Avodah Mailing List

Volume 35: Number 141

Tue, 19 Dec 2017

• 1. Vayigash (Richard Wolberg)
• 2. S"A Principles (Richard Wolberg)
• 3. [Tvunah] Teabag on Shabbos (Micha Berger)
• 4. Using "Al haTevila" for tevilat Kelim (Aryeh Frimer)
• 5. Re: Rambam Hilchot Kiddush Hachodesh -- on "min" (hankman)
• 6. Yehudah Speaking to Yosef (Professor L. Levine)
• 7. Re: Rambam Hilchot Kiddush Hachodesh (Jonathan Traum)
• 8. Re: Using "Al haTevila" for tevilat Kelim (Zev Sero)
• 9. Did the Patriarchs Speak Hebrew? (Professor L. Levine)
• 10. Re: Did the Patriarchs Speak Hebrew? (Gershon Seif)
• 11. Re: Did the Patriarchs Speak Hebrew? (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Did the Patriarchs Speak Hebrew? (Zev Sero)
• 13. Re: Did the Patriarchs Speak Hebrew? (Micha Berger)

                                                                                                                

The first three words of the Sidra: Vayigash eilav Yehuda mean that Judah
approached Joseph to speak to him. The m?forshim bring out that they
communicated through interpreters since officially, (the brothers thought)
Joseph didn?t speak Hebrew and the brothers didn?t speak Egyptian.

 
The baal haturim and the m?forshim point out the last letter of the first
three words (shin, vov, hey) spell shaveh which means ?equal.? Judah is
implying to Joseph: ?I am equal to you. You think you?re a king; I?m also a
king.? According to this interpretation, Judah spoke very sharply to
Joseph. The Vilna Gaon brings out a fascinating insight on the trope of the
first six words which is kadma v?azla r?vi?I, zarka, munach segol. The
Vilna Gaon explains that the trope here explains the meaning of these
words. Kadma v?azla in Aramaic meaning kadam v?awzal, he (Judah) stepped
forward, Yehudah has a r?vi?i, since Judah was the fourth son. So why the
fourth son? Because zarka, he was going to be thrown out, munach segol from
being able to rest in Gan Eden. Since Judah cursed himself that if he
doesn?t bring Binyamin back, he would be damned in both worlds ? in this
world and in the world to come. (Segula which means ?treasure? from Segol
comes to mean here Gan Eden).  

 
When the sons finally tell Jacob that Joseph still lives (45:26), the
m?forshim resolve a theological problem that arose in parashas Vayeshev
(37:35). For there we read about Jacob: ?and his sons and daughters wished
to comfort him and he refused to be consoled.? Isn?t it one of the basic
articles of faith to accept God?s judgment and to welcome the comforting
offered by others. Why did Jacob refuse? Our Sages sensed this anomaly and
gave a brilliant answer, ?For no condolences are accepted over the living"
(see Rashi on 37:35). Yes, Jacob refused to accept condolences because he
had a faint ray of hope that Joseph might be alive. A psychologist might
explain it as ?wishful thinking.? In any event, his ray of hope was
vindicated when he found out that Joseph was indeed alive (and that is why
he originally refused to accept the condolences offered by all the people).

Hope is being able to see that there is light despite all of the darkness.  
Desmond Tutu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20171217/f85dbb5c/attachment-0001.html>

Reb Joel asks:
does anyone know of a theory as to why the Mechaber in some cases quotes Talmudic sources (or Torah or Rishonim) and in others just states the halacha? 

My theory is that when it is either a well known halacha and no reason to question it or at least, when the Mechaber thought it to be indisputable, then 
it was felt there was no reason to quote sources. OTOH, if was felt that there would be many questioning it, then the sources quoted would obviate 
that from occurring.  

This pesaq by R' Asher Weiss surprised me.
<https://en.tvunah.org/2017/12/15/tea-bag-shabbos>

    Tea Bag on Shabbos
    Tvunah in English by Rabbi Akiva Dershowitz

    Question: Does a tea bag [used in a kli shlishi] need to be removed
    from the cup with a spoon on Shabbos, to avoid issues of borrer? What
    about holding it over the cup to avoid dripping on the table, to
    allow drips to fall into the cup?
    
    Answer: The tea bag may be removed normally, and may be held to
    allow drips to fall back in to the cup.

I was told at a young age to take the teabag out by spoon, making sure to
take tea out along with the bag. For boreier reasons. So, as I said, I
found this pesaq surprising.

The actual teshuvah in Hebrew is on that page.

RAW finds a precedent in Rashi on Shabbos 140a, who discusses the mishnah
allowing one to put straw in a sieve in a feed trough. Rashi says "even
though the motz will fall on our own, as it's a davar she'ein miskavein
-- and the mishnah holds like R' Shim'on.

And see SA OC 319:8, who makes it clear (which it isnt' from Rashi, see
teshuvah) that even if the boreir will certainly occur, it's still mutar.
Pesiq reishei, but not melekhes machasheves, and still mutar. Similarly in
Nishmas Adam 18:2.

An enlightening and anjoyable Chanukah!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             We look forward to the time
mi...@aishdas.org        when the power to love
http://www.aishdas.org   will replace the love of power.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                - William Ewart Gladstone

 Rav Zvi Cohen, in his Encyclopedic Tevilat Kelim: Rules that be-Di-avad Al haTevila is valid.
I was surprised by this since the Mehaber in Bet Yosef explicitly rules
against this shita  (for le-khatehilla) and holds in SA  that one should
say "Al Tevilat Kelim."   Having done so, to say "Al haTevilah" would not
be "Matbe'ah sheTavu Hakhamim."   Any ideas?

--------------------------------------------------
Dr. Aryeh A. Frimer
Ethel and David Resnick Professor Emeritus
   of Active Oxygen Chemistry
Chemistry Dept., Bar-Ilan University
Ramat Gan 5290002, ISRAEL
E-mail (office): Aryeh.Fri...@biu.ac.il<mailto:Aryeh.Fri...@biu.ac.il>
Homepage http://ch.biu.ac.il/frimer
Tel: 972-3-5318610; Fax: 972-3-7384053
Tel Home: 972-8-9473819/9470834
E-mail (home): Frim...@zahav.net.il<mailto:Frim...@zahav.net.il>
Cellphone: 972-54-7540761

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20171218/761eac26/attachment-0001.html>

R. Micha Berger wrote:
?Ironically, defining a "min" is not settled halakhah either.?

CM asks:
If I am not mistaken the modern secular definition of ?species? is based on
whether the populations can interbreed or not. Do we know with any
certainty that the Torah rejects this criteria as a determinant of ?min??

Kol tuv
Chaim Manaster


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20171218/f471161b/attachment-0001.html>

In what l language did Yehudah speak to Yosef.	Was it Hebrew and was the
translator present to "translate" for Yosef?  The Chumash does not mention
a translator in this week's parasha.


YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20171218/2e957ddc/attachment-0001.html>

On 12/09/2017 03:59 PM, Ben Waxman wrote:
> 1) Rambam Hilchot Kiddush Hachodesh 3:1 makes it clear that anyone who 
> sees the new moon and can get to Jerusalem by the following evening 
> should go. ...
> [snip]
> Is there any problem in making sure that you don't see the moon? Just 
> stay in for the evening. Rambam doesn't say that there is a chiyuv to 
> look.

I imagine that most people wouldn't have to worry about it.? On the 30th 
day after the previous Rosh Hodesh, the tiny crescent moon would only be 
visible for a short time after sunset and before moonset, and only to 
those who have an unobstructed view of the western horizon.

Jonathan Traum

On 18/12/17 02:09, Aryeh Frimer via Avodah wrote:
>  ?Rav Zvi *Cohen*,?in his Encyclopedic *Tevilat Kelim*: Rules that 
> be-Di-avad Al haTevila is valid.
> 
> I was surprised by this since the Mehaber in Bet Yosef explicitly rules 
> against this shita ?(for le-khatehilla) and holds in SA? that one should 
> say ?Al Tevilat Kelim.??? Having done so, to say ?Al haTevilah? would 
> not be ?Matbe?ah sheTavu Hakhamim.?? ?Any ideas?
> 

"Al hatevilah" *is* a coinage of the chachamim, just not the one they 
prescribed for this occasion.

-- 
Zev Sero                May 2017, with its *nine* days of Chanukah,
z...@sero.name           be a brilliant year for us all

From the article at

https://goo.gl/Z3QWs2


Ramban says:


It is possible that he said this to them simply as a means of pacifying
them, for there was no proof [that he was Joseph] in the fact that someone
in Egypt should speak in the Holy Tongue. In my opinion, Hebrew was a
Canaanite language. For Abraham did not bring it from Ur of the Chaldees
[in Mesopotamia] and from Haran, for there they spoke Aramaic, as the
incident of the pile of stones erected by Laban and Jacob proves [see Gen.
31:47]. And it was not a private language spoken by a single person but a
language of Canaan, and many people in Egypt knew it for the countries were
close together--particularly the ruler, for it is customary for kings and
rulers to know several languages.

For his assertion that Hebrew is "a Canannite language" Ramban makes
reference to Isaiah, who does thus refer to Hebrew: "On that day there will
be five cities in the land of Egypt that speak the language of Canaan and
swear by the Lord of hosts" (Isa. 19:18). That the original language of the
Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) was Aramaic is proved to Ramban's
mind by virtue of the fact that Laban gave the name "Yegar-sahaduta" to
what Jacob called "Gal-ed" (Gen. 31:47), The former had remained in
Mesopotamia and continued to speak Aramaic (which Ramban thinks was spoken
in Ur and in Haran), while Jacob, who had grown up in Canaan, had learnt
the local language.


Please see the above URL for much more on this topic.


YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20171219/430ab152/attachment-0001.html>

Leavining Avraham Avinu aside, what is the Ramban's view about the
language spoken by Adam HaRishon? ie. Naming his wife Chava and assigning
names to all the animals?If the Ramban concurs that these names were given
in lashon hakodesh, then he agrees that it was the first language. No?

Unless you say that lashon hakodesh was one of at least 2 languages that
Adam spoke and he reserved it for holy purposes only, such as giving
these names. And I suppose that would be along the lines of the other
Ramban quoted there which says that it's called Lashon Hakodesh because
it's the language that Hashem used to convey the Torah.

 

On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 1:37 AM, Professor L. Levine
<llev...@stevens.edu> wrote:
> From the article at https://goo.gl/Z3QWs2
> Ramban says: 

>> It is possible that he said this to them simply as a means of
>> pacifying them, for there was no proof [that he was Joseph] in the fact
>> that someone in Egypt should speak in the Holy Tongue. In my opinion,
>> Hebrew was a Canaanite language. For Abraham did not bring it from Ur
>> of the Chaldees [in Mesopotamia] and from Haran, for there they spoke
>> Aramaic...

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 07:37:41AM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote:
:  From the article at 
: https://goo.gl/Z3QWs2
: 
: Ramban says:
: 
:     It is possible that he said this to them simply as a means of
:     pacifying them, for there was no proof [that he was Joseph] in
:     the fact that someone in Egypt should speak in the Holy Tongue. In
:     my opinion, Hebrew was a Canaanite language...

... and yet also lashon haqodesh.

And to the Ramban (on "sheqel haqodesh" in parashas Sheqalim), this is
because it's the language in which Hashem created the world and in which
the Torah and Nakh were written. And leshitaso, the letters of the Torah,
if not their breakup into words, preceded creation.

The notion that the avos spoke Aramaic is in Vayiqra Rabba on 32:5. The
Medrash Peliyah (#166) concludes that even Adam did! This is a comment
about Sarah's death in "Qiryas Araba". The Niv Sefasayim explains that the
medrash is getting this from the use of the Aramaic term "qirya". But I
don't see how we know this was the name of the cite from back when Adam
and Chava were buried there; or how else this moved the line to any time
before Efron.

R Yonasan Eibschitz (Tif'eres Yehonasan on Bereishis 11:1) that Adam
spoke LhQ before the cheit, and Aramaic after.

Fore that matter, Medrash Tanchuma (beginning of Devarim in Buber) and
Medrash Seikhel Tov (Shemos 4:11) say Adam spoke all 70 languages.
Requires a new peshat in what happened at Migdal Bavel, no?

I am not to clear on the whole thing. Languages evolve, so that if
one were to trace them out over time, one would draw a tree or a
bush. Adam's proto-Semitic, or proto-proto-proto... everything is an
ancestor of all language. I could call it early Hebrew if I wanted,
and claim that Hebrew is the trunk from which other languages branched
off. But that's just a decision about how to draw the tree. I could pick
another run from root to twig and pull it straight, and say that Adam
spoke proto-...proto-Mandarin, and all the other languages branched off.
For languages as similar as Hebrew and Aramaic, where neither could have
drifted from the original significanly more than the other, doesn't
the whole discussion of whether Adam's language was a predecessar to
the language of the chumash, Nakh, Chazal, etc... or of Aramaic in
its evolutions all kind of arbitrary?


I wonder if the Ramban understands the name of Kesav Ashuris to mean
"Assyrian Script", rather than "Enriched Script" (from "osher". YMMV
on the definition of osher.)

After all, he seems to have no problem saying that Hashem left holy
things in the hands of other peoples for us to find and use.

For that matter, Eretz Yisrael was also given to the Kenaanim to hold
until we got there...

It might also be leshitaso -- but this may be a stretch -- with the
Ramban's take on rainbows. The Ramban says that rainbows existed since
Maaseh Bereishis. Nature didn't change in this regard with the Mabul.
Rather, the already existing phenomenon was made a symbol when HQBH
made the beris with Noach.

Again, something put in place naturally so that when the time came it
would be available take on its full significance.

:     Canaan, and many people in Egypt knew it for the countries were close
:     together--particularly the ruler, for it is customary for kings and
:     rulers to know several languages.
: 
: For his assertion that Hebrew is "a Canannite language" Ramban makes
: reference to Isaiah, who does thus refer to Hebrew: "On that day there
: will be five cities in the land of Egypt that speak the language of
: Canaan and swear by the Lord of hosts" (Isa. 19:18). That the original
: language of the Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) was Aramaic is
: proved to Ramban's mind by virtue of the fact that Laban gave the name
: "Yegar-sahaduta" to what Jacob called "Gal-ed" (Gen. 31:47), The former
: had remained in Mesopotamia and continued to speak Aramaic (which Ramban
: thinks was spoken in Ur and in Haran), while Jacob, who had grown up in
: Canaan, had learnt the local language.
: 
: Please see the above URL for much more on this topic.

Have a Great Month,
and a enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The greatest discovery of all time is that
mi...@aishdas.org        a person can change their future
http://www.aishdas.org   by merely changing their attitude.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Oprah Winfrey

On 19/12/17 12:05, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> I wonder if the Ramban understands the name of Kesav Ashuris to mean
> "Assyrian Script", rather than "Enriched Script" (from "osher". YMMV
> on the definition of osher.)

You associate osher with an alef and `osher with an `ayin?

-- 
Zev Sero                May 2017, with its *nine* days of Chanukah,
z...@sero.name           be a brilliant year for us all

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 12:12:45PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
: On 19/12/17 12:05, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
: >I wonder if the Ramban understands the name of Kesav Ashuris to mean
: >"Assyrian Script", rather than "Enriched Script" (from "osher". YMMV
: >on the definition of osher.)

: You associate osher with an alef and `osher with an `ayin?

RSRH does, as he does all alef-ayin pairs. Also osher with asher. But
I used enriched because in common usage, it refers to someone having
a gift. We say that a cereal is enriched with vitamins. We far more
rarely speak of a CEO being enriched. At least, not anymore.

And what about yiysher kochakha, assuming the correct niqud isn't
yeyasher? Reish Laqish (Shabbos 87a) says "asher shibarta" is an
allusion to "yiyshar kochakha", so that's connected as well.

RSRH himself uses "being in successful progress" (eg Bereishis 30:30),
which R/Dr Mattiyahu Clark's Hirschian dictionary gives as its 1st
definition.

Chodesh tov,
un a lichtikn un freilechn Chanukah!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The trick is learning to be passionate in one's
mi...@aishdas.org        ideals, but compassionate to one's peers.
http://www.aishdas.org
Fax: (270) 514-1507


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



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


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


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

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

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah/avodahareivim-membership-agreement/


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..."

A list of common acronyms is available at
        http://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah/avodah-acronyms
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)