#*#*#*#*#  (C) 2001, RashiYomi Inc. Dr Hendel President #*#*#*#*#
  -----------------------------------------------------------
  |      Rashi is Simple Version 2.0                         |
  |      (C) RashiYomi Inc., Dr Hendel President             |
  |       http://www.RashiYomi.Com                           |
  | PERMISSION to reprint WITH this header if NOT for profit |
  ------------------------------------------------------------


VERSE: Lv21-05a

RASHIS COVERED: Lv21-05a Lv21-05b Lv21-08b
                Lv08-16a Ex29-13b Lv03-04c Lv19-28a

======================= THE ALIGNMENT METHOD ===================

----------------------------------------
TODAYS RASHI RULE:       ALIGNMENT
TODAYS RASHI SUBRULE:    SEVERAL ASPECTS
----------------------------------------

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF RULE
-------------------------
Many Rashis do NOT focus on an internal analysis of the verse.
There may be nothing bothering Rashi in THAT verse. The words
used may all be normal.

But when the given verse is compared with another verse--that
is, when the two verses are ALIGNED together-- we see blatant
differences.

The ALIGNED verses therefore suggest that these ALIGNED
DIFFERENCES were deliberately placed there to emphasize
certain nuances.

A nifty way of explaining the ALIGNED verses is to think
of ALIGNMENT as the vehicle that the Biblical Author uses
to indicate FOOTNOTES. That is, a modern writer might use
FOOTNOTES to indicate details; the Biblical Author instead
used REPEATED ALIGNED VERSES with DIFFERENT DETAILS.

If the 2 ALIGNED verses are speaking about the same LAW
but indicate DIFFERENT DETAILS then one alignment approach
sees the TWO verses as presenting TWO DETAILS of the law--
that is the TWO details of the TWO verses apply in every
situation. The challenge of such an interpretation is to
defend that have ONE law with 2 details rather than TWO
laws with different details.

STANDARD EXAMPLE
----------------
Perhaps the simplest example are the 11 verses requiring
the FINGER OF THE LIVER to be offered in the sacrifices.
Here are some sample verses:

----------------------------------
Ex29-22 the finger OF-- the liver
Lv03-04 the finger ON-- the liver
Lv09-10 the finger FROM the liver
---------------------------------

STUDENT EXERCISES:
------------------
-- What is the SAME in the ALIGNED verses
-- What is DIFFERENT in the ALIGNED verses
-- Give examples of EACH of these differences
-- Indicate how these differences COMBINE into one law
-- (Advanced) Defend that all 3 verses apply to one situation

RASHIS SOLUTION
---------------
- The phrase FINGER OF THE LIVER means you take the LIVER FINGER

- FINGER ON THE LIVER means take a little bit of the liver
  with the finger (that is, dont take ONLY the finger with
  all other liver scraped off but take the finger with a
  little bit of liver so that the finger is ON the liver)

- FINGER FROM THE LIVER uses the word FROM indicating
  SEPARATION; so you shouldnt take alot of liver with the
  finger; rather take the finger and a little bit of liver
  (Where the liver and finger meet)



STANDARD REFERENCES FOR THIS RULE
---------------------------------
http://www.Rashiyomi.com/align-58.htm

This summary may be a bit too terse. You can browse the
57 postings leading up to by going to
http://www.Rashiyomi.com/align-1.htm
http://www.Rashiyomi.com/align-2.htm etc.

Or you can visit the Rashi Yomi Calendar at

http://www.RashiYomi.com/calendar1.htm

This calendar presents a day by day listing of Rashis.
The ALIGNMENT series occurs between 7-28-01 and 10-10-01.

(The above example about the finger of the liver
occurs at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/lv08-16a.htm)

HOW TO USE THESE LISTS FOR SCHOOL PROJECTS
------------------------------------------
You can use the LISTS referenced above for
school projects. Here is how. If you are a
teacher then you can present the two aligned
verses and ask the students to perform the
5 student exercises listed above.

The students can then compare their analysis with that
of Rashis. This leads to greater appreciation of Rashi.

TODAYS EXAMPLE
--------------
Lv21-01:08 repeats several laws for priests that were already
given to Israelites. By ALIGNING the Israelite and Priestly
version we infer details to these laws. An advanced analysis
shows that we have 1 law with 2 details rather than 2 laws
(one for priests and one for Israelites) with different
details.

Here is the list. In presenting these alignments it is
useful to CAP the aligned words that differ. In this list
the lv21 verses contain the PRIESTLY obligations while
the other verses are obligations to ISRAELITES.
==============================================================
VERSE    PHRASE1     PHRASE2    PHRASE3           PHRASE4
======== =========== ========== ================= ============
Lv21-05a Dont BALD   a baldness in your HEAD
Dt14-01  dont PLACE  baldness   between your EYES FOR THE DEAD
-------- ----------- ---------- ----------------- ------------
Lv21-05b dont        SHAVE      the beard corners
Lv19-27  dont        DESTROY    the beard corners
-------- ----------- ---------  ----------------- ------------
Lv21-05c dont ETCH   an etch    in their flesh
Lv19-28  dont PLACE  an etch    in your flesh     FOR THE DEAD
-------- ----------- ---------  ----------------- ------------
Differ   *1          *2         *3                *4

NOTES
-----
*4 The extra phrase FOR THE DEAD shows that these practices
   (ripping out here; destroying the beard; mutilating skin)
   were done by the idolaters as mourning practices for death
   (Rashi: Lv19-28a)

*2 One verse calls it DESTROY while another verse calls it
   SHAVE. We conclude that both SHAVING AND DESTRUCTION must
   be present. Hence shaving by SCISSORS, TWEEZERS, &
   CHEMICALS is not prohibited *10

*1 *3 SInce the Bible mentions BOTH balding the HEAD
      and between the EYES I infer that BALDING on the
      whole head is prohibited to priests and Israelites.

      The sifrah answers the following provocative question:
      Maybe PRIESTS are prohibited from balding the HEAD;
      but ISRAELITES are prohibited ONLY from balding the eyes

      In other words: How do we know that we have 1 law
      with 2 details vs 2 laws (priests/Israelites) with
      2 details. See footnote *11 for my sparkling
      interpretation of Rashi.

------------------------ LONGER FOOTNOTES --------------------

*10
   -- SHAVING WITH A RAZOR is prohibited since a razor is
      a destructive instrument

   -- SHAVING WITH A SCISSORS is not prohibited (Since
      a scissors is not a destructive instrument--hence
      the modern allowance to use some types of electric
      shavers)

   -- SHAVING with TWEEZERS is not prohibited
      Biblically since TWEEZERS are not destructive

   -- SHAVING with CHEMICALS is not prohibited because
      we dont call CHEMICAL REMOVAL OF HAIR, SHAVING

*11 Here is a stronger form of the argument (Brought down
    by the Sifrah). We all know that Priests have many
    more stringencies that ordinary Israelites. So maybe
    also in the balding prohibition we have
    -- Israelites are prohibited from BALDING TWEEN EYES
    -- the Holier Priests are prohibited from BALDING ANY
       PLACE ON THE HEAD?

    While this question appears strong note that it assumes
    that in the ALIGNMENTS the PRIESTS always have the more
    stringent verses.

    Hence if we show that sometimes the ISRAELITES have
    the more stringent verses we will see that there is
    balance and that both sets of verses are read together.

    Looking at the above aligned verses we see that by
    the ISRAELITES it states DONT PLACE (dont place an
    etch, dont place a baldness) while by the PRIESTS it
    states less stronger language (DONT ETCH; DONT BALD)

    Thus
    -- the verbs are STRONGER by the ISRAELITES while
    -- the INDIRECT OBJECT (Where it is done--balding EYES
       or head) is stronger by the PRIESTS
    SImilarly REASONS are sometimes given by ISRAELITES
    and sometimes by ISRAELITES and PRIESTS.

    This gives evidence that the two chapters should be
    read as one law rather than two.

    The above is my understanding of the Rashi and Sifrahs
    answer to the question: Are EYE-HEAD one combined law
    for Israelites-Priests or are they 2 laws for two
    different groups? (Again: The answer is that neither
    group is overall more stringent and hence we treat
    them as one)

    Let us now review Rashis language
    ----------------------------------------------------
    Both verses use the word BALDNESS. Hence we have
    a WORD ANALOGY linking the verses and showing them one
    ----------------------------------------------------

    This is also the language of the sifrah. Most
    people regard WORD ANALOGIES (The same word in
    two verses) as SINAITIC in origin without reason.

    However I would suggest that WORD ANALOGIES is used
    in two ways in Talmudic literature. It can refer to
    a sinaitically received transmission on which there
    is no dispute. OR, it can refer to an OVERALL ALIGNMENT
    where inference and reason apply.

    Thus I interpret the Sifrah as follows
    ----------------------------------------------------
    Perhaps we have two laws for two groups? Priests
    who have many more commandments would be prohibited
    EVEN form balding the head while ISRAELITES would
    ONLY be prohibited form balding between the eyes!

    THerefore we have ALIGNMENTS (Word analogies!) of
    the BALDING and ETCHING commandments. (In both
    these laws the activity (PLACE vs BALD-ETCH) is
    more general for the ISRAELITES showing that neither
    group receives a greater stringency)
    ------------------------------------------------------

 I believe that this approach to these Sifrahs is more
 intellectually satisfying. It is therefore a tool that
 the reader can use when studying these texts
================================================================


===================== HOLINESS OF PRIESTS ======================

 We continue with alignment examples brought above
 This example is interesting because Rashi seems to deviate
 from the Sifrah. The analysis of this Rashi as coming
 from alignment is due to Rashi
================================================================
VERSE    PHRASE1 PHRASE2                PHRASE3
======== ======= ====================== ========================
Lv21-06  THEY    will be holy           to their GOD
Lv21-08b HE      will be holy           to YOU
Differ   *1      *2                     *3

NOTES
-----
*1 *3 The 2 verses speak about two holiness
      requirements: COLLECTIVE (they) holiness to GOD vs
      INDIVIDUAL (he) holiness to the INDIVIDUAL (to you).

      So Rashi is Simple: Since Lv21-06 is speaking about
      holiness in marriages enforceable by the courts,
      it follows that Lv21-08b speaks about holiness in
      individual social matters (e.g. Letting them lead
      Grace after meals; letting them get called to the
      Torah first etc).

      Interestingly Rashis simple approach is not used
      by the Sifra which interprets Lv21-08b to obligate
      blemished priests (who cant serve in the Temple)
      to follow the extra priestly marriage laws.

      The defense that Lv21-06 refers to court protected
      holiness is presented at
      http://www.RashiYomi.com/lv21-06a.htm

*2 These phrases are the same
================================================================

RASHI RULE USED: ALIGNMENT
---------------------------------------------------
WARNING: The following additional references may be too wordy
However they frequently contain additional information & lists
The hyperlinks only work on the main website

Volume 13 Number 20


#*#*#*#*#  (C) 2001, RashiYomi Inc. Dr Hendel President #*#*#*#*#
Volume 13 Number 20