|
Their presence in Rashis on Parshath VaYiQRaH Volume 16, Number 3 This weeks Weekly Rashi with Hebrew/English source tables Is accessible at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule1603.htm (c) RashiYomi Incorporated, Dr. Hendel, President, Mar 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 Lv01-17a discussing the tearing of the up bird offering states And he [the priest] shall rip it [the bird] by the wings thereof, but shall not divide it asunder; and the priest shall offer it... Rashi clarifies the underlined word rip by referencing verse Ju14-06 which states And the spirit of the Lord camJe mightily upon him [Samson], and he ripped the lion like the rip of a kid and he had nothing in his hand; but he told not his father or his mother what he had done. Hence the Rashi comment: The Hebrew root Shin-Samech-Ayin has a general meaning of tear. Its specific nuances are a energetic deliberate ripping. Here Rashi uses other verses to clarify the meaning and nuances of a word. We could have also classified this Rashi as using the synonym method.
Rashi's point was the meaning of a word. We have already incorporated Rashi's translation of the Hebrew word as meaning rip in the actual verse. Such translations show the effect of the Rashi comment.
Rashi would sometimes derive the meaning of a word from the meaning of its underlying Biblical root. In applying this method Rashi would use all available grammatical methods to study the meanings of related roots. The next paragraph presents one such rule.
Advanced Rashi: We can just leave the list as masculine-feminine; but we can also see the pairs as speaking about enablement a characteristic frequently associated with females. Thus the bride completes her husband; the sun enables heat; something healthy will drive and facilitate selection (otherwise you won't want to select anything); the fuel enables and facilitates fire; finally, (remarkably) it is charity that facilitates justice. Justice thrives best when people are generally charitable; this makes it less likely for someone who deserves no mercy to receive strick justice.
Advanced Rashi:The careful reader may have noticed in bullet #2, that we jumped ahead and made the priest subject for the grabbing a handful even though the change of subject to priest does not explicitly occur till the next verselet. It appears as if Rashi was inferring that the pronoun he refers back to the end of the last sentence son's of Aaron the priest. Actually however Rashi had a deeper reason. Verses Lv06-07:08 explicitly state that the priest performs the grabbing of the handful. The proper way to articulate this observation is that Rashi supplemented the grammar method with the reference method to arrive at the above analysis. There are other subtle points in the above switches. For example priest switches to Aaron and priests. There are subtle laws on who may eat the offerings. As a general principle the Head Priest may always partake. Similarly the group of priests serving in the Temple that week could partake of the offerings offered by their members. There are many more laws but our purpose today was to show how change of grammatical subject indicates change of the main person acting.
The table below presents an aligned extract of verses or verselets in Lv01-14b Both verses/verselets discuss the types of birds that may be offered as offerings. The alignment justifies the Rashi comment that: Here, in this verse, as well as throughout the rest of the Bible, we always find children associated with Pigeons. Similarly we always find turtledoves associated with lack of reference to children. Hence we conclude that a) When bringing turtledoves only adults can be brought as bird offerings while b) When bringing pigeons only teenage/younger pigeons can be brought as a bird offerings.
Advanced Rashi: We have defended this Rashi using the alignment method. However we could have also defended it using the format method since the repeated keyword of in Lv01-14 which states ...he shall bring his offering of turtledoves or of pigeons, creates a bullet like structure emphasizing the distinctness of each enumerated item: a) turtledoves and b) child pigeons. Similarly we could have defended this Rashi using the database method since a database review of all verses referring to turtledoves and pigeons always associates the adjective child with pigeons, not with turtledoves.
The table below presents presents two contradictory verses. Both verses talk about the Altar fire. The underlined words highlight the contradiction. One verse says fire perpetually remains on the altar while the other verse says the priests place fire on the altar. Which is it? Was the altar fire perpetual or was it supplied by Priests. Rashi simply resolves this using the 2 aspects method: There were two sources for the altar fire. (1) The altar fire was perpetual and consequently only additional wood was needed. (2) The priests, in addition to bringing wood, also brought fire.
Advanced Rashi: Rashi literally says The fire came from heaven [from above] and also from the priests. This does not contradict our approach that the fire was perpetually on the altar. The altar is a Temple object and Temple ownership is frequently referred to as Heaven Ownership or Higher Ownership. Although Rashi does not explicitly mention the verse about perpetual fire we feel that this is the source for the Rashi comment.
Certain Biblical paragraphs are stated in a Theme-Development form. In other words a broad general idea is stated first followed by the development of this broad general theme in specific details. The Theme-Detail form creates a unified paragraph. Today's example illustrates this as shown below.
Advanced Rashi: In other words, in classical general-detail guidance Rashi is stating If you bring an oven-baked rest offering then you can only bring either wafer or loaf offerings. We should add that in addition to the derivation based on style Rashi derives technical laws on the difference between wafer and loaf offerings by aligning the two halves of the detail clause. For example, as can be seen in the above citation, loaves are mixed with oil while wafers are anointed with oil. More can be said but our basic goal here was to clarify the Rashi use of the style method.
This Rashi requires the use of three Rashi methods. We recommend that the reader first read method #4, alignment, then read method #7, format and finally read method #5, contradiction. The Rashi will become clear if the rules are read in this order. 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. In applying this repetition rule we often employ a principle of the Malbim which states If after using a noun the Bible repeats the noun instead of using a pronoun then this repetition is treated like other repetitions indicating unspecified emphasis.
Following the repetition principle above we regard these repeated words as indicating unspecified emphasis similar to a modern underline or bold. The unspecified emphasis can be clarified using traditional words connoting emphasis. Our choice of traditional words connoting emphasis is based on context. We can translate the Lv03-8,13 verses as ...he shall sprinkle only its blood ... Such an emphasis indicates that only its blood can be sprinkled. However if the blood of the offering got mixed up with bloods of other offerings then we don't offer it. We can translate the Lv01-05 verse as ...he shall sprinkle any blood ... Such an emphasis indicates the blood is sprinkled even if it was mingled with other blood. The actual law, cited by Rashi, combines these two unspecified emphasii: If the blood of two valid offerings were accidentally mixed up then the mixed blood may be thrown and the owners of both sacrifices achieve expiation. By contrast, if the blood of a valid and invalid offering were accidentally mixed up then both offerings become invalid. Each sacrifice owner must bring another sacrifice to replace their sacrifice which had become invalid. To recap: There is a dual emphasis - only its blood but also any blood. We resolve this contradiction by allowed mixed valid bloods to be offered on the altar but not a mixture of valid and invalid blood.
We ask the following database query: What Minchah procedures (rest-offering procedures) are offered and who (owner/priest) must/may do them. 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: 1) All procedures until taking the handful may be done by the owner. This includes, mixing with oil, placing the frankincense and bringing to the Priest. 2) From the handful procedure to the end only Priests may officiate. This includes taking the handful, bringing it to the altar, offering oil-flour on altar, offering frankincense on altar. The list below presents the results of the database query. The list below has an unusual construction: The left hand column mentions all procedures of the Minchah offering. The other 4 columns list 4 textual passages dealing with Minchah. The table itself reflects which procedures are mentioned in which textual passages. Taking the table as a whole shows how Rashi following the Talmud inferred the laws of Minchah.
Advanced Rashi: Rashi states The requirement of priest starts with the lifting of the fistful procedure. But a review of the above table shows that the requirement of priest starts with the bringing of the Minchah to the altar corner. Why did Rashi deviate from the implications of the above list? The above table answers this. The bringing to the altar corner is not mentioned in the Lv02-01:03 passage. In that passage the requirement of Priest is first mentioned in the taking of the fistful procedure. Hence the Rashi comment The requirement of priest starts with the taking the fistful procedure is not a statement about legal requirements but rather a statement about the textual listing of the word priest among all procedures. In the Lv02-01:03 text the word Priest first occurs in the the taking of fistful procedure. However to infer the correct legal requirements we have to not only review this passage but all passages discussing Minchah. When we do that we find that the legal requirement of priest begins with bringing the Minchah to the altar corner.
Verse Lv01-05f discussing the throwing of blood during the offering procedures states And he shall kill the bullock before HaShem; and Aaron's sons, the priests, shall present the blood, and throw the blood around against the altar that is at the door of the tent of meeting. Rashi applies the diagram method to explain the mechanics of throwing around. By way of background we note that words like around can connote continuosly or discretely around. Many other words have this continuous - discrete ambiguity. For example the word always can mean continuously, all the time or can mean e.g. every day, (discretely always). Rashi following the Sifra points out that throw would be inconsistent with a continuous around: You can't throw continously around. Hence Rashi diagramatically interprets throws around as follows: He throws on two opposite diagonals so that the blood covers all 4 sides satisfying the requirement of around. Here, Rashi's primary goal is to clarify the diagramatics of throwing around.
Verse Lv02-13a discussing the requirement of salting (rest) offerings states And every meal-offering of thine shalt thou season with salt; neither shalt thou suffer the salt of the covenant of thy G-d to be lacking from thy meal-offering; with all thy offerings thou shalt offer salt. Rav Hirsch (in Nu) explains the symbolism of salt:After reviewing many biblical verses we see that salt is used to indicate destruction. But salt is also used to preserve meat from decay. How can the same item be used for both perservation and destruction? Rather salt maintains the status quo. If a land is destroyed then salting it preserves this destruction preventing further growth. If meat is about to decay then salting it prevents the decay. Thus salt symbolizes steadfastness. Using this symbolism we can understand the symbolic requirement of salting offerings: Whatever lessons are taught by the offerings must not be transient one day lessons in the Temple but permanantly preserved eternally. Advanced Rashi:But Rashi does not say this. Rather Rashi crytpically says: Water and salt made a deal at creation. Water is used on the Succah festival while salting is done to sacrifices. But we can now explain this cryptic Rashi. If salt is the symbol of preservation then water is the symbol of growth. Growth and change belong on the Succah festival when the water ceremony was performed. The Succah symbolizes non-citizenship. Every non-citizenship situation is one we should grow from. But the offerings symbolize acceptance of God's law. God's law is not something we grow out of; rather it is something eternal which should always be preserved. It is a climactic state where satisfaction and happiness abound; it is not a temporary transition state to something better for there is nothing better.
Conclusion
This week's parshah contains examples of all Rashi methods. Visit the RashiYomi website at http://www.Rashiyomi.com for further details and examples. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||