Language:
Hebrew
Year of publication:
2021
Titel der Quelle:
אורשת; כתב עת ליהדות, לחברה ולחינוך
Angaben zur Quelle:
י (תשפא) 233-268
Keywords:
Rashi,
;
Bible. Commentaries
;
Bible. Commentaries
;
History and criticism
Abstract:
The research presents new insights in the first Rashi on the Torah thatsheds light on Rashi's entire commentary to the Torah. It shows thatthis commentary contains three parts that interact with each other. Itcomes to define the Torah as a book of law in contrast to the prophetsand scriptures. Dissection of the various parts of the commentaryreveals additional conceptual elements. One of them involves aninnovative understanding of the word "Bereshit". It continues toexplain the historical background that was main reason Rashi wrotehis commentary to the Torah.The Torah commentary intended to helpJewish Society culturally and spiritually. However, there was also aspecial historical reason that Rashi opened his commentary with thisunique introduction to the way he saw the Torah and its contents.Through the prism of the first paragraph of Rashi’s commentary onthe Torah a new insight into the methodology of Rashi’s commentaryon the Torah is revealed.In any case, the existence of terms and expressions which inthemselves imply direct exegetic awareness; expressions such as "TheTorah 'spoke' as if in the present" or "The Torah 'spoke' as if in thelanguage of human beings", in themselves prove awareness to anexegetic process, which in itself is the basis to the distinctionsbetween methodologies.At its center, this article presents disagreements in rabbinic literature,which for the purpose of our discussion we have named "methodicaldisagreements". In them disagreements in various commentarymethods are presented, this in itself bears witness towards awarenessof distinctions between the commentary methods. Follow-ups of suchtypes are disagreements can be found not only in Tannaitic Literature (First to early Third Century Rabbis), but also in later works such asBereshit Rabba (mid Fifth Century). In any case, as the years advance,the less those disputes appear.To strengthen our conclusion we presented further examples of thedistinction between Biblical exegetic methods, both from SecondTemple period literature, and that of early church theologians. Anddespite the fact that there is no broad linkage between those literaryanthologies and Rabbinic literature, these examples can strengthen thefeasibility of this distinction also amongst the Rabbinic Sages duringthe Mishnaic and Talmudic era.
Note:
With an English abstract.
URL:
אתר את הפרסום בקטלוג המאוחד של ספריות ישראל
Permalink
