
T1.Law.Object T2.Law.Object
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
From: "4 gzntr8"
To: rashi-is-simple@shamash.org
Subject: Q from parshat Ekev
Date: July 29, 1999
Shalom:
Am I missing something in explaining
this from this week's parsha?
"Vehesir Hashem mimcha kol choli
vecholi madvei mitzrayim haraim asher
yadata lo yesimam bach ..."
"G-d should remove from you all
sickness, and all the bad maladies of
Egypt that you knew he will not place
upon you." (Devarim 7:15)
"Vehesir" implies removal. this means
that we are sick already. What's the
implication?
Also, what's the difference between
"choli" and "madveh"? Why does it say
regarding "choli" vehesir implying we
have it, and regarding madvei, "lo
yesimam", implying we will be prevented
from getting it in the first place?
Could not find any explanation
from Rashi on these. I don't have M.
gedolot in front of me, but
perhaps somebody explains this.
Shabbat Shalom
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
----__ListProc__NextPart__933289636--
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
From: C1A1Brown@aol.com
To: rjhendel@juno.com
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 10:51:11 EDT
Subject: digest 54
>>>But Rashi says on 4-5-13 that
even one witness suffices!!
But this is no longer a problem.
Because Rashi couldn't have
possibly believed that two witnesses
are not necessary after
he said so explicitly on two verses.
The principle he stated
WITNESS = 2 WITNESSES applies to
only 3 verses. How then could
Rashi ignore it here.<<<
I don't think this is a question
on Rashi. Rashi does read the pasuk as
referring to 2 witnesses - 'aid ain bah'
=there aren't 2 witnesses who have
seen the adulterous act, only one witness.
The chiddush of the Torah is that
although there are not two witnesses
the women is nonetheless deemed a sotah
bec. she was already warned (kinuy).
See Sifsei Chachamim
>>>Proof that Rashi could not have
seriuosly believed this COUNT GAME
that the witnesses are asked 7
questions comes from the fact that
they are asked many more
then 7 questions (WHAT place, HOW it
took place etc).<<<
HOwever, only these 7 must they answer
and cannot say we don't know - see
mishnayot in Ch. 5 of Sanhedrin.
The gemara Rashi is quoting is used to
derive the need for precisely
7 questions, not just a general need for
precise questions.
>>>Second we should make some
comments about WORD LINKS. My own
opinion is that the term WORD
LINK (GEZAYRAH SHAVAH) has many
meanings. It could refer
to a sinaitic tradition. But it
apparently refers to any
derivation based on a common word.
For example the commandment to
require 10 people for davening
is rabbinic. Nevertheless the
number 10 is based on a WORD LINK
(clearly there could not be a
sinaitic word link to a rabbinic
commandment)<<<
The latter case is merely an asmachta.
The case of learning out derisha and
chakira is a din d'oraysa.
See Tos. in Sukkah 31a d.h. vR"Y all GZ"Sh are
from Sinai and Rashi even extends it to other middot.
Kol Tuv,
-Chaim
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
From: C1A1Brown@aol.com
To: rjhendel@juno.com
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 10:17:01 EDT
Subject: Re: RASHI-IS-SIMPLE digest 56
<< --POINT 2: Some people may
wonder why 1-1-31 refers to the
"receiving of the Torah"---
what does that have to do with
the rest of the chapter?
But in v1-1-4 in v1n25 we have
shown that all of Genesis 1 must
be referring not to the creation
of the physical world but to
the creation of prophecy. >>
The simple answer I think is that
is exactly Rashi;s point - receiving the
Torah is the telos and ultimate
purpose of *physical* creation. You
answered by saying in effect that
we aren;'t dealing with a story of physical
creation but of spiritual/prophetic
creation. (Both will explain the
consistancy of 1-1-31 with with rest
of the chapter; the point is which one
do you think Rashi there meant?)
>>Such a thesis requires great
elaboration and a detailed defense of each
verse in Genesis 1.<<
Nu, so is that for the next digest,
or would you like a little more time : -
).
-CB
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
From: C1A1Brown@aol.com
To: rjhendel@juno.com
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 08:27:59 EDT
>>>1) How often does the chumash cite itself
(ie how often does God command something and
say "As I, God, have commanded"
QUESTION 2) For each verse whiere
God cites himself go and find
the verse referred to<<<
Just as an aside: HS students would
not be able to do this because they do
not know how to use tools like a
Concordenance. They would have no clue
where to look for the citation, and
might not even understand what a citation
is. (I am no longer teaching, but
I am unfortunatley not exaggerating the
state of education today). A HS class
would have to focus on deriving the
principle from the Rashi - that a pasuk
can refer to a previous citation.
You haven't addressed what I see as
the glaring question here - what is
Rashi's point? What else can the
pasuk be referring to other then a
previously mentioned command by G-d,
and I don;t think Rashi is there to
refresh our memory of pesukim.
Any thoughts?
-CB
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
From: "Avraham (avi) and pnina parnes"
To: rashi-is-simple@shamash.org
Subject: a.s.h.
DATE: Aug 17,1999
1) I think that your fifth explanation
squeeze is from the root Ayin
Samech Hay with the samech turning into
a sin. Modern Hebrew has this
root as a massage or in rabbinic
Hebrew to make a dough which also
involves squeezing.The eben Ezra on
Psalms 139 15 indeed puts Vaasotem
reshaim (with a Samech) together with
Ezekial 23 3 issu (with a sin) and
says that ussayti with a sin in
psalms is from a different root.
2) I am not sure that Rashi in Psalms
is explaining ussati as squeeze as
you posted. He writes betashmish -
through conjugal relations - and may
be explaining why a person is MADE
(ussati) in hiding due to relations
being a private hidden thing.So there
is no dispute between Rashi and
your wat of ynderstanding usatu.
Avi
----__ListProc__NextPart__934909647--
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (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 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*