Avodah Mailing List

Volume 32: Number 49

Sat, 22 Mar 2014

• 1. Re: Esther (Micha Berger)
• 2. How to Teach History (Prof. Levine)
• 3. Re: Can Xerxes be Achashverosh - Jewish Chronology (Arie Folger)
• 4. Esther (Sholom Simon)
• 5. Can Xerxes be Achashverosh - Jewish Chronology (Eli Turkel)
• 6. Esther (Eli Turkel)
• 7. Re: How to Teach History (Harry Maryles)
• 8. Points to Consider (cantorwolb...@cox.net)
• 9. Re: Points to Consider (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Can Xerxes be Achashverosh - Jewish Chronology (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Can Xerxes be Achashverosh - Jewish Chronology (Arie Folger)
• 12. Fighting the Taf Guys (Prof. Levine)

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 09:17:29PM +0000, Allan Engel wrote:
: If Ya'aqov was the Eid, why would Re'uvein's name be there at all?

Perhaps that's why we don't hold this way.

But in any case, it shows there is a discussion about how tightly
"ben" binds to the first name, and thus whether "eid" -- and therefore
I would think "asher haglah..." -- would more reasonably refer to
the father('s father's....) or to the name before the "ben".

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Life isn't about finding yourself
mi...@aishdas.org        Life is about creating yourself.
http://www.aishdas.org                - Bernard Shaw
Fax: (270) 514-1507

At 04:09 PM 3/20/2014, R. Ben Waxman wrote on Areivim:

>Contrast this to a classic from Rabbi Schwab:
>
>What ethical purpose is served by preserving a realistic historic 
>picture? Nothing but the satisfaction of curiosity. We should tell 
>ourselves and our children the good memories of the good people, 
>their unshakable faith, their staunch defense of tradition, their 
>life of truth, their impeccable honesty, their boundless charity and 
>their great reverence for Torah and Torah sages. What is gained by 
>pointing out their inadequacies and their contradictions? We want to 
>be inspired by their example and learn from their experience... 
>Rather than write the history of our forebears, every generation has 
>to put a veil over the human failings of its elders and glorify all 
>the rest which is great and beautiful. That means we have to do 
>without a real history book. We can do without. We do not need 
>realism, we need inspiration from our forefathers in order to pass 
>it onto posterity.
>Selected Writings (Lakewood, 1988)

I knew Rabbi Schwab, ZT"L, personally.  He was, IMO,  one of the 
great rabbonim of the last century.

That being said,  I have never understood his attitude toward Jewish 
history that is espoused in what you have quoted.  I find it all the 
more difficult to understand in light of the fact that RSRH makes it 
clear that the Torah points out the "shortcomings" of the Avos and 
Emos and says that this is a plus, and the fact the Rav Schwab was a 
Hirschian.  For example,  RSRH, following the RAMBAN,  says that 
Avraham committed a Chet when he said that Sarah was his sister.  He 
gives other examples such as the fact that Yitzchok and Rivka made a 
mistake in how they educated Esav.

I am fond of saying that there are Holocaust deniers and there are 
Orthodox deniers.  There are those within our community who refuse to 
realize that there was much wrong with Judaism in Europe.   One thing 
that particularly disturbs me is the fact that the Cheder system in 
Europe was an abysmal failure (See Saul Stampfer's article about 
this.),   yet they want to perpetuate this Cheder system.

YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140321/5d0f69bb/attachment-0001.htm>

RLL wrote:

> That's not good enough. You've got to posit a multigenerational hoax
> that didn't let a single contradictory view through.

Only if you assume that it was a hoax. I claim that it was so obvious, so
transparent, that it could not be a hoax. It was mussar. Unfortunately,
over time, we seem to have forgotten those small, but extremely important
details. Perhaps 'Am Yisrael was so worthy that it didn't need that mussar
for hundreds of years, but now, we suddenly need it again, so G"d made us
rediscover the hostry through the greeks.
-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Wieviel Feste feiern wir an Sukkot (Audio-Schiur)
* Die ethische Dimension des Schma Jissra?ls (Audio-Schiur)
* Ein Baum, der klug macht?! (Audio-Schiur)
* Podiumsdiskussion ?J?dische Religion zwischen Tradition und Moderne?
* Great Videos from the CER in Berlin
* A Priest Returns to his Faith
* The CER Berlin Conference in Pictures
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140321/edb7cfcd/attachment-0001.htm>

>Since Hebrew doesn't have commas...

Yes they do!  (sort of).  But we call them: esnachta, zakef, tipcha, 
etc . . . .

-- Sholom

<<That's not good enough. You've got to posit a multigenerational hoax
that didn't let a single contradictory view through. It simply isn't
plausable. You only have two options. Either the Greek version of
history is correct, in which case Chazal are flat out wrong, and had no
real conception of how events transpired (not to mention the fact that
the unbroken mesorah is a fiction), or Chazal are right and the Greek
version of history is a reconstruction based on the tales of Herodotus
and others, who were not historians in any way that we understand the
term today, but were rather paid story tellers. Raconteurs.>>

Again it is not just Herodotus. There are pillars carved in stone in Oersia
with the
list of kings giving A son of B son of C etc which is the same as the Greek
historians.
There are similar dishes which have been authenticated with similar lists.
The Greek
historians detail battles between the Greeks and Persians over many years.
Were they lying to
their contemporaries about these battles? The years affect many other
dynasties, Babylonian, Assyrian etc.
There are even eclipse events that support the extended Persian history.
see for example http://www.starways.net/lisa/essays/heifetzletters.html by
First.
In spite of what Aronson responds these inscriptions in pillars are not
forgeries.

It is well that Herodotus was not a historian in the way we understand
today but neither was
Seder Olam meant in that way. This concept simply did not exist in ancient
days.

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140321/681fc422/attachment-0001.htm>

[Micha:]
> Who is the subject of the "asher" -- Mordachai or Qish?

> This might be related to the question of whether Matisyahu ben Yochanan
> Kohain Gadol refers to Maisyahu as the kohein gadol, or as the son of
> Yochanan Kohein Gadol.

It does seem unlikely to be Matityahu who lived in Modiin
and there are no records listing him as a high priest

-- 
Eli Turkel

I am told that Rav Schwab was heavily influenced by the Lithuanian type
Yeshivos he attended. So much so that he had ?accepted the Charedi view
that ?RSRH only meant TIDE as a B'Dieved (as explained to him by R' Baruch
Ber Leibowitz, whiom he consulted about it). He later rejected that view
and returned to the view that RSRH meant it as a L'Chatchila.

No doubt, R' Schwab was still heavily influenced by his yeas in the
Litvishe Yeshivos and retained some of that Hashkafa, which probably
explains his views about Jewish history.?

I think that's even more true about today's German/Jewish observant
community. Almost all of them attend Lithuanian type Yeshivos and the only
thing that remains of their RSRH's TIDE are the Minhagim. The philosophy of
?classic TIDE is practically gone. IIUC.?

This attitie is reinforced by the current successor to R' Schwab, Rabbi
Zechariah Gelley. He asserted that TIDE is no longer a viable option in our
day, because we cannot practice it properly without RSRH's guidance (or
some other excuse like that). He said so during the celebration of RSRH's
200 birthday (IIRC) after Jonathan Rosenblum's speech extolling classic
Hirschian TIDE (and probably embarrassing JR in the process).

HM


?
Want Emes and Emunah in your life? 


Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/



On Friday, March 21, 2014 5:12 AM, Prof. Levine <llev...@stevens.edu> wrote:
 
At 04:09 PM 3/20/2014, R. Ben Waxman wrote on
Areivim:
>
>
>Contrast this to a classic from
Rabbi Schwab:
>>
>>What ethical purpose is served by preserving a realistic historic
picture? Nothing but the satisfaction of curiosity. We should tell
ourselves and our children the good memories of the good people, their
unshakable faith, their staunch defense of tradition, their life of
truth, their impeccable honesty, their boundless charity and their great
reverence for Torah and Torah sages. What is gained by pointing out their
inadequacies and their contradictions?...?
>>
>>
>Selected Writings (Lakewood, 1988)
>I knew Rabbi Schwab, ZT"L, personally.? He was, IMO,? one
of the great rabbonim of the last century.? 
>
>That being said,? I have never understood his attitude toward Jewish
history that is espoused in what you have quoted.? I find it all the
more difficult to understand in light of the fact that RSRH makes it
clear that the Torah points out the "shortcomings" of the Avos
and Emos and says that this is a plus, and the fact the Rav Schwab was a
Hirschian...?
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140321/685d5d8c/attachment-0001.htm>

Part of this week?s portion deals with kashrut. Many different explanations have been
conveyed as to the rationale for kashrut. But the bottom line is that in reality there is none
known to man. There?s a common understanding that when you have many different theories, 
you really don?t have the answer because if the true reason were known, there would be no need 
for speculation.
Another important point to consider: if the laws of kashrut were to better us and make us 
masters over our primal instincts, then wouldn?t the Almighty include everyone? If a parent
has 10 children, he or she would want the best for all the kids. Interestingly, the very 
first Law of Kashrut WAS for all mankind ? namely the prohibition from eating the forbidden fruit.
With that in mind, it is apparent that the laws of kashrut are basically a chok, for which there is 
no definitive rational explanation. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140321/4a52355f/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:43:39PM -0400, cantorwolb...@cox.net wrote:
: Interestingly, the very
: first Law of Kashrut WAS for all mankind -- namely the prohibition
: from eating the forbidden fruit.

There was actually a second food-related law given to Adam, and I've
been wondering about it lately.

Of the 7 mitzvos benei Noach, 6 were given to Adam. Eiver min hachai
was added, because until then people weren't allowed to eat meat at
all. Vegetarianism was also a kashrus law for all mankind. Just as eiver
min hachai still is.

WRT kashrus in the usual sense of the word, kashrus not only involves
meat. The only way to avoid the territory of kashrus would be to be a
full began. Milk must come from a tahor species and the animal can't be
a tereifah. Similarly, we may not eat eagle or turtle eggs.

So, based on the same linkage Cantor Wikberg implies, I happened (by
"concidence") to be wondering whether people who lived before the magul
were allowed egg and milk.

Were they vegetarians, prohibited meat because of the decessary death
involved?
Or is the kashrus of Beris Sinai a way to matir those things that were
prohibited by an original Adamic veganism?

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             For those with faith there are no questions.
mi...@aishdas.org        For those who lack faith there are no answers.
http://www.aishdas.org                     - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 11:28:47AM +0100, Arie Folger wrote:
: RLL wrote:
:> That's not good enough. You've got to posit a multigenerational hoax
:> that didn't let a single contradictory view through.

: Only if you assume that it was a hoax. I claim that it was so obvious, so
: transparent, that it could not be a hoax. It was mussar. Unfortunately,
: over time, we seem to have forgotten those small, but extremely important
: details. Perhaps 'Am Yisrael was so worthy that it didn't need that mussar
: for hundreds of years, but now, we suddenly need it again, so G"d made us
: rediscover the hostry through the greeks.

I must confess, I was pretty surprised to see Lisa use the argument
that a medrash must be historical, or else Chazal were lying to us.
This isn't her/your position on Chazal's aggadic stories in general,
why does Seder Olam warrant different treatment than the rest of the
genre? (Or I guess your answer would most likely be to explain why it's
not part of that genre.)

:-)BBii!
-Micha

On Mar 21, 2014 6:09 PM, "Micha Berger" <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
>
> I must confess, I was pretty surprised to see Lisa use the argument
> that a medrash must be historical, or else Chazal were lying to us.
> This isn't her/your position on Chazal's aggadic stories in general,
> why does Seder Olam warrant different treatment than the rest of the
> genre? (Or I guess your answer would most likely be to explain why it's
> not part of that genre.)

I'll let Lisa reply for Lisa. As for me, I can say that thre are actually a
number of reasons to think Sedrr Olam is exactly of that (non literal)
genre. Think about it, so many numbers are just too beautiful to be actual
history. The absolute crown goes IMO to the way minyan shetarot, which is
actually a Greek post Alexandrian system, begins exactly 1000 years after
the Exodus. I mean, suddenly it looks like those Greeks were closet Jews
converting the Greeks to a Jewish dating system.

IMO, these are some of the many intentional clues left by Chazal, so we
would realize what they really meant.

Good Shabbos,

AF
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140321/5f8bd61a/attachment-0001.htm>

I personally am not a fan of the way Hebrew is 
pronounced in Israel.  I much prefer the 
Ashkenazic pronunciation.  Indeed,  I 
cringe  when I hear someone say Yitgadal.  It 
turns out that I am not alone in this.

From  http://www.ou.org/jewish_action/03/2014/fighting-taf-guys/

Upbringing aside?or, perhaps because of it?I just 
don?t understand the Sepharadic pronunciation. A 
beis is different from a veis. A kaf is different 
from a chaf. A pei is different from a fei. So 
why should a taf and a saf be the same? A dagesh 
(the dot sometimes found in Hebrew letters) has 
many functions. It can double a letter; for 
example, a dagesh in the gimmel makes the word 
?Haggadah,? properly transliterated with two g?s. 
In a ?mapik hei,? the dagesh makes the vowel 
precede the letter hei, e.g., ?Elo-Ah? rather 
than ?Elo-Ha? in Hallel. But what purpose does 
the dagesh serve in the last letter in Hebrew if 
it is always pronounced like a t?

And then there?s the issue of the kamatz, the 
little t-shaped vowel that Ashkenazim pronounce 
?aw? and Sepharadim pronounce ?ah.? The pasach 
(the straight line) is already pronounced ?ah.? 
Since the vowel symbols, like the trope marks, 
were designed by the Masoretes3 as an aid to 
reading the Torah, why would they come up with 
two vowels to represent the same sound? And how 
would they determine where to put each one?

Sharing my personal befuddlement is not meant to 
disparage Sepharadic pronunciation, which is a 
legitimate, accepted form of the language?but so 
is Ashkenazic! Can I feel some love in return?

Rabbi Moshe Feinstein addressed this matter 
several times. In Iggeros Moshe (Orach Chaim 
3:5), he writes that both pronunciations are 
acceptable in halachah to those who use them. As 
an example, he discusses the chalitzah ceremony, 
used to dissolve the bond between a widow and her 
deceased husband?s brother. This ceremony must be 
performed in Hebrew to be considered valid. A 
woman who performed chalitzah using one 
pronunciation would still be considered separated 
from her brother-in-law, even to members of a 
community that uses the other. Nevertheless, 
since we have no way of knowing which modern 
pronunciation most closely approximates the way 
our forefathers spoke, Rav Moshe rules that one 
is absolutely forbidden to change his 
pronunciation in prayer from the way his family 
says it. It is not permitted to reject one?s 
received tradition in favor of another practice 
that is not necessarily more accurate.

See the above URL for more.  YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20140322/fc8a400e/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 32, Issue 49
**************************************

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/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)