tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35481891.post8076345102743270984..comments2022-05-15T11:52:41.828+03:00Comments on rabbisedley: Rashi had ruach hakodeshrabbi sedleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15276453426346276243noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35481891.post-28795286597466391742013-04-21T14:44:07.026+03:002013-04-21T14:44:07.026+03:00Rashi is a pashtan, so what we see isn't Rashi...Rashi is a pashtan, so what we see isn't Rashi's astronomy, but Rashi's conception of Chazal's astronomy. Note how he quotes gemaros to make astronomical points.<br /><br />BTW, there is a similar problem with Rashi on Bereishis 1. Yes, he explains the pesuqim quite literally. But his job is to give peshat in the pasuq. Just as in 1:1 and 2:4, where he indicates a peshat in which the week of creation isn't a week as we know it today, despite his other comments. Anyway, if the pasuq is allegorical, or a partial explanation of something people inherently can't understand, Rashi's goal would be to explain the mashal, not the nimshal.<br /><br />You'll also find Rashi using Persian astronomy here (sun going behind a dome at night), but Ptolmeic astronomy when Chazal do.<br /><br />In any case, the whole thing is difficult no matter whose opinion we believe Rashi is describing. Ignorance of things like sun- and moonrise were pretty rare in the pre-industrial, pre-urban era. It's hard to believe either anyone from Chazal or that Rashi wouldn't know something that is common knowledge in agrarian societies.<br /><br />Sidenote: It doesn't mean north and south of due west. Because when living north of the tropics, the sun and moon are always south of the west - east line. This is why north is "tzafon" (hidden). Here the terms must be relative, north or south of average.micha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.com