Avodah Mailing List

Volume 10 : Number 068

Saturday, November 30 2002

• old Jerusalem
• donkeys
• Rambam and Astrology (Mazal)
• Re: Astrology - possible resolution of Rambam & Chazal
• Important! Hakdama to SY in PDF!
• Greek at the time of Moshe Rabbeinu
• Re: donkeys
• Re: Astrology
• Re: Rachel's tomb
• CD-ROM search request for marei makom
• kedushat Yerushalayim
• Re: donkeys

According to (some?) archaeologists the "wide wall" in the center of the
Jewish quarter formed the outer wall of bayit sheini (I hope I'm getting
it straight). Even Ir David is under dispute, since some archaeologists
claim it was much wider (westward) than it is usually drawn. I believe
that there is a new "dig" beginning now to try to verify this.

Tzvi Harris
Talmon, Israel
tzvi@halachayomit.com
www.halachayomit.com

In some correspondence in the past, I've seen certain Rabbinic authorities
referred to as "chamor noseh sfarim" or a similar reference. I happened
upon the following quote from the Koran and could find no earlier Jewish
use of the reference. Does anyone know of any? In any event I would
suggest that the reference not be used in the future.

    5. (But only the people who comprehend what they read and then
    act upon it can benefit from Allah's Book. The Book would be of no
    use if it is carried around wrapped in beautiful covers. This is
    what the Bani-Israel did to Allah's book; and you can see their
    condition.) The Torah was given to them and they were told that it
    was their duty to act upon it. However they (carried the book with
    extreme reverence but) did not undertake the responsibilities it
    imposed on them. An apt parable would be that of a donkey laden with
    books. (It is obvious that the books cannot benefit the donkey in the
    least). This is an example of people who admit to the truthfulness
    of Divine Laws, but belie it by their deeds. How wretched their
    plight would be. The people who treat the Divine Book in this way
    obviously cannot find the right path. (Can a donkey ever go on the
    right path just because the books containing guidance, namely the
    distinction between right and wrong, are laden on its back?)

KT
Joel Rich

My test for Rambam following mesorah on chazal and astrology was not
finding anything positive on astrology (mazalot) by RI MI'GAASH, RIF or
Rabeinu Chananel (the chain of mesorah to the Rambam). I found a gemara
in Taanit 29b which is quoted l'halacha in Orach Chayim 551:1 but not
mentioned l'halacha by the rambam. However, I did find a RIF on the above
gemara (dapei haRIF 9b) which does quote it l'halacha ["d'rei'a mazalya"].

Chazal don't differentiate between mazal and astrology.

Josh

At 07:32 PM 11/26/02 +0200, Daniel Eidensohn wrote:
>9) R' Shilat proposes the following in his volume on the Rambam's
>Introductions page 81-82.
>"Foretelling the future is a recognized profession that can not be simply
>rejected...                      This is explained in Moreh Nevuchim
>(2:37)....Certain people with special abilities connected with the
>imaginative faculty - even though they are not scholars or fit to be a
>prophet - are nevertheless successful in foretelling the future or
>performing magic (today we call this parapsychological abilities)...."

>In sum: The Rambam is totally consistent with Chazal in acknowledging the
>fact of meaningful predictions by some astrologers and diviners. He rejects
>as minority opinon or reinterprets those statements of Chazal that seem to
>ascribe this accuracy to the **science of astrology**. He agrees with the
>consensus that astrology and divination - because of its accuracy as well as
>its inaccuracy distracted people away from relying on HaShem and thus is
>prohibited. The upset of the Gra and others with the Rambam was because they
>disagreed with his rejection of those chazal which unambiguously support the
>validity of the science of astrology and divination - because they
>themselves felt that these systems had some validity.

Could be!

Kol Tuv,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

From: "Bennett Ruda" <bruda@idt.net>
>The file is at 
><http://www.tzemachdovid.org/shaareiyosher>www.tzemachdovid.org/shaareiyosher

>I have the full 3 page text as one file as well as each of the 3 pages 
>individually.
>I did only the first 2 and 1/2 pages--up to the point that you indicated.

Courtesy of R' Bennett Ruda, the most basic, yet profound, piece of Jewish 
thought I have ever read (a bit of hyperbole - but only a bit!), the 
Hakdama of R' Shimon Shkop to Shaarei Yosher - highly, highly recommended. 
If you cannot access the website, I can send you the PDF.

Kol Tuv,  Good Shabbos & Chanukah,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

[Forwarded by RMF -mi]

> 2. R. Yishmael connects "hen" with the Greek word for one. Did Greek
> exist in the time of Moshe Rabbenu and why would the Toah want to
> give a derasha based on Greek.

Dear Moshe,

Certainly, Greek existed at the time of Moshe Rabbenu. We have writings
in Greek (in syllabic rather than alphabetic form) dating from 2000 to
1200 BCE, which is contemporary with Moshe Rabbenu. The Torah itself
refers to Yefet, the son of Noah, and the rabbinic tradition and Josephus
ident ify him as the ancestor of the Greeks. His son Yavan =Ion, the
ancestor of the Ionians. There seems reason to believe that there
was commercial contact between Greeks and Jews, but it is not until
Herodotus in the fifth century BCE that any Greek writer refers to t he
"Syrians" of Palestine. There are a number of Hebrew (or Phoenician)
words that are also found in the eighth century BCE Homer:or Hesiod:
(or Greek words found in Hebrew or Phoe nician) erev (Greek erebos,
"darkness"), ketonet (Greek khiton, "t unic"), makerah (Greek makhaira-,
"large knife"), mazzah (Greek maza, "barley cake"), egel (Greek agele,
'calf"), mum (Greek amumon, "blameless").

Love,
Aby

> In some correspondence in the past, I've seen certain Rabbinic authorities
> referred to as "chamor noseh sfarim" or a similar reference. I happened
> upon the following quote from the Koran and could find no earlier Jewish
> use of the reference. Does anyone know of any? In any event I would
> suggest that the reference not be used in the future.

What is the problem with using an expression used by:
    Ramban to Sefer HaMitzvos
    Chovas HaLevavos (3:4)
    Kli Yakar(Devarim 30:11)
    Reishis Chochma Shaar Kedusha Chap 6
    Zohar Chadash
    Chavas Ya'ir
    Nodah BeYudah
    Sho'el u'Meishiv
    Yabia Omer
    Mishna Halachos

Who says that it originated with the Koran and even if it did - the use by
the above sources surely justifies it.

                                                            Daniel Eidensohn

RMB wrote:
> 1 - "shenas ... lebri'as ha'olam" is followed by "leminyan she'anu monim
> kan be..." It seems we're trying to guarantee the validity of the dating
> whether or not it actually is the age of the universe.

> 2- We're counting since the /end/ of beri'ah. Or, as someone else
> put it, since Adam's "birth".

Which is why I told RSS that the messorah for anno mundi currently used is 
totally irrelevant to the debate WRT whether ma'aseh vereishit verses may or 
may not be interpreted according to one allegorical scheme or another.

Arie

PS: I just came up with an idea. We should distribute the complete Avodah 
archive as a tool for classes, etc. Even better would be to first rearrange 
it a bit. I suggest setting up a wiki (a publicly modifiable website. Search 
for wiki, wikipedia and more on google) to allow list members to modify the 
category or the order of a post within the subject index. This way, threads 
which have been broken up by people like me who are on digest, can be 
reconnected, and changing subject lines can be accomodated, and threads where 
serious digressions took place can be divided up. We could then ask 
volunteers to each tackle a certain number of threads. I suggest that people 
commit ahead of time to a certain portion of the archive.

RCS wrote:
> This theory (and I don't know of any proof for it in the Medrash or
> Gemara) would argue that Rachel passed away close to her place of burial
> and not (unless you accept the "northern theory" - which I find difficult
> especially in light of the Ramban) near Beit El.

Err, I don't really understand why you mention the Ramban. The Ramban
testifies that in the 13th century the current location of qever Rachel
was already considered as such (or at least close to the currently
popular spot).

Considering that mame Ruchel passed away many, many centuries ago,
I don't see why Ramban's discovery would be much more meaningful than
our present massorah WRT its location.

The question is whether there was a continuous massorah WRT her graves
location, and since we know that soon after the destruction of bayit II
the current location is already mentioned, we must rephrase the question
as "did 'Hazal have a messorah WRT her grave's location, a massorah that
had been maintained throughout.

Not to say that the current location is wrong, but I do recall that
rav Etsshalom considered the possibility that in the days of Shmuel the
location was already not so well known.

We may, of course, also suggest that she got bored being near Tzeltza'h,
and took a hike. After all, tzaddikim be mitatan kruyin 'hai ;-).

Arie
-- 
It is absurd to seek to give an account of the matter to a man 
who cannot himself give an account of anything; for insofar as
he is already like this, such a man is no better than a vegetable.
           -- Book IV of Aristotle's Metaphysics

[Moderator's aside: A mazal tov (pun intended) to RMW on the birth
of a daughter. -mi]

I seek a midrash that states as follows:

(quoting from Shir HaShirim)
"Ha dooda-im nasnu ray-ach"--ze Reuven she-hee-tzeel es Yosef
"Ve-al be-sachaynu kol megadim"--ze ner chanukah

None of the sources quoted in A. Hyman's "Torah Ha-Ketuvah Ve-hanessurah"
have this ma-amar, so forget about midrash rabba.

Kindly reply (or "cc") off-list to nwitty@ix.netcom.com

Thank you.

I re-looked at some standard maps of what was considered to be Jerusalem
in the time of the first Temple. In these maps there are large sections
south of the present old city that would be insider the ancient walls. As
I said previously the areas near Shaar Shechem are clearly outside.

Hence, under the assumption that kedushat Yerushalayim was established
in the first Temple era and not changed in the second Temple era why do
we use the present walls of the old city to define the original city. It
is not close at all and not just a small change. It is relatively close
to the walls of the second Temple era.

I thank RDE for his reference to an article by Resnick that appeared
in Jewish Action in 2001. However, I found the article strange. It
is basically an attack on the minimallist theory of the size of
Jerusalem. However, he assumes that the traditional site of the Tomb of
David is correct which even the maximalists deny. What all archaelogists
assume is that the Jebusite city conquered by David only consisted of what
is today called Ir David (Silwan). Shlomo extended it to the Temple mount
and later kings extended it westerward. The entire debate is only the
extent that the later kings added, not the status in King David's time.

--
 Eli Turkel, turkel@math.tau.ac.il on 11/28/2002

In a message dated 11/29/2002 10:35:13 AM EST, yadmoshe@012.net.il writes:
>> In some correspondence in the past, I've seen certain Rabbinic authorities
>> referred to as "chamor noseh sfarim" or a similar reference. I happened
>> upon the following quote from the Koran and could find no earlier Jewish
>> use of the reference. Does anyone know of any? In any event I would
>> suggest that the reference not be used in the future.
 
> What is the problem with using an expression used by:
...
> Who says that it originated with the Koran and even if it did - the use by
> the above sources surely justifies it.

The reason for my question was to find out if it originated with the
Koran. Would you feel the same way if the above quoted sources were
unaware of the source but used what was a common expression(I don't know
that to be the case)?

SS
Joel

*********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]