Emending text.

“Changing the girsa” has been in the armamentarium of traditional scholars since the Oral Law was written down. While no one questions that Rishonim had established Acharonim had the authority to engage in this form of Torah study, more recently, it has fallen out of favor, if not repute. We are, of course, blessed with much ore reliable and standardized texts than out predecessors, in no small measure because of their efforts to clarify correct texts [1]; in addition, modern man with his databases and libraries assumes that the texts that it find so easy to copy and store are essentially accurate. Our technologies allow easy proofreading and correction of texts prior to their dissemination and publication and we sometimes forget that this was not the case throughout much of human history. Manuscripts were rare, expensive and prone to copying errors. The advent of printing made ore copies available for comparative study but early printing was laborious and tedious and it was easy for the print-setters to misplace or omit. [ 2]

Unfortunately, aside from comparison of manuscripts and logical arguments, the methods that were used to identify errors have not been transmitted to us. We do not know how the authorities who engaged in this activity perceived their texts and what theory of composition they used to guide them in making judgments about them. We must therefore resort on our own to proposing tentative theories of how Midrash came to take the shape and structure in which we received it.

We had previously proposed that the Oral Law was initially transmitted as a series of notes to the Torah text. In time, it expanded to a running commentary, somewhat resembling Jerusalem Targum and Targum (Pseudo)Jonathan. At the same time, there was an ongoing activity of systemizing the received tradition in the form of lists and verse correlations. The first developed into the Halachic Midrash and latter into the Mishna. Later quotes and cross-references from the Mishna to Tannaitic Midrash and vice versa were added to both texts [3]. At that stage, comments of individual Tannaim were also added. At times these reflected the verse and location in which they were taught even if they belonged at a different verse. That was sufficient as long as there was oral transmission and every teacher could attach teachings to verses as he wished; however, at the point of writing down, a version that was to persist for generation needed to be generated. With the decision to write down Midrash, a process of editing and rearrangement took place. Many passages were moved to more appropriate locations and other passages were placed in their stead. Sometimes a passage was not moved but copied. This required adding introductions and transitioning statements and sometimes explanatory notes. While we do not know who did the editing, the result is an internally consistent running commentary that generally coheres well.

This process in Sifri Devarim seems to have been interrupted after Parshas Ki Teitse. Whereas Teitse is quite long and follows the usual pattern of the Sifrei, the following sections are truncated and difficult to read and understand. This fact has been recognized by certain commentators, such as R. Naftoli Tsvi Berlin of Volozhin, who ended their commentary at this point. Apparently the editing of these versions was interrupted. As an illustration, let us take an almost incomprehensible passage in the very beginning of the Sifri Nitsavim Vayelech. I will first present it as it currently exists, then try to reconstruct different steps in editing, which as we said, were not fully completed, and then compare it with the emended version of the Vilna Gaon. This greatest of scholars ahs a clear perception of all midrashic teachings, their location within our current texts, and what phrases or verses contained which teachings. He was therefore able to spot each place where a teaching was temporarily misplaced and reattach it or its source verse to the place where it belonged. It is my hope that at the end the reader appreciates that the he attempted to complete the work of editing following some understanding similar to the one presented above.

You stand today…. And Hashem said to Mosher, behold you days have drawn nigh to die…

R. Shimon Bar Yochai says : Blessed be the true Judge before Whom there is no injustice or favoritism. And so it says, Do not believe a friend and do not trust the leader for every relative will twist and turn…. Moshe answered before the Holy One Blessed Be He: “Master of the World, since I leave this world with great foundation[4], show me a faithful man who will stand over Israel, that he can fulfill the requirements from them in peace. And so it says, who will go out before them and who will bring them in , and it says, And Hashem spoke to Moshe – Take for yourself Yehoshua Son of Nun and it says, We have a little sister who does not have breasts ”. Four kingdoms rule over Israel and there is not in them an inderstanding one and there is not in them a wise one. In the days of Achav, the king of Israel and Yehoshophat, king of Judah , Israel were spread over the mountains like sheep without a pastor .

Clearly, this passage is not complete. It ahs no introductions and transitions, the ideas do no belong, and it is evident that not all verses fit the purported lessons.

Let's list the problems.

The passage opens up with a quote from the beginning of Nitsavim but continues on with the middle of Vayelech. This is noted by Zera Avrohom who attempts to resolve it with a homiletical drush based on the words of Alshich. More simply, this suggests that there were intervening passages between the beginning of Nitsavim and our passage that have been moved elsewhere, leaving only the headings.
The heading does not cohere well with the words of R. Shimon Bar Yochai. This also suggests that something that served as an introduction to this statement that has been moved or removed
The verse, Do not believe a friend and do not trust the leader, seems poorly suited to refer to G-d. In fact, in Chagiga 16a it is interpreted in reference to the Evil Impulse.
The quote from the Songs of Songs about a sister that does not have breasts seems to be intended to refer to Yehoshua but really has nothing to do with the import of the passage and unnecessarily and inexplicably goes against Yehoshua's honor.
The reference to the four kingdoms seems completely out of place.
The statement about Achav and Yehoshopat also appears to be both unrelated to the rest of the passage and and out of place.

It appears than that had we known and understood the entire midrashic literature very well, we could locate the intervening passages and move them back or copy them back from wherever they are now to this location. This, in fact, appears to be what the Vilna Gaon did in his emendation of the passage.

The Vilna Gaon's version.

You stand today…. And Hashem said to Moshe, behold you days have drawn nigh to die

R.Shimon Bar Yachai says, Blessed be the True Judge before Whom there is no injustice or favoritism and so it says, God of Fathfulness and not of injustice, He is just and straight. (Explanation: Hashem says – You are standing today before me in judgment and I judge you worthy of dying at this time. This is My decision and I am God of Faithfullness and not of injustice…) Moshe responded before the Holy One Blessed Be He (to the directive to elect a successor): ““Master of the World, since I leave this world with great foundation [5], show me a faithful man who will stand over Israel, that he can fulfill the requirements from them in peace”. And so it says, who will go out before them and who will bring them in , and it says, And the congregation of Hashem should not be like sheep without a pastor. A nd it says of this in the Scripture, Tell me, You Who my soul loves … for why shall I be like one who oversees the flocks of your sheep. What did the Holy One answer him? If you do not know, the most fair of women – the fairest among the prophets. Go in the end path of the sheep -that which I do with them at the end (of history). Four kingdoms ruled over Israel and there was not in them one neither a prophet nor a wise man, and so it says in the days of Achav : I have seen the Children of Israel spread over the mountains like sheep without a pastor.

By bringing back the introductory phrase and reassigning the correct verses that are elsewhere connected to appropriate midrashic explanations, The Gaon was able to re-establish the original passage that was apparently in the process of being edited at the tie it was written down. One might think of it as a process of cutting and pasting that was interrupted as it was taking place. One can imagine that at a time without computers, several intermediate working copies were written down with the intent to completing the process in subsequent copies. Due to persecutions or other events of which we do not know, certain passages were left in this intermediate state. Fortunately, the Gaon was able to identify the missing passage as he know and clearly recognized every midrashic teaching and which verses were traditionally assigned to each teaching. He was therefore able to identify the missing or corrupted passage, phrases and sentences and bring them back to the place in which they belonged, or, to complete the work of the editors, that they were not able to complete.