Volume 26: Number 16
Mon, 19 Jan 2009
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Message: 1
From: Cantor Wolberg <cantorwolb...@cox.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 21:49:07 -0500
Subject: [Avodah] Interesting Count
Saadya Gaon writes that if you count all the letters of the Aseres
Hadibros
from the aleph of Anochi to the chof of l?rayecha, you will find there
are
620 letters: 613 Mitzvos for the Jews and the shiva mitzvos b'nai
Noach.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090118/bd7a3919/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 2
From: T6...@aol.com
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 21:18:44 EST
Subject: Re: [Avodah] schechinah in the west
From: Eli Turkel _eliturkel@gmail.com_ (mailto:elitur...@gmail.com)
There is one opinion in the gemara that the schechina is in the west
1. What does that mean versus the opinion that the schechina is everywhere
which seems to be more obvious
2. What is west for me is east (or north or south) for someone else.
Thus, not putting certain types of activities to the west of the city may be
to the east of some other city and vice-versa
--
Eli Turkel
>>>>>
1. Hashem is everywhere but His presence is more manifest, more "intense,"
more accessible, in certain places than in others -- more in E'Y than in
chu'l, more at the Kosel than anywhere else.
2. I see how west of one city could be east of another but I don't see how
one person's east could be another person's north or south. IIRC if you
start shmoneh esrei and then realize you're facing the wrong direction, if you're
facing west you just continue because west -- if you go far enough -- will
also get you to Yerushalayim. But if you find that you are facing north or
south, you have to turn. That's what I heard, anyway, not sure if I really
have that halacha right.
--Toby Katz
==========
--------------------
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?
redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/p
m/defaul
t.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=DecemailfooterNO62)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090118/1b78099b/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 3
From: "I. Balbin" <Isaac.Bal...@rmit.edu.au>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:00:04 +1100
Subject: Re: [Avodah] schechinah in the west
>
> From: Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] schechinah in the west
> To: avodah <avo...@aishdas.org>
> Message-ID:
> <471ff3f40901180431v4c2acdf8h54587f40c7b3a...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> There is one opinion in the gemara that the schechina is in the west
>
> 1. What does that mean versus the opinion that the schechina is
> everywhere
> which seems to be more obvious
>
> 2. What is west for me is east (or north or south) for someone else.
> Thus, not putting certain types of activities to the west of the
> city may be
> to the east of some other city and vice-versa
R.Turkel,
There is a glorious drush brought in Nefesh HoRav in the name of the
Rav regarding the Shechinah being mis-halech bgan eden
"L'Ruach Hayom" in which the difference between "directions" of the
Shechinah are given meaning. If you can't find it, I'll try and
remember to look it up again and summarise.
Go to top.
Message: 4
From: Yitzhak Grossman <cele...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 17:08:30 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] schechinah in the west
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 12:08:47 -0500
Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:
> Eli Turkel wrote:
> > There is one opinion in the gemara that the schechina is in the west
>
> One opinion? Is there another one?
>
>
> > 1. What does that mean versus the opinion that the schechina is everywhere
> > which seems to be more obvious
>
> Is this a contradictory opinion, or something entirely different? I've
> never heard of them contrasted.
The Gemara (Bava Basra 25a) clearly contrasts them, and see Tosafos
(s.v. le'chol) who clearly indicates that not everyone agrees with the
statement "shechina be'ma'arav".
Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters
Go to top.
Message: 5
From: Harvey Benton <harveyben...@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 16:04:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Avodah] Rishonim on God's Corporeality
There is an Article online by R. David Sedley, bringing sources from Talmud
through Rishonim on their views of Aggada. Some Rishonim [pg. 116 of link]
held to the Literal interpretations of Aggada, including R. Yosef ben
Todros, and possibly R. Yonah; to not believe this they held, is to degrade
the Torah.
One of the Tosafists, R. Taku, holds all Aggada are to be held LITERAL, and
even the ones that say God has a body. (The other Rabbeim mentioned in the
article do not explicity say this, but it may be that they believed it, as
per the article).
R. Taku is mentioned by the Ramban, Rama and others. His book was written
to challenge the denial of God's corporeality as brought down by R. Saadia
Gaon, and the Rambam. (He has very strong words to say against them, and
their interpretations [Pg. 117-118 of link below]).
http://www.hashkafacircle.com/journal/R2_DS_aggada.pdf
I have never heard of any legitimate Chazal that actually believes God has
a body; does this train of thought precede the Rishonim? And on what basis
have we, as post-Rishonim Jews, rejected the idea of God's corporeality, in
favor of the train of thought that rejects such a notion? (As evidenced by
the Yigdal prayer, Rambam, etc.) HB
Go to top.
Message: 6
From: Michael Poppers <MPopp...@kayescholer.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 20:35:24 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Age of "Ancient" Minhagim
In Avodah Digest V26#15, RKB replied to me:
>> ...Not only is it a relatively-recent phenomenon that many take for
granted nowadays, but it's downright improper (e.g. see BH 17:4, quoted in
MB 17:10, as well as MhSh ad loc.) in an era when most parents can afford
to buy taleisim for their sons (and do purchase talisei qatan for those
sons even years prior to age 13 mishum chinuch). <<
> The source for this minhag is the Maharil, darshening the juxtaposition
of "Gedilim ta'aseh l'cha" (Devarim 22:12) with "ki yikach ish ishah"
(Devarm 22:13). If that's recent, then I'd be hard pressed to find an
Ashkenazi minhag that isn't recent. <
If the matter was that simple, one might understand what many Ostjuden do
despite the response of BH 17:4 and of MhSh on MA 17:3 to which I
previously alluded (also, in general re this issue, let me mention MA 8:3,
quoting BT Qidushin 29b [the implication is that a young man should also
wear a talis gadol prior to marriage but not cover his head w/ it <even if
he's a talmid chachamim> until he's married], even if BH considers that
point "eino muchrach"), but the matter is not that simple. In this
particular case, AIUI, a sh'eila to MaHaRYL (Hilchos Nisuin -- see bottom
of page at http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8918&;pgnum=129) indeed
noted that young men in the shoeil's community didn't wear taleisim until
their marriage, but MaHaRYL didn't per se agree w/ that custom (he did "go
w/ the flow" of that shoeil's custom, as pos'qim have always done, and he
did tell the shoeil that the latter had not acted properly in being
misateif lichvod haregel [chag haShavuos] instead of waiting 'til the
chas'nah...and NB that BH 17:4 is careful to mention what was "written in
d'rashos MaHaRYL" and what "sam'chu *lahem*" but doesn't say that MaHaRYL
sanctioned the custom); the custom apparently spread across much of Europe
not because of that shoeil's community's custom (or its recording by
talmidei MaHaRYL) but much later, perhaps when m'qubalim suggested, based
on BT Y'vamos 62b's "kal adam sheain lo ishah," that young men prior to
marriage don't have a sufficient level of simcha for atifas talis.
All the best from
--Michael Poppers via RIM pager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090118/d6f4f081/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 7
From: T6...@aol.com
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 21:25:54 EST
Subject: Re: [Avodah] tehillim at night
From: Eli Turkel _eliturkel@gmail.com_ (mailto:elitur...@gmail.com)
>>what is the origin of the custom of not saying tehillim at night?
The question arose for those that volunteered to say certain tehillim for
the welfare of the soldiers.
What does one do on shabbat?
Some say not to say tehillim as a request on shabbat and others do not
say it on motzei shabbat. Doesn't leave much time in between<<
>>>>>
It is always mutar to say Tehillim. The yehi ratzon that some say with it
-- don't know about saying that on Shabbos. The Sefer Tehillim in many
editions is divided into seven sections, one for each day, including Shabbos, plus
there are a number of perakim of Tehillim that are part of the davening on
Shabbos, so I don't see how there could be any problem with saying Tehillim on
Shabbos.
As far as saying Tehillim at night, the source is kabalistic, but I once
asked my father and he said not to worry about it. I never heard of the Motzash
thing and do not believe it is anything to worry about, either.
--Toby Katz
==========
--------------------
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?
redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%2
6bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090118/275da73b/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 8
From: Harvey Benton <harveyben...@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 14:53:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Avodah] Changes re: VLamalshinim and Tehillim
A. VLAMALSHINIM:?
Berachos 28b discusses Rabban Gamliel adding VLamalshinim to the Shmoneh
Esreh. Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld, Rosh Kolel of Kollel Iyun Hadaf of
Yerushalayim brings down (link below) many additional mekoros including the
Yerushalmi version of events (Berachos 4:3 and Ta'anis 2:2).
?
Discussed in the article is that according to some sources, Es Tzemach was
added even after VLamalshinim. Wether or not this is the case, everyone
agrees that VLamalshinim was added after the initial Shmoneh Esreh.?
?
My question is: since the initial Shemone Esreh was est. by the
AKHagedolah, how can a later generation (R. Gamliel) make changes to it??
Wouldn?t the concept of greater in number and greater in chochma (GINGIC)
come into play?? I was told that the GINGIC would only apply to abrogations
or deletions, but not to changes or additions to any enactments.? Is this
really the case?? Are there any other changes or additions in Rabbinic
history (to earlier enactments) that would bear this out?
?
B. TEHILLIM:?
The Article goes on to discuss sources that indicate Tehillim Chapters 9
and 10 were initially combined (Tosfos to Megilla 17b on tradition of
Rashi, as brought down by R. David Cohen), as were Chapters 1 and 2
(Berachos 9b).? R. David Cohen (as per R. Kornfeld) explains regarding chs.
9 and 10 of Tehillim that: originally they were one chapter and later the
Chachamim split them into two chapters.
?
Again (similar to above), my question is, how could the Chachamim make
changes to the layout of parts of Tanach, many years after it was already
established exactly what they would contain????
?
(Under separate cover I will ask R. Kornfeld as to a timeline of these
Tehillim changes, how someone as late as Rashi could still have a pre
change version, and how would that version disappear between Rashis day and
ours.? Anyone interested in any feedback I obtain, pls. email me.) HB
?
Article: Berachos 029: Different versions of the Shemonah Esreh
http://www.mail-archive.com/daf-disc...@shemayisrael.co.il/msg00682.html
?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090118/6b43abe2/attachment-0001.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 9
From: "Jay F Shachter" <j...@m5.chicago.il.us>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 18:12:53 -0600
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Titles Before Names
>
> Well, it's a nice little vort, but "Moshe Rabbeinu" seems to follow
> the normal, natural rule of [old?] Hebrew: Avraham Avinu, Yosef
> Hatzaddik, Aharon Hakohen, Dovid Hamelech, Eliyahu Hanavi, Esther
> Hamalka, Yehuda Hanasi, Saadya Gaon. Name before title, regular
> rule.
>
> I guess that the Chasam Sofer was not asking, "Why is Moshe's name
> first and his title second?" but "Why do we nowadays put the title
> first and the name second?" The obvious (at least to me) answer is
> that our Hebrew has been influenced by European languages.
>
The schools really need to teach girls more Talmud.
The Talmudic titles Rabban, Rabbi, Rav, and Mar all precede the name.
Micha Berger has already sarcastically suggested that maybe the
western language (he changed "European" to "western" when making his
sarcastic comment) was Greek. But in fact, even in the Torah you can
find titles that precede the name. The Torah's Hebrew contains no
Greek component whatsoever, just a scattering of loan-words from
Egyptian and Sumerian. (Parenthetically, why do people speak of
languages "borrowing" words? Are we supposed to give them back? It
seems to me that it would be more correct to say that we "copied" the
words from Egyptian and Sumerian, not that we "borrowed" them.) Look
at the end of Parashath Vayyishlax, at Genesis 36:15-18,29-30,40-43.
Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
6424 N Whipple St
Chicago IL 60645-4111
(1-773)7613784
j...@m5.chicago.il.us
http://m5.chicago.il.us
"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"
Go to top.
Message: 10
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:19:14 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Titles Before Names
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 06:12:52PM -0600, Jay F Shachter wrote:
: Micha Berger has already sarcastically suggested that maybe the
: western language (he changed "European" to "western" when making his
: sarcastic comment) was Greek...
It wasn't 100% sarcastic. The title "rav" post-dates the zugos, and
therefore coulld very well follow a Greek pattern.
I think the reall difference is that until late bayis sheini we didn't
so much give titles as use appositives to emphasize someone's positive
role. (An apppositive is when you identify the noun in a second way. Eg,
"Mrs Cohen, my teacher,...")
: Look
: at the end of Parashath Vayyishlax, at Genesis 36:15-18,29-30,40-43.
I'm not sure how the alufei benei Eisav are relevent. There the chiefs
aren't named. "Aluf Teiman" names who the person was aluf of, and not
calling Teiman the aluf.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant
mi...@aishdas.org of all expense.
http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant
mi...@aishdas.org of all expense.
http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Go to top.
Message: 11
From: Yitzhak Grossman <cele...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:14:24 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Titles Before Names
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 18:12:53 -0600
"Jay F Shachter" <j...@m5.chicago.il.us> wrote:
...
> find titles that precede the name. The Torah's Hebrew contains no
> Greek component whatsoever, just a scattering of loan-words from
> Egyptian and Sumerian. (Parenthetically, why do people speak of
I assume that by Torah you mean the Pentateuch; Google seems to
indicate that there's considerable controversy over whether the
book of Daniel contains Greek loan words.
Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters
Go to top.
Message: 12
From: Yitzhak Grossman <cele...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:36:07 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Titles Before Names
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:19:14 -0500
Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 06:12:52PM -0600, Jay F Shachter wrote:
> : Micha Berger has already sarcastically suggested that maybe the
> : western language (he changed "European" to "western" when making his
> : sarcastic comment) was Greek...
>
> It wasn't 100% sarcastic. The title "rav" post-dates the zugos, and
> therefore coulld very well follow a Greek pattern.
>
> I think the reall difference is that until late bayis sheini we didn't
> so much give titles as use appositives to emphasize someone's positive
> role. (An apppositive is when you identify the noun in a second way. Eg,
> "Mrs Cohen, my teacher,...")
>
> : Look
> : at the end of Parashath Vayyishlax, at Genesis 36:15-18,29-30,40-43.
>
> I'm not sure how the alufei benei Eisav are relevent. There the chiefs
> aren't named. "Aluf Teiman" names who the person was aluf of, and not
> calling Teiman the aluf.
That's certainly not the plain meaning of the text; the names of the
Alufim correspond (more or less) to those named earlier as the sons and
grandsons of Esav.
Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters
Go to top.
Message: 13
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 07:34:57 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Titles Before Names
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 10:36:07PM -0500, Yitzhak Grossman wrote:
:> I'm not sure how the alufei benei Eisav are relevent. There the chiefs
:> aren't named. "Aluf Teiman" names who the person was aluf of, and not
:> calling Teiman the aluf.
: That's certainly not the plain meaning of the text; the names of the
: Alufim correspond (more or less) to those named earlier as the sons and
: grandsons of Esav.
Every beis av, named for the avos of Eisav's various batim, had an aluf.
Thus, "Aluf Teiman" isn't calling Teiman an aluf, but saying that the
house of Teiman had its own aluf. That's the difference between the list
starting at pasuq 10, which is a geneology, and the alufim list which
starts at 15. Thus making it a bridge to the list of kings starting at
31. Notice also the repeated reference of their being the alufim in
eretz Edom.
It's therefore very much peshat in the pasuq.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight,
mi...@aishdas.org and he wants to sleep well that night too."
http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Go to top.
Message: 14
From: "Gilad Field" <gila...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 10:39:11 +0200
Subject: Re: [Avodah] PEARLS OF SHMOS
>The Chasam Sofer asks why should all rabbis have the title of rabbi
>precede their name, whereas with Moshe, his name preceded his title:
>Moshe Rabbeinu.
Not sure if this would apply here - but the klal is "gadol m'raban shemo".
Go to top.
Message: 15
From: Harry Maryles <hmary...@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 19:31:27 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [Avodah] tehillim at night
--- On Sun, 1/18/09, Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com> wrote:
what is the origin of the custom of not saying tehillim at night?
The question arose for those that volunteered to say certain tehillim for
the welfare of the soldiers.Yeshivas Brisk says Tehillim every night after Maariv.
Yeshivas Brisk in Chicago says Tehilim every night after Maariv. (...and after Shachris and Mincha).
?
HM
Want Emes and Emunah in your life?
Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20090118/62ac40fd/attachment.htm>
Go to top.
Message: 16
From: "Elazar M. Teitz" <r...@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 03:53:26 GMT
Subject: Re: [Avodah] tehillim at night
REli Turkel wrote:
<<what is the origin of the custom of not saying tehillim at night?>>
To which RZev Sero responded:
<The kepeida is not just on tehillim but on any torah shebichtav. Al pi
kabalah, from dark until midnight one should learn only torah sheb'al peh.
The parts of TSBK that are in davening are not counted, because they're not
there as torah but as tefilah, which is OK. But tehillim-saying is a form
of limud hatorah, so it's not appropriate at night before midnight, unless
it's an emergency.>>
I hesitate to write about topics of which I know nothing, and kabbala
certainly is in that category. But I would like to understand why the
saying of L'Dovid Ori in Elul-Tishri and Lam'natzeiach in a bais
eivel, which are said by Nusach S'fard at mincha rather than at
ma'ariv, as is minhag Ashk'naz, for that k'peida, is considered limud
rather than t'filla. (I assume that saying T'hillim for the sick falls
into the category of an emergency, since I doubt that anyone could
claim that it is being said as learning.)
Another question: if, in the course of learning TSBP, one comes across
a pasuk quoted from Nach, does studying the pasuk in its context in
order to better understand the TSBP render study of the pasuk TSBP as
well, or must one defer study of the pasuk until midnight?
I pity the child who has not yet advanced beyond Chumash and whose
father doesn't come home from work until after sunset. He can't study
with his father nor get help with his homework; in fact, if the
mitzvah of chinuch applies to the restriction against learning Torah
shebichsav before midnight, he should probably be told not to do the
homework at night -- which can cause a problem in the winter, if his
school lets out late.
EMT
____________________________________________________________
Click here to find single Christians that want to meet you today.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/
PnY6rw23Hcgmm45DywE8Txt1ke5YAEc2K5fNeswqqyzR8bKoREMSO/
Go to top.
Message: 17
From: Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 08:17:20 +0200
Subject: [Avodah] tehillim on shabbat
The problem with tehillim on shabbat is that one is not supposed to ask for
personal requests on shabbat which why we dont say the regular shemonei esrei
on shabbat.
I asked a talmid chacham and he said that this case is considered
pikuach nefesh and is
permitted as would be saying tehillim for a very sick person.
BTW the same would apply to saying tehillim at night which would be permitted
even according to kabbalah for pikuach nefesh
--
Eli Turkel
Go to top.
Message: 18
From: Zev Sero <z...@sero.name>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 01:21:15 -0500
Subject: Re: [Avodah] tehillim on shabbat
Eli Turkel wrote:
> The problem with tehillim on shabbat is that one is not supposed to ask for
> personal requests on shabbat which why we dont say the regular shemonei esrei
> on shabbat.
But tehillim isn't requests, it's torah shebichtav. Saying the tefilot
that accompany it is another matter, which is why there's a special one
for shabbat that doesn't include any inappropriate requests, just a general
one that the zechut of the tehillim should stand by us.
--
Zev Sero A mathematician is a device for turning coffee
z...@sero.name into theorems. - Paul Erdos
------------------------------
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 16
**************************************
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..."