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 9
Produced Nov 30, 2000
WARNING: USE FIX WIDTH FONTS (eg COURIER (NEW) 10)
Verses/Topics Discussed in This Issue with quicky explanations
WEEKLY PARSHAH SERIES
=====================
We have a collection of short items from this Parshah.
The theme here is >Why one should not interpret Rashi literally
but rather add something< In each
Rashi a literal interpretation leads to problems while a
simple examination of sources leads to a deep interpretation
Rashis covered in this issue
----------------------------
VERSE RULE BRIEF DESCRIPTION
======== ============== ================================
Gn24-07a DOUBLE PARSHAS God referred to in 3 ways
Gn24-17a DOUBLE PARSHAS Rivkah drew water quickly
Gn26-08b GRAMMAR Tz-Ch-K in piel means tease
Gn26-20a NEW MEANING Meaning can be derived from context
Gn26-20b NEW MEANING Meaning can be derived from context
Gn27-24a DOUBLE PARSHAS Comparison of Jacobs tone vs Esauvs
Gn27-19a DOUBLE PARSHAS Comparison of Jacobs tone vs Esauvs
Gn22-22a DOUBLE PARSHAS Comparison of Jacobs tone vs Esauvs
Gn27-29b DOUBLE PARSHAS Rashi compares order in two verses
Gn24-02b MORAL REASONS Why was oath taken on thigh
-----------------------------------------------------------------
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (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 REFERECE: 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: Gn24-07a
RULE
====
To create emphasis the Bible will sometimes repeat identical
verses or phrases and place a minor difference in them. This
minor difference is then perceived as something deliberately
emphasized, thus justifying a study of its nuances. We call
this the method of >ALIGNMENT< or the method of >DOUBLE
PARSHAS<.
BACKGROUND
==========
This chapter of the Bible discusses how Abraham sent Eliezer
to get a wife for Isaac. Abraham made Eliezer take an oath
not to get a 3rd world nation(Canaanite) wife. Throughout
the chapter, God is referred to in several ways.
{LIST}
References to God in Gn24
================================================================
VERSE REFERENCE TO GOD CONTEXT OF VERSE
======= ============================ ===========================
Gn24-03 God Lord of Heaven and Earth Abraham makes Eliezer swear
Gn24-07 God Lord of Heaven Abraham says he has faith
Gn24-40 God whom I served Eliezer repeats story
*2 *1
NOTES
-----
*1 Before Abraham came only religious people spoke about God
Abraham encouraged non-religious people to speak about God
Hence when God makes Eliezer swear he does so in the name
of the God of both the spiritual people (Heaven) and the
physical people(Earth) since Abraham was sending him to
physical people (Rashi on Gn24-07a)
*2 On the one hand Eliezer did not want to brag >My great
master who introduced God to the physical people< on
the other hand Eliezer did not want to make Abraham
sound distant from everybody >my great spiritual master<
So instead Eliezer struck a middle of the road path
>My master who serves God< (This interpretation comes
from Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch).
{END OF LIST}
THE POINT
=========
Rashi explicitly compares Gn24-03 and Gn24-07. Rashi also
explicitly explains the difference.
However as we have emphasized in this list many times---
it is not enough to read Rashis problem and solution. One
must make a >LIST< of all similar problems. One must then
apply Rashis methodology to the >WHOLE< list even if
Rashi did not explain every member of the list. We call
this the >WORKBOOK< method since Rashi only gives one
example while the reader must supply the rest
Thus in this example it is not enough to explain the
difference between Gn24-03 and Gn24-07 (>God of Heaven<
vs >God of Heaven and Earth<). One must also explain the
difference between Gn24-40 and Gn24-03 (>God of Heaven<
and >God whom I have served<). This is Masterfully done
by Rashi Hirsch
RASHI RULE USED: DOUBLE PARSHAS
===============
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
VERSE: Gn24-17a
BACKGROUND
==========
Recall that Eliezer went to a strange city to obtain a wife
for Isaac. Gn24-17 says that Eliezer ran towards Rivkah. WHY?
Rashi suggests >He ran towards her because when she went down
to get water from the well, the well water sprang towards her<
It is tempting to interpret this literally...the water really
sprang up towards her. But a careful examination of the
verses which support this Rashi (cited from Midrash Rabbah)
suggest that >Rivkah obtained the water without alot of
drawing<. In other words what happened was extraordinary
but not miraculous---the water didnt spring up towards
her but rather she gathered the water quicker than usual
We derive this by ALIGNING the following verses
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gn24-16 She went down to the well, Filled her bucket, & went up
Gn24-45 She went down to the well, drew water
*1 *2
----------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES
-----
*1 Eliezer, in Gn24-45, when he spoke to her parents/relative,
played down the miracle and simply said she >Drew the water<
But Gn24-16, which relates what actually happened states
that she >Filled her bucket<
The simplest way of explaining >filling her bucket< vs
>drawing the water< is that >She filled the bucket
quickly without alot of redrawing< (How much you
draw from a well depends on how much water is flowing
at that time)
*2 The difference between a >quick filling up< and a >long
filling up< is that after a >quick filling up< you can
leave the well immediately while during a >long filling up<
you have to stay at the well and dont have time to go up.
In conclusion the combined statement >she FILLED the bucket and
WENT UP< suggests a quick fill; by contrast the statement >she
drew water< suggests an ongoing process
THE POINT
=========
As emphasized above the explanation we have given, that Rivkah
was able to fill the bucket quickly is more palatable than the
idea that the >water sprang up towards her<. Our interpretation
also has a connotation of >Divine intervention< without involving
extraordinary physical events.
RASHI RULE USED: DOUBLE PARSHAS
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
VERSE: Gn26-08b
BACKGROUND
==========
Recall that Isaac had come to a strange town and claimed that
his wife was his sister. The story continues that one day
THE VERSE
=========
Gn26-08 >Avimelech peered out the window and he saw and behold
Isaac was flirting with his wife<
The verse is clear enough. But Rashi explicitly says that
>He saw them during intimacy<
The Sifsay Chachamim, a commentator on Rashi, asks >This
requires investigation: Maybe Avimelech just saw them kissing
and hugging<. To resolve this problem the Sifsay Chachamim
starts contriving ingenious grammatical explanations.
(In other words the Sifsay Chachamims problem is that he
interpreted Rashi literally that Avimelech saw them during
intimacy..but it is unlikely that Isaac and Rivkah were
fully intimate in public)
THE POINT
=========
I would say quite simply that Avimelech saw them flirting
the way a husband and wife flirt. Rashis statement that
>He saw them during intimacy< would still be true since
the wider interpretation of the word intimacy means all
acts connected with intimacy. I think (in response to the
sifsay chachamim that it is well known that certain types
of flirting only husbands and wives do)
The actual derivation of Rashi would come from the Hebrew
root used: Tz-Ch-K in the active mode means to >LAUGH<
certainly not something that only husbands and wives do; by
contrast, in the intense mode >Tz-Ch-K< means >FLIRT or
INTENSE LAUGHTER<. Thus Rashi was simply commenting on the
grammatical form. He wasnt trying to suggest that Isaac
and Rivkah were cohabiting in public. For a full discussion
on the dozen or so examples where the root >Tz-Ch-K< occurs
see http://www.RashiYomi.Com/gn21-09a.htm from Volume 4
Numbers 4 and 5. As can be seen from the following list
>Tz-Ch-K< means more to >flirt< than to have full fledged
intimacy.
EXAMPLES OF Tz-Ch-K
-------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the following verses Tz-Ch-K refers to SEXUAL TEASING
----------------------------------------------------------------
VERSE ROOT MEANS TEXT
======= ===== ===== ==============================================
Gn39-17 TzChk Sex This slave came to TEASE with me(Potiphera)
Gn39-14 TzChK Sex You brought a slave to TEASE with us?
Gn26-8 TzChK Sex Isaac and his wife were PLAYING (sexually)*3
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the following verses Tz-Ch-K refers to making fun of, MOCKERY
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ju16-25 ShChK Mock Call SAMSON and let him be a MOCKERY before us
Ju16-25 TzChK Mock And Samson was a MOCKERY before them
Gn19-14 TzChK Mock He looked like he was MOCKING them
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Tz-Ch-K refers to wild physical activity,a BRAWL
-----------------------------------------------------------------
2Sa2-14 ShChK Brawl Let the soldiers PLAY A WAR GAME
Ex32-06 TzChK Brawl And they (at the Golden calf) made a BRAWL*2
Gn21-09 TzChK Brawl Ishmael and Isaac were playing*1
2Sa6-21 ShChK Brawl And I will DANCE WILDLY before God*3
NOTES
-----
*1 Rashi.
*2 Rashi. Note that the interpretation of Ex32-06 as referring
to murder is supported by the explicit other verse Ex32-18
"And (Moses) Said: It is not the shouts of people upset nor is it
the shouts of a victory but rather it is the shouts of shouting(a
brawl)". Please examine the verse yourselves.
This helps establish that a murder took place. The fact that
CHUR was killed is guessed at because we never find him
mentioned again. NOTE: Rashi did NOT derive the fact that
Chur was killed from the absence of his name---rather Rashi
derived that someone was killed from the above explicit verse
Ex32-18 and the use of the term BRAWL.
*3 Although this verse looks like it is saying that Isaac and
Rivkah were "playing" nevertheless the connective word used
is "slept OF" (vs the usual "Slept WITH")--this suggests that
it was a teasing behavior.
2Sam6-21 "I will dance wildly before God" does not look perjorative
Perhaps the dance symbolically made fun of Gods enemies. Michals
protests also seem to indicate that the dance was not appropriate
RASHI RULE USED: GRAMMAR
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
VERSE: Gn26-20a
RASHIS COVERED: Gn26-20a Gn26-20b
Gn26-19:20 states >And Isaacs laborers dug in the river and they
found there live water. But the shepards of
Grar disputed with the shepards of Isaac saying
THE WATER IS OURS---They called that well AYSEK
because they had an AYSEK with him<
Rashi simply explains the meaning of the word. Most people
are unaware that 50% of our language is learnt from context
and not from dictionaries.
Looking over the above sentence we easily see that the word
AYSEK corresponds to the word DISPUTE. Thus the last part of
Gn26-19:20 would translate >They called that well DISPUTE
because they DISPUTED his ownership<
A further defense of Rashi could come from the cognate word
>Ayin-Shin-Koof<. The accepted meaning of this word by
Radack, Rashi and Chazal is not so much >theft< as a
>witholding of wages< (In other words you are not taking
something from somebody but rather depriving them of the
fruits of their labor).
This meaning would fit in here since the shepards of Grar
were simply asserting that the fact that Isaac dug the
well (labor) did not entitle him to ownership. Hence they
were depriving him of the fruit of his labor.
Such an emphasis on nuance is consistent with human psychology
People dont just sin...rather they create distinctions to
justify what they do. In this case the shepards of Grar
deluded themselves into arguing that they werent taking
away something someone had but rather not recognizing his labor
This type of analysis was frequently done by Rav Hirsch. It
does sound reasonable in this case. But a thorough analysis
of lists of roots that differ in the letters Shin-Sin reveals
that although there is some resemblance between the two roots
there is no hard rule(See the LIST below).
We conclude that the real derivation of the meaning is the
>CONTEXT<. This is consistent with the fact that most
meaning is learned from context(Also bear in mind that
this root--->Ayin-Shin-Koof< only occurs twice in the Bible.)
{LIST}
List of root-pairs where one root has a >SHIN< while the
other root has a >sin<. While >SOME< connection is apparent
--eg become low vs swim(the swimmer is horizontal)--
nevertheless there does not seem to be a hard and fast rule
Hence the relationship between >WITHOLDING WAGES< and
>DISPUTING OWNERSHIP< must be regarded as coincidental.
================================================================
Shin root Hebrew Sin root Hebrew
MEANING ROOT-SHIN MEANING ROOT-SIN
====================== ================ ======= ===============
bow or become low (Shin-Cheth) swim (Sin-Cheth)
explain dream (Shin-Beth-Resh) analyze (Sin-Beth-Resh)
withold wages (Ayin-Shin-Koof) dispute (Ayin-Sin-Koof)
Sin(overstep boundary) (Pay-Shin-Ayin) Step (Pay-Sin-Ayin)
Soak*1 (Shin-Resh-Hey) Wrestle (Sin-Resh-Ayin)
NOTES
=====
*1 Actually Sin-Resh-Ayin means to fight. The emphasis would
be on the type of fighting involving surrounding as in
a wrestling match or in a war.
THE POINT
=========
Very often commentators add >EXTRA EXPLANATIONS<. It is important
to test each extra explanation. If a LIST backs it up fine. If
not we should stick with the one simple explanation that makes
sense. In the case at hand it is quite sufficient to say that
Rashi made his derivation from the CONTEXT of the verse and used
it to explain a root which occurs only once or twice.
RASHI RULE USED: NEW MEANING
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
VERSE: Gn27-24a
RASHIS COVERED: Gn27-24a Gn27-19a Gn22-22a
BACKGROUND
==========
Recall that at Rivkahs advice. Yaakov dressed up as Esauv and
fed his father dinner in order to get the blessings. Also
recall that although Isaac recognized Yaakovs gentler speech
patterns he nevertheless was fooled by the externals and called
him Esauv. There are several verses where Isaacs attempt to
recognize Jacob as Jacob occurs. Let us examine 2 of them and
their Rashis
THE VERSES
==========
Gn27-19a >I am Esauv your elder (Stated by Jacob)
Gn27-24a>Are you my son Esauv(Asked by Isaac)?& Jacob said,I am<
THE RASHIS
==========
Gn27-19a >I AM ESAUV YOUR ELDER< should be interpreted as
>I< am Jacob who brings to you but >ESAUV IS YOUR
ELDER<
It thus looks like Rashi is playing a word game with
the phrase >I AM ESAUV YOUR ELDER< and breaking it up
into two parts: >I< (am Jacob) but >ESAUV IS YOUR ELDER<.
The advantage of such an alleged interpretation is that
it saves Jacob from violating the ethical norm of lying
Gn27-24a On the verse >Are you my son Esauv? and Jacob said,I AM<
Rashi states >Jacob doesnt answer >I AM ESAUV< but
rather he answers >I AM<
Again it looks like Rashi is playing word games and trying to
make Jacob look as if he is avoiding the ethical prohibition
of lying by only saying >I AM< vs >I AM ESAUV<
DISCUSSION
==========
But the ethical prohibition of lying is not a prohibition on words
but rather a prohibtion on meaning. If Jacob answers >I AM< to
Isaac who asks him if he is Esauv, then the >MEANING< of >I AM<
is >I AM ESAUV< and Jacob has indeed mislead Isaac. Nothing is
gained by saying >I AM< vs >I AM ESAUV<
A MORE REASONABLE EXPLANATION
=============================
If we place the emphasis on Rashi on different words we get
a much more reasonable explanation. We use the method of
ALIGNMENT of similar verses
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gn27-19 I am Esauv Your elder I did what you asked please get up
Gn27-31 *1 *2 *3 get up
----------------------------------------------------------------
The above {LIST} compares the responses of Jacob and Esauv to
Isaacs identical question >WHO ARE YOU<.
NOTES
=====
*3 Notice for example how Jacob says >PLEASE< but Esauv does
not. Jacob was a more polite person and this led Isaac to
suspect that he was really Jacob
*2 Jacob emphasizes (while Esauv does not) that he routinely
did errands for his father (He wasnt just doing >THIS ERRAND<
to get a blessing). Thus Jacob but not Esauv says >I did
what you asked me<
*1 Jacob in effect says >I (Jacob) always do what you ask
me and yet you wish to recognize Esauv as your eldest
by the fact that he brings you food for a blessing<
THE POINT
=========
Jacob did >NOT< try and hide his identity. Jacob uses words like
>PLEASE< or later on >YOUR GOD HELPED ME< in his conversation to
Isaac. Jacob clearly did >NOT< go out of his way to fool Isaac
(which he could have done by changing his verbal patterns).
Indeed Isaac himself noticed this for Isaac says in Gn27-22
>The voice is the voice of Jacob but the hands feel like Esauv
AND ISAAC DID NOT RECOGNIZE HIM BECAUSE OF HIS HANDS<
The whole emphasis in the Bible is that Isaac could be so easily
mislead by externals and not pay attention to more important
features like use of the words >YOUR GOD<, >PLEASE< or who
usually did him errands.
We are indebted to Rav Hirsch for the above analysis. Rav Hirsch
points out that Rivkah (a Matriarch) was not stupid enough to
think that >a blessing< could be stolen. She didnt ask Jacob to
dress up to steal a blessing. Rather she asked him to dress up
in order TO SHOW ISAAC HOW HE HAD BEEN FOOLED HIS WHOLE LIFE
BY THE EXTERNALS OF ESAUV. Isaac in fact finally learned his
lesson as it says Gn27-31 >And Isaac was very frightened/shocked<
(Said when he realized he had been fooled). Isaac finally
realized that his whole life he had been fooled by externals.
With that background we can now interpret the verses
Gn27-19a >hints< at the following contrast >I (Jacob) am the one
always doing you errands but Esauv is your elder?<. Why, Isaac
are you judging the birthright by who brings you food for it?
We now see this interpretation in Rashi
Gn27-19a >I(Jacob)always bring for you but Esauv is your elder?<
To help summarize we bring the following list of items by which
Jacob could have been recognized
{LIST}
Things Jacob did or said which identified him as Jacob and
not as Esauv. Isaac himself said >You sound like JACOB but
you feel like ESAUV<. The Bible emphasizes >And Isaac did
not recognize him BECAUSE of how his hands felt<. More
nuances could be added to this list but this will suffice
for now
===========================================================
VERSE THINGS JACOB SAID BUT ESAUV DIDNT
======== =================================
Gn27-19a I always do the things you ask
Gn27-19 PLEASE get up
Gn27-20 Your God helped me find food quickly
{END OF LIST}
Having explained Gn27-19a we now proceed to explain
Gn27-24a
Jacob continues this theme in Gn27-24a. When Isaac asks
>who are you< (Gn27-24 to Jacob and Gn27-32) he gets
two different answers
----------------------------------------------------------
Gn27-24 Are you Esauv? I am
Gn27-32 Who are you? I am Esauv your eldest
*1
----------------------------------------------------------
NOTES
-----
*1 The difference is clear. Esauv is a person of Titles
>I am ESAUV your ELDEST< while Jacob is a person of
deeds >I AM (who I am)<.
THE POINT
=========
It is not necessary to interpret Rashi as seeing Jacob trying
to use word games to escape lying. Rather Rashi was seeing
Jacob as taking his mothers side and trying to make Isaac
aware that he had been fooled his whole life by titles and
externals but he did not look at deeds. Accordingly Rashi
interprets >I am Esauv your elder I have done as you asked<
as a cynical comment >You know, Isaac, that Jacob always does
errands for you...why are you Judging Esauv as worthy of the
blessings because he does you one favor<. Similarly when Isaac
said >Are you Esauv< Jacob simply said >I AM<---again Jacob
cynically said >Why dont you judge me by my deeds and speech
patterns instead of by what I claim to be<
Again Isaac himself acknowledged he was being fooled >The Voice
is the voice of Jacob but the hands are the hands of Esauv..
and he didn't recognize him BECAUSE of how his hands felt<.
COMMENT:
=======
One further nuance. There are two words for the pronoun >I<
in Hebrew. We could discuss the difference between these 2
>II<) Therefore the above analysis
should suffice for now.
RASHI RULE USED: DOUBLE PARSHAS
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
VERSE: Gn27-29b
Rashi compares or >ALIGNS< the following two verses
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gn27-29 Isaac Jacob Curses to your cursors;Blessings to blessors
Nu28-09 Bilam Jews Blessing to blessors; Curses to Cursors
*1 *2
----------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES
=====
*1,*2 The order is reversed. Isaac first curses those who curse
Jacob and then blesses those who bless him while by
contrast Bilam first blesses those who bless Jacob and
then curses those who curse him.
Each party (Isaac, Bilam) used an order relative to their
life experiences. Righteous people usually suffer in the
first part of their life and only see happiness later while
wicked people enjoy the first part of their life and see
suffering later.
I think this Rashi clear enough. I only wanted to add that such
Rashis should be >Supplemented with a list<. Is it really true
that Righteous people suffer the first part of their life (to
remove their immaturities) and only then receive blessings?
A LIST enhances appreciation of the Rashis. Here is a
partial list of righteous people who suffered the first part
of their life and later had some happiness
{LIST}
Righteous people in the Bible who suffered the first part
of their life and then later had happiness. This is
seen as a general pattern since by suffering first
the righteous can remove immaturities
================================================================
Person How did he suffer Happiness at end
====== ============================= ============================
Jacob His sons tried to kill Joseph He lived to see family unity
Joseph He was sold as a slave He was King;family reunion
David Saul pursued him to kill him He was King
Jews Suffered in Egypt,wilderness Inherited Israel
Moses Pharoh tried to kill him Was leader of Israel
{END OF LIST}
THE POINT
=========
Even though the derivation of the Rashi is clear we should
use LISTS to supplement what Rashi says. This enhances
appreciation.
RASHI RULE USED: DOUBLE PARSHAS
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
VERSE: Gn24-02b
Gn24-02 says >And Abraham said to his senior servant who ruled
over everything he had, PLACE YOUR HAND ON MY THIGH...
and I will administer an oath....<
RASHI
=====
There is no problem with the verse. However Rashi explains
>WHY< Abraham requested Eliezer place his hand on his thigh
while swearing.
Rashi points out that all serious oaths are taken while holding
something sacred like a Bible or Tefillin (Similar to what is
done in court today). (See chapter 1 in the Rambam on the laws
of PLAINTIFF and DEFENDANT for a discussion of the SERIOUS and
NON SERIOUS oaths). Holding a holy object makes the oath more
serious to the swearer.
Therefore since the circumcisized organ was holy (because a
commandment was done with it) therefore Eliezer placed his
hand on Abrahams thigh.
THE POINT
=========
One need not be literal and say that Eliezer grabbed Abrahams
actual organ (and that the Bible euphemistically refers to
it as his >thight<). Rather it suffices to say that the
>thigh< is near that organ and therefore Eliezer placed
his hand on the thigh.
RASHI RULE USED: MORAL REASONS/LESSONS
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (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 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*