|
Their presence in Rashis on Parshat Korach Volume 12, Number 22 Rashi is Simple - Volume 35 Number 22 Used in the weekly Rashi-is-Simple and the Daily Rashi. Visit the RashiYomi website: http://www.Rashiyomi.com/ (c) RashiYomi Incorporated, Dr. Hendel, President, June 18th, 2009 The goal of this Weekly Rashi Digest is to use the weekly Torah portion to expose students at all levels to the ten major methods of commentary used by Rashi. It is hoped that continual weekly exposure to these ten major methods will enable students of all levels to acquire a familiarity and facility with the major exegetical methods.
Verse Nu16-19 discussing the descent of God when he intervened in the Korach rebellion states And Korah assembled all the congregation against them unto the door of the tent of meeting; and the honor of God appeared unto all the congregation. Rashi notes that the underlined words, honor of God appeared unto all the congregation. references verses Nu17-07,Ex40-34, and Ex24-15:16. discussing God's Divine presence appearing. Hence the Rashi comment The statement in Nu16-19 that the Honor of God appeared references several other verses, for example, Nu17-07, Ex40-35, Ex24-15:16 which associate the appearance of God's honor with the descent of the cloud.
When Rashi uses the synonym method he does not explain the meaning of a word but rather the distinction between two similar words both of whose meanings we already know.
In our article Peshat and Derash: A New Intuitive and Logical Approach, which can be found on the world-wide-web at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rashi.pdf we have advocated punchy translations of Biblical verses as a means of presenting Rashi comments. The following translation of verse Nu18-27 embeds the Rashi translation YaQeV means a vat. And the gift which ye set apart shall be reckoned unto you, as though it were the grain of the granary-silow, and as the harvest of the wine-vat. Advanced Rashi: Here the standard English translations and Rashi translation agree.
Today Hebrew grammar is well understood and there are many books on it. Rashi, however, lived before the age of grammar books. A major Rashi method is therefore the teaching of basic grammar. Many students belittle this aspect of Rashi. They erroneously think that because of modern methods we know more. However Rashi will frequently focus on rare grammatical points not covered in conventional textbooks.
Today we present a Rashi which is best understood using the rules of person agreement. Surprisingly Rashi gives us a rule we do not know! Most people know that the subject, verb and object should agree in plurality and person. This is a rule in all languages. For example we say He speaks but They speak. Similar rules exist in Hebrew. Rashi enunciates an exception to this rule: If you are speaking about something unpleasant you can switch from 1st person to 3rd person. This switch creates an artificial distance between you (the 1st person) and the unpleasnat topic. Let us apply this Rahsi rule to Nu16-14 discussing the refusal of Dathan and Aviram to appear before Moshe. The intended verse is Moreover thou [Moses] hast not brought us into a land flowing with milk and honey, nor given us inheritance of fields and vineyards; will you take out our eyes [so we don't see what you have done to us]? we will not come up.' Following Rashi's principle we replace the underlined phrase, take out our eyes with the phrase take out their eyes or even better take out the eyes of these men. The entire verse would then read as follows: Moreover thou [Moses] hast not brought us into a land flowing with milk and honey, nor given us inheritance of fields and vineyards; will you take out the eyes of these men. [so we don't see what you have done to us]? we will not come up. Advanced Rashi: This person-switch principle is universal to all languages and there are many examples of it in the Bible. Psychologically the use of this principle by Dathan and Aviram shows a heightened sensitivity to any suggestion of mishap. Such a heightened sensitivity is characteristic of the parnaoic state in which many of the slaves who left Egypt were still in. This paranoia prevented them from accepting God's love and ultimately led to their ruin. Interestingly the psychological evaluation of the Jews as paranoic is explicitly stated in the Bible Dt01-27, since the Hebrew root Resh-Gimel-Nun means paranoia.
The table below presents an aligned extract of verses or verselets in Nu16-01c, 1C06-22:23. Both verses/verselets discuss the Korach family. The alignment justifies the Rashi comment that: The Torah discusses the bad Korach rebellion and the good songs sung in the Temple by the Korachites. Genealogy discretely omits Jacob's name by the rebellion but includes it by the Temple songs. This omission / inclusion discretely indicates disapproval and approval respectively.
Advanced Rashi: Some alignments are more explicit. For example the Decalogue speaks about the prohibition of making vs. having idols thus explicitly indicating two prohibitions: manufacture and possession of idols. By contrast some alignments are more discrete indicating their messages with omissions rather than with explicit contrasts. I am indebted to Dr. Aviva Zornberg's new book, The Murmuring Deep: Reflections of the Biblical Unconscious, for inspiring the understanding of this Rashi. I was at the launching of this book at Pardes in June a few weeks ago. There professor David Shulman used Indian philosophy to describe Aviva's book as studying silence. The book describes several types of silences and the communications implicit in them. Aviva picked up this theme in her own talk on her book. Using Kabbalistic terminology she distinguished between voice and words Frequently the Biblical text will give voice without words and it is important to understand the implied content. You can google the book title to find reviews or purchase it. Using these concepts we can see the omission of Jacob's name by Korach as an unworded voiced silence. This particular silence indicates disapproval. It is important to emphasize the relationship between the alignment and this silence. The alignment - one verse with mention of Jacob and one verse without proves the intentionality of the Author in the omission. That is, the sole purpose of the alignment is to prove that the silence is really there. We must then interpret the silence - the omission - as indicating disapproval. Interestingly Rashi adds: Jacob, in his blessings explicitly states In their congregations let my honor not be mentioned.... Hence we see that Jacob's name was not mentioned in Nu16-01. However I think it important to emphasize that the true driving force of the omission is disapproval. The explicit verse in Jacob's blessings is simply an added embellishment. Indeed it shows how Korach's rebellion can be traced back to Levi's attack on Joseph. My point in not emphasizing this added verse is to show that it is only an embellishment; the real driving force behind Rashi is the alignment which points to a voiced silence.
The table below presents two contradictory verses. Both verses talk about the similarity of the Levite Tithed-Tithe to granary grain. The underlined words highlight the contradiction. One verse says it (the tithed tithe) will have the same status as granary grain [which must be eaten in ritual purity] - Nu18-12:13 while the other verse says you will raise a gift (tithed-tithe) to the priest .....it will be like granary grain ... you can eat it anywhere Which is it? Must there be ritual purity or may it be eaten anywhere (even the cemetery). Rashi simply resolves this using the 2 Stages Method method: 1) You separate tithe from the tithe (If the Terumah was not separated you separate that first). This tithed tithe has a status of granary grain gifts which must be eaten in ritual purity (Nu18-11:13). 2) Then the remaining grain will have the status of granary grain (after gifts have been separated) They can be eaten anyplace even in the cemetery (Nu18-31:32).
Certain Biblical paragraphs are stated in a Theme-Development-Theme form. In other words a broad general idea is stated first followed by the development of this broad general theme in specific details. The paragraph-like unit is then closed with a repetition of the broad theme. The Theme-Detail-Theme form creates a unified paragraph. The detailed section of this paragraph is therefore seen as an extension of the general theme sentences. Today's example illustrates this as shown immediately below.
Rashi generalizes the detail clause You shall have no inheritance in their land as illustrative of the general clause, All the raised gifts of the Temple objects have I given you and states: You shall not have an initial portion in the division of Israel and also you will not divide booty in future defensive wars in which territory is captured. We believe this comment evident and consistent with the Rabbi Ishmael style guidelines. Advanced Rashi: To strengthen our understanding of this Rashi we present an almost identical general-theme-general derivation on the same topic but from a Deuteronomy verse.
Rashi generalizes the detail clause They shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire as illustrative of the general clause, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel and states: The detail clause explains the general clause. The reason the Levites have no inheritance in Israel is because they obtain all their needs from the sacrificial fires. It immediately follows that all the Levite needs are obtained from the Temple objects and therefore they have no need for wars to obtain additional land. We believe this comment evident and consistent with the Rabbi Ishmael style guidelines.
I chose to derive the Rashi from style rather than from alignment. I did this to negate the idea that the most important thing in learning Rashi is counting superfluity and redundancy. While this is one component of learning Rashi there are equally important approaches which require intuiting general feel and direction and generalizing verses.
We have explained in our article Biblical Formatting located on the world wide web at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/biblicalformatting.pdf, that the Biblical Author indicated bullets by using repeating keywords. That is, if a modern author wanted to get a point across using bullets - a list of similar but contrastive items - then the Biblical Author would use repeating keywords. Today's verse illustrates this principle. Bullets whether indicated through modern notation or through the Biblical method of repeating keywords always indicate contrastive emphasis - that is, each bullet is presumed to be a distinct item contrasted to the other items on the list. Very often the bullets are also used to indicate that the entire list of exhaustive of some spectrum.
Today we ask the database query: Does one's neighborhood influence character? To answer the query recall that the Jews camped in a square in the wilderness. Each side of the square had 3 tribes. The southern side of the camp had Reuben, Shimon, and Gad. The table below shows that although the national census remained stable (a drop of only -0.3%) between the first and second census, nevertheless, the southern side of the camp dropped 30%. In the table below we identify sins of each of the southern-side tribes. Overall the table gives a picture that bad people tend to live with bad people, suggesting that one should avoid bad neighborhoods when one can. There are a wealth of philosophical questions connected with such an approach. We, like Rashi, suffice with noting the results of the table leaving each person to make their own inferences!
Advanced Rashi: Rashi actually states The Kehathite branch of the Levites (from which Korach who rebelled came) lived near the southern camp. This facilitated the association of Levi and Reuben. We have generalized the approach of Rashi. We seek all people associated with the southern side and review their behavior. The review shows that the Rashi comment - people who live together get involved in the same type of moral behavior - is true in general and does not apply only to the Kehatites-Reubenites. Such a generalizing approach enriches our understanding of Rashi and is therefore the proper method to be used.
Verse Nu18-32b the prohibition of descecrating Temple objects states And you shall bear no sin because of it, when you have set aside the best of it; you shall not descecrate the holy things of the people of Israel, and you shall not die. Rashi comments: This should be interpreted causatively: If you descecrate the holy things then you deserve to, and will, die. To properly understand this we review certain rules of logic. The export-import law allows the conjunction and to exchange for an implication. For example, If it rains today and I don't have an umbrella, then I will get wet has the same logical meaning as If it rains today then if I don't have an umbrella, then I will get wet In the Bible a statement of the form do not descecrate and you will not die has the same logical meaning as do not descecrate; if you descecrate then you will die. In general any Biblical statement of the form don't do X and have consequence Y is similarly interpreted as Don't do X; If you do X the consequence is you will Y. Since this interpretation primarily involves the formal manipulation of logical connectives we classify it as a non verse rule similar to the spreadsheet and diagram methods. There are many examples of this rule in the Torah and we will have opportunity to visit it during this yearly cycle.
Conclusion
This week's parshah contains no examples examples of the symbolism Rashi method. Visit the RashiYomi website at http://www.Rashiyomi.com and http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule.htm for further details and examples. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||