|
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
Lv18-21
discussing
the appearance the Molech idolatry
states
And thou shalt not give any of thy seed to pass them to the Molech,
neither shalt thou profane the name of thy G-d: I am HaShem.
Rashi clarifies the underlined word
Molech
by referencing verse
Dt12-31, Dt18-10
which states
You shall not do so to the Lord your God;
for every abomination to the Lord, which he hates, have they done to their gods;
for even their sons and their daughters they have burned in the fire to their gods.
....
There shall not be found among you any one who passes his son or his daughter through the fire, or who uses divination, or a soothsayer, or an enchanter, or a witch,
Hence the Rashi comment:
The Molech idolatry consisted of a 3 stage process:
1) The parents handed their child to the priests
2) The priests passed the child on foot between two viscious fires
3) The child continued through the between-fire path even if (s)he got burnt.
|
Text of Target verse
Lv18-21
|
Text of Reference Verse
Dt12-31, Dt18-10
|
|
And thou shalt not give any of thy seed to pass them to the Molech,
neither shalt thou profane the name of thy G-d: I am HaShem.
|
You shall not do so to the Lord your God;
for every abomination to the Lord, which he hates, have they done to their gods;
for even their sons and their daughters they have burned in the fire to their gods.
....
There shall not be found among you any one who passes his son or his daughter through the fire, or who uses divination, or a soothsayer, or an enchanter, or a witch,
|
Rashi comments:
The Molech idolatry consisted of a 3 stage process:
- 1) The parents handed their child to the priests
- 2) The priests passed the child on foot between two viscious fires
- 3) The child continued through the between-fire path even if (s)he got burnt.
|
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.
The following Hebrew words all refer to
sins.
-
Pay-Shin-Aleph, Peshah,
rebellious sin
-
Ayin-Vav-Nun, Avon,
willful sin
-
Cheth-Teth-Aleph, Chayt,
negligent sin.
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
Lv16-16a
embeds the Rashi translation
Chayt means negligent sin
And he shall make atonement on the holy place,
and from the ritual impurities of the children of Israel,
and from their transgressions [pesha],
for all their negligent sins [chayth];
and so shall he do for the tent of meeting, that dwelleth with them in the midst of their uncleannesses.
Advanced Rashi:
Rashi goes a step further and explains typical examples of rebellious and negligent sin connected
with ritual impurity.
- A typical rebellious sin connected with ritual impurity would be defiantly walking into the Temple grounds while ritually impure
- A typical negligent sin connected with ritual impurity would be walking into the Temple (or dealing with Temple sacrifices)
while ritually impure and not being aware of this impurity either at the beginning or end.
As we have explained several times in this list it is a mistake to see Rashi as exhausting the meaning of the verse
with this example; rather the proper perspective is that Rashi is giving a typical example which illustrates the general principle.
Such a reading of Rashi is mature and deep. Technically Rashi does not explicitly mention the willful-negligent distinction and
similarly Rashi does not explicitly mention the rebellious sin examples; all Rashi does is mention the negligent ritual impurity
examples. However to properly understand Rashi we have provided a contrastive rebellious example as well as explained the synonym
distinction which underlies the Rashi example.
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.
There are many classical aspects to grammar whether
in Hebrew or other languages. They include
- The rules for conjugating verbs. These rules govern how you
differentiate person, plurality, tense, mode, gender, mood, and
designation of the objects and indirect objects of the verb. For
example how do you conjugate, in any language, I sang, we will
sing, we wish to sing, she sang it.
- Rules of agreement. For example agreement of subject
and verb, of noun and adjective; whether agreement in gender or plurality.
- Rules of Pronoun reference.
- Rules of word sequence. This is a beautiful topic which is
not always covered in classical grammatical textbooks.
Today we deal with the topic of single-plural. Verse Lv18-29
concluding a long chapter prohibiting forbidden sexual relations, states
For he who does any of the abominations - the people doing them, they
will be cut of from their nation.
Note the gentle but forceful change from singular to plural, emphasized by the
underlined words - he, they, their. Rashi comments:
By using the plural the Bible emphasizes that both males and females are liable.
Advanced Rashi: There is a subtlety to this Rashi. The previous chapter dealt
with sexual sins. The various laws are introduced with a man a man shall not come close to exposing
nakedness...whoever sleeps with his sister..... Thus I might think that only the man (who initiates sexual sin)
is punished with cutoff. The Bible therefore emphasizes that the people doing these things, they will be cut off.
This is further emphasized in e.g. Lv20-10 both the adulterer and adulteress shall be put to death.
The table below presents an aligned extract of verses or verselets
in
Lv18-21
Both verses/verselets
discuss
the prohibitions of using children for the Molech idolatry.
The alignment justifies the Rashi comment that:
There are two prohibitions. Children should not be used:
a) to give to the Molech idolatry priests
b) to pass through the Molech idolatry fires.
|
Verse
|
Text of Verse
|
Rashi comment
|
|
Lv13-21
|
From your children:
- Do not give [to the Molech priests]
- Do not [to] pass through to the Molech [fires]
|
There are two prohibitions. Children should not be used:
- a) to give to the Molech idolatry priests
- b) to pass through the Molech idolatry fires.
|
|
Lv18-21
|
From your children:
- Do not give [to the Molech priests]
- Do not [to] pass through to the Molech [fires]
|
Advanced Rashi:
Several supplemental points support todays Rashi explanation.
- In rule #1, references we have provided additional verses complementing
the information presented at verse Lv18-21. These additional verses show that
Molech involved a passing of children between two viscious fires.
- In presenting the above verses we have used the technique of ellipsis.
The actual verselet states From your children: Do not give in order to pass through to the Molech.
Ellipsis requires that certain parts of the sentence are elliptically transferred to each of the sentence
halves. So the actual verse halves read as follows:
- (#1) From your children: Do not give to the Molech;
- (#2) From your children: Do not pass through to the Molech.
In other words it is as if the verse said From your children: Do not give to the Molech and do not pass through to the Molech.
When the Bible is faced with such a sentence it will frequently combine both sentence halves by removing repetition and using ellipsis:
From your children: Do not give in order to pass through to the Molech.
The table below presents presents
two contradictory sets of verses.
Both verse sets talk about
paying workers on time.
The underlined words highlight the contradiction.
One verse set says
don't delay payment till morning
while the other verse says
the sun shall not set over him [that is, his wages.]
Which is it?
Do you have till morning or evening to pay wages?
Rashi simply resolves this using the 2 aspects method:
(1) If a person works by day then you have all night, till the following morning, to obtain money to pay him
(2) But if a person works by night then you have all day, till the following sunset (evening), to obtain money to pay him.
|
Summary
|
Verse / Source
|
Text of verse / Source
|
|
Don't delay paying a day-worker till the next morning
|
Lv19-13
|
You shall not defraud your neighbor, nor rob him; the wages of he who is hired shall not remain with you until the morning.
|
|
Don't delay paying a night worker till the (next day's) sunset
|
Dt24-14:15
|
You shall not oppress a hired person who is poor and needy,
whether he is of your brothers,
or of your strangers who are in your land inside your gates
At his day you shall give him his hire,
nor shall the sun go down upon this payment;
for he is poor, and sets his heart upon it; lest he cry against you to the Lord, and it should be sin to you.
|
|
Resolution:
|
2 Aspects:
|
- (1) If a person works by day then you have all night, till the following morning, to obtain money to pay him
- (2) But if a person works by night then you have all day, till the following sunset (evening), to obtain money to pay him.
|
Advanced Rashi: About 10 years ago we had a Rashi-Rambam series,which we discontinued. This
series focused on differences between Rashi and Rambam in biblical commentary. These verses on employee payment
are one of the few examples where Rashi is more explanatory than Rambam. For Rambam simply lists the laws - a day
worker must be paid by the next morning and a night worker by the next sunset - while Rashi explains the reasons for
the laws: The half day wait gives the employer time to obtain money to pay the worker/employee.
Certain Biblical paragraphs are stated in a Example-General form.
In other words several particular examples are stated followed by
a general theme.
The Detail-Theme form creates a unified paragraph and
consequently the examples are interpreted broadly as illustrating multiple
aspects of the general theme.
Today's example illustrates
this as shown below.
Verse(s)
Lv18-03
discussing
the prohibition of adopting Egyptian/Canaanite practices
states
- Detail: Don't do Egyptian/Canaanite deeds
- General: Don't walk in Egyptian/Canaanite practices
The detail clause states
do not do Egyptian/Canaanite deeds
and could mean
not to practice their laws.
The General clause provides an all inclusive principle
and requires that the detail clause should be interpreted broadly:
The statement
do not do Egyptian/Canaanite deeds
means the restrictive
do not follow Egyptian/Canaanite laws
and also means more broadly
do not follow their cultic practices.
It is important to emphasize what Rashi is and is not saying. Rashi is not saying that the simple
meaning of
do not do Egyptian/Canaanite deeds
is
you should not go e.g. to Egyptian/Canaanite theaters and watch artistic performances of ritual-related items.
Rather Rashi is saying that because there is a terminal general clause we should see the example
clauses as illustrating all examples of this general clause. The driving force of this broad interpretation is
the paragraph structure which teaches us that the example clause is not the only example of the
theme but rather one of many examples of the theme. Hence the paragraph as a whole even though
it doesn't explicitly say so teaches us that
it is prohibited to follow specific Egyptian/Canaanite laws
and
it is also prohibited to follow their non-legal cultic practices such as
watching artistically performed ritual-related performances in their theaters.
Advanced Rashi:
I am indebted to the Talner Rebbe, Rabbi Dr. Isidore Twersky, with whom I learned for 7 years, who pointed out that
the prohibition of walking in Egyptian/Canaaanite paths was a prohibition on cultic-related activities
(for example, artistic performances of ritual-related items). However, there is no prohibition of adopting, for example,
technological improvements of these societies.
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 indicates bold, italics, underline by using
repetition. In other words if a modern author wanted to emphasize
a word they would either underline, bold or italicize it. However when the Biblical
author wishes to emphasize a word He repeats it. The effect - whether
thru repetition or using underline - is the same. It is only the
means of conveying this emphasis that is different.
Verse
Lv17-13
discussing
the slaughter of animals/birds
states
A person who hunts [any] hunt of [any] edible animal or venizon, he shall pour out the blood and cover it with dust.
The repeated underlined word phrase hunt hunt indicates an unspecified emphasis.
Rashi translates this unspecified emphasis as indicating
Hunts a hunt emphasizes any hunt - that is, a hunt of any
animal or bird, even domesticated animals/birds such as chickens.
That is Rashi translates the verse as follows:
A person who hunts [any] hunt of [any] edible animal or venizon, he shall pour out the blood and cover it with dust.
It follows that the requirement to cover the blood of a slaughtered animal applies both to animals that are typically hunted as well
as to domesticated animals.
We ask the following database query:
How are animal offerings designated?
The reader is encouraged to perform the query using a standard Biblical Konnkordance or search engine.
This database query yields the list below. The list justifies the following Rashi-Midrashic inference:
The standard designatory phrase uses the words take with the preposition for.
e.g. Take a lamb for a sin offering. The non-standard designatory phrase,
and make it a sin offering connotes emphasis and indicates special verbal designation e.g.
This will be a sin offering.
The list below presents the results of the database query.
| Verse
| Sample Text
| Designatory phrase
|
| Lv09-02
| ...take a calf for a sin offering
| take....for
|
| Lv16-05
| take two he-goats for a sin offering
| take ....for
|
| Nu08-08
| take...and a second ox...for a sin offering
| take ...for
|
| Nu28-19
| Offer an elevation offering .... 2 oxen and 1 ram...
| Offer an ________: ___________________
|
| Lv16-09
| Aaron will offer the goat that the lottery picked up for God and he will make it a sin offering
| he will make it a sin offering
|
Advanced Rashi:
As can be seen the designatory phrase he shall make it a sin offering
is unusual. Rashi therefore comments This teaches that he must verbally declare: This is
for the sake of God for a sin offering. Just to recap: The driving force of the Rashi comment
is the unusual designatory phrase.
We should also mention that the above table is simplified. The actual verses often indicate
multiple sacrifices e.g. Take a calf for a sin offering and a ram for an elevation offering.
The important point is that the designatory phrase is take ...for.
Verse Lv19-33a generally prohibits teasing - no person should tease his colleague. The Hebrew
root for teasing, Aleph-Nun-Hey, Anah, means to cause, and would connote a relationship where
a person obtains actions by force rather than by sharing.
But the Bible gives no further details. It does not define teasing. The definition of teasing
requires not Biblical exegesis but real-world knowledge of the psycho-social behaviors that cause mental anguish.
Because this Rashi is based on real-world knowledge rather then on biblical exegesis we classify this Rashi as non-verse.
Rambam, Sales, 13 Lists 6 such categories:
- Sinful Ancestry: e.g. Can the descendant of an idolater be a communal leader
- Non Jewish Ancestry: Can the descendant of a non-jew be a communal leader
- Ones past: Can a former sinner be a communal leader
- Times of Anguish: Telling a person who is burying his children that his sins caused this
- Referrals: Referring someone (e.g. a seeker of donations) to someone who can't give now
- Consultations: Consulting with someone when you know he is ignorant of the field.
The Torah and Jewish leaders frequently reinforced needed values during specific situations using symbolism.
We present several examples of symbolic emphasis of moral values below. Particularly noteworthy is the fact that
an animal with which a person (sexually) sinned is stoned. Why? So as not to embarass the person - for if the animal
was not executed people would say There goes the animal so and so sinned with. Such a law emphasizes the
importance of human feeling and dignity.
| Verse
| Event
| Need
| Symbolic reminder
|
| Ex17-11a
| War with Amalayk
| Prayer
| Moses raised his hands
|
| Nu21-09a
| God's cure of snake bites in nation
| Prayer
| Placing the the copper snake on high (hinting to heaven)
|
| Dt12-02
| Destroying Idolatry
| Horror of crime
| Even the idolatrous trees are killed
|
| Lv20-15a
| Punishment for sleeping with animals
| Horror of crime
| Animal is stoned to death also
|
| Ex20-23a
| Temple service
| Decorum, atmosphere, modesty
| Use ramp vs. staircase so as not to excessively expose nakedness
|
| Gn06-14b
| Noah's Ark
| Punishment of sinful people by brimstone
| Use Brimstone wood (to symbolize coming punishment of brimstone)
|
This week's parshah contains
examples of
all
Rashi method.
Visit the RashiYomi website at
http://www.Rashiyomi.com
and
http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule.htm
for further details and examples.
|