120 R o b e rt A. H a r r i s
- [in Hebrew], esp. the fi rst two chapters; David Weiss Halivni, Peshat and De-
rash: Plain and Applied Meaning in Rabbinic Exegesis (New York: Oxford Univer-
sity Press, 1991). On the latter, see Abraham Joshua Heschel, Th eology of Ancient
Judaism (London: Soncino, 1965) [in Hebrew], now translated as Heavenly Torah as
Refracted through the Generations, trans. and ed. Gordon Tucker (New York: Con-
tinuum, 2005).
- For a variety of approaches and translations by scholars writing in English,
see Raphael Loewe, “Th e ‘Plain’ Meaning of Scripture in Early Jewish Exegesis,” in
Papers of the Institute of Jewish Studies London, vol. 1, ed. J. G. Weiss (Jerusalem:
Magnes, 1964); Sara Japhet, “Th e Tension between Rabbinic Legal Midrash and
the ‘Plain Meaning’ (Peshat) of the Biblical Text — an Unresolved Problem? In the
Wake of Rashbam’s Commentary on the Pentateuch,” in Sefer Moshe: Th e Moshe
Weinfeld Jubilee Volume, ed. Chaim Cohen et al., 403 – 25 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisen-
brauns, 2004). - Th is is my translation of Kamin, Rashi ’s Exegetical Categorization, 14. Ka-
min’s contribution has been brilliantly analyzed in a recent Hebrew article by Mor-
dechai Z. Cohen, “Refl ections on the Conception of Peshuto Shel Miqra at the Be-
ginning of the Twenty-First Century,” in “To Settle the Plain Meaning of the Verse”:
Studies in Biblical Exegesis, ed. Sara Japhet and Eran Viezel, 5 – 58 (Jerusalem: Bialik
Institute; Mandel Institute of Jewish Studies of Hebrew University, 2011). - Th e translation of Rashi’s comment includes my own conjectural emenda-
tion of one letter in the standard editions. - Like the comment by Rashi discussed previously, I have treated this intro-
duction at greater length in Harris, “Rashi’s Introductions.” - Uriel Simon, “Th e Religious Signifi cance of the Peshat,” Traditi on 23:2
(1988): 41 – 63. - For a brief presentation of rabbinic sources, see Hayyim Nahman Bialik and
Yehoshua Hana Rawnitzki, Th e Book of Legends = Sefer Ha-Aggadah: Legends from
the Talmud and Midrash, trans. and ed. William G. Braude (New York: Schocken
Books, 1992), 414. - In the traditional Jewish prayer book, this is generally printed as “Avot,
Chapter 6.” However, it is not actually part of that Mishnaic tractate but, as con-
temporary rabbinic scholarship has demonstrated, replicates material found in
several post-talmudic, midrashic collections. - I.e., the one who “studies Torah for its own sake” is called all of these things.
- In roughly contemporary Christian circles, for example, a fi gure such as
Hugh of St. Victor composed two treatises on the role of literal exegesis within the
structure of Christian religious life. One of these was his De scripturis et scriptoribus
sacris, on the study of sacred Scripture, and the other was the Didascalicon, “on the
study of reading.” For a translation of these two important works, see now Frank-
lin T. Harkins and Frans van Liere, Interpretations of Scripture: Th eory, Victorine
Texts in Translation 3 (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2012). For Victorine biblical