Literary analysis is not only the function, but the essential structure of parshanut.
I am sufficiently old to be impertinent enough to say this in my own name, but I may say it with greater authority in the name of our teacher, Nechama Leibowitz, z"l.
During one of my first shiurim with Nechama about twenty-one years ago, I offered the observation that her approach was very literary. She smiled and said in English: "New Criticism?" "Yes, exactly," I said.
"You understand," she said in Hebrew.
I offer some brief notes on New Criticism here. I could be persuaded to be more long-winded if there is really anyone out there who would like me to be. Alternatively, an interested reader might find it useful to read "The New Criticism" by John Crowe Ransom (1941) to get it from the author.
In brief, New Criticism held that the text the reader held before her/him was "closed." The author's biography, religious beliefs, personal philosophy had relevance insofar as it was existent in the text. There was no need nor right to research beyond the source. Therefore, the source contained all that was needed, or, at least, all that was available to understand the text. It follows, then, that every word, letter, punctuation mark of the text was available to the reader to try to utilize to understand the text ...within the framework of reason, logic and context. One could expect the text to be consistent and coherent, and one could, therefore, draw conclusions as to the meaning of a phrase used on page 210 from a similar phrase used on page 7.
If you will follow this approach through to its logical conclusion, you will find that we develop naturally from this a taxonomy of "13 dimensions by which the Torah may be interpreted". The biography of God, His personal musings, His hobbies, etc. are not available to the reader. We have only the text in front of us and the comparison and contrast of the words, phrases and syntax which the Author has made available to us to utilize in terms of its consistency, coherence and context.
If there is a better way to understand ma kasheh l'rashi, I have not seen it.
Gary Levine,
Jerusalem
