Changes

The Torah is understood and interpreted according to the level being discussed. The Torah can be understood on four levels, while other writings may be confined to only one level. For example, Bereshit (the book of Genesis) can be understood on all four levels, while the Midrash and sefer Matitiyahu (Matthew) can only be understood on the drash level. The following chart details these four levels.

~~(Lawyers, Judges, Scientists)~~

~~(civil servants, political scientists)~~

~~Hermeneutic level[1]~~

~~32 Ben Gallil Laws~~

~~I and II Luqas (Luke)~~

~~Matityahu (Matthew)~~

~~Yochanan (John) 1, 2, 3, and Revelation~~

~~HaShem’s Servant~~

~~Principle Concern~~

~~What do we have to do?~~

~~What is the meaning behind what we have to do?~~

~~How do we go about establishing HaShem's Kingdom on earth?~~

~~What metaphysical meaning is there to what is happening?~~

~~Matanot L’Evyonim~~

For a geater explanation for these four levels, look at the study titled: REMEZ. Each of these four levels has its own rules for proper interpretation. The rest of this paper deals with the details of these rules.

~~Pshat - The Thirty-two Rules of Eliezer B. Jose Ha-Ge-lili[2]~~

~~Rules laid down by R. Eliezer b. Jose Ha-Gelili for haggadic exgesis, many of them being applied also to halachic interpretation.~~

1. Ribbuy (extension): The particles “et”, “gam”, and “af”, which are superfluous indicate that something which is not explicitly stated must be regarded as included in the passage under consideration, or that some teaching is implied thereby.

~~2. Mi’ut (limitation): The particles “ak”, “rak”, and “min”, indicate that something implied by the concept under consideration must be excluded in a specific case.~~

~~3. Ribbuy ahar ribbuy (extension after extension): When one extension follows another it indicates that more must be regarded as implied.~~

~~4. Mi’ut ahar mi’ut (limitation after limitation): A double limitation indicates that more is to be omitted.~~

~~5. Kal va-chomer meforash: “Argumentum a minori ad majus”, or vice versa, and expressly so characterized in the text.~~

6. Kal va-chomer satum: “Argumentum a minori ad majus” or vice versa, but only implied, not explicitly declared to be one in the text. This and the preceeding rule are contained in the Rules of Hillel number 1.

~~7. Gezerah shawah: Argument from analagy. Biblical passages containing synonyms or homonyms are subject, however much they differ in other respects, to identical definitions and applications.~~

Rashi’s Commentary for: Shemot (Exod.) 34:20 and they shall not appear before Me empty-handed According to the simple meaning of the verse, this is a separate matter [from the rest of this verse] and is unrelated to the firstborn, because there is no obligation to appear [in the Temple] in the commandment dealing with the firstborn. Instead this is another warning, [meaning] and when you ascend [to the Temple] on the festivals, you shall not appear before Me empty-handed, [but] it is incumbent upon you to bring burnt offerings (Chag. 7a) whenever appearing before God. According to the way it is interpreted by a Baraitha, this is a superfluous verse [for this was already stated in Exod. 23:15], and it is free [i.e., has no additional reason for being here other than] to be used for a גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה , [i.e.,] an instance of similar wording, to teach [us] about the provisions given a Hebrew slave [when he is freed]—that it is five selas from each kind [i.e., of sheep, grain, and wine], as much as the redemption of a firstborn. [This is elaborated upon] in tractate Kiddushin (17a).

~~8. Binyan ab mi-katub ehad: Application of a provision found in one passage only to passages which are related to the first in content but do not contain the provision in question.~~

~~9. Derek Kezarah: Abbreviation is sometimes used in the text when the subject of discussion is self-explanatory.~~

~~10. Dabar shehu shanuy (repeated expression): Repitition implies a special meaning.~~

11. Siddur she-nehlak: Where in the text a clause or sentence not logically divisible is divided by the punctuation, the proper order and the division of the verses must be restored according to the logical connection.

~~12. Anything introduced as a comparison to illustrate and explain something else itself receives in this way a better explanation and elucidation.~~

~~13. When the general is followed by the particular, the latter is specific to the former and merely defines it more exactly. (compare with Hillel #5)~~

Rashi on Bereshit (Genesis) 2:8 from the east Heb. מִקֶּדֶם . In the east of Eden, He planted the garden (Midrash Konen). Now if you ask: It has already been stated (above 1:27): “And He created man, etc.!” I saw in the Baraitha of Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Jose the Galilean concerning the thirty-two principles by which the Torah is expounded, and this is one of them [method 13]: A general statement followed by a specific act, the latter constitutes a specific [clarification] of the first [general statement]. “And He created man.” This is a general statement. It left obscure whence he was created, and it left His deeds obscure [i.e., how God created man]. The text repeats and explains: “And the Lord God formed, etc.,” and He made the Garden of Eden grow for him, and He placed him in the Garden of Eden, and He caused a deep sleep to fall upon him. The listener may think that this is another story, but it is only the detailed account of the former. Likewise, in the case of the animal, Scripture repeats and writes (below verse 19): “And the Lord God formed from the ground all the beasts of the field,” in order to explain, “and He brought [them] to man” to name them, and to teach about the fowl, that they were created from the mud.

~~14. Something important is compared with something unimportant to elucidate it and render it more readily intelligible.~~

~~15. When two Biblical passages contradict each other the contradiction in question must be solved by reference to a third passage.~~

16. Dabar meyuhad bi-mekomo: An expression which occurs in only one passage can be explained only by the context. This must have been the original meaning of the rule, although another explanation is given in the examples cited in the baraita.

~~17. A point which is not clearly explained in the main passage may be better elucidated in another passage.~~

~~18. A statement with regard to a part may imply the whole.~~

~~19. A statement concerning one thing may hold good with regard to another as well.~~

~~20. A stetment concerning one thing may apply only to something else.~~

~~21. If one object is compared to two other objects the best part of both the latter forms the tertium quid of comparison.~~

~~22. A passage may be supplemented and explained by a parallel passage.~~

~~23. A passage serves to elucidate and supplement its parallel passage.~~

~~24. When the specific implied in the general is especially excepted from the general, it serves to emphasize some property characterizing the specific.~~

~~25. The specific implied in the general is frequently excepted from the general to elucidate some other specific property, and to develop some special teaching concerning it.~~

~~26. Mashal (parable).~~

~~27. Mi-ma’al: Interpretation through the preceding.~~

~~28. Mi-neged: Interpretation through the opposite.~~

~~29. Gematria: Interpretation according to the numerical value of the letters.~~

~~30. Notarikon: Interpretation by dividing a word into two or more parts.~~

~~31. Postposition of the precedent. Many phraes which follow must be regarded as properly preceding, and must be interpreted accordingly in exegesis.~~

~~32. May portions of the Bible refer to an earlier period than to the sections which precede them, and vice versa.~~

These thirty-two rules are united in the so-called Baraita of R. Eliezer b. Jose HaGelili. In the introduction to the Midrash ha-Gadole, where this baraita is given, it contains thirty-three rules. Rule 29 being divided into three, and rule 27 being omitted.

32 rules of Rabbi Eliezer