Avodah Mailing List

Volume 35: Number 110

Thu, 07 Sep 2017

• 1. Avodah] Machlokes in Mishnayos, why? (H Lampel)
• 2. Questions about mechiyas amalek (Marty Bluke)
• 3. Re: Questions about mechiyas amalek (Zev Sero)
• 4. Parshat Ki Tavo: What Was Written on the Stones? (Prof. Levine)
• 5. Re: Parshat Ki Tavo: What Was Written on the Stones? (Simon Montagu)
• 6. Re: Parshat Ki Tavo: What Was Written on the Stones? (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: Parshat Ki Tavo: What Was Written on the Stones? (Lisa Liel)
• 8. Re: Parshat Ki Tavo: What Was Written on the Stones? (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: what mitzvos did Avos follow? (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Questions about mechiyas amalek (Ben Waxman)
• 11. Re: Questions about mechiyas amalek (Zev Sero)
• 12. Re: Questions about mechiyas amalek (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Questions about mechiyas amalek (Zev Sero)
• 14. Re: Questions about mechiyas amalek (Micha Berger)
• 15. Re: Questions about mechiyas amalek (Zev Sero)
• 16. Re: Questions about mechiyas amalek (Ra...@opengemara.org)

Sun, 3 Sep 2017 Marty Bluke asked:
> ...The Beis Din Hagadol was in existence throughout the period of the
> Tannaim...
> so how can the Rambam write When the Beis Din Hagadol was in existence
> there was no machlokes in Israel when Hillel and Shammai and their students
> had disputes that were unresolved when there clearly was a Beis Din Hagadol
> in existence?
> 2. Why didn't the Beis Din Hagadol resolve the disputes between Hillel and
> Shammai and their students and in fact all of the disputes in the Mishna?
> Why did they let Machlokes fester? Their clearly was a Beis Din Hagadol for
> most if not all of the period of the Tannaim.
By '''in existence,'' the Rambam means when it functioned properly. R' 
Yitzchak Isaac HaLevy in his work, Doros HaRishonim develops the sources 
that there were periods of persecution during which the Beis Din Gadol 
could not operate normally, including the time when Beis Shammai and 
Beis Hillel were unable to unite. The English-language Jewish history 
books that have been published over the past few decades follow this 
model. I have also done so in ''The Dynamics of Dispute,'' (Judaica 
Press) Chapter 10, ''The Control and Proliferation of Machlokess, 
Keeping the Torah One.''

Zvi Lampel

1. When Shaul returns to Shmuel Hanavi after fighting Amalek he says
hakimosi es dvar hashem that he destroyed Amalek and in fact, the Medrash
states that Amalek only survived because Agag was allowed to live the night
and it was his descendents that perpetuated Amalek.

However, the Navi says (Shmuel 1 30) that a few years later David fought
Amalek in Tziklag and 400 Amalekim escaped. Who were these Amalekim if
Shaul had wiped them out a few years earlier?

2. Why did no King after Shaul attempt to fulfill this Mitzva? Both David
and Shlomo certainly had the power to do so and yet they never attempted to
wipe out Amalek, nor did any other king, why not?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170905/ef1e9b86/attachment-0001.htm>

On 05/09/17 04:59, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
> 
> 2. Why did no King after Shaul attempt to fulfill this Mitzva? Both 
> David and Shlomo certainly had the power to do so and yet they never 
> attempted to wipe out Amalek, nor did any other king, why not?

David did; Yoav killed all the males but didn't know that the females 
must be killed as well.  Your question of how Agag's descendants, 
conceived the night before he was killed, managed to become so numerous 
so quickly applies here too.

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

According to some the entire Torah was written on these 
stones.  However,  others disagree.

Please see the article at

http://tinyurl.com/yblaj8cu

If as some hold that the entire Torah was translated into 70 
languages,  then why was it necessary for Alexander to gather 70 
sages to translate it into Greek.  Didn't there already exist a Greek 
translation?

YL

On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah <
avo...@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:

> If as some hold that the entire Torah was translated into 70 languages,
> then why was it necessary for Alexander to gather 70 sages to translate it
> into Greek.  Didn't there already exist a Greek translation?
>

Greek changed a lot over the centuries. I'm not sure if it even existed as
a language at the time of Joshua, and the Greek alphabet was certainly much
later. If Greek was the one of the languages the Torah was translated into
then it would probably have been unrecognizable in the Hellenistic period.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170905/feb6035b/attachment-0001.htm>

On 05/09/17 11:17, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
> 
> If as some hold that the entire Torah was translated into 70 languages,  
> then why was it necessary for Alexander to gather 70 sages to translate 
> it into Greek.  Didn't there already exist a Greek translation?

1. Ptolemy, not Alexander.

2. 72 sages, not 70.

3. Why do you think the stones, with the plaster on them and the writing 
on the plaster, still existed after 1000 years of exposure to the 
elements?  Does any 1000-year-old writing (not engraving) exist today?

4. Even if the writing did still exist, would whatever passed for Greek 
in 1271 BCE have been intelligible in 271 BCE?

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

On 9/5/2017 6:17 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
> According to some the entire Torah was written on these stones.  
> However, others disagree.
...
> If as some hold that the entire Torah was translated into 70 
> languages,  then why was it necessary for Alexander to gather 70 sages 
> to translate it into Greek.  Didn't there already exist a Greek 
> translation?

Well, for one thing, it was Ptolemy, rather than Alexander.  But for 
another, maybe it wasn't necessary.  Perhaps if they'd simply asked for 
the authoritative Greek translation, they'd have gotten it, and any 
number of distortions of the Torah caused by the Septuagint wouldn't 
have happened.

Lisa

On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 12:17:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
: 3. Why do you think the stones, with the plaster on them and the
: writing on the plaster, still existed after 1000 years of exposure
: to the elements?  Does any 1000-year-old writing (not engraving)
: exist today?

Rishonim on Yehoshua also argue how many such monuments there were. For
example Rashi (at least as explained in Gur Aryeih) has three copies:
one in the Yaedrin, one on the mizbeiach on Har Eivel (which is named
in Devarim) and one at Gilgal.

AND there is a machloqes tanna'im (Sotah 35b) about how they were
written. But I think both shitos hold they were engraced. R' Shimon
says that the stones were plastered, and then the words were engraved
into the plaster. R' Yehudah held the stones were engraved, and then
plastered on top of them.

R' Yehudah's position sounds like it's describing more permanent writing,
but how would you get to see it? You would not only need to peel off
the plaster, the plaster could well get into the engraved letters.

To address the original question:
Ezra haSofer used majority to produce the mesoretic text, leaving us
with a sefer that didn't match any of the copies found. Why didn't he
check the Hebrew copy/ies from the monunemnt(s)? Wouldn't a text
engraved by people who met MRAH be more authoritative than any of them?

(All this assuming, as is the post I'm replying to, that they contained
the whole Torah. That is the shitah we're trying to understand, no?)

So it would seem to me that just as we have no idea how to find this
monument / these monuments, even if the writing is still legible, they
were already unavailable in Ezra's day. Unsurprising, given how much
more pragmatic and used knowledge was lost.

And even if they did know where to find it, either the writing wore off
the plaster, or perhaps the plaster was too embedded after all those
centuries to be picked off to read the stone.

Regardless of the shift in Greek, the stones weren't even usable when
the target was the original Hebrew.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and
mi...@aishdas.org        this was a great wonder. But it is much more
http://www.aishdas.org   wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a
Fax: (270) 514-1507      "mensch"!     -Rav Yisrael Salanter

On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 05:17:58PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote:
: >The following are universally accepted
: >1]  AAvinu [howsoever we explain his Jewish status] followed all 
: >Halacha and even Minhag
: 
: Is this the case?

In a footnote to one of his father-in-law's maamarim, RMMS (the LR),
writes that this is meant that they did so "beruchnius, velo begashmius":
Some mitzvos they "only" fulfilled the point of the mitzvah without
physically doing the mitzvah. E.g. tefillin, with its mention of yetzi'as
Mitzrayim. Others, they did perform the mitzvah physically, but still
they only did so to accomplish the ruchnius -- it was only incidentally
physical, and only sometimes in the same form.

See http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=31608&;st=&pgnum=137

For example (not given there), the Zohar links Yaaqov's spotted sticks
and changing the coats of sheep to the mitzvah of tefillin. But the
sticks didn't become qadosh, because uplifting and redeeming the gashmi
wasn't part of the plan.

There is more in Liqutei Sichos on Lekh Lekha
www.chabad.org/therebbe/article_cdo/aid/68627/jewish
/Likkutei-Sichot-Lech-Lecha.htm

Given RMMS's relationship to shitas Rashi, and our stereotype that
chassidus tends to take maximalist positions, I thought this position
would be somewhat interesting.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             We are what we repeatedly do.
mi...@aishdas.org        Thus excellence is not an event,
http://www.aishdas.org   but a habit.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Aristotle

On 9/5/2017 5:01 PM, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
> David did; Yoav killed all the males but didn't know that the females 
> must be killed as well.

How is it that Yoav made such a grievous mistake? No one told him what 
the mitzvah and the dinim were?

Having said that, it seems that even righteous kings made grievous 
mistakes in the halacha. David (according to the Ramban) didn't know 
that counting the number of Bnei Yisrael was assur, and apparently no 
one informed him.

Ben

On 05/09/17 16:30, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote:
> On 9/5/2017 5:01 PM, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
>> David did; Yoav killed all the males but didn't know that the females 
>> must be killed as well.
> 
> How is it that Yoav made such a grievous mistake? No one told him what 
> the mitzvah and the dinim were?

They had no printed chumashim with nekudos, of course.  His rebbe taught 
him to read "macho timcheh es z'char amalek", instead of "zecher". 
Apparently he never had occasion to read this parsha in front of anyone 
else, so nobody ever corrected him, and he never knew about the correct 
pronunciation until he did this.   He was so angry he killed his rebbe 
for his malpractice.


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

On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 11:43:20PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
: They had no printed chumashim with nekudos, of course.  His rebbe
: taught him to read "macho timcheh es z'char amalek", instead of
: "zecher". Apparently he never had occasion to read this parsha in
: front of anyone else, so nobody ever corrected him, and he never
: knew about the correct pronunciation until he did this.   He was so
: angry he killed his rebbe for his malpractice.

BB 21b.

I think he concluded said rebbe (Yoav) did it as intentional ziyuf, not an
error.

R Mordechai Breuer <www.herzog.ac.il/tvunot/fulltext/mega10_broyer.pdf>
concludes that the semichut (i.e. the "X of Y" form of the word for X)
for "zakhar" could follow a variant conjugation and come out "zekher".
And while it's hard to picture confusing "z'khar" and "zeikher",
"zekher" and "zeikher" is much easier.

The "zekher" vs "zeikher" debate over what the Gra had for Parashas
Zakhor was over which means the Gra's intent was to tell us the word means
"reminder / memorial" rather than "memory". The mesorah is "zeikher".

But if zekher could mean both "males of" and "memory of", the mistake
is VERY easy. (Not that RMB would worry about the possibility of the
Gra disagreeing with the mesoretic niqud.)

But in any case, #6 on the Rambam's history of gedolei hador since Sinai
never learned the sugya with anyone in the beis medrash? It's strange.
In our culture, it would be the "hot topic" of study for the weeks leading
into the war...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             You are not a human being in search
mi...@aishdas.org        of a spiritual experience. You are a
http://www.aishdas.org   spiritual being immersed in a human
Fax: (270) 514-1507      experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

On 06/09/17 10:45, Micha Berger wrote:

> I think he concluded said rebbe did it as intentional ziyuf, not an
> error.

No.  Why would he do that?  The Rishonim discuss whether the rebbe 
himself didn't know the correct pronunciation, or whether he knew it and 
therefore taught it corrrectly, but didn't pay enough attention to how 
each boy was pronouncing it, so never noticed that young Yoav had 
misheard him and was reading "z'char".


> But in any case, #6 on the Rambam's history of gedolei hador since Sinai
> never learned the sugya with anyone in the beis medrash?
Yoav was a gadol hador?!  I don't see him listed in the Rambam's hakdamah.

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

On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 02:48:00PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
: On 06/09/17 10:45, Micha Berger wrote:
: >I think he concluded said rebbe did it as intentional ziyuf, not an
: >error.

: No.  Why would he do that?

A king can extrajudicially kill, but for an honest mistake?
And yet no one discusses this as a sin on David haMelekh's part.

:> But in any case, #6 on the Rambam's history of gedolei hador since Sinai
:> never learned the sugya with anyone in the beis medrash?

: Yoav was a gadol hador?!  I don't see him listed in the Rambam's hakdamah.

No! David haMelekh is the 6th name on the list. And how did someone
at or rising to that level never discussed Yoav's shitah with others,
particularly during the ramp-up time to the war. How is it DhM didn't
get clarification /before/ the war?

And why did he think Shelomo haMelekh killed all the women and most
of the animals? Actually, if you figure the remaining animals were for
qorbanos, he was planning on all them being killed. A random reenactment
of Yericho?

Was there no one in the beis medrash who had it right? Who spoke up when
it was too late, but wasn't there to be asked?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             What we do for ourselves dies with us.
mi...@aishdas.org        What we do for others and the world,
http://www.aishdas.org   remains and is immortal.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Albert Pine

On 06/09/17 18:51, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 02:48:00PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
> : On 06/09/17 10:45, Micha Berger wrote:
> : >I think he concluded said rebbe did it as intentional ziyuf, not an
> : >error.
> 
> : No.  Why would he do that?
> 
> A king can extrajudicially kill, but for an honest mistake?
> And yet no one discusses this as a sin on David haMelekh's part.

I don't understand why you keep bringing David up.  What does he have to 
do with this story?   The story is about Yoav, not David.

And I repeat my question, why would Yoav's rebbe intentionally corrupt 
the pasuk?  Why would Yoav even suspect him of it?


> :> But in any case, #6 on the Rambam's history of gedolei hador since Sinai
> :> never learned the sugya with anyone in the beis medrash?
> 
> : Yoav was a gadol hador?!  I don't see him listed in the Rambam's hakdamah.
> 
> No! David haMelekh is the 6th name on the list.

So how does that make Yoav a gadol?


> And how did someone
> at or rising to that level never discussed Yoav's shitah with others,
> particularly during the ramp-up time to the war. How is it DhM didn't
> get clarification /before/ the war?

Why would it even occur to him that Yoav had such a misunderstanding?



> And why did he think Shelomo haMelekh killed all the women and most
> of the animals?

Do you mean Shaul?   Perhaps Yoav didn't know the details of what had 
happened all those years ago.   In fact how many people ever knew about 
Shmuel's rebuke of Shaul?  It may have been secret by the king's order, 
and not spoken about, so Yoav may never even have heard of it.


> Was there no one in the beis medrash who had it right? Who spoke up when
> it was too late, but wasn't there to be asked?

Again, Yoav thought he had it right.  He didn't even know that there was 
anything he needed to ask.


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

On September 6, 2017 3:51pm PDT, Micha Berger wrote:
...
> A king can extrajudicially kill, but for an honest mistake?
> And yet no one discusses this as a sin on David haMelekh's part.
..
>: Yoav was a gadol hador?!  I don't see him listed in the Rambam's hakdamah.

> No! David haMelekh is the 6th name on the list. And how did someone
> at or rising to that level never discussed Yoav's shitah with others,
> particularly during the ramp-up time to the war. How is it DhM didn't
> get clarification /before/ the war?

The Gemara (Bava Basra 21b) says that the issue was "???? ???? ????? ?'
???? [arur oseh melekhes H' remiyah -mb]" -- that the teacher should
be more attentive (also, it fits into the Sugya there -- that a teacher
who is medayek is better than one who's fast).

Also, there's a machlokes in Sanhedrin if Yoav was a good person who
made mistakes or if he was evil but found Dovid Hamelech to strong.


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



_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/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://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..."


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.)