1. RASHI METHOD: REFERENCES BRIEF EXPLANATION: Commentary on a verse is provided thru a cross-reference to another verse. The cross references can either provide (1a) further details, (1b) confirm citations, or (1c) clarify word meaning. This examples applies to Rashis Nu11-15b URL Reference: (c) http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule1416; Brief Summary: Nu11-15b - If you God do this to me, kill me, so I won't see their suffering REFERENCES Ex32-32 - If only you forgive them; if not, erase me from your book.

Verse Nu11-15b discussing Moses' reaction to God's anger on Jewish complaints states If you [God] do this to me [to make me alone deal with all national complaints] then please kill me if I find grace in your eyes so that I don't see my [their] suffering. Rashi clarifies the underlined words my [their] suffering by referencing verse(s) Ex32-32 which states If only you forgive their sin [of the golden calf]; but if not, please erase me from the book [of life] which you write Hence the Rashi comment: Although the biblical text Nu11-15 states kill me so I don't see my suffering it really means the same as in Ex32-32 erase me from your book [of life] so I don't see their suffering [if you don't forgive them].

Text of Target verse Nu11-15b	Text of Reference Verse Ex32-32
If you [God] do this to me [to make me alone deal with all national complaints] then please kill me if I find grace in your eyes so that I don't see my [their] suffering.	If only you forgive their sin [of the golden calf]; but if not, please erase me from the book [of life] which you write
Rashi comments: Although the biblical text Nu11-15 states kill me so I don't see my suffering it really means the same as in Ex32-32 erase me from your book [of life] so I don't see their suffering [if you don't forgive them].

This Rashi is continued below in rule #3, grammar.

The FFF submethod states that words can be named by Form, Feel, and Function.
• Some examples of naming words by Form include (a) the leg of a chair, (b) the handle of a pot, (c) the branch of a family tree, (d) surfing the net or (e) brainstorming Some of these examples illustrate naming objects by form while other examples illustrate naming activities by form.
• A good punchy example distinguishing naming by form vs. function is pentagon-UN. The pentagon is named after the shape and form of the building while the United Nations is named after the function and purpose of the building. Although both these buildings have as a purpose world peace they are named differently.
• Examples of naming by feel/substance are glasses, hardship, ironing-board, plaster etc.

The FFF principle is a special case of the literary techniques of synechdoche-metonomy. These literary principles, universal to all languages, state that items can be named by related items, by parts of those items, or by good examples of those items. For example honey refers to anything sweet since honey is a good example of something sweet. Similarly hot refers to matters of love since the two are related. Todays Rashi can best be understood by applying these principles.

Rashi explains that the Hebrew Pay-Resh-Vav-Resh, Parur means a cooking pot. The root Pay-Resh-Resh means to cut into pieces, to crumble. Recall, a basic principle of cooking: to maximize the surface area exposed to heat one does not put in whole vegetables and meat. Rather one cuts up into pieces or even crumbs before placing in the pot. This maximizes the surface area exposed to liquids and heat.

But then an appropriate name for this type of cooking pot would be the form of the items in the pot. They have the form of pieces and crumbs. Hence we call this cooking utensil the piece-pot or the crumb-pot.

Advanced Rashi: Several decades ago I wrote an unpublished article, The Sacred Letters, in which I showed how biblical Hebrew used a principle of opposites to name objects. We ordinarily think of pieces and crumbs as something bad. However a crumb appearance is good for cooking. Here we see biblical Hebrew at work: crumbs can be both good and bad - they are good for maximal exposure but bad wholistically.

This Rashi is continued from above in rule #1, references.

Today Hebrew grammar is well understood and there are many books on it. Rashi, however, lived before the age of grammar books. A major Rashi method is therefore the teaching of basic grammar.

Many students belittle this aspect of Rashi. They erroneously think that because of modern methods we know more. However Rashi will frequently focus on rare grammatical points not covered in conventional textbooks.

There are many classical aspects to grammar whether in Hebrew or other languages. They include
• The rules for conjugating verbs. These rules govern how you differentiate person, plurality, tense, mode, gender, mood, and designation of the objects and indirect objects of the verb. For example how do you conjugate, in any language, I sang, we will sing, we wish to sing, she sang it.
• Rules of agreement. For example agreement of subject and verb, of noun and adjective; whether agreement in gender or plurality.
• Rules of Pronoun reference.
• Rules of word sequence. This is a beautiful topic which is not always covered in classical grammatical textbooks.

Today we cover the rule of euphemism which allows change of person and plurality in pronouns for reasons of social discretin.

Verse Nu11-15b, discussing Moses' reaction to God's anger on the behavior of the Jewish people's complaints states If you [God] do this to me [to make me alone deal with all national complaints] then please kill me if I find grace in your eyes so that I don't see my suffering. We have shown above in rule #1, references, based on analogy with similar statements in other verses, that the Bible really intended please kill me if I find grace in your eyes so that I don't see their suffering.

Here Rashi uses the universal rule of euphemism. Euphemism allows substitution of different persons in pronouns to place distance from a bad thought. Here their suffering a first-person-plural phrase is replaced with my suffering a first-person-singular phrase. By not uttering the word their Moses places distance from the expected punishment that will befall the Jews.

Euphemism is a universal grammatical rule. A simple well known example in English is use of the plural they for the singular his/her. Similarly in speaking about personal problems one might use the third person.

Advanced Rashi: Rashi notes that there are 18 uses of euphemism in the Bible. The Hebrew idiom for euphemism literally means the fix of the scribes. This literal translation has suggested to some people that the original biblical text was different but the Rabbis changed it.

But euphemism is not a biblical midrashic category! It is a universal grammatical rule used in all languages. To assume that the original biblical text did not use it is to assume God is coarse but the Talmudic sages fixed God's coarseness. This is rediculous. The truth of the matter is that God in the Bible uses all rules of grammar including euphemisms.

Here is another way of looking at this. There are several rules governing use of person - I, you, he. One rule deals with who is using it. But another rule deals with deliberate deviations to avoid emotionally painful statements. Both these approaches are valid! Therefore we need not see any problem in God using euphemism.

On a very deep philosophical level this use by God of euphemism points to a controversy between Judaism and Kant. Judaism believes that Peace is God's name while truth is only God's seal. Kant however believed that truth is paramount. But then we immediately see that the Jewish world view sees nothing wrong, on the contrary, sees something right, in God deviating from the rules of pronouns for the sake of peace. By contrast Kant, to whom truth was paramount, doesn't "understand" how a perfect God could chose peace over Truth. Thus our affirmation that the original Bible was written with these euphemism's is simply an affirmation that Judaism sees peace as taking precedence over truth.

The table below presents an aligned extract of verses or verselets in Nu11-17e, Nu11-14. Both verses/verselets discuss bearing the Jewish people. The alignment justifies the Rashi comment that: The phrase bearing the Jewish people refers to bearing the grudgings and complaints. God's request to Moses to appoint delegate judges should be perceived as a request to appoint judges who would bear the grudgings and complaints of the people.

Verse	Text of Verse	Rashi comment
Nu11-14	I cannot by myself bear this nation for they are more than I can take	The phrase bearing the Jewish people refers to bearing the grudgings and complaints. God's request to Moses to appoint delegate judges should be perceived as a request to appoint judges who would bear the grudgings and complaints of the people.
Nu11-16:17e	Gather for My sake 70 men from the Jewish elders... The will bear with you in the bearing of the nation and you will not bear alone.

Advanced Rashi: We have derived this Rashi comment using the alignment rule. However we could have equally derived it using the formatting rule. The repetition they will bear with you in the bearing of the nation, creates an emphasis on the type of bearing - a bearing of grudges and complaints.

We could also derive this Rashi using the meaning method. Verse Nu11-17 uses the phrases They bear....you bear... without explaining what bear means. Verse Nu11-14 clarifies this meaning: I can't bear this nation because it is too much for me. Hence we infer that bearing a nation means putting up with their grudges and complaints.

5. RASHI METHOD: CONTRADICTION BRIEF EXPLANATION:Rashi resolves contradictory verses using 3 methods. (5a) Resolution using two aspects of the same event (5b) Resolution using two stages of the same process (5c) Resolution using broad-literal interpretation. This example applies to Rashis Nu08-24b URL Reference: (c) http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule1416.htm Brief Summary: a) Levites apprentice TO LEARN at 25 b) Levites apprentice TO SERVE at 30

The table below presents two contradictory verses. Both verses talk about the Levites performing service in the Temple. The underlined words highlight the contradiction. One verse says they start to service at 25 while the other verse says they start to service at 30. Which is it? Did they start at 25 or 30? Rashi simply resolves this using the 2 aspects method: a) They start learning Temple service at 25; b) They start actual Temple services at 30.

Summary	Verse / Source	Text of verse / Source
They start actual Temple service at 30	Nu04-03	From 30 years old and upward even until fifty years old, all who enter into the army, to do the work in the Tent of Meeting.
The Levites start learning Temple service at 25	Nu08-24b	This is that which pertaineth unto the Levites: from 25 years old and upward they shall go in to perform the service in the work of the tent of meeting;
Resolution:	2 Aspects	a) They start learning Temple service at 25; b) They start actual Temple services at 30.

Certain Biblical paragraphs are stated in a Theme-Development form. In other words a broad general idea is stated first followed by the development of this broad general theme in specific details. The Theme-Detail form creates a unified paragraph and consequently the law or narrative statement only applies to the enumerated details but not to other cases. Today's example illustrates this as shown below.

Verses Nu09-02a discussing the requirement to observe the Passover states
• General: Let the Jews observe the Passover
• Detail: at its appointed time.
The general clause states Let the Jews observe the Passover and could mean that similar to allowing courts to change the exact date of the new month, the Jews can approximately observe Passover on the 14th, moving it a day or two forward or backward if it is necessary to avoid a great inconvenience (like Passover falling on Saturday). The detail clause provides specificity to the general clause and describes how Passover should be interpreted: It must be observed in its appointed time, the 14th of the month, even if it falls out on the Sabbath or while Jews are in ritual impurity which is very inconveniencing.

The formatting rule includes all rules governing paragraph formation and paragraph sequence. Rashi new of three reasons for consecutive paragraphs and sentences:
• Contrast
• Causal sequence
• Unifying Theme
It becomes exciting when the consecutive paragraph rule is connected with a violation of chronological order. We are asserting a basic theme of Rashi, Rabman and several other authorities on the underlying reason for the Bible breaking chronological order: If an incident belongs in a certain place in a chronological sequence, but the Bible deliberately avoids the chronological order, then the Bible is placing this incident proximate to other paragraphs in order to imply a contrast, cause or unifying theme. More succinctly Whenever the Bible violates chronological order it does so in order to indicate a contrast, cause or unifying theme with the new paragraphs in which it lies. Today's example exquisitely illustrates this.

We begin by noting the following blatant violation of chronological order.
• Nu01-01 speaks about a prophecy ...in year 2, month 2, day 1 from the day the Jews left Egypt.
• Nu09-01 speaks about a prophecy ...in year 2, month 1.
Thus as Rashi notes Chapter 9 in year 2, month 1, is stated in the biblical text after Chapter 1 in year 1, month 2.

Having established a break in chronological order we seek to explain this break by seeking a contrastive, causal, or unifying theme of Nu09 with the surrounding biblical chapters. The table below shows that Nu09 presents a unifying theme with the surrounding chapters of Jewish complaining.

Advanced Rashi: abc We make some supplemental points on the above Rashi
• The literal statement of Rashi There is no chronological order in the Bible is negative; it declares what isn't. It is therefore not a complete statement.
• By contrast we have supplemented this statement with what the lack of order accomplishes. So Rashi is in effect stating Chronology is not the only source of consecutiveness in the Bible. There are other equally important considerations such as cause, contrast, unifying theme.
• Notice that we have supplemented Rashi's literal explanation The order was changed. Chapter 9 was placed here. Why? Because this was the only Passover that the Jews observed. What I have added to Rashi's explanation is a clarification of the underlined words here and observed. I have explained
  • Chapter 9 was placed here in a sequence of chapters speaking about Jewish complaints
  • The essence of Jewish complaints was lack of belief in God's deliverance whether a deliverance for food, water, or conquest. Maybe the Jews did formally observe the other Passovers; but they did not observe these Passovers emotionally!! They did not experience through their observance that just as God overcame Egypt so too he could overcome Canaan and so too he could provide food and water.
  In short through the application of our fundamental principle on breaks of chronological order I have enriched the understanding of Rashi as indicating a deep and profound psychological principle: The slaves did remember God's beneficience (It wouldn't make sense if they didn't) But slaves have no sense of time, possesion and permanance. This recognition of God was intrinsically temporary because of their slave mentality. No sooner had they thanked God did they start complaining again. The way I have explained Rashi, the lack of observance of other Passover's is not an issue. Rather the underlying issue is the unifying theme of much of Numbers - the theme of complaints and lack of gratitude. Rashi sees an occasional observance as temporary contrastive appreciation.
• Ramban agrees with Rashi's approach. He explicitly states that The default Torah order is chronological; however if the Bible explicitly violates that chronological order then we are justified in using other explanatory devices [such as cause, contrast and unifying theme.]
• My opinion (which I cannot fully defend here) is that when Ramban and Rashi disagree on issues of chronological order they do so because of one obscure grammatical rule that forces Rashi to see a break in the chronological order. Since Ramban was ignorant of this rule he does not see a need to break the chronological order. Hence, although he appears to disagree with Rashi on the treatment of chronological order he really disagrees with Rashi on an obscure gramamtical principle (I intend to bring examples of this grammatical dispute in future issues).

We ask the following database query: Which procedures require a shaving of the entire body. The reader is encouraged to perform the query using a standard Biblical Konnkordance or search engine. This database query yields the list below. The list justifies the following Rashi inference: Shaving the entire body is symbolic of feminization. Female passivity - the capacity to be a good listener has importance for two purposes: a) to cure the lepor who slanders people. By acquiring female passivity and listening the lepor will cure his urge to slander. b)to indoctrinate the Levites who counsel people. It is well known that passive listening is an important part of counseling. The list below presents the results of the database query and shows examples

Acknowledgement: Although Rashi states the lepor-levite connection it was Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch who founded the entire field of Biblical symbolism on a deep elegant and logical axiomatic basis. We owe much to Rav Hirsch who, culminating several 100 years of midieval symbolic commentary, unlocked the doors to a biblical room filled with color, aroma and an etheral beauty not expected in the bible.

Verse Ex19-01 describing the Jews arrival at Sinai, where they received the Torah, states: In the third month after the children of Israel were gone forth out of the land of Egypt, the same day came they into the wilderness of Sinai. Verse Nu10-11a describing the departure of the Jews from Sinai, states: And it came to pass in the second year, in the second month, on the twentieth day of the month, that the cloud was taken up from over the tabernacle of the testimony. Based on these two verses Rashi infers The Jews stayed at Sinai for a little under a year. [The table below shows they stayed for 11 months 3 weeks)] The spreadsheet below shows the computations that led to Rashi's conclusion.

Sermonic Points: There is an absolutely delicious explanation of the above Rashi. The Torah was received at Sinai. But you can't learn a whole new law code in one day. Most probably Moses lectured at the rate of one biblical paragraph per day thereby ensuring mastery of biblical content. There are in fact 293 paragraphs in the Torah. It is reasonable that Saturdays were used for review. Hence the whole Torah was reviewed in 293 days (one for each paragraph) + 49 Saturdays (293/6 = 49) = 344 days = 11 months x 29.5 days per month + 19 days. In other words this Rashi The Jews camped at Sinai for 344 days is not a numerical curiosity but rather a profound method of biblical pedagogy. Here the Torah and Moses show us the proper way to absorb new learning material thru small digestable daily learning. This Rashi is the basis of the Page-a-day (DafYomi) Talmud learning project.

Praise be Him Who chose them and their learning.

Acknowledgement: This 293 calculation (with modifications) is based on modern biblical research. The interested reader can find a detailed reference in the introduction to the Israeli Korain Tanach.

10. RASHI METHOD: SYMBOLISM BRIEF EXPLANATION: Rashi provides symbolic interpretations of words, verses, and chapters. Rashi can symbolically interpret either (10a) entire Biblical chapters such as the gifts of the princes, Nu-07 (10b) individual items, verses and words The rules governing symbolism and symbolic interpretation are presented in detail on my website. This examples applies to Rashis Nu07-19b:f Nu07-20a:c URL Reference: (c) http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule1416.htm Brief Summary: Shaving of all hair symbolizes feminization. Female passivity - the capacity to listen - is important in a) curing the Lepor - slanderer and b)indoctrinating the Levites who counciled the people.

This Rashi continued from rule #8, databases above.

We have seen above that two procedures - the Lepor (slanderer) purification ceremony and the Levite indoctrination ceremoy - both required shaving all body hair. Rashi explains: Shaving the entire body is symbolic of feminization. Female passivity - the capacity to be a good listener has importance for two purposes: a) to cure the lepor who slanders people. By acquiring female passivity and listening the lepor will cure his urge to slander. b)to indoctrinate the Levites who counsel people. It is well known that passive listening is an important part of counseling. We repeat the list, presented in rule #8, databases above.

Advanced Rashi: Although Rashi states the lepor-levite connection it was Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch who founded the entire field of Biblical symbolism on a deep elegant and logical axiomatic basis. We owe much to Rav Hirsch who, culminating several 100 years of midieval symbolic commentary, unlocked the doors to a biblical room filled with color, aroma and an etheral beauty not expected in the bible.