The 10 RashiYomi Rules
Their presence in Rashis on Parshat VayRah-Boh
Vol 19#16 - Adapted from Rashi-is-Simple 
(c) RashiYomi Incorporated, Dr. Hendel President, Jan. 10th, 2013
For the full copyright statement see the Appendix

Useful URLS:,  
Rashiyomi Website:       http://www.RashiYomi.Com
This week's issue: 	        http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule1916.rtf
Former week's issue:      http://www.Rashiyomi.com/rule.htm
Old weekly Rashis:         http://www.Rashiyomi.com/weeklyarchives.htm
Rashi short e-course:      http://www.Rashiyomi.com/RashiShortGuideHTMLBook.htm
Hebrew-English Rashi:    http://www.http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/63255/jewish/The-Bible-with-Rashi.htm

GOALS
The goal of the Weekly Rashi Digest is to use the weekly Torah portion to expose students at all levels to the ten major methods of Rashi's commentary. Continual weekly exposure to these ten major methods facilitate the acquisition, familiarity, and facility with the major exegetical methods. This year, 2012-2013, we are concentrating on the grammar rule. We acknowledge benefitting from Dr. Isseroff's book, An Introduction to Rashi's Grammatical Explanations in the Book of Genesis, 1985, Published by the Torah Education Department of World Zionist Organization, MP Press Inc, ISBN 965-222-049-3. For a full  lightning statement of all Rashi rules see the Appendix.

NEW: Starting with Shemoth we will be listing references, secular articles on grammar that enhance the Rashi experience.  Starting with VaayRah we will list homework assignments - typically verses to look up - so that interested readers can further check suggested explanations. NEW

Subscribe / Unsubscribe: Email RashiYomi@GMail.Com 
 
Verbs - Active and Passive Voice Daily Rashi: Sunday Jan 12, 2013
 
All languages have the capacity to express concepts in the active or passive voice. Here are some simple examples in English.
•	Active: I ate the apple
•	Passive: The apple was eaten by me.
Both these sentences describe identical scenes. They however differ in style. 

Style conveys extra nuances of meaning. A skilled author can use style to indicate things not explictly stated in the text  There is no one set of rules for style. As we go through the year we will tune our ears to the various nuance implicit in use of active and passive. We present below a Rashi on today's Parshah.

Example 1: Gn40-20
Biblical text: On the 3rd day [after the wine butler's dream], Pharoh's birthday, he [Pharoh] made a party for all his staff, he restored the wine butler to his position.

English and Hebrew differ in how they name birthday
•	English names birthday using the active style: The day the person's mother gave birth
•	Hebrew names birthday using the passive style: The day the person was delivered.

Rashi explains that the Hebrew hrase used to indicate birthday uses a very rare biblical conjugation, the hafal, the passive causative. because someone else (the mother or midwife) delivers the child causing the infant to be born; therefore the infant is passive not active.

Notice however, that we have translated the verse above using the English birthday. This is proper translation technique; we use the English word meaning birthday vs. a literal Hebrew translation.

Example 2: Ex10-05b
Background: Moses was explaining to Pharoh the plague of locusts. They would be so numerous that no one could see the ground!
Biblical Text: They [the locusts] will cover the appearance of the land until one cannot see the land
Rashi:  The second (underlined sentence) in this verse, one cannot see the land, has a verb, see, but has no subject (in the biblical text). The proper translation would reference a general subject (Hence we have use the English one cannot see the land).

This Rashi corresponds to the principle, valid in English as well as Hebrew, that other things being equal, an active voice is preferable to a passive voice as shown in the following example.
•	Active: One cannot see the land, is preferable to
•	Passive: The land could not be seen.

Homework:
Look up the Rashi on Ex10-11c for the same theme.

REFERENCES

The following reference gives four methods of avoiding the passive style

D. Graham and J. Graham, The Writing System. Preview Press, 2002.

Plural vs. Singular Daily Rashi: Monday Jan 13, 2013

All languages have the capacity to indicate plurality - many vs one:
•	In English, the plural is indicated by a terminal s: For example, apples, would indicate many apples.
•	In Hebrew, the plural can be indicated by a terminal mem, or in the case of the Hebrew construct, by a terminal yud.

Prior to translating and commenting on the verse studied today, we mention some useful background information: Certain words are collective nouns and do not have a plural. Here are some simple examples from English
•	Grass is a collective noun; it can equally refer to a single blade of grass or to many grass growing in a field.
•	Cattle is a collective noun; it can equally refer to a single cattle or to a herd of cattle.
•	Blood is a collective noun; it can equally refer to a single drop of blood or to many blood.

Hebrew also has collective nouns. For example 
•	desheh, meaning grass-like foilage and 
•	shor, referring to ox (similar to the English cattle) are collective nouns. 
However, English and Hebrew do not always agree on whether a noun is collective. 

With this in mind let us review Ex08-02 describing the second plague: And the frog came up on Egypt.

Rashi gives two explanations:
•	One frog came up and attacked Egypt
•	Frog is a collective noun indicating a swarm of frogs came up.

Of course we all impulsively like the 2nd explanation. But why did Rashi even mention the first explanation. Furthermore, did he really believe that only one frog came up.

Here is the explanation I would suggest making both explanations one.
The reason certain nouns are collective without a plural is because when the flock of animals for example walks it does so in relative unison following a leader. The best known example is a flock of birds - one can see them all flying in the same direction in a formation which clearly shows a leader and followers. 

But not all animals act in unison. Frogs for example typcially do not act in unison. Hence they should be indicated with a plural. However, at the plague of frogs besides the fact that the frogs came up they also came up in military formation following each other. Hence on this  particular occason frog is a collective noun referring to a herd of frogs. 

So Rashi's statement One frog came up really means a herd of frogs came up in a unified formation.
 
Verb Connectives Daily Rashi: Tuesday Jan 14, 2013

Most people know that the meaning of Hebrew verbs are determined by their 3-letter roots. For example the basic Hebrew root, Shin-Mem-Resh, means to watch. So for example, ShaMaRti means I watched, while, yiShMoR means he will watch.

People are aware that the different modes of the verb (binyanim) can change meaning. For example,
•	the Qal mode of the root Beth-Vav-Aleph means to come
•	the Hifil mode (causative mode) means to bring (to cause something else to come).
 
Here the two concepts - come, bring -  
•	have the same verbal Hebrew roots  but
•	have different English roots.

In a similar manner
•	just as verbal modes can change a root meaning
•	so too the same root with differing prepositional or adverbial connectives can change meaning.

Many people however are not aware that the prepositional connective that follows a verb may determine its meaning. As we go through the weekly Parshah cycle we will examine examples of this phenomenon. This phenomenon happens in English also. See the discussion at the end.

Example 1 Gn50-16
Compare the following two sentences
•	They commanded Joseph ...as follows: Your father commanded: Forgive your brothers
•	They commanded to Joseph ...as follows: Your father commanded: Forgive your brothers

Rashi: Command to refers to a command sent by a delegate or messenger. 

Such a sending shows distance from and respect for the authority and feelings of the person being commanded.

Example 2: Ex09-02
Biblical Text: [Background: Moses is talking to Pharoh in the name of God and demaning the release of the Jewish people. He continues with a threat.]
For if you refuse to let my people go and continue to hold them.
Rashi: The Hebrew root Cheth-Zayin-Kuph, 
•	ordinarily means to be strong
•	but when followed by the preposition beth means hold or grab.

Rashi proceeds to cite other verses illustrating this concept.

Example 3: Ex08-17a
Background: Moses is threatening Pharoh who refuses to let the Jewish people leave Egypt. Moses threatens to incite mixtures of animals against Egypt. This is the 4th plague: Arov, which means mixture of animals. 
Biblical Text: For if you do not let my people go (Meshalayach), [then] behold: I will incite (mashliach) against you, your servants, your nation and household the mixture [of animals]
Rashi: The biblical root Shin-Lamed-Cheth means to send. However,
•	In the intensive, Piel mode, it means to let go
•	In the causative, Hifil mode, when coupled with the prepositional connective beth, in, it means to incite.

Comment: Many Rashi students overlook the delightful plan on words in the verse: If you do not Shin-Lamed-Caph (let go) of my people then I will Shin-Lamed-Caph (incite) wild animals on you.
A tit-for-tat.

Homework

Look up Lv26-22, Ex08-17, 2K15-37 for other examples of Shin-Lamed-Cheth with the prepositional connective in, meaning incite.

REFERENCES

In English we distinguish between prepositional and phrasal verbs. Like in Hebrew these verbs can change meaning because of the preposition or adverb following them. Some simple examples are 
•	 put off the party (postpone the party), 
•	bring up an issue (mention an issue), 
•	turn down a gift (refuse the gift).

Here the verb-adverb pairs, put-off, bring-up, and turn-down have meanings totally different than the singleton verbs put, bring and turn.

This idea was first proposed by
[1] T. F.Mitchell, "Syntagmatic relations in linguistic analysis", Transactions of the Philological Society (1958), pp. 101-18, esp. 103-6. 

For a more detailed description see
[2] A.P. Cowie and R. Mackin, Oxford dictionary of current idiomatic English. Vol. 1: Verbs with prepositions and particles (London, 1975) 

For applications to interpreting difficult biblical verses (by reinterpreting the verb-preposition or verb-adverb pair) see

[3] T. Muraoka, "On Verb Complementation in Biblical HebrewAuthor(s)",  Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 29, Fasc. 4 (Oct., 1979), pp. 425-435 
  
Verbs - Conjugation Daily Rashi: Wednesday Jan 15, 2013

The Rashi discussed in this posting can be analyzed from three totally different perspectives.  Ex10-02a  states that God is bringing the 10 plagues in order that you should tell the story of how I mocked [Ayin-Lamed-Lamed alal] Egypt and the signs that I placed in them.

Rashi comments 
•	on the root Ayin-Lamed-Lamed and 
•	on the conjugation of this verb
•	and possibly on the connectives used with this verb.

This root is most perplexing and baffling. The following facts given as a homework assignment allow the reader to appreciate the difficulty.

•	The verb form only occurs about 10 times in the entire Bible. The verses are below.
•	All English translations are baffled by this verb. 
This is proven that they translate the same root differently. Some translations are mocked, afflicted, teased, played with, did. Notice that 
•	some of the terms like did or done  are neutral in tone, 
•	some, like afflicted  are strongly pejorative in tone, and 
•	some, like mocked, played with are weakly pejorative.

The verb occurs in
•	the active tense (qal) and
•	the hitpael tense which can be  used for reflexive or interactive.

No grammarian that I have seen points it out but 
•	The active tense of the verb is always accompanied with the prepositional connective lamed, to
•	The hitpael tense of the verb is always accompanied with the prepositional connective beth, with

Homework
Look up these verses in an English translation. Check the variety of translations showing the uncertainty in any one meaning. Also check the prepositional connective used (in, to)
•	Active, Qal tense -Lam01-12:22, Lam03-51
•	Hitpael - Interactive, Reflexive Nu22-29, 1S06-06, 1S31-04, J38-19, 1C10-04

What does Rashi actually say? Rashi makes two points.
Rashi text: 
•	The word Ayin-Lamed-Lamed in Ex10-02 means tease.
•	The word is conjugated in the Hitpael.
Rashi also gives most of the examples cited above.

To sum up: While 
•	many Grammarians (e.g. the Radaq) and 
•	many English translations
translate this root as deeds, or great deeds, or deeds of impact
•	Rashi translates this root as teased.
If you have done your Homework you will see that several English translations follow this approach of Rashi some of the time.

A comment is also made about the conjugation of the verb: Hitpael instead of active.
•	Rashi himself states this fact but does not explain the significance
•	The Radaq explains that both conjugations mean the same thing but the hitpael connotes intensive activity

What should we do with all this? It is perfectly acceptable to simply state the word is difficult with controversy and ambiguity among the rishonim, early Jewish commentators.

However I have a method of resolving it which I think will be acceptable to all. There is an obscure controversy between Rashi and Rav Saadia Gaon.
•	Rav Saadia believed in meaning maximalism
•	Rashi believed in meaning minimalism
This simply means that 
•	Rav Saadia preferred to list as many possible meanings (maximal) of a root in the dictionary
•	Contrastively Rashi preferred to list a  unifying meanings with overtones.
This controversy is not just between Rashi and Rav Saadia but is a thread that goes through the middle ages in both Arabic and Jewish cultures. The reference below discusses this at length.

So let me suggest a unified meaning of Ayin-Lamed-Lamed consistent in fact with the meaning of some related roots like Ayin Lamed Hey.
•	Ayin Lamed Hey (Aleh) can mean a young leaf
•	Ayin Vav Lamed Lamed (Olal) can mean a young animal or young infant.

I would therefore like to suggest that Ayin-Lamed-Lamed means
•	treating like a child
•	playing with somebody
In other words it does not refer to violent crime per se but to playing with someone.

Even in English we speak e.g. They took captives and sportedwith them. Another good example of this approach is the word Ayin-Vav-Lamed, Avel, such as used in Lv19-16 which prohibits playing games with weights. If you think about it
•	armed robbery is a violent crime; contrastively
•	shaving off weights is more in the nature of playing games with people.

If the interested reader will now examine the verses given above for homework they will see that the suggested translations: treating like a child and playing with fit nicely. For example, King Saul committed suicide because he was afraid of being captured and sported with (the same way Samson was sported with and the same way the Romans would sport with captured slaves).

On a final note:
In the hitpael mode which can indicate interactive activity, Ayin Lamed Lamed can indicate sporting with. Hence the preposition beth which can mean with.
In the Qal mode the word indicates giving treatment like a child to someone.

Also note that God did not just destroy Egypt but interactively played with them for 9 plagues before he brought the final blow.

Although this suggested approach is not in Rashi it is consistent 
•	with Rashi's translation of Ayin Lamed Lamed as teased
•	with the prepositional connectives Beth, with and lamed to
•	with Rashi's approach of meaning minimalism.

REFERENCES

Richard C. Steiner, Saadia vs. Rashi: On the Shift from Meaning-Maximalism to Meaning-Minimalism in MedievalBiblical Lexicology  The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series, Vol. 88, No. 3/4 (Jan. - Apr., 1998), pp.213-258 
 
Connective words - Interchangability of connective words
Daily Rashi: Jan 12, 2013
 
Every language has connective words which can connect two sentences or connect nouns with the adjectival phrases modifying them. Some common examples of connective words in English are because, and, or, if-then, from, when, ....

A beautiful discovery by Rashi, following the researchers of the Midrash, is that in biblical Hebrew, each connective word has multiple meanings, sometimes as many as half a dozen meanings. The most famous example points out that the biblical Hebrew word ki, can have any of the following six meanings! rather, perhaps, because, when, if-then, that. As several Rashi researchers have pointed out, this  principle of multiple meanings applies not only to ki, but generally applies to all connective words and prefixes. 

So biblical Hebrew is unlike English:
•	English is user friendly; the speaker explicitly by choice of words tells the listener exactlly what the speaker intends to say
•	Contrastively, in Hebrew, the speaker and listener share the discovery of meaning: The speaker says something, but the listener has a choice of meanings.

Perhaps the reason for biblical Hebrew in doing this is that by the listener participating with the speaker in identifying meaning the listening experience is intensified, facilitating retention of communication.

A consequence of this principle is that connective words do not necessarily have one meaning. In fact, the same prepositional connective can have opposite meanings - like to and from. 

Here is an example which is made punchy by the use of parallel passages. In all these passages Moses promises to pray to God to remove the plague after he leaves. The underlined words show a startling difference.

•	Ex08-08 Moses left from Pharoh and entreated God...
•	Ex08-25 [Moses speaking to Pharoh] Behold: I am leaving from being with you and I will besearh God...
•	Ex09-29a When I [take] leave of the city I will spread my hands to God ....

The following is a deep way to read and understand the Rashi.
Rashi addresses not one but two blatant differences in the above parallel passages
Prepositional Connective
•	The first two verses use from
•	The last verse uses of [which sounds strange in English but corresponds to our Hebrew principle of interchangability of connectives]

The object of the preposition (What Moses is leaving from)
•	The first two verses speak about leaving Pharoh
•	The last verse speaks about leaving the city

If you read Rashi carefully, Rashi makes two comments addressing the above two issues.
•	The word of (eth in Hebrew) in the 3rd verse means from (min) used in the first two verses
•	Moses wasn't really leaving the city; rather he was leaving Pharoh.  

This leaves two questions
•	Why was Moses leaving Pharoh?
•	If Moses was leaving Pharoh why does it say that he is leaving the city?

Why was Moses leaving Pharoh?
Recall that Moses was praying. But Pharoh considered himself a God. If Moses prayed in Pharoh's presence and is answered, Pharoh could turn around and say it was him, not God, who granted the prayer. Hence Moses had to be careful not to pray in front of Pharoh.

If Moses was leaving Pharoh why does it say that he is leaving the city?
As a general principle one does not confront Royalty. For example (See Rashi on Ex11-08)
•	Instead of Moses saying "You Pharoh will come down and bow to me and let my people go" 
•	He instead said "Your servants will come down and bow to me and let my people go
Similarly 
•	Instead of Moses saying "When I leave you"
•	He instead said, "When I leave the city."

Comment: If you read Rashi carefully he seems to combine the statement that of means from and the explanation that Moses was leaving the city because of the presence of idols. 

It is a contribution of this list to show that Rashi here (and in many places) was making two separate comments to explain two different problems in the same verse. This "two instead of one" principle can make clear many Rashis.

Also: If you read Rashi carefully, he simply speaks about idols in the city. He does not point out that Moses really was leaving Pharoh. This is my contribution. I based it on the parallel verses above. Although Rashi does not say it explicitly I believe the explanation has cogency and support as shown above.

REFERENCES

The following are some references on the interchageability of specific connectives. There are many more

Esra Shereshevsky, The Use of Prepositions and Conjunctions in Rashi's Commentary,  The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series, Vol. 57, No. 3 (Jan., 1967), pp. 200-211  

Nahum M. Sarna, The Interchange of the Prepositions Beth and Min in Biblical Hebrew, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 78, No. 4 (Dec., 1959), pp. 310-316 
 
Connective words - Interchangability of connective words
Daily Rashi: Thursday Jan 16, 2013 
 
Every language has connective words which can connect two sentences or connect nouns with the adjectival phrases modifying them. Some common examples of connective words in English are because, and, or, if-then, from, when, ....

A beautiful discovery by Rashi, following the researchers of the Midrash, is that in biblical Hebrew, each connective word has multiple meanings, sometimes as many as half a dozen meanings. The most famous example points out that the biblical Hebrew word ki, can have any of the following six meanings! rather, perhaps, because, when, if-then, that. As several Rashi researchers have pointed out, this  principle of multiple meanings applies not only to ki, but generally applies to all connective words and prefixes. 

So biblical Hebrew is unlike English:
•	English is user friendly; the speaker explicitly by choice of words tells the listener exactlly what the speaker intends to say
•	Contrastively, in Hebrew, the speaker and listener share the discovery of meaning: The speaker says something, but the listener has a choice of meanings.

Perhaps the reason for biblical Hebrew in doing this is that by the listener participating with the speaker in identifying meaning the listening experience is intensified, facilitating retention of communication.

A consequence of this principle is that connective words do not necessarily have one meaning. In fact, the same prepositional connective can have opposite meanings - like to and from. 

Here is an example which is made punchy by the use of parallel passages. In all these passages Moses promises to pray to God to remove the plague after he leaves. The underlined words show a startling difference.

•	Ex08-08 Moses left from Pharoh and entreated God...
•	Ex08-25 [Moses speaking to Pharoh] Behold: I am leaving from being with you and I will besearh God...
•	Ex09-29a When I [take] leave of the city I will spread my hands to God ....

The following is a deep way to read and understand the Rashi.
Rashi addresses not one but two blatant differences in the above parallel passages
Prepositional Connective
•	The first two verses use from
•	The last verse uses of [which sounds strange in English but corresponds to our Hebrew principle of interchangability of connectives]

The object of the preposition (What Moses is leaving from)
•	The first two verses speak about leaving Pharoh
•	The last verse speaks about leaving the city

If you read Rashi carefully, Rashi makes two comments addressing the above two issues.
•	The word of (eth in Hebrew) in the 3rd verse means from (min) used in the first two verses
•	Moses wasn't really leaving the city; rather he was leaving Pharoh.  

This leaves two questions
•	Why was Moses leaving Pharoh?
•	If Moses was leaving Pharoh why does it say that he is leaving the city?

Why was Moses leaving Pharoh?
Recall that Moses was praying. But Pharoh considered himself a God. If Moses prayed in Pharoh's presence and is answered, Pharoh could turn around and say it was him, not God, who granted the prayer. Hence Moses had to be careful not to pray in front of Pharoh.

If Moses was leaving Pharoh why does it say that he is leaving the city?
As a general principle one does not confront Royalty. For example (See Rashi on Ex11-08)
•	Instead of Moses saying "You Pharoh will come down and bow to me and let my people go" 
•	He instead said "Your servants will come down and bow to me and let my people go
Similarly 
•	Instead of Moses saying "When I leave you"
•	He instead said, "When I leave the city."

Comment: If you read Rashi carefully he seems to combine the statement that of means from and the explanation that Moses was leaving the city because of the presence of idols. 

It is a contribution of this list to show that Rashi here (and in many places) was making two separate comments to explain two different problems in the same verse. This "two instead of one" principle can make clear many Rashis.

Also: If you read Rashi carefully, he simply speaks about idols in the city. He does not point out that Moses really was leaving Pharoh. This is my contribution. I based it on the parallel verses above. Although Rashi does not say it explicitly I believe the explanation has cogency and support as shown above.

REFERENCES

The following are some references on the interchageability of specific connectives. There are many more

Esra Shereshevsky, The Use of Prepositions and Conjunctions in Rashi's Commentary,  The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series, Vol. 57, No. 3 (Jan., 1967), pp. 200-211  

Nahum M. Sarna, The Interchange of the Prepositions Beth and Min in Biblical Hebrew, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 78, No. 4 (Dec., 1959), pp. 310-316 

APPENDIX
THE 10 RASHI RULE CATEGORIES / THE 30 RASHI RULES
Copyright 2001, Rashiyomi Inc., Dr Hendel President, www.Rashiyomi.com/rules-01.htm
NOTE ON COPYRIGHTS:
This particular appendix, like many portions of the Rashiyomi website, are protected by a paid copyright. However, we clarify  that  the intent of Rashiyomi copyright statements is the intent expressed in the creative commons copyright statement, the full statement of which may be found at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/legalcode and the human readable summary which may be found at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/. The basic intent is: (1) (by) any citation of Rashiyomi explanations, rules etc should acknowledge the Rashiyomi website as the author by giving its URL: http://www.Rashiyomi.com (or the specific page on the website); (2) (nc) It is prohibited for anyone to use the material on this website for commercial use, that is to derive monetary gain from it; (3) (sa)while people are encouraged to cite paragraphs of explanations from Rashiyomi in their own works, they must share their works in a similar manner under the creative commons agreement, cc by nc sa version 3.0; they must cite the urls for the Rashiyomi website and the creative commons website. In short our intention is to facilitate distribution of Torah educational material and not inhibit that distribution with monetary interests or lack of acknowledgement. For precise legal details see the URLs cited earlier. The contents of this paragraph govern all future uses of Rashiyomi material and take precedence (or clarify and explain) already existing copyrights as well as permissions given in private emails.
======================================================== 
I-REFERENCE: Dt26-05d We went down to Egypt with a few people explained by Gn46-27: with 70 people
======================================================== 
II-MEANING / Lexicography / Dictionary:  EXAMPLE (Connectives) KI means IF,PERHAPS,RATHER,BECAUSE,WHEN,THAT (Rashi on Gn18-15a Gn24-33a  ) EXAMPLE (Nuances): YDA means FAMILIAR, not KNOW (eg Dt34-10a) eg Gn04-01 Adam was FAMILIAR with his wife EXAMPLE (Idioms) ON THE FACE OF means DURING THE LIFETIME (Rashi on Nu03-04a Gn11-28a Ex20-03c Dt05-07a) EXAMPLE (Synonyms) Marchesheth means  pot; Machavath means frying pan (Lv02-05a, 07a) EXAMPLE (Hononyms) SHAMAH can mean listen, hear, understand: (Gn42-23a) They didn't appreciate that Joseph understood them (Note: They knew he was listening) EXAMPLE (Metonomy) (Lv02-11a) Don't offer ...any honey as sacrifices RASHI: honey includes any sweet fruit juice
=========================================================
III-GRAMMAR:  EXAMPLE: BA-ah means CAME;ba-AH means COMING(Gn46-26a) 
EXAMPLE: Hitpael conjugation has different rules if 1st root letter is Tzade (Gn44-16a) 
===============================================================
IV-PARALLELISM: (Ex20-04) Dont POSSESS the gods of others Dont MAKE idols RASHI: So both POSSESSion & MAKING of idols are prohibited
===============================================================
V-CONTRADICTION: (Nu04-03, Nu08-24a)Levites start Temple work at 25;  Levites start temple work at 30. RASHI: They apprentice at 25 but start actual service at 30.
==============================================================
VI-STYLE: RABBI ISHMAEL RULES: EXAMPLE: (Simple verses should be generalized): (Rashi Pesachim 6) (Dt25-04a) Dont MUZZLE an OX while THRESHING RASHI: Dont STOP any WORKING ANIMAL from eating  
==============================================================  
VII-FORMATTING:  EXAMPLE (BOLD indicated by Repetition): Ex12-09c) COOK COOK it in water (So COOKED-COOKED is understood the same way bold is understood by modern reader) RASHI: Prefered to COOK it in water; But COOK it at all costs(Even if you dont have water) EXAMPLE: (BULLETS indicated by Repeating keywords) (Ex03-11a) Who am I - THAT I should go to Pharaoh - THAT I should take the Jews out of Egypt  RASHI: Repeated word THAT creates BULLET effect - Pharoh was a difficult king (Bullet one) - Jews were not yet ready for freedom (Bullet two) EXAMPLE (Climax assumed in any Biblical list): (Dt19-11a) If a man HATES, SPIES, CONFRONTS & KILLS. RASHI: Bible identifies 4 stages to murder(indicated by capped words
==============================================================  
VIII-DATABASE: EXAMPLE: God spoke to Moses to say over introduces about 7 dozen biblical commandments; God spoke to Aaron to say over only introduces 2 commandments. RASHI: (Lv10-03b) Aaron was silent when his sons died because they served in the Temple drunk; hence he merited that the commandment prohibiting priests to work in the Temple drunk, was given to him
==============================================================  
IX-NON VERSE: EXAMPLE: (Use of Algebra)(Ex38-26b) Temple donations of silver were 100 Kikar and 1775 Shekel from 630,550 half-shekels RASHI: So one Kikar of silver = 3000 Shekel.
================================================================= 
X: SYMBOLISM: EXAMPLE: (Use of puns) (NuXX-XX) Moses made a copper snake for people to look up to when bitten by snakes (so they should pray and recover) RASHI: (Nu21-09a) The Hebrew root for copper and snake are identical (Cf. The English copperhead) Moses  made the metal snake copper colored to symbolize the snake