tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post4986249244997709079..comments2024-03-05T21:22:43.426-05:00Comments on parshablog: Why does Rashi change Midrash Tanchuma?joshwaxmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03516171362038454070noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-87312156792403357132015-11-04T10:59:31.913-05:002015-11-04T10:59:31.913-05:00I also posted this in the comments at DovBear
Ras...I also posted this in the comments at DovBear<br /><br />Rashi omits the men's response from the Tanchuma<br />זאת אומרת אני נאה ממך, וזה אומר אני נאה ממךWarren Bursteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09851196721637207769noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-5151074959153505622014-02-23T23:34:33.959-05:002014-02-23T23:34:33.959-05:00DovBear actually mentioned that difference between...DovBear actually mentioned that difference between Rashi and Tanchuma in <a href="http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2014/02/ie-vs-rashi-on-value-of-sensuality.html" rel="nofollow">an earlier post</a>, but for some reason didn't include it here.<br /><br />At this point, I am still leaning towards it being a Tanchuma A, though I don't know whether the one in Zichron Aharon is a conjectural reconstruction based on Rashi or not. Given that we apparently have a number of places in which Rashi differs from Tanchuma while crediting Tanchuma (hmm... unless we only grant the attribution to the very nearing statement...), and given that the changes here include drastic changes from our Tanchuma, I would rather posit that all differences here stem from this other source.<br /><br />I don't know enough about the nature and style of Tanchuma A, B, and C, to venture a guess as to whether it would smooth or roughen, and what it would consider improvement over the earlier.joshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-65877685950638568502014-02-23T22:26:39.963-05:002014-02-23T22:26:39.963-05:00It seems odd to me if Rashi's version is actua...It seems odd to me if Rashi's version is actually an earlier Tanchuma than the one we have. Rashi's modifications relative to our version strike me as edits which "smooth" and enhance an earlier, rougher version: delete the bit about striking women with iron bars, add some nice flourishes, add poetic justice by noting that the kiyor brings peace between husband and wife.<br /><br />By the way, although DB noted only 3 differences, a 4th and very significant difference is the romantic thing about the wives looking into the mirrors together with their husbands and teasing them. That one especially does not seem like something Rashi could have inserted himself as an edit; surely his version of Tanchuma must have included it. <br /><br />I always thought that part was the coolest part of this midrash, and it's interesting to know that it isn't there in our version of Tanchuma.Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14371365602074869132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-30892800777962413392014-02-23T21:53:09.442-05:002014-02-23T21:53:09.442-05:00the zichron aharon edition has the "regular&q...the zichron aharon edition has the "regular" tanchuma in the front and bubers (aleph) in the back. four vol with all the meforshim. The one to get!yeshivamannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-83110776620308522202014-02-23T19:54:25.087-05:002014-02-23T19:54:25.087-05:00Efraim:
thanks. i'll try to try it out.
i st...Efraim:<br /><br />thanks. i'll try to try it out.<br /><br />i still *attempt* to respond to my yahoo email, though often emails get by me. it attracts a lot of spam, and i get busy with other projects.joshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-89559637869800648722014-02-21T07:51:34.824-05:002014-02-21T07:51:34.824-05:00The place to check is חומש אריאלThe place to check is חומש אריאלמ"מnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-27401859302036042482014-02-21T00:38:28.424-05:002014-02-21T00:38:28.424-05:00Josh, by the way you can search bar illan even wit...Josh, by the way you can search bar illan even without an account, the source and a couple words before and after will come up, and yu alum can get a free bar illan account, check out the yu alumni library website,<br /><br />also do you still respond to your yahoo email?Efraimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-26544659038028742422014-02-20T22:11:13.418-05:002014-02-20T22:11:13.418-05:00interesting. thanks.
so what do you think is happ...interesting. thanks.<br /><br />so what do you think is happening? conjecture on R' Krinsky's part? <br /><br />The Zichron Aharon 5768 edition is of Tanchuma Aleph?joshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-34818648033866424712014-02-20T21:58:38.031-05:002014-02-20T21:58:38.031-05:00Agreed, I can't find it here. http://books.goo...Agreed, I can't find it here. http://books.google.com/books?id=mlYMAQAAIAAJ&dq=editions%3Ay376Im6XT0cC&pg=RA2-PA126#v=onepage&q&f=falseAryehSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-14915244277811644622014-02-20T21:57:40.864-05:002014-02-20T21:57:40.864-05:00no such tanchuma in bubers edition. (at least not ...no such tanchuma in bubers edition. (at least not in pekudei and certainly not 9.) In the 5768 edition from "zichron aharon" the missing parts are in parentheses with a ס''א<br />although that may be in deference to rashi. yeshivamannoreply@blogger.com