Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 195

Tue, 27 Sep 2011

• 1. Re: RYBS: Sources for "Lonely Man of Faith" (Efraim Yawitz)
• 2. Re: R. Reisman's question (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 3. kosher switch (Chana Luntz)
• 4. Shabbath In An Airport (Liron Kopinsky)
• 5. Re: Using Non-Jewish Tunes For Mussaf of Rosh Hashanah? (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 6. Re: Using Non-Jewish Tunes For Mussaf of Rosh Hashanah? (Simon Montagu)
• 7. Is Rosh HaShanah A Day Of Tshuva? (Prof. Levine)
• 8. Re: Humanoids, Who Cares? What Difference Does it Make? (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: Using Non-Jewish Tunes For Mussaf of Rosh Hashanah? (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Using Non-Jewish Tunes For Mussaf of Rosh Hashanah? (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: RYBS: Sources for "Lonely Man of Faith" (Yitzchak Schaffer)
• 12. Rabbis: Jewish law prohibits walkouts at IDF ceremonies (Prof. Levine)
• 13. Keser on Shin on Tefillin (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: R. Reisman's question (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 15. Re: Humanoids, Who Cares? What Difference Does it Make? (Lisa Liel)

    On Sep 26, 2011, at 9:58, Yitzchak Schaffer <yitzchak.schaf...@gmx.com>
wrote:

    > I think one may be Idea of the Holy:
    > http://www.amazon.com/Idea-Holy-R-Otto/dp/0195002105
    >
    > IIRC Otto spoke of Abraham as Knight of Faith, which I think RYBS
adopts or adapts.

I was hoping people would understand that I was bothered by the very fact
that RYBS would have based his most famous essay on Jewish thought on
Christian thinkers without even mentioning the fact.  From Brill, it seems
that the ideas were practically copied right out of books by Brunner and
Barth.  Does anyone else have trouble with this?

Shana Tova to all,

Ephraim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110927/ff9cd43c/attachment-0001.htm>

Rav Elazar M. Teitz wrote:
> on the day of his birth, a boy is ben yom echad, not ben zero
> yamim [...]  a boy's bris takes place when he is seven days
> old [...] the Torah calls him "ben sh'monas yamim"

and R' Zev Sero added:
> And a lamb is "ben shana", and fit for the korban tamid, from
> its birth *until* its first birthday, velo ad bichlal.

We have the same thing by hechsher keilim.

My gut feeling had always been for "ben yomo" to mean "a day old", and
"aino ben yomo" to be "not yet a day old". Until tonight, it was very
difficult for me to understand that they are actually the reverse of that.

But thank you, Rav Teitz and R' Sero. I finally understand how "ben yomo" means "during its first day", and "aino ben yomo" means "no longer in its first day".

Oh yeah - I'm quite satisfied with how this answers both R Reisman's question about Moshe Rabeinu, and my question on the MB. Thanks again!

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
60-Year-Old Mom Looks 27
Mom Reveals Free Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4e81400e10b2d57ce6fst05vuc

RET writes:

> While R. Rosen writes against the kosher switch, I note that Zomet does
> allow the use pf a dishwasher on shabbat subject to several restrictions
> 
> http://www.zomet.org.il/Eng/?CategoryID=250&;ArticleID=105
> 
> Anyone know how accepted these conclusions are?

In theory or in practice?

In theory, I can't see anybody disagreeing with Zomet on this one on
*halachic* grounds (unless you consider disabling the safety switch a
pikuach nefesh risk and hence a halachic ground), unless you accept Rav
Moshe's position that we should not do anything with time clocks set before
Shabbat except lights.  

In practice, what Zomet have written is almost certainly not practical, as
it involves getting an engineer to disable the safety switch on the
dishwasher.  Now that is clearly not just a hassle, but, while safety
standards might well be lower in Israel than they are, for example, in the
UK, I would be extremely surprised if you would find a CORGI registered
electrician here who would be prepared to go disabling a safety switch of
this nature.  Such safety switches are put in for a reason, and I would have
thought it was not worth it for them to risk their reputation by doing so.
Not to mention that even if there is no pikuach nefesh risk in disabling
this, you would probably invalidate your house insurance policy, at least
vis a vis the dishwasher.

But I agree with RMB here, there is no comparison between a setting a time
clock *before* shabbas on a dishwasher that will then come on during shabbas
without any further human intervention, and a switch which involves the
element of human activity to occur on shabbas.

Where there may be a level of comparison is between setting a time switch on
a dishwasher before shabbas where the safety switch on the dishwasher has
*not* been disabled.  Because there you have one of the ways (albeit the
least innovative way) that this switch apparently attempts to avoid grama -
ie the removal of an obstacle.  

As I understand it, the discussion regarding grama centres on two cases: (a)
throwing wheat up into the air whereby the air separates the wheat from the
chaff.  This is an av melacha issur d'orisa, despite the fact that it is not
the human being who does the separating, but the wind, so arguably this
should be grama and permissible.  (b) if there is a fire, placing in front
of the path of the fire some barrels filled with water, because, when the
fire reaches them, it will burst them open and cause the water to come and
out and extinguish the fire.  This is understood by the gemora to be grama
and permissible on shabbas (at least, according the standard Ashkenazi
interpretation in a case of great need, such as the need to put out a fire).

Now it has been argued that even the case of the fire involves putting
something (ie the barrels) in front of the fire, thus ultimately causing the
barrels to break and the fire to go out, but that if it was merely a matter
of removing an obstacle (ie let's say that these barrels happened to be
anyway in the path of the fire, but there was something else in the way that
would divert the fire from them, and you took that something else away) that
is a step beyond what even the gemora describes, and thus can be understood
to be even better than grama, and hence (arguably) even according to the
Ashkenazi position, mutar l'chatchila.

Now note that in fact this psak of Zomet's regarding dishwashers clearly
rejects the idea that merely taking away an obstacle is better than grama
and hence mutar, because that is what is involved with dishwashers when you
do not disable the safety switch.  That is, even if you set the time switch
before Shabbat, so long as the door is open, the safety switch would operate
(if the power were on) to prevent the dishwasher working.  So by closing the
door (an action you will do on Shabbat) you would be taking away the
obstacle (open door) that prevents the dishwasher from working when the
power ultimately comes on, and this Zomet holds is not permissible.  On the
other hand, I believe there are others who do allow the removal of an
obstacle (ie shutting the door) even not in a case of great need (and noting
of course that this idea that you need great need to do grama on shabbas is
a Rema, so that, according to most Sephardi poskim, certainly shutting the
door on shabbas that might ultimately lead to the dishwasher working is
permissible).

But, it seems to me, the more innovative bit about this kosher switch is the
introduction of randomness.  The point being that, if you toss a coin, you
have a 50% chance of not getting a head.  If you toss it again, then you
only have a 25% chance of not getting a head on one of those two times.  If
you toss your coin again and again and again, the chances of you not getting
a head at least once gets smaller and smaller and smaller.  BUT the chance
that you never get a head remains (and will remain until infinity).   So in
theory this kosher switch might *never* work, it just means that the
probability of it never working gets smaller and smaller and smaller the
longer time goes on (and the more coin tosses are done).  Up until now, all
analysis' of grama, as far as I am aware, assume certainty of operation.
Indeed RYBS's analysis of what constitutes grama would seem to me to be
particularly impacted by this, because it particularly assumes a definite
force in motion, and it seems difficult to say that one has a force in
motion if at any particular time there is only a fifty per cent chance that
something will happen, depending on a coin toss (note that, as I have
written on this list before, I remain to be convinced that RYBS's analysis
actually works for the two cases in the gemora, or, at least to the extent
that it does, that the logical conclusion is not that eg adjusting time
switches on shabbas are not then within the permissible form of grama - ie I
remain to be convinced that using the analysis of RYBS, one gets to the
conclusion of the impermissibility of time switches that is generally drawn
from his analysis.)  But even assuming the correctness of the analysis as
people such as RHS assume it to be, it seems to me that this particular
addition marks a major extra fact that an RYBS type analysis needs to
grapple with, because the force that will turn the timeswitch on is not in
motion, and will not be set in motion unless and until a head has been
thrown.  It seemed to me that RGS missed this whole aspect in his discussion
on Hirhurim.

Now you could say that even winnowing relies on a level of randomness, since
winds are notoriously random, and the wind in question might just drop just
as you threw the wheat in the air.   But that is clearly a different level
and nature of randomness than only having something work (eg a wind blow) if
a coin is tossed and lands on heads.  It doesn't seem to me that Zomet in
this letter (or RGS) has really grappled with the implications of this
particular part of the switch.  That is not to say that there are not other
reasons not to use light switches even if they could be designed to be
halachically compliant (minhag yisrael is also a powerful halachic aspect,
and one that the makers of the switch do not grapple with).  Also the
suggestion that one should install these to minimise the chillul shabbas of
those in the household who are not frum I do find rather odd.  No doubt
installing LEDs rather than regular lights would also qualify, but we hardly
here a call to do that (in fact, I have yet to hear anybody advertise LED
lighting on the grounds that if one accidentally switch on a light, one is
less likely to be doing an issur d'orisa, which seems to me to have more
basis in our sources, ie minimising shogeg, rather than worrying about those
who are b'mezid).  But I think we need to separate out these kind of
arguments from what seems to me to be the extremely interesting halachic
ramifications of what does strike me as a new approach (although maybe it
isn't, and those working in the field of grama switches for hospitals and
the like have already been utilising aspects of this, perhaps those who work
in the field more intimately can tell me). 

> --
> Eli Turkel

K'tiva v'chasima tova

Chana

In Areivim the following exchange took place regarding people possibly
needing to spend shabbat in an airport.

RET:
> > What Shabbos emergency?  They are not doing any melacha.  At worse
> > they have to spend the shabbat in the airport.
>


> RJFS:
> If you arrive in a city on Shabbath, you do not have access to the
> city's txum; your txum is 4 amoth around your body.  By stating the
> above, you are apparently pasqening that every airport, together with
> the runways that surround it, is a reshuth hayyaxid, and equivalent to
> 4 amoth for the purposes of this halakha.  That may be the law, but if
> it is, it is not so obvious a law that it is proper to present it
> without any explanation or exposition, as you have done.
>

Rabbi Revah in Los Angeles gave a drasha one shabbat about this. Of course,
I can't remember all the details, but here is some of what he said:
There is a difference of opinion whether your techum is set by your position
over land when Shabbat enters, or where your plane lands. According to the
first opinion, he said you are stuck in the airport, but that the airport is
considered a reshut hayachid and you could go anywhere in it (at least in
the current terminal). I do not remember if he discussed what you would do
if exiting the plane involved going on the taxiway.

According to the second opinion, you would have access to the local techum,
assuming the airport is in the city (like it is in LA, but is not in
Denver).

The bigger issue is what do you do with your carry-on luggage which contains
your laptop/wallet. I think he said you can directly ask a goy to carry it
for you and put it in a safe place, but I'm not sure.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110927/7c8ed75d/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Micha Berger wrote:

> ... it was old even when he was born in 1365 or so. (And thus to
> be considered minhag kedin.)

Are you suggesting that there is a specific cut-off year for determining what counts as "minhag kedin"? Or even an approximate era?

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Penny Stock Soaring 3000%
Sign up for Free to find out what the next 3000% Stock Winner is!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4e813dab6892657c460st05vuc

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:39 AM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 05:11:01PM -0400, Rafi Hecht wrote:
>: By the way, speaking of non-Jewish music and Kol Nidrei, ever wonder where
>: the tune comes from? You guesses it - Classical music! Beethoven's "Adagio
>: Quasi Un Poco Andante - Beethoven Op. 131. 14/6 C#," in fact!
...
> Just the opening phrase. But, you underestimate the Ashkenazi melody
> for Kol Nidrei. It was one of the tunes the Maharil declared miSinai,
> meaning it was old even when he was born in 1365 or so. (And thus to
> be considered minhag kedin.) Beethoven was born in 1770. If there was
> borrowing, it went the other way.

Shortly before writing Op. 131, Beethoven had been commissioned to
write a piece for a concert held by the Jewish community in Vienna to
celebrate the opening of a new Beit Knesset/community centre. Because
of the quotation from Kol Nidrei in op 131, musicologists assume that
he took some time to hear the melodies used in the shul, even though
the piece that he wrote for the Jewish Community, the "Dedication of
the House" overture, doesn't use any Jewish themes.


[A correction came in a 2nd email. -micha]

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Simon Montagu <simon.mont...@gmail.com> wrote:
> the piece that he wrote for the Jewish Community, the "Dedication of
> the House" overture, doesn't use any Jewish themes.

My memory was confused here. See
http://www.schillerinstitute.org/fid_97-01/992_mend_spm.html and
search for "Vienna's Salomon Sulzer" for a more accurate version.

 From http://revach.net/article.php?id=4080

We all know that Rosh HaShana is not a day where we bombard Hashem 
with our wish list for the upcoming year.  But is it a day of 
Tshuva?  On one hand we don't say Slichos and avoid all mention of 
any reference to aveiros on this day, but on the other hand we blow 
the Shofar which is very much tied to tshuva.  We also know that 
there are Aseres Yimei Tshuva of which Rosh HaShana is part of.  So 
is it a day of tshuva or is it just a day to coronate our King and 
kick off our new year?

Rav Moshe Shmuel Shapiro says that indeed it is a day of Tshuva but a 
special kind of Tshuva.  On Yom Kippur we do tshuva for each and 
every one of our aveiros.  Not so on Rosh HaShana.  The Rambam says 
that the blast of the Shofar is to awaken us from our slumber and 
remind us to do tshuva.  What kind of tshuva?  The Rambam continues 
that we must remember our creator and stop sleeping through life 
indulging in all the silly pleasures of this world.  We need to peer 
deeply into our hearts and change our outlook.

Rav Moshe Shmuel says that on Yom Kippur we do tshuva for all the 
actual aveiros that we did.  On Rosh HaShana we repair our character 
and out outlook on life.  We need to repent for our anger, hatred, 
jealousy, lust after money and food, and so on, says the Rambam 
(Tshuva 7:3).  Rosh HaShana is a day to reflect on the year that was 
and to chart a course for the new year.  Once we've made that change 
over the next ten days we then look at the details.  We assess the 
actual damage and make repairs.

On Rosh Hashana we don't need viduy and all the outward 
manifestations of Tshuva.  We need deep and honest 
contemplation.   We need to recognize who is the boss, who created 
the world on this day, and what our job is.  This we do on the first 
day of the year and we start by crowning our King and pointing our 
eyes and thoughts towards him.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110927/ef230123/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 10:41:53AM +0000, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
: It is all too clear to me that I don't understand RMR's question.
: 
: The subtitle is "Insights into the weekly Torah portion", and it is
: written by someone who teaches at Aish Hatorah. No, you don't have
: to accept his positions, but is that enough to passul it from being
: Talmud Torah?

We aren't discussing the book, we're discussing one atypical statement
about pre-Adamic humanoids. Did the "afar min ha'adamah" evolve into a
homo sapien before HQBH hafach be'apav nishmas chayim?

I see RMR as asking what's really a compound question:

1- Is the mode by which HQBH created Adam relevant to our lives? Does
it even qualify as aggadita, or is it a historical curiosity?

2- Okay, people are curious, and so they'll explore the question. But
if the problem is thorny and might lead people religiously astray, is
the right approach to find an answer they may not find compelling, or
is it to point out that the question is (depending on the answer to #1)
either on the periphery to the religion or outside it altogether?

3- What does the mitzvah of talmud torah mean WRT learning miqra? Does the
presence of the words "Vayitzer H' E-lokim es haadam afar min ha'adamah"
mean that knowing what it is HQBH actually did to produce Adam's body
is part of understanding the pasuq?

As an aside, related to no.s 2 and 3, I suggested here more than once
that leshitas haRambam, studying aggadita is not talmud Torah, to the
extent that it's outside of miqra, mishnah and gemara. Rather, in
Yesodei haTorah 2:1-2 he places it within the mitzvah of ahavas Hashem.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             None of us will leave this place alive.
mi...@aishdas.org        All that is left to us is
http://www.aishdas.org   to be as human as possible while we are here.
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 05:53:51PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
>> Just the opening phrase. But, you underestimate the Ashkenazi melody
>> for Kol Nidrei. It was one of the tunes the Maharil declared miSinai,
>> meaning it was old even when he was born in 1365 or so. (And thus to
>> be considered minhag kedin.) Beethoven was born in 1770. If there was
>> borrowing, it went the other way.

> Not that I'm disagreeing, but how do you know that the tune we have  
> today is the one the Maharil was talking about?

Because Yekkes and chazanim who take chazanus seriously wouldn't tamper
with any of the MiSinai tunes. We have a very strong living mesorah.

(Although I would consider the Ashkanzi melody to Qol Nidrei to really
be a narrow range rather than a single specific tune. At "veqinusei"
or so onward there is some regional and creative divergence.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man is capable of changing the world for the
mi...@aishdas.org        better if possible, and of changing himself for
http://www.aishdas.org   the better if necessary.
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 03:04:54AM +0000, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
: R' Micha Berger wrote:
: > ... it was old even when he was born in 1365 or so. (And thus to
: > be considered minhag kedin.)

: Are you suggesting that there is a specific cut-off year for determining
: what counts as "minhag kedin"? Or even an approximate era?

I'm not suggesting anything. I'm telling you what the Maharil did.

It's a famous story. From Sefer Maharil, Hil' YK (tr R' Murray Singerman):
    Our teacher, Rabbi Yaakov Seigel [Maharil] said we do not change the
    custom of the place for any matter, including for melodies they are
    unaccustomed to sing. He told us the story about himself that once
    he was the prayer leader in the community of Ransburg for the High
    Holidays. He was using the melodies of the custom for the Austrian
    community, because that was the custom. He was bothered because they
    used for the Haftara the tune of the Reines community. He told us
    he recited on that day the penitential prayer, "I, I am the One who
    speaks," which R. Ephraim set up to recite in Musaf. He thought it
    was a mitsva to say it there for the honor of R. Ephraim, the author,
    who is buried there. The leaders of the community said it was not
    their custom to say that penitential prayer. Because of [R. Yaakov's]
    desire to honor R. Ephraim, he did not listen [to the leaders of the
    community]. A year later, [R. Yaakov's] daughter died on Yom Kippur.
    The Rav's statement [above that we do not change the custom of the
    place for any matter] was shown to be just, for his daughter was
    stricken, because he changed the custom of the place.

And so the Rama summarizes in OC 619:1. The MA says the problem is that
changing the tune will confuse the tzibur. The Gra holds the problem is
that it opens the door for machloqes. See also the MA in 68:1.

I believe the notion of miSinai is not that there is a cut-off year for
minhagim, although some Yekkes sometimes talk like the Maharil's era
defines True Minhag Ashkenaz. Rather, that minhagim get more binding with
age (RRW would liken this to peer review). There is some age at which a
minhag is as binding as din, and the Maharil held this was true for the
MiSinai tunes.

See R' Chazan Sherwood Goffin's essay on MiSinai tunes in general and
on Yamim Noraim in particular at
<http://www.yutorah.org/togo/roshhashana/articles/
Rosh_Hashanah_To-Go_-_5770_Cantor_Goffin.pdf>
(or <http://bit.ly/fsVoeb>). He notes that what is usually canonized into
minhag is not the specific melody, but what he calls the 3 "M"s: Mode (the
type of scale and motif), Mood (don't use a dance tune for Av haRachamim),
and Min haQodesh. His discussion of this third criterion adds a source I
don't recall seeing on this thread yet -- Chagiga 15b says that Acher's
divergence from mesorah started with "zemer Yevanei lo pasaq mipumeih".
So should we be comfortable singing zemer Yevani at all? And what is
zemer Yevani? Might be as hard to pin down as chokhmah Yevanis.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I always give much away,
mi...@aishdas.org        and so gather happiness instead of pleasure.
http://www.aishdas.org           -  Rachel Levin Varnhagen
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On 09/27/2011 04:57, Efraim Yawitz wrote:
> I was hoping people would understand that I was bothered by the very
> fact that RYBS would have based his most famous essay on Jewish thought
> on Christian thinkers without even mentioning the fact.  From Brill, it
> seems that the ideas were practically copied right out of books by
> Brunner and Barth.  Does anyone else have trouble with this?
>

Well look at R' Saadia, he followed faithfully (well maybe not) in the 
Kalamic tradition. To say nothing of Rambam and Aristotle. Jewish 
philosophy has historically been informed by non-Jewish philosophy to a 
great extent. R' SR Hirsch was against this at least in theory, and did 
criticize the Rambam for it. The Rambam writes in the Moreh that the 
philosophic tradition was actually an esoteric Jewish tradition that was 
lost, so I suppose Rambam would deflect RSRH's attack that way.

In any case, RSRH wrote in 19 Letters that Judaism should be developed 
from within, organically. From the style of Horeb it seems he meant from 
the Chumash and the mitzvos themselves. Seems like RYBS also attempted 
this in his Brisker philosophy, although as you mention he was 
well-versed in general philosophy and wove it into his own thought.

-- 
Yitzchak Schaffer

 From http://tinyurl.com/3l8lnyq


Rabbi David Bigman states Jewish law requires that when a conflict 
arises between the prohibition against hearing women singing and harm 
to human dignity Torah does not require soldiers to leave.

See the above URL for the rest of this article.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110927/4d549168/attachment-0001.htm>

Yet another minhag survey....

Does anyone know if having a keser on the shin's (both three and four
headed) on the outside of the bayis of the shel rosh is a matter of
minhag or personal taste, and if minhag -- which qehillos have this
minhag? What's the sevara pro or con?

Actually, pro seems self-evident...

Ashkenazi batim have shin's that resemble the Kesav Bet Yosef. Sepharadi
batim, Vellish. I never looked that closely, but I presume Chassidish
batim have a Kesav Ari shin. (With the leftmost "head" connected to the
upright line at the bottom-right corner, rather than in the middle -- as
per the Beis Yoseif. So if we make the shin look basically the way it does
on the kelaf, why not (other than extreme difficulty) make it exactly?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The true measure of a man
mi...@aishdas.org        is how he treats someone
http://www.aishdas.org   who can do him absolutely no good.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Samuel Johnson

This post is a followup to my own earlier post, in which I thanked REMT and
RZS for resolving R Reisman's question, when they pointed out that "ben
sh'monas yamim" means "in his eighth day", and that a lamb is "ben shana"
*during* its first year.

According to this, how are we to understand what Moshe Rabeinu said. Let's
look at his exact words, from the beginning of Vayeilech: "Ben meah v'esrim
shana anochi hayom." According to REMT and RZS, this would mean, "Today I
am in my 120th year."

I suppose one way of interpreting this could be, "Today I am in my 120th
year. But tomorrow, if I live so long, which I won't, I'd be in my 121st
year." This reading would be consistent with the commonly-accepted
chronology that he was born on 7 Adar 2368, and that this speech, and his
death, occurred on 7 Adar 2488.

But to me, it seems unnatural to stress the word "today" in this manner. It
seems more likely that "today" would be used to indicate something new,
which did not exist yeaterday. According to this, what he meant was, "Today
I am in my 120th year. But yesterday I was not yet in my 120th year."

I think this is a much simpler way of understanding the words, but it
totally messes up our chronology, because according to this, if he was born
in 2368, then he entered his 120th year in 2487. And if he entered his
120th year in 2488, he couldn't have been born until 2369.

Can anyone suggest a way in which "Today I am in my 120th year" is consistent with the 2368/2488 chronology?

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Penny Stock Jumping 3000%
Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4e81e720ce7b3802b54st02vuc

On 9/27/2011 7:48 AM, Micha Berger wrote:
> I see RMR as asking what's really a compound question:

> 1- Is the mode by which HQBH created Adam relevant to our lives? Does
> it even qualify as aggadita, or is it a historical curiosity?

Whose lives?

Lisa



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 195
***************************************

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..."