Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 201

Mon, 12 Oct 2009

• 1. Re: La'az or Lo'ez in Rashi? (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: RSRH on the First Pasuk in Bereishis (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: RSRH on the First Pasuk in Bereishis (Micha Berger)
• 4. Birkat Cohanim on Hoshana Rabbah (Prof. Levine)
• 5. train switch conundrum (Rich, Joel)
• 6. Re: La'az or Lo'ez in Rashi (Yisrael Herczeg)
• 7. First Pasuk of Bereshis (Cantor Wolberg)
• 8. vlamalshinim (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 9. Re: Where did Moshe die? (hankman)
• 10. Hekker for Sukkah on Shmini Azteres (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 11. Breishis: Pru uRvu & Yishuv ha'Olam (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 12. minhag simchat tora (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 13. Re: minhag simchat tora (Zev Sero)
• 14. Re: Hekker for Sukkah on Shmini Azteres (Stuart Feldhamer)

T6...@aol.com wrote:

> It would appear that the author of the [unsigned] Publisher's Preface of 
> the ArtScroll Chumash, like R' Silbermann, regards the word 
> Lamed-Ayin-Zayin as a word and not an abbreviation, since he 
> transliterates it "lo'ez" and not "la'az."

That wouldn't explain the odd transliteration; "lo`ez" is a verb,
meaning "those who speak la`az".  The Mishna uses both forms in the
same phrase: "kor'in otah lelo`azim bela`az".  Using "lo`ez" as a
noun seems plainly wrong.

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

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 06:24:28AM -0400, Yitzchok Levine wrote:
: IMO Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch's commentary on the 
: first pasuk in Bereishis...
:                              Yeish Ma ayin. This constitutes the basis of 
: the conviction that the Torah seeks to instill within us.
: 
: The opposite notion is the belief in the eternity of the world, which
: is the cornerstone of pagan belief until this very day...

Actually, yeish mei'ayin and the eternity of the world are NOT
opposites, and can in fact coexist.

The key is to remember that time itself is a nivra.

Therefore maaseh bereishis can not preceed existence in time. Besides,
what would it mean that the first moment has something that happened
*before* it?

Thus, HQBH causes the universe in a manner that is entirely different
than temporal sequence. And thus, yeis mei'ayin means that Hashem is
logically prior and the cause of the universe and everything in it --
not just that He took what was otherwise caused and gave it form and
order (shitas Plato).

But I believe the Rambam holds that Yahadus could have continued
unchanged had we not believed the universe had a beginning. It's only
that lemaaseh it did, and that our chakhamim and neviim said so, that
makes him insist it did.

How? HQBH is the non-temporal cause of everything. Therefore, had HQBH
wanted a universe with no beginning, He could have made one. He would
still have been the cause. A mashal: A printing press publishes a
poster, a timeline of the history of the universe (leshitas Seder Olam)
from Adam to 6,000. It stamps out the whole timeline at once. For
imaginary people living within the timeline, the line is a progression
of events; but the printing press has a different dimension of time. HQBH
has no different time, but like our mashal, isn't within our concept of
it. There is no reason why HQBH couldn't have "stamped out" / "is
stamping out" / "will stamp out" an infinite timeline, if He so chose.

There is a diqduq oddity that means that we really don't even understand
the first word of chumash very well. The word "bereishis" is in semichut,
meaning "in the begining of", but the pasuq has no obvious "of what".
RSRH writes:
: Our verse, then, means: "In the beginning of all existence, it was
: God Who created"; or, if we add to the predicate the two objects that
: follow: "From the very beginning God created the heaven and the earth."
: In any event, "Bereishis" proclaims that nothing existed prior to God's
: act of creation, and that heaven and earth were created only through
: God's Word. Scripture thus teaches us that the world was brought into
: existence from nonexistence, Yeish Ma ayin. This constitutes the basis of 
: the conviction that the Torah seeks to instill within us.

He struggles, but ends up with two versions:
inserting the "of what" manually -- "all existence" and
"from the very beginning" -- although there is no leading "mi".

Rashi is so convinced the diqduq oddity has no literal explanation,
he brings midrashim about "with something called 'reishis'" into the
realm of peshat.

But lulei demitztafina hayisi omer that we should read the pasuq
exactly as written:
    In the beginning of 'G-d created the heaven and earth'..."
Meaning that "bara es hashmayim ve'es ha'aretz" is a permanent
relationship between Creator and created, and the week of creation was
the unfolding, the beginning of it. Again, dividing between our temporal
experience of time as having a beginning, and His creating of time,
which is "orthogonal" to our beginning and end. Thus we have a "reishis"
but for HQBH it's all perfect tense, "bara".

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where
mi...@aishdas.org        you are,  or what you are doing,  that makes you
http://www.aishdas.org   happy or unhappy. It's what you think about.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Dale Carnegie

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 06:24:28AM -0400, Yitzchok Levine wrote:
: IMO Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch's commentary on the 
: first pasuk in Bereishis...
:                              Yeish Ma ayin. This constitutes the basis of 
: the conviction that the Torah seeks to instill within us.
: 
: The opposite notion is the belief in the eternity of the world, which
: is the cornerstone of pagan belief until this very day...

Actually, yeish mei'ayin and the eternity of the world are NOT
opposites, and can in fact coexist.

The key is to remember that time itself is a nivra.

Therefore maaseh bereishis can not preceed existence in time. Besides,
what would it mean that the first moment has something that happened
*before* it?

Thus, HQBH causes the universe in a manner that is entirely different
than temporal sequence. And thus, yeis mei'ayin means that Hashem is
logically prior and the cause of the universe and everything in it --
not just that He took what was otherwise caused and gave it form and
order (shitas Plato).

But I believe the Rambam holds that Yahadus could have continued
unchanged had we not believed the universe had a beginning. It's only
that lemaaseh it did, and that our chakhamim and neviim said so, that
makes him insist it did.

How? HQBH is the non-temporal cause of everything. Therefore, had HQBH
wanted a universe with no beginning, He could have made one. He would
still have been the cause. A mashal: A printing press publishes a
poster, a timeline of the history of the universe (leshitas Seder Olam)
from Adam to 6,000. It stamps out the whole timeline at once. For
imaginary people living within the timeline, the line is a progression
of events; but the printing press has a different dimension of time. HQBH
has no different time, but like our mashal, isn't within our concept of
it. There is no reason why HQBH couldn't have "stamped out" / "is
stamping out" / "will stamp out" an infinite timeline, if He so chose.

There is a diqduq oddity that means that we really don't even understand
the first word of chumash very well. The word "bereishis" is in semichut,
meaning "in the begining of", but the pasuq has no obvious "of what".
RSRH writes:
: Our verse, then, means: "In the beginning of all existence, it was
: God Who created"; or, if we add to the predicate the two objects that
: follow: "From the very beginning God created the heaven and the earth."
: In any event, "Bereishis" proclaims that nothing existed prior to God's
: act of creation, and that heaven and earth were created only through
: God's Word. Scripture thus teaches us that the world was brought into
: existence from nonexistence, Yeish Ma ayin. This constitutes the basis of 
: the conviction that the Torah seeks to instill within us.

He struggles, but ends up with two versions:
inserting the "of what" manually -- "all existence" and
"from the very beginning" -- although there is no leading "mi".

Rashi is so convinced the diqduq oddity has no literal explanation,
he brings midrashim about "with something called 'reishis'" into the
realm of peshat.

But lulei demitztafina hayisi omer that we should read the pasuq
exactly as written:
    In the beginning of 'G-d created the heaven and earth'..."
Meaning that "bara es hashmayim ve'es ha'aretz" is a permanent
relationship between Creator and created, and the week of creation was
the unfolding, the beginning of it. Again, dividing between our temporal
experience of time as having a beginning, and His creating of time,
which is "orthogonal" to our beginning and end. Thus we have a "reishis"
but for HQBH it's all perfect tense, "bara".

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where
mi...@aishdas.org        you are,  or what you are doing,  that makes you
http://www.aishdas.org   happy or unhappy. It's what you think about.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Dale Carnegie

At 08:13 AM 10/12/2009, David Cohen wrote:

>The davening on Hoshana Rabbah takes on some but not all the charcteristics
>of Yom Tov. Were any specific criteria used to determine which parts were
>changed to YT and which were left like a chol day? Specifically, in nussach
>askenas, we add the extra tehillim in p'sukei d'zimra, but don't say
>Nishmat. We use the weekday kedusha for Shacharit but Yom Yov kedusha for
>mussaf.
>And since it is questionable that we don't duchen in chutz l'aretz except on
>YT, why don't we do so on HR?
>
>Shabbat shalom and chag sameach,
>
>David I. Cohen

Some places in Chutz L'Aretz do duchan on HR. I davened in a Shteibel 
near my home in Brooklyn on HR, and they did indeed duchan.  Of 
course, they daven the (Chassidishe) Nusach Sefard.

I still recall what happened one year (some time between 1968 and 
1973) when I was living in Elizabeth, NJ. On HR Rav P. M. Teitz, 
ZT"L, took huge Hoshanos.  They were at least 6 feet tall and looked 
even taller. Then, much to the surprise of everyone, he told the 
Kohanim to duchan, which they did. Rav Teitz's shuls all davened 
Nusach Ashkenaz.

YL


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091012/6c412ef7/attachment-0001.htm>

Any sources on the diversion of the train to kill one instead of 5 (besides the chazon Ish)?
Any compendium discussion?

BTW see
By CHARLOTTE ALLEN<http://online.wsj.com/search/search_center.html?KEYWORDS=CHARLOTTE
+ALLEN&;ARTICLESEARCHQUERY_PARSER=bylineAND>

Harvard government professor Michael J. Sandel's semester-long "Justice"
course is so popular that it fills a free-standing auditorium, the
university's Sanders Theater. About 1,000 Harvard undergraduates sign up
for Mr. Sandel's class every time it's offered to explore the moral
dilemmas surrounding such contentious issues as abortion, stem-cell
research, same-sex marriage, torture, selling one's organs, affirmative
action and reparations for slavery.



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703298004574457170
924031720.html

for an interesting article on the non-grounded approach to the question.

KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091012/604da7ff/attachment-0001.htm>

Thanks to Rebbetzen Katz for her kind words about the Artscroll Rashi. The
Even Shoshan dictionary has la'az as a noun but not lo'ez.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091012/7bdf5f3f/attachment-0001.htm>

  In the first verse of Bereishis there are seven words, corresponding  
to the seven days of the week, the seven years of the shemittah cycle,  
the seven shemittah cycles of a yovel cycle, the seven heavens, the  
seven lands, the seven seas , the seven servants.  Corresponding to  
these, Dovid hamelech said: "Sheva bayom hilalticha al mish'p'tay  
tzidkecha." (Tehillim 119:164)
And because of this correspondence, the chachomim ordained that the  
refrain in the Kaddish, "Y'hei sh'mei rabba..." - contains seven  
words, and is recited seven times each day.  Moreover, in the first  
verse of the Torah there are twenty-eight letters, as there are in the  
refrain ?Y?hei shm?mei rabba?."
As a parallel, Shlomo hamelech composed seven verses - beginning with  
"Ays laledes" and ending with "v'ays shalom" (Koheles 3:2-8) - that  
speak of twenty-eight "times" [which correspond to the twenty-eight  
different time periods each week].  For there are four "times" in each  
24 hour period: From dawn to noon is one time; from noon to dusk is a  
second time; from dusk to midnight is a third time; and from midnight  
to dawn is a fourth time. [And so in seven days there are twenty-eight  
"times or watches?].
Similarly, seven words and twenty-eight are also contained in the  
verse "Vay'dabeir Elokim ays kol had'vorim ha-eyleh leimor." (Shemos  
20:1), [which introduces the Aseres hadibros].  This correspondence of  
letters and words between the refrain of the Kaddish and the  
"Bereishis bara..."  and the Aseres hadibros, alludes to the statement  
of the chachomim: "Whoever answers...Amein, Y'hei sh'mei..." with all  
of his strength (koach - gematria also 28) becomes a partner with the  
Holy One, Blessed be He, in the work of Creation." Baal HaTurim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091012/05851b78/attachment-0001.htm>

i had  the  impression, i'm not  sure  where i heard it, that  a major 
purpose of  instituting the 19th  bracha  was to get out of shul, those 
who  outwardly looked  jewish  , but held  alien beliefs, such as praying 
to the trinity.  someone over  sukkot  took great offense to this idea, 
that there were jews who became xtians and were praying on shul to other 
than the RBSO.   it seems that  the  rambam talks  about   the bracha  as 
a  warning  to jews  to avoid 
heretical movements , rather than a community purification method,

maybe  i am conflating a  few  ideas, but the question is    1] was there 
initially  a problem with 'hebrew xtians'  that this bracha caused to 
leave the shuls
2] was the bracha  more  a curse and a warning , rather than a method to 
separate these sects into separate  communities  3] are there numbers as 
to the percent of  prushim  [pharisees]  versus  tzdukim, baitusim, 
xtians, etc  and did they have their  own institutions   ?

[ maybe i am conflating  the issue the fast of Ezra, which many have 
pointed to , as commemorating the effort  to separate out the early xtian 
community  by paul]....


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091012/4499791f/attachment-0001.htm>

See the Yalkut Shimoni (Moshe R. died bechelkas Ruvain but was buried
bechelkas Gad) see also Abarbanel who says that chelkas mechokeik safun  in
birchas Gad refers to the mokom hakevura of Moshe R. and why there.
However, see also Eben Esra who writes: "vehinai dovor borur, ki bemokom
shemais Moshe shom kevuroso."

Kol tuv


Chaim Manaster

R'nTK wrote:

 If Hashem  
buried him where he died, that would also make more sense than having him 
die in  one place and be buried in another.  Does "he died there" mean "he 
died in  Moav" -- not necessarily on Mt Nevo?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091012/1eb1afc9/attachment-0001.htm>

A common explanation for why Leshev Basukkah is not said on Shmini Atzeres
in Chu"l is that the absence of the bracha serves as a hekker regarding the
mitzvah status. This appears, for example, in Aruch Hashulchan 668:2.

This concept of the hekker appears elsewhere as well. For example, if an
Israeli has no choice but to eat in the sukkah on Shmini Atzeres, then he
makes a hekker by making part of the sechach passul, in the late afternoon
of Hoshana Raba. If a chu"lnik must eat in his sukkah on Simchas Torah, he
doesn't have that option, because it has to be kosher on Shmini Atzeres,
and he can't passul it on yom tov. Therefore, the hekker is made by
bringing pots and pans into the sukkah on Simchas Torah (Aruch Hashulchan
666:4).

We see that this hekker can be made in a variety of ways. Here's my question:

Most machzorim and luachs say that in Chu"l, the Yehi Ratzon upon leaving
the sukkah is said in the afternoon of Shmini Atzeres, *not* the afternoon
of Hoshana Raba. And it seems to me the the Rama held this way as well,
because he mentions this Yehi Ratzon in siman 667, and not earlier.

But it seems to me that this Yehi Ratzon destroys the hekker. No one would
say this Yehi Ratzon on a day when there's no mitzvah of Yeshivas Sukkah.
Saying the Yehi Ratzon has the same effect as saying the bracha of Layshev
would. If a person has a more-than-kebaytza snack on Shmini Atzeres
afternoon, and leaves out the Layshev in order to provide a hekker, he
defeats his purpose when he says the Yehi Ratzon.

It seems that the idea of the omission of Layshev being a hekker
contradicts the custom of saying the Yehi Ratzon on Shmini Atzeres. A
chutznik should either say the Yehi Ratzon on Hashana Raba, or he should
have a different reason for why the Layshev is omitted on Shmini Atzeres.

Comments?

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Instant Health Insurance
Get fast, free health insurance quotes online now in 2 minutes.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/c?cp=XUyDz5FyiybabPZD1pwS8gAAJ
z3zeK-F0bLcqGb51B0rOTOKAAQAAAAFAAAAAN8Qlz4AAAMlAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABZhQAAAAA=

It seems bepashtus that the mitzva of pru urvu is about populating the
world by reproducing more humans than what was there before. IOW to
not merely replace, but to add on by increasing the numbers.

While women are technically exempt from this mitzva. Yet their
participation is essential nonetheless [Of course!]
Lasheves yetzarah, implies a quasi obligation upon women to participate
in this goal.

Now let's step back and ask - what about those [men and women] who
unfortunately are not birthing children due to various circumstances
and limitations? What should the childless Jew do?

Approaching this from a communal focus - instead of from an individual
focus - the resolution seems also "pashtus". Men and women who are not
blessed with offspring can assist OTHERS in this noble endeavor

Digression:
The last mitzva in the Torah - I.E. kesivas Sefer Torah - is assigned
to the individual. Yet, it is rarely accomplished by the individual
anymore - it usually takes a a sofer, and often it "takes a village."

So too with bringing up the next generation. The physical parents are
analogous to the sofer, and so there is room for more participation.
Several tasks that can be parcelled out to the community at large include:
    + Assisting the new parents by providing meals or "baby-sitting" relief.
    + Medical and Nursing. Assistance
    + Training or Coaching "new parents"
    + Training children in Talmud Torah or in parnassah
    + Participating in synagogue youth work, such as minyanim etc.
    + Giving rides when necessary for parents or children -- such as
      to the doctor or shopping.
    + Playing surrogate "grandparents" when the children have none handy.

Anyway, the list goes on. The point of this exercise is to afford an
oportunity for the community to adopt this mitzva so that all may be
a part of yishuv olam. So those that cannot do themselves still can
enable others in this essential Mitzva.

Illustration:
A childless woman [let's call her Tzipporah] has dedicated her life
to teaching children in a Jewish Day School. In addition, as an aunt,
she helps her nieces and nephews by playing the role of "surrogate
grandmother". Thus both her personal and professional life participate
in partipcaitng or enabling
The mitzva of Yishuv Olam

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

a blog not normally allowed here lists the following as 'shtick'
done on simchat tora. any additions?

 1. High Holiday tune for the first Maariv*
 2. Show tunes, or old standards, for the Chazan's part of Maariv.
 3. Auctioning off every honor of the day* to the highest bidder
 4. The gabbai calling someone up to read a verse of Ata Haraysa by
    his profession ("Mechubid HaCaterer Hagodol")
 5. The gabbai calling someone up to read a verse of Ata Haraysa by
    reciting the verse himself ("Mechubid HaCaterer Hagodol mit de
    posuk hashem melech hashem molach hashem yimloch l'olam voed")
 6. Completely removing the mechitza during hakafot*
 7. Putting a shtreimal on the person leading the hakafa* (You don't
    usually wear a shtrimal and a talis simultaneously, but the joke
    has more bite (not that its all that funny in any case) if the
    person being forced to don the shtreimal isn't hasidic)
 8. Blocking the torah's return to the ark after hakafos*
 9. Reading the torah at night to the High Holiday tune (Everywhere I
    know does this all day, too)*
10. Someone taking an aliya and reciting the blessings using the
    "wrong" accent or pronunciation. (in a shtiebel the joke is to use
    a sing-song for asher notan lonu torat emet; in a Young Israel the
    joke is mumbling Borchee es heshem hamivoyrach and putting the
    accent on the wrong syllable of the word torah.)*
11. The reverse hagbah at maariv (Some do it all day, too)*
12. "Young Israel" tunes for Aleinu or Kaddish (Shteibles only)*
13. Funny hats (I've seen cowboy hats, bucharin kippot, and fezes,
    among others)
14. A shachris chazan in a formal cantors uniform
15. Singing parts of shachris not normally sung, usually to out of
    context tunes (ie modernisha tunes in a shteible, hasidic melodies
    in a big shul)*
16. Kids running around tying talitot together
17. Lubovitch style duchaning (in non Lubovitch shuls)
18. Stealing the kohens' shoes
19. Calling up any boy who can read for an aliyah*
20. Singing hamalach hagoel at kol nearim*
21. Singing wedding tunes at chosan Torah and Berayshis.*
22. Screaming out vayihi erev vayihi boker yom X in advance of the
    Torah reader.*
23. Screaming out "Boreh Pri Hagofen" when the Torah reader reaches
    Yom Hashishi
24. Neilah tunes at musaf
25. Abuse of the baal musaf, including: tying him up, carrying him
    out, spinning him around, and dousing him with water at the prayer
    for rain.
26. Someone making a mezonos or shehakol blessing with the tune used
    for the kohen's blessing at the moment in musaf when that prayer
    would normally be said on an ordinary holiday

* =  done this year in his temple 

Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:
> a blog not normally allowed here lists the following as 'shtick'
> done on simchat tora. any additions?

I wouldn't call all of these "shtick".  E.g.

>  1. High Holiday tune for the first Maariv*
>  3. Auctioning off every honor of the day* to the highest bidder
> 22. Screaming out vayihi erev vayihi boker yom X in advance of the
>     Torah reader.*

I'd call 1 and 22 standard minhag, while 3 would seem more a matter
of whether, given the kind of shul and the kind of crowd, it's a
practical way to bring in money.

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

RAM:
> It seems that the idea of the omission of Layshev being a hekker
> contradicts the custom of saying the Yehi Ratzon on Shmini Atzeres. A
> chutznik should either say the Yehi Ratzon on Hashana Raba, or he
> should have a different reason for why the Layshev is omitted on Shmini
> Atzeres.

The Yehi Ratzon is l'maaseh, a tefilah you make upon leaving the Sukkah for
the last time that year. Regardless of the reason why, l'maaseh you are not
leaving the Sukkah until after Shmini Atzeret (if that is your minhag). It
would not make sense to say the Yehi Ratzon and then go back into the Succah
to have another meal.

Stuart



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 201
***************************************

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..."