1. RASHI METHOD: REFERENCES BRIEF EXPLANATION: Commentary on a verse is provided thru a cross-reference to another verse. The cross references can either provide (1a) further details, (1b) confirm citations, or (1c) clarify word meaning. This examples applies to Rashis Nu16-19b URL Reference: (c) http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule1222.htm Brief Summary: God's HONOR appeared (Nu16-19) REFERENCES Nu17-07,Ex40-34, and Ex24-15:16 which associates God's HONOR with the DESCENT OF THE CLOUD

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.

Text of Target Verse Nu16-19	Text of Reference Verse Nu17-07,Ex40-34, and Ex24-15:16.
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. .	And Moses went up into the mount, and a cloud covered the mount. And the honor of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai, .... Then a cloud covered the Tent of Meeting, and the honor of the Lord filled the tabernacle.... And it came to pass, when the congregation was gathered against Moses and against Aaron, that they looked toward the Tent of Meeting; and, behold, the cloud covered it, and the honor of the Lord appeared.
Rashi comments: 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 what we might loosely call the hononym method he shows the underlying unity in disparate meanings of the same root. Very often this unity clarifies further known meanings.

The Hebrew root Kuph-Beth means hollow. This root can refer to
• the belly (the hollow of the body)
• a hole (in a wall)
• a hammar (to make holes)
• female gender
• a measure of volume (equal to the volume of 24 eggs)
• a wine press( cavity in the ground)

As can be seen all the meanings are simply connected with the fundamental idea of hollow, hole and cavity.

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 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 Nu18-20a Both verses/verselets discuss the lack of Levite portion in Israel. The alignment justifies the Rashi assertion that Levites did not a) inherit the land upon entry nor b) take apportionments in conquests

Verse	Text of Verse	Rashi comment
Nu18-20a	And the Lord spoke to Aaron, You shall have no inheritance in their land, neither shall you have any apportionment among them; I am your part and your inheritance among the people of Israel.	Levites did not a) inherit the land upon entry nor b) take apportionments in conquests
Nu18-20a	And the Lord spoke to Aaron, You shall have no inheritance in their land, neither shall you have any apportionment among them; I am your part and your inheritance among the people of Israel.

Advanced Rashi: Everyone agrees that there is an alignment with an emphasis on two nuances, inheritance and apportionment. Rashi and Raavad explain as we have presented above - no inheritance on initial inheritance and no apportionment on conquests.

But the Rambam states There is no inheritance on initial conquest nor apportionment in the three lands annexed to Israel at the time of the coming of the Messiah. But Levites do take apportionment in conquests! Remarkable! The Raavad demurs: But the Bible explicitly states that the Levite 10% is in exchange for inheritance. So this would apply to conquests.

The Rambam can be defended by the extra underlined word in this verse, Nu18-21: And, behold, I have given the sons of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an inheritance, an exchange for their service which they serve, the service of the Tent of Meeting. So, the Rambam argues, the Levite 10% is only in exchange for inheritances. The Rambam does accept the double nuances of the alignment. However the Rambam argues that the two nuances refer to the initial inheritance and the future inheritance at the time of King Messiah (Both of these inheritances were promised to the Patriarch Abraham). Since however the verse explicitly delimits the 10% tithe exchange to inheritances it logically follows that Levites can apportion conquests.

The above explanation of the controversy of the early authorities is a peach of an example of how to apply the methods of this list to the resolution of controversies. Notice how all authorities agree on the fact of alignment and the resolution by two nuances. However Rambam adds an additional textual exegesis which delimits the two nuances to inheritances while Rashi and Raavad do not.

5. RASHI METHOD: CONTRADICTION BRIEF EXPLANATION:Rashi resolves contradictory verses using 3 methods. (5a) Resolution using two aspects of the same event (5b) Resolution using two stages of the same process (5c) Resolution using broad-literal interpretation. This examples applies to Rashis Nu18-30b Nu18-30c URL Reference: (c) http://www.Rashiyomi.com/w33n24.htm Brief Summary: Brief Summary: When a Levite receives Tithe he FIRST tithes his tithe to the priest. THEN the remainder can be eaten anyplace (it has no sanctity)

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).

Summary	Verse / Source	Text of verse / Source
Tithed Tithe (and Terumah) must be eaten like grain that is in ritual purity	Nu18-11:13	And this is yours; the offering of their gift, with all the wave offerings of the people of Israel; I have given them to you, and to your sons and to your daughters with you, by a statute forever; everyone who is clean in your house shall eat of it. All the best of the oil, and all the best of the wine, and of the grain, the first fruits of them which they shall offer to the Lord, these have I given you. And whatever is first ripe in the land, which they shall bring to the Lord, shall be yours; everyone who is ritually pure in your house shall eat of it.
After separating gifts the remainder will be like ordinary grain and can be eaten anywhere [Rashi: Even in a cemetery.]	Nu18-30:31	Therefore you shall say to them, When you have set aside the best of it, then it shall be counted to the Levites as the grain in the granary, and as the produce of the winepress. And you shall eat it in every place, you and your households; for it is your reward for your service in the Tent of Meeting.
Resolution:	2 Stages	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).

6. RASHI METHOD: STYLE Rashi examines how rules of style influences inferences between general and detail statements in paragraphs. Example: Every solo example stated by the Bible must be broadly generalized; Theme-Detail: A general principle followed by an example is interpreted restrictively---the general theme statement only applies in the case of the example; Theme-Detail-Theme: A Theme-Detail-Theme unit is interpreted as a paragraph. Consequently the details of the paragraph are generalized so that they are seen as illustrative of the theme. This examples applies to Rashis Nu18-29a URL Reference: (c) http://www.Rashiyomi.com/w33n24.htm Brief Summary: GIVE TITHE OF TITHE; like Israelite grain tithe; GIVE TITHE OF TITHE. Rashi: Similarity in requirements of eating (in ritual purity) and fine for violation.

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.

Verses Nu18-26:28 are stated in a Theme-Development-Theme form as shown below:
• General: Thus speak to the Levites, and say to them, When you take of the people of Israel the tithes which I have given you from them for your inheritance, then you shall ,offer up an offering of it for the Lord, a tenth part of the tithe.
• Detail: And this your offering shall be reckoned to you, as though it were the grain of the threshing floor, and as the fullness of the winepress.
• General: Thus you also shall offer an offering to the Lord of all your tithes, which you receive from the people of Israel; and you shall give from it the LordÆs gift to Aaron the priest.

Rashi treats the entire set of three verses as one paragraph with a central theme developed by details. The paragraph in essence states The Levites must give priestly gifts from their tithe similar to the Israelite gifts to the priests. Rashi interprets this to mean that the Levite and Israelite gifts are examples of the general category of gifts to the priest. The point here is that the paragraph structure indicates an underlying commonality to all gifts to priests, whether from Israelites or Levites. Since these gifts are all the same they all have the same requirements. They are all treated the same.

These requirements are spelled out in two verses. Verse Nu18-13 states that only people who are ritually pure may eat it; however it can be eaten by anybody - male or female. Verse Lv22-14 states that those non-Priests who accidentally eat holy gifts must pay a 25% fine.

8. RASHI METHOD: DATABASES BRIEF EXPLANATION:Rashi makes inferences from Database queries. The precise definition of database query has been identified in modern times with the 8 operations of Sequential Query Language (SQL). This example applies to Rashis Nu16-01c URL Reference: (c) http://www.Rashiyomi.com/w33n24.htm Brief Summary: Non standard genealogical references can be used to indicate by inuendo certain support and lack of it for causes.

Today we ask the database query: How are genealogies indicated? The query uncovers many examples. An examination of these examples justifies the Rashi assertion that Genealogy by father is standard. Genealogy by brother indicates help in marriage. Genealogy with omission indicates lack of approval.

The table below presents results of the query along with illustrations of Rashi's comment.

Advanced Rashi: Rashi cutely mentions 1C06-22:23 where the sons of Korach who composed, sang and delivered temple songs, were listed in full genealogy going back to Jacob. This verse contrasts nicely with our verse.

The main point here is that the database method uncovers the innuendo and exposes it as intended by the author. The large number of standard genealogies proves that non-standard genealogies were intentionally produced to hint at certain inuendos.

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.