Rashi-Is-Simple Mailing List
VISIT the RASHI DATABASE archives AT
http://www.shamash.org/rashi
(C) Dr Russell Jay Hendel, 2000
Volume 4 Number 23
Produced Jan, 14 2000
WARNING: USE FIX WIDTH FONTS (eg COURIER (NEW) 10)
Verses/Topics Discussed in This Issue with quicky explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------
v2b2-14
Several verses are studied where PERCEPTION= PROPHETIC
PERCEPTION. A few verses earlier it explicitly says
'AND MOSES PROPHETICALLY SAW'. Hence Moses killed the
Egyptian because of the prophecy Ramban doesn't disagree
but rejects alternative derivations.
v1a42-1
SEE can mean a) Physically see b) understand c) Perceive
d) prophetically see. Meaning is determined by context
and grammar. For example the word pair SEE HEAR always
denotes EITHER PROPHECY or DEEP UNDERSTANDING
v1a27-42
The verse says ESAUV THOUGHT TO HIMSELF 'I'll KILL
JACOB'. So when it says in the next verse 'And Rivkah
was told about Esauvs thoughts' we conclude that SHE WAS
TOLD means SHE WAS TOLD thru prophecy. We discuss how
THINKING TO ONESELF=SPEAK TO ONES HEART
v1-21-12
When a word is REPEATED it BROADENS the interpretation
of the word. Many examples are given using NOUNS and
VERBS. In this verse it says a) Everything that Sarah
says listen to b) Listen to her voice. Thus we interpret
VOICE in a broader sense to PROPHECY
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
GOALS: To grammatically defend all 8000 Rashis on Chumash.
METHOD:Every Rashi will be defended with a LIST of comparable cases
INTENDED AUDIENCE: Laymen, Academicians, Rabbis, Yeshiva students
COMMENTS,QUESTIONS: EMail to address below; (minor edits may occur)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:Always given unless 'anonymous' is explicitly asked
(UN)SUBSCRIBE: Email to above with keyword "(UN)subscribe"
JOURNAL REFERECE: Pshat & Drash, TRADITION, Win 1980, R Hendel
NOTATION: eg v2b1-8 refers to Ex(Book 2) Chap 1 Verse 8 Rashi b(#2)
SPECIALS:...on Rambam,Ramban,Symbolism,Pedagogy,Daily Questions
EMAIL: RJHendel@Juno.Com,rashi-is-simple@shamash.org,
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v2b2-14
======
v2b2-16 Are you going to kill me?
[Moderator:Said by the 2 fighting Jews to Moses]
RASHI TEXT:
===========
v2b2-16 From here we learn that Moses killed him
with the Divine name
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
=========================================
There is no apparent relation between the verse and Rashi. For
the verse says
>Are you going to kill me like you killed the Egyptian
while Rashi says
>This teaches that Moses killed the Egyptian with Gods name
Some commentators (eg Sifsay Chachamim) claim that this is learned
from the literal Biblical phrase
>Are you SAYING to kill me
These commentators claim that the phrase
>SAYING to kill me
proves that Moses killed him thru SPEACH (SAYING). However as the
Ramban points out on this verse
>It is sytlistically normal to express a desire to kill
>in terms of SAYING. For example the verse
>1Sam24-11 And I(David) SAID to kill you (Saul)
------------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 1: |
| =========== |
| Suppose you wanted to help out the Ramban. What |
| LIST would you make to show that the Biblical |
| phrase |
| >Are you SAYING to kill me |
| is perfectly normal. See below in {LIST1} for an |
| answer expanding on what the Ramban said. |
| What tools would you use to help the Ramban build |
| his list? |
------------------------------------------------------
We emphasize that Ramban was NOT disagreeing with RASHI. On the
contrary, Ramban was disagreeing with COMMENTATORS ON RASHI who
derive Rashi's lesson from the words
>Are you SAYING to kill me
Just as Ramban was aware of {LIST1} which shows that SAYING TO..
is a Biblical phrase for THINKING TO so was Rashi aware of these
verses. The Ramban was simply preventing us from misinterpreting
Rashi. He disagreed with bad commentaries on Rashi not with
Rashi himself.
Where then does Rashi derive that Moses killed the Egyptian
with the Divine name? Rashi does NOT derive this from this verse
but from an OTHER VERSE 2-2-12 which says explicitly
>And Moses PROPHETICALLY SAW that the Egyptian was a tramp
>and he(Moses) smote the Egyptian and hid him in the sand
So indeed Rashi Is Simple. Another verse 2 sentences above 2-2-12
explicitly says that Moses killed the Egyptian because of a
prophetic vision. In other words we intepret
>Moses killed him WITH THE DIVINE NAME
to mean
>Moses killed him BECAUSE OF THE PROPHECY IN THE NAME OF GOD
Indeed the Midrash Exodus Rabbah further elaborates with
two opinions
>It says 'AND MOSES **SMOTE** THE EGYPTIAN' teaching that
>he killed him with his fist
An alternative opinion says that
>Since Moses killed him because of the prophetic vision
>that he was a tramp it follows that Moses SMOTE him
>by cursing him with the Divine Name.
There is no reason to suppose these opinions CONTRADICT each
other--we can suppose they COMPLEMENT each other. In fact the most
reasonable interpretation is that
>Moses PROPHETICALLY SAW THRU THE DIVINE NAME that
>the Egyptian was a TRAMP (a 'NO MAN')
Moses then decides to help the Jew being beaten and Moses
>beats up the Egyptian (with his fist) and buries him
>in the ground.
Thus it is conceptually correct to say that
>Moses killed him WITH the Divine Name
because we interpret this to mean that
>Moses killed him BECAUSE of the prophecy coming from the Name
Still not convinced? Then look at the end of the verse
>and Moses buried him in the sand
Now the burial was obviously physically done with his own two hands
(not with the Divine name). So too the smiting was done with his
own two hands but it was done BECAUSE of the prophecy in the name
of God.
In summary
>The Torah explicitly says that Moses PROPHETICALLY SAW
>THE EGYPTIAN WAS EVIL
>Moses then physically kills him BECAUSE OF THE PROPHECY
>Rashi expresses this by saying that
>He killed him BECAUSE OF THE DIVINE NAME
>The Ramban simply emphasizes that you cannot derive Rashi's
>derivation from grammar since the phrase SAY TO KILL always
>means THINKING OF KILLING
Thus our approach unifies Rashi, Ramban and the two opinions in the
Midrash Rabbah.
We have left one minor point: We interpreted 2-2-12
>And Moses PROPHETICALLY SAW that the Egyptian was a tramp
But this involves two assumptions--we assume that
>SEE = PROPHETICALLY SEE
>THERE IS NO MAN = The Egyptian was NOT RESPECTABLE
Isn't this distorting the simple meaning of the text? Why not simply
interpret it as the standard English translations do
>And Moses SAW that NO ONE (was looking)
This indeed is a reasonable question until we realize that the
phrase
>And he looked around AND HE SAW NO PERSON
violates a basic principle of Hebrew style that verification of
a status always uses the words BEHOLD (HNaY). So the verse should
have said
>And he looked around AND BEHOLD THERE WAS NO ONE
In other words INVESTIGATIONS always conclude with a statement
>...and BEHOLD there was such and such
The phrase
>He looked around and HE SAW NO ONE
may sound normal in English but it violates Hebrew (Biblical)
Grammar. Therefore we interpret the word
>SAW as PROPHETICALLY SAW.
This approach was fully explained in a previous issue Volume 1
Number 9, v2-2-12 and v2z2-12. {LIST2} below shows the evidence
for this grammatical rule that
>after an investigation you use the words
>AND BEHOLD THERE ...
>You do not say
>AND I SAW THAT...
----------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 2: |
| =========== |
| How would you make a list showing that after an |
| investigation the proper concluding phrase is |
| >and BEHOLD THERE... |
| What tools would you use? |
----------------------------------------------------
Finally to strengthen the points we made in Volume 1 Number 9, we
bring up the whole question of how PROPHECY is indicated in the
Bible. In fact the other postings in this issue all deal with
verses which are interpreted prophetically but look like they
are talking about physical perception.
----------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 3: |
| =========== |
| How would you make a list of verses which |
| >are interpreted prophetically |
| >but which appear to be non-prophetic |
| What tools would you use to construct such a |
| list. {LIST3} below contains a partial listing |
----------------------------------------------------
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
=========================
Again, as we have pointed out in the past, we point out that
the Rashi-Ramban controvresy can be understood in terms of
LEVELS.
At the ELEMENTARY Level Ramban brings verses and Rashi does not,
so we think Rashi is wrong
At the INTERMEDIATE LEVEL we can find verses supporting Rashi
>Intent to kill should be phrased as WANTING(BKSH)TO KILL
and we can find verses supporting Ramban
>Intent to kill is normally phrased as I SAY TO KILL YOU
However at the ADVANCED LEVEL we see Rashi and Ramban as agreeing
For Ramban never disagreed with anything Rashi said...rather he
disagreed with a POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION of Rashi. At the advanced
level we see the REAL reason of Rashi lies in another verse. Thus
Ramban simply warned us not to use a bad interpretation of Rashi.
The technique of other verses is very powerful for making Rashi
simple when things seem difficult.
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
===========================================================
{LIST1} {Verses where SAID means THINK TO HIMSELF. Sometimes the
phrase used is
>SAID TO HIS HEART
or
>SAID IN HIS HEART
We especially brought the verse 1S24-11 (which the Ramban
did not bring) since it explicitly says
>and I SAID to kill you
which is similar to our verse. This LIST can be constructed
with a Konkordance or a CD Rom using a search on the word
pattern AMR BLB*}
VERSE TEXT SHOWING THAT "SAY"="THINK"
======= ===========================================================
1-8-21 And God SAID TO HIMSELF I will not destroy the world again
1-17-17 And Abraham SAID TO HIMSELF will a 100-year old have a chid
5-7-17 And you SAY TO YOURSELF--how can I conquer such big nations
5-8-17 And you (might) SAY TO YOURSELF--my 'might' enabled victory
1S27-1 And David SAID TO HIMSELF'(If I stay here)Saul will kill me'
1K5-19 And I am SAYING to build a house to God
1S24-11 And I SAID TO MYSELF that I should kill you
{LIST2} {Of verses with AYN=WAS NOT; NONE; NOONE...*2 *3}
VERSE PRECEDING ACTIVITY CONNECTING WORD TEXT
========= ================== =============== =============
1-37-29 Reuven searched And BEHOLD (HNH) Joe not there
3-13-21*1 Priest will see And BEHOLD (HNH) No white hair
Jud 21-9 Nation counted And BEHOLD (HNH) No Giladeans
1Sam14-17 And they counted And BEHOLD (HNH) John notThere
2R7-5 They came there And BEHOLD (HNH) Noones there
FOOTNOTES
*1 2-8-6 and 2-9-14 have similar patterns and deal with similar
situations. Similarly for 3-13-26 and 3-13-31. Hence we
enumerated them only once. Similarly for 2R7-5 and 2R7-10
*2 We should also mention Isa41:28 ...And I LOOKED and there was no
Person ". Apparently this is an exception...I say that this verse
is an exception (and not all the other verses we cited) since
as the Konkordance under AYN shows there are numerous examples and
they all have HNH--this verse in ISA seems to be the exception and
therefore should be interpreted elliptically (And I saw..and BEHOLD
there was no man...perhaps the paralellism caused it..
And I looked And there was no man
And from these There was no counsel
The study of lists also involves the careful decision of whether
exceptions are too numerous to form a rule or whether we are
justified in calling something an exception
*3 Finally we should mention verses like Esth 3-5 "And Haman saw
that Mardechai did NOT bow down to him" where however AYN is
used in the sense of NOT (modifying an activity) rather than NONE.
{LIST3} {Verses where ordinary perception words refer to prophecy.
This list can NOT be constructed with a CD ROM or
Konkordance You must use your mind. These verses are
discussed in the other postings of Volume 4 Number 23}
VERSE TEXT WHY INTERPRET IT AS PROPHECY
======= =========================== ================================
1-21-12 Listen to Sarah's VOICE VOICE means prophecy*1
1-27-42 Rvkh was TOLD Esv's hatred 1-27-41says he ONLY thought it*2
1-42-1 And he SAW food in Egypt Anticlimatic to 1-42-2 *3
1-48-8 And he SAW Joe's children Contradicts 1-48-10,14 *4
2-2-14 And He SAW there was no man should be And there was noone
FOOTNOTES
*1 There are really two proofs here
>The verse uses a GENERAL PARTICUALR style
>>Listen to EVERYTHING that Sarah says
>>Listen to her VOICE
>Thus of the things that Sarah says only her 'VOICE'
>should be listened to---'VOICE' in the Bible
>frequently refers to prophecy--this will be defended
>in the other postings of this Volume 4 Number 23
*2 How could Rivkah have been 'told' something Esauv only thought
In fact Rivkah explicitly says
>Esauv is THINKING of killing you
Thus the text makes clear that she was told 'someone's thoughts'
Hence we conclude that this was done thru prophecy
*3 Rashi explicitly says that two consecutive verses say
>And Jacob SAW there was food in Egypt
>And Jacob said I have HEARD there is food in Egypt
Although it is normal to use SAW and HEARD for general perception
nevertheless the sequence SAW--HEARD is peculiar and suggests
that it was a PROPHETIC SEEING
*4 The list of verses here is almost comical. We have
>Jacob SAW the children of Joseph 1-48-8
>Jacob could NOT SEE because of old age 1-48-10
>Jacob switched the order of eldest and youngest 1-48-14
So could Jacob 'see' or not? As we have explained in a previous
issue the contradictions necessitate interpreting SEE as prophecy.
See Volume 1 Number 6 v1a48-8
CROSS REFERENCES:
=================
Volume 1 Number 9 v2-2-12 (Shows that after an investigation
you use the phrase AND BEHOLD...)
Volume 1 Number 6 v1a48-8 shows that SEE in 1-48 should
be interpreted prophetically.
Volume 4 Number 23--postings dealing with interpretations of
communication as prophesy.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
=================
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
===============================================================
OTHER VERSES
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v1a42-1
======
v1a42-1 And Jacob SAW that there was food in Egypt...
and he said to his children,'I have HEARD...
that there is food in Egypt'
v1z48-8 And Jacob SAW the children of Joseph....
RASHI TEXT:
===========
v1a42-1 Jacob SAW thru a prophetic spirit. ..But it wasn't
a complete prophecy since God didn't want to tell
him that Joseph was there
v1z48-8 Jacob SAW thru a prophetic spirit.
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
=========================================
The text uses the verb
>TO SEE
This verb both in Hebrew and English has about a dozen meanings
which are reviewed in {LIST1}. Some simple examples of diverse
meanings are
>To physically see (with ones eyes)
>to perceive,
>to understand
>to prophesy
---------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 1: |
| ========== |
| How would you find all meanings of the Hebrew |
| root, RAAH, which means TO SEE? What tools would|
| you use? |
---------------------------------------------------
When a word has multiple meanings we interpret the word based
on its context. A simple English example will help: The word
FIFTH in English can mean
>a numerical fifth
>a musical chord
>a drink of liquor
So if you ask for a FIFTH then we interpret this as
>a drink, if you are in a bar
>a chord, if you are playing music in a group
>a proportion, if you are talking prices.
Isn't that simple? Well, Rashi is simple, also. In the verses in
question the context clearly indicates that
>TO SEE = PROPHECY or UNDERSTANDING.
We first explain 1-48 and then explain 1-42-1
----------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 2: |
| ========== |
| How would you prove that we can't have |
| >RAAH = SEE |
| in 1-48. What tools would you use? |
| The answer is provided in {LIST2} and the method |
| is explained in the next paragraph. |
----------------------------------------------------
In 1-48 we have the following statements
>1-48-8 Jacob SEEs Joseph's children
>1-48-8 Jacob asks 'Who are these?' (So he didn't see them)
>1-48-10 Jacob's eyes are old and he can't see
>1-48-14 Jacob who can't see switches his hands on the boys
>1-48-19 Jacob KNOWS that the younger child will be greater
Thus Rashi Is Simple---these verses are speaking about
>SEE = KNOWING THE FUTURE (ie Prophecy).
We have already explained this verse in volume 1 number 6, v1a48-8.
Next we analyze verse 1-42-1.
In 1-42-1 we have the double verb SEE-HEAR
>And Jacob SAW that there was relief in Egypt...& Jacob said
>I have HEARD that there is relief in Egypt
As {LIST3} shows the stylistic use of the pair
>SEE-HEAR
versus the individual use of
>SEE or HEAR
indicates not
>physical seeing
but rather
>understanding or precognition
To be consistent with Rashi we note that Rashi himself says that
we needn't interpret this SEE as PROPHECY but rather as a
HOLY INSIGHT.
-------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 3: |
| ========== |
| How would you construct {LIST3}. How would |
| you prove that |
| >See-hear |
| stylistically denotes |
| >understanding; deep insight |
-------------------------------------------------
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
=========================
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
===========================================================
{LIST1} {A brief list of meanings of the Hebrew root RAH,
which means to see. These meanings are obtained by
using the book ROOTS of the RADACK which contains
the list of meanings of all Biblical roots. Because
of the rich list of meanings this list is only partial*1
and condensed (cognate meanings are in the footnotes}
MEANING VERSE TEXT
=========== ======= ===================================
See* 2 1-29-10 When Jacob saw Rachel he kissed her
Perceive 1-27-27 See the scent of my son is good
Understand Ecc-1-16 My heart SAW much understanding
Prophesy *3 1Sam9-9 Come let us go to the SEER(Prophet)
FOOTNOTE
*1 eg We leave out
>RII=Dung
We take this to come from
>RR II (dung) = a pussy(RR) island (II)
*2 This includes such related items as MIRROR, APPEARANCE
*3 This includes such related items as PROPHETIC VISION, PROPHET
and the act of prophesy
{LIST2} {Verses in chapter 1-48 having bearing on Jacob's ability
to see. Reviewing these verses we see that
>some of them imply he could see
>some of them imply he could not see
>one of them says he KNEW the future of a nation
These multiple statements using SEE lead one to the
conclusion that the verb SEE here means PROPHECY *1}
VERSE TEXT
======= ===================================================
1-48-8 Jacob SEEs Joseph's children
1-48-8 Jacob asks 'Who are these?' (So he didn't see them)
1-48-10 Jacob's eyes are old and he can't see
1-48-14 Jacob who can't see switches his hands on the boys
1-48-19 Jacob KNOWS that the younger child will be greater
FOOTNOTES
*1 We add two more supportive points
(i) All of chapter 49 deals with prophecies about the future
of Jacobs children. So it shouldn't surprise us if chapter
48 deals with the same theme
(ii) We could also perceive {LIST2} in terms of the principle
of Rabbi Ishmael---
>Two verses contradict each other and a 3rd verse comes
>to resolve them
So in this case we have
>one set of verses saying that Jacob could see
>one set of verses implying/saying that Jacob could not see
>therefore a 3rd verse comes and says 'Jacob KNEW'
Thus this 3rd resolves the contradiction---the seeing mentioned
refers to KNOWING.
{LIST3} {Verses where the PAIR of verbs
>SEE and HEAR
occur. As can be seen this stylistically denotes
>PROPHECY or a HIGHER UNDERSTANDING
and is distinguished from
>SEE by itself.
The list can be composed by reviewing SEE in the
Konkordance OR by using a CD-ROM and searching for
the pattern "*RAH* ... *SHA*". As can be seen there are
4 cases to the occurence of the pair SEE/HEAR.Either..
>The verse definitely means prophecy or
>The verse refers to God caring about us or
>The verse could EITHER refer to prophecy or
intense knowing and finally
>One verse cannot refer to PROPHECY but refers
to intense UNDERSTANDING}
VERSE NOTE TEXT
========= ==== =====================================================
Ez40-4 *1 (God says) SEE / HEAR the vision;...understand
Ez44-5 *1 (God says) SEE / HEAR the vision;...understand
Job4-16 *1 I saw a VISION; & I HEARD a voice 'Is man trusted'
Dan8-14:15 *1 I saw a VISION; and I HEARD a voice...
Ez1-28 *1 And I SAW / HEARD the Glory of God
Isa6-10 *2 The nation is cursed lest they SEE/HEAR & get better
Jer23-18 *2 Who can SEE / HEAR that God is good
2K19-16 *3 Chizkiyahu prays that God SEE/HEAR prayer on Snchriv
Ps106-44 *3 (God hears us)
2-3-7 *3 God SEE / HEARS the Jews in Egypt
Jer4-21 *4 How long will I SEE foreign flags;HEAR their trumpets
FOOTNOTES
*1 In these verses the verb pair SEE HEAR definitely refers to
>definitely refers to PROPHECY
*2 In these verses the verb pair SEE HEAR
>COULD mean UNDERSTANDING
>COULD mean PROPHECY
>PROBABLY means UNDERSTANDING
*3 These verses speak about God KNOWING/HEARING. Apparently it
means
>An intense understanding
*4 In this verse we CANNOT interpret it as referring to prophecy
and must interpret it as referring to
>INTENSE UNDERSTANDING
CROSS REFERENCES:
=================
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
=================
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
===============================================================
UNIFIED MEANING
UNIFIED MEANING
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v1a27-42
======
v1a27-42 & Rivkah was told the plot of Esauv
(to kill Jacob)
RASHI TEXT:
===========
v1a27-42 She was told thru prophecy
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
=========================================
v1-27-41 clearly states that
>Esauv thought to himself 'I will kill Jacob'
The actual literal phrase used by the Bible is
>Esauv SAID IN HIS HEART.
Since (see {LIST1}) the Hebrew phrase
>Said in his heart
means
>think to oneself
it follows that the following verse
>and Rivkah was TOLD about the plot
must mean
>that she was told thru prophecy,
(ie no one knew about Esauv's plot, since the verse
explicitly says that he only THOUGHT IT TO HIMSELF.)
In fact following the Midrash Braishith Rabbah 67:8 we see that
there are two idioms to denotes
>THINKING TO ONESELF
If the thinker is a wicked person then the Biblical phrase used is
>speak IN his heart
while if the thinker is a righteous person then the Biblical phrase
used is
>speak TO his heart OR speak ON his heart
As a simple example we have the contrast
>and Haman THOUGHT TO HIMSELF (said IN his heart)
versus
>and David THOUGHT TO HIMSELF (said TO his heart)
or
>and Chana THOUGHT TO HERSELF (said TO her heart)
In other words
>the preposition IN (IN his heart) is used by the wicked
while
>other prepositions (ON/TO) are used by the righteous
----------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 1: |
| =========== |
| How would you rediscover the Midrashic principle |
| that SPEAKING TO/IN ONES HEART denotes THINKING |
| to oneself? What tools would you use?Surprisingly|
| the Midrash Rabbah shows us the inadequacy of |
| Konkordances and CD ROMS and shows us the power |
| of lists by meaning. |
----------------------------------------------------
We have already seen several other postings in this volume, volume 4
Number 23 illustrating the thesis that all words of communication
>see, hear, told...
can mean
>prophecy
if the context suggests it. So Rashi Is Simple, since the verse
explicitly says that
>Esuav had THOUGHTS of murder
it follows that if Rivkah was
>told about these THOUGHTS.
then she must have been told prophetically. Several other supportive
proofs are mentioned in the COMMENTS ON RASHIS FORM SECTION
---------------------------------------------------
|QUESTION 2: |
|=========== |
|How would you construct {LIST2} illustrating |
|several verses dealing with |
| >communication |
|which we interpret to refer to |
| >prophecy |
---------------------------------------------------
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
=========================
We mention in passing several other possible supports of Rashis
thesis that
>Rivkah was told by prophecy.
However these supportive arguments are not that strong and we
do not back them up by lists.
The strange Hebrew word
>MITHNACHEM (hithpael form of nchm)
has been the subject of much controversy. Perhaps it means
>Esuav was forcing himself to look like he regretted
>making a scene over the blessings
Similarly the passive form of
>Rivkah WAS TOLD
---(Instead of the more active form
>And they told Rivkah
(eg cf 1-48-2
>And they told Jacob (active form))---
could suggest that she found out not from external sources but
rather from God.
Since it is the firm policy of this email group NOT to
display anything as an argument UNLESS it can be backed with
a list, therefore we will not pursue this further here. In
future issues we will discuss the Rashi on
>MITHNACHEM, the hithpael form of the verb
and we will also discuss
>the passive form, 'AND SHE WAS TOLD'
We will only do so when we have lists to back them up.
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
===========================================================
{LIST1} {Verses where the concept
>THINKING TO ONESELF
occurs. As can be seen the rule of thumb is
that THINKING TO ONESELF is expressed using the idiom
>TALK **IN** ONESELF (if one is wicked)
but is expressed
>TALK **TO** ONESELF (if one is righteous)
Without the Midrash I would simply do a CD ROM search
on the pattern "AMR* ... *LV" But there are ONLY 2
cases of TALK TO ONES HEART and this is not enough
to formulate a list (Besides there are EXCEPTIONS
to the TALK IN ONESELF rule).
The Midrash Genesis Rabbah 67:8, brilliantly
EXTENDS the list using both OTHER VERBS and
OTHER PREPOSITIONS--e.g. you can SPEAK TO YOUR
HEART, PLACE ON YOUR HEART,CITE TO YOUR HEART etc.
Thus this is an example of a LIST BY MEANING
rather than a LIST BY WORDS.
The situation is further complicated by exceptions.
The full story is contained in the footnotes.}
VERSE IN/TO WHO WHAT DID THEY THINK TO THEMSELVES NOTE
======= ===== ======= ======================================= ====
1-27-41 IN Esauv I will kill Jacob *1
1K12-26 IN Yaravam I will lose my kingdom;let me make idols *1
Isa47-10 IN Babel I(Babel) am safe *1
Ov1-3 IN Edom Who can overpower me *1
Ps10-6 IN Wicked I won't fall *1
Ps10-11 IN Wicked God doesn't remember our deed *1
Ps10-13 IN Wicked God doesn't watch man *1
Ps14-1 IN Wicked There is no God *1
Eccl2-15 IN people Man and animal have the same fate *1
Es6-6 IN Haman Who else would the king honor if not me *1
ZCR 12-5 IN Jew We have our protection from God *2
Eccl2-1 IN People Let me be happy *2
1-17-17 IN Abraham Will a 100 year old man give birth *1
1-8-21 TO God I will not destroy the world anymore *3
1S27-1 TO David If I stay in Israel, Saul will kill me *3
Jer51-50 ON Jews They'll remember Jerusalem in Exile *4
1S1-13 ON Chana Chana was speaking on her heart *4
Dan1-8 ON Daniel Daniel avoided the Kings (non kosher)food *4
Song8-6 ON Lovers Place me like a trinket on your heart *4
Prov6-21 ON TheWise Tie wisdom ON your heart *4
Isa46-8 ON Sinners Sinners repent by remembering... *4
Jer32-25 ON God It never dawned on me to command this *4
Jer44-21 ON God God remembered your sins *4
Mal2-2 ON People If you don't THINK to honor me *4
Isa65-17 ON People No one will pay attention... *5
Jer3-16 ON People No one will pay attention *5
Jer12-11 ON People No one pays attention *5
Isa47-7 ON Babel You didn't THINK OF CONSEQUENCES *5
Ez38-10 ON Gog You will think to conquer the innocent *6
Ez14-3 ON Wicked These people think of their animality *6
FOOTNOTES
*1 These are about a dozen examples of
>WICKED PEOPLE
who
>THINK *IN* THEIR heart.
Thus these examples confirm the rule
*2 These 3 verses are EXCEPTIONS to the rule. Thus Abraham
spoke IN his heart even though he was righteous. Although
it is permissable for a grammatical rule to have exceptions
we would simply reformulate the rule as follows:
>CONTINUOUS THINKING/HARPING TO ONESELF
is expressed as
>SPEAKING **IN** ONES HEART
Compare the comparable English
>ENGULFED IN THOUGHT
In Hebrew we use the word IN versus ENGULFED.
I think the idea is that we constantly harp on a thought then
so to speak we are IN the thought but the thought is not IN us.
This would explain why WICKED PEOPLE usually are associated with
IN----part of being WICKED is that you are a victim of your
own emotions. (Notice how the LIST enriches our appreciation of
the rule and enables us to go deeper)
*3 These are the ONLY 2 examples of
>SPEAKING TO ONES HEART
They occur by Righteous people (God and David).
However it is improper to form a list from just 2 examples.
Therefore Rav Assi Bar Rav Yosi in Genesis Rabbah introduces
BOTH
>other VERBS (e.g Daniel PLACED on his heart)
as well as
>other PREPOSITIONS (eg Daniel placed ON his heart)
*4 These are examples with the preposition
>ON ONES HEART
The verses here either
>speak about God
or
>deal with righteous people
*5 These verses use the preposition
>ON
but deal with thoughts/people that are
>neither GOOD nor BAD
Many of these verses deal with
>PAYING ATTENTION vs THINKING TO ONESELF
Thus we would again reformulate the rule as
>speak IN ones heart = TO HARP on a subject
>Wicked people traditionally HARP on subjects
>speak TO ones heart = To MATURELY think
>Traditionally only Righteous people can so think
>speak ON ones heart = to think in passing
>(as in the English expression to SKIM the surface)
>(therefore ON is associated with PAYING ATTENTION)
> Thus ON is a more neutral term
*6 These verses use the preposition
>ON
but deal with BAD THOUGHTS / PEOPLE.
We therefore modified the rule (as in footnote 5)
We would suggest that the two verses in question don't yet
deal with total wickedness. Indeed note that in
>Ez14-3 speaks about THINKING IN PASSING ABOUT SIN
>Ez14-5 speaks about HARPING ABOUT ONES SIN
Thus we see a progression.
Similarly Isa47-7 and Isa47-10 show a progression from
>ON ONES HEART to >TO ONES HEART
In summary we have a good rule of thumb and a working model
for a deeper understanding of the rule. (Such developments
of rules with exceptions and further refinements is normal
in everyday grammar--the reader who is interested in
serious study of the Bible should thoroughly review this
list as it is typical).
{LIST2} {Verses where ordinary perception words refer to prophecy.
This list can NOT be constructed with a CD ROM or
Konkordance You must use your mind. These verses are
discussed in the other postings of Volume 4 Number 23}
VERSE TEXT WHY INTERPRET IT AS PROPHECY
======= =========================== ================================
1-21-12 Listen to Sarah's VOICE VOICE means prophecy*1
1-27-42 Rvkh was TOLD Esv's hatred 1-27-41says he ONLY thought it*2
1-42-1 And he SAW food in Egypt Anticlimatic to 1-42-2 *3
1-48-8 And he SAW Joe's children Contradicts 1-48-10,14 *4
2-2-14 And He SAW there was no man should be And there was noone
FOOTNOTES
*1 There are really two proofs here
>The verse uses a GENERAL PARTICUALR style
>>Listen to EVERYTHING that Sarah says
>>Listen to her VOICE
>Thus of the things that Sarah says only her 'VOICE'
>should be listened to---'VOICE' in the Bible
>frequently refers to prophecy--this will be defended
>in the other postings of this Volume 4 Number 23
*2 How could Rivkah have been 'told' something Esauv only thought
In fact Rivkah explicitly says
>Esauv is THINKING of killing you
Thus the text makes clear that she was told 'someone's thoughts'
Hence we conclude that this was done thru prophecy
*3 Rashi explicitly says that two consecutive verses say
>And Jacob SAW there was food in Egypt
>And Jacob said I have HEARD there is food in Egypt
Although it is normal to use SAW and HEARD for general perception
nevertheless the sequence SAW--HEARD is peculiar and suggests
that it was a PROPHETIC SEEING
*4 The list of verses here is almost comical. We have
>Jacob SAW the children of Joseph 1-48-8
>Jacob could NOT SEE because of old age 1-48-10
>Jacob switched the order of eldest and youngest 1-48-14
So could Jacob 'see' or not? As we have explained in a previous
issue the contradictions necessitate interpreting SEE as prophecy.
See Volume 1 Number 6 v1a48-8
CROSS REFERENCES:
=================
The distinction between TELL TO ONES HEART and TELL IN ONES HEART
first occured in my tradition article, Winter 1980, PSHAT AND DRASH
A NEW ANALYTIC APPROACH.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
=================
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
===============================================================
STYLE
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v1-21-12
======
v1-21-12 Everything that Sarah says Listen
(Listen) to her voice
RASHI TEXT:
===========
v1-21-12 The double statement
>Everything that Sarah says listen to...
>Listen to her voice
shows that the verse is speaking about the
>voice of prophecy.
Sarah had a higher degree of prophecy than
Abraham.
[The first paragraph is not in Rashi but was
inserted here to make things clearer:Moderator]
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
=========================================
Repetitions of NOUNS and VERBS occur frequently in Tnach. The
standard way of treating these double occurences is to interpret
the 2nd occurence of the NOUN or VERB as referring to a BROADER
interpretation of the NOUN or VERB or even to an ALTERNATIVE
meaning of the word.
----------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 1 |
| ========== |
| Can you come up with good examples of |
| of repeated nouns and/or verbs which are |
| interpreted using this principle? |
| How would you find such examples? |
|____________________________________________|
{LIST1} {LIST2} {LIST3} all give many examples from past issues.
Here are some nifty examples which illustrate the above principle
The repetition of
>HOUSE
in 3-27-14:15
>sanctify HOUSE...redeem HOUSE
extends the normal meaning of HOUSE to refer to POSSESSIONs.
(That is the laws apply both to empty HOUSES as well as houses
with their CONTENTS. In other words the concept
>HOUSE
has been broadened to refer not only to the house but also to the
>possessions, the contents of the house)
The repetition of
>MAN
in 3-18-6
>A MAN MAN shall not come near to having illicit sex
extends the CONTEXTUAL meaning of
>Jewish MEN are prohibited (cf 1-18-2)
to
> All men (non jewish also) are prohibited
The repetition of
>BLOOD
in 3-1-5
>bring near the BLOOD...throw the BLOOD
extends the contextual meaning that
>the properly collected blood of a sacrifice is thrown
to
>ANY blood (whether collected or spilled) is thrown
The repetition of
>HIT
in 5-13-16
>HIT HIT the city by sword
extends the meaning of HITTING the city to non-sword hittings
(if eg swords are not available)
The repetition of
>BROTHER
in 1-45-3:4
>And Joseph said to his brothers....
>And Joseph said to his brothers....
extends the meaning of BROTHER to BOTH physical brotherhood
as well as the emotional bonds of brotherhood (So Rashi says
that Joseph reminded his brothers that eg he was circumcised
and abstained from illicit sexual relations and that even though
he was in Egypt he nevertheless was their SPIRITUAL brother).
In our verse we have a repetition
>Listen to everything Sarah says
>Listen to her voice
It follows, using our principle that
>Repetition denotes a broadening of the concept
that
>the word VOICE must be interpreted in its broader meaning
So Rashi Is Simple and inteprets
>VOICE as the VOICE of PROPHECY.
In other words, Sarah spoke to Abraham, not only physically, but
also prophetically.
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
=========================
An alternative approach to this verse is to use the Rules of
Rabbi Ishmael. We have discussed these in Volume 1 Number 13,
v2b25-22. We easily see that this verse has the form
>GENERAL PARTICULAR
So that
>Every thing that Sarah says to you(GENERAL)
>Listen to her voice (PARTICULAR)
This would then be interpreted as
>Among the things that Sarah tells you only those
>that are VOICE (prophetic) must you listen to
(This uses the principles of GENERAL - PARTICUALR developed in
Volume 1 Number 13). However we will not pursue this here as it
would take us to far afield. We however will pick this up in later
issues when we again use Rabbi Ishmael's rules.
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
===========================================================
{LIST1} {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)
{LIST2} {Of verses with A MAN A MAN. All attempts see the repetition
as denoting a more liberal interpretation. However the
details of this liberalness have no concensus. Thus Rashi
simply teaches us the general idea of liberal interpretation
but leaves out any mention of details}
VERSE A MAN A MAN means? SOURCE SUBJECT OF VERSE
====== ==================== ============ ==========================
3-17-8 2 men do it together Zevachim 108 Offerings outside temple
3-17-3 bisexual people Zevachim 66 Slaughter outside temple*1
3-18-6 Non Jews Sanhedrin 57 Incestuous relationships
4-5-12 Even men in prison Sotah 27 Suspect wife ceremony *2
FOOTNOTES:
*1 Note that even though 3-17-3 and 3-17-8 sound alike nevertheless
3-17-8 by law applies even if two men together offered up the
animal while 3-17-3 by law does NOT apply if two men offered
up the anaimal together. The attempt to apply 3-17-3 to
women is seen as weak since the general equivalence of men and
women is learned from more explicit verses in Baba Kama 15
*2 This is NOT the halachah. If the wife of a prison inmate is
behaving improperly the court does NOT have the right to make
her go thru the suspect-wife ceremony. The most reasonable
interpretation of 4-5-12 applies to varied social types...
the woman must go thru the ceremony whether her husband is
the possesive type or easy going type.
4-5-12 A MAN A MAN when his wife commits adultery.
Quite amusingly here the Talmud (Sotah 27) derives that
the repetition of A MAN A MAN means that the suspected wife
laws of 4-5 apply to ALL men (even eg men in prison or
marriages with deaf people etc). I say "amusingly" because
even though such a midrash is sound and logical it is NOT
the halacha. Again we can appreciate why Rashi left out
a midrash which is not accepted halachah.
{LIST3} {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 Jews 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. This opinion
would hold by NONE of the laws in this list--they hold the
double verb form to be a Hebrew Idiom with no special meaning.
Nevertheless Rashi was faced with a problem. We use most of the
laws on this list. How then do the people who hold that the
infinitive and double verb have special meaning deal with these
verses. 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 continues that you
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
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).
Volume 4 Number 13 v1b48-7 Use Good examples for abstract concepts
Volume 4 Number 6 v1a28-2 TO A PLACE = SUFFIX HAY
Volume 4 Number 19 v1b48-7; Discusses idea of repetition.
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
===============================================================
DOUBLE NOUN
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
End of Rashi-Is-Simple Digest
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 1999 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*