Avodah Mailing List

Volume 44: Number 13

Mon, 23 Feb 2026

• 1. Re: nefesh hachayim (Akiva Miller)
• 2. Re: Asseres Hadibros (Arie Folger)
• 3. Re: Counting Asseres Hadibros (Arie Folger)
• 4. Re: Counting the Aseres Hadibros (Michael Mirsky)
• 5. Re: Counting the `Asereth Haddibbroth -- ibn Ezra on Deuteronomy 5:18 (Jay F. Shachter)
• 6. Shaatnez -- too bad, or too good? (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Counting the Aseres Hadibros (Micha Berger)

.
R' Joel Rich asked:

> "Similarly, one is permitted to interrupt and neglect learning
> briefly in order to contemplate for a bit the fear/awe of HKBH.
> And he need not be concerned about this being neglect of Torah
> (learning), since this is what causes his wisdom of Torah to be
> sustained." (my translation)
>
> Fascinating,  is he saying that the only reason contemplating
> yirah during learning is that it is intrinsic to learning because
> it causes his torah to be remembered, not as an independent value.
> Thoughts?

I think you translated it well, and understood it correctly. To take a
*short* break during one's learning -- and note that we're not talking
about going for a cup of coffee, but specifically to contemplate the
subject matter -- is not a hefsek in the learning, and does not constitute
Bitul Torah. Rather, it is a tafel which *enhances* the ikar. Or, to use
your translation, it *sustains* his learning!

I fear you're putting too much emphasis on the fact (and yes, it is a fact)
that "thinking about Hashem" is not necessarily the same thing as "learning
Torah", and not enough emphasis on the fact that -- in the Nefesh
Hachayim's opinion -- it is a price worth paying.

> ... not as an independent value.

But if one treats this hisbonenus as an "independent value", then I daresay
that the Nefesh Hachayim would hold that he has gone beyond the "me'at"
limitation. (Note that the Nefesh Hachayim used that word *twice* in this
snippet!) I understand "independent value" to mean that he treats it as its
own ikar, and no longer batel to the learning.

For more information I suggest Pirkei Avos 3:9. Admiring and praising
Hashem's handiwork is a wonderful thing. But if one interrupted his
learning to do it, and it is unrelated to what he was learning, then it's
*not* so good.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20260219/fe453545/attachment-0001.htm>

R'Micha Berger wrote:
? Taam Elyon has one sof pasuq per diberah.

Indeed. That is literally what the Ta'am Elyon is for, using te'amim above
the letters for not pausing until the end of every dibberah (OK, and have
one er nachts per dibbur)

Mit freundlichen Gr??en,
Yours sincerely,

Arie Folger
Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/

<http://rabbifolger.net/2016/01/28/wir-missionieren-nicht-aber-warum-nicht/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20260219/848de1e9/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, 18 Feb 2026, 11:36 Akiva Miller via Avodah, <
avo...@lists.aishdas.org> wrote:
> R' Micha Berger wrote:
> > Taam Elyon has one sof pasuq per diberah.
>
> If so, then I count only nine dibros.
>
> I can't find a sof pasuq anywhere from "Anochi Hashem" until "Ulshomrei
> mitzvosai". The word which I *thought* ended the first diberah, namely
> "avadim," has a revi'i in Taam Elyon...

The are different Minhaggim about how to "ta'amate" the first Passuk, and
at stake is exactly the question of whether Anokhi should be separated from
Lo Yihyeh Lekha.

Mit freundlichen Gr??en,
Yours sincerely,

Arie Folger
Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/

<http://rabbifolger.net/2016/01/28/wir-missionieren-nicht-aber-warum-nicht/>

On Thu, Feb 19, 2026, 19:24 Arie Folger <arie.fol...@gmail.com> wrote:

> R'Micha Berger wrote:
> ? Taam Elyon has one sof pasuq per diberah.
>
> Indeed. That is literally what the Ta'am Elyon is for, using te'amim above
> the letters for not pausing until the end of every dibberah (OK, and have
> one er nachts per dibbur)
>
> Mit freundlichen Gr??en,
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Arie Folger
> Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/
>
>
> <http://rabbifolger.net/2016/01/28/wir-missionieren-nicht-aber-warum-nicht/>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20260219/ed8a4ee8/attachment-0001.htm>

 R' Micha Berger wrote:

> Taam Elyon has one sof pasuq per diberah.

In the Simanim Tikun, for the Taam Elyon, it lists the number of each dibra
but the first sof pasuk is read at  ul'shomrei mitzvotei, which according
to the count that long pasuk actually contains two dibrot. First anochi
hashem ...mibait avadim. And the second starting lo yihyeh lcha
...ul'shomrai mitzvotei.

That's the way I have always heard it lained and how I lain it. But I read
somewhere (I forget) that this is wrong and the baal koreh should read a
sof pasuk at mibait avadim (as this is the end of the first dibra), and
then continue with lo yihyeh lcha. That way there are ten sofei pasuk as R'
Micha noted.

I am confused then as to the proper way to lain it.

Michael Mirsky
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20260221/f171af52/attachment-0001.htm>

In Avodah v44n11 someone wrote:

> 
> My question: Are there any authoritative Jewish sources which
> clearly identify these ten? Do Chazal ever say "This is the first,
> and this is the second"?
> 
> I have always understood that different religions count the ten
> differently. I will not give examples, because then we'll get bogged
> down in the specifics of that example. Suffice it to say that, as
> far as I can recall, every Paroches and Torah Mantel that I've ever
> seen (counting the ones that give words, not numerals) breaks them
> up the same way: "Anochi Hashem" is first, "Lo yihyeh" is second,
> etc.
> 
> But do we have any *writings* which tell us the proper breakdown?
> Something more authoritative than the consensus of the Embroiderers
> Union?
> 
> ..............................................................................
> 
>>
>> Taam Elyon has one sof pasuq per diberah.
>>
> 
> If so, then I count only nine dibros.
> 
> I can't find a sof pasuq anywhere from "Anochi Hashem" until
> "Ulshomrei mitzvosai". The word which I *thought* ended the first
> diberah, namely "avadim," has a revi'i in Taam Elyon. (Even if it
> were an esnachta I'd question it, but a revi'i? I'd really like to
> see someone who wrote, "Even though there's no sof pasuk here, this
> is where the first dibrah ends and the second begins.")
> 

(Unlike the ethnaxta, the rvi`iy doesn't even normally put a word
into pausal form, although there are rare exceptions, e.g., compare
the vocalization of "aniy" in Leviticus 25:38, to the vocalization of
"aniy" in Genesis 31:52.)

For the benefit of readers who have not read ibn Ezra's commentary on
Deuteronomy 5:18, or who have read it but don't remember what he
wrote, here it is again:

    All the scholars of antiquity believed that the First
    Commandment is "I am..."  (even though it raises the
    question, why would one utter two commandments directly, and
    then stop?).  I have already offered an explanation of the
    Ten Commandments that conforms to their belief.  In my
    opinion, though, "I am..." is not one of the Ten
    Commandments.  Rather, it introduces the Commander, and
    provides a basis for all the other Commandments, as I have
    already explained.  "You shall not be jealous of your
    fellow-man's house" is the Ninth Commandment, and "you shall
    not be jealous of your fellow-man's wife" is the Tenth
    Commandment.



               Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
               6424 North Whipple Street
               Chicago IL  60645-4111
                       +1 773 7613784   landline
                       +1 410 9964737   GoogleVoice
                       j...@m5.chicago.il.us
                       http://m5.chicago.il.us

               When Martin Buber was a schoolboy, it must have been
               no fun at all playing tag with him during recess.

I know that R SR Hirsch and R Sacks makes shaatnez and all the kelayim
laws about respecting the order put into Maaseh Bereishis.

Which would make the prohiibition of shaatnez about avoiding something
bad.

But being maavir sedra last week and next (Terumah & Tetzavah) it is
hard not to notice half the fabrics in the Mishkan and most of those in
the Bigdei Kohein Gadol are shaatnez.

(And according to the more popular shitah [Hil' Kelei haMiqdash 8:1-2],
the avneit of a Kohein Hediot too as it was identical to the KG's. See
Yuma 12b, where R Dimi cites both opinions, and the gemara determines
that Rebbe says it was the same shaatnez avneit, and R Elazar b"R Shimon
who says it was linen.)

Would bigdei kehunah include something normally too bad for regular
use? Could it be the problem with shaatnez is more like me'ilah? It's to
*good* for mundane use?

This would fit Derashos haRan, derashah 1, which lauds the value of
mixtures over homogenous elements: the 6 days of creation were about
forming the 4 elements in the right ways, the qetores smells better with
chelbonah, avaryanim bring something Kelel Yisrael would lack without
them... Every element lacks something, which the other elements can
fill in.

And by extension -- maybe this is the problem with other forms of
kelayim?

Although, a mixed team for plowing or any other work would appear
to be a tzaar baalei chaim issue more than anything else.


-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 "'When Adar enters, we increase our joy'
http://www.aishdas.org/asp    'Joy is nothing but Torah.'
Author: Widen Your Tent       'And whoever does more, he is praiseworthy.'"
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                   - Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l

On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 06:58:00PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
> This struck me as odd. My understanding is that Christians consider "I am
> Hashem..." to be an introduction...

Even many rishonim who consider Anokhi H' to be part of the first diberah
do not count it as one of the 613 mitzvos. After all, to accept a tzivui
presupposes the existence of a metzaveh. Commanding us to believe in
Him makes no sense.

And that is the problem of bringing in Christian interpretations. We
count 14-16 mitzvos included in the 10 Diberos (or "Devarim", to use
the Author's title). They're talking 10 Commandments. The concepts
don't mesh.

Perhaps they consider it a preamble because it cannot be a commandment,
and since they think the 10 are commandments, they cannot include it
within #1. That line of reasoning has nothing to do with our take on
the subject.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Problems are not stop signs,
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   they are guidelines.
Author: Widen Your Tent              - Robert H. Schuller
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF


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



_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/lists/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://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah/avodahareivim-membership-agreement/


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.)