Rabbi Ishmael-5 Methods:#11 of 14 ########################################################### # 10 YEAR Ayelet DAILY-RASHI-YOMI CYCLE # # Mar 15-Apr 30, 2000 # # Rashis 1-14 Of 7800 (0.2%) # # # # Reprinted with permission from Rashi-is-Simple, # # (c) 1999-Present, Dr. Hendel # # http://www.shamash.org/rashi # # # #Permission to reprint with this header but not for profit# # # # WARNING: READ with COURIER 10 (Fixed width) FONTS # ########################################################### This series is devoted to the 2 dozen Rashis that deal with the Rabbi Ishmael rule of >two complementary verses It turns out there are 5 ways that Rabbi Ishmael deals with >two complementary verses In part 1 we showed the method of >2 verses = 2 ASPECTS of the same entity Thus >ISRAEL sent a delegation to Edom >MOSES sent a delegation to Edom perceive >MOSES as the representative of Israel A reader completing the reading of this dozen-example-module will have minimum proficiency in appreciating how this rule of Rabbi Ishmael works (If this module works out we will try and develop modules for the other 12 principles). This material is printed with permission of the author,myself Those who wish to see complete details may visit the Rashi Website at >http://www.shamash.org/rashi/ You may browse, subscribe, or ask questions there. In this and the next issue we introduce a new principle >2 contradictory verses can indicate 2 Different MODALITIES By the word >MODALITY we mean whether an action is >REQUIRED >PERMISSABLE (But not required) >PROHIBITED The basic idea is that if one verse says that something is >REQUIRED but another verse says it is >PROHIBITED we >RESOLVE the two verses and say it is >PERMISSABLE We now give two examples(one today and one next time) #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* EXAMPLE 11 ---------- We have already reviewed this example in the Rashi-Rambam GOLDEN series. The two verses v5-15-9 and v5-24-15 speak about the prohibition of witholding loans or wages. The two verses warn against hurting the person >lest he DOES CALL TO GOD (5-15-9) >so that he does NOT CALL TO GOD (5-24-15) From these verses we learn >MODALITY That is we learn that the opressed person has >the RIGHT to pray against the opressor(he MAY pray) >but is not OBLIGATED to so pray (not, he MUST pray) #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*