Avodah Mailing List

Volume 30: Number 25

Sun, 22 Apr 2012

• 1. Re: two fictional sects (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 2. Re: What does "Redemption/Geulah" mean? (Poppers, Michael)
• 3. Re: Fwd: [DTT] A new Fear of Gd? (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Kama Maalot Tovot Lamakom Aleinu? (Arie Folger)
• 5. Re: Eretz Yisrael and the Roots of Ashkenaz (Arie Folger)
• 6. gevinat akum (Eli Turkel)
• 7. Re: Eretz Yisrael and the Roots of Ashkenaz (Arie Folger)
• 8. Re: Stopped learning Nach? (was Re: What does "Redemption/Geulah" mean?) (Ben Waxman)
• 9. Re: Stopped learning Nach? (Micha Berger)
• 10. Fwd: Re: Stopped learning Nach? (Ben Waxman)
• 11. Machar Chodesh (cantorwolb...@cox.net)
• 12. RSRH on Golus (Prof. Levine)
• 13. Re: RSRH on Golus (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: Particles of flour cannot become Chamets (Micha Berger)
• 15. The Origins of the Non-Jewish Custom Of 'Shlissel Challah' (Key Bread) (Prof. Levine)
• 16. Re: two fictional sects (Micha Berger)
• 17. Re: two fictional sects (Zev Sero)
• 18. Re: two fictional sects (Micha Berger)
• 19. Korbanot before the mishkan (Liron Kopinsky)
• 20. Re: two fictional sects (Zev Sero)

Sometimes we have a situation where a person makes a very general
statement, a comment about the general approach of Tosfos across all of
Shas Bavli. Several people seem to have made comments like that in this
thread.

I'm wondering if these comments are based merely on a survey of the
Tosfoses which appear in our printed gemaras, or if it also includes other
collections, of other Tosfoses.

Let's remember that Tosfos was not a specific person, or even a specific
group of people who edited their comments together. My understanding is
that the Tosfoses which appear in our printed gemaras were hand-picked by
the printers and publishers of the gemaras.

What I'm suggesting is this: If one notices a general trend among *all* the
Rishonim of Ashkenaz areas, *including* those Tosfoses which are not part
of the standard gemaras, then this trend would seem to be an important
point that Bnei Ashkenaz should pay heed to. But if one notices a trend,
merely among the Tosfoses which appear in our gemaras, that might signify
nothing more than the whims of the publishers.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4f8f625fc99e16580d1st03vuc

In Avodah V30n22, RAM responded to R'Micha:
>> Rav Hirsch places the "ge'ulah" in the same family as [yud ayin
>> lamed] (to progress), ... Our definition can thus be phrased as "a
>> process for the ultimate revelation of truth." <<
> My problem with this is that ge'ulah always appears in context of
> being the redemption of a group or of an individual. If it is reshaped
> into being a "revelation of truth", then I do not know how to apply it
> to phrases like "he was redeemed" or "we were redeemed". As I'm
> accustomed to hearing these phrases, they don't concern a search for
> truth as much as a search for salvation or vindication. <
RSRH al haTorah relates the first three l'shonos to the three aspects of
servitude b'nei Yisrael experienced as per what hQbH told Avraham at the
B'ris bein hab'sarim, with the 3rd lashon, "v'ga'alti," related to the 1st
aspect, geirus/being on their own ("ki geir yihyeh zar'echa"), i.e. the
lack of a goeil, someone who would "have their back."  Perhaps that
explanation, RAM, is more your speed :). 

> one of them - Go'alti - does not mention any goal or purpose; it only
> mentions the means by which it will be accomplished. So what WAS the
> goal? What does redemption *accomplish*? <
RSRH notes this, hence his explanation that hQbH, k'vayachol, made Himself
the "goeil" of b'nei Yisrael in order to eliminate the lack of a "goeil"
represented by being a geir b'eretz lo lahem. 

All the best from 
-- Michael Poppers via BB pager

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 06:50:08PM -0400, Poppers, Michael wrote:
: What R'Micha writes reminds me of the popular, but philosophically
: double-edged, "H' is here/H' is there/H' is truly everywhere" lyrics and
: of the dialectic between transcendence and immanence...

Or between that song and "Just one Shabbos/ Just one Torah/ Just one
Hashem in Heaven..." which Lub modified to "Who can't be seen" primarily
to be able to correct the rhyming line from "10 but not 11" commandments
to "... 613". But it really does seem to reflect the Litta vs Chassidus
split. Uncle Moishe, who I believe is Belz, unsurprisingly wrote a song
that emphasizes Immanence.

: would represent gilui Shchinah in a way we can't currently see baOlam
: hazeh, so I wouldn't dismiss it; and yir'as H' represents the level of
: awareness I constantly aspire to ("yir'ah" more in the sense of "r'iyah").

But I don't think what I said actually is related. Because I didn't
speak of olam hazeh or things I am aspiring to while alive. I quoted
Chazal's description of olam haba -- ateroseihem berosheihem venehenin
miziv hashechinah.

Thus, the Alter Rebbe of L, when he says he doesn't want olam haba,
just Osekha bilvad, isn't he contradicting the maamar chazal? Gan eden
is just the ability to sit before Him, with no intervening gashmius,
neither a body nor gashmi or evil desires, and enjoy Osekha bilvad.

Related is the Rambam's shitah that "olam haba" refers to the afterlife,
not (as per the Ramban) life after techiyas hameisim. And that in fact
leshitaso there is a second misah after techiyas hameisim. Because the
greatest good *is* Osekha bilvad, and as the Rambam cogently argues,
the unemcumbered soul is more able to receive and enjoy Him.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 11th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            strict justice?

RMB wrote:
> Li nir'eh the machloqes between 40 and 50 makos might really be
> about whether there is a difference between teva and neis.

Very beautiful insight.

Alternatively, it might really be a machloket about how to read
Tehillim, and the number of stages within each makkah is totally
beside the point. I.e., they both want to stress the multiple stage
nature of the makkot (which would place them within what can be
explained with teva', except for the fact that it was alsoi a major
neis - see Ralbag and Malbim on keritat mei hayarden for this theory
of neis in detail), and they both, along with RYHG, want to stress
that the gilui at qeri'at Yam Suf was far, far greater than even the
ten makkot. However, when it comes to expressing those ideas through a
proof text, their different approaches to how to read a list comes to
the fore.

-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Wir ziehen um! ? We are Moving
* Muslims Question Their Calendar ? Could it Have Happened to Us?
* Technologie und j?disches Lernen
* Biblical Advice for the Internet Age iv
* The Disappearance of Big Ideas
* Rabbi, wie stehen Sie zur Ein?scherung?
* Biblical Advice for the Internet Age iii

I wrote:
> Definitely. Ashkenaz and Sefarad are both mixes, which brought
> EY and Bavel closer to each other.

However, I should still stress that despite Ashekenaz and Sefarad
being both influenced by both EY and Bavel, the relative proportions
are different, and it remains useful to keep their respective dominant
origins in mind. These do explain certain oddities, like, as I
suggest, the different texts of kol 'hamira wa'hami'a.

PS: For the purist rabbis, there is really nothing preventing them
from ending their 'eruv tavshilin declarations with lana ulekhol
yehudain dedarin bekarta hadein. (Ba'alei batim are really not
concerned by that phrase, as they don't tend to do zikui of their
'eruv tavshilin and therefore cannot make it be valid for others).

Kol tuv,
-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Parsing Modim's Poetry
* In der Presse: Synagoge und Facebook
* Ist Rosch haSchan? hart?
* Wir ziehen um! ? We are Moving
* Muslims Question Their Calendar ? Could it Have Happened to Us?
* Technologie und j?disches Lernen

with the various discussions of what cheeses are allowed and Rennet see

http://e.yeshiva.org.il/midrash/?orderby=401

for a detailed discussion

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120419/1c8ac54b/attachment-0001.htm>

RMB wrote:
> No surprise that R"Dr HS had long discussions of topics I couldn't
> even think of [that are differences between the Bavli and minhag
> Ashkenaz, which get mentioned in Tosafot --arie]. Still, even if we
> chould get the number up to 20 examples, it still is a negligable
> subset of Tosafos's comments.

But then again, the differences between the two are not so great. The
area of greatest divergences is in prayer, and since R' Amram Gaon was
the first to compose a siddur we know of, he had a disproportionate
influence, bringing a lot of minhag Bavel into Ashkenaz. Furthermore,
with the Islamic Conquest, Israel again became a meeting place between
East and West, Jewishly speaking, and the 9th-10th centuries saw
considerable harmonization between the two traditions.

That's why, for example, Ashkenazim no longer only have eighteen
blessings in the shemeona 'essrei; Et Tsemavh David and
VeliYrushalayim became once again disambiguated, as they had been
before the inclusion of VelaMalshinim.
-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Parsing Modim's Poetry
* In der Presse: Synagoge und Facebook
* Ist Rosch haSchan? hart?
* Wir ziehen um! ? We are Moving
* Muslims Question Their Calendar ? Could it Have Happened to Us?
* Technologie und j?disches Lernen

In Mevakshei Panecha, Rav Sabato's interviews with Rav Lichtenstein, RL 
talks about the resurgence of learning Tanach today. He says that while 
this is generally a good, positive development (with some serious 
reservations), any deep learning in TN"K must only come after the 
student has a strong background in Torah Shel B'al Peh.  RAL also said 
that while in Europe, TN"K wasn't generally studied, those who did study 
it tended to be the best of the best. He gave Rav Ahron Kotler as an 
example; apparently RK memorized the entire Bible at a young age.

Ben

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 09:17:06AM +0300, Ben Waxman wrote:
>            .., any deep learning in TN"K must only come after the  
> student has a strong background in Torah Shel B'al Peh.  RAL also said  
> that while in Europe, TN"K wasn't generally studied, those who did study  
> it tended to be the best of the best. He gave Rav Ahron Kotler as an  
> example; apparently RK memorized the entire Bible at a young age.

I am missing how the illustration proves the point. RAK's memorization of
Tanakh is described as being *before* he yet built a "strong background
in TSBP" and before he was noted as "the best of the best". Admittedly
memorization isn't "any deep learning", but then we were originally
talking about the lack of remedial exposure too. Couldn't someone have
cited RAK's example and argued that early and extended exposure to Tanakh
is a help in *becoming* "the best of the best"?

:-)BBii!
-Micha

I didn't write the story as a proof; I was simply retelling various
points that he made in the interview.  RAL didn't give a specific
program or detail what he went by saying that students who want to learn
TN"K have to first immerse themselves in TSBP.

What I found interesting in the story was that even a "moderni" like RAL 
feels that TN"K can't/shouldn't be learned on its own, but only within 
the framework of TSBP.

Ben

On 4/20/2012 1:09 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
 >
 > I am missing how the illustration proves the point. RAK's memorization of
 > Tanakh is described as being *before* he yet built a "strong background
 > in TSBP" and before he was noted as "the best of the best".

The theme of tomorrow's haftarah, Machar Chodesh, deals with King David and Jonathan. There is an obvious association between King David and Rosh Chodesh. 
There is also the strong symbolism of the "disappearance" of the moon
(decline of the Jewish people) and our gradual reappearance and finally,
the appearance of  Moshiach. 
The Maharsha points out the gematria of David, melech Yisroel chai v'kayam and Rosh Chodesh is exactly equal [819]. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120420/ca91ad37/attachment-0001.htm>

There has been considerable discussion on Areivim about living in 
Golus and the role of Jews in Golus.  In light of this,  I have 
posted the ninth letter from RSRH's The Nineteen Letters About 
Judaism at http://www.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/ninth_letter.pdf 
.   It deals in detail with Golus.

Yitzchok Levine 

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 01:00:54PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
> There has been considerable discussion on Areivim about living in Golus 
> and the role of Jews in Golus.  In light of this,  I have posted the 
> ninth letter from RSRH's The Nineteen Letters About Judaism at 
> http://www.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/ninth_letter.pdf .   It deals 
> in detail with Golus.

Or <http://books.google.com/books?id=q02JxKxj5jQC&;pg=PA79#v=onepage>
for the Ninth Letter in R' Dr Bernard Drachman's 1899 edition. It
suffers in readability both due to 113 years of language drift and
because RDBD stayed very close to the German original. (That link
is to a full free and legal e-copy of the book.)

As I wrote on Areivim before seing that RYL took the discussion here...

RSRH was anti-Zionist. We don't know if his reasoning applied to
post-1948 realities would yeild different results or not. It's an
untestable hypothetical.

RSRH would have us take the culture of Yefes and bring it into ohalei
Sheim. Perhaps retreating to our own country before the final ge'ulah is
a bad idea, as it doesn't bring the yaft E-lokim leYefes to the service
of ohalei Shaim. I don't know. I wouldn't take it for granted.


The chapter ends with a long quote from Yeshaiah, but before that:

    If in the midst of a world which reveres wealth and lust it should
    live a tranquil life of righteousness and love if while everywhere
    the generation is rapidly sinking into sensuality and immorality
    Israel's sons and daughters should bloom forth in the best adornment
    of youth purity and innocence if though everywhere the habitations of
    men should cease to be the orchards in which are grown human fruit
    pleasing in the sight of God and man every Israelitish house should
    nevertheless be a temple of true faith in God of reverence and love
    for Him if though everywhere avarice lust and greed should become the
    motives of human actions every Jew should still in despite thereof be
    a silent example and teacher of universal righteousness and universal
    love if thus the dispersed of Israel should show themselves everywhere
    on earth the glorious priests of God and pure humanity O my Benjamin
    if we were if we would become what we should be if our lives were a
    perfect reflection of our law what a mighty engine we would constitute
    for propelling mankind to the final goal of all human education More
    quietly but more forcefully and profoundly would it effect mankind
    than even our tragical record of sorrows powerfully though this
    latter teaches the intervention of providence in human affairs.

    In the centuries of passion and scorn our mission was but imperfectly
    attainable but the ages of mildness and justice now begun beckon
    us to that glorious goal that every Jew and every Jewess should be
    in his or her own life a modest and unassuming priest or priestess
    of God and true humanity When such an ideal and such a mission
    await us can we still my Benjamin lament our fate?

Perhaps RSRH would say that until mashiach, we priests need to continue
mingling with our flock?

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 13th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 6 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Yesod sheb'Gevurah: To what extent is judgment
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   necessary for a good relationship?

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 03:08:09PM -0400, hankman wrote:
:> When I saw the ST, I *assumed* he was talking chemistry, not shiurim. One
:> wet grain of wheat can't leaven (neither chimutz nor even sirchah). Even
:> if ambient yeast turn some of the carbs in the wheat into CO2 and alcohol,
:> there isn't the ability to make a bubble of dought around the CO2.
: 
: My understanding of what actually makes something chometz has always
: been quite deficient. I understood that as a practical matter it
: requires one of the 5 grains to come into contact with water for an
: adequate length of time (which could vary with temperature etc), and
: is commonly called rising or leavening. The more direct terminology in
: lashon hakodesh (as RMB mentions above) of chimutz (process) or sirchah
: (result of process?)...

Here is how I understand leshon Chazal.

Chameitz is by definition only with 5 grams and water.

The same physical process with other subtances (wheat and pure undiluted
juice or rice and water) is sirchah. Sirchah might be all fermentation,
including chameitz, or perhaps is defined exclusively as fermentation
that isn't chameitz. I don't know.

:               Loosely, I took chimutz sometimes to mean the rising (or
: synonymously leavening? -- or is leavening a term more related to the
: chemistry?) brought on by the chemical process RMB refers to above...

The biology is fermentation. Leavening is when fermentation causes a
dough to rise.

But notice that chameitz isn't really leavening, it's a certain level
of fermentation that in doughs would be leaven. E.g. beer and ale have
too much water to become dough, but have the din deOraisa of taaroves
chameitz. (See Pesachim 3:1 and the Bartenura.)

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 13th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 6 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Yesod sheb'Gevurah: To what extent is judgment
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   necessary for a good relationship?

See http://www.alfassa.com/bread.html

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 05:41:32PM -0400, David Riceman wrote:
>> But that's the idiom, not the concept. These people left their maqom
>>  and are told to do what their families have been doing for generations.

> I'm confused by the referent.  Which people?

I am saying the Benei Baishanim, after they left Beis She'an to go from
being the Baishanim to the Benei Baishanim, no longer were following
the minhag hamaqom of Beis She'an. R' Yochanan tells them they must
continue minhag haBaishanim, just as Ashkenazim in EY must continue minhag
qitniyos, and says it's because of "shema beni mussar avikha..." Minhag
avos carrying their old locale's minhag hamaqom through to the next
generation.

A similar case is in the Y-mi Peschim 4:1 26a. R' [Ab]ba said that
Benei Maisha excepted upon themselves not to cast their nets in
the Mediterranian. They then settle Israel's west coast, and so
they ask Rebbe if they could continue fishing, or if they were bound
by this too? Rebbe answers:Mikivan shenahagu bahen avoseikhem be'isur.
al tishnu minhag avoseikhem. (Reish Laqish then asks why it isn't
assur because of lo sisgodedu, but R' Yochanan answers him.)

Had their new location had a contradicting minhag hamaqom, I presume
that would win out.

...
> But I don't know of any mechanism which enables me to require my kids to
> adopt a practice without their consent...

In which case, how can someone be born Jewish?

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 05:52:12PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>> And while I can't tell which Rashi you're referring to, I don't see any
>> of the 3 Rashi's on Abayei's quote as referring to the recipients of the
>> letter in particular. The letter itself gives no motive, the "zimnin
>> degazru" isn't "dezimnin degazru", and all Rashi does is describe the
>> possible gezeira -- that the people wouldn't be allowed to learn, and
>> the calendar algorithm would be forgotten.

> Rashi d"h "degazri hamachus gezeira".  Rashi explains what sort of gezeira
> is meant, and how it could lead to problems with the calendar.  And he does
> so *in the second person*.  This clearly shows that these words are part of
> the letter, not commentary on it.   As for the language, Hebrew and Aramaic
> are often used interchangeably within the same sentence in the gemara.

He describes the effects of some future gezeira on the people in that
country. It obviously doesn't refer to the letter's generation in
particular according to either of us. Nothing about second person.

As for switching language... Not usual for a quote. Yes, redacted
text can have such things.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 11th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            strict justice?

On 21/04/2012 11:34 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
>> Rashi d"h "degazri hamachus gezeira".  Rashi explains what sort of gezeira
>> >  is meant, and how it could lead to problems with the calendar.  And he does
>> >  so*in the second person*.  This clearly shows that these words are part of
>> >  the letter, not commentary on it.   As for the language, Hebrew and Aramaic
>> >  are often used interchangeably within the same sentence in the gemara.

> He describes the effects of some future gezeira on the people in that
> country. It obviously doesn't refer to the letter's generation in
> particular according to either of us. Nothing about second person.

What are you talking about, it's clearly in the second person.  How can
you possibly deny that, the words are right there on the page.  The
Sanhedrin is addressing the Bavlim directly.  If these were not the
Sanhedrin's words but Abaye's (or the stama digemara's) commentary, then
Rashi would express his explanation in the third person, or even perhaps
in the first person since it's being said by a Bavli.  But he explains it
in the second person, because the words he's explaining are being said
by the Sanhedrin to the Bavlim, about what the Sanhedrin fears might happen
to the Bavlim in the future.

-- 
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 Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 11:41:25PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
> What are you talking about, it's clearly in the second person.  How can
> you possibly deny that, the words are right there on the page.  The
> Sanhedrin is addressing the Bavlim directly.  If these were not the
> Sanhedrin's words but Abaye's (or the stama digemara's) commentary, then
> Rashi would express his explanation in the third person...

1- Rashi writes:
    Shelo yis'asku baTorah veyishtakach sod ha'ibur mikem....

RZS is clearly focused on the "mikem", this being the word indicating
second person. The "yis'asku" rather than "tis'asku" conflicts that,
and person really can't insist which person it is written in.

2- As far as I know, no one is claiming that this generation of Bavliim
are the specific people who need to worry about the gezeira. The victims
are any future group that would be so threatened. Not the "you" of the
letter, anyway.

I'm saying that Abayei's or the stam's added explanation of a second
benefit to the taqanah, beyond the taqanah's own "hischazku minhag
avoseikhem" as an end to itself, would still plausibly be written that
way, even without speaking to the Bavliim. Just as Rashi used second
person when *he* wasn't speaking to the Bavliim.

But again, my arguiment revolves around my insistence that a letter from
the Sanhedrin doesn't change languages midstream, that the Aramaic is part
of the discussion of the letter. Othwerise, there is no reason to insist
that "hischazku minhag avoseikhem" is an end in itself. Although we saw
Rebbe and R' Yochanan in Pesachim did consider inherited chumerous to be
binding. Barring minhag hamaqom -- Reish Laqish's question -- or other
overriding factors.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 15th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        2 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Tifferes: What is the Chesed in
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            harmony?

Where there any Korbanot brought by the Jewish people after we left Egypt
and before we had the mishkan?

The closest I can come to a proof is from Yitro, but that depends on the
fact that a) he came before the building of the mishkan, which is not at
all clear, and b) he was Jewish when he brought his sacrifices.

In any case, the thought that prompted me to think about this was that if
there were no sacrifices until we had the Mishkan, then there was no
opportunity for any type of "seder Yom Kippur" to atone for the egel
hazahav, which could be why Moshe was forced to seek kapara through 40 days
and nights of Tefillah.

Kol Tuv,

-- 
Liron Kopinsky
liron.kopin...@gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120422/340fc38e/attachment-0001.htm>

On 22/04/2012 12:27 AM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 11:41:25PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>> What are you talking about, it's clearly in the second person.  How can
>> you possibly deny that, the words are right there on the page.  The
>> Sanhedrin is addressing the Bavlim directly.  If these were not the
>> Sanhedrin's words but Abaye's (or the stama digemara's) commentary, then
>> Rashi would express his explanation in the third person...
>
> 1- Rashi writes:
>      Shelo yis'asku baTorah veyishtakach sod ha'ibur mikem....
>
> RZS is clearly focused on the "mikem",

And "ta'avdu" and "tochlu".

> this being the word indicating
> second person. The "yis'asku" rather than "tis'asku" conflicts that,
> and person really can't insist which person it is written in.

"That people should not learn torah" is the *decree*.  The result of that
decree will be that "*you* will forget how to set the calendar, and *you*
will make one day, and *you* will eat chometz on Pesach".  Not "they" ,
or "we", but "you", because it is the Sanhedrin speaking to the Bavlim.



> 2- As far as I know, no one is claiming that this generation of Bavliim
> are the specific people who need to worry about the gezeira. The victims
> are any future group that would be so threatened. Not the "you" of the
> letter, anyway.

First of all, how do you know when this decree might hit?  It might happen
next year, or it might never happen at all, but one can never tell.  Second,
it makes no difference how many years or centuries in the future it might
happen, the point is that it might happen to you Bavlim.


  
> I'm saying that Abayei's or the stam's added explanation of a second
> benefit to the taqanah, beyond the taqanah's own "hischazku  minhag

"hizoharu beminhag", actually.

> avoseikhem" as an end to itself, would still plausibly be written that
> way, even without speaking to the Bavliim. Just as Rashi used second
> person when *he* wasn't speaking to the Bavliim.

Rashi is explaining the Sanhedrin's words, and *they* were speaking to
the Bavlim, so naturally he uses the second person.  If he were explaining
Abaye's or the stama digemara's words, he'd say "we will forget", or maybe
"they will forget", not "you".


> But again, my arguiment revolves around my insistence that a letter from
> the Sanhedrin doesn't change languages midstream

And I see no reason at all to believe that.  What basis do you have
to believe that they didn't mix languages, just as people today will
use English, Hebrew, and Yiddish in the same sentence?

-- 
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


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 30, Issue 25
**************************************

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..."