Professor Zvi Koren writes: (https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/archaeology-today/biblical-archaeology-topics/regarding-the-color-of-tekelehet/):
Dr. Baruch Sterman responds (https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/archaeology-today/biblical-archaeology-topics/baruch-and-judy-taubes-sterman-respond/: )
---------
Dr. Sterman is wrong for claiming that the latter words in the Rashi are his own words rather than RMH. It's obvious that the words "וכן צבע התכלת דומה לרקיע המשחיר לעת ערב" are absolutely those of R Moshe Hadarshan and not Rashi himself.
How could Sterman not have noticed that Rashi first comments on Pasuk 38 that techeiles is yarok, then goes on to expound on pesukim 39-41, and then goes back to write another comment on pasuk 38?!
Rashi is doing here what he does in the beginning of Chukas: He first gives his Pshat comments on all the pesukim, and then quotes R Moshe Hadarshan on all those pesukim. The quote from RMH starts from "ומיסודו של ר משה הדרשן העתקתי" until the end of the parsha. That's why there's a new דיבור המתחיל at על כנפי בגדיהם even though Rashi already finished that pasuk.
--------
Dr. Koren is also protesting too much because he's assuming yarok has to mean "green". Yarok does not have to mean green. It can mean anything from yellow to green to blue. See for example YD 188-1.
Firstly, Rashi never wrote that tekhelet’s color is “deep blue or dark violet”, as the authors claim. Throughout his commentaries (e.g., Exodus 25:4, Numbers 15:38), Rashi states that the color of tekhelet is green (yarok), and if he also meant to include turquoise, it is certainly not what the authors stated. Further, the citation about tekhelet that it is “the color of the sky as it darkens towards evening” that the authors attribute to Rashi is incorrect. Though this citation appears in Rashi in Numbers 15:41, just a few verses after he called tekhelet green, Rashi states that this is the position of someone else (Rabbi Moshe HaDarshan).
Dr. Baruch Sterman responds (https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/archaeology-today/biblical-archaeology-topics/baruch-and-judy-taubes-sterman-respond/: )
As to Koren’s other points: Although Rashi does write that tekhelet is “yarok,” he also clearly states, as we cited, that it is “the color of the sky as it darkens towards evening.” (In the name of correcting “various inaccuracies” Koren might want to double check his sources. Although not particularly pertinent to the discussion, these are, in fact, Rashi’s own words and NOT, as Koren insists, an attribution to Rabbi Moshe HaDarshan, whom Rashi quotes in an earlier gloss on the same verse but in a different context altogether).
---------
Dr. Sterman is wrong for claiming that the latter words in the Rashi are his own words rather than RMH. It's obvious that the words "וכן צבע התכלת דומה לרקיע המשחיר לעת ערב" are absolutely those of R Moshe Hadarshan and not Rashi himself.
How could Sterman not have noticed that Rashi first comments on Pasuk 38 that techeiles is yarok, then goes on to expound on pesukim 39-41, and then goes back to write another comment on pasuk 38?!
Rashi is doing here what he does in the beginning of Chukas: He first gives his Pshat comments on all the pesukim, and then quotes R Moshe Hadarshan on all those pesukim. The quote from RMH starts from "ומיסודו של ר משה הדרשן העתקתי" until the end of the parsha. That's why there's a new דיבור המתחיל at על כנפי בגדיהם even though Rashi already finished that pasuk.
--------
Dr. Koren is also protesting too much because he's assuming yarok has to mean "green". Yarok does not have to mean green. It can mean anything from yellow to green to blue. See for example YD 188-1.
אין תגובות:
הוסף רשומת תגובה