9The word 'ish' (איש) literally means;'man' in Hebrew. However, the context and grammar of the text lead commentators to define this 'man' further. Ibn Ezra applies a rational interpretation, while Rashi applies a midrashic (supernatural) approach. Both must read things into the text to make their approaches fit smoothly. Both approaches are valid, both have strengths and weaknesses.
AND A MAN CAME UPON HIM – According to the plain meaning of the text a passer by found him.
WHERE THEY ARE PASTURING – If you know
Abraham ben Meir Ibn Ezra (1089–c.1167) Spain, was one of the most distinguished Jewish Biblical commentators and philosophers of the Middle Ages.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_ibn_Ezra
Shlomo Yitzchaki (Hebrew: רבי שלמה יצחקי) 22 February 1040 – 13 July 1105, today generally known by the acronym Rashi (Hebrew: רש"י, RAbbi SHlomo Itzhaki), was a medieval French rabbi and author of a comprehensive commentary on the Talmud and commentary on the Tanakh. Acclaimed for his ability to present the basic meaning of the text in a concise and lucid fashion, Rashi appeals to both learned scholars and beginner students, and his works remain a centerpiece of contemporary Jewish study.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashi
QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER
What are the strengths and weaknesses of Ibn Ezra's definition of 'ish'? Rashi's?
Which approach to this text appeals to you more? Why?