Rashi-Is-Simple Mailing List
VISIT the RASHI DATABASE archives AT
http://www.shamash.org/rashi
(C) Dr Russell Jay Hendel, 2000
Volume 5 Number 17
Produced Mar, 17 2000
WARNING: USE FIX WIDTH FONTS (eg COURIER (NEW) 10)
Verses/Topics Discussed in This Issue with quicky explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------
v1q34-1
Question from Amy Goldstein about the Rape of Dinah. Why
does Rashi bring in her being forward--did Rashi imply
that Dinah's forwardness influenced the rape? Why is it
implied that Leah was not modest? Comments from the
Abarbanel are also mentioned.
v1-34-1
Rashi does not say 'Dinah was forward and HENCE she was
raped" Rather Rashi says that "Dinah was forward & HENCE
since other non jews would say it was her fault,
therefore Shimon and Levi had an added incentive to
destroy schem (an explicit verse is shown
v1-46-10
Shaul is the only person in the 70 people who came to
Egypt that is mentiond as the son of his mother---Dinah.
Rashi cites the beginning of a midrash--Rashi wanted us
to review the whole midrash which comprehensively covers
5 aspects of rape
v3a24-1
5 Sacrifice laws are explicitly learned from a Biblical
cross reference to other Biblical verses (a) Sin
offerings are slaughtered in North; b) Guilt offerings
are slaughtered in north, (c) various sin offerings
havesame fat component as peace offerings)
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
RASHI IS SIMPLE
GOALS: To grammatically defend all 8000 Rashis on Chumash.
METHOD:Every Rashi will be defended with a LIST of comparable cases
INTENDED AUDIENCE: Laymen, Academicians, Rabbis, Yeshiva students
COMMENTS,QUESTIONS: EMail to address below; (minor edits may occur)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:Always given unless 'anonymous' is explicitly asked
(UN)SUBSCRIBE: Email to above with keyword "(UN)subscribe"
JOURNAL REFERECE: Pshat & Drash, TRADITION, Win 1980, R Hendel
NOTATION: eg v2b1-8 refers to Ex(Book 2) Chap 1 Verse 8 Rashi b(#2)
SPECIALS:...on Rambam,Ramban,Symbolism,Pedagogy,Daily Questions
RASHI-IS-SIMPLE RULES...Complete set with examples ON BOTTOM
EMAIL: RJHendel@Juno.Com,rashi-is-simple@shamash.org,
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
FROM: Amy Goldstein, Hadassah
TO: Rashi is Simple
RE: v1-34-1
On 1-34-1 Rashi suggests that Dinah was a forward woman like
her mother (and therefore the Torah calls her DINAH BATH LEAH
instead of the more traditional DINAH BEN LEAH) Leah's
forwardness is learned from the Biblical incident where she
used the mandrakes to have her son visit her that night.
This raises several questions
Q1: Why is Rashi 'blaiming Leah for being forward
Q2: Why is Rashi in effect blaiming the rape on her
(By accusing her of being forward)
Q3: The Abarbanel points out that it was Rachel who was
by the well, not Leah. So Leah was the Modest one
Amy Goldstein
[Moderator: This question is answered below in v1-34-1.
Note that many feminist books visciously attack this Rashi
It is important to fully defend this (which Rashi does)]
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v1-34-1
======
v1-34-1 And Dinah the daughter of Leah went out to
visit the girls of the country...(The Bible
relates how she got raped)
RASHI TEXT:
===========
v1-34-1 She is called
>Dinah the daughter of Leah
instead of
>Dinah the daughter of Jacob
to show that she behaved like her mother
Just as Leah was a forward woman so was
Dinah a forward woman. We learn that Leah
was forward from 1-30-16 where Leah says
>come to me tonight because I have hired
>you with the mandrakes of my son
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
=========================================
This Rashi has irritated many feminists who accuse rashi of
blaiming rape victims on the rape. Actually Rashi is Quite Simple
To clarify Rashi we first state what Rashi did NOT say. Then what
he did say will be very simple.
#1) Rashi did not BLAME Dinah/Leah
----------------------------------
There are many Rashis that begin
>The Torah is BLAIMING or being PEJORATIVE
Rashi is NOT doing this here. He is just describing a personality
type.
#2) Rashi is NOT accusing Leah of being Immodest
------------------------------------------------
The definition of
>IMMODEST = Playing with other men
But the definition for a woman to
>BE FORWARD = **verbally** demanding relations
(Cf Rambam, Marriage 15:18)
Furthermore it is well known that women are
>praised for seducing their husbands
>when they are depressed (See Rashi 2-38-8)
Thus initiation is a good attribute in women. And while
verbal initiation is 'forward' there is no indication that
it is intrinsically bad. This answers the Abarbanel
#3) Rashi is NOT linking Dinah's forwardness to the rape
--------------------------------------------------------
True, Rashi does mention Dinah's forwardness
And True, it is obviously related to the Rape story
But Rashi does not link the forwardness to the Rape
But if Rashi links the Forwardness to the
>Rape story
but not to the
>Rape
then what does Rashi link Dinah's forwardness to?
The answer to this question can be found in an obscure
but brilliant YFAH TOAR on Braishit Rabbah 80:12. The
YFAH TOAR suggests that since Dinah was Raped and since
Dinah had a forward personality therefore OTHER people
would blame her for the rape
>What should she have expected...you see the
>way she behaves
But Jacob and his sons (and Judaism) did not so blame
Dinah for her rape. Therefore a primary reason for
Shimon and Levi destroying the city was because of the
way their sister was slandered. Rashi learns this from
the explicit verse 1-34-31
>But Shimon-Levi said: Should THEY say our sister
>behaves like a prostitute (and that she CAUSED It)
In other words the following are RIGHT and WRONG intepretations
of Rashi.
WRONG
-----
Dinah had a forward personality. Hence she caused the Rape
RIGHT
-----
Dinah has a forward personality. Hence other non-jews would
blame her for the rape. Hence the city had to be terminated
BOTH because of the rape and because of the consequent slander.
So Rashi is Simple and the feminists have no complaint against
Rashi.
We have left to explain the obvious derivation. This however is
clearly stated in Rashi---the lineage is
>MATERNAL (Daughter of Leah)
not
>Paternal (Daughter of Jacob).
It is well known that lineage in the Bible is usually paternal.
Deviations in lineage are interpreted to show a close relationship
between the two parties---in this case Leah influenced Dinah.
-------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 1: |
| =========== |
| How would you show that lineage is usually |
| paternal in the Bible and that deviations |
| denote influence of other relatives on the |
| person? What tools would you use? {LIST1} |
| below gives a partial answer. |
-------------------------------------------------
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
=========================
Note how Rashi is defended by the YEFAH ToAR by interpreting
>some other verse
We have frequently emphasized that difficult Rashis can
be salvaged by other verses.
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
===========================================================
{LIST1} {Most genealogies in the Bible are paternal. However
exceptions happen frequently-eg sibling or maternal
genealogy. In such cases the person is seen as having
an 'extra' special relationship with the other relative
In the case of sibling genealogies CARING/SACRIFICIAL
behavior has transpired between the siblings.In the
case of maternal genealogies the Bible emphasizes
that the mother influenced the child. Since we have
more sibling than maternal genealogies the list below
comes from the sibling genealogies for which we have
explicit support for our statements. For further
insights see footnote *5}
VERSE SISTER BROTHER CARING ACT OF BROTHER FOR SISTER
===== ====== ======= ===================================
2-15-20 Miriam Aaron Petitioned for her(Num 12)*1
1-34-25 Dinah Simon-Levi Waged war for her(Gen 35)*1
4-25-18 Cazbi Midian-Nation She prostituted for them*2
2-6-23 Elisva Nachson He "married her" to Aaron
1-28-9 Machlth Nevayoth He "married her" to Esauv
1-4-22 Naamah Tuval-Kayin He "married her" to Noach*3
1-25-20 Rivkah Laban Helped her recognize criminals*3 *4
4-26-59 Miriam Moses-Aaron The both petitioned for her(Num12)*3
FOOTNOTES:
==========
*1 Only the first 3 cases are mentioned by the Mechiltah
Nevertheless, when Rashi uses a principle, unless that principle
can be universally applied it has no validity. It would take too
long to go over every case (in this issue) but I did want to bring
them down and show the general idea. To make the list short I only
brought down Biblical examples. Note how CD ROMS would NOT help
us here since the list uses many keywords: SISTER OF, THEIR SISTER,
BROTHERS etc.
*2 In other words (See 4-31-16 for an explicit statement)--she,
as part of a war effort, deliberately seduced strategic people
so that God should be angry with the Jewish people. Note how
in this case she acted as "big sister" for her nation.
*3 The preceding 3 examples were NOT brought down by the
Mechiltah. Nevertheless they fit into the general pattern.
Note how Rashi explicitly mentions marriage in 2-6-23 and
1-28-9. Although Rashi does not explicitly say that Tuval-Kayin
married Naamah to Noach it a) is consistent with the other members
of ths list and b) it would seem logical that Noach who built an
ark needed the "father of utensils"--Tuval Kayin--Naamahs brother.
We will go into this in a future issue.
*4 See Rashi here. There are numerous references to the fact
that Rivkah learned how to recognize "criminal behavior" in
her fathers-brothers house and this helped her marriage to Isaac.
Again, we will go into this in a future issue
*5 eg 2K12-2 states that YHOASH's mother was
>TZVYAH=Colored
Perhaps a reference to the fact that she was happily
married and well dressed. An obvious implication is
that happily married people give rise (on the average)
to well raised children. However we cannot prove this
speculation from Verses or midrashim. Hence we concentrated
on the sibling genealogies. Note how a CD rom would not
have helped us here...Indeed the issue is not only the
list but finding a MEANINGFUL list that yields results
CROSS REFERENCES:
=================
Volume 1 Number 10 v2b15-20 (Discusses sibling genealogies)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
=================
* To my Shomray emunah Rashi class for their helpful
comments. In particular I quote the following cute thought
from Chaya Bruryiah Chait
>Dinah was FORWARD because according to our
>tradition she was suppose to have been a boy
>but prayer changed her to a girl.
>
>So her forwardness was a leftover from her
>almost being a boy
* To Hadassah Goldstein for both asking the question
as well as pointing out the Abarbanel.
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
===============================================================
OTHER VERSES
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v1-46-10
======
v1-46-10 and the sons of Ishmael ...and Saul the son
of the Canaanite woman
RASHI TEXT:
===========
v1-46-10 Saul was actually the son of Dinah who was
raped by a CANAANI (and hence she is called
the CANAANITH). When Simon and Levi destroyed
the city Dinah refused to leave until Simon
swore to marry her.
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
=========================================
First observe that 1-46-8:27 is filled with the names of 70
people BUT ONLY SAUL is mentioned as the son of his mother.
For example in 1-46-10 we have that the sons of Simon are
>YEMUEL
>YAMIN
>OHAD
>YACHIN
>TZOCHAR
>SAUL THE SON OF THE CANAANITE WOMAN
-----------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 1: |
| =========== |
| Can you construct a richer list of genealogies |
| that show that maternal lineage is rare in Tnach? |
| How would you construct such a list? What tools |
| would you use? {LIST1} below provides an answer |
-----------------------------------------------------
Besides the FORM of the verse being peculiar the CONTENT is peculiar
Indeed it explicitly says in several verses that Jews did NOT marry
Canaanite women because of their great depravity
------------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 2: |
| ========== |
| Can you find verses showing that Jews did not / |
| should not marry canaanites? How would you find |
| such verses? What tools would you use? |
| {LIST2} below presents a list. |
------------------------------------------------------
So Chazal suggest that
>SHIMONS WIFE = CANAANITE WOMAN = DINAH
Such use of DOUBLE NAMES for one person is quite common in Tnach
since many people have several names. Indeed God Himself is called
by several names.
-----------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 3: |
| ========== |
| Can you find several people who have several names|
| in Tnach? How would you find such a list? What |
| tools would you use? {LIST3} below provides a |
| partial list. |
-----------------------------------------------------
The only question that remains is
>WHY
is
>Dinah
called
>the Canaanite woman.
5 opinions are given in Genesis Rabbah, Chapter 80:11.
Opinion 1
---------
Dinah was raped by Schem and she went thru a sort of Stokholm
experience---she found it difficult to separate from him.
She refused to leave until Shimon promised to marry her.
This opinion focuses on the HELPLESSNESS of the rape experience.
Opinion 2
---------
Dinah was raped by Schem and she felt embarassed to leave--
>Who will marry a rape victim?
she said. Thus she did not leave until Shimon promised to
marry her.
This opinion focuses on the HUMILIATION of the rape experience
Opinion 3
---------
Dinah was raped by Schem whose rape act was a despicable act
like those of the CANAANITES (and he is called a CANAANI)
This opinion focuses on the TALKING BEHIND THE BACK of the rape
experience (that is everyone says "Oh look...there goes so and
so who was raped by a Canaani").
Opinion 4
---------
Dinah was raped by Schem who belong to the nation of
>Chivites
which (the Chivites) had an alliance with
>the Canaanites
This opinion focuses on the RACIAL aspects of the rape victim
(Schem is 'perceived' as a 3rd-world nation aligned with
the Canaanites--this is similar to modern avoidances of certain
neighborhoods because of 'who' lives there).
Opinion 5
---------
Finally a 5th opinion says that Dinah was buried alive--that is
she was socially ostracized and this lead to her being raped.
The 'burial alive' process was a common torture technique in
both Egypt and Canaan and is one of main reasons God destroyed
them.
This opinion focuses on the CAUSES of rape--the rape victim very
often is deprived of a 'normal social community' which in turn
leads to irregular behavior or the throwing off of signals or
the perception that they are helpless or some combination of
the 3 and this in turn leads to rape.
This list of 5 possible aspects of rape cases is compactly presented
below in {LIST4} which gives further information on this Midrash
Rabbah. Further comments are made in the Comments on Rashis Form.
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
=========================
We make three points
#1) Rashi uses workbook methods
-------------------------------
Note that Rashi used WORKBOOK METHODS here. That is he stated
>just the beginning of a Midrash
and expected the reader
>to fill in the rest.
He also expected the reader to eg
>explore why Dinah is called the Canaanith.
This pedagogic technique resembles the modern technique of WORKBOOK
methods where a workbook (say in Math) fills in one or two model
answers and expects you to do the rest.
#2) Rashi without this principle can be misunderstood
------------------------------------------------------
Indeed we have conjectured that Rashi is
>just citing the FIRST paragraph of a whole Midrash
By contrast if we believe that Rashi is
>citing the WHOLE explanation
then Rashi will not look defensible because he is eg saying
that all Rape victims are afraid to leave or do not see any
future for them. It is precisely by citing all 5 explanations
that we make rashi rich and deep.
#3) Rashi frequently only cites the beginning of a Midrash
----------------------------------------------------------
We have conjectured that Rashi only cited the beginning of
the Midrash. Is there any way of proving that Rashi INTENDED
us to read the remember?
-------------------------------------------------------
| QUESTION 5: |
| =========== |
| Can you find other examples where Rashi deliberately|
| cites the beginning of a Midrash but expects us to |
| read the rest? How would you find such a list? What |
| tools would you use? {LIST5} below provides a |
| partial answer. |
-------------------------------------------------------
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
===========================================================
{LIST1} {A list of people showing maternal lineage is uncommon
in Tnach. This list can be obtained by reviewing 1-46.
But it is preferable to obtain it by taking examples
from several Parshas containing references to people.
It would be hard to make this list with a CD ROM---
instead knowledge of the Bible is needed}
VERSE PEOPLE
===== ======
1-10-2 Gomer
1-25-14 Mishmah
1-36-11 Tayman *1
4-26-12 Nmuel
2-6-14 Chanoch *2
FOOTNOTES
=========
*1 Note how AMALEK in the next verse 1-36-12 is also ascribed to his
mother. It seems that when something very evil happens (like
Amalek who was one of Israel's worst enemies---then they
show where in his upbringing (from his mother) something
went wrong.
Similarly Rav Hirsch points out that a comparison of the census
in 4-1:3 and 4-26:27 shows only a 1/2% decrease in the national
figures over the years while the Tribe of Shimon decreased 70%!
Apparently says Rav Hirsch, Shimon was most of the 24000 people
lost in the war with the Moabite Prostitutes which culminated
in open relations between a prince of the tribe of Shimon with
a moabitess (4-25). Shimon's corruption may be traced back to
his marriage with Dinah who never fully recovered from her
rape experience.
In summary we are suggesting that linkage to the mother
is done when the offspring are very bad to show what went
wrong.
*2 Note how in the next verse SHAUL is again ascribed to his mother
{LIST2} {Verses showing that Jews avoided marriages with Canaanites
This list can be found with a Konkordance, a CD ROM or with
a knowledge of the Bible}
VERSE TEXT SHOWING AVERSION OF CANAANITES
====== ===================================
3-18-3 Do not behave like the Canaanites*1
1-24-3 Do not take a Canaanite wife for my son, Isaac
1-27-46 I (Rivkah) can no longer stand the Chitites
1-28-8 And Esauv saw that the Canaanites were not good wives
1-46-10 Shaul the son of the Canaanite woman
FOOTNOTES
---------
*1 This is the chapter on sexual prohibitions
{LIST3} {People with two names in Tnach. You cannot get this
list with a CD ROM or Konkordance but rather have to
know the Bible}
Name 1 Verse 1 Name 2 Verse 2 How do I know they're same?
====== ======= ====== ======= ===========================
God 1-2-4 Lord 1-2-4
Jethro 2-18-1 Reuel 4-10-29 Both are Moses' fatherinlaw
Jacob 1-35-10 Israel 1-35-10
Machlat 1-28-9 Basmat 1-36-3 Both are Ishmael's daughter
Abram 1-17-5 Abraham 1-17-5
{LIST5} {A summary of the 5 aspects of a rape case found in the
Midrash rabbah 80:11---note how this list is quite
exhaustive}
ASPECT REASON DINAH=CANAANY
======== ====================
Stokholm 'Canaanite rape victims find it difficult to separate'
Embarass Rape victim is embarassed to return ('Who will marry me')
Labeling Oh..there goes Dinah who was raped by a CANAANI *1
Racist 'It happened' because she went to the Chivi =Canaanites*2
LiveBurial Rapes can be caused by organized social ostracization*3
FOOTNOTES
---------
*1 There are 2 versions to the text...one suggests that it says that
SHE (not HE) behaved like a Canaani...and this would make the rape
her fault...but our current texts don't support this..besides Dinah
did not do something that terrible
*2 This is the classical 'bad neighborhood paradigm'
*3 The actual text simply says 'Shimon buried her there' but
as the Ramban says this does not make sense...she went into
Egypt (So they say that Shimon returned and buried her there
..but this also does not make sense. Instead I have
interpreted the Midrash as 'live burial' which was a Canaanite
practice--such organized social ostracization leads to
irregular behavior, unwanted signals and a general feeling of
lack of belonging which make such people ripe for rapists.
{LIST5} {List of verses where Rashi should be perceived as
citing the beginning of a Baraitha. This list cannot
be obtained with a CD ROM but must be obtained by
general knowledge of Rashi *1}
VERSE Text of verse What Rashi Cites
======= ======================= ================
5-1-3 Moses rebuke near death 1 of 4 reasons why 'near death'
5-4-23 Moses Petitioned God 1 of 10 words meaning prayer
1-46-10 Dinah = Canaaniteth*2 2 of 5 reasons why she is so called
2-32-13 Remember the Patriarchs 1 of 7 reasons why 'Patriarchs'*2
FOOTNOTES
---------
*1 A 5th example, a brilliant novelty by the Rambam, will be
brought down in the next, the 5th of the Golden Rashi-Rambam
series to appear soon. Stay tuned for another great member
of the Golden series.
*2 In these verses Rashi does not (as he does in the other
verses) EXPLICITLY state that he is only citing the
beginning of the Midrash. Nevertheless this is the only
way to make sense of the Rashi and besides it is
consistent with explicit language we find in other
Rashis. For a fuller discussion of technique see
v2a32-13 in Volume 1 number 17.
CROSS REFERENCES:
=================
v2a32-13 Volume 1 Number 17 (Discusses this principle)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
=================
*See Sanhedrin 82 for further discussion on this verse
*Acknowledgement to Amy Goldstein for asking
why Rashi only selected certain comments about this
Rape incident.
*Acknowledgement to my Shomray Emunah Chumash and Rashi
group for their stimulating comments on this Baraithah
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
===============================================================
DOUBLE PARSHAS
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VERSE: v3a24-1
======
v3a4-24 Slaughter the Sin offering WHERE you
slaughter the ELEVATION offering
v3a4-26 And offer its fat like the fat of the peace offering
v3a4-31 and offer its fat like the fat of the peace offering
v3a14-13 (slaughter it) where you slaughter the ELEVATION
v3a4-35 And offer its fat like the lamb fat of the peace..
RASHI TEXT:
===========
[Moderator: All these Rashis have the same principle
>Learning something by cross reference
Hence the Rashis can be compactly summarized by the
following table. To illustrate the list the
verse says
>slaughter the sin offering WHERE you
>slaughtered the elevation offering
But the elevation offering was slaughtered in the
North. Hence, the sin offering is slaughtered
in the north. Reasons why comparisons are needed
are found in the footnotes}
VERSE WHAT WHAT VERSE WHAT WHY IS
IS IS THAT IS IS COMPARISON
BEING CROSS CROSS LEARNT NEEDED
TALKED REFERENCED REFERENCED
ABOUT
====== ======= ========== ========== ======= ===========
3a4-24 Slaughter Slaughter 1-1-11 Slaughter
Sin Elevation in North *1
offering Offering
3-4-26 Offer fat Offer fat 3-3-14:15 Include
Sin Peace Kidneys *2
Offering Offering
Goat
King
3-4-31 Offer fat Offer fat 3-3-14:15 Include
Sin Peace Kidneys *2
Offering Offering
Goat
Individual
3-4-35 Offer fat Offer fat 3-3-9:10 Include
Sin Peace Kidneys *2
Offering Offering Tail
Lamb Lamb
individual
3a14-13 Slaughter Slaughter 1-1-11 Slaughter *3
Metzorah Elevation in North
Guilt Offering
Offering
FOOTNOTES
---------
*1 I might have thought that one
>SHOULD
slaughter in north but
>IF one did not slaughter in NORTH
then
>after the fact, the sacrifice is OK
The comparison therefore teaches us that
>NORTH IS ESSENTIAL
(This is learned from the repetition of
north (cf 3-6-18) according to the principle
that
>repetition implies essentiality
*2 The Malbim in the name of the Sifrah points out that
>FAT
could mean
>FAT
>FAT + KINDEYS (As mentioned in 3-14:15)
>FAT + KIDNEYS + TAIL (As mentioned in 3-3-9)
Since the Bible EXPLICITLY compares it to 3-14:15
we infer that the term FAT means
>FAT+ KIDNEYS
(In other words FAT could be interpreted NARROWLY
(only FAT) or BROADLY (things offered with FAT).
Comparisons are then used to clarify which meaning
of FAT is intended.
Note how in 3-4-35 the explicit phrase
>like the LAMB fat of the Peace offerings
So rashi is simple
>The LAMB sin offering fat = LAMB Peace offering fat
>Other sin offering fat = Other peace offering fact
*3 Rashi himself points out that since the Metzorah
guilt offering differs from other guilt offerings
in that there is a
>3-14-11 STANDING PROCEDURE
I might think that the STANDING PROCEDURE interrupts the
normal sequences of positions. Therefore the comparison
teaches us that BESIDES the STANDING PROCEDURE all other
guilt offering procedures hold
BRIEF BUT COMPLETE NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:
=========================================
The Rashis and LIST above are clear and need no further
elaboration.
I should explain that we intend to eventually
>review all sacrificial laws
>review them in light of the Rambam
The laws of sacrifices are very intricate with
>many REPEATED verses
>many aligned verses with MINOR differences
>many cross references
Therefore I thought we would start off lightly with
>cross references since these are the easiest
>of midrashic methods to understand.
COMMENTS ON RASHI'S FORM:
=========================
Note that Rashi on on 3-14-13 says that the need to give an
additional reference to the place of slaughter of the guilt
offering is because of a technicality in the Rabbi Ishmael rules
(regarding
>identical procedures (Guilt offering Metzorah/Others)
>with one major difference between them (3-14-8 STANDING)
Under such circumstances one needs (according to Rabbi
Ishmael) an explicit verse that so to speak reunites
the two procedures (that is, that says that Guilt offerings
are all the same EXCEPT for this one EXCEPTION (STANDING).
Without the verse I would think that since STANDING is
a differece between guilt offerings therefore there is no
justification in comparing them at all.
LISTS {For ADVANCED students and for those with more time}:
===========================================================
VERSE WHAT WHAT VERSE WHAT WHY IS
IS IS THAT IS IS COMPARISON
BEING CROSS CROSS LEARNT NEEDED
TALKED REFERENCED REFERENCED
ABOUT
====== ======= ========== ========== ======= ===========
3a24-1 Slaughter Slaughter 1-1-11 Slaughter
Sin Elevation in North *1
offering Offering
3-26-1 Offer fat Offer fat 3-3-14:15 Include
Sin Peace Kidneys *2
Offering Offering
Goat
King
3-31-1 Offer fat Offer fat 3-3-14:15 Include
Sin Peace Kidneys *2
Offering Offering
Goat
Individual
3-35-1 Offer fat Offer fat 3-3-9:10 Include
Sin Peace Kidneys *2
Offering Offering Tail
Lamb Lamb
individual
3a14-13 Slaughter Slaughter 1-1-11 Slaughter *3
Metzorah Elevation in North
Guilt Offering
Offering
FOOTNOTES
---------
*1 I might have thought that one
>SHOULD
slaughter in north but
>IF one did not slaughter in NORTH
then
>after the fact, the sacrifice is OK
The comparison therefore teaches us that
>NORTH IS ESSENTIAL
(This is learned from the repetition of
north (cf 3-6-18) according to the principle
that
>repetition implies essentiality
*2 The Malbim in the name of the Sifrah points out that
>FAT
could mean
>FAT
>FAT + KINDEYS (As mentioned in 3-14:15)
>FAT + KIDNEYS + TAIL (As mentioned in 3-3-9)
Since the Bible EXPLICITLY compares it to 3-14:15
we infer that the term FAT means
>FAT+ KIDNEYS
(In other words FAT could be interpreted NARROWLY
(only FAT) or BROADLY (things offered with FAT).
Comparisons are then used to clarify which meaning
of FAT is intended.
Note how in 3-4-35 the explicit phrase
>like the LAMB fat of the Peace offerings
So rashi is simple
>The LAMB sin offering fat = LAMB Peace offering fat
>Other sin offering fat = Other peace offering fact
*3 Rashi himself points out that since the Metzorah
guilt offering differs from other guilt offerings
in that there is a
>3-14-11 STANDING PROCEDURE
I might think that the STANDING PROCEDURE interrupts the
normal sequences of positions. Therefore the comparison
teaches us that BESIDES the STANDING PROCEDURE all other
guilt offering procedures hold
CROSS REFERENCES:
=================
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
=================
RULE CLASSIFICATION {See the web site for comparable examples}:
===============================================================
OTHER VERSES
OTHER VERSES
OTHER VERSES
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
THE 2 DOZEN RASHI-IS-SIMPLE RASHI RULES
=======================================
I: RASHI gives MEANING
======================
A: WORD MEANINGS--(eg)"on the face of"=during the lifetime
(v2n6,v4-3-4), http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v4-3-4.htm
B: SPECIAL WORDS--(eg)ACH=USUALLY;USUALLY observe shabbath!
(v2n6, v4-1-49),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v4-1-49.htm
C: SYNONYMS--(eg)YShV=RESIDE; GARTI='INNED'--temporary say
(v1n1, v1-32-5), http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v1-32-5.htm
D: UNIFIED MEANING--(eg)Tz Ch K = (a) laugh, OR (b) mock
(v4n4, v1-21-9), http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v1-21-9.htm
E: NEW MEANINGS--(eg)HEAD-MOUTH of garment = HEM of Garment
(v5n10,v2a28-32),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v2a28-32.htm
II: RASHI teaches GRAMMAR/STYLE
===============================
F: CLASSICAL GRAMMAR--(eg)HEY+CHATAF PATACH=QUESTION
(v2n24,v1b3-11),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v1b3-11.htm
G: USAGE(NEW GRAMMAR)--(eg)INFINITIVE=GERUND;WATCHING laws;
(v2n10,v4-32-6),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v4-32-6.htm
H: ROOT+PREPOSITION--(eg) BCH AL=cries about,BCH ETH=mourn
(v1n14,v1a45-14),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v1a45-14.htm
I: SEMANTIC RULES--(eg) WAGES="ENDoF"="END oF Work Day';
(v1n10,v1b1-1),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v1b1-1.htm
J: STYLE--(eg)REPETITION denotes Endearment;'Abraham,Abraham
(v1n6,v2-1-1),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v2-1-1.htm
K: DOUBLE NOUNS--(eg)HIT HIT by sword ('even without sword')
(v2n20,v2a22-25),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v2a22-25.htm
L: PRONOUNS--(eg) sanctify OTHO = sanctify ONLY IT;
(v2n10,v4a7-1),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v4a7-1.htm
III: OVERALL TEXTUAL STRUCTURE
==============================
M: OTHER VERSES--(eg)STONE(3-25-13)=BALANCE STONES(3-19-36)
(v3n9,v5b25-13),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v5b25-13.htm
N: EXTRA SENTENCES--(eg)he'll dress his measurement=TAYLORED
(v1n20,v3a6-3),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v3a6-3.htm
O: DOUBLE PARSHAS-'he WILL pray'-'he WON'T pray';So Optional
(v3n12,v5a24-14),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v5a24-14.htm
P: CLIMAX-(eg 5-19-11)(a)Hate, (b)spy, (c)confront,(d)Murder
(v3n9,v5-19-11),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v5-19-11.htm
Q: OVERALL STRUCTURE-growing nails=despisement(from context)
(v3n8,v5-21-12),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v5-21-12.htm
IV: IMPLICATIONS & DERIVATIONS
==============================
R: STAGES-learn HUMAN marital frequency from ANIMAL ratios
(v1n14,v1a32-15),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v1a32-15.htm
S: MORAL LESSONS/REASONS-God spoke before punishment;we too
(v2n12,v4-12-9),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v4-12-9.htm
T: RabbiIshmael-(eg)When an OX gores; OR ANY animal gores;
(v2n19,v2-22-17),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v2-22-17.htm
V: OVERALL
=================
U: SYMBOLISM-'WASHING his clothes in wine'=PLENTY of wine;
(v4n18,v1a49-11),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v1a49-11.htm
V: PICTURES--(eg) The TZITZ was like a HELMET over a turban
(v5n12,v2-40-35),http://www.shamash.org/rashi/v2-40-35.htm
W: TABLES/SPREADSHEETS---To appear
End of Rashi-Is-Simple Digest
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*