Volume 28 Number 101
Produced: Mon Jul 12 6:14:31 US/Eastern 1999
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
B'alma in Kaddish CORRECTION
[Michael R. Stein]
Correction - Tekiot posting
[Shlomo Pick]
Dagesh in yud
[Eliyahu & Sarah Shiffman]
Differentiation between 'aleph and `ayin (2)
[Richard Schultz, Warren Burstein]
Fish Blood (2)
[Josh Backon, Yitzchok Zirkind]
Halichos Sheluchin v'Shutafin
[Rachel Furman]
OU & DE
[cp]
Prayer in English
[Yrachmiel Tilles]
Pronunciation of Tal
[Zev Sero]
The conventional orientation of maps in Medieval times
[Jay F Shachter]
The Three cantillation versions on Ex 20:2
[Russell Hendel]
Vegetarianism (2)
[Bill Bernstein, Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz]
Yom Tov Sheni
[Gitelle Rapoport]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael R. Stein <stein@...>
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 08:42:08 +0200 (MET DST)
Subject: B'alma in Kaddish CORRECTION
A crucial "not" somehow got lost in my editing of my posting on this
subject in a recent issue. The paragraph in question should read:
> (The connection with what locals here in Strasbourg call Nusach
> Ashkenaz and the nusach of edot hamizrach is much more complex than he
> implies, and certainly does NOT extend to the pronunciation of Hebrew or,
> for that matter, to the actual words that we say).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shlomo Pick <picksh@...>
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 1999 08:58:30 +0200
Subject: Correction - Tekiot posting
seeing my last post, note the following correction:
As a boy, I remember in the 50s and 60s the German expatriate
congregation in Hartford, Ct, sound 40 WITH the repetition of mussaf, as
is recorded in the Heidenheim makhzor.
30 Before mussaf and 10 with the repetition of mussaf:
TSRT for malchuyot
TST for zichronot
TRT for shofrot
thank you for bearing with me
shlomo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eliyahu & Sarah Shiffman <shiffman@...>
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 22:32:29 +0200
Subject: Dagesh in yud
Does anyone know what the function is/was of a dagesh in a yud? And is
my name correctly pronounced Eliyahu or Eliahu? (The yud has a dagesh
in it.)
Eliyahu Shiffman
Beit Shemesh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Richard Schultz <schultr@...>
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 07:13:58 +0300
Subject: Differentiation between 'aleph and `ayin
Elie Rosenfeld <erosenfe@...> wrote:
: I'm sure many will provide personal examples but rather than do so, let
: me point to the clearest evidence of Western knowledge of this
: distinction. English bibles for hundreds of years have often
: transliterated Ayin, especially at the beginning of a word, as "G". Two
: well-known examples: "Gomorrah", "Gaza". So clearly, it was known back
: then that Ayin had a more gutteral sound than Aleph.
This is not really an accurate statement of the reason for "ayin"
being transliterated as "G." The transliterations in the KJV by
and large seem to be pronunciations that go back in Western translations
to the Septuagint (the Greek Bible translation made in, IIRC, the
third century B.C.E.).
Originally, Hebrew had two similar sounds equivalent to the Arabic
`ayn and ghayn, but due to a lack of letters in the alphabet, they
were both represented by the letter `ayin. At the time of the
Septuagint, the difference in pronunciation between the two sounds
was apparently known, and so sometimes, they transliterated `ayin with
a gamma (Gemorra, Gaza), and sometimes without (Eden, Atarot).
Thus, the appearance of this distinction in English Bible translations
says nothing about whether or not the difference was known to the
translators.
Richard Schultz
<schultr@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Warren Burstein <warren@...>
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 11:54:49
Subject: Re: Differentiation between 'aleph and `ayin
I'd be delighted to hear personal examples. Anyone recall how their
grandfather pronounced Ayin?
The English translators did not ask the local Jews. Not that there were
any - the Jews were expelled from England in 1290 (all dates C.E.) and were
readmitted in 1655. The King James Version appeared in 1611 (it says
"Gaza" and "Gomorrah"). Earlier English translations are on the web, but
not accessable to the public, all were written after 1290. If the
translators were in contact with Jews elsewhere, it could have been with
Sepharadim.
Another possible explanation for the G is earlier translations (that
provide information about Ayin was pronounced in much earlier periods).
The Vulgate, (http://estragon.uchicago.edu/Bibles/), from 405 C.E.,
translates Ber 10:19 (which conveniently includes both 'Amorah and 'Aza) as
"factique sunt termini Chanaan venientibus a Sidone Geraram usque Gazam
donec ingrediaris Sodomam et Gomorram et Adama et Seboim usque Lesa". The
LXX (http://spindleworks.com/septuagint/Genesis.htm) spells both names with
a Gamma.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Josh Backon <BACKON@...>
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 11:52 +0200
Subject: Re: Fish Blood
Eating live fish is forbidden because of the halacha of BAAL TESHAKTZU
(to do disgusting things). See Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 13:1 in the Rema
quoting the Haga'oht Maimoniot and the Mordechai.
Josh Backon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yitzchok Zirkind <Yzkd@...>
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 00:07:44 EDT
Subject: Re: Fish Blood
> From: Janet Rosenbaum <jerosenb@...>
> I've been curious about fish blood. One doesn't have to drain it out in
> any particular way, so it is apparently not dam b'nefesho, but is it
> b'nefesho dam? That is, assuming that goldfish are kosher, could one
> eat a live goldfish?
One is prohibited to eat a fish live due to "Bal Tishaktzu", (Ramoh Yoreh
Deioh 13:1)
> Also, I know that one has to label jugs of fish blood, but can one eat
> around them (as is prohibited for animal blood in lev 19:26)?
Fish blood in a Jar is due to "Maris Hoayin" if there are scales in it it is
permissible, (Yoreh Deioh 66:9), the Halachos based on Lev. 19:26 can be
found in Tractate Sanhedrin 63a.
> From: Zvi Weiss <weissz@...>
> Subject: Re: Yom Tov Sheni
> Reaching the border is NOT the same as reaching the communal areas of
> Bavel. For "Tal U;Matar", it is only necessary that the travelers be
> out of Israel. There is NO indication that they were anywhere near
> "home" at that point.
The Mishna says clearly "Kdei Sheyagia Achron Shebiysroel Lnahr Pros" (in
order so that the last (farthest) of Israel should reach the Pros river), and
see S"O Horav 117:1 "Kdei Sheyagia..Lbeisoi..." (in order that he should
reach..to his house..).
Kol Tuv
Yitzchok
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rachel Furman <rsusselj@...>
Subject: Halichos Sheluchin v'Shutafin
B"SD, Shalom!
First, a thank you to all of you who responded to my previous post
requesting info about Halichos Shidduchim and Lashon Hara and Laws of
Agency. I received many references to the Halichos of Sh'miras Halashon
as they pertain to Shidduchim, but none whatsoever to the Halichos of
Agency. I am still searching. I can read and understand Hebrew-but not
easily. Are there any sources available which translate Halichos
sheluchin v'Shutafin into English?
Thank you,
Rachel Furman <rsusslej@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: cp <chips@...>
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 21:32:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: OU & DE
There are several reasons why the OU avoids the DE designation and goes
straight to D.
1) Most people see "Pareve" and don't know what the DE rules are.
2) DE can be a slippery slope. What if the equipment isn't cleaned as
usual and a taste gets imparted onto the item?
3) There is a dispute about how to calculate 1/60th that tangents to
dairy equipment. To over simplify: do you go by volume or surface
area of the main item, secondary item or both?
There are a couple of other things that influence their reasoning.
-c
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yrachmiel Tilles <seminars@...>
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 1999 18:06:51 +0300
Subject: Prayer in English
>The sefer "On Wings of Prayer" states the opinion that if one does
>not understand Hebrew, prayer SHOULD (not CAN) be done in one's native
>tongue. (Yehuda Poch)
If so, it should not be done from an Artscroll siddur, which writes
"HASHEM" in place of G-d's name, including in blessings. "Blessed are
You, Hashem..." is not a genuine blessing, not even in English.
Yrachmiel Tilles
ASCENT SEMINARS OF SAFED
http://www.ascent.org.il (woth checking out)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Zev Sero <zsero@...>
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 18:33:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Pronunciation of Tal
Ari Kahn <kahnar@...> wrote:
> my Karlin sources also tell me that they have a
> custom of skipping the line when praying in a cemetery, because of
> "loeg larash". This custom would be understood if one accepts my
> thesis in the article.
How is `He brings down the Dew!' more `mocking' of the dead than
`..He killed you in justice...and He will revive you and make you
exist in justice'? On the contrary, under your interpretation
`morid hatal' is most appropriate in the cemetery, and perhaps we
should say it there not only in summer but all year round!
Zev Sero Harmless Historical Nut
<zsero@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jay F Shachter <jay@...>
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 02:07:56 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: The conventional orientation of maps in Medieval times
Joseph Tabory <taborj@...> wrote:
> Ancient Israel faced east as determined by Abraham who faced kedmah
> (forward) to the East and his right (Teymanah) was south. Medieval maps
> were also oriented to the East, apparently also considering Jerusalem as
> being the direction of travel. Modern maps are oriented to the north.
Abraham ibn Ezra's comment on Deuteronomy 1:25 indicates that in ibn
Ezra's time and place maps were conventionally oriented with North on
top. The linguistic evidence cited by Tabory does show that in ancient
times this was not yet the case.
Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
6424 N Whipple St
Chicago IL 60645-4111
(1-773)7613784 - <jay@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@...>
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 15:56:14 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: The Three cantillation versions on Ex 20:2
Perry Zamek (mj28n92) asks about Breuer's article that explains the
3 possible cantillations on Ex20:2). There are 3 grouping issues:
A) The actual VERSES listed in the Torah
B) The actual PARAGRAPHS listed in the Torah
C) The breakdown of the TEN COMMANDMENTS
A brief summary is as follows
A) SOF PASOOK--Because Ex20:2 is a verse by itself (in the so called
lower cantillations)
B) A RVIAH--Because Ex20:2-Ex20:6 forms ONE paragraph in the Torah
C) ETHNACH--because (c1) Ex20:2 is the 1st commandment while
Ex20:3-Ex20:6 is the 2nd commandment; (c2) it is not cantillated
as a SOF POSOOK because it is not a separate paragraph. Thus
the ETHNACH combines the multiplicity of commandments (commandment
1 and 2) with the singleness of paragraphs.
Russell Jay Hendel;Phd ASA; http://www.shamash.org/rashi/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bill Bernstein <bbernst@...>
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 1999 11:24:07 -0500
Subject: Vegetarianism
In #94 Dagoobster questioned the practice of vegetarianism when done
because the practitioner believes that killing animals for food is
inherently wrong (as opposed to doing so for aveilus for the Beis
HaMikdash or for health reasons). While there is certainly no mitzva
today (by and large) to eat meat, the poster imo has hit upon a real
problem I see often: many people hold there is a standard of morality
that goes above halakha. I hear this voiced often: that if halakha is
in accord with this "morality" (whatever its source) then good; if not,
then we need to change/reform/reject the halakha. I often wonder and
sometimes ask what the source of this "morality" is, but have yet to get
a clear answer. Any ideas?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 1999 22:52:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Vegetarianism
> [Indeed, it is my understanding that it is not consistant with Halacha
> to espouse a belief (as you put it above) that one is not "allowed" to
> kill animals for meat. The practice of not eating meat for various
> reasons, whether health or destruction of Bais Hamikdash considerations
> would not be a problem. Mod.]
There are those who are vegetarian because they do not want to "reward"
people who violate the prohibition against tzaar baalei chaim. That is,
they do not believe that slaughtering animals for food is wrong, but
that the conditions in which the animals are kept are wrong. If animals
are kept chained up or chickens are kept in crowded cages, that is wrong
and a person would not patronize the merchant who does such things.
One must be careful to differentiate between that motive and a motive
which leads to avodas zara (as espoused by those who belong to such
groups as "People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals") which is
partially shown by the last portion of my signature.
Said the fox to the fish, "Join me ashore" | Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz
Jews are the fish, Torah is our water | Zovchai Adam, agalim yishakun
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gitelle Rapoport <giteller@...>
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 13:06:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Yom Tov Sheni
Re Tzvi Weiss' interesting remarks on Yom Tov Sheni, just a personal
observation: The assumption that observant Jews would rather not have
the extra days of yom tov in galut is not always correct. Personally,
on the whole I think I would miss them. Sometimes it takes me a while
to get into the "yom tov mode" emotionally and having that second day
helps. While an extra day of Chol Ha'Moed would be nice, and many
people forget to invest it with the kedushah it deserves, it isn't the
same yom tov experience. Shavuot especially (even more especially if
one stays up all night to learn) would seem frustratingly brief if we
didn't have that extra day.
gitelle rapoport
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 28 Issue 101