|
Their presence in Rashis on Parshath TeZaVeH Volume 15, Number 24 This weeks Weekly Rashi with Hebrew/English source tables Is accessible at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule1524.htm (c) RashiYomi Incorporated, Dr. Hendel, President, February 10th, 2011 Visit the Rashi website http://www.Rashiyomi.com 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. Although I frequently use my own English translations of biblical verses and Rashi comments, the Hebrew and English translations in the source tables are derived from online parshah files at chabad.org who in turn acknowledges the Judaica Press Complete Tanach, copyright by Judaica Press.
Verse Ex28-10a discussing the order of tribal names on the stones attached to the priests clothing states states Six of their names on one stone, and the other six names on the other stone, according to their birth. Rashi clarifies the underlined words according to their birth by referencing verses Gn29-31 -- Gn30-24 which states And when the Lord saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb; but Rachel was barren. And Leah conceived, and bore a son, and she called his name Reuben; for she said, Surely the Lord has looked upon my affliction; now therefore my husband will love me. And she conceived again, and bore a son; and said, Because the Lord has heard that I was hated, he has therefore given me this son also; and she called his name Simeon. Hence the Rashi comment: The tribal names on the two stones were sequenced according to the order in which the 12 tribes were born. Reuven was born first so his name comes first; Shimon was born second so his name comes second.
Advanced Rashi: The tribal names occurred in several places in the priest garments. There are various controversies on the order of names. My purpose in this email group is only to expose the underlying methods used to determine order. A detail discussion of the controversies and to where they apply would take us beyond the goals of this email newsletter.
When Rashi uses, what we may losely call, the hononym method, Rashi does not explain new meaning but rather shows an underlying unity in disparate meanings. Rashi will frequently do this by showing an underlying unity in the varied meanings of a Biblical root. In my article Peshat and Derash found on the world wide web at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rashi.pdf. I advocate enriching the Rashi explanation using a technique of parallel nifty translations in modern English. Today's examples show this.
Applying the above translation to Ex28-30b discussing the priestly garments we obtain And you shall put in the breastplate of judgment, the Light and Innocence [garment appendages that inspire prophetic visions] ; and they shall be upon Aaron’s heart, when he goes in before the Lord; and Aaron shall bear the judgment of the people of Israel upon his heart before the Lord continually.
In each case we reject a literal interpretation and instead stick to the basic idea that the Urim, the Light garment, inspired prophecy. We believe such an approach the best.
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 deal with the Biblical rules governing indication of pronoun indirect objects. The basic rule is that e.g. the difference between take gifts (Ex25-02) vs. take for Me gifts is that the latter style indicates purpose and dedication - the gifts must be dedicated to God. Similarly the difference between send spies vs. send for yourself spies (Nu13-02) indicates a personal aspect and purpose, for your own purposes. There are many Rashis whose focal point is a pronominal indirect object - as we go through the yearly cycle we will try and gather them all together. Today however we extend this pronominal indirect object rule to general indirect objects of purpose. Verse Ex27-20b discussing the oil used for the Candellabrah states And you shall command the people of Israel, that they bring you pure olive oil beaten for lighting, for the lamp to burn always. The phrase beaten for lighting contains an indirect object indicating purpose. Rashi comments: You must beat the olives in such a way that the resulting oil can be used for lighting. Here Rashi interprets the indirect object indicating purpose; Rashi requires a capacity for lighting as intrinsic to the oil production process. Further details are given below in rules #4,9. Another example of the pronominal indirect object rule indicating purpose and dedication, occurs in Ex29-25d which states And thou shalt take them from their hands, and make them smoke on the altar upon the burnt-offering, for a sweet savour before HaShem; it is an offering made by fire for God. Rashi commenting on the phrase for God states:The offering must be dedicated to God's name.
The table below presents an aligned extract of verses in Ex27-20b, Lv24-02, Ex29-40, Nu28-05 All verses discuss Temple items requiring oil The alignment justifies the Rashi assertions that The oil used for light was of a higher quality without dregs. The oil used for Minchah offerings could be of lower quality.
More advanced Rashi: We have aligned above only Ex27-20b and Ex29-40. An almost identical alignment is found in verses Lv24-02 and Nu28-05.
The table below presents two contradictory verses / verselets. Both verses speak about fixing the Priestly mask on the head. The underlined words highlight the contradiction. One verse says place the mask upon the turban while the other verse states place the mask opposite the turban We see the contradiction---which is it? Is the mask placed upon or opposite the turban? Rashi simply resolves this contradiction using the 2 aspects method: The mask was secured by two threads - one went around the head in back while the other went over the head. Hence one thread was opposite the turban while the other thread was on on the turban. A diagram and explanatory legend are presented below.
The following diagram clarifies
(A)
(A)/----------------|
/ | (B) |(A)
mask/ Priest Head |
\ | (B) | Back of Priest's head
eyes \ |
(A)\ | (B) |(A)
\---------------|
(A)
Hence we see that there are two aspects to the Priestly Mask/Turban relationship. There is a mask-thread on the Turban and there is a mask-thread around the Turban. Advanced Rashi: The above Rashi requires two techniques: The Contradiction technique and the spreadsheet technique.
Advanced Rashi: The example just presented occurs in my article Biblical Formatting located on the world wide web at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/biblicalformatting.pdf. It is also discussed in an article, not yet published, on broad-restrictive interpretation in law, presented at the 20th Midwest Jewish Studies conference.
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. Ex29 describes the consecration/induction ceremony of the priests. Verses Ex29-30, Ex29-35 create an unspecified emphasis by repeating: And that son who is priest in his place shall put them on seven days, when he comes into the Tent of Meeting to minister in the holy place. ... And thus shall you do to Aaron, and to his sons, according to all things which I have commanded you; seven days shall you consecrate them. Rashi simply comments: The repetition (equivalent to a modern underline or bold) indicates unspecified emphasis: You must do all of these things 7 days. Hence if even some small subprocedure was omitted the consecration / induction is invalid and must be done again.
Advanced Rashi: We should clarify that certain sacrifices the Priests have a right to eat while others they do not eat at all. Similarly the owners participate in the eating of certain sacrifices but not others.
Verse Ex29-12c discussing the blood procedures during the sacrifices states And thou shalt take of the blood of the bullock, and put it upon the horns of the altar with thy finger; and thou shalt pour out all the remaining blood at the base of the altar. To understand the Rashi on this verse we first cite Rav Hirsch's comments on Nu28-06 which discusses the daily offerings and states It is a continual burnt offering, produced at Mount Sinai for a sweet savor, a sacrifice made by fire to the Lord. Rav Hirsch notes that the daily offerings were not produced at Mount Sinai but offered on the altar. Therefore, concludes, Rav Hirsch, The altar resembled a mountain in appearance starting with a wide base and having a small top. The diagram below depicts this. Rav Hirsch further explains The altar resembled Mount Sinai since the sacrifices inspired prophecy and Mount Sinai was the original national prophetic revelantion. Therefore the altar resembled Mount Sinai so as to symbolically confirm prophetic capability of the people.
' ----- ALTAR TOP ' ----------- ' ----------------- ' ---------------------- ALTAR BASE The actual dimensions and height of each component are mostly given through tradition and cannot be inferred from textual sources. The height of the altar base was minimal, 1 cubit. Rashi explains that There was an indentation on top of the altar base; the indentation served as a receptacle for the blood poured to the foundation. The diagram below depicts this.
' ------------ ' | | Altar base ' | | Each side had an indentation. ' | | Blood could be poured in ' | | This indentation. ' ------------- Since this Rashi clarifies diagrams we classify it as a NonVerse, Diagramatic method.
The symbolism of the sacrifices: a) the intention by the Biblical Author to perceive the sacrifices symbolically b) the methods by which the sacrifices are interpreted as well as c) the resulting interpretation of the sacrifices is presented by Rav Hirscsh in his monumental essay, Groundlines for Jewish Symbolism, and summarized in my paper on symbolism mentioned above. Consequently, for reasons of space I will simply present the symbolic interpretation below. Those interested in the associated literary and logical arguments should read the above references.
Advanced Rashi: Rashi literally actually says The ox was brought to atone for the golden calf. Some Rashi commentators see this as sort of a pun: The parent ox atones for the sin with the child calf. However Rashi never explicitly states that his comment is based on a pun. This is only an interpretation!!! I have supplied a different interpretation of Rashi based on deep, underlhing, universal symbolic methods which are rooted in the function of the items involved. The function of a ram is leadership. The function of an ox is continous routine productive behavior. Here is a simple example of continuous routine productive behavior: If I was miserly and wanted to become more charitable I should not be advised to give a traumatic sudden $1000 donation to a charity. I would rather be advised to start giving small donations every week or month. Over a year I might give in total a $1000 but I would acquire the habit of being charitable by the continuous daily productive behaviors. This example is actually mentioned by Rambam in his commentary on the tractate Avoth. It immediately follows that the requirement of continuous routine productive behavior contradicts the traumatic approach such as happened in the making of the idol, the golden calf. As can be seen my interpretation accepts Rashi fully - the ox does atone for the sin of the calf. But I don't interpret this atonement as due to a superficial pun. Rather I interpret it as due to a different psychological approach to permanant behavioral change: Permanant behavioral change comes from routine continuous behavior, not from traumatic non-routine behavior. Furthermore by interpreting the ox functionally I use a universal principle of symbolic association which applies uniformly throughout the Bible.
Conclusion
This week's parshah does contains examples of all Rashi methods. Visit the RashiYomi website at http://www.Rashiyomi.com for further details and examples. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||