Avodah Mailing List

Volume 33: Number 25

Fri, 13 Feb 2015

• 1. Re: Revealing the Nakedness (Simon Montagu)
• 2. Re: Revealing the Nakedness (Zev Sero)
• 3. Re: Revealing the Nakedness (Zev Sero)
• 4. Re: steps up to the menorah ()
• 5. Re: Safeik as Metzi'us (Kenneth Miller)
• 6. Ashkenazim Sefardim (Prof. Levine)
• 7. Different Ways of Pronouncing Hebrew (Prof. Levine)
• 8. Going from Gemara to halacha (Rich, Joel)
• 9. Re: Revealing the Nakedness (Kenneth Miller)
• 10. Re: Different Ways of Pronouncing Hebrew (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Revealing the Nakedness (Zev Sero)
• 12. Stairs in the Mikdash (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi)
• 13. Re: Stairs in the Mikdash (Kenneth Miller)
• 14. Re: Stairs in the Mikdash (Zev Sero)
• 15. Re: [Areivim] 70th anniversary issue/question (Micha Berger)

On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 3:40 AM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah <
avo...@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:
>
>
> Are there other cases where the Torah takes an idiom, and uses it so
> literally?
>
>
An example comes to mind at the end of Vayyeshev: in Gen 40:13 and 19,
"yissa ... et rosh'cha" is used idiomatically and literally in quick
succession. I think there are other examples too.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150211/2eb3cb93/attachment-0001.htm>

On 02/11/2015 06:40 AM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:

> Let's put it this way. I'm going to use modern English idioms to
> illustrate what I suspect is happening when the Torah uses this
> Hebrew idiom. We know that there's a mitzvah of Morah Mikdash, to
> have the appropriate respect while in the Mishkan, and not do
> frivolous activities. For example, if I'm not mistaken, it is assur
> to sleep there. Now, suppose the Torah wanted to explicitly forbid
> such sleeping, but instead of writing "Do not sleep on the
> mizbe'ach", it had written "Do not sleep *with* the mizbe'ach."
> That's sort of what seems to be happening in this pasuk.

If you're going in that direction then you have to take account the reversal
of the usual idiom.  Giluy ervah, as it is used in a sexual context, seems to
refer to what the male does to the female; *he* "reveals *her* nakedness",
and we all (think we) know what that means.  Here, the Torah tells the cohen
that if he goes up to the mizbeach on stairs *his* nakedness will be revealed.
Make of that what you wish.

On 02/11/2015 10:35 AM, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 3:40 AM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah <avo...@lists.aishdas.org <mailto:avo...@lists.aishdas.org>> wrote:
>
>
>> Are there other cases where the Torah takes an idiom, and uses it so literally?
>
>
> An example comes to mind at the end of Vayyeshev: in Gen 40:13 and
> 19, "yissa ... et rosh'cha" is used idiomatically and literally in
> quick succession. I think there are other examples too.

That's different because it's a deliberate pun.  Similar examples are
1. "vayihyu sheneihem `arumim...vehanachash haya `arum"
2. "va`avadtem elohim acherim...va'avadtem mehera"

Here there's no such juxtaposition, so it's not a pun.  RAM may well be on
to something, I'm just not sure what.

[1] From: Ben Waxman via Avodah  <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>

>>  At the end of parshat  Yitro is the famous pasuk about the mizbei'ach 
having a ramp and not steps,  to make sure that no one views the cohen's 
nakedness. Yet my 7 YO asked me  why do all the pictures of the menorah 
(at least in her books) show a cohen  standing on steps or on a ladder?  
I didn't have an answer.  <<





[2] From: Zev Sero via Avodah  <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>

....But see Rashi on the pasuk
in  Yisro, who points out that the stones aren't going to "see" anything
anyway,  because he's wearing shorts.  The concern is that it will *look*
like  they're seeing his nakedness, because he is visibly lifting his
knees to  climb them.....


[3] From: Akiva Miller via Avodah  <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>
....what makes the kevesh more sensitive to  tznius than any other part of 
the mishkan, such as the stairs by the menorah?  


[4] From: Micha Berger via Avodah  <avo...@lists.aishdas.org>

I heard once that the difference is that  the menorah is indoors.






>>>>>>
 
If we put together all these questions and comments, a possible answer  
suggests itself:  when the kohen is going up the ramp he is seen by  hundreds 
or thousands of people, whereas IIANM there was no "audience" inside  the 
mishkan, where the menorah was lit.
 
On Shabbos we cover the challah when kiddush is said, so as not to  
"embarrass" the challah -- which can only possibly be "embarrassed" by the  
projection of the thoughts and feelings of the people who are gathered round the  
Shabbos table.  Likewise it isn't really the steps or ramp, but the people  
witnessing the steps or ramp, who will sense either the bizayon of the steps 
or  the kovod of the ramp as the kohen ascends.
 
I would also like to say to RBW, whose seven-year-old started this thread,  
that he should be very proud of his daughter and have a lot of nachas!
 

--Toby  Katz
t6...@aol.com
..
=============


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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150211/0c95fddb/attachment-0001.htm>

I suggested a comparison:

: Let's say that my wife insists that I'll look like an idiot
: if there's no feather in my hat, but I'm an animal rights activist who
: feels very uncomfortable wearing a genuine feather. May I go out with
: the feather or not?

R' Micha Berger responded:

> I still don't see a parallel, ...
>
> If you choose to wear the feather, it's because your desire
> for shalom bayis, for not looking like an idiot, or whatever,
> outweights your animal rights activism. In total, you want to
> wear it.
>
> If you want to ask about a feather you're only wearing because
> kofin oso ad sheyomar rotzeh ani... That would be different!

I agree, and I think this is an excellent summary of how both of us see
this issue. The difference is that RMB sees the bottom line as that for
whatever reason, I DO want to wear the feather, and the Briskers DO want to
wear the all-white tzitzis.

But *my* thoughts are that I wonder what the mindset is of those Briskers,
and perhaps their reluctance to wear the all-white tzitzis might indeed put
them into a "kofin oso" situation, or nearly so. I wrote previously that
even if they grudgingly wear all-white tzitzis during the week, there's
less of an incentive to do so on Shabbos, and I think this would apply even
more so if one keeps the tzitzis tucked in (in which case the "tachshit"
heter is weaker).

Do we have any no-tzitzis-on-Shabbos Briskers in the chevreh who might share their views on this?

Akiva Miller


____________________________________________________________
Old School Yearbook Pics
View Class Yearbooks Online Free. Search by School & Year. Look Now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/54db950934ba21509160bst03vuc

<https://soundcloud.com/law
rence-schiffman>https://soundcloud.com/law
rence-schiffman

This is a talk by Prof. Lawrence Schiffman. YL


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150211/b2b287fa/attachment-0001.htm>

About half way through his talk at 
https://soundcloud.com/lawrence-schiffman Dr. Schiffman discusses why 
there are differences how different groups pronounce Hebrew.   He 
claims that pronunciation that one hears in most Young Israels was 
"introduced"  by Artscroll some years ago and is something completely new!

YL

The Gemara Moed Katan 5a discusses the source for marking a grave. Amoraim
give about 7 different psukim. The Rosh and Rif quote 3 of the amoraim in
bringing this halacha down. Would you understand that each pasuk has a
different force and all the reasons apply (for purposes of halachic
analysis of new cases) or that only a combination of all 3 would yield the
psak but any one missing would not? Or why bring 3 of 7?

Kol Tuv
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/20150212/5c5672c2/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Zev Sero wrote:

> If you're going in that direction then you have to take account
> the reversal of the usual idiom.  Giluy ervah, as it is used in
> a sexual context, seems to refer to what the male does to the
> female; *he* "reveals *her* nakedness", and we all (think we)
> know what that means.  Here, the Torah tells the cohen that if
> he goes up to the mizbeach on stairs *his* nakedness will be
> revealed. Make of that what you wish.

Fascinating thought! I would add, though, that the idiom *generally* seems
to refer to what the male does to the female. But there ARE exceptions, and
the first two were pretty easy to find:

The first I found was Vayikra 20:11 - "A man who lies with his father's wife: he revealed his *father's* nakedness..."

In the next, the idiom changes. Instead of *revealing* the nakedness, it is
about *seeing* the nakedness: Vayikra 20:17 - "A man who takes his
sister... he sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness..."

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Fast, Secure, NetZero 4G Mobile Broadband. Try it.
http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT2

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:53:09PM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
: About half way through his talk at
: https://soundcloud.com/lawrence-schiffman Dr. Schiffman discusses
: why there are differences how different groups pronounce Hebrew.
: He claims that pronunciation that one hears in most Young Israels
: was "introduced"  by Artscroll some years ago and is something
: completely new!

While I agree that it doesn't represent a real mesorah, I find his
proposing this explanation very very odd.

R/Dr Schiffman, Prof Levine, and I are all old enough to remember when
ArtScroll first started publishing. (Megillas Esther, 1975.) And R/D
LS should remember that those YI members were talking like that before
ArtScroll had a chance to influence them.

And until they had a fully transliterated book, so that the reader would
be exposed to enough non-buzzwords, enough words they don't already
know, that they would reconstruct the wrong pronunciation?

So, I not nly think it's wrong, I think it's altogether odd for someone
who grew up in that era to even suggest.

And English readers are used to "a" having numerous sounds. The idea that
people dropped the qamatz-patach distinction because they thought all
"a"s are alike would be a stretch, even if the timing did work.

My preschool reader had "aw", but even back then (WELL before 1975)
it was anachronistic. The norm had shifted to the "u" of "nut", or the
"a" as well as the "o" of "another" (in my own regional accent).
And it's not like "o" or "u" were any more available.

And last, do we really need to hunt for an explanation when a bunch of
Anglo Religious Zionists speaks an approximation of Israeli Hebrew --
as close as possible without having to learn a reish sound English
doesn't have?

Where does R/D LS think the YI sav = /t/ come from?

But returning to the Avodah-ness of the topic; in either case, it's not
some kind of well established mesorah.

In general, I wonder what "real mesorah" means WRT havarah. Does it
make a difference if I say /oi/ because my ancestors were Poilish or
because I live in a "yeshivish" neighborhood. That's hypothetical, I
actually use an American /o/ which is close to a mesoteric pronunciation,
but not my greatgrandfather's Lithuanian long /A/ and rounder than the
traditional. But then again, shift in sounds as we go through the golah is
common. On the other hand, Lithuanian has /o/ and /sh/ sounds why doesn't
Litvisher Hebrew? Did Litta inherit its /s/ for shin in some chain that
dates back to sheivet Ephraim? (Shofetim 12:6) Did the Ashkenazi ayin drop
out of "Yankl" to become silent because our languaged didn't have them,
or because this was a variant that dates back to the shevatim that just
happened to reach a populational critical mass to grow into a norm?

What kinds of changes are "real mesorah" and which not, and is that
distinction itself even real?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Time flies...
mi...@aishdas.org                    ... but you're the pilot.
http://www.aishdas.org                       - R' Zelig Pliskin
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On 02/12/2015 07:59 AM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
> Fascinating thought! I would add, though, that the idiom*generally*
> seems to refer to what the male does to the female. But there ARE
> exceptions, and the first two were pretty easy to find:
>
> The first I found was Vayikra 20:11 - "A man who lies with his
> father's wife: he revealed his*father's* nakedness..."

In other words, someone who isn't even present!   I suggest, though, that
it has its usual meaning, and the Torah is telling us that the reason this
is fobidden is that he is figuratively doing that to his father (cf Avshalom).


> In the next, the idiom changes. Instead of*revealing*  the nakedness,
> it is about*seeing*  the nakedness: Vayikra 20:17 - "A man who takes
> his sister... he sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness..."

Perhaps this is a separate idiom, that we only find this once.
It seems to imply more mutuality than "giluy" does.

There's also the related idiom "to reveal the corner [presumably of a
garment]", as in "arur shochev im eishes aviv, ki gila kenaf aviv".

Perhaps it is of a greater concern when one is carrying heavy loads such as
the animal parts, which often prompts those bearers to take larger steps.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20150213/1bf51259/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Meir Rabi wrote:

> Perhaps it is of a greater concern when one is carrying heavy
> loads such as the animal parts, which often prompts those bearers
> to take larger steps.

That's a very interesting thought, but I think it would actually work in
favor of stairs. Let's take two different cases: where he is carrying the
load in his arms, or where he is dragging or pushing it across the floor.

If one is carrying a heavy load on a ramp, his big problem is maintaining a
good center of balance to avoid falling over. On a ramp this is solved by
keeping his legs far apart. On a staircase, this is less of a problem,
because at least his feet are on a horizontal surface.

But when pushing or dragging, his problem isn't so much the center of
balance, but the fight against gravity constantly pulling the load
backwards. The solution here is not so much the distance between the legs,
but the distance between the person and the load. This is a lot easier on a
staircase, because the load can simply rest at each step. If the load is so
large (and this would indeed be the case for many animals) that there's a
danger of it rolling down the stairs anyway, I think the stairs would still
be easier than the ramp. Actually, I wonder if the angle of the incline
might be a more important factor than whether it is a ramp or steps.

To keep the question Torah-oriented and in Avodah territory: I imagine that
most korbanos walked up to the mizbe'ach under their own power, and the
question is how they got down. Were they carried or dragged? I'd think that
dragging would be bloody and messy and cause needless damage to the kodesh
korban. Is it possible that carts of some sort were used?

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
How Old Men Tighten Skin
63 Year Old Man Shares DIY Skin Tightening Method You Can Do From Home
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/54dde2cca23af62cc41east02vuc

On 02/13/2015 06:40 AM, Kenneth Miller via Avodah wrote:
> To keep the question Torah-oriented and in Avodah territory: I
> imagine that most korbanos walked up to the mizbe'ach under their own
> power,

Certainly not!  All shechitah was done either batzafon, or bechol
makom ba'azarah, never on the mizbeach!  No live animal ever saw
the top of the mizbeach (since they didn't sacrifice giraffes).

The parts were always carried up, never dragged.  That would be
the ultimate in derech bizayon.   The only thing ever dragged
along the kevesh would be the ashes whenever the Tapuach was
removed, and when they did that there was one cohen dragging
it down, and another walking behind it, holding it back by a
chain so that it wouldn't slip down and crush the front cohen.

[Accidentally misdirected from Areivim, but I'm keeping it in the archive
anyway. -micha]

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 01:07:56AM -0500, via Areivim wrote:
:>  And the flipside of saying that HQBH allowed/caused the Shoah as
:> punishment  for XYZ would be to ascribe messianic import (or some other
:> motive) to  providing that Chessed. Something RYBS refused to do, even
:> as many of his  students followed RAYKook rather than their own rebbe on
:> that point.

: "Something RYBS refused to do" -- that's why he wasn't really a Zionist. 

Well then, neither was Herzl, by that definition!

: He was active in Mizrachi (although he didn't accept its core premise -- 
: the messianic nature of the Medinah)...

And neither was R' Reines, the very founder of Mizrachi!

Not all Religious Zionists are messianic about it.

Just today, RGS wrote on his e-zine
<http://www.torahmusings.com/2015/02/new-zionism> something similar:

    For the past few decades, Religious Zionism has come in two main
    varieties: Messianic and Pragmatic. Both face significant challenges
    today.... If so, where is mashiach? Why are religious Jews a minority
    in Israel? Where is the promised peace and righteousness?

    These questions form the basis of a rich Messianic Zionist literature
    that interprets texts as showing a gradual progression of the promised
    redemption...

    However, the Disengagement from Gaza generated a theological shockwave
    among Messianic Zionists. The setback raised questions...

    Pragmatic Zionism does not dismiss the power of biblical prophecy
    but prefers not to dwell on it. Instead, it supports a Jewish state
    as a home for Jews, not just as a refuge but as a place of our own
    in which we can flourish. However, the religious and emotional pull
    of an almost purely political ideology has significant limits. From
    afar, it seems to me that Pragmatic Zionism is becoming a larger
    force in Israel, and with it a noticable decline in the fervor of
    Religious Zionism.

R' AY Kook had a strong influence on the RZ community, particularly after
the Six Day War when R ZY Kook and Gush Emunim got to the scene. It got
to the point that the party that carries Mizrachi's and Mafdal's legacy,
Bayit Yehudi, is more about settlements and greater Israel -- Neo-Zionism
-- than what they see as the rest of Torah.

RZYK's messianic hashkafah tied to belief in an ever-growing Greater
Israel is why so many of Gush Qatif's residents refused to prepare
for the worst, and wrote songs like "Zeh lo yihyeh, zeh lo yiqreh"
<http://youtu.be/VULZ5YchxI8>, and ended up alienating the government
that they needed social assistance from to manage the transition.

So, I thought that the Hitnatqut kind of disproved RZYK's hashkafah, much
as the Shoah and post-Zionism diproved his fatheers. But his followers
(I'm CC-ing Rn Boublil to give her a chance) have adjusted.

However, while the R's Kook did influence much of RZ, they don't define
it. "Reishit tzemichat ge'ulateinu" or even "shetehei reshit tzemichat
ge'ulateinu" aren't the only religious reasons to support the movement
Herzl et al founded. (I'm CC-ing R' Eli Turkel for his two cents on
that score.)

But any definition of "Mizrachi's philosophy" that defines it as excluding
what RGS calls Pragmatic [Religious] Zionism, which was adhered to by
its founder, as well as those of the president of its American Arm, or
the first generation of Gush's RY (RYA and RAL), is at best idiosyncratic.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I long to accomplish a great and noble task,
mi...@aishdas.org        but it is my chief duty to accomplish small
http://www.aishdas.org   tasks as if they were great and noble.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                              - Helen Keller



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



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