When reading Rashi, each comment on the pasukkim is split up by DiBur Hamatchil (quotes from the pasuk to let you know what Rashi is commenting on). Are these original to Rashi, or were they added? On a related note, wouldn't have been more helpful to put Rashi's question in its place?

  • 1
    Just pointing out that "Dibbur HaMatchil" literally means "Words that Start". – Double AA Jan 17 '12 at 20:15
  • 1
    I don't understand what you mean by "wouldn't have been more helpful to put Rashi's question in its place?". – msh210 Jan 17 '12 at 20:53
  • @msh, I think she means that if someone else put the headline there, couldn't they have added what prompted Rashi's comment as well, similar to sifsei chachamim but within the flow of Rashi. – YDK Jan 17 '12 at 21:14
  • Someone definitely played with the D"hM. Sometimes Rashi will explain a series of verses using the words of the pesukim, yet someone put them bolded followed by a colon, definitely not the intent of the author. – YDK Jan 17 '12 at 21:19
  • 1
    @YDK, that depends on the edition you're reading. – msh210 Jan 18 '12 at 0:32

Update: According to comments with better screen contrast than my own, there are marks indicating the Dibbur Hamaschil.

Here are pictures of Rashi Manuscripts. It appears to me, but maybe I'm just not seeing it, that the Dibbur Hamaschil is not in the manuscripts.



|improve this answer|||||
  • Looks to me like the dibbur hamaschil is there. In the first link for sure. I'm having trouble reading the second link, though. – jake Jan 17 '12 at 21:52
  • Excellent research! I can't help but notice that in the second link the peirush goes from Yeshayah to Trei Asar following a different order of Tanach. – Double AA Jan 17 '12 at 21:57
  • @jake, the second one indeed has the dibburei hamaschil too. The first column, for example, begins with the d.h. החרדים אל דברו. – Alex Jan 18 '12 at 0:48
  • 1
    When you identify these as original, just how original do you mean? Are these in Rashi's own hand? – Seth J Jan 18 '12 at 2:29
  • 1
    @SethJ they are manuscripts of Rashi from about 200 years after Rashi died. – avi Jan 18 '12 at 8:31

The Lubavitcher Rebbe learned many concepts in Rashi from the Dibbur Hamaschil. Therefore, it seems to come from Rashi himself.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe in a footnote says explicitly:

*ועפ"ז מובן גם מה **שרש"י מעתיק (לפני פירושו) את התות "וישלה יעקב מלאכים

"And now it's understood what [why] Rashi copied (before his explanation) the words "And Yaakov sent angels"...

|improve this answer|||||
  • 5
    Just to play devil's advocate, that doesn't really mean it has to come from Rashi, it just means who ever wrote it can be learned from. – morah hochman Jan 17 '12 at 20:40
  • +1, Rabbi Yisrael Herzceg, translator of the Artscroll Rashi on Chumash and Tehillim, taught us the same thing. – Adam Mosheh Jul 3 '12 at 16:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .