Rashi-Is-Simple Mailing List
VISIT the RASHI DATABASE archives AT
http://www.RashiYom.com/
Surfing the Talmudic Seas
(C) RashiYomi Incorporated, 2000
Written by Dr Russell Jay Hendel
Volume 8 Number 15
Produced Dec 19, 2000
WARNING: USE FIX WIDTH FONTS (eg COURIER (NEW) 10)
Verses/Topics Discussed in This Issue with quicky explanations
NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW
The following are new additions to the Rashi website
Visit http://www.RashiYomi.Com/ for details
* Free download of the RashiYomi Calendar. This calendar
--lists dates in Reverse order (current date on top)
--has one Rashi Link per day with 2-3 Rashis (1-2 pg)
--Each group of Rashis is organized into modules
--each module covers one Rashi theme & is color coded
--summaries recap all rashis in a module
--Summaries are color coded(you can review only them)
NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW
* The Advanced Jewish Philosophy page is up
100 of my best essays on jewish philosophy
--Derivation of the Next World from Explicit verses
--Rational Psychological explanation of the EVIL EYE
--Who/What is Satan-If he serves God what are his goals
--How can prophets who know God, Sin? What is Sin?
NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW
* 2 New editions to the Dr Hendel-vs-Dr-Leibowitz series
These postings in fact occur in this Digest
WEEKLY PARSHAH
--------------
Gn40-04a--Completion of the series on Biblical sentences with
missing parts. 4 Methods are presented
Gn40-23a--Two new postings on the difference in methodology
Gn40-05a between the traditional approach to Rashi and the
approach of this email list. Clarification on the
difference between SIMPLE and EXPOUNDED meanings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rashis covered in this issue
----------------------------
VERSE RULE BRIEF DESCRIPTION
======== ============== ================================
Gn40-04a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Nu24-14c GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Nu33-54a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Ex10-05b GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Ex10-11c GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Ex22-22a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Ex32-32a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Gn29-02a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Gn41-13a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Gn39-14a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Gn48-01a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Gn48-02a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Gn39-04a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Gn04-15a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Gn13-06a GRAMMAR Sometimes a sentence is missing a word
Gn40-23a DOUBLE PARSHAS REMEMBER-DONT-FORGET occurs only 6 times
Gn40-23b DOUBLE PARSHAS REMEMBER-DONT-FORGET occurs only 6 times
Gn40-05a GRAMMAR THEY both FED THE DOG vs FED DOG OF both
Gn40-01a SPECIAL WORDS >AFTERWARDS< creates a LINK & EMPHASIS
Gn15-01a SPECIAL WORDS >AFTERWARDS< creates a LINK & EMPHASIS
Gn22-01a SPECIAL WORDS >AFTERWARDS< creates a LINK & EMPHASIS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
RASHI IS SIMPLE
GOALS: To grammatically defend all 8000 Rashis on Chumash.
METHOD:Rashis are defended with LISTS of comparable cases
INTENDED AUDIENCE: Laymen, Academicians, Yeshiva world
COMMENTS,QUESTIONS: EMail to address below
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:If you want to ask anonymously please ask
(UN)SUBSCRIBE: Email to addresses below with "(UN)subscribe"
JOURNAL REFERENCE: Pshat & Drash,TRADITION, Win 1980,R Hendel
NOTATION: eg Gn01-02a refers to Rashi "a" on Genesis 1:2
SPECIALS:...on Parshah,Rambam,Ramban,Pedagogy,Symbolism
RASHI-IS-SIMPLE RULES Complete set of rules on bottom
EMAIL: RJHendel@Juno.Com, rashi-is-simple@shamash.org,
WEB: http://www.RashiYomi.Com/
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: Gn40-04a
RASHIS COVERED: Gn40-04a Nu24-14c Nu33-54a Ex10-05b Ex10-11c
Ex22-22a Ex32-32a Gn29-02a Gn41-13a Gn39-14a Gn48-01a
Gn48-02a Gn39-04a Gn04-15a Gn13-06a
COMMENT: For those who havent yet seen it, this posting
is simultaneously being posted on the Daily Rashi series.
Some people prefer the smaller sized Rashis in the Daily
Rashi series. (If you want to change OR if you want both
just let me know) You can visit the Rashi website to
view the RashiYomi Calendar.
--GRAND SUMMARY--
OVERVIEW:
========
This module dealt with Rashis which explain verses where
a sentence part is MISSING. There are 4 methods of >MISSING
SENTENCE PARTS<.
METHOD 1: A pronoun refers to the OBVIOUS noun not to the
-------- last mentioned noun(eg. >The child fell in the
puddle and HE quickly picked him up< The word >HE<
refers to the childs father, not the child.
METHOD 2: An IF statement lacks a conclusion (eg
-------- >IF you dare do such and such<
METHOD 3: An extra word is added just to clarify a
-------- a translation(eg. >He gave him everything
THAT he had<)
METHOD 4: An extra word is added to prevent an
--------- absurd translation(eg >I will give you
advice TO COUNTERACT for those who rebel)
REFERENCE:
=========
The material in this module comes from the following postings
on the Rashi Website
http://www.RashiYomi.Com/h8n12.htm
http://www.RashiYomi.Com/h8n14.htm
http://www.RashiYomi.Com/h8n15.htm
--GRAND SUMMARY--
------------------------------------------------------------
-PRONOUNS THAT DONT REFER TO LAST MENTIONED PEOPLE-
In the following verse a pronoun does not refer
to the LAST MENTIONED subject (Grammatical approach)
but rather refers to the OBVIOUS subject(Logical approach)
------------------------------------------------------------
EXAMPLE 2: Gn29-02a
===================
--------------------------------------------------------------
there were 3 flocks RESTING by the well because from that well
>THEY(ie the Shepards)< watered the flocks
--------------------------------------------------------
The grammatical approach would say that the FLOCKS watered
themselves!!
EXAMPLE 4: Ex10-05b
===================
--------------------------------------------------------
I(God) will bring >LOCUSTS< tomorrow
And >THEY< (the locusts) will cover the ground
and >THEY(ie people)< WILL NOT be able to see the ground
--------------------------------------------------------
The grammatical approach makes it sound like the LOCUSTS
cant see the ground.
EXAMPLE 3: Gn39-14a
===================
-----------------------------------------------------------
And she grabbed him(JOSEPH) by his clothes (to seduce him)
but >HE< (>JOSEPH) fled and
when she saw that >HE< (>JOSEPH<) fled she told her staff
see that >HE(ie my husband)< brought us a slave to tease us
-----------------------------------------------------------
The grammatical approach would say that Jospeh brought
himself to this household
EXAMPLE 1: Gn41-13a
=========
--------------------------------------------------------------
& there was there a slave(JOSEPH) who interpreted our dreams;
and as >HE< (Joseph) interpreted the dreams so did they occur;
>HE(ie Pharoh)< returned me to my job;
but >HE(ie Pharoh)< hanged the other person
--------------------------------------------------------------
The grammatical approach would say that it was JOSEPH (not
Pharoh) who hung him
EXAMPLE 5: Gn48-01a
=========
---------------------------------------------------------
and JACOB said SWEAR TO ME and
JOSEPH swore and
JACOB bowed to him.
After these events HE said >YOUR FATHER IS SICK<;
----------------------------------------------------------
In this sentence either approach is correct:
Maybe JACOB sent a message to Joseph saying YOUR FATHER
(ie myself) is sick (This is the grammatical approach)
OR: Maybe someone on JOSEPHS STAFF told him YOU FATHER
IS SICK(This is the logical approach)
EXAMPLE 6: Gn48-02a
=========
------------------------------------------------------------
After these things SOMEONE told Joseph >YOUR FATHER IS SICK<
And >HE< (Joseph) took his two sons with him
And >HE< told Jacob >Your Son Joseph is coming<
------------------------------------------------------------
Again: Either Joseph sent a message to Jacob that he is
coming (grammatical approach) OR someone from Jacobs
or Josephs staff told Jacob (Logical approach)
EXAMPLE 7: Ex10-11c
==========
----------------------------------------------------------
And >HE< (Pharoh) said..this is not so;only adults may go;
And >HE< banished them
----------------------------------------------------------
Again: Either Pharoh himself banished them(Grammatical
approach) OR: Someone from Pharohs staff banished them
(Logical approach)
------------------------------------------------------------
--IF SENTENCES MISSING SECOND HALVES--
In the following verse we have IF sentences missing a
second half! This is typical in all languages, for example:
>IF you dare do such and such<. Such sentences are complete
thoughts. The missing second half is deliberate so that
the listener will supply his own worse fear. The listener
then hears the sentence as: >IF you dare do such and such
THEN THE FOLLOWING HORRIBLE THING WILL HAPPEN TO YOU<
------------------------------------------------------------
EXAMPLE 8: Gn04-15a
=========
BACKGROUND
----------
God had just banished Kayin from Gan Eden for murdering his
brother. Kayin protests that he will be vulnerable. God says
------------------------------------------------------------
>INDEED IF ANYONE KILLS YOU...<:
------------------------------------------------------------
EXAMPLE 9: Ex22-22a
==========
---------------------------------------------------------
Dont torture orphans and widows!
(If you dare tease an orphan at all!)
---------------------------------------------------------
EXAMPLE 10: Ex32-32a
=========================
--------------------------------------------------
Please forgive the Jews for making the golden calf
>IF YOU FORGIVE THEM<
---------------------------------------------------
The last example is reminiscent of our English
>IF ONLY YOU WILL FORGIVE THEM<
------------------------------------------------------------
-EXTRA WORDS THAT CLARIFY-
In the following sentences Rashi adds the CAPPED word
in translating the sentence; the CAPPED word does not
change or make meaning but it does CLARIFY
------------------------------------------------------------
EXAMPLE 12: Gn39-04a
====================
-------------------------------------------------------
The Egyptian liked Joseph;
He appointed him on his household;
everything THAT he had he placed under him
-------------------------------------------------------
EXAMPLE 13: Nu33-54a
====================
--------------------------------------------------------
Divide the land by lot; THE PLACE,to where the lot falls,
will belong to that person
--------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
-EXTRA WORDS THAT CLARIFY-
In the following sentences Rashi adds the CAPPED word
in translating the sentence; the CAPPED word does not
change or make meaning but it does CLARIFY
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
-EXTRA WORDS THAT PREVENT MISTRANSLATION-
In the following sentences Rashi adds the CAPPED word
in translating the sentence; the CAPPED word does not
change or make meaning but it does CLARIFY
------------------------------------------------------------
EXAMPLE 14: Gn40-04a
==========
-----------------------------------------------------------
And the Prison Executioner appointed Joseph TO BE with them
-----------------------------------------------------------
Without the word >TO BE< it sounds as if both JOSEPH
and the other two people (the Baker and Wine Pourer)
were BOTH appointed (Pointed out by Sifsay Chachamim)
EXAMPLE 15: Gn13-06a
==========
-----------------------------------------------------------
The PASTURE of the land was not sufficient for both of them
-----------------------------------------------------------
Without the added word, PASTURE,
it sounds like they had too many
people and there werent enough apartments.
EXAMPLE 16: Nu24-14c
==========
BACKGROUND
----------
Nu24-14c is presenting the advice that Bilam gave
Balak, King of Moab, concerning the Jews.
----------------------------------------------------
I will give you advice TO COUNTERACT that which this
nation will do to you at the end of days
----------------------------------------------------
Without the word COUNTERACT we clarify the meaning of the
verse thus it sounds as if Bilam was giving Balak advice
on how to get beat up at the end of days by the Jews.
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: Gn40-23a
RASHIS COVERED: Gn40-23a Gn40-23b
COMMENT
=======
The following is an important posting (# 3) explaining
the difference between Dr Hendel's vs Dr Leibowitz's
methodology.
BACKGROUND
==========
Joseph was in prison. He did the Chief Wine Pourer a favor by
interpreting his dream favorably and comforting him. Joseph
asked for a reciprocal favor that he should remember to mention
Joseph and free him from prison.
THE VERSE
=========
Gn40-23a >But the Chief Wine Pourer did not remember Joseph and
forgot him<
THE RASHI
=========
The phrase >He did NOT REMEMBER him< means that he forgot
him on the day that he was released from prison. By contrast,
the phrase >He forgot him< means during the next few years
whenever Joseph came to his mind he consciously put him out
of it.
THE TRADITIONAL APPROACH TO RASHI
=================================
The traditional approach to Rashi is based on DISTINCTIONS
and QUESTIONS--one popular phrase is >WHAT IS BOTHERING
RASHI<. In this verse the >QUESTION< would be that
it says BOTH >he did NOT REMEMBER< and >he FORGOT<. To
resolve this question we are told that Rashi introduces
two dimensions of >TIME<---he forgot him on the day he
left prison and he also forgot him during the coming year.
THE PROBLEM WITH THE TRADITIONAL APPROACH
=========================================
The problem with the traditional approach is that it appears
picky and ad-hoc. After all it is normal to use repetitive
phrases. And yes, even in the Bible it is normal to use
repetititve phrases--not all repetitions are subject to
Biblical exegesis. For example on the verse >Jacob Jacob<
Rashi simply says that >repetition is a sign of endearment<
(Gn46-02a). Rashi does not for example say >JACOB JACOB:
One call for the physical Jacob and one for the spiritual
Jacob<. So indeed, repetition is normal and Rashi should
not be making comments on repeated phrases.
THE DATABASE APPROACH OF THIS EMAIL LIST
========================================
In this email list all Talmudic and Rashiian statements are
based on database queries. In other words it may be valid
to be picky on the repeated phrase >Didnt remember, forgot<
but only if a LIST of comparable phrases justifies this
perception of the repetition as an oddity.
{LIST}
As the LIST below shows the phrase >REMEMBER DONT FORGET<
only occurs about half a dozen times in the Bible. Furthermore
it only occurs by important events. For example Amalek had
attacked us right after we left Egypt while we were weak
and helpless. God therefore ordered the extermination of
Amalek--God said >REMEMBER WHAT THEY DID--DONT FORGET<.
This type of emphasis is easily appreciated for such a
horrible event. We now present the list
===============================================================
VERSE REMEMBER DONT FORGET WHY THE EMPHASIS
======= ==================== =================================
Dt09-07 Angering God Important not to rebel
Dt25-19 Amalek They attacked helpless people
1S1-11 Chanas childlessness She was horribly teasted
Ps9-13 Avenge Murder We were holocosted
Gn40-23 Remember Joseph He placed the Jew out of his mind
{END OF LIST}
SUMMARY
=======
The position of this email list as well as
the traditional approach on Rashi is that
* The phrase >REMEMBER DONT FORGET< indicates emphasis
* Therefore we conclude that the Chief of Wine both forgot
Joseph as well as put him out of his mind
But we differ from the traditional approach as follows:
--The reason that the phrase >REMEMBER DONT FORGET<
indicates emphasis is NOT because it is a REPEATED
phrase
--rather the reason that the phrase >REMEMBER DONT FORGET<
indicates emphasis is because a database query shows
that ALL OTHER occurences of this phrase indicates
emphasis.
In other words we differ from the traditional approach
in HOW we prove Rashis point. We do not prove Rashis
point by picky distinctions--rather we prove Rashis
point by LISTS of comparable examples. And even though
the traditional approach welcomes lists and queries it
nevertheless does not BASE its derivations on them--
it rather bases its derivations on distinctions and
welcomes a LIST as supportive evidence; by contrast we
in this email list do base our derivations on LISTS
and welcome distinctions as supportive evidence.
RASHI RULE USED: DOUBLE PARSHAS
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: Gn40-05a
COMMENT:
=======
This is an important posting--it is #4 in our series on the
difference between our approach and the approach of Dr Leibowitz
and other modern commentators. In this important posting we
expound on the difference between the so called SIMPLE and
EXPOUNDED meaning of the text.
THE VERSE:
==========
Gn40-05a >And they dreamed a dream about both of them<
THE RASHI
=========
There is a >SIMPLE< and >EXPOUNDED< meaning to this text.
The >SIMPLE< meaning is that >They BOTH dreamt a dream<
The >EXPOUNDED< meaning is that >They dreamt the dream
of BOTH OF THEM<. In other words they each had a dream
about eg the King having a birthday party and the King
summoning all his servants; the Wine Pourer was returned
but the Baker was executed. That is, each of them had
a dream on the same topic.
Rashi derives the EXPOUNDED meaning from the placement
of the word BOTH in the verse: >They dreamed a dream
about BOTH of them< (not >They BOTH dreamed a dream<)
THE TRADITIONAL APPROACH
========================
The traditional approach believes that there is a SIMPLE
and EXPOUNDED meaning. It believes that the SIMPLE meaning
is NATURAL. It also believes that the EXPOUNDED meaning is
a bit picky but has a spiritual basis.
THE TROUBLE WITH THE TRADITIONAL APPROACH
=========================================
The traditional approach does not believe in A TRUE MEANING
of a text. It rather believes that you can peg whatever you
feel like on the text as long as it is spiritual. Therefore
there is no way to debate or argue.
By contrast, on this email list we believe that ideas can
be proved by LISTS of comparable examples. Furthermore we
believe that texts have a UNIQUE MEANING which we can arrive
at. We believe that this UNIQUE MEANING corresponds to the
way native speakers spoke. Finally we believe that this
UNIQUE MEANING which was spoken by NATIVE SPEAKERS can be
arrived at thru LISTS.
Let us examine this thesis by the verse at hand
{LIST}
The list below shows that native speakers used word
order to indicate meaning (the same way we do in
English). For example >They both fed their dogs< has a blatantly
different meaning that >They fed the dog of BOTH of them<
===================================================
VERSE TEXT OF VERSE WITH BOTH VERB or OBJECT
======= ================================ =================
Gn21-27 they BOTH made a treaty Both did activity
Gn22-06 they BOTH walked Both did activity
2S14-06 they BOTH faught Both did activity
Ex22-08 The dispute of BOTH comes to God Dispute of both
Pr29-13 God enlightens the eyes of BOTH Eyes of both
{END OF LIST}
THE APPROACH OF THIS LIST
=========================
Each of the above sentences has one unambiguous meaning.
It is the way people speak in Hebrew, English etc. Thus
the sentence >they BOTH dreamt a dream< would mean that
each one had a dream. By contrast, the sentence >They
dreamt the DREAM ABOUT BOTH OF THEM< clearly and
unambiguously means that each of them had a dream
about the two of them--for example, Pharoh had a birthday
party, invited both of them, killed the Baker and reinstated
the wine pourer. Our surety of this meaning is in turn
based on the above LIST.
BUT WHAT ABOUT RASHI? WHY DOES HE SAY WHAT HE DOES?
===================================================
This is an improper question. For Rashi, a mere commentator
on the Chumash cannot supercede the very Chumash he is
explaining. You cannot use a non-understood Rashi to contradict
the plain meaning of a Biblical verse. So even if we did not
know why Rashi said what he did we would still be certain of
the verses meaning.
In passing, and before explaining why Rashi said what he
did, I am indebted to my High School Bible Teacher, Rabbi
Amnon Haramati, who always emphasized to us that we should
read the Bible first and only then read Rashi.
Now we can explain Rashi as follows: As we have just seen
the simple meaning of the text is that >they each dreamt
the dream about both of them<.
So we must interpret >SIMPLE< to refer to people not meanings
>SIMPLE< people would erroneously intepret the verse as
>They each had a dream<. Those people who are more advanced
in interpretation would correctly interpret the verse as
>They each dreamt the dream about both of them<
SUMMARY
=======
In both English and Hebrew the sentences >he fed BOTH their
dogs< vs >he fed the dog of both< has a clear difference. Hence,
the sentence, >And they dreamed the dream of both< has a clear
unambiguous meaning: They each dreamed about the upcoming
birthday party and how the Baker would be hung and the Wine
pourer would be reinstated.
This interpretation is further backed by a solid list.
However Rashi points out that simple people would probably
not see the difference and interpret the verse as >They each
had a dream<. Nevertheless, as Rashi notes, anyone with minimal
training can see what the verse really means.
COMMENT:
========
Rashi adds some points about Joseph not having faith but
depended on the Wine pourer to get him out of Prison.
This Rashi does not have its basis in this verse but rather
has its basis in the next verse >After the COMPLETION of a
two year period< which denotes that Joseph had some growing
up(completion of personality) to do. We have therefore
commented on this part of Rashi on this other verse
RASHI RULE USED: DOUBLE PARSHAS
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: Gn40-01a
RASHIS COVERED: Gn15-01a Gn22-01a Gn40-01a
RULE
====
The Hebrew word >Aleph-Cheth-Resh< means >AFTERWARDS<.
The word >AFTERWARDS< is used to emphasize a >CONTRAST<
between two chapters--that is, it indicates a conceptual
link between the two chapters.
EXAMPLES
========
(1) Gn15-01a
--------
PRIOR CHAPTER: Abraham conquered the 5 Kings in war
NEXT CHAPTER: God promises Abraham much reward
LINK: Even though Abraham had killed people he still had
much reward
(2) Gn22-01a
--------
PRIOR CHAPTER: Avimelech wants a treaty with Abraham
PRIOR CHAPTER: Abraham banishs his child Ishmael
NEXT CHAPTER: God asks Abraham to sacrifice Isaac
LINK: Even though Abraham is respected by foreign powers
who seek treatys with him and his children,
nevertheless he was willing to give up his progeny
which these powers wanted a treaty with
Even though Abraham had to give up Ishmael and
only had one child left he nevertheless was willing
to give us Isaac also. But whereas Abraham lost
Ishmael(as a successor) he did not lose Isaac(as
a successor)
(3) Gn40-01a
--------
PRIOR CHAPTER: Joseph was jailed & framed by his bosses wife
NEXT CHAPTER: The Baker and Chief wine pourer were jailed
LINK: Even though Joseph was a slave and should
have been killed, neverhtheless, the King
had a birthday party and couldnt afford to
go after everybody
Even though Joseph was a slave and in jail
nevertheless God offered him an opportunity
to show his talents so that one day he would
be needed
RASHI RULE USED: SPECIAL WORDS
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
THE 2 DOZEN RASHI-IS-SIMPLE RASHI RULES
=======================================
I: RASHI gives MEANING
======================
A: NEW MEANINGS--(eg)"on the face of"=during the lifetime
Volume 2 Number 9, http://www.rashiyomi.Com/Nu04-04a.htm
B: SPECIAL WORDS--(eg)ACH=USUALLY;USUALLY observe shabbath!
Rashi Yomi Summaries,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Ach-6.htm
C: SYNONYMS--(eg)AMR=to speak; DBR=to cite or to quote;
Volume 2 Number 1, http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Lv20-02a.htm
D: WORD MEANINGS-Thermos(TzNTzNTh)=doubly(TZN TZN) Cold(TZN)
Volume 1 Number 9,23,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Ex31-15a.htm
E: UNIFIED MEANINGS-PAAM=Repeated action:To Ring,Hammer,Step
Volume 1 Number 3,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Gn41-08a.htm
II: RASHI teaches GRAMMAR/STYLE
===============================
F: CLASSICAL GRAMMAR--(eg)QUESTION = HEY+CHATAF PATACH
Volume 3 Number 22,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Gn04-09z.htm
G: USAGE(NEW GRAMMAR)--(eg)INFINITIVE="be involved in";
Volume 5 Number 24,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Ex13-03a.htm
H: ROOT+PREPOSITION--(eg)ChZK B="to hold";ChZK M="overpower"
Volume 1 Number 7,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Ex04-04a.htm
I: THE SENTENCE--2 verses can make 1 sentence-eg Dt02-16:17
Volume 3 Number 7,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Dt19-06a.htm
J: STYLE--REPETITION denotes Endearment;eg 'Jacob Jacob'
Volume 1 Number 12,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Gn46-02a.htm
K: DOUBLE NOUNS--(eg)"GIVE GIVE";if not CHARITY then LOAN
Double Noun page, http://www.RashiYomi.Com/DN.htm
L: PRONOUNS-(eg)IMCHAH=with you; ITCHAH=Accompanying you;
Volume 3 Number 13,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Ex22-24c.htm
III: OVERALL TEXTUAL STRUCTURE
==============================
M: OTHER VERSES--Aaron SAW(Ex32-05)...the brawl(Ex32-18)
OTHER VERSE page, http://www.RashiYomi.Com/ov.htm
N: EXTRA SENTENCES-eg[GIVE HIM][WHAT HE NEEDS](Not if rich)
Volume 2 Number 20,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Dt15-08c.htm
O: DOUBLE PARSHAS-'he WILL pray'-'he WON'T pray';So Optional
Volume 3 Number 12,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Dt24-14a.htm
P: CLIMAX-(eg Dt19-11)(a)Hate, (b)spy, (c)confront,(d)Murder
Climax Page, http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Climax.htm
Q: OVERALL STRUCTURE-growing nails=despisement(from context)
Volume 3 Number 8,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Dt21-11a.htm
R: SPREADSHEETS-What is the marriage loophole in inheritance
Volume 2 Number 23,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Nu36-03a.htm
IV: BEYOND THE TEXT
===================
S: MORAL LESSONS/REASONS-God explains BEFORE punishing;
Volume 2 Number 12,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Nu12-09a.htm
T: RabbiIshmael-(eg)"When an OX gores";(Or ANY animal gores)
Volume 4 Number 21,http://www.RashiYomi.Com/Dt25-04a.htm
End of Rashi-Is-Simple Digest
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*