“investiture controversy” (debate between kings and
popes over the authority to appoint bishops) in his com-
mentaries, but in fact there are no such references.
He was completely opposed to “secular” learning.
In his commentary to Lev.18.4 he wrote: “Do not de-
part [from study of the Torah], and do not say ‘I have
learned the wisdom of Israel, now I shall go and learn
the wisdom of the nations.’”
There are some interesting observations concerning
the dispersion of the Jews; e.g., on Lev. 36.31, he refers
to the “caravans of Jews who used to sanctify themselves
and go” to the site of the destroyed Temple (since the
Christians who at the time occupied Jerusalem did not
allow the Jews to go there), or v. 33 (“I will scatter you
among the nations”): “this is a harsh measure, since
when people of a town are exiled to another place they
see each other and are consoled, but the Israelites were
scattered as with a winnowing fork, as a man who
scatters barley with a sieve and not one [grain] adheres
to another” (cf. also on v. 38: “when you are scattered
among the nations you will be lost from one another”).
On v. 35 he gives an interesting lengthy chronological
analogy of the “seventy years” of the Babylonian exile
corresponding to the “seventy years” of the sabbatical
and jubilee years which were not observed in Israel (see
the important notes in the English translation).
“Rashi” also was the source for many proverbial
statements which became commonplace in later gen-
erations. One of the most important of these was “an
Israelite even though he transgresses remains an Israel-
ite,” which was used by rabbinical authorities to allow
repentant Jews who had been forcibly converted during
the attacks of 1096 to return to the Jewish fold. Others
are: “with Laban I dwelt and [but] the 613 command-
ments I kept” (where there is a play on words: gartiy,
“I dwelt,” and tiryag, 613), applied to one who remains
faithful among bad companions; “prepared for prayer or
for war,” ready for any circumstance; “mercy of truth”
(h.esed shel emet), attending to the preparation of a dead
person for burial. He also related various stories in his
talmudic commentaries, derived or adapted from talmu-
dic and geonic sources (see on this the important article
of Lewis Landau, “The stories of “Rashi” printed in
the Babylonian Talmud” (Heb.) in Eshel Be’er Sheva‘3
“Rashi” and his grandson “Rabbe ̄nu Ta m” disagreed
over the arrangement of the sections of biblical passages
in tefi llin. To this day some very strict Jews put on two
pairs of tefi llin.
Language
Since the nineteenth century, scholars have been in-
terested in the French glosses (explanations of words
or concepts in French, written of course in Hebrew
characters) in “Rashi”’s commentaries. There are at
least ten thousand such words in his commentaries.
Elaborate theories of a “Judeo-French” dialect were even
developed on the basis of these see also Shereshevsky,
p. 14, notes 20–22). Important French glosses appear in
other works, most notably the Siddur, where the editor
has provided a detailed explanation and transcription
into Romance. Some of these are of importance not
only linguistically, but for customs of the time (note, for
example, the use of salse, or sauce, a mixture of wine
and salt in which cooked meat was dipped; Siddur, p.
58, No. 118).
A topic that needs further scholarly investigation is
the so-called Rashi script. The cumbersome nature of
square Hebrew letters, with strokes of varying widths,
makes writing extremely burdensome. At an early period
a method of nearly “cursive” script was employed, fi rst
among Jews in Muslim lands and then in Spain generally
(so-called Sefardic script), and in France and Germany
the style which has come to be known as “Rashi script,”
for no apparent reason other than it was modifi ed and
used in the fi rst printed edition of his commentary on
the Torah.
See also Asher b. Yeh.iel; Ibn Adret, Solomon;
Ibn Ezra, Moses; MaimonidesFurther ReadingWorks by “Rashi”
Pentateuch with Targum Onkelos, Haphtaroth and Rashi’s Com-
mentary, tr. M. Rosenbaum and A. M. Silberman (New York,
s.a.), 2 vols.; rpt. New York [1965?], 5 vols.
Solomon b. Isaac. Pa rd e ̄s ha-gadol (Jerusalem, s.a.; photo rpt.
of 1870 ed.).
——. Parshan-data, ed. Isaac Maarsen (Amsterdam, Jerusalem,
1930–35; photo rpt. Jerusalem, 1972), critical ed. of commen-
taries: vol. 1: “minor” prophets, vol. 2: Isaiah, vol. 3: Psalms;
with English introductions.
——. Peirushey Rashi ‘al ha-Torah, ed. Charles Chavel (Jeru-
salem, 1982), based on Berliner’s editions, with same manu-
scripts, and “corrections.”
——. Rashi ‘al ha-Torah, critical ed. Abraham Berliner (Berlin,
1866); second, revised edition (Frankfurt, 1905), based on
many more manuscripts.
——. Rashi’s Commentary on Ezekiel 40–48, edited on the basis
of eleven manuscripts by Abraham J. Levy (Philadelphia,
1931).
——. Se ̄ fer ha-orah (Lemberg, 1905; photo rpt., 1966), ed. S.
Buber.
——. Siddur Rashi (Berlin, 1911), ed. S. Buber.
——. Teshuvot Rashi ed. I. Elfenbein (New York, 1943; photo
rpt. Benei Berak, 1980).
——. [Teshuvot Rashi. German] Rechtsentscheide Raschis aus
Troyes: 1040–1105) Quellen über die sozialen und wirtschaftli-
chen Beziehungen zwischen Juden und Christen, tr. Hans-
Georg von Mutius (Frankfurt; New York, 1986–87), 2 vols.
(responsa of Rashi also in Teshuvot h.okhmey S.arfat ve-Lotir, ed.
Joel Mueller [Vienna, 1881], Nos. 11–13, 15,16,18 (?), 21–32,
33(?), 34(?), 40–42, 73–84).“RASHI” (SOLOMON B. ISAAC)