1

Rashi to Shemos 18:13 starts by saying:

ויהי ממחרת: מוצאי יום הכיפורים היה

It came about on the next day: This was the day after Yom Kippur.

And then goes on to describe the first Yom Kippur right after the giving of the Torah which would have been the first available day to judge the people.

But then Rashi goes on to say:

ואין פרשה זו כתובה כסדר, שלא נאמר ויהי ממחרת עד שנה שניה

Hence, this section is not written in [chronological] order, for "It came about on the next day," was not said until the second year.

In fact, the Rashi in its entirety would make no sense other than to say that this was the first Yom Kippur, because by the second Yisro already left (Bamidbar Chapters 9 and 10).

So what is he saying it wasn't said until the second year?

0

I think "the second year" is counting the year as starting from Tishrei. Thus, the Yom Kippur of "the second year" is the first Yom Kippur after leaving Egypt.

Rashi thus means to say that these events occurred about four months before the Giving of the Torah, which is written later.

  • But Bamidbar 9 uses the second year, the second month. Why would Rashi deviate from that numerology here? – Yishai Feb 2 '15 at 23:52
0

The Sefer Minchas Mechareshes says that Rashi means to say that the Parsha was said by Hashem for Moshe to write down not before the second year, even according to the opinion that the Yisro came before Mattan Torah, because it concludes (18:27) with an event that only happened after the second month of the second year.

Note that Rashi holds (Shemos 24:7) that the Torah was first given up to the time of Mattan Torah and the rest added later.

You must log in to answer this question.

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