#*#*#*#*# (C) 2001, RashiYomi Inc. Dr Hendel President #*#*#*#*#
-----------------------------------------------------------
| Rashi is Simple Version 2.0 |
| (C) RashiYomi Inc., Dr Hendel President |
| http://www.RashiYomi.Com |
| PERMISSION to reprint WITH this header if NOT for profit |
------------------------------------------------------------
VERSE: Lv21-05a
RASHIS COVERED: Lv21-05a Lv21-05b Lv21-08b
Lv08-16a Ex29-13b Lv03-04c Lv19-28a
======================= THE ALIGNMENT METHOD ===================
----------------------------------------
TODAYS RASHI RULE: ALIGNMENT
TODAYS RASHI SUBRULE: SEVERAL ASPECTS
----------------------------------------
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF RULE
-------------------------
Many Rashis do NOT focus on an internal analysis of the verse.
There may be nothing bothering Rashi in THAT verse. The words
used may all be normal.
But when the given verse is compared with another verse--that
is, when the two verses are ALIGNED together-- we see blatant
differences.
The ALIGNED verses therefore suggest that these ALIGNED
DIFFERENCES were deliberately placed there to emphasize
certain nuances.
A nifty way of explaining the ALIGNED verses is to think
of ALIGNMENT as the vehicle that the Biblical Author uses
to indicate FOOTNOTES. That is, a modern writer might use
FOOTNOTES to indicate details; the Biblical Author instead
used REPEATED ALIGNED VERSES with DIFFERENT DETAILS.
If the 2 ALIGNED verses are speaking about the same LAW
but indicate DIFFERENT DETAILS then one alignment approach
sees the TWO verses as presenting TWO DETAILS of the law--
that is the TWO details of the TWO verses apply in every
situation. The challenge of such an interpretation is to
defend that have ONE law with 2 details rather than TWO
laws with different details.
STANDARD EXAMPLE
----------------
Perhaps the simplest example are the 11 verses requiring
the FINGER OF THE LIVER to be offered in the sacrifices.
Here are some sample verses:
----------------------------------
Ex29-22 the finger OF-- the liver
Lv03-04 the finger ON-- the liver
Lv09-10 the finger FROM the liver
---------------------------------
STUDENT EXERCISES:
------------------
-- What is the SAME in the ALIGNED verses
-- What is DIFFERENT in the ALIGNED verses
-- Give examples of EACH of these differences
-- Indicate how these differences COMBINE into one law
-- (Advanced) Defend that all 3 verses apply to one situation
RASHIS SOLUTION
---------------
- The phrase FINGER OF THE LIVER means you take the LIVER FINGER
- FINGER ON THE LIVER means take a little bit of the liver
with the finger (that is, dont take ONLY the finger with
all other liver scraped off but take the finger with a
little bit of liver so that the finger is ON the liver)
- FINGER FROM THE LIVER uses the word FROM indicating
SEPARATION; so you shouldnt take alot of liver with the
finger; rather take the finger and a little bit of liver
(Where the liver and finger meet)
STANDARD REFERENCES FOR THIS RULE
---------------------------------
http://www.Rashiyomi.com/align-58.htm
This summary may be a bit too terse. You can browse the
57 postings leading up to by going to
http://www.Rashiyomi.com/align-1.htm
http://www.Rashiyomi.com/align-2.htm etc.
Or you can visit the Rashi Yomi Calendar at
http://www.RashiYomi.com/calendar1.htm
This calendar presents a day by day listing of Rashis.
The ALIGNMENT series occurs between 7-28-01 and 10-10-01.
(The above example about the finger of the liver
occurs at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/lv08-16a.htm)
HOW TO USE THESE LISTS FOR SCHOOL PROJECTS
------------------------------------------
You can use the LISTS referenced above for
school projects. Here is how. If you are a
teacher then you can present the two aligned
verses and ask the students to perform the
5 student exercises listed above.
The students can then compare their analysis with that
of Rashis. This leads to greater appreciation of Rashi.
TODAYS EXAMPLE
--------------
Lv21-01:08 repeats several laws for priests that were already
given to Israelites. By ALIGNING the Israelite and Priestly
version we infer details to these laws. An advanced analysis
shows that we have 1 law with 2 details rather than 2 laws
(one for priests and one for Israelites) with different
details.
Here is the list. In presenting these alignments it is
useful to CAP the aligned words that differ. In this list
the lv21 verses contain the PRIESTLY obligations while
the other verses are obligations to ISRAELITES.
==============================================================
VERSE PHRASE1 PHRASE2 PHRASE3 PHRASE4
======== =========== ========== ================= ============
Lv21-05a Dont BALD a baldness in your HEAD
Dt14-01 dont PLACE baldness between your EYES FOR THE DEAD
-------- ----------- ---------- ----------------- ------------
Lv21-05b dont SHAVE the beard corners
Lv19-27 dont DESTROY the beard corners
-------- ----------- --------- ----------------- ------------
Lv21-05c dont ETCH an etch in their flesh
Lv19-28 dont PLACE an etch in your flesh FOR THE DEAD
-------- ----------- --------- ----------------- ------------
Differ *1 *2 *3 *4
NOTES
-----
*4 The extra phrase FOR THE DEAD shows that these practices
(ripping out here; destroying the beard; mutilating skin)
were done by the idolaters as mourning practices for death
(Rashi: Lv19-28a)
*2 One verse calls it DESTROY while another verse calls it
SHAVE. We conclude that both SHAVING AND DESTRUCTION must
be present. Hence shaving by SCISSORS, TWEEZERS, &
CHEMICALS is not prohibited *10
*1 *3 SInce the Bible mentions BOTH balding the HEAD
and between the EYES I infer that BALDING on the
whole head is prohibited to priests and Israelites.
The sifrah answers the following provocative question:
Maybe PRIESTS are prohibited from balding the HEAD;
but ISRAELITES are prohibited ONLY from balding the eyes
In other words: How do we know that we have 1 law
with 2 details vs 2 laws (priests/Israelites) with
2 details. See footnote *11 for my sparkling
interpretation of Rashi.
------------------------ LONGER FOOTNOTES --------------------
*10
-- SHAVING WITH A RAZOR is prohibited since a razor is
a destructive instrument
-- SHAVING WITH A SCISSORS is not prohibited (Since
a scissors is not a destructive instrument--hence
the modern allowance to use some types of electric
shavers)
-- SHAVING with TWEEZERS is not prohibited
Biblically since TWEEZERS are not destructive
-- SHAVING with CHEMICALS is not prohibited because
we dont call CHEMICAL REMOVAL OF HAIR, SHAVING
*11 Here is a stronger form of the argument (Brought down
by the Sifrah). We all know that Priests have many
more stringencies that ordinary Israelites. So maybe
also in the balding prohibition we have
-- Israelites are prohibited from BALDING TWEEN EYES
-- the Holier Priests are prohibited from BALDING ANY
PLACE ON THE HEAD?
While this question appears strong note that it assumes
that in the ALIGNMENTS the PRIESTS always have the more
stringent verses.
Hence if we show that sometimes the ISRAELITES have
the more stringent verses we will see that there is
balance and that both sets of verses are read together.
Looking at the above aligned verses we see that by
the ISRAELITES it states DONT PLACE (dont place an
etch, dont place a baldness) while by the PRIESTS it
states less stronger language (DONT ETCH; DONT BALD)
Thus
-- the verbs are STRONGER by the ISRAELITES while
-- the INDIRECT OBJECT (Where it is done--balding EYES
or head) is stronger by the PRIESTS
SImilarly REASONS are sometimes given by ISRAELITES
and sometimes by ISRAELITES and PRIESTS.
This gives evidence that the two chapters should be
read as one law rather than two.
The above is my understanding of the Rashi and Sifrahs
answer to the question: Are EYE-HEAD one combined law
for Israelites-Priests or are they 2 laws for two
different groups? (Again: The answer is that neither
group is overall more stringent and hence we treat
them as one)
Let us now review Rashis language
----------------------------------------------------
Both verses use the word BALDNESS. Hence we have
a WORD ANALOGY linking the verses and showing them one
----------------------------------------------------
This is also the language of the sifrah. Most
people regard WORD ANALOGIES (The same word in
two verses) as SINAITIC in origin without reason.
However I would suggest that WORD ANALOGIES is used
in two ways in Talmudic literature. It can refer to
a sinaitically received transmission on which there
is no dispute. OR, it can refer to an OVERALL ALIGNMENT
where inference and reason apply.
Thus I interpret the Sifrah as follows
----------------------------------------------------
Perhaps we have two laws for two groups? Priests
who have many more commandments would be prohibited
EVEN form balding the head while ISRAELITES would
ONLY be prohibited form balding between the eyes!
THerefore we have ALIGNMENTS (Word analogies!) of
the BALDING and ETCHING commandments. (In both
these laws the activity (PLACE vs BALD-ETCH) is
more general for the ISRAELITES showing that neither
group receives a greater stringency)
------------------------------------------------------
I believe that this approach to these Sifrahs is more
intellectually satisfying. It is therefore a tool that
the reader can use when studying these texts
================================================================
===================== HOLINESS OF PRIESTS ======================
We continue with alignment examples brought above
This example is interesting because Rashi seems to deviate
from the Sifrah. The analysis of this Rashi as coming
from alignment is due to Rashi
================================================================
VERSE PHRASE1 PHRASE2 PHRASE3
======== ======= ====================== ========================
Lv21-06 THEY will be holy to their GOD
Lv21-08b HE will be holy to YOU
Differ *1 *2 *3
NOTES
-----
*1 *3 The 2 verses speak about two holiness
requirements: COLLECTIVE (they) holiness to GOD vs
INDIVIDUAL (he) holiness to the INDIVIDUAL (to you).
So Rashi is Simple: Since Lv21-06 is speaking about
holiness in marriages enforceable by the courts,
it follows that Lv21-08b speaks about holiness in
individual social matters (e.g. Letting them lead
Grace after meals; letting them get called to the
Torah first etc).
Interestingly Rashis simple approach is not used
by the Sifra which interprets Lv21-08b to obligate
blemished priests (who cant serve in the Temple)
to follow the extra priestly marriage laws.
The defense that Lv21-06 refers to court protected
holiness is presented at
http://www.RashiYomi.com/lv21-06a.htm
*2 These phrases are the same
================================================================
RASHI RULE USED: ALIGNMENT
---------------------------------------------------
WARNING: The following additional references may be too wordy
However they frequently contain additional information & lists
The hyperlinks only work on the main website
Volume 13 Number 20
#*#*#*#*# (C) 2001, RashiYomi Inc. Dr Hendel President #*#*#*#*#
Volume 13 Number 20