Oxford Jewish Thought

Rashi wrote commentary on the whole of the Torah, including the Pentateuch, Prophets and Writings, besides on Chronicles that is only attributed to Rashi. The supercommentary of the Rebbe on Rashi was however focused primarily on the commentary on the Pentateuch. The reason for this is as indicated in the reasoning given for the commentary itself: the study of Rashi on Shabbat is based on the clause in Jewish law that the commentary of Rashi may serve in the place of the Aramaic translation of Onkelos in the context of the custom to read each Shabbat the Torah, twice in Hebrew and one with the Targum. Rabbi Joseph Karo writes that a G-d-fearing person should read the Rashi commentary, in addition to the Targum. While the reading of Rashi wa… Read More »

The commentary of Rashi is based on the level of interpretation of p’shat, as Rashi states in his commentary on Genesis 3:8: ‘There are many Aggadic midrashim, and our Sages already arranged them in their proper order in Genesis Rabbah and in other midrashim, but I have come only [to teach] the simple meaning of the Scripture (p’shuto shel mikra) and such Aggadah that clarifies the words of the verses, each word in its proper way.’ In this statement Rashi acknowledges that he also brings midrashic teachings in his commentary. Complicating the intention of Rashi to follow only p’shat, is the fact that a vast amount of the commentary, estimated seventy f… Read More »

The methodology of the Rebbe’s commentary on Rashi appears conventional to other super-commentators whereby a question is asked on a text of Rashi and an answer is proposed in validation and explanation of the comment. A unique feature of the Rebbe’s commentary is, however, the style of the questioning. The Rebbe would not suffice in posing a central question but rather on occasion pose up to twenty questions on a particular, sometimes short text of Rashi,^[1] before proposing a principle, upon which he would be build a new perspective, fundamentally, upon reflection, simple and obvious, that due to its simplicity was overlooked. The reason for having overlooked the answer proposed may have been due to the conventional appro… Read More »

An interesting style of the way the studies of Rashi were taught was that it was not just frontal teaching but interactive. While the Rebbe had other structured series of studies on different works, including Igeret ha-teshuvah (Epistle of Repentance) in the work of the Tanya by Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi,^[1] the work of his father, Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Schneerson, on the Tanya and the Zohar, Ethics of the Fathers, and in the 1980s on Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, the studying of Rashi was unique in that the Rebbe invested effort in making it interactive. This was done in various way and in stages. During 1964-5, it began as frontal teaching without interaction. The Rebbe would choose to… Read More »

With the closing of the chapter of the explaining a Rashi based on the system of selecting the beginning and final verse in each Parsha, what method did the Rebbe use to decide which Rashi to dwell on and incorporate in his commentary? On most occasions, the Rebbe would unilaterally choose a comment of Rashi to explain. There are other factors that also had influence on the particular Rashi that would be discussed. On occasion it was related to a topic that was being discussed at that time and fit well with the theme. This can be found in 1966 (Pinchas, 21 Tammuz 5726), when the Rebbe linked the discussion on the Exodus as a case of coming out of danger, which would require a blessing of thanksgiving, to an internal exodus from spiritual ai… Read More »

Some of the classic Biblical commentaries on the Torah and Rashi developed in one of two ways: either as a solitary written commentary or a series of Shabbat lectures that were later developed into a commentary. The former occurred with Levush Ha-orah commentary on the Torah by Rabbi Mordechai Yaffe (1530-1612), who wrote his commentary on Rashi, beginning after he got married in 1553 and continued over a fifty year year period until its completion in Poznan in 1603.^[1] He would dedicate time to study a section of the Torah portion each week in depth on Thursday or Friday and write down his commentary. The following year he would continue with the next section of the Torah portion and so on. A further commentary that was written in this way… Read More »