Avodah Mailing List

Volume 30: Number 19

Sun, 15 Apr 2012

• 1. No Simcha on Pesach? (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Stopped learning Nach? (was Re: What does "Redemption/Geulah" mean?) (T613K@aol.com)
• 3. Re: Stopped learning Nach? (was Re: What does "Redemption/Geulah" mean?) (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: the eighth day of Pesach in golus (Elazar M. Teitz)
• 5. Re: The 8th Day of Pesach in Golus (T6...@aol.com)
• 6. Re: The 8th Day of Pesach in Golus (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: The 8th Day of Pesach in Golus (Liron Kopinsky)
• 8. Re: The 8th Day of Pesach in Golus (Liron Kopinsky)
• 9. The 8th Day of Pesach in Golus (Prof. Levine)
• 10. Re: No Simcha on Pesach? (Zev Sero)
• 11. Re: Fwd: Rabbi Hershel Schachter - True Freedom (Doron Beckerman)
• 12. Nusach twice excising Tal in Amidah AND "sab'einu mituvecha" or "mituvahh" (David Wacholder)
• 13. Re: Kama Maalot Tovot Lamakom Aleinu? (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 14. Re: Transition From Aramaic To Hebrew (kennethgmil...@juno.com)

I noticed something odd about the leining for the 8th day of Pesach.
(Devarim 16).

Pesach and Matzos are not called a chag, nor is there any mention
of simchah. Shavuos is "chag Shvuos" (v 9) and "vesamachta lifnei H'
E-lokekha" (v 10). Similarly "chas haSukos" (v 13) and "vesamachta
bechagekha" (v 14). But Pesach is just about the qorban, matzah and
chameitz. No notion of holiday or of joy -- although there is in Emor.
Why not?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 8th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Gevurah: When is holding back a
Fax: (270) 514-1507                           Chesed for another?

 


On 4/12/2012 9:38 AM, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:

" I believe  it was Rav Hutner ZT"L who once complained about how the 
Christians stole  Tanach from the Jews- after all they can quote Isaiah 
and Zedekiah better  than most Jews; as the Jews stopped learning these 
works."
 
 

From: Lisa Liel <l...@starways.net>

What?  When did  this happen?

Lisa

 
>>>>>
 
It seems to me that it wasn't the Christians who "stole" Tanach  from us by 
memorizing portions that few frum Jews study.  It was actually  the 
Haskalah, the Documentary Theory and all that -- turning Tanach into a field  of 
secular academic study -- that "stole" it from us, because the response of  
the yeshiva world was to look askance at anyone who had too deep an  interest 
in Tanach.  In the same way and for the same reason, the study of  Hebrew 
language and dikduk was "stolen" from us.  When did this all  happen?  In the 
19th century in Europe.  It has remained the norm in  most of the yeshiva 
world ever since then to discourage the study of Tanach and  of Ivrit (except 
in Israel, where dikduk IS studied in depth in the  chareidi world).
 
In the 20th century, as one godol remarked (name supplied on request), the  
study of Tanach was "saved" by the girls' schools, the Bais Yakov  movement 
and women's seminaries.  "If it were not for the women of  this generation, 
the study of Tanach would  be lost to us."
 
 
--Toby Katz
=============
Romney -- good values, good family, good  hair


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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120415/c949883a/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:46:09PM -0400, T6...@aol.com wrote:
: It seems to me that it wasn't the Christians who "stole" Tanach  from us by 
: memorizing portions that few frum Jews study.  It was actually  the 
: Haskalah, the Documentary Theory and all that...

Except that it was already true that we neglected Nakh and Mishnah in
Rabbeinu Tam's day, as I already posted.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

>Yesterday in EY was just Shabbos,  whereas here it was both Shabbos 
and the 8th Day of Yom Tov.  Therefore, it seems to me that there was 
more kedusha here yesterday than in EY.

Dare one say that yesterday it was preferable to be in Golus given 
the combination of the kedusha of Shabbos and the d'rabbonim kedusha 
of the 8th day of Pesach?<

     Why restrict the question to Shabbos? The same could be asked about
     any yom tov sheini, which has k'dushas chag in chutz la'aretz and is a
     yom chol in Eretz Yisraeil.

EMT


____________________________________________________________
57 Year Old Looks 27
Local Woman Reveals Wrinkle Secret That Has Doctors Angry.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4f8b26a8b05a4ef5a5st04vuc

From: "Prof. Levine"  <llev...@stevens.edu>

>>Yesterday in EY was just  Shabbos,  whereas here it was both Shabbos 
and the 8th Day of Yom  Tov.  Therefore, it seems to me that there was 
more kedusha here  yesterday than in EY.

Dare one say that yesterday it was preferable to be  in Golus given 
the combination of the kedusha of Shabbos and the d'rabbonim  kedusha 
of the 8th day of Pesach? <<

YL
 

>>>>>
 
On every yom tov sheni shel galuyos we have yom tov when those in E'Y do  
not.  We have that extra day because of sefeka deyoma, i.e., BECAUSE we are  
in galus.  What you are suggesting is that it is in general better to be in  
galus than in E'Y because our doubt as to what day it is somehow increases  
kedusha!  Needless to say this seems prima facie absurd to me.   
Additionally, it is only on yom tov that the day approximates the level of  kedusha 
that is present in E'Y every day of the year, which is why we only have  
duchening on yom tov while they duchen in E'Y every day.
 
 


--Toby Katz
=============
Romney -- good  values, good family, good  hair


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








-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120415/6007d5b4/attachment-0001.htm>

On 15/04/2012 10:39 AM, Prof. Levine wrote:
>
> Dare one say that yesterday it was preferable to be in Golus given the
> combination of the kedusha of Shabbos and the d'rabbonim kedusha of
> the 8th day of Pesach?

Certainly.  But it doesn't do much good, since to be in Chu"l for that
day one would also have to be there the previous day, and would miss
the full revelation of a yomtov in EY.

-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Prof. Levine <llev...@stevens.edu> wrote:

> Yesterday in EY was just Shabbos,  whereas here it was both Shabbos and
> the 8th Day of Yom Tov.  Therefore, it seems to me that there was more
> kedusha here yesterday than in EY.
>

That assumes that on a day of Chol the kedusha of EY and outside of EY is
the same. But since we can't quantify the levels of kedusha the land of EY
itself provides, for all we know Yom Tov + Shabbat in Ch"ul < EY even on a
chol day.

Kol Tuv,
Liron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120415/e9ed8c77/attachment-0002.htm>

On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Prof. Levine <llev...@stevens.edu> wrote:

> Yesterday in EY was just Shabbos,  whereas here it was both Shabbos and
> the 8th Day of Yom Tov.  Therefore, it seems to me that there was more
> kedusha here yesterday than in EY.
>

That assumes that on a day of Chol the kedusha of EY and outside of EY is
the same. But since we can't quantify the levels of kedusha the land of EY
itself provides, for all we know Yom Tov + Shabbat in Ch"ul < EY even on a
chol day.

Kol Tuv,
Liron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120415/e9ed8c77/attachment-0003.htm>

At 12:27 PM 4/15/2012, R. Micha wrote:

>On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 10:39:51AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
> > Dare one say that yesterday it was preferable to be in Golus given the
> > combination of the kedusha of Shabbos and the d'rabbonim kedusha of the
> > 8th day of Pesach?
>
>On the contrary, a reason often given for the importance of Bavel
>continuing their minhag avos was that it takes two days of yom tov in
>chu"l to get to the same qedushah as one day in Eretz Yisrael.

Let's say that it is indeed true that one needs two days of Yom Tov 
in Galus to add up to the same Kedusha as one day in EY.

Still,  looking at the 8th day of Pesach in Golus which fell on 
Shabbos this year,  is it not true that looking at this day alone 
that it had more kedusha than the same Shabbos day in EY which did 
not have the additional kedusha of Yom Tov?  This was my point.  I 
was not focusing on the sum of the kedusha of the entire Yom 
Tov,  just on the last day here.

YL


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120415/332d1c94/attachment-0001.htm>

On 15/04/2012 12:48 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> Pesach and Matzos are not called a chag,

"Bechag hamatzos" (in the second-last pasuk of the leining)

> No notion of holiday or of joy -- although there is in Emor.

Where is joy in Emor?  It looks exactly like Re'eh.  Chag but no
simcha.

-- 
Zev Sero        "Natural resources are not finite in any meaningful
z...@sero.name    economic sense, mind-boggling though this assertion
                  may be. The stocks of them are not fixed but rather
                 are expanding through human ingenuity."
                                            - Julian Simon

Why was RHS so stunned? If the high school in question takes metzuyonim
only (and if he is referring to Nachalas Haleviyim, then it pretty much
is), then the goal of that high school is to produce people who will sit
and learn for a very long time, no less than the goal of an Air Force cadet
school is to produce Air Force pilots. And the Netziv in Terumah says this:

It is the will of the king that anyone who is fit for battle should become
a soldier, and anyone who shirks this, even if, based on the laws of the
kingdom, he is not obligated to be a soldier, nonetheless that is not the
primary will of the king. Similarly, it is the will of Hashem that all Jews
who are fit to toil in Torah should be Bnei Torah, and one who shirks this,
even if he has reasons which bring this about for him, nonetheless he is
called ?Not doing the will of Hashem,? in Berachos (35) and Bava Basra
(99). Although they were involved with Avodah, nonetheless since they were
not toiling in Torah as when they were in the desert, that is not called
doing the will of Hashem.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120415/e3d76c3a/attachment-0001.htm>

To what purpose -     after the grand Tal prayer Musaf of Yom Tov Rishon,
Nusach Ashkenaz slights Tal by not mentioning it at all, to the detriment
of clarity. .


Perhaps the year-round rainy climates of Europe made mention even of Tal ?
that least stormy precipitation -  diplomatically risky. Chazal?s ?Mashiv
Haru?ach UMorid hatal? was dropped with no footprints left. In the Bakashot
section, V?tein Bracha sounds suitable for almost anything, but is quite
Nistar compared to requests of Tallelei  at even long length by Eidot
Mizrach.

Ritva in Taanis [?]says that in EY and Mid-East rain after Nissan ? is Open
Miracle. If so there is no insult in mentioning Tal as rain is Against
nature.

Not even mentioning Tal may be a form of silent wistful wishing for the
Geulah, for a renewed relationship, which this season has not yet arrived.
Nissan may usher it in.

Tefilas Tal becomes a one-time attempt to show gratitude. On a daily
routine basis we cannot address it, so as not to offend the ?Giver of
Rain?.

 ===

?Put Blessing onto the earth, and make us fed from [?her? ?Your? Goodness
and Bless our Year like the Good Years?.

 Which of three meanings is preferred? Which of three conduits of
sustenance?

Box #1: RosH in a responsum  says the only True wording, theologically
sound,  is ?Your [Not hers!] Good or Bounty ? which naturally is Diaspora
Ashkenaz.

He rejects the Sfarad version of the wording is ?Her Good? ? is the Good of
the Year. That is clear in Eidot Mizrach sidurim, wording the entire
passage based on it. This is interesting theology,  that hashem blesses the
years, and the Year leaks it for us and we pray for that. .

Siddur Vilna says uses Her Good, taking from Al hamichya ? put Blessing on
the face of the Adamah ? earth or soil ? and  we beseech hashem to fill us
from the bounty of the soil earth.  Tentatively,  bless the good or
potential blessing of the soil, which in turn will grow grain and fruit,
and  allow us to be filled by it

So he uses Sfarad ? now EY Ashkenaz and GRA wording ? with different
meaning, deviating from  Eidot Mizrach and Sfarad

SAYING HAGESHEM - BACK TO WHERE?

Despite its strategic place at beginning of Second Blessing, Rain is a
?hazardous utterance?. Out of season ? last six days of Passover ? it lands
you ?Back to Go? ? by Baruch atah Hashem.  That is at least the opinion of
Raaviyah. Which if any Rishon says to go back only to Atah Gibor? Based on
what?

 We see that improper mentioning of even such Divine a favor as Rain - ?
can be considered insulting improper and gauche, invalidating the entire
long list of Praises and Requests.



 Rain is a present to a family member ? a token of love. Therefore it must
be treated as such ? one cannot complain of it, even in the face of
imminent flooding. Like in family life, it can show great feeling of
connection or its opposite, it can show pleasure in giving or mixed
emotions..



Am I missing to my detriment some elementary discussions from the past?

  .

-- 
David Wacholder
Cell: 917-742-7838
Email: dwachol...@gmail.com
dwachol...@optonline.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120415/420250c5/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Liron Kopinsky asked:

> In the Hagaddah, we go through the math of how many makkot there
> were in mitzrayim and at the yam suf. We say that since each
> maka in mitzrayim was an "etzba" and at the yam suf it was a
> "yad" that there were 5X as many plagues at the yam than in Egypt.
>
> This is fine except for the fact that we say "B'yad chazaka: zo
> hadever" (With a strong hand: this refers to the dever.) Why don't
> we say that dever counts as 5 times more than the other plagues?

I had previously approached this question by noting a contradiction: The
plague of kinnim (Shemos 8:15) seems to teach that each of the plagues (or
at least that one plague) was made by a finger of G-d, while the dever
(Shemos 9:3) seems to teach that each plague (or at least that one) was
made by His whole hand.

I'd like to suggest that this aparent contradiction is problematic for Rabbi Eliezer, but not for Rabbi Akiva.

Rabbi Eliezer, in the very section of the haggadah that we're discussing,
considers all ten plagues to be fourfold in nature. But Rabbi Akiva
considers them to be fivefold, and thus RLK's question is not a problem. Of
course, Rabbi Akiva's *main* limud is the pasuk "charon apo", but he could
very easily accept finger/hand as a second demonstration of the principle.

In other words, Rabbi Akiva *might* say the following (and if he would not, I hope he would forgive me for putting words in his mouth):

The pasuk "charon apo" shows that each plague had a fivefold nature. In
fact, in Shemos 9:3, at the plague of dever, HaShem told Moshe to warn
Par'oh of this "hand" which would soon attack his animals. In no way does
this contradict Par'oh's chartumim, who saw only one manifestation (of the
five) at the plague of kinnim (in Shemos 8:15). Thus, all ten of the
plagues in Mitzrayim (including both kinnim and dever) were fivefold,
giving a total of fifty destructive aspects. And so, at the Yam Suf, where
He put His Yad HAGEDOLAH on Mitzrayim, there were 250 plagues.

Let's keep in mind that the Torah is a Shirah - poetry. The rhetoric and
anthropomorphism does not need to be precise on every level. I accept that
the symbolism at the dever and kinim could be a problem. But the Yad
Hagedolah at the sea can easily be five times as [fill in your own word
here] as the Yad at the dever.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4f8b3c81cd2824f6fb8st04vuc

R' Yaakov Shachter wrote:

> I just finished reciting the standard text of the `Eruv
> Tavshilin, which, like the Qaddish, like the Ha Laxma `Aniya,
> begins in Aramaic, and ends in Hebrew.
>
> What makes it interesting is that, precisely in the region where
> the text switches from Aramaic to Hebrew, there are two words of
> indeterminate language, words that could be either Aramaic or
> Hebrew. Specifically: either the last 3 words, or the last 4
> words, or the last 5 words, are Hebrew, while the rest of the
> words are Aramaic.

Could you be more specific about these words? You seem to be using a very different text than me.

I am looking at three different siddurim (Otzar Hatefilos, ArtScroll, and
Sacks/Koren/OU) and they are virtually identical, except for some vowelling
changes. In all three of them, the "vadai Aramaic" stops six words from the
end, not five, and in all three siddurim, those words are: "lanu ul'chol
yisrael hadarim ba'ir hazos".

There is one (possibly significant) difference between these three
siddurim, and that is the ArtScroll puts all six words in parentheses. This
*might* suggest that these six words are a later addition which is not said
by some nuschaos; if so, that could be strong evidence to them six being
the same language.

Looking to widen my data sample, I found two other siddurim (Birnbaum and
Hirsch/Feldheim) which have a slightly different wording. Again, the
beginning of the text differs only in vowelling, but the word "yisrael" is
missing in both of these. I suspect that this is the version RYS is using,
and the five words he is asking about are "lanu ul'chol hadarim ba'ir
hazos".

> Specifically: either the last 3 words, or the last 4 words, or
> the last 5 words, are Hebrew, while the rest of the words are
> Aramaic.

If you're using the text I think you are, then the 3rd word from the end is
"hadarim", which you think is definitely Hebrew. This surprises me. In my
Mandelkern, I was unable to find any Hebrew uses of "dalet resh" as a verb.
In contrast, Mandelkern does show a few places in Daniel 2-4 where this
shows up as an Aramaic word. (My guess is that this word is not from
Biblical Hebrew, but entered Rabbinic Hebrew from the Aramaic, and is found
in Rabbinic phrases such as mezuza being a "chovas hadar", an obligation of
the resident.)

I'm also surprised that you are unsure about the word "lanu". If the author
had wanted to use an Aramaic word, wouldn't he have chosen "lana" or "lan",
each of which appear in Brich Sh'meh?

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4f8b77fa2285b50b74bst06vuc


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 30, Issue 19
**************************************

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..."