Volume 12 Number 04
Produced: Wed Mar 2 21:31:46 1994
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Beth Hamikdash
[Dana-Picard Noah]
Pesach parve/dairy recipes
[Lorri Lewis]
Yashar kochacha
[Bob Werman]
Yedid Nefesh in the ArtScroll siddur
[Sol Stokar]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <dana@...> (Dana-Picard Noah)
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 94 14:48:18 +0200
Subject: Beth Hamikdash
In addition to Uri Meth's posting (v12#01) about the Temple Mount: there
are two very interesting sources to read.
1) Yr Hakodesh ve-Hamikdash, by Rav M. Tikutsinsky (no spelling
warranty); a complete encyclopedy on Yerushalaim, in particular the Beth
Hamikdash. There he deals with the two kinds of kedusha, that of the
place, and that of the walls. Even when the Temple is destroyed, the
kedusha of the place remains. "et mikdashi tira-u = even when
destroyed".
2) Har Habayit, by Rav Shlomo Goren. An historic chapter on what
happened on the Mount, since his liberation by Tsahal on June '67, and
the first prayers there on 9 Av and Yom Kippur. And a large study of the
various opinions on the places and their kedusha. With maps, including
those of Hel Handassa ('67). There are some places where we could be
allowed to go nowadays, with suitable preparation (mikwe). Of course
these do not include the Dome of the Rock, which seems to be on the
Kodesh Hakodashim. This book was released last year, I think.
Anyway, the israeli law (not the Torah in this issue!) forbids Jews to
pray on the Temple Mount.
May G.g help us rebuild His House soon.
Thierry Dana-Picard
<dana@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <lorrin@...> (Lorri Lewis)
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 94 23:53:36 -0500
Subject: Re:Pesach parve/dairy recipes
Joe Bachman asked for help in planning a dairy/fish vegetarian Pesach. I
am attaching several parv/dairy recipes. Matza lasagna works well. Kugels
with sauted onions, mushrooms, celery instead of fruit and sweet also are
filling and a change. Fritadas can easily be made pesachdik. Check a
number of Pesach cookbooks for more ideas, try the libraries and note the
Sephardi and Israeli cookbooks for a different approach to cooking.
The fact that you will eat fish makes it quite easy. Fish can be broiled,
sauted, poached and served with vegetables and salad for any meal. The
kugels can be used as side dishes or main dishes.
The question of how to have a hot meal that stays on the heat for many
hours is best solved with soups. There are a myriad of vegetable soups one
can make and keep on a low flame for hours or in the oven. Shabbat is the
only time when heating up food is any problem. For Shabbat you may want to
eat room temperature and cold foods with only the soup left on the heat for
long periods.
Hot trays/Shabbat platta are another way to keep food warm for Shabbat
without drying it out too much. Some people put the food for Shabbat lunch
on the platta just before leaving to shul and don't leave the food on warm
from before candle lighting--this doesn't go for soup, but is used for
nonliquid foods.
Pesach Recipes
Matza Apple Kugel
350 degrees
1 hour
6 matzas soaked in water
6 eggs
1 cup sugar (white or brown)
1 tsp vanilla
4 large apples, coarsely grated
3 sliced bananas
1/2 cup raisins
1 orange, juice and zest
1 1/2 lemons, juice and zest
1/2 cup melted butter or margarine
Mix all ingredients together in the order listed. Melt butter in 9x13 pan.
Pour all ingredients into pan and bake .
Farfel Fruit Kugel
350 degrees
1 hour
4 eggs separated
3 cups farfel soaked in orange juice to cover for 15 minutes
3 thinly sliced apples
1/2 cup raisins
1/4 cup chopped walnuts or almonds
1 can crushed pineapple
1 tsp cinnamon
1 cup sugar
1 lemon, juice and zest
Beat egg whites until stiff with 1/2 the sugar. Beat egg yolks and
remaining sugar, add lemon, cinnamon, farfel, fruit and nuts. Fold in egg
whites. Bake in 9x13 greased pan.
Potatoe Starch Blintzes
3 eggs well beaten
1 cup water
1/2 tsp salt
3 TBLSP potatoe starch
Mix all ingredients in order given. Fry as for regular blintzes. Fill as
desired. Very delicate pancake.
Lorri Lewis
Palo Alto, California
<lorrin@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bob Werman <RWERMAN@...>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 13:18:37 -0500
Subject: Yashar kochacha
Mark Steiner <MARKSA@...> writes:
> This source is striking confirmation for one of my
>hypotheses, that perhaps "ashsher koax" and "yashsher koax" are the
>same phrase, spelled differently, where the basic meaning is to
>strengthen, not to straighten, and the verb is an imperative.
>'Aleph and `ayin simply alternate. This phenomenon is true even in
>spoken Israeli Hebrew. I have not yet studied the Matteh Efrayim,
>but it is at least possible that what the author reports as
>"ye'ashsher" [which actually means, "may (G-d) strengthen"] may in
>fact be "yashsher." There is lots more to be done here.
The shoresh [root] here is shin resh resh and not alepf shin resh and
means sharir ve kayam as in the ketuba [wedding certificate],
implying "in force." The shin appears with a dagesh to remind us of
the missing resh.
May all our strengths be in force.
__Bob Werman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <sol@...> (Sol Stokar)
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 94 15:47:25 -0500
Subject: Yedid Nefesh in the ArtScroll siddur
Recent issues of M-J have contained an interesting discussion of
the positive and negative aspects of various Hebrew pronounciations. Aryeh
Frimer descried the sore lack of knowledge of Hebrew amoung contemporary
Yeshiva graduates. A number of writers argued that the lack of emphasis on
the study of Hebrew grammer in the "Yeshiva world" stems from a (recent)
historical association of such study with Haskala ("Enlightenment")
type heterodoxy. Eli Turkel mentioned the different biases of the Steinsaltz
and ArtScroll editions of the Talmud regarding when the foreign roots of
Talmudic terms are discussed. I would like to raise a related point. While it
may be argued that some traditional pronounciations have a basis in Masora
("genuine tradition"), and while it may be argued that sometimes the discovery
of manuscript editions of ancient works should not be allowed to affect prac-
tical "halakha", occasionally Orthodox rigidity clearly goes too far, perpet-
uating obvious and easily corrected mistakes under the guise of "tradition".
For instance, consider the poem "Yedid Nefesh", sung in most Israeli (and many
American) synagogues on Friday evening as a prelude to the "Qaballat Shabbat"
service and sung by others at "Seuda Shlishit" (the third Shabbat meal). The
poem was written by a prominent 16th century Safed Qabbalist, R. Eliezer
Azikri, the author of the Qabbalistic diary Sefer Hareidim. R. Azikri was a
contemporary of R. Joseph Karo and R. Shlomo Luria. R. Meir Benayahu published
an edition of the poem in the author's own handwriting. (The manuscript is
reproduced in R. Shlomo Tal's slim volume "The Siddur in its Develpment
("HaSiddur Behishtalshelusho") - Responsa in the Wake of the Rinat Israel
Siddur" published by Natan Tal, Jerusalem, 1985). This autograph manuscript
served as the basis for the version of "Yedid Nefesh" that appears in the
Rinat Israel "siddur" (prayer-book). (For those who are unfamilair with it,
Rinat Israel is the most widely used "siddur" in Israel). Even a cursory
comparison between this version and the version contained in most other con-
temporay "siddurim" reveals a large number of differences. I would like to
illustrate of few of these differences, comparing the Rinat Israel and
ArtScroll versions.
[1] At the end of the second stanza, in ArtScroll's version the poet says that
after G-d heals his soul, "eternal gladness will be hers (i.e. his soul's)",
("vehayta lah simkhat olam") while the manuscript (and Rinat Isreal) has
"and she (my soul) will be Your eternal maidservant ("vehayta lah shifhat
olam")". Aside from changing the word "maidservant" into "gladness", the
emendation or error perpetuated in the ArtScroll version also changes the
implication of the use of the feminine pronoun "lah" (for her); in the
author's version, G-d is referred to using the feminine pronoun, while in the
ArtScroll version, the poet's soul is female. A short perusal of any text on
Qabbalah (e.g. "Major Trends" by Scholem, "R. Joseph Karo" by Werbolowski or
"The Qabbalah" by Idel) shows how important a role the contrast between the
masculine and feminine aspects of the Shekhina had for the qabbalists.
[2] In the third stanza, the end of the first line in ArtScroll reads:
"please take pity on the son of Your beloved" ("khussa na al ben ahuvecha")
while the manuscript (and Rinat Israel version) reads: "and have pity on the
son who loves You" ("khus na al ben ohavach"). Who is beloved? From the
manuscript text we see that the poet intended to describe G-d as the beloved
one, while ArtScroll changed man into the beloved one! It is extremely
interesting that this "emendation" is repeated at the end of the poem (4th
stanza, penultimate line), where Rinat Israel has "Hasten, my Beloved" ("maher
ahoov"), addressing G-d as the poet's beloved, while ArtScroll has "Hasten,
show love" ("maher ehov"), addressing G-d as the one who shows love to the
poet.
[3] At the end of the third stanza, in the manuscript (and Rinat Israel)
versions the poet cries out, "O, my Lord, my heart's desire, hurry please""
("anna Eli makhmad libi khusha na") while in ArtScroll's version the poet says
"Only these my heart desired, so please take pity" ("Eleh hamda libi vekhussa
na").
Since a manuscript written by the author exists, it seems completely
reasonable, nay, required, to reproduce the text of this "Urtext". It is
neither correct nor reasonable to blame the editors of the ArtScroll for any
of the above errors, since they all originated long before the ArtScroll
siddur was conceived. However, I feel that the editors of the siddur should
have corrected the errors once they were brought to their attention. A friend
of mine, a professor of Bible at Yeshiva University, told me that he sent a
copy of this autograph to the editors of the ArtScroll siddur shortly after the
siddur first appeared. He told me that ArtScroll's response was that they are
unwilling to deviate from "tradition" and if "tradition" had sanctified a
text, that was the way they were going to reproduce it. I ask the m-j
readership, is there anyone on this list who can justify such a response?
I like to consider myself as reasonably open-minded person, yet I cannot begin
to understand such a response in a matter that has no direct halakhic
ramifications or repercussions. It sounds like an application of the idea
Aryeh Frimer asked about recently, viz. "even though "A" is permitted, let's
announce that it is forbidden, lest ....".
Having brought up the subject of the ArtScroll siddur, I'd like to
mention another point. It is extremely commendable that the editors decided
to help the reader distinguish between the "silent" and the "vocal" shewa
(i.e "shewa na" and "shewa nakh"). However, in my humble opinion, the editors
chose an unfortunate method of showing the distinction. They distinguish a
"vocal" shewa by placing a horizontal line on top of the letter. The reason
this is an unfortunate choice it that it violates tradition! (Who would have
believed the arch-traditionalists would violate Tradition). In all manuscript
editions of the Tanach that I have seen, a horizontal line atop a letter
indicates "rafeh" i.e. soft (e.g. a letter from amoung "BEGET KEFET" without a
dagesh qal). In fact, this tradition is preserved in some shul "khumashim"
(Bibles) where one occasionally finds a letter (such as the Qof of "veyiqkhu"
("and they shall take") or the "lamed" of "halve'im" ("the Levites") with
a horizontal line on it, indicating a shewa nakh. I feel that the ArtScroll
editors should have distinguished between the two types of "shewa" by using two
distinct shewa symbols, just like the editor of Rinat Israel distinguished
between the long and short qamats by using two different qamats symbols.
Why have I picked on the ArtScroll "siddur" and not on one of the
myriad other "siddurim" that perpetuate the same errors? That is the price of
popularity. I have noticed that the ArtScroll "siddur" is widely quoted by
m-jers. Don't misunderstand me - there are some extremely positive aspects to
the ArtScroll "siddur" - for instance its translation of the "krovot" for the
"four parshi'ot" and the "piyutim" for Hoshana Rabba make these prayers
accessible to readers who would otherwise be completely lost. However, the
widespread distribution and acceptance of the ArtScroll siddur means that it
will have a wide-ranging influence for years to come and I feel duty-bound to
bring to light what I consider to be significant errors. I welcome comments in
its defense.
Dr. Saul Stokar
Work: Home:
Head, MRI Physics Department 8 Shwartz Street
Elscint Ltd. Apartment 20
Tirat HaCarmel, Israel Ra'anana, Israel
Phone: (972)-4-579-217 Phone: (972)-9-914-637
Fax: (972)-4-575-593
e-mail: <sol@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 12 Issue 4
