Avodah Mailing List

Volume 24: Number 3

Sun, 14 Oct 2007

• 1. When was the Torah given to Moshe? [was: Resh Lakish] (T613K@aol.com)
• 2. Para Aduma (Galsaba@aol.com)
• 3. insert the slichos (SBA)
• 4. Re: Reish Lakish (David Riceman)
• 5. Blessing before and after eating (Galsaba@aol.com)
• 6. Re: Shmini Atzeret - why Sukkah YES and Lulav NO? (T613K@aol.com)
• 7. Re: How Bitter Can A Month Be? Bittersweet. (T613K@aol.com)
• 8. Re: Reish Lakish (Micha Berger)
• 9. Re: How much Conformity to local Nusach/Mihag isrequired for Shatz (T613K@aol.com)
• 10. Re: Tea before Shacharis (Elazar M. Teitz)
• 11. Re: German siddur questions (Elazar M. Teitz)
• 12. Geklapte Hoshaynes (Zev Sero)
• 13. Mitsvat Sukkah is almost unique (Joseph Kaplan)

 
 
From: "Micha Berger" <micha@aishdas.org>


>>R' Yochanan, who acquired Torah over his whole life, holds that  Moshe
got the Torah piece-by-piece over the 40 years. Reish Lakish --  at
once.<<

>>>>>
I was thinking about this very subject this morning (Shabbos morning) and  
meant to post after Shabbos, but forgot -- and then, providentially, here is  
RMB's post to prod my memory.
 
What I was wondering was, when and where did Moshe Rabbeinu receive the  
whole Torah?   If he received it on Har Sinai, did he come down from  the mountain 
carrying, not only two slabs of stone, but also a whole sefer  Torah?!  Or 
did he receive part of it on Har Sinai (minus everything that  happened after 
Ma'amad Har Sinai) and bring down a lighter, smaller scroll to  which he later 
added as events occurred?  Or did he receive both the  Written and Oral Torah 
orally and transcribe the Written Torah from memory after  he came down from 
the mountain?  And again, was it the whole Torah that he  wrote all at once, 
including events that were yet to occur, or only the Torah up  to the point of 
Ma'amad Har Sinai, adding to it later as events unfolded?
 
BTW I know that there are two opinions about the end of the Torah,  
describing Moshe's death -- an opinion that he wrote those pesukim prophetically  and 
an opinion that they were written by Yehoshu after Moshe's  death.   Can 
someone please provide me with the exact quotes and who  says which opinion?  And 
again, if these verses were written by Moshe --  when did he write them?  On Har 
Sinai, or right after he came down from Har  Sinai, or shortly before his 
death?





--Toby  Katz
=============



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071014/d2b34a4c/attachment-0001.htm 

 
Mishna Artscroll says that it is wrong to call Parah Adum a Red Heifer,  
because the Parah Aduma must be 3 or 4, while according to Webster 
Dictionary Heifer is less than 3, therefore Heifer cannot serve as 
Parah Aduma. 
I checked the following:  

In most places I checked Heifer = Parah Adumah.  

In Britanica: Hebrew  Para Adumma,   in Jewish history, unblemished, 
never-before-yoked animal.  

I found also: Heifer = A young female cow of over 12 months old, which 
may or may not have had a calf.  

According to Webster On Line: a young cow, especially : one that has 
not had a calf  

it did not mention the age, but the hardcooy Webster I have does say 
under 3 years old.  

According to Hilchot Parah Aduma, the Remabam mentioned  that she needs to be 
3-4 years old (I think he means on her 3rd or 4th year), and that was never 
given a birth.  
In my opinion the fact that the Para is Para that not nirbea was the 
dominent reason why it is called Heifer.  

the onse who call it a cow consider more the age then than the fact 
that the cow should not be one that had a calf.  

So what would be the right translation for Para Adumah? Red Heifer, or Red 
Cow?  

Thanks,  

galsaba 



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071014/4651955e/attachment-0001.html 

From: "Michael Kopinsky" < >
Lately, I have been davening maariv out of a small German siddur, published
in Basel in 1974.  

1) In the middle of the bracha of S'lach Lanu (right before "ki mochel..."),
it has a note saying "An Fasttagen schaltet man hier im Morgengebet die
Slichos ein," which according to my best approximation (and Google
Translate), means, "On fast days, insert the slichos here in the morning
prayers."
What minhag is this referring to?  Slichos in the middle of shemoneh esrei?!
==========

Correct. During hoych shemona esra.
That is the way our main Nusach Ashkenaz minyan does it.
It must be a Oberland and yekkish nusach.

SBA

Rich, Joel wrote:
> I was thinking about this this morning on the way to work.  Is it
> apikorsus according to at least some hashkafic strains to say that one's
> torah opinions are formed based in part on personal experiences since it
> might imply personal nigiut as well as different people reaching
> different conclusions on amita shel torah when there can (may?) be only
> one amita shel torah.
>   

Wow! Are we to conclude that the dictum "eilu v'eilu divrei elokim 
hayyim" is also apikorsus according to these opinions? How about all of 
the Tannaim and Amoraim (and ...) who disagreed with each other?

David Riceman

I am not sure how to define if a Mitzvah is from Rabanan or Torah. For 
example: According to Berachot daf 21, Chazal learned from Kal Vachoner that Beracha 
before eating is from Torah, although the Torah does not write it BeFeirush.  
In this case, when Chazal learned, would it be Mitzvah DeRabanan? or from 
DeOrayta? Another example is "Tuma'at Of Tahor" it does not say BeFeirush in the 
Torah.
Is there any different in the applications between those that were written 
Beferush in the Torah to those that were leaned by Chazal?
 
Thanks,
 
galsaba



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071014/8e59725e/attachment-0001.htm 

 
 
From: "Richard Wolpoe" _rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com_ 
(mailto:rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com) 

>>For  some reason unbeknownst to me there are actually G'maras that discuss
Bal  Tosif in conjunction with sitting in the Sukkah an extra day. [I saw it
once  or twice during the daf but I have forgotten exactly where. iirc 1
sugya is  in megillah.]

I haven't seen any Talmudic sources discuss problems with  Blowing Shofar an
extra  day etc.  As above, I do not know the  hilluk<<

>>>>>
"For some reason unbeknownst to me"?  Wasn't the Talmud Bavli  written in, 
um, Bavel?  Where they kept two days yom tov?


 

As for "Talmudic sources discuss problems with Blowing Shofar an  extra day" 
-- well I never learned Gemara, as you know, but wherever it  calls the 
two-day Rosh Hashana a "yama arichta" -- wouldn't that be about  blowing shofar an 
extra day?



--Toby  Katz
=============



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071014/ea476fa7/attachment-0001.html 

 
 
From: Micha Berger _micha@aishdas.org_ (mailto:micha@aishdas.org) 

>>The  original name of the month is Marcheshvan, give or take some vowels
--  probably Merachshevan. Akkadian roots differ from Hebrew in that the
roles of  /n/ and the semivowels /v/ and /y/ switch. So, merach would
be yareiach in  Hebrew, and shevan would be shemini -- IOW, it's simply
"eight month",  October.<<




>>>>>
I've seen this explanation before -- there was an article about it in  Jewish 
Action, a few years ago -- but it does raise some questions.   Akkadian is a 
cognate language to Hebrew, a Semitic language, but most of the  other names 
of the Hebrew months seem to be Babylonian names -- not  Semitic.  So why would 
just this month (and maybe Av) have Semitic  names while all the others have 
non-Semitic, galus-Bavel names?  
 
Also, all the other months seem to be named after Babylonian gods,  powers, 
forces or whatever -- why would this month alone have a name that is  only a 
number?  Of course in the Torah ALL the months are identified only  by number 
(plus sometimes an additional identifying season, e.g., chodesh  he'aviv.)  But 
if we are borrowing names from other cultures, why would we  take just this 
one month from the Akkadians and give it a number instead of a  name?


--Toby  Katz
=============



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071014/0cdd54a9/attachment-0001.htm 

On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 10:21:46AM -0400, David Riceman wrote:
: Rich, Joel wrote:
:> I was thinking about this this morning on the way to work.  Is it
:> apikorsus according to at least some hashkafic strains to say that one's
:> torah opinions are formed based in part on personal experiences since it
:> might imply personal nigiut as well as different people reaching
:> different conclusions on amita shel torah when there can (may?) be only
:> one amita shel torah.

: Wow! Are we to conclude that the dictum "eilu v'eilu divrei elokim 
: hayyim" is also apikorsus according to these opinions? How about all of 
: the Tannaim and Amoraim (and ...) who disagreed with each other?

This addressed his "as well as", but RJR raises a good point.

It seemed obvious to me that different people find this "eilu" vs that
"eilu" because of their own lives and kishronos. However, take this
idea to far and one ends up with the heresy of the Historical School --
that Torah is created by personal need and expediency.

Saying personal negius would determine which aspect of amitah shel Torah
one most readily sees is different than saying that the negius /replace/
the search for emes. But drawing the line between them is non-trivial.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Take time,
micha@aishdas.org        be exact,
http://www.aishdas.org   unclutter the mind.
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm

 
 
From: Micha Berger _micha@aishdas.org_ (mailto:micha@aishdas.org) 

>>How can one talk
about violating minhagim most shuls don't  bother setting one?<<

>>>>>
My husband davened in a shul once where an argument erupted over whether to  
do X or Y (something that comes up every year).  He asked them, "Don't you  
remember what you did last year?  What is the minhag of the shul?"   They 
replied, "The minhag of the shul is to argue about this every  year."






--Toby  Katz
=============



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071014/710909c7/attachment.html 

<<I think it's a pretty safe bet that RSZA said Birkas HaTorah prior to Tehillim, and if so, then V'haarev Na is *not* enough.
I wonder why? What do those psukim have that v'haarev lacks? Could it be that davening for ruchniyus does not meet the definition of bakasha? I don't know...>>

<Perhaps the whole point of tefillah before akhillah is that one ask for siyata diShmayah for one's physical needs befrore trying to address them oneself? In which case, it would make sense that the baqashah must be closer to the subject of food than birkhas haTorah.>
 
     The reason V'ha'arev does not suffice is that the source is the g'mara's statement that " 'Lo so'chlu al hadam' -- lo soch'lu kodem shetispal'lu al dimchem."  Obviously, then, it must be a t'filla for the physical.

     Thus the pasuk in T'hillim 30 that is relevant is not "Mah betza," but "Sh'ma Hashem v'choneini, Hashem heyei ozeir li."

EMT
     

 

      Apropos of RZSero's quote of http://www.lookstein.org/articles/veten_tal.htm., that "most of the Jews of South America and Australia abide to this very day" by R Chaim Shabbetai of Salonica's teshuva to the Jews of Recife, never to say 'tal umatar' in Birkat Hashanim, and instead to insert it into Shomea Tefila as required" (a statement which he contradicts, with respect to Australia), R. Michel Feinstein attested that his grandfather-in-law, R. Chaim Brisker, would do the following all year:
(1) say "v'sein b'racha" in birchas hashanim; (2) say "v'sein tal umatar" in Sh'ma koleinu; (3) never say "morid hagashem," but rather (4) say "morid hatal."

EMT

In Yiddish there's nothing so useless as a "geklapte hoshayne".  Once
someone has taken that bundle of five twigs and beat the ground with them
five times, they have no use at all until Pesach, when they're used to
feed the fire for baking matzos or burning chametz (I forget which, or
whether it matters).

And yet, is this really so?  Five whacks against the ground is usually
not enough to make an arava pasul, and it's certainly not likely to make
all five aravot in the bundle pasul, so why shouldn't someone else use it?
I understand that in shul the custom is for everyone to buy their own, so
everyone can do the beating at the same time, or perhaps to provide more
income for the gabai (whose traditional prerogative it was to sell them),
but is there really a reason why a family can't buy just one bundle (or
perhaps two in case some of the aravot do become pasul after a while)
and each whack it in turn?

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

RTK wrote: Whoever first said, "There are two mitzvos that are  
performed with the
entire body" had in mind this definition of mitzva:  an obligation   
incumbent upon
everyone.  (Or, incumbent upon every Jewish man, to be  more precise.)"

Toby's analysis is probably correct, but personally, I prefer R.  
Riskin's reaction.

Joseph Kaplan


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 24, Issue 3
*************************************

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..."