Foreshadowing and Pre-Emption

Found 3 Search results

1. Rav Yosef Kara

   Dr. Avigail Rock

   Mahari Kara, an apparent student of Rashi, maintained both a loyalty to and at the same time a strong independence of Rashi.

   Mahari Kara’s exegetical principals include:

   • Loyalty to the peshat, much more so than Rashi, feeling no obligation to cite any derash at all. In this, his commentary may be considered trailblazing. 
   • A great sensitivity to literary technique and style including lashon nofel al lashon, alliteration, paronomasia, rhythm and meter, literary structure, and connective associations.
   • He delineates exegetical principles that may be applied elsewhere in Tanakh including pre-emption and parallelism.  

    

   Mahari Kara makes two basic assumptions about peshat and derash:

   • Even the Sages, who wrote the midrashim, believed that peshat is the essence.  The aim of derash is only for ethical purposes, and not to provide an explanation missing in Tanakh.
   • Tanakh does not require external facts in order to explain it; it cannot be that the verse speaks ambiguously and relies on Midrashic material in order to be understood.

2. Rashbam

   Part 2

   Dr. Avigail Rock

   Foreshadowing

   One of the most important ideas that the Rashbam develops is the principle of foreshadowing. According to this principle, when the Torah notes details that appear to be disconnected, extraneous, or anachronistic, it actually provides them in order to explain an event that comes afterwards.

   It is possible to apply the principle of foreshadowing, not only to verses or fragments, but even to larger segments. For example, in the Rashbam’s introduction to Bereishit, he declares that the story of Creation interests us solely because it helps us understand the Ten Commandments.

   From explanations similar to this, it arises that the essence of the Torah is the mitzvot, while the narratives are secondary; the stories appear in order to explain the mitzvot.

   Peshat and Halakha

   In his explanations of the halakhic portion of the Torah, the Rashbam employs the same method which he applies to the narrative portion of the Torah: the explanation of the verses without any reliance on Midrashic literature. This approach is difficult to apply to mitzvot because the binding halakha is not the simple meaning of the verse, but the interpretation of the verses as the Sages explain it. The Rashbam believes that one should adopt the views of the Sages for everything that relates to practical Halakha; however, the interpretation of the peshat and the halakhic midrashim can live under the same roof. What worth does peshat have when it does not fit with Halakha? One possibility is that the peshat reflects the ideal, while the derash deals with the real.

3. R. Yosef Bekhor Shor

   Dr. Avigail Rock

   R. Yosef of Orléans, (northern France) was a 12^th-century exegete who has become known through the generation as Ri Bekhor Shor. He was a Tosafist, a student of Rabbeinu Tam, and he was influenced mainly by Rashi’s commentary and the commentaries of Mahari Kara and the Rashbam. Like his predecessors Mahari Kara and Rashbam, he was a member of the peshat school.  It appears that Ri Bekhor Shor forges a path that is a middle way between Rashi and the pursuers of the peshat. These are his major exegetical principles:

   • Ri Bekhor Shor aims to explain the verses without non-biblical information; however, when the derash is appropriate for explaining the peshat and for the general context of verses, or when one may explain it as being in keeping with biblical reality, he will not hesitate to bring a midrash.
   • The Torah does not provide superfluous information. All information provided is in fact essential.
   • Verses should be explained within their specific context, a reverse method to the foreshadowing principle of Rashbam.
   • Verses should be explained based on understanding the state of mind of the human actors.
   • Verses should be explained according to the reality of the biblical era.
   • God directs the world in a natural way as much as possible, and the use made of miracles is the absolute minimum.
   • An expansive and consistent approach to the question of the reasons of mitzvot.
   • In the Peshat vs. Halakha discussion, Ri Bekhor Shor is closer to Rashi’s approach with exception in which he explains the verses according to a Peshat that differs from Halakha.
   • A tendency to counteract Christian interpretations of the Torah.