Rabbi Ishmael Example Method:#4 of 36
###########################################################
# 10 YEAR Ayelet DAILY-RASHI-YOMI CYCLE #
# Aug 8, 2000 #
# Rashis 194-196 Of 7800 (2.5%) #
# #
# Reprinted with permission from Rashi-is-Simple, #
# (c) 1999-Present, Dr. Hendel #
# http://www.RashiYomi.Com/ #
# #
#Permission to reprint with this header but not for profit#
# #
# WARNING: READ with COURIER 10 (Fixed width) FONTS #
###########################################################
This module deals with the principle of CLIMAX. We review
Rashis on verses where the motivating interpretive force of
Rashi is the climactic development of verses.
Briefly speaking the rule of CLIMAX states that at certain
times a sequence of 3 or more Biblical phrases will develop
a theme in a CLIMACTIC FASHION.
EXAMPLE: The best example of Climax is the Rashi on Dt19-11
According to Rashi this verse describes MURDER as occuring
in 4 stages:
------------------------------------------------------------
--The EMOTIONAL stage---"When a person HATES another person"
--The OBSERVATIONAL stage--"& he spys/STALKS on that person"
--The CONFRONTATION stage--"& he CONFRONTS him"
--MURDER-------------------"& he MURDERS him".
------------------------------------------------------------
In other words Rashi uses the CLIMACTIC development of this
verse to show HOW a murder occurs--you don't just get up
and murder somebody. First you hate them; then you spy alot
on them; finally you can pick a fight with them and this
leads to murder.
The principle of CLIMAX is particularly useful for purposes
of OUTREACH. For every climactic development teaches us
HOW to stop something from developing. Thus the best way
to stop murder is to stop the hatred and stalking that
leads to it. Many other useful examples of outreach will
be presented in this module.
This example will complete the unit workers. A summary
will appear Saturday night.
This posting may be found in its entirety at the
Rashi website at
http://www.RashiYomi.Com/lv05-21b.htm
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#
EXAMPLES 11-13: Lv05-21a
EXAMPLES 11-13: Lv05-21b
EXAMPLES 11-13: Lv05-21c
VERSE: Lv05-21b
Rashi infers meaning by using CONTEXT and the principle of CLIMAX
Lv05-21:22 speaks about 5 types of denials
1) Denial of a DEPOSITED OBJECT
2) Denial of a "PLACEMENT IN POSSESSION"??
3) Denial of THEFT
4) Denial of WITHOLDING WAGES (A-Sh-K)
5) Denial of FINDING A LOSS OBJECT
Meaning of (1)(3)(5)
--------------------
Notice how (1)(3)(5) have clear known meanings
Meaning of (4)
--------------
The technical meaning of the root A-Sh-K in (4) may be
inferred from the following LIST of other verses where
A-Sh-K occurs (and means WITHOLDING WAGES)
{LIST}
VERSE TEXT
===== ====
Mal3-5 Those who WITHOLD the wages of laborers, orphans..
5-2-14 Do not WITHOLD the wages of poor laborers
Jer7-6 Do not WITHOLD the alien, orphan and widow
Jer50-33 The Jews are WITHELD--their captives hold them
Job40-33 He(Leviathan) WITHOLDS the river (waters)
Meaning of (2)
--------------
We have left to explain the meaning of (2),
PLACEMENT IN POSSESSION
Rashi (and Rambam Thefts & Losses 7:1) explain
>PLACEMENT IN POSSESSION = Loans or Investments
Clearly the individual words of the phrase
PLACEMENT IN POSSESSION
--placement
--hand or possession
are well known and have clear meaning. Therefore Rashi used the
principle of CLIMAX to creat a NEW MEANING for this phrase which
fit in with the rest of the chapter Here are the 5 types of
denial in this chapter listed in a CLIMACTIC FASHION
{LIST}
1) DEPOSITED OBJECT---something with monetary value
2) LOANS/INVESTMENTS--Value itself, but no object*1
3) THEFT--------------The other person didn't participate*2
4) WITHOLDING WAGES---Nothing was taken(something is OWED*3)
5) LOSS OBJECTS-------The owner doesn't know WHO found it*4
NOTES
-----
*1 When you are given a deposit you are expected to return that
deposit. When you are given a loan you only have to return
the VALUE of the loan--you need not return the actual dollars
deposited with you
*2 In LOANS and DEPOSITS the person willfully transferred
property to you which you then denied. In theft there was
no initial transfer
*3 In the other 3 cases something was taken (a deposit, loan or
theft). By contrast in witholding wages the person worked for
you--you OWE him money but no OBJECT was taken.
*4 In the other 4 cases the OWNER knows who took his property
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# (C) Dr Hendel, 2000 *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#