Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In describing the layout of B'nei Yisra'el's camp in the wilderness, the Torah records four groups (called d'galim) comprising 3 tribes each, and lists them in order, dictating a diagram of how they traveled. After finishing with the lead tribe in each group the Torah introduces the next tribe using the formula

‫וְהַחוֹנִם עָלָיו מַטֵּה X‬

And camping adjacent to [tribe Y] was tribe X

The preposition that the Torah uses for "adjacent" is "עָלָיו", which could be misinterpreted as its more standard meaning, "upon". Thus, Unkelus translates the phrase unambiguously as

‫ודי שרן סמיכין עלוהי שבטא דX‬

And those who camped adjacent to it were tribe X

This is the translation three out of four times this formula appears (in Num. 2:5,12, and 27). The fourth time, when a slightly different phrasing is used (in 2:20), leaving out the verb, Unkelus follows suit, literally translating

‫ודסמיכין עלוהי שבטא דX‬

And those adjacent to it were tribe X

Only this time does Rash"i comment, seemingly to explain the meaning of "עליו", by quoting Unkelus. His comment reads in full:

ועליו - כתרגומו ודסמיכין עלוהי‏

"And upon it" - Like its translation [by Unkelus]: "and those adjacent to it"

Rash"i is assuming we were able to figure out the meaning of this word the other three times either on our own or with the help of Unkelus, but this time not. Why is this? What is he uniquely adding to our understanding of this pasuk?

share|improve this question
    
I'm puzzled by your "as if". Wasn't it so dictating? –  msh210 Aug 28 '11 at 19:42
1  
If I ran across a situation like this, I would look towards the midrashim and see if there is a greater lesson being hinted at here. –  avi Aug 28 '11 at 21:14
    
@msh210 - I just meant in the כביכול sense, but I see what you mean and I've removed it. Also thanks for the edits. I am not sure what you did, but I clearly have not yet mastered ‏. –  WAF Aug 28 '11 at 21:16
    
No problem. For what you did here, RLM is insufficient. If you like, one day when we both have time I'll explain it to you in chat, or something. Or try Googling "unicode rle lre" (no quote marks). –  msh210 Aug 28 '11 at 21:43
add comment

1 Answer

Sifsei Chachamim (Bamidbar 2:20):

לעיל לא צריך רש"י לפרש מידי, שהרי גבי "ועליו" כתיב "והחונים" אם כן ודאי פירושו כתרגומו, אבל כאן אין כתיב כלום רק ועליו מטה מנשה אם כן אין אני יודע פירושו, לכן פירש רש"י כתרגומו

Apparently, Rashi felt that the wording "והחונים עליו" is clear enough as meaning "adjacent to", but just "עליו" is ambiguous and therefore refers to the Targum for clarification.

share|improve this answer
1  
What is so ambiguous? There are many places in the Torah where the word means "next to" based on the context, yet Rashi is quiet. It seems that there might be an alternate meaning here (certainly not "upon") that Rashi is addressing. –  YDK Aug 28 '11 at 21:31
1  
Grammatically, the use of "עליו" here in favor of another preposition is dealt with by Ibn Ezra. I can see Rashi's problem, though. It is not so ambiguous when the verb is used with it as in the previous three times, but to say just "ועליו" without the verb is a bit confusing. Maybe there is a reason the Torah omitted the verb in this pasuk, but Rashi is only interested in the p'shat in this case. –  jake Aug 28 '11 at 21:40
    
I'm betting 100 reputation points that a midrash exists which this Rashi is addressing. –  avi Aug 30 '11 at 8:38
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.