Thought for the Day: Rashi's Approach to the Simple/Straightforward Meaning of Scripture is דָּ֜בָ֗ר דָּבֻ֥ר עַל־אָפְנָֽיו

Catchy title, no? Now you have more insight into why I was a spectacular failure working for a marketing company. (I mean, besides the fact that I consider marketing just the study of how to lie in the most efficient way to extract the most money from consumers. And, of course, I made no secret of my disdain while working for them.) On the other hand, I am quite good at mathematics. (No, not arithmetic.. I have trouble balancing my checkbook.)

How good am I at mathematics? Consider what is meant by a "continuous function." Basically it means a function (think line on a graph) that you can draw without lifting your pencil. You get it; no breaks or jumps. Of course, you could have a function that has some jumps/breaks; that would be called "piecewise continuous." So far, so good. I know (and can construct) a function that is continuous at only one point. Right... any point you choose except that one, to move from one point to the next would require lifting your pencil. But at that one point on the whole number line -- that single, unique point -- the function is continuous. But if you move off that point, you need to lift your pencil. Now, you (after thinking about that for a moment or two) say, "Wait... wait.... if you have to lift your pencil once you leave that point, then what does it mean that you can draw it at one single point only without lifting your pencil?!

Right, those statements don't seem to go together. But they do. I am happy to explain it to you. We'll need to spend probably a couple of hours discussing some background material, then learning some special notations for expressing these new concepts, then understanding about limits and infinity, then... what? Not interested? At least not now? Ok... I'll be here in case you change your mind. My point here is really that even though very few people are really interested in understanding how that works, resolving those seemingly contradictory ideas leads one to a much deeper understanding of functions in general.

Sorry... that takes longer to write than it took to say in my head. That introduction was to give you an insight into how I view Rashi's commentary on Chumash. Rashi apparently knows every Chazal -- gemara and medrash and more that I don't even know about -- and knows in a fundamental way how they all go together. I don't believe Rashi sees contradictions in the myriad of explanations that Chazal have given us on Chumah. Rashi simply has an almost unfathomably profound understanding of Chumash. Rashi took all that and gave us Rashi on Chumash.

I used to say that Rashi is all Chazal; that he just finds that Chazal that he felt most readily allowed one to read the text of the Chumash and follow the story. I have recently modified that. Rashi, in fact, almost never quotes Chazal, but everything that Rashi says on Chumash is the result of knowing all that Chazal. Every single Chazal goes into the way Rashi expresses פשט -- the simple/straightforward meaning of the text.

There are, it seems to me, three things that motivate Rashi to comment, and the last one is -- in my mind -- what really sets Rashi apart from every other commentary. The first two are vocabulary and grammar. That is, sometimes the word is just a strange/slightly unusual choice, so Rashi comments. Second, the grammar. We all know those grammar Rashi's -- you know, the ones you skip. So a few years ago I decided to really appreciate each grammar Rashi -- the ArtScroll Rashi has been a truly indispensable help in that endeavor. For those two you don't need the depth Rashi has in Chazal.

The third motivator is: but why is the Chumash presenting this information? What does the juxtaposition of the verses tells us? For example, the Torah tells us (B'reishis 39:6) that Yosef was very good looking. The next verse tells us that Potifar's wife was interested in Yosef. The Ramban (and others) comment that verse 39:6 tells us why Potifar's wife was so interested in Yosef; because he was so pretty.

Rashi tells us about his methodology that he strives for דָּ֜בָ֗ר דָּבֻ֥ר עַל־אָפְנָֽיו/a word spoken with a proper basis. That phrase is from Mishlei (25:11) and the entire verse is (see Rashi there 😁):

תַּפּוּחֵ֣י זָ֖הָב בְּמַשְׂכִּיּ֥וֹת כָּ֑סֶף דָּ֜בָ֗ר דָּבֻ֥ר עַל־אָפְנָֽיו/Like knobs depicted on silverplated vessels, is a word spoken with proper basis.

Rashi doesn't just use even his own understanding of פשט! Rashi uses Chazal's own definition of פשט. Not only does the explanation have to fit. It has to be beautifully presented, and the presentation itself must be tailor fit to the explanation. There is nothing at all simple about Rashi's פשט; each and every word and phrase in Rashi's commentary is weighed against and expresses Rashi's incredibly complete -- both in depth and breadth --  picture of the myriad dimensions with which Chazal viewed each word and verse in Chumash.

So how does Rashi explain that verse about Yosef's good looks? First, it has nothing to do with Potifar's wife... she is (at best) supporting cast. If she is turning her attention to Yosef it is to tell us something about Yosef. Rashi brings a midrash that Yosef was so good looking because he was spending too much effort on his appearance and not enough empathy with his father's plight.

I feel compelled to add at this point something I heard repeatedly from R' Cziment, shlita. We cannot and must not for a single instant believe that we actually have any comprehension of what was going through the minds of our exalted ancestors. Chazal use the events presented in the Torah to reveal deep truths of human character and how we interact with HaShem.

The lesson for us is clear. Also it is clear here and throughout Rashi's commentary that the focus of the Torah is in Klal Yisrael. One parting point: The value of Rashi's approach in his epic work has been accepted by Klal Yisrael as the commentary, as evidenced that Shulchan Aruch adds that regarding the mitzvah of learning the parasha twice each week in the original and then once in translation, that requirement to learn a translation can be fulfilled by learning Rashi.