Verses Lv23-05b describing the Passover holiday states In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at dusk, is HaShem'S Passover. Rashi explains the name of the holiday, Passover by citing an other verse Ex12-12:13 which describes what God did on Passover: For I will go through the land of Egypt in that night, and will smite all the first-born in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments: I am HaShem. And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are; and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and there shall no plague be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt. Hence the Rashi comment: The Passover holiday is so-named because God Pass-ed over the Jewish houses when killing the first born of Egypt.

Students of Rashi must bear in mind that Rashi could sometimes use universal principles applicable in all languages. This particularly applies to the meaning methods.

The synechdoche principle basically says that any language can use a good example to name an entire category. For example, in English,
• the word honey can mean anything sweet.
• Similarly bread can refer to any food.
• Man can refer to any person (male of female)
• day can refer to the entire 24 hour period
• heart can refer to the entire person as in e.g., (Ps 43)My heart yearns for you, God which really means My entire person yearns for you God

Applying this principle to Lv21-21 which presents the prohibition of Priests making offerings, no man of the seed of Aaron the priest, that hath a blemish, shall come nigh to offer the offerings of HaShem made by fire; he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his G-d. we would translate as follows no man of the seed of Aaron the priest, that hath a blemish, shall come nigh to offer the offerings of HaShem made by fire; he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the food / offerings of his G-d.

Advanced Rashi: Rashi actually uses two principles here:
• Synechdoche: The word Bread can refer to any food. Hence bread of God is translated as food of God.
• Symbolism: The phrase food of God refers to offered items that are consumed like food to trigger prophetic visions and the descent of Godly energy.
Here Food and fire consumed offerings have a common form and function: They both involve
• the destruction / consummation of items and
• they both involve renewed energy (Food provides physical energy while the offerings provide spiritual energy).

A beautiful rule of grammar discovered by the great Malbim is that there are two words for it in Hebrew
• Aleph Tauv Vav (Otho) means only it and connotes limitation
• A terminal suffix vav means it
The examples below illustrate usage and connotation of Aleph Tauv Vav

• Verse Lv01-06b states And he shall flay the burnt-offering, and cut only it into its pieces. Rashi: The priest only cuts the offering but does not cut the cuts since the verse explicitly says cut only it
• Verse Lv02-06a states Thou shalt break only it in pieces, and pour oil thereon; it is a meal-offering. Rashi: The priest only breakes the matzoh offering but does not further break the broken pieces again since the verse explicitly says break only it
• Verse Lv20-05b discussing the punishment of a person who worshipped idols states then I will set My face against that man, and against his family, and will cut only him off, and all that go astray after him, to go astray after Molech, from among their people. Rashi: Although God places His Face against the person and his family nevertheless God only cuts him off, but not his family, since the verse explicitly says I will only cut him off.
• Verse Lv23-03 discussing the lighting of the Candellabrah for the entire night states Before the Ark-veil of the testimony, in the Temple, shall Aaron arrange wholly it [to burn] from evening to morning before HaShem continually; it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations. Rashi: It is arranged once to burn from evening to morning. But it would be improper to place enough oil for half the night and then come back and refill. It must all be arranged.

Note that in the first few examples the Hebrew word Aleph Tauv Vav is translated only it and indicates Do the action to the object but not to its physical parts. In the last example we have translated the Hebrew word Aleph Tauv Vav as meaning wholly it;the verse indicates Do the action (filling oil for lighting) for the entire time period, the entire night, but not for parts of it.

Biblical verse
• Lv19-27, discussing the prohibition of adult Jewish males from shaving the sides of their beards, states ... neither shalt thou destroy the corners of thy beards.
• Verse Lv21-05, discussing an almost identical prohibition on priests, of shaving beard sides, states ... neither shall they shave off the corners of their beard,

The alignment focuses on both
• destruction
• shaving of the beard sides.

Hence the Rashi comment:
• It is prohibited to use a razor to destroy the beard sides since a razor is both destructive and shaves.
• However it is not Biblically prohibited to remove beard sides with chemicals or scissors since although these items shave they are not destructive. (E.g. You don't use a scissors for destructive purposes).

Advanced Rashi: This email list generally does not discuss questions of Jewish law. However the above discussion points to the basis of deciding whether electric shavors may be used for shaving. The sole issue is whether the shavers are destructive (use a razor-like cutting) or non-destructive (use a scissor-like cutting).

Note the contradiction in the following two verses, discussing the requirement to bring offerings on the Passover Festival:
• Verse Lv23-08 states
  • And ye shall bring an offering made by fire unto HaShem ....
• Verse Nu28-27 states
  • but ye shall bring an offering made by fire, an elevation-offering unto HaShem:
  • • two young bullocks,
    • one ram,
    • seven he-lambs of the first year.

We see the contradiction, indicated by the presence of an extra bullet in the second citation providing a list of animals to be brought. Which is it? Is there an obligation of bringing 2 oxen, 1 ram and 7 lambs, or is the obligation to simply bring [any] offering?

Rashi resolves this contradiction using the broad-literal method:
• You must bring an offering under all circumstances
• If possible it is preferred to bring 2 oxen, 1 ram, and 7 lambs.
In other words
• the 2-oxen verse indicates the preferred obligation.
• The Leviticus verse indicates the if-you-don't have obligation.
So if e.g. you only have 7 lambs and 1 ram but no oxen then you bring the 7 lambs and 1 ram without the oxen.

Advanced Rashi: Rashi literally says as follows: The 7 lambs, 1 ram and 2 oxen are independent requirements. If you don't have all you bring whatever you do have. What I have added to Rashi is the derivation of this exegesis from the contradiction method. Precisely because one verse gives details - bring 2 oxen, 1 ram, 7 lambs - and the other verse gives generality - bring - therefore, I infer that the details are obligatory and the general bring applies when all species are not there.

The astute reader should note the added word, elevation offering in the alignment of the above two verses: bring an offering of fire unto Hashem vs. bring an offering of fire, an elevation offering, unto Hashem. I know of no Rashi or Midrashic analysis explaining this alignment anomaly. Typically, when studying Rashi the use of proper methodology exposes other similar stylistic requirements requiring exegesis.

Today we ask the database query: When is leaning used in Biblical commandments / procedures? The query uncovers 3 examples of commandments with leaning. An examination of these 3 examples shows that leaning symbolically indicates transfer of responsibility.
• Physically the leaner is now supported by the object he leans on.
• This symbolically affirms that the leaner is now supported morally by the object he leans on - that is, there has been transfer of responsibility.

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.