5

I feel like there's more of a stress to learn other commentaries, and midrash rabbah and tanchuma are just nice things extra if you want to. I see amazing droshos in the midrash, and was wondering why it's not seized as a pearl.

7
  • 1
    Rashi's commentary on the Chumash draws extensively from the midrashim.
    – James Read
    Jun 15 at 19:20
  • 1
    Midrash can easily be seriously misunderstood if learned the wrong way.
    – Chatzkel
    Jun 15 at 19:41
  • 2
    From what I know about the history of Rashi's commentary, before Rashi - most people learned straight from midrashim to understand Tanach. However, midrashim, while nice, are often very long and contain many, many ideas on each verse, sometime contradictory or seemingly so.
    – Harel13
    Jun 15 at 19:56
  • Also, as the centuries passed, less and less people could properly understand the language. Came Rashi with a solution: Condensing the midrashim by choosing the most key ideas + occasional French or German translations for some of the tougher words. And from their the ball started rolling and Rashi's commentary became very popular. He wasn't the first commentator, but I think he was the first to do an expansive yet simple version for Anglo-Franco-Germanic Jews and from there it spread across Europe.
    – Harel13
    Jun 15 at 19:57
  • 2
    It depends where you look. Yalkut Meam Loez was for centuries the most widely printed and studied commentary on the Torah and is probably 60% made up of midrash rabbah Jun 15 at 20:08

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .