A careful examination of recent postings shows 4 distinct questions being addressed:
I) What is the underling rule/method driving the Rashi comment(or the Midrash he cites) ?
II) If Rashi expresses his underlying comment in a certain way: a) Do we have the right (or obligation) to interpret it figuratively and b) if we do have the right or obligation how should the Rashi be interpreted?
III) What are the philosophical and moral consequences of our interpretation?
IV) How does a suggested interpretation of Rashi mesh with the actual Rashi text.
Our discussions would be more meaningful if discussants identified which of the above 4 items they are addressing.
For example the assertion that because the Hebrew naar and naarah are spelled identically, consequently, they must refer to pre-puberty when the difference between boys and girls are mostly cultural, addresses issue I) above, the underlying Rashi rule/method. RESPONSE: We examine suggested Rashi rules using the principle of consistency. There are just too many examples (speaking about adultery, rape etc) where naarah is also spelled defectively. Hence the suggested rule is wrong.
Several discussants have suggested the philosophical consequences of the interpretation that a 40 year old married a 3 year old. Such a marriage asserts a) that the woman could look up to the husband as a grandfather role model, and indicates b) purity at the wedding (3 years old).
RESPONSE: I believe this contradicts basic philosophic tenets in Judaism about marriage: The ideal marriage is an eyzer cenegdo relationship where husband and wife take turns giving and getting. Rivkah (e.g. according to Hirsch) fooled Isaac with Jacob dressing up like Esauv not because she looked up to him but because she understood him to be behaving naively and judging by externals. Her job here was to act as a co-partner and teach him about disguises something she learned all too well in her father’s house. As for the assertion of purity, isn’t it contradictory to Jewish law for a couple to enter into marriage if they have differing physical needs? Isn’t it important to tell young couples that however important middoth are, physical compatibility is a prerequisite for any marriage. The Gemarrah in Yevamoth (61) also takes Rivkah as an adult (you simply don’t marry children…there may even be problems with the kiddushin). Interestingly, Gn24-16 explicitly says that Rivkah was good –looking.
Here is another approach. Several years ago (or maybe currently) Chassidic Rabbis who dealt with the excessive divorce suggested that young couples be encouraged to see each other more often before the wedding. Doesn’t this correspond to Rivkah being 14 or 15? She had been exposed (without intimacy) to men and could make a decision that she wanted a religious way of life. She was not married at 12 (certainly not at 3). Perhaps such a Rashi interpretation could have curtailed divorce rates.
In dealing with figurative statements I follow the advice of Rav Hirsch in his great 100 page essay, Groundlines for a Jewish symbolism who taught, do not interpret symbolically unless a) you have to because of specific criteria and b) you have a required method to interpret.
I differ from those who have said that Rashi is **sometimes** Peshat and sometimes Derash. On my website I require that we identify WHEN Rashi is derash and HOW to interpret him. I would suggest that sexual aggadoth are to be interpreted using the technique of exaggeration. Here are 5 examples:
(1) Rivkah was 15, 3 years into puberty when she got married. She knew what men could be like and wanted a religious life.
(2) Sarah was careful to use a lot of makeup (her makeup cabinet). It was part of the way she flirted with her husband. When they got to Egypt she tried going without makeup to which Abraham responded “Now I see it wasn’t the makeup..you just have natural beauty.” The statement >>he hid her in the cabinet<< refers to the perfume cabinet and her covering up her natural beauty with makeup (which if properly used can lead to avoiding some men).
(3) Reuven did not sleep with Bilhah…he interfered with the naturality of her relationship and hence the text says he slept with her (Exaggeration).
(4) Eli’s children did not sleep with every woman bringing a sacrifice; they however interfered with their marital relationship.
(5) A famous story relates how one Rabbi “hid” under his master’s bed to learn how to do things. I would simply interpret: he stayed over at a meal even though the couple was flirting excessively and when asked why he didn’t leave said he wanted to learn (Again exaggeration).
Taken singly these interpretations look queer. Taken together they reflect a style talking about physicality and no longer appear forced.
To address IV): The actual Rashi text does not say Rivkah was 3. It says “he waited until she could reproduce for 3 years.” I interpreted that as 15. Avi Billet cited a Sifray in Devarim showing the basis for Tosafoth asserting that Rivkah was 14. The Gemarrah in Yevamoth (61) clearly identifies Rivkah as of marriageable age.
Summary: I mentioned that I approached the Rashi text using numerical methods. Several other discussants echoed this. Perhaps to explain my position I should cite a concept of Rav Chaim about twilight. The doubt whether twilight is day or night is not **our** doubt but rather an **intrinsic** doubt **rooted in reality.** It is not that **we** don’t know if twilight is day or night but rather it is not knowable.
So too I would suggest that when Rashi uses numerical methods which show that Rivkah was between 3 and 20ish depending when the Akaydah happened, represents an intrinsic doubt. I don’t believe Rashi and Tosafot disagree, one holding Rivkah was 14 and one that she was 15. I believe that they both agree that she was in the 14-15 year old range.
Russell Jay Hendel; PhD ASA
Dept of Mathematics, Towson University
[
www.Rashiyomi.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/01/2013 08:10AM by mlb.
