Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

16

A common commentary to the Yerushalmi that serves a similar function to Rashi is the Penei Moshe written by Rabbi Moshe Margolis. A volume from the Talmud Yerushalmi with his commentary can be seen here. Other commentaries that follow a similar pattern are Korban Ha'edah by Rabbi David Frankel and Chiddushei Ridvaz by Rabbi Yaakov David Willowsky. These are ...


14

As part of the extensive research behind my RASHI'S DAUGHTERS, no subject intrigued me more than the elusive [and ubiquitous] legend that they wore tefillin. Indeed, when I first started studying Talmud and was introduced to Rashi, I was told that legend held that they were learned and wore tefillin. I actually tracked the earliest mention of this back to ...


12

Rashi was being intellectually honest. He knew that there was something to be learned from the redundancy, but he wasn't sure what it was. Being that Rashi got much of his material from midrashic sources, chances are he just wasn't able to find a midrash addressing this fact. As to what the reason is behind the Torah mentioning that Rivka was the mother of ...


12

In his commentary to I Kings 6:7: ומקבות" - דלוט"א בלשון רוסיא" Although it seems quite likely that this is a later interpolation; it doesn't appear in early prints of Rashi. In several places, though, Rashi refers to לשון כנען, which was a popular term at the time for the Slavic languages (based on the equation of "Slav" with "slave" and the ...


11

I've heard from Rabbi Shalom Carmy that the reference to Beitzah is actually a printer's error and Rashi got this from this Mechilta D'Rabbi Yishmael, where it remains undisputed.


11

Ramban on this verse says that the difference is that the gold from the kumazes was mixed with the rest of the gold, whereas the kiyor was made only from these mirrors, without any admixture of anything else. Moshav Zekeinim (a collection of commentaries from the schools of Tosafos) takes a slightly different tack: the kumazes were melted down and so were ...


11

According to this article by Rabbi Dr. Ari Z. Zivotofsky (published in the Orthodox Union's Jewish Action Journal, Summer 2011), such a source does not exist. Apparently, this idea appeared in the late 20th century, and never before then.


10

A solution is to use the Chabad online Rashi commentary to fuel Google searches. First, type site:http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/ and then add your search terms after typing a space. Example: site:http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/ אחרון אחרון חביב to find a Rashi from this week's parsha.


9

On Bava Basra 29a. He also died on Makkos 19b. See six lines down in the narrow lines. Not sure where he died first.


9

You are not allowed to. This is because the two opinions mutually invalidate one another and therefore you would be taking Kosher Tefillin and making it not Kosher according to Rabbeinu Tam. This is considered to be Mezalzel in the shita of Rabbeinu Tam. See the Ridvaz Chelek-6 Siman 2286.


9

It is true that there are different kinds of peshat. For example, we have Rashbam's comment (to Gen. 37:2) that Rashi himself, who aimed at peshat (נתן לב לפרש פשוטו של מקרא) agreed that new peshat-based interpretations are needed (והודה לי שאילו היה לו פנאי היה צריך לעשות פירושים אחרים לפי הפשטות המתחדשים בכל יום). That said, it is worth highlighting the ...


9

R. Eitam Henkin (R. Y.H. Henkin's son) wrote an essay on the curious Rashi. He claims there that the text attributed to Rashi was a later interpolation by an errant student, since it is not referred to by any of the subsequent commentaries for centuries. His argument is not the usual "must have been an errant student" type, but rather is quite convincingly ...


9

To quote S. from On The Main Line: Rashi was known by Christians as Rabbi Solomon Jarchi (Yarchi) because of a mistake, the mistake being that it was thought that 1) he was from Lunel and 2) that the yud stood for ירחי, which was Hebrew for "from Lunel" (Lunel as in luna as in moon). This mistake was so entrenched that the Chida (page 6 in linked ...


8

The original basis for saying that Rashi is always saying peshat is his statement on Bereishit 3:8: ואני לא באתי אלא לפשוטו של מקרא ולאגדה המיישבת דברי המקרא דבר דבור על אופניו But note the end of the statement, ולאגדה המיישבת דברי המקרא דבר דבור על אופניו. Thus, some or much of what Rashi says is admittedly aggada, but which works well with the peshat ...


8

There are many supercommentaries on Rashi's commentary to Chumash, which do pay very close attention to each word he wrote, but these are written by Acharonim for the most part. Rashi's commentary was popular already throughout the times of the Rishonim. Here are several famous quotes from Rishonim about Rashi that I know of: Ramban: (Inro. to commentary ...


8

It is mentioned in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashi_script that it was not Rashi's script (according to he.wikipedia.org, the script is actually sefardic in origin). The printers needed a new script to differentiate commentaries from the main text. (Tosfos also uses "Rashi letters" as well as many other commentaries)


8

Rashi is actually quoting here from Bereshis Rabbah 61. The question is, do we trust the midrash with the text of our sifrei torah, and "fix" the problem accordingly, or do we trust the vast majority of our texts and sifrei torah that have the word with two yud's? Beis Yosef (YD 275), who claims that this problem happens quite often, seems to say (correct ...


8

The Gur Aryeh (Bereshit 25:27) writes that when making a halachic inquiry, you don't go to a lesser Rabbi in place of the greater Rabbi. Since Shem was greater, she went only to him. See the Toras Menachem in the Gutnik Chumash, where the Lubavitcher Rebbe points out that Rashi previously wrote that Shem was MalkiTzedek, high priest of G-d (Bereshit ...


7

In one of his talks, the Lubavitcher Rebbe zt"l explains: The Splitting of the Sea was the first intimation that the physical and the spiritual could combine (which ultimately became a reality a few weeks later, at the Giving of the Torah), since "the sea" represents the spiritual worlds that are hidden from our ken (like the depths of the ocean), while ...


7

According to the Wikipedia entry on Rashi, The first dated Hebrew printed book was Rashi's commentary on the Chumash, printed by Abraham ben Garton in Reggio di Calabria, Italy, 18 February 1475. (This version did not include the text of the Chumash itself.) Some good images of that sefer can be found here. And yes, they are in "Rashi script"!


7

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 ...


7

Seder HaDoros has a lot of the popular information that we know about Rashi, see the sources that he brings.


7

The Maskil LeDavid on the verse brings a fascinating explanation. He says Rashi is explaining what Yitzchok was telling Yaakov. Yitzchok told Yaakov, I'm sending you to Lavan, but be careful, since I don't know what kind of man he is (i.e. Tzaddik or Rasha). Normally we can tell the nature of an uncle by looking at the majority of his nephews, but I have ...


7

The midrash that I assume Rashi is quoting actually does say that she went to "מדרשו של שם ועבר". However, lower on that same page, it does identify Shem as the one who is the official navi (though not clear if it's talking about Rivka or Hagar). Interestingly, Abarbanel quotes the midrash as saying that she went to the beis midrash of Shem and Eiver, but it ...


7

Among the many explanations of what it means when we say that the Avos kept the Torah (as in the linked question) is that they did so on a spiritual level. R. Shneur Zalman of Liadi thus states in one of his Chassidic discourses (Va'eira 5572): קיים אאע״ה כל התורה כולה עד שלא ניתנה וכן ביעקב עם לבן גרתי ותרי״ג מצות שמרתי והיינו רק ברוחנית שהרי לא יתכן ...


7

Rambam writes in perush hamishnayot on Hullin 7:6 that the reason we keep certain mitzvot today such as ever min hachai isn't cuz it was commanded to Biney Noach, but rather because it was given over at Sinai. The reason why we keep pre-matan-torah mitzvot such as Milah isn't because it was commanded by god to Avraham avinu, but rather because it was ...


7

Double AA covered the main commentaries on Yerushalmi. Here are a few very useful contemporary ones: Lev Yerushalayim (on all of Yerushalmi, I think) Commentary of Rav Chaim Kanievsky (example here) The Artscroll Yerushalmi (in progress)


7

If I'm not mistaken, Dayan Gukovitzky's Targum HaLaaz has a transliteration guide. It seems that Rashi did have a specific set of rules for doing this.


7

Asked and answered here. it seems quite likely that this is a later interpolation; it doesn't appear in early prints of Rashi. In several places, though, Rashi refers to לשון כנען, which was a popular term at the time for the Slavic languages (based on the equation of "Slav" with "slave" and the association of the latter with Canaan). These ...


6

There's an undated edition of Rashi (also without the Chumash text) that is generally assumed to be from about 1470 - a few years earlier than Garton's edition referenced in Dave's response. A facsimile is at Hebrewbooks - and it's in square (not "Rashi") type.



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible