Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 156

Thu, 05 Aug 2010

• 1. Leshon haKodesh (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Reb Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz on RSRH's 19 Letters (Arie Folger)
• 3. Re: Leshon haKodesh (Simon Montagu)
• 4. Re: Leshon haKodesh (Zev Sero)
• 5. Re: Reb Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz on RSRH's 19 Letters (Akiva Blum)
• 6. Bein hashemashot: A Reevaluation of the Texts Part IV (Prof. Levine)
• 7. Re: Leshon haKodesh (Amitai Halevi)
• 8. Re: Leshon haKodesh (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: Leshon haKodesh (Amitai Halevi)
• 10. Re: anti-meat rhetoric "according to Judaism" (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Tzedakah: Giving to an organization vs. giving privately (T613K@aol.com)
• 12. Re: P'rat U'Klal, Ejusdem Generis and the FBI (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 13. davening outdoors (Eli Turkel)
• 14. changing nusach (ben Simpleton)

The following was posted by Amitai Halivni
<chr0...@techunix.technion.ac.il> to soc.culture.jewish.moderated.

: Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 06:41:33 +0000 (UTC)
: From: Amitai <chr0...@techunix.technion.ac.il>

: On Aug 4, 7:07?am, "Abe Kohen" <abeko...@gmail.com> wrote:
: >                                          Hebrew has NO dirty words, and
: > tachat is not a dirty word. (Ayin tachat ayin.)

: I agree that there aren't many, but your NO is too sweeping. Even in
: theTanakh several had to be euphemized ("ktiv-qri"). See e.g., 2 Kings
: 18:27.

Abe is agreeing with the Rambam, who gives this phenomenon as the reason
why Hebrew is Leshon haQodesh. So, how does the Rambam translate the
kesiv in the pasuq Amitai sites. I must say it sure looks to me too like
the q'ri is replacing scatalogical terms with more euphamistic ones.

I thought the question would be more likely to get answered here than
there.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

Cc: Amitai, Abe -- kindly remember to do the same on your replies.

-- 
Micha Berger             Between stimulus & response, there is a space.
mi...@aishdas.org        In that space is our power to choose our
http://www.aishdas.org   response. In our response lies our growth
Fax: (270) 514-1507      and our freedom. - Victor Frankl, (MSfM)

RSM wrote:
> Why is this surprising? Do everybody's writings "do it" for you?
> RSRH certainly doesn't "do it" for me. I'm not sure if it's the effect
> of the translations that I've seen or a feature of the original, but I
> find his style so over-elaborate that I am unable to extract any
> content from it.

That is a feature of the 19th century German, and modern editorialists
are still influenced by that style. However, I grant that in
translation it is even more convoluted, because people do not write
like that in English.

Caveat: I barely read the 19 Letters, and base myself for this comment
on RSRH's style entirely on his commentary to Chumasch, Tehillim and
his Gesammelte Schriften (Collected Writings), the first and last of
which I occasionally also consulted in English.

-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Equal Justice for All
* Brutal Women of Nazi Germany
* Gibt es in der Unterhaltungsliteratur eine Rolle f?r G"tt?
* If You Work With Garbage, You Will Get Dirty
* Cows moo-ve over: camel milk coming to Europe
* Scharfe Analyse der Gaza-Flotte auf ARD
* The New Face of Jewish Studitainment

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 3:36 AM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:

> The following was posted by Amitai Halivni
> <chr0...@techunix.technion.ac.il> to soc.culture.jewish.moderated.
>
> : Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 06:41:33 +0000 (UTC)
> : From: Amitai <chr0...@techunix.technion.ac.il>
>
> : On Aug 4, 7:07 am, "Abe Kohen" <abeko...@gmail.com> wrote:
> : >                                          Hebrew has NO dirty words, and
> : > tachat is not a dirty word. (Ayin tachat ayin.)
>
> : I agree that there aren't many, but your NO is too sweeping. Even in
> : theTanakh several had to be euphemized ("ktiv-qri"). See e.g., 2 Kings
> : 18:27.
>
> Abe is agreeing with the Rambam, who gives this phenomenon as the reason
> why Hebrew is Leshon haQodesh. So, how does the Rambam translate the
> kesiv in the pasuq Amitai sites. I must say it sure looks to me too like
> the q'ri is replacing scatalogical terms with more euphamistic ones.
>
>
shama`ti mipi HaRav Ephraim Wiesenberg zt"l: words change their meaning and
their register, especially words of this kind, and the standard term of one
century is considered scatological in another century and needs to be
euphemized.

If you look up the KJV ("appointed to be read in churches") for the verse
referred to, you will see that it translates "mey raglayim" with a word that
nobody would use in church in the 21st century. I'm sure that the ketiv
words in the verse weren't dirty words at the time of Bayit Rishon, but by
Bayit Sheni or later they couldn't be read out in public.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100804/5cc767a2/attachment-0001.htm>

Micha Berger wrote:

> Abe is agreeing with the Rambam, who gives this phenomenon as the reason
> why Hebrew is Leshon haQodesh. So, how does the Rambam translate the
> kesiv in the pasuq Amitai sites. I must say it sure looks to me too like
> the q'ri is replacing scatalogical terms with more euphamistic ones.

Perhaps those are Assyrian words that Ravshakeh (or his interpreter) used
because he couldn't find equivalent Hebrew words, much as modern Hebrew
uses Arabic swear words.

But why go to Melachim, when we have the tochacha of Ki Tavo?  Perhaps,
though, those words are meta-euphemisms, a phenomenon we find in English
with regard to the euphemisms used for the place of elimination: as soon
as a euphemism catches on it becomes "dirty" and people re-euphemise it.
So perhaps "yishgalenah" doesn't really mean "will f--- her", but rather
something more genteel, that is still more direct than "yishkavenah";
perhaps it should be rendered "will mate with her".  At the time the
Torah was written, perhaps "yishgalenah" was still thought of as clean,
but at some later stage it became dirty so the sofrim instituted a
kri that was even more indirect and thus cleaner.


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher

 


  _____  

From: avodah-boun...@lists.aishdas.org [mailto:avodah-boun...@lists.aishdas.org]
On Behalf Of Prof. Levine
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 2:54 PM
 
 
At 07:17 AM 8/2/2010, Ben Waxman wrote:


TTBOMK means to the best of my knowledge and if they didn't follow in their
father's path, that is fine.


Really, this is fine!!!!  What happened to mesora? Is it to be ignored and
simply cast aside?

And here I thought that Yahadus was based on following one's mesora.  YL 

 
What does any of this have to do with mesorah? Do I have have to do everything
my father decided to do?
 
If he is simply following the traditions of his fathers, so be it. But if my
father wakes up one day and decides to grow a beard, so must I?? Do my children
need to subscribe to Avodah (T) just because I do???
 
You can argue how far back a mesorah need be to be valid, but surely one's
father's inventions don't count for too much.
 
Akiva 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100804/d87facd1/attachment-0001.htm>

Please see http://tinyurl.com/27yhjvt

From: "Micha Berger" <mi...@aishdas.org>
> Abe is agreeing with the Rambam, who gives this phenomenon as the reason
> why Hebrew is Leshon haQodesh....

Where does Rambam say this? I wonder how he gets around Megillah 25b,
where it is explicitly stated that "qri" renders objectionable terms in
"ktiv" acceptable for reading in public.

Amitai Halevi (not Halivni)

On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 11:00:42PM +0300, Amitai Halevi wrote:
> Where does Rambam say this? I wonder how he gets around Megillah 25b,
> where it is explicitly stated that "qri" renders objectionable terms in
> "ktiv" acceptable for reading in public.

The Rambam says this in the Moreh 3:8. Friedlander's translation (copied from
<http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp144.htm>):
    I have also a reason and cause for calling our language the holy
    language -- do not think it is exaggeration or error on my part,
    it is perfectly correct -- the Hebrew language has no special name
    for the organ of generation in females or in males, nor for the
    act of generation itself, nor for semen, nor for secretion. The
    Hebrew has no original expressions for these things, and only
    describes them in figurative language and by way of hints, as if
    to indicate thereby that these things should not be mentioned, and
    should therefore have no names; we ought to be silent about them, and
    when we are compelled to mention them, we must manage to employ for
    that purpose some suitable expressions, although these are generally
    used in a different sense. Thus the organ of generation in males is
    called in Hebrew gid, which is a figurative term, reminding of the
    words, "And thy neck is an iron sinew" (gid) (Isa. xlviii. 4). It
    is also called shupka, "pouring out" (Deut. xxiii. 2), on account
    of its function. The female organ is called kobah (Num. xxv. 8),
    from kobah (Deut. xviii. 3), which denotes "stomach"; rechem,
    "womb," is the inner organ in which the fetus develops; tzoah
    (Isa. xxviii. 8), "refuse," is derived from the verb yatza, "he went
    out"; for "urine" the phrase meme raglayim, "the water of the feet"
    (2 Kings. xviii. 17), is used; semen is expressed by shikbat zera',
    "a layer of seed." For the act of generation there is no expression
    whatever in Hebrew: it is described by the following words only:
    ba'al, "he was master"; shakab, "he lay"; laqah, "he took"; gillah
    'ervah, "he uncovered the nakedness." Be not misled by the word
    yishgalennah (Deut. xxviii. 30), to take it as denoting that
    act: this is not the case, for shegal denotes a female ready for
    cohabitation. Comp. "Upon thy right hand did stand the maiden"
    (shegal) "in gold of Ophir" (Ps. xlv. 10). Yishgalennah, according
    to the Kethib, denotes therefore "he will take the female for the
    purpose of cohabitation."

And although M focuses on the lack of sexually explicit terms, his
examples do include urination and defacation. As well as the example
RZS gave, with a slightly different resolution.

Since the Rambam doesn't discuss the gemara in Megillah, I don't have
much of an answer. *Perhaps*, like yishgalennah, the kesiv is overly
descriptive in meaning, even though it's not the direct translation on
a word-by-word basis.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

PS: Sorry for inadvertantly whitening your levitical status. (The only
Halivni I know of is a Hebraization of "Weiss", nothing to do with
bricklaying.)

-- 
Micha Berger             With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns
mi...@aishdas.org        G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four
http://www.aishdas.org   corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets
Fax: (270) 514-1507      to include himself.     - Rav Yisrael Salanter

From: Simon Montagu
> shama`ti mipi HaRav Ephraim Wiesenberg zt"l: words change their meaning and 
> their register, especially words of this kind, and the standard term of one 
> century is considered scatological in another century and needs to be 
> euphemized.

> If you look up the KJV ("appointed to be read in churches") for the verse 
> referred to, you will see that it translates "mey raglayim" with a word that 
> nobody would use in church in the 21st century. I'm sure that the ketiv 
> words in the verse weren't dirty words at the time of Bayit Rishon, but by 
> Bayit Sheni or later they couldn't be read out in public. 

I tend to agree.

The term "shegal" in Nehemiah 2:6 appears in a definitely non-pejorative
context, where it probably was intended to mean "consort".
The old JPS version translates it as "queen", as do most Protestant
Bibles, whereas the on-line English translation of the Septuagint has
"concubine".
Therefore "yishaglena" originally must have simply meant "consorted" or
"cohabited"with her", and - over time - acquired an obscene connotation
that made it necessary to euphemize it.

The process is still  going on. For example: ma`hraot -> motza'ot -> beit
hakisei -> beit hakavod -> beit hashimush -> sherutim.


[Email #2. -micha]

From: "Zev Sero" <z...@sero.name>
> Micha Berger wrote:
>> Abe is agreeing with the Rambam, who gives this phenomenon as the reason
>> why Hebrew is Leshon haQodesh. So, how does the Rambam translate the
>> kesiv in the pasuq Amitai sites. I must say it sure looks to me too like
>> the q'ri is replacing scatalogical terms with more euphamistic ones.

> Perhaps those are Assyrian words that Ravshakeh (or his interpreter) used
> because he couldn't find equivalent Hebrew words, much as modern Hebrew
> uses Arabic swear words.

I doubt it; "horehem" (2 K 18:27) is too similar to "ma`haraot" (2 K 10:27)
for them not to be related etymologically.

> But why go to Melachim, when we have the tochacha of Ki Tavo?  Perhaps,
> though, those words are meta-euphemisms, a phenomenon we find in English
> with regard to the euphemisms used for the place of elimination: as soon
> as a euphemism catches on it becomes "dirty" and people re-euphemise it.
> So perhaps "yishgalenah" doesn't really mean "will f--- her", but rather
> something more genteel, that is still more direct than "yishkavenah";
> perhaps it should be rendered "will mate with her".  At the time the
> Torah was written, perhaps "yishgalenah" was still thought of as clean,
> but at some later stage it became dirty so the sofrim instituted a
> kri that was even more indirect and thus cleaner.

I agree completely. See my earlier response to Simon Montagu's post.
The genteel meaning of "yishaglena" must have been retained at least
until the return from the Babylonian captivity.

Amitai

Someone who wasn't sure enough of himself to post this to Avodah
sent me a link to <http://www.physorg.com/news200074899.html>. It
begins:

    Emotions help animals to make choices
    August 3, 2010

    To understand how animals experience the world and how they should
    be treated, people need to better understand their emotional lives. A
    new review of animal emotion suggests that, as in humans, emotions may
    tell animals about how dangerous or opportunity-laden their world is,
    and guide the choices that they make.

    The review by Bristol University's Professor Mike Mendl and Dr Liz
    Paul and Lincoln University's Dr Oliver Burman, is published online
    in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

    An animal living in a world where it is regularly threatened by
    predators will develop a negative emotion or 'mood', such as anxiety,
    whereas one in an environment with plenty of opportunities to acquire
    resources for survival will be in a more positive mood state.

I tried addressing the difference between having emotions and being
able to realize one is feeling that emotion when I invoked Skinner and
Radical Behaviorism.

Also, it is common for someone to react out of anger (just to pick one
emotion as an example at random) to another without ever admitting to
themselves on a conscious level that they are angry at that person. It's
that kind of thing Marriage Counselors and Family Therapists can make
a fortune off of.

But I think it's only fair to add this article to the conversation.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of
mi...@aishdas.org        greater vanity in others; it makes us vain,
http://www.aishdas.org   in fact, of our modesty.
Fax: (270) 514-1507              -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980)

 
From: Micha Berger _micha@aishdas.org_ (mailto:mi...@aishdas.org) 



RSW's first vaad in Alei Shur is one for "Hislamdus"....
The  goal of this particular avodah is to say Adon Olam with hislamdus --
not to  actively increase one's kavanah, but to become more aware of how
one says it  as it is being said. 

 



.....Where should tzedaqah go -- is it better to give to  established
institutions, which have more skill at using the money, but you  end up
paying for that skill, or to private individuals?

Perhaps it  depends on which aspect of our relationship to HQBH we are
trying to  emulate.

Emulating the Adon Olam would be working wholesale, and thus  push more
toward supporting communal institutions.


Emulating Chai Goali would be having a personal stake in an  individual,
and therefore push toward the matan beseiser in the mail-slot  kind
of giving.

What do you think? A valid take-home lesson from Adon  Olam? No?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha  Berger            
mi...@aishdas.org     





>>>>>
I'm going to tell you what I think, but you're not going to like it.   I 
think that chassidus has much more warmth and heart than does mussar, and  
there's a good reason why the one attracted hundreds of thousands while the  
other attracted...dozens.  That was in Europe and kal vechomer in  America.
 
I think a heart-warming story and a beautiful niggun will inspire many more 
 acts of tzedakah -- whether communal or private -- than will weeks of 
pondering  Adon Olam and how best to practice Imitatio Dei.  
 
Furthermore, chassidus includes a hefty dose of kabbalah -- even if it's  
just kabbalah-lite for most people -- which makes people feel that every good 
 deed, every mitzva and every tefillah, activates wheels within wheels in  
the Heavenly spheres and has powerful effects throughout the cosmos.   By 
contrast, mussar inspires the thought that you can spend a whole lifetime  
trying to change just one midah without succeeding, and most of what we do is  
just an exercise in futility.  Hevel havalim, hakol hevel.
 
People need a combination of mind and heart to inspire them.   I  really 
think that thinking about Adon Olam just won't cut it.  However,  singing Adon 
Olam to a beautiful melody -- just might.
 
 


--Toby Katz
==========



-------------------- 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100804/bada4169/attachment-0001.htm>

Old MYG:
The underlined words are conclusive proof that the canon of statutory
construction ejusdem
generis applies. Under that principle, "where general words follow specific
words in a statutory
enumeration, the general words are construed to embrace only objects similar
in nature to those
objects enumerated by the preceding specific words." Circuit City Stores,
Inc. v. Adams, 532
U.S. 105, 114-15 (2001). Courts use ejusdem generis in conjunction with
common sense and
legislative history to discern the legislature's intent in writing a
statute.

I was struck by the similarity between ejusdem generis and "P'rat u'klal,
ein b'klal ela mah she'b'prat."
---------------------


Mah She'b'prat is actually the rule when one encounters a Klal u'Prat, not
the reverse. My apologies for mixing it up!

KT,
MYG

In the past we have discussed the permissibility of davening outdoors

In todays halacha from ROY he discusses one who is on a tiyul.
One preferably one should daven in a shul he allows davening in a minyan
outdoors. They should stand near each other but bidieved it is okay
as long as they hear the chazzan. They also bring that the group should
not be on two sides of a road which is a separation between them

-- 
Eli Turkel

> From: "Prof. Levine" _Larry.Levine@stevens.edu_
>> I believe the Reb Moshe has a teshuva in which he says that one can
>> switch  from Nusach Sefard ... to Ashkenaz, because virtually
>> everyone in  Europe davened Ashkenaz originally until the advent of
>> Chassidus.  I am  not sure, but I doubt that he would approve of
>> someone who davens Ashkenaz  switching to Sefard.

> This comes up at least once a year on Avodah so I will write my annual
> comment:
> Lithuanian poskim say that you can switch from Nusach Sfard...
> Chassidim say that you can switch from Nusach Ashkenaz to Nusach Sfard...
> So the bottom line is whether you're a Litvak or a chossid, everyone  else
> can change to your nusach but you can't change to theirs.

I was told Rabbi Abadi permits anyone to pray Nusach Ashkenaz in a
Ashkenazi shul. Nusach Edot Mizrach in a Sephardi shul, Temani in
a Temani, etc. Never heard if he says it is permissible to enter a
hasidish shul.

I heard he holds it is forbidden to enter a Conservative shul even to vote !!


------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 27, Issue 156
***************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."