|
Their presence in Rashis on Parshath MaSaY Volume 16, Number 22 This weeks Weekly Rashi with Hebrew/English source tables Is accessible at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule1622.htm (c) RashiYomi Incorporated, Dr. Hendel, President, July 28 th, 2011 Visit the Rashi website http://www.Rashiyomi.com The goal of this Weekly Rashi Digest is to use the weekly Torah portion to expose students at all levels to the ten major methods of commentary used by Rashi. It is hoped that continual weekly exposure to these ten major methods will enable students of all levels to acquire a familiarity and facility with the major exegetical methods.
Verse Nu35-12a, discussing the creation of refuge cities for accidental murderers states And they shall be to you cities for refuge from the avenger; that the man slayer should not die, until he stands before the congregation in judgement. Rashi clarifies the underlined words refuge from the avenger by referencing verse(s) Dt19-06, discussing a case of accidental murderer which states Lest the avenger of the blood pursue the slayer, while his heart is hot, and overtake him, because the way is long, and slay him; though he was not deserving of death, since in times past he did not hate him. Hence the Rashi comment: When Nu35-12a discusses designating cities for refuge from the avenger it refers to saving the murderer from an avenging murderer who would not receive the death penalty as indicated in Dt19-06.
Advanced Rashi: Rashi does not explicitly bring down Dt19-06. Rashi simply comments on the word avenger by stating: From the avenger of blood that is a relative of the murdered. However, a careful examination shows that Nu35-12 uses the word avenger while Dt19-06 uses the phrase avenger of blood. Rashi chose this phrase - avenger of blood - so as to refer to Dt19-06. Dt19-06 clarifies Nu35-12 since it explicitly indicates the lack of a death penalty if the avenger of blood kills the murderer. For this reason we have classified this Rashi as using the reference method even though no explicit reference is made. Such non explicit reference Rashis occur frequently. As can be seen Rashi can use non-explicit nuancing when using the reference method.
When Rashi uses the synonym method he does not explain the meaning of a word but rather the distinction between two similar words both of whose meanings we already know.
In our article Peshat and Derash: A New Intuitive and Logical Approach, which can be found on the world-wide-web at http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rashi.pdf we have advocated punchy translations of Biblical verses as a means of presenting Rashi comments. The following translation of verse Nu35-22 embeds the Rashi translation Petha means unexpectedly. But if he thrust him unexpectedly without enmity, or hurled upon him any thing without lying in wait, Advanced Rashi: We have translated the words Pithom and Petha as meaning suddenly and unexpectedly based on context. This may also be partially supported by the resemblance of the Pay-Tauv-Ayin and Pay-Tauv-Cheth roots. Pay-Tauv-Cheth means Door. So unexpectedly in Hebrew means from behind the door; a concept indicating nearby and present but unseen so it is unexpected. There is a certain amount of conjecture in our translations since there are very few verses with either of the words and the etymologies although possibly supportive don't prove anything.
The above interactions between the translations and details in Jewish law afford us a rare glimpse at the interaction of language and law.
Most people know that the Biblical meaning of a word is determined by its underlying three-letter root. The Biblical root can be conjugated in different a) persons, b) tenses, c) pluralities, d) genders, e) constructions and f) modalities. For example I watched has a different conjugation then I will be watched even though both phrases will use the same 3 letter Hebrew root. Rashi explains that the infinitive form can also indicate attribution. Hence Rashi translates Nu35-32b discussing the prohibition of bribes from residents of the refuge cities, as And you shall take no ransom for him who has fleed to his city of refuge, that he should come back to live in the land, until the death of the priest. Advanced Rashi: We have followed our custom of embedding the Rashi comment in the body of the translation. Rashi also discusses the possibility of translating the Hebrew as the infinitive. In such a case the verse would read And you shall take no ransom to flee to his city of refuge, that he should come back to live in the land, until the death of the priest. Rashi rejects this as not making sense: Why should a person outside the refuge city need to bribe to come back to live in the land? For this reason Rashi interprets the infinitive form as indicating attribution. Rashi also brings several other examples.
The table below presents an aligned extract of verses or verselets in Nu35-29a, Nu15-15 Both verses/verselets discuss the extent, in time and place, of Biblical statutes. The alignment justifies the Rashi comment that: The laws of accompanying Minchah libations only apply for all generations, but not for all places, implying that the Minchah libation law only applys in the Temple in Israel but not outside it. By contrast, the laws of courts for murder trials, which apply in all generations and all places, do equally apply in and out of Israel (Whenever murder-trial courts are set in Israel they must also be set outside Israel).
The table below presents two contradictory verses. Both verses talk about the status of land ownership in the Jubilee year. The underlined words highlight the contradiction. One verse says Sold land does revert to its owner in the Jubilee year, while the other verse says Inherited land does not revert to its owner in the Jubilee year. Which is it? Does land revert to the owner in the Jubilee year or not? Rashi simply resolves this using the 2-aspects method: Sold land reverts back to the original owner in the Jubilee year. But inherited land - e.g., the land inherited by the son of a marriage of a Reuvenite daughter, who inherited her father, and then married a Shimonite man, followed by the death of the 2 parents - does not change status in the Jubilee year and consequently this land, which was initially Reubenite, would become Shimonite, since the son's tribal status is patrilineal.
Certain Biblical paragraphs are stated in an example form. In other words an example of a law is stated rather than the full general rule. The reader's task is to generalize the example. The idea that all Biblical laws should be perceived as examples (unless otherwise indicated) is explicitly stated by Rashi (Pesachim 6.). This is a rule of style since the rule requires that a text be perceived as an example rather than interpreted literally. The Rabbi Ishmael style rules govern the interpretation of style. Verses Nu35-23:25 discussing negligent murder which leads to banishment to the refuge cities states Or with any stone, whereby a man may die, without seeing him, and he felt it upon him, that he died, and he was not his enemy, nor sought his harm; Then the congregation shall judge ... And the congregation shall deliver the slayer from the hand of the avenger of blood, and the congregation shall restore him to his city of refuge, ... Rashi commenting on the underlined phrases states: A status of willful or negligent murder requires an initial downward (falling) thrust. However a death that took place from something falling after an initial upward thrust - e.g. 1) a person climbing up a ladder who fell, 2) a person climbing up a ladder, one of whose rungs dislodged and fell and 3) a pail carried by a person climbing up a ladder, which subsequently fell and killed - is neither classified as willful nor negligent. [Note: If you throw a knife straight up and it then falls and kills there is no death penalty; but if you threw it sideways and up and it fell and killed there is a death penalty (because in the first case the force killing was gravity while in the latter case there were two forces killing, your initial thrust and gravity.] Advanced Rashi: Note that there have been several legal citations in todays Weekly Rashi. Several years ago we had a Golden Rambam Rashi series exploring the beautiful relationship between Biblical exegesis and technical Jewish law. The series faded out (primarily because of lack of interest on the readers). However from time to time we still bring citations of Jewish law and explore the exegetical legal interaction.
Very often Rashi will make an inference from the paragraph structure. A typical paragraph structures can be parallel or contrastive with or without bullets. The parallel and contrastive structure naturally generate Rashi comments. This type of inference also follows from the Rabbi Ishmael Style rule of inferring from context since the paragraph structure endows the disparate paragraph sentences with a unified context.
The main point of the Menasheeans is presented in bullet #3. Bullet #4 does not make sense! - what does it add to the inquiry? Rashi explains bullet #4 by interpolating the word [even]. In other words bullet #4 is simply a follow up to bullet #3 - it explains that bullet #3 is permanant without any remedy - for even the Jubilee, which in many other cases frees lost land, does not help here (The Jubilee does not free land lost through inheritance). We have classified this Rashi as a Rashi based on format. The point here is that Rashi perceives the paragraph Nu36-01:04 as having a supplemental parallel structure: Bullets #3 and #4 supplement each other; bullet #3 states that tribal land is lost while bullet #4 supplements this statement of loss by pointing out that it can not be remedied. As we have explained above such a Rashi inference based on paragraph formatting echoes the Rabbi Ishmael rule of context.
Todays Rashi presents a map, a geographical description, of Israeli geography and the surrounding (Biblical countries. The map is presented below and appropriate footnotes outline Rashi's comment. Because Rashi clarifies diagrammatic material we classify this Rashi as non-Verse.
=========================================================== MAP OF SOUTHERN BORDER OF ISRAEL AND SURROUNDING COUNTRIES =========================================================== ' | | ' | NORTH |----- ' | ISRAEL | | ' | | | Sichon, Og ' |W E | -------------- ' Pelishtim |E A | | | ' |S S | J | | ' |T T | O | | ' | | R | | ' | | D | MOAB | ' | ISRAEL | A | | ' | SOUTH | N | | ' | | | | ----------------------|-----------------| | ' | | | ' Egypt | Edom |------------- ' | | ' | | ' | | ' | | ' | |
Verse Nu35-25a states And the congregation shall deliver the negligent murderer from the hand of the avenger of blood, and the congregation shall restore him to his city of refuge, where he had fled; and he shall live there until the death of the high priest, who was anointed with the holy oil. Rashi comments on the connection between the underlined phrase connecting the death of the high priest to the release of the negligent murderer from the prison city of refuge:A primary task of the Priest is to atone for inadvertency. For example a person who negligently descecrates the Sabbath receives atonement by bringing a sin offering and attending to the procedures performed by the priest. If the priests had done their job perfectly there would be no negligent murders. Consequently when the High Priest dies ( as a punishment for lack of prevention of negligence) the negligent murderer goes free.
We should explain why the death of the priest releases the prisoner. Prior to the death of the priest the blood-avenger blaimed the murder on the murderer's negligence. The blood-avenger may wish to avenge the murder by killing the murderer. However when the High Priest dies a message is sent to the blood avenger: Perhaps the murder is not the murderer's fault. Perhaps it is the priest's fault. If the priests had been more diligent in their prevention of negligence then the murder would not have happened.Since you are not certain whether the negligent murder was the fault of the priest or the murderer you shouldn't want to kill the murderer.
Conclusion
This week's parshah contains examples examples of all Rashi methods. Visit the RashiYomi website at http://www.Rashiyomi.com and http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule.htm for further details and examples. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||