Timeline for Are any of the pesukim in the Torah not meant to be understood derech p'shat?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 2, 2013 at 3:14 | comment | added | josh waxman | אינו אלא טועה is not meant literally. ;) ;) | |
| Oct 2, 2013 at 21:43 | comment | added | Isaac Moses♦ | @ShmuelBrin, I don't know the exact definition of "peshat," but I'm certain that it's not "interpreting each word or phrase literally, regardless of context." If that were the case, the answer to this question would probably be "a great deal of the Torah; source: Rashi." Relevant questions: judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/6103/is-rashi-really-pshat judaism.stackexchange.com/q/16870/does-pshat-explain-everything Another prominent example: "עין תחת עין" | |
| Oct 2, 2013 at 20:40 | comment | added | ertert3terte | @IsaacMoses So what's Peshat? I think that we have this question somewhere here | |
| Oct 2, 2013 at 18:41 | history | edited | Double AA♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
links
|
| Oct 2, 2013 at 17:37 | comment | added | Isaac Moses♦ | The analysis in the Gemara appears to be a peshat analysis. It resolves an apparent contradiction in the text by assuming a particular interpretation of one of the phrases. Even if that interpretation isn't what you'd first think when reading the text before doing that analysis, and even if you don't find the analysis convincing or consistent with your tradition, the product is still peshat. Similarly, if I say "the Sun rose," and you choose not to interpret that as an increase in the distance between the Sun and the Earth, that doesn't mean that you're interpreting my statement un-Peshatly. | |
| Oct 2, 2013 at 17:26 | comment | added | ertert3terte | @DoubleAA I think that there are opinions in the Gemara who say that he did. | |
| Oct 2, 2013 at 16:35 | comment | added | Double AA♦ | Are there any sources who disagree? | |
| Oct 2, 2013 at 16:23 | history | answered | Adám | CC BY-SA 3.0 |