Ideas and Model Lessons in Learning Rashi-#19 Copyright RashiYomi Inc 7-23-2005 Adapted From Rashi-is-Simple http://www.RashiYomi.Com/
Written by Dr. Russell Jay Hendel;
A: REVIEW
This is the 19-th in a 30 part series on the methods that are useful for teaching Rashi. Parts 1 - 16 may be accessed on the Rashi website at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/wbook.htm in the workbook series. Part 1 contains useful information on our notation and methods - to best understand this chapter the reader should be familiar with our conventions.

B: THE FORMATTING METHODS
Chapter 17 began a multi-chapter series discussing the Rashi formatting method. In chapter 18 we presented the bullet method. In that chapter we focused on Biblical texts that indicate bullet effects by repeating keywords. In this chapter we present advanced examples of bulleting. More specifically we 1st present an example of bulleting where the repeating keyword motif is absent. We next present several Rashi interpretations of poetic passages using the bullet technique without repeating keywords. In one of these examples Rashi himself provides alternative translations; these alternative translations allow us to study subtleties in identifying superior translations of bulleted passages. Finally, we present a sophisticated example using advanced Talmudic conceptual techniques showing the contrastive power of bullets.

C: EXAMPLE 1: Lv22-04:06 UNCLEAN PRIESTS
The following Biblical paragraph deals with the prohibition of priests to eat holy objects
Text: Lv22-04:06
Whoever, of the seed of Aaron,
(A) is a leper,
(B) or has a discharge;
he shall not eat of the holy things, until he is clean.
(C) And whoever touches any thing that is unclean by the dead,
(D) or a man whose seed issues from him;
(E) Or whoever touches any creeping thing, whereby he may be made unclean,
(F) or a man of whom he may take uncleanness, whatever uncleanness he has;
The soul who has touched any such shall be unclean until evening, and shall not eat of the holy things, unless he washes his flesh with water.

D: ERRATIC BULLETING WITHOUT KEYWORDS
Notice the unusual nature of this bulleted passage: The bullets (A)-(F) are interrupted by a non-bulleted text, he shall not eat of the holy things. The bullets are not indicated by any repeating connective keyword Rather the bullets are indicated by content: That is, the Biblical paragraph Lv22-04:06 lists 6 types of uncleanliness that prevent priests from eating holy objects. It is this content, an enumeration of a type of uncleanliness, that allows us to identify the bullets.

E: RASHIs ON THE BULLETS
Notice how bullets (C) and (F) seem to say the same thing:
(C) And whoever touches any thing that is unclean by the dead,
(F) or a man of whom he may take uncleanness, whatever uncleanness he has;
However, the bulleted nature of the list requires seeing the bullets as contrastive. Hence the Rashi interpretations:
Lv22-04a Bullet (C) refers to a person who touched a dead body.
Lv22-05b Bullet (F) refers to a dead body itself.

F: INFERENCE FROM BULLETS vs WORDS
To fully appreciate this last Rashi we re-examine the Biblical text commented on
(F) or a man of whom he may take uncleanness, whatever uncleanness he has;
This text by itself, that is the simple meaning of its words, does not, by itself, seem to be talking about a dead body. Indeed, Rashi did not make his inference about the meaning of this text from either the words or the grammar of this text. Rather, Rashi makes his inference solely on the bulleted nature of the paragraph. There are six bullets. Together they exhaust the major methods of becoming ritually impure:
Whoever, of the seed of Aaron, has
(A) Leprosy: is a leper,
(B) Unusual sexual discharge: or has a discharge;
he shall not eat of the holy things, until he is clean.
(C) People who touch dead bodies: And whoever touches any thing that is unclean by the dead,
(D) Seminal emissions: or a man whose seed issues from him;
(E) Dead animals: Or whoever touches any creeping thing, whereby he may be made unclean,
(F) Dead humans: or a man of whom he may take uncleanness, whatever uncleanness he has;
In summary, it was the comprehensive nature of the bulleted list that motivated Rashi to identify the otherwise obscure texts as referring to specific types of ritual uncleanliness. In other words, bulleting, whether thru keywords or context, is a separate and distinct exegetical method. The inferences of the bullet method are the simple meaning of the text, just as the inferences on the bulleted text of a secular author is the simple intended meaning of the text.

G: EXAMPLE 2: Nu23-21 THE GOD-ISRAEL RELATIONSHIP
Biblical Text:
He has not seen iniquity in Jacob,
nor has he seen toil in Israel;
the Lord his God is with him, and
the trumpet blast of a king is among them
Again: The bulleted nature of this text is not indicated by keywords but rather by context. In this passage, Bilam praises the God-Israel relationship by enumerating 4 verselets praising this relationship. Each separate verselet, or sentence, is therefore seen as one bullet item in this paragraph on God-Israel relationships.

H: THE MEANING OF THE BULLETS
The main theme is clearly indicated by the 3rd bullet, the Lord his God is with him. Rashi now proceeds to paint a poetic picture exhausting this theme, of God being with the Jews, by indicating a spectrum of circumstances in which God is with the Jews
Nu23-21b He has not seen iniquity in Jacob, Rashi: God overlooks sin!
Nu23-21c nor has he seen toil in Israel; Rashi: God overlooks sin toiled on, i.e. premeditated sin
Nu23-21d the Lord his God is with him, Rashi: Even when they sin [That is, in all circumstances]
Nu23-21e the trumpet blast of a king is among them Rashi: A language of friendship and endearment [so the message is that God is not just with them, but with them in a festive manner]
In other words, Rashi uses the exhaustive nature of the bullets as indicating the following spectrum of the God-Jewish relationship.
God is with the Jews
by overlooking momentary sin
by overlooking premeditated sin
God is not only with the Jews, but with them festively [Trumpet blast]
Again: The driving force of the interpretation is from the bulleted list, not from the individual words or the grammar of the phrases.

I: EXAMPLE 3: Dt32-10 GOD AND JEWS IN WILDERNESS
In the following example Rashi presents two competing translations of the text. This affords us the rare opportunity to compare and assess different methods of bulleting.
Biblical Text:
He found him [The Jews] in a desert land,
and in the waste howling wilderness;
he led him about,
he instructed him,
he watched him as the apple of his eye

J: EXAMPLE 3: RASHIs FIRST EXPLANATION
Biblical Text:
He found him [The Jews] in a desert land, Rashi: they were faithful to Him
and in the waste howling wilderness; Rashi: they were faithful; God protected against elements
he surrounded them, Rashi: God led the Jews with their camp organization and the Divine cloud
he instructed him, Rashi: God instructed them with the Torah
he watched him as the apple of his eye; Rashi: God protected them from foreign attacks and desert animals
Here, Rashi simply identifies each bullet with some aspect of the journey through the wilderness. However there is no intrinsic order to the bullet items. Rashi was obviously dissatisfied with this 1st explanation. Rashi therefore brings a 2nd explanation based on the Aramaic translation, Oonkelos. In this 2nd translation there is clear order and climax. We present this 2nd explanation in the next paragraph.

K: EXAMPLE 3: RASHIs SECOND EXPLANATION
Biblical Text:
Basic Sustenance
He provided for him [The Jews] in a desert land, Oonkelos: God gave them food and water
and in the waste howling wilderness;Rashi: God protected them against elements
National Identity
he surrounded them, Oonkelos: The 12 Tribes surround the focal center, the Temple
he instructed him, Rashi: God instructed them with the Torah
he watched him as the apple of his eye; Rashi: God enabled conquest of foreign nations

L: EXAMPLE 3: A COMPARISON OF THE EXPLANATIONS
First notice how the bullet items naturally evolve in the 2nd explanation. The first two bullet items describe basic sustenance (food, water, and protection against elements) while the next three bullet items describe the establishment of a national identity (The Temple, a house of worship, a religion, the Torah, and political independence from foreign powers). It is this natural evolution that makes the 2nd explanation more appealing and superior to the 1st explanation.

M: EXAMPLE 3: EVOLVING BULLETS vs WORD MEANING
Rashi's first explanation translates the first verselet, he found them in the wilderness, while Rashi's 2nd explanation, based on Oonkelos, translates the first verselet, he provided for them in the wilderness. Obviously, interpreting the Hebrew root Mem-Tzade-Aleph as provided (Oonkelos) vs. found (Rashi), facilitates translating the verselet as he provided them food and water (Oonkelos) vs. he found them faithful (Rashi).
Rashi in fact defends Oonkelos' translation of Mem-Tzade-Aleph as meaning provides by citing several verses where this translation holds: e.g. Nu11-12 if the entire fish population of the sea was gathered would it provide for them. It thus appears that the issue between Rashi's 1st vs 2nd explanation is an issue of word meaning: Does Mem-tzade-aleph mean find (find them faithful in the wilderness) or provide (provide food and water in the wilderness).
However such a perspective is fallacious: It views word meaning as the primary source of Biblical interpretation. Rather the proper perspective is that the evolving bulleted structure, in and of itself, suggests (or requires) that the initial bullets speak only about basics, such as food, water and protection. True, there are verses to support this perspective, but -- and this is crux of the argument -- even without the verses the evolving bulleted structure in and of itself would justify interpreting the verselet as he provides food and water (Here the root Mem-Tzade-aleph whose primary meaning is find, would take on a causative nuance--he finds for them, that is, he provides.)
In summary, an evolving bulleted structure has sufficient force to justify interpretations with new word meanings. Where possible these new meanings should be supplemented with support from other verses.

P: EXAMPLE 4: Lv05-21:22: ADVANCED BULLET EVOLUTION
In the previous example we have introduced the concept of an evolving bullet structure. The precise articulation of this evolution may require Talmudic type distinctions and analysis. The following advanced example illustrates.
Biblical Text:
If a soul sins, and commits a trespass against the Lord, and lies to his neighbor
in that which was delivered him to keep / guard,
or in a placement
or in a thing taken away by robbery,
or committed Ayin-Shin-Kuph
Or have found that which was lost,
and lies concerning it, and swears falsely; in any of all these that a man does, sinning in it;
Notice, that two of the bullets, placement and Ayin-Shin-Kuph do not have clear and known meaning. Rashi provides meaning based on the evolving bulleted structure which describes a five-step hierarchy of monetary sin. One of these unknown interpretations can be justified by other verses while the other cannot. Thus this example affords us the opportunity to see bulleting as an independent interpretive tool.

Q: THE FIVE FOLD HIERARCHY
Rashi only interprets the two difficult items. The full five fold hierarchy is presented in the Sifre:
If a soul sins, and commits a trespass against the Lord, and lies to his neighbor
in that which was delivered him to keep / guard,-- Sifre: The aggrieved participated in the monetary sin since initially he consented to letting the thief have the object, albeit to watch it
or in a placement--Sifre: This refers to refusal to pay a loan or investorship: Unlike the deposit where the actual item must be returned the lender need not return actual dollars but instead must return value
or in a thing taken away by robbery--Sifre: Robbery differs from loan refusal and denial of guardianship in that the owner never participated in transfer
or committed Ayin-Shin-Kuph -- Sifre: Ayin-Shin-Kuph refers to wage withdrawal: Unlike robbery where something tangible is taken, in wage withholding, nothing is taken. However it is still theft. Scriptural support for interpreting Ayin-Shin-Kuph as withholding wages occurs in Lv19-13: Don't do Ayin-Shin-Kuph...don't withhold wages of a worker
Or have found that which was lost--Sifre: Withholding a lost article differs from withholding wages or theft in that the owner is unknown (The returner of the lost article must advertise to find the owner).
Thus the Sifre infers from the evolving five bullet list that
placement refers to not returning the value of a loan and
ayin-shin-kuph refers to witholding earned wages.
Although there is scriptural support for one of these inferences the major driving force behind the interpretation is the evolving bulleted structure itself. Note that the formulation of this evolution requires talmudic type logic. Hence the naturality of the interpretation may depend on the student's familiarity with Talmudic type distinctions.

P: THE RASHI WEBSITE AS A RESOURCE
In chapter 18 we have indicated the major urls for the bullet methods. We urge the serious student to revisit these urls and study the examples.