Ways of reading Chumash are commonly divided into four headings: p'shat, simple readings; d'rash, exegeses; remez, hints; and sod, secrets. The g'mara and midr'she halacha are full of d'rash: they engage in diyuk, nitpicking, paying careful attention to each word, asking why each word appears where it does. It is commonly said about that that there are no extraneous words in chumash; for example, because Biblical Hebrew sometimes omits "es", the accusative-case marker, a tana derived something from every single es in Chumash. But that's all at the level of d'rash. My question is, what about p'shat? That is, is it true that there is a p'shat-level explanation for every nuanced wording change, for every diyuk? (For example, can every presence or absence of "es" be explained in terms of cadence, unambiguity, or other p'shat-level concerns?) Or does P'shat (my made-up personification of p'shat) sometimes (perhaps often) simply throw up her hands and say "it just is that way, I don't have to have a reason; try asking D'rash"?
Sourced answers strongly preferred.
No comments:
Post a Comment