13 Methods for inferring meaning:#8 of 32
###########################################################
#       10 YEAR Ayelet DAILY-RASHI-YOMI CYCLE             #
#                 June 1st, 2001                          #
#          Rashis 765-766 Of 7800 (9.8%)                  #
#                                                         #
#           VISIT THE RASHI YOMI ARCHIVES                 #
#           -----------------------------                 #
#       http://www.RashiYomi.Com/calendar.htm             #
#                                                         #
#    Reprinted with permission from Rashi-is-Simple,      #
#  (c) 1999-Present, RashiYomi Inc., Dr Hendel President  #
#Permission to reprint with this header but not for profit#
#                                                         #
#    WARNING: READ with COURIER 10 (Fixed width) FONTS    #
#                                                         #
###########################################################





GOALS:
------
I decided its time for a longer unit.

This unit will focus on a major Rashi task--explaining
the MEANINGS OF WORDS.

Explaining the MEANINGS of WORDS is more than looking
something up in a dictionary. There are METHODS to
explaining WORDS.

Thus in this module we will explore HOW Rashi determines
the meanings of words.



TODAYS UNIT
-----------
In yesterdays unit we showed how Rashi inferred
the meaning of PEGS (YaThaYD) from THE USAGE OF
THE WORD IN VERSES. Upon inspection the last
footnote in the table yesterday was in error. We
therefore today and tomorrow explain
---How Rashi knew the meaning of the Hebrew YTR--cord
---How Rashi knew which Levite tribes carried which
   items

Although todays unit has nothing to do with the MEANING
OF WORDS, it is logically connected to yesterdays unit
dealing with the PEGS and CORDS and therefore we bring
it now. This unit is a bit long (3 pages vs 1-2). But
we show a beautiful illustration of how to resolve
controversies between Ramban, Rashi and Sifsay Chachamim

REFERENCE:
----------
This module comes from the following references in the
Rashi-is-Simple series.

http://www.RashiYomi.Com/h10n9.htm  (Up Sunday)


#*#*#*# (C) RashiYomi Inc., 2001, Dr. Hendel, President #*#*#*#*#

RASHI: Nu03-26a
RASHI: Nu04-32a


BACKGROUND
----------
In the previous RashiYomi we have critically examined the Hebrew
words YaThaYD and YeTeR which refer to PEGS and TENT STRINGS.
In this issue we examine the PURPOSE of having PEGS and TENT
STRINGS in the Temple as well as who carried these PEGS and
TENT STRINGS in their journeys.



================ PURPOSE OF THE PEGS =================

 Two purposes are presented for the tent pegs

======================================================
AUTHOR   PURPOSE
======== =======
Rashi    Pegs prevented tent skins from flapping*1
Chizkuni Pegs gave taut to ceiling--prevent cave in

NOTES
=====
*1 Ex27-19b
======================================================


============== WHO CARRIED PEGS/ROPES ================

 This is a delightful exercise in exegesis. The
 verses at first glance are very confusing and 3
 approaches -- Rashi Sifsay Chachamim
 and Ramban -- arise on who carried the pegs and
 ropes when the Jews journeyed.

 I am following a simple but insightful commentary in
 the Silberstein translation of Rashi which resolves
 the issues brought up by Sifsay chachamim and Ramban
 and settles them grammatically.

 First recall the Biblical phrase THE PEGS & CORDS
 OF THE TEMPLE & THE COURTYARD (e.g. Ex35-18, Ex38-20
 Nu04-32 etc). In fact there were curtains in the
 TEMPLE proper as well as in the COURTYARD. These
 curtains required pegs and cords to hold them down.

 Rashi suggests that the pegs and cords served 2
 purposes
 --to hold down the tent skins to prevent flapping
 --to support poles from which curtains hung
 We shall see the proof of these functions below

 This LIST compactly displays who carried each
 peg and cord
===========================================================
ITEM  USED IN    CARRIED BY  VERSE PROVING THIS
====  ========== ==========  ==================
Cords Temple     Gayrshon    Nu03-26a*1
Cords Courtyard  Gayrshon    Nu04-26 *2
Cords poles      Merrari     Nu04-31
Pegs  Temple     Merrari     *3
Pegs  Courtyard  Merrari     Nu04-32a *3
Pegs  Poles      Merrari     Nu04-32a *4

NOTES
=====
*1 The following is a translation of Nu03-25:26
---------------------------------------------
The Gayrshonites watched (a,b) the temple-tent
(skins) (c,d) their skin coverings (e) the skin
door of the temple (f) the courtyard curtains
(g) the courtyard door (h) and ITS cords
---------------------------------------------

Note the phrase ITS CORDS (vs THEIR CORDS).
Silberstein brilliantly points out that the
Hebrew phrase ITS CORDS has a singular referent
not a plural referent. Hence, concludes
Silberstein, the phrase IT could NOT refer to the
courtyard curtains (which are plural). We are
FORCED (By the grammar) to refer the phrase
ITS CORDS back to the TEMPLE-TENT unit.

We conclude, says Silberstein, that Nu03-25:26
says that Gayrshonites only carried the cords
of the temple-tent BUT NOT the cords of the
courtyard poles. This is exactly what Rashi
says: THE CORDS OF THE TEMPLE-TENT BUT NOT
THE COURTYARD. Now please read footnote
#2 as it occurs in the above list.


*2 Using Silbersteins principle of PLURAL
   SINGULAR we translate Nu04-25:26 as follows
   ----------------------------------------
   (Gayrshon) Carried (a) Temple skins (b)
   tent (Skins) (c) its covering (d) its
   Tachash covering (e) Tent curtain door
   (f) the courtyard curtains (g) the
   courtyard door (h) and THEIR CORDS
   ----------------------------------------
   Notice the plural THEIR CORDS referring
   to the plural COURTYARD CURTAINS.

   Thus we are forced to admit that Gayrshon
   carried cords of the COURTYARD CURTAINS
   also.


*3 My opinion is that the simplest approach
   to this is to assume that there is NO
   verse for who carried the Temple Pegs!!!!
   Instead we use an approach of logic!!

   It is clear from Nu03-26 & Nu04-26
   that Gayrshon carried all non-hard items
   such as skins and cords. By contrast
   Nu04-31:32 makes it clear that Merrari
   carried all hard items such as poles,
   sidebars and pegs.

   Hence using the method of Generalization
   we infer that Merrari also carried the
   temple pegs(Which were hard items)

   I think this approach, deriving it from
   logic rather than by twisting a verse
   is simple and straightforward

   This approach(Of a unified theme--Gayrshon
   carried soft objects while Merrari carried
   hard objects) also justifies the assumption
   that the courtyard pegs were solely carried
   by Merrari.

   This is explicitly stated
   in Nu04-32 as well as by the observation
   of the Rambam that throughout, the Bible uses
   the phrase PEGS AND CORDS except in Nu03-26,
   Nu04-26 where it just uses the phrase CORDS hinting
   that Gayrshon ONLY carried cords and not pegs

*4 As is clear from Footnotes #1 #2 Gayrshon
   carried the cords of the courtyard.

   Assuming the reasonable assumption that
   no two Levite tribes had different
   tasks (justified by many verses) it
   follows that Merrari must have carried
   a peg that was neither for the Temple
   nor for the courtyard curtains.

   Rashi therefore explains that Merrari
   carried the cords that supported
   the poles from which the curtains
   hang.

   Silverstein explains that the cords
   attached to these pegs formed one
   unit with the pegs since the FUNCTION
   was to suspend the pole from which
   the curtains hung. Hence, says
   Silberstein, Merrari carried the
   PEG-CORD unit (even though, the cord
   was not hard).

   I believe this approach answers the
   Rambans objection: BUT WE FIND NO
   EXPLICIT SOURCE THAT THE POLES HAD
   PEGS.

   True enough. But we know that the
   curtains had to hang from something
   and that hanging pole had to be
   supported, presumably by pegs and
   cords. Again we have an inference
   by logic rather than textual

================================================================



#*#*#*# (C) RashiYomi Inc., 2001, Dr. Hendel, President #*#*#*#*#