Alleyways To Torah

I am not sure I understand the question, but I posted today about that first Rashi, so perhaps that can help:

http://parsha.blogspot.com/2008/10/vayelech-and-i-am-not-able.html

Kol Tuv,
Josh

thanks for the insightful explanation.

But I meant the Rashi that said "Vayeilach vi'go'" and that is it! He didn't say anything?

Ah! Now I get the question. :)

I didn't even register that as a separate Rashi, since I was working online off of Chabad.org's version of Judaica Press.

I would venture the following explanation: Rashi was originally in ktav yad, and not printed alongside the text of the Chumash. Therefore, for someone to correlate Rashi's commentary with the psukim, we have citations of psukim. And for someone quickly scanning, you want to have some designation of the beginning of the parsha.

Where Rashi comments on the first recognizable words, such as in Nitzavim, there is no problem. But if he begins commenting on less recognizable words in the first pasuk, such as he does in Ki Tavo

(see here

http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9617&pgnum=318
)

it begins the dibbur hamatchil with Vehaya ki tava followed by viyrishta.

And in Vayelech, where the dibbur hamatchil is from the second pasuk, while the parsha is known by Vayalech, from the first parsha, you would have a long citation in the dibbur hamatchil, starting with the word Vayelech, then Vegomer, to connote the ending of the pasuk, and then the citation from the second pasuk. But Rashi's first comment really begins on that second pasuk.

At least, that is my reading of the situation.

Kol Tuv,
Josh