The 10 RashiYomi Rules
Their presence in Rashis on Parshat Boh-Beshalach-Jethro
Vol 19#18 - Adapted from Rashi-is-Simple 
(c) RashiYomi Incorporated, Dr. Hendel President, Jan. 24th, 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/rule1918.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.
 
Subscribe / Unsubscribe: Email RashiYomi@GMail.Com 
 
The 400 Years in Egypt Daily Rashi Sunday January 27, 2013

Although we have committed ourselves this year to discussing grammar, that is Rashis based on Grammar, from time to time I may bring in other rules. In later years we will focus on them.

Last week we read how the Jews were in Egypt 430 years. This raises some questions on how to account for the 430 years. The original posting on this was done about 7 years ago and may be found at http://www.rashiyomi.com/ex06-16a.htm. However that posting addressed another problem of chronology as well. Several people over the years have asked me about it and some I am reprinting it again. The rest of the posting in this weeks weekly Rashi deal with this week's Parshah, Beshalach, and next weeks Parshah, Jethro.

Year of 430	Verse	Chronological Event	Event	
0	Gn12-04	Abraham 75	God appears to Abraham,  1st Jew who enters Egypt and expelled	
25	Gn21-05	Abraham 100	Isaac Born	
85	Gn25-26	Isaac 60	Jacob Born	
215	Gn47-09	Jacob 130	Jacob meets Pharoh; 9th year of Famine	
206	Gn45-06,Gn41-53:54	0th Year of famine	Jacob met Pharoh after 7 years of plenty and 2 years of famine	
206	Gn41-46	Joseph 30	Joseph meets Pharoh and appointed ViceRoy over Egypt	
176	Gn41-46	Joseph 0	Joseph, last of Jacob's children, Born	
176	Gn30-24	Jacob's 14th year with Laban	Jacob asks leave of Laban when Joseph was born	
162	Gn31-41	Jacob meets Laban	Jacob works 7 years for 2 wives; 7 years for children	
169	Gn29-20:27	Jacob's 7th year with Laban	Jacob works 7 years for 2 wives; 7 years for children	
172	Gn29-34	Jacob's 3 child, Levi born	Reasonable: Jacob had 1 child per year (Sifsay Chachamim)	
309	Ex06-16	Levi 137	Levi dies	
309	Ex01-06:11	Slavery in Egypt starts	Ex01 juxtaposes death of tribes and slavery; Levi's death at 309	
430	Ex12-40	Exodus	Jews delivered from Egypt by God through Moses	
350	Ex07-07	Moses 80 at Exodus	Moses Born	

NOTES: 
It doesn't really matter if Levi was born in 3rd year of 7 years of children being born, in first year or in last year. This does not affect the calculation that much				
				
Between Levi's death in year 309 and Moses birth in year 350 there is a 41 year gap.				
It is not clear how to fill in the details. Was Yocheved really born when Jacob came to Egypt in year 215.There is a midrash to that effect but then Yocheved was 135 years old when she gave birth to Moses.				
Even without assuming this it explicitly states that Kehath, Levi's son came down with Jacob to Egypt in year 215But then Moses, Kehath's grandchild was born 135 years later. This is hard to deal with. When did Kehath marry?When was his child Amram born. When did Amram marry? When did Amram have Moses? 	

Verbs  Daily Rashi Monday January 28, 2013

 What is the difference between the following English sentences.
•	I ate the apples. 
•	I am eating apples
•	I will eat the apples.
•	Eat the apples
•	I ate and ate the apples

The above sentences show a difference in both
•	Form and
•	Meaning. 

The differences in form, actually the form of the verb, is indicated by the underline. The sentences differ in when the apple was eaten, that is, at what time relative to the present moment was the apple eaten.
•	Past: I ate the apple.
•	Present: I am eating the apple. 
•	Future: I will eat the apple.
•	Command: Eat the apples
•	Past-Infinitive: Eat and eat the apples.
 
It is hard to find a good English equivalent of hasbayah hisbeah, the use of the infinitive with the past. I have translated the past as ate  and the infinitive-past as ate and ate. Ex13-19a uses the verb to swear. 

Biblical Text:  Moses took the bones of Joseph with him because he swore and swore the Jews as follows: God will redeem you and take up my bones from here with you.

The approach to such double verbs is an interpretation of intensity. On the one hand 
•	it happened at one moment in the past (Joseph swore the Jews shortly before his death)
•	it repeatedly happened (like an infinitive).

Rashi suggests the following: Joseph 
•	swore the Jews and 
•	made sure that each generation swore the succeeding generation.

So here we have elements of both 
•	the past, swearing someone at one point
•	the infinitive, repeatedly doing something through the generations.

There is no nice analogy to this usage in English.

As we go through the biblical cycle we will have occasion to examine many such uses of the infinitive.

REFERENCES

Babylonian Talmud, Baba Metziah Folio 31b gives about a dozen examples. There is the famous and problematic controversy on whether this  infinitive form has a special meaning (We will explain this controversy after we have examined a number of cases; for the moment we point out that there only seems to be disagreement in two cases, a point made by the Talmudic commentators).

Verbs - Active and Passive Voice 
Daily Rashi Tuesday January 29, 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.

Today we explore how passive and active give rise to 
different meanings
to the same root.

The Hebrew root Nun-Ceth-Mem, simultaneously means
•	to comfort (in the active mode)
•	to regret (in the passive mode!).

How do Biblical commentators deal with roots that have two such different meanings?
•	One approach, called meaning maximalism, asserts that the dictionary should give as many meanings as possible. Rav Saadia Gaon is one of the meaning maximalists
•	A second approach, called meaning minimalism, asserts that the dictionary should give a few meanings as possible, possibly one meaning, and show how this one meaning manifests itself in different ways. Rashi was a meaning minimalist.

Example:  Ex13-17d.
Biblical Text: When Pharoh let the people go, God did not let them go thru Plishtim territory even though it was closer because God said, The people might have regrets when they see a military nation and return to Egypt.

Note the exact wording of Rashi.
•	1) They will think thoughts on leaving
•	2) They will desire to return.

Here is how we analyze Rashi.
•	Clause #1 explains the fundamental unifying meaning of the biblical root, Nun-Cheth-Mem. This root means to dwell in thought which Rashi describes as they will think thoughts on leaving
•	Clause #2 explains how this fundamental meaning of dwelling in thought applies in the passive: To passively dwell on something is basically to think negatively on this matter, that is, to regret it.
•	There is no Clause #3: But to actively dwell in thought on something is basically to think positively on it, for example to console or encourage somebody.

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 

Verbs  Daily Rashi Wednesday January 30, 2013

 What is the difference between the following English sentences.
•	I ate the apple.
•	I am eating the apple.
•	I eat apples
•	I will eat the apple.
•	I had eaten the apple.

The above sentences show a difference in both
•	Form and
•	Meaning. 

The differences in form, actually the form of the verb, is indicated by the underline. The sentences differ in when the apple was eaten, that is, at what time relative to the present moment was the apple eaten.
•	Past: I ate the apple.
•	Present: I am eating the apple.
•	Habitual Present: I eat apples
•	Future: I will eat the apple.
•	Past Perfect: I had eaten the apple.

We refer to the time when a verb or activity was done as the tense of the verb. For example, a past tense means the activity was done formerly, that is, in the past.

But what is the difference between
•	Present: I am eating the apple.
•	Habitual Present: I eat apples?

The difference is as follows:
•	The present refers to a one-time activity being done now;  
•	The habitual present refers to a habit of mine - for example, it might mean that I eat apples instead of oranges for breakfast. Or it might mean that when I snack I eat apples. It refers to an activity that periodically recurs. This activity refers to things done in both the past, present and future. We call it the habitual present because a habit is a prototype of something done in the past, present and future.

Notice how in English each tense has its own distinct form corresponding to that meaning. English is a rich language with 14 tenses. We refer to the form of a verb as its conjugation. 

So a grammarian would say that in English each tense has its own distinct conjugation by which the grammarian would mean that for each intention of meaning - past, present, future, etc. - there is one specific form that you should use.

By contrast, Hebrew only has 2 conjugational forms: the past and future conjugation. When speaking biblical Hebrew one has to use these conjugations not for one meaning but for many possible meanings.

Rashi in several places teaches us that the future conjugation can be used 
•	To indicate a meaning of future activity, or
•	To indicate a meaning of a present habitual activity.
Similarly, Rashi in several places teaches us that the past conjugation can be used 
•	To indicate a meaning of past activity, or
•	To indicate a meaning of a present habitual activity.

Rashi further explains: A habitual present refers to possible activities in both the past and future and consequently either the past or future conjugation can be used to indicate it.

This can be confusing, especially to an English reader, since the reader must figure out himself what the author intended. There is no one-to-one correspondence between meaning and form. But that is the way the Hebrew language is.

It is interesting that this multi-use of conjugations is often not taught in Hebrew Grades chools and university Hebrew courses. Thus even those proficient in Hebrew grammar may not be aware of this principle.

In order to understand this important principle we list several examples from the current and other Parshahs. In these examples we have underlined the translation of the literal future conjugation which is parenthetically inserted; the actual translation follows Rashi using a habitual present. In the first example we explain the Rashi in detail while in the other examples we suffice with the translation.

Example 1: (Gn18-19)
For I [God] will let him [Abraham] know in order that he commands [literally, he will command ] his children after him, [so that] they will guard the way of God to do justice and charity.

The Hebrew Ye-Tza-Veh, has the form of the future conjugation. Hence the translations improperly translate this as he will command  with a future meaning.

Not so! The intent of the sentence is not a one-time command but rather an ongoing parent-child relationship. It really refers to a habit of teaching rather than a one-time future activity. Here the future conjugation means and refers to the habitual present. To capture this nuance we would translate the verse as follows: For I [God] will let him [Abraham] know in order that he commands his children after him, [so that] they will guard the way of God to do justice and charity.

Example 2: (Gn29-02)
And he [Jacob] looked, and saw a well in the field, and, lo, there were three flocks of sheep lying by it; for from that well they watered [literally: they will water ] the flocks; and a great stone was upon the well’s mouth.

Example 3,4: (Gn29-03)
And all the flocks gather there [literally gathered there]; [so that] they [can] roll [literally: so that they rolled] the stone from the well’s mouth, and water [literally: watered] the sheep, and put the stone again upon the well’s mouth in his place.

Examples 5,6 (Ex19-15:16)
When they [the Jewish people] will have an issue [a legal matter that needs resolution], he [the litigant] came to me 

I have translated the above sentence according to the Hebrew conjugations used. (the underlined future and past words) Here is the same sentence with identical meaning translated not according to biblical usage but rather according to proper English usage.

When they [the Jewish people]  have an issue [a legal matter that needs resolution], he [the litigant] comes to me 

The technical description here the conditional habitual present. The activity in the verse
•	Is not something that occurred at one point in the past or future
•	Is not something that occurs frequently but rather
•	Is something - coming to Moses - that happens when there is a legal issue.

Although the Rashi is technical, even experienced users of Hebrew may not notice the fluctuating future and past conjugations. This is simply a matter of style. By translating into proper English we capture the meaning of the verse and Rashi's contribution.

Verb Connectives Daily Rashi Thursday January 31, 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 4: Ex19-27
And his father-in-law [Jethro] took leave of Moses, and went, for personal  reasons, to his home.

Here is the brilliant contribution of Rashi
•	The Hebrew Vayaylech means to go (went in the past tense)
•	When the adverbial phrase lo, for himself, is attached to any verb, Rashi interprets it to mean for personal reasons.

In this particular case since we have a historical record of 
•	a society of Kaynites (Judges 4:17,21)
•	that helped the Jews 
Rashi reasonably assumes that Jethro founded this society which later came 
•	to the aid of the Jews. 

Note how the Rashi proceeds in two stages:
•	Rashi always interprets the preposition  lo meaning for himself, to mean that the activity of the verb was done for personal reasons
•	Given this interpretation Rashi then finds the most reasonable interpretation of done for personal reasons.

As we go through the yearly cycle we will find about a dozen such Rashis!
However the interested reader can begin looking them up now.

Homework

Read the Rashis at Nu13-02, Ex25-02, and Nu10-01. Test the hypothesis that all these Rashi are based on the interpretation of the connective pronoun, lo, for himself, as meaning for personal reasons. Such a homework exercise sharpens the eye of the student of Rashi.

There are English parallels to the above Hebrew phenomenon. 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 

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