|
Their presence in Rashis on Parshath EMOR Volume 18, Number 8 This weeks Weekly Rashi with Hebrew/English source tables will be accessible, on Sunday, at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule18087.htm (c) RashiYomi Incorporated, Dr. Hendel, President, May `0 2012 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 Lv23-39b discussing when to celebrate the holiday of Succoth states Also in the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when you have gathered in the fruit of the land, you shall keep a feast to the Lord seven days; on the first day shall be a sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a sabbath. Rashi clarifies the underlined words when you have gathered in the fruit of the land by referencing verses Dt16-01 which states Watch for the month of Spring, and keep the Passover to the Lord your God; for in the month of Spring the Lord your God brought you out of Egypt by night. Hence the Rashi comment: The Bible ties Passover to Spring and Succoth to harvest. From this requirement we infer that calendar months must be watched (adding if necessary extra months) so that Passover always falls out in Spring and Succoth at Harvest time.
Advanced Rashi: Rashi literally states From here - Verse Lv23-39b, discussing Succoth and harvest - we learn that calendar months must be adjusted so that Succoth coincides with harvest. Ah! But that is not true! It is not true that we learn this law (adjusting the calendar) from Succoth. In fact we learn the law requirement of adjusting the calendar from the explicit Biblical verse at Dt16-01 Watch [for] the Spring time and make a Passover. It appears to me that this Rashi text is proof that when Rashi say we learn from here this phrase should not be taken literally. It rather should be interpreted as This is one of the possibly many places where we learn from and it is not even the main place. Throughout this email list I have encouraged such reinterpretations of exclusive statements by Rashi. The serious student of Rashi should carefully review the Rashi text and the arguments presented above to convince him/her self of this. For this reason we always feel free to supplement a Rashi statement we learn from here with other derivations. The more skeptical reader is encouraged to read the Rashi on Dt16-01 which proves that Rashi did not learn the calendar law requirement from here. For another application of this fundamental principle in reading Rashi please see below rule #4, alignment.
When Rashi uses the synonym method he does not explain the meaning of a word but rather the distinction or commonality between several similar words both of whose meanings we already know.
The advanced student may wish to supplement his reading of this Rashi with a sister Rashi presented below on Rule #6, style.
The table below presents an aligned extract of verses in Lv21-01e,Lv21-11. Both verses discuss the prohibition of priests becoming ritually impure by contact with a dead person The alignment justifies the Rashi assertions that The priest should not come to a dead body in ordinary funerals in the country. But if he bumped into the dead body (strewn on say a road) the priest should defile himself and bury the person.
Advanced Rashi: In our analysis we have emphasized the two contrastive aligned pairs come-defile and in the country indicated in bullets (2) and (4) in the above table. The combined nuances of these two bullets - come vs. bump into- and - in the country vs on the road - make it plausible that the Bible makes an exception if either the priest or High Priest bumped unexpectedly into a dead body on the road with no one attending to the person to bury it. In such a case the Priest must defile himself and bury the body. In presenting this explanation we have deviated from Rashi's literal statement that we infer this law from the extra phrase in the country (bullet #(2)). We instead offer a combined approach come vs bumped into unexpectedly (bullet #(4)) and in the country vs on the road (bullet #(2)). The combined approach makes Rashi more plausible. Such a reading of Rashi where we interpret Rashi's statement we learn from here to mean We learn from a variety of places inclding here is consistent with the approach to Rashi laid down in rule #1, references above. There are some further subtleties in this Rashi which we have not gone into. For example the Bible splits the aligned nuances between the chapters dealing with Priest and High Priest. The High Priest should not come to a dead body but he may defile himself to a dead body he bumps into unexpectedly. Similarly the ordinary priest should not let himself be defiled for funerals in the country; but for a dead body on the road he may or even should let himself be defiled. It is my opinion that Rashi simply noted one difference in the country. He expected each student to supplement this one observation with other differences.
The table below presents presents two contradictory verses. Both verses talk about penalties for damages. The underlined words highlight the contradiction. One verse says a death penalty applies when you smite the entire soul of a person while the other verse says a death penalty applies when you smite a person. Which is it? Is there a death penalty simply for wounding / smiting or does the death penalty require murder / smiting the whole soul? Rashi simply resolves this using the 2 Aspects method: (1) There is a death penalty for smiting people only if death occurs. (2) There is a death penalty for smiting parents even if wounding, not death, occurs.
This Rashi is a good example of the contradiction method since the contradiction is inferred from the alignment of the entire soul of a person vs. person. Furthermore the resolution is supported by an explicit verse stating that smiting parents in and of itself is punished by a death penalty.
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 they shouldn't marry a prostitute or divorcee as illustrative of the general clause, they shall be holy and states: Make them holy! If the priest violates the commandments and marries a divorcee then force him, against his will, to divorce her! We believe this comment evident and consistent with the Rabbi Ishmael style guidelines.
We totally agree with this analysis. But we point out that without the paragraph structure we would interpret make them holy to refer to symbolic gestures of giving Priests preference and treatment with honor. By embedding the detailed prohibition of forbidden marriages inside the general clauses of requiring them to be holy we infer that the general clauses apply to the detailed clauses and require them in all circumstances - hence the prohibition of marrying a divorcee applies even if it was inadvertently done - that is, a divorce is required.
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 is exhaustive of some spectrum.
Advanced Rashi: We have embedded this Rashi comment in the above translation. It is important to emphasize that Rashi is not deriving this translation from the meaning of the Hebrew word which is translated as relative. Indeed there are many verses where this Hebrew word (Shin-Aleph-Resh, Sher) means any relative; for example Lv18-06, Lv25-49. Rather the driving force motivating Rashi to translate the word relative as meaning wife comes from the bulleted structure which requires that each bullet item be regarded as distinctive. Reviewing the list shows that wife is a logical complement to the other items and fits nicely at the beginning of the list. What emerges from this analysis is that the formatting method is a separate and distinct exegetical tool, alongside with grammar, meaning and alignment, by which to understand textual material.
The table below presents the 3 commandments as well as their symbolic interpretation. We also include a non-commandment example of leaning. It follows that this Rashi combines the database and symbolism methods.
Sermonic points: The idea of symbolically affirming a serious moment such as transfer of responsibility occurs in many cultures with many diverse symbols. All cultures recognize the need to symbolically affirm serious moments and values. The symbolism here identifes support in the physical realm with moral support in the social realm. It is a symbol based on function.
Verse Lv24-11e presenting the blasphemer mentions the name of her mother and tribe. Similarly verse Ex31-06 mentioning the craftmanship of Bezalel mentions his father and tribe. Rashi comments From this we can infer that generally good and bad people bring honor and disgrace respectively on their family and tribe. Here Rashi infers real-world consequences from the verse and therefore we classified this Rashi as a non-verse method. We could have alternatively perceived this Rashi as generalizing two cases - one bad and one good. As such it would be classified under the rule 6, style the Rabbi Ishmael rules. In this email newsletter we have frequently emphasized that the generalization rule applies to non-legal domains. This verse would be one example of such an application.
The table below presents the 3 commandments as well as their symbolic interpretation. We also include a non-commandment example of leaning. It follows that this Rashi combines the database and symbolism methods.
Sermonic points: The idea of symbolically affirming a serious moment such as transfer of responsibility occurs in many cultures with many diverse symbols. All cultures recognize the need to symbolically affirm serious moments and values. The symbolism here identifes support in the physical realm with moral support in the social realm. It is a symbol based on function.
Conclusion
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. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||