Volume 47 Number 48
Produced: Wed Apr 6 6:56:14 EDT 2005
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Ashamnu Translation (2)
[Jack Gross, Jonathan Baker]
Book on History of Jerusalem
[Joseph Ginzberg]
Checking Labels
[Susan S.]
correction: Haleluhu
[Baruch J. Schwartz]
Karaite Calendar
[Nathan Lamm]
Karaites and Purim
[Shmuel Himelstein]
lEHashem Haaretz U'Meloah
[Ira L. Jacobson]
Locations of Ancient Cities
[Nathan Lamm]
Lubavitch Rebbe and shtreimel
[Susan S.]
Tachnun last day of Purim Meshulash (5)
[Martin Stern, Perets Mett, Ari D. Kahn, Gershon Dubin, Menashe
Elyashiv]
Tircha D'zibor
[Anonymous]
Where was Shushan?
[Mike Gerver]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jack Gross <jbgross@...>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 08:04:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Ashamnu Translation
Yes, I was long aware of the original Artscroll Siddur translation, and
the change (the latter retained in a series of editions, in a variety of
sizes, covers, and nusachim).
I speculated what could have caused them to change their translation. Did
the editor find some commentator who misread
Ti'ta'nu (first person plural)
as
Ti'ta'tanu
(= Ti'ta'ta [second Person singular] plus "-nu"
[first-person-plural-direct-object suffix]),
and "correct" accordingly? If so, "shrei lehon Mareihon" to both the
commentator and his uncritical adherent.
Even if the idea that G-d contributes to our sinning is theologically
supportable, it does not belong in the confession, and Meta'tea' surely
would not be the term used to describe that attribute to the Master.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jonathan Baker <jjbaker@...>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 11:01:24 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Ashamnu Translation
From: David Feiler <dfeiler@...>
> Jack Gross wrote:
> > I hope they insist that ArtScroll not perpetuate its mistranslation
> > of Ti'ta'nu (the final word in the Ashamnu confession) as "you have
> > caused us to sin". (What were they thinking? "Ti'ta'tanu"?)
> The Artscroll Siddur (1984 edition) correctly translates Ti'ta'nu as "we
> have led others astray" using the verb letataya as it is used in the
> passuk "vehayiti be'einav k'metataya" ([...] as a trickster).
> However in the Artscroll Yom Kippur Machzor (1986) and the Artscroll
> Selichot (1992) the word is translated as "You have let us go astray"
> which seems incorrect.
Not necessarily incorrect. It follows the translation in the Chayei
Adam. "You have left us to our free choice to stray".
Alternatively, it might be related to the word `aa'tha', in Aramaic,
which Jastrow renders "crookedness, perverseness, wrong" (p. 1034), a
variant of `awtha'. Appears in Targum to Prov. 12:21, 15:16, 4:24.
- jon baker <jjbaker@...> <http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker> -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joseph Ginzberg <jgbiz120@...>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 21:30:00 -0500
Subject: Book on History of Jerusalem
>There is a recently- issued book, coffeee-table size, on the history of
>Jerusalem, that in 30 seconds I found two major errors in. Don't
>recall the name at the moment.
Had a Senior moment, sorry.
The book is "Heaven Touches Earth" by David Rossof
Publisher is Guardian Press,Jerusalem
Yossi Ginzberg
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <SShap23859@...> (Susan S.)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 09:13:26 EST
Subject: Re: Checking Labels
In reference to the comment:
Do you check the label everytime (as I do) on long-standing Kosher
products,
Yes, every time.
Susan S
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Baruch J. Schwartz <schwrtz@...>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 15:51:00 +0200
Subject: correction: Haleluhu
I want to thank David Wachtel for bringing to my attention my error
regarding haleluhu v/b. The manuscripts, accurate printed editions and
rules of Masoretic accents confirm David's suspicion and findings,
namely, that I inadvertently wrote virqia uzzo when I meant to write
Vigvurotav.
So here is a corrected version, to replace what I wrote in MJ 47:39:
Haleluhu indeed has the potential to bring about the elimination of the
dagesh in BGDKPT in the following word, since it ends with a long vowel
in an open syllable. However, for this to happen, a second condition
needs to be fulfilled: there must be a conjunctive accent under the word
haleluhu itself.
In Psalm 150, this is the case in the first half of v. 2, where halelulu
has mercha, therefore: hallelulu Vigvurotav. It is also the case in the
first half of v. 5, therefore: haleluhu Vetsiltsele-shama. In the
remaining cases, haleluhu has a disjunctive accent: in the second half
of vss. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 it has revia mugrash, and in the first half of
vss. 3 and 4 it has dehi (the thing that looks like a tippecha but
comes at the beginning of the word).
It is readily observable that the reason for the disjunctive in 1b, 2b,
3a, 3b, 4a, 4b and 5b is that the half-verse has three words, two of
which follow haleluhu, whereas in 2a and 5a the half-verse has only two
words (vetsiltsele-shama being connected by maqqef and thus considered
one word) -- and in these conditions, unlike the system of the 21 Books,
the taamei Emet tend to lose the disjunctive entirely. Sorry for the
error, and I hope the choirmasters will drill this with their meshorerim
for next Rosh Hashanah. A random sampling of siddurim and mahzorim I
have on hand was not very encouraging, however.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nathan Lamm <nelamm18@...>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 05:38:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Karaite Calendar
According to many, the extra month was inserted after Shevat, not after
Adar. Hence, there never would be a double Purim, as you'd know two
weeks before 14 Adar I whether there'd be an Adar II.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shmuel Himelstein <himels@...>
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 20:36:35 +0200
Subject: Karaites and Purim
In answer to Maththew Pearlman's query, I checked - the Karaites do not
celebrate either Purim or Chanukah. This is not surprising, as they are
both d'Rabbanan - of rabbinic origin.
Historically, the Karaites in Lithuania were not killed by the Nazis in
World War II as they claimed they were of a different religion than the
Jewish religion.
Shmuel Himelstein
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 18:06:13 +0300
Subject: Re: lEHashem Haaretz U'Meloah
Martin Stern <md.stern@...> stated the following on Wed, 23 Mar
2005 08:36:19 +0000:
The correct reading should be LaShem not LEhashem nor Lahashem,
just as the actual word it replaces is Ladon....
I think that the word it *really* replaces is the ineffable name. Sort
of a circumlocution for a circumlocution, no?
But don't we actually say "la'adon" rather than "ladon"? With no suffix
at the end of the word, of course.
I offer no opinion on how one would pronounce the tetragrammaton with a
lamed affixed.
IRA L. JACOBSON
mailto:<laser@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nathan Lamm <nelamm18@...>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 05:41:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Locations of Ancient Cities
There is a city in Iran called "Susa" on the site of the original
Shushan. Shushan, it should be noted, was only a part-time (winter or
summer, I forget which) capital of the Persian Empire.
In the Soncino translation of the Bavli (I forget which mesechta)
there's a map of Mesopotamia showing the locations of all the cities
mentioned in the Gemara and from the Geonic era.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <SShap23859@...> (Susan S.)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 09:12:20 EST
Subject: Re: Lubavitch Rebbe and shtreimel
In reference to the comment:
After the Rebbi's passing, R. SG wore the Rebbi's shtreimel. R.
MM then cancelled the wearing of shtreimels for Habadinks... After
a year passed, R. MM was the official Rebbe.
I'm curious as to if you have a written source for this. I may have
missed it, however, in my 35+ years as a Chabadnik I haven't heard that.
Sometimes these things slip by. Please let me know if there is a source
for this.
Susan S.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 13:13:56 +0100
Subject: Re: Tachnun last day of Purim Meshulash
on 1/4/05 12:47 pm, Moshe Bach <moshe.bach@...> wrote:
> Any opinions on whether we should or should not have said Tachnun this
> past Sunday, the last day of Purim Meshulash? The question is for
> people who live outside of Jerusalem.
> I naively thought this day should be treated as we normally treat
> Shushan Purim, hence we should not say Tachanun. Friends of mine opined
> that there is no megilla anywhere, no hallel, just a festive meal in
> Jerusalem, hence there is no reason we should not say Tachanun.
This day is not listed as a day not to say tachanun in the Shulchan
Arukh so those who follow its rulings do say it, just as they say it on
Pesach Sheini which commemorates the private yomtov of those who brought
the korban.
> People have quoted various luchot (calendars) with one or the other
> opinion. Our local Rav said we should say tachanun. (I heard about it
> too late :-)
>
> Your opinions?
Nahara nahara uphashtei - each community should conduct itself according
to its own customs - but not try to force them on others! If one's LOR
paskened to say tachanun, one would be obliged to do so.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 07:59:51 +0100
Subject: Tachnun last day of Purim Meshulash
Moshe Bach wrote:
> I naively thought this day should be treated as we normally treat
> Shushan Purim, hence we should not say Tachanun.
Not in the least bit naive!
Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zatsal said that the custom is not to say
tachanun anywhere 16 Ador when it falls on a Sunday, since it is one of
the days of Purim in Yerusholayim.
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ari D. Kahn <kahnar@...>
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:22:47 +0200
Subject: Tachnun last day of Purim Meshulash
Rav Yosef Toladono announced in Givat Zev that Tachanun should not be
said this past Sunday. And that was the practice in our shul. I
discussed this with my brother - Rav Yair Kahn, who felt it depended on
whether Sunday was a tashlumin (makeup) or seen as Shushan Purim
itself. He mentioned that this was the subject of a disagreement between
Rav Shlomo Zalmen Auerbach, and Lbclc Rav Elyashiv.
Incidentally Rav Shlomo Zalmen Auerbach was married in yerushalayim on
Shushan Purim - with Rav Kook as the misader kidushin.
Ari Kahn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 21:06:37 -0400
Subject: Tachnun last day of Purim Meshulash
Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach held that you do not say Tachanun.
Gershon
<gershon.dubin@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Menashe Elyashiv <elyashm@...>
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 20:16:15 +0300 (IDT)
Subject: Tachnun last day of Purim Meshulash
This was never brought up in the Poskim, because outside of Israel it
does not exist. One could assume that Tahanun should be said outside of
Jerusalem, maybe not in the 2 day Purim cities like Hebron. R. Mordehai
Eliyahu said to say Tahanun, because one should not skip it for no
reason.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Anonymous
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 07:23:27
Subject: Tircha D'zibor
Our shule has a morning weekday minyan that always ends at 7:00 A.M.
(starting time is adjusted for Monday / Thursday, Rosh Chodesh, etc.)
Recently a congregant became an avul and is now chiuv to daven for the
amud. Unfortunately, he davens somewhat slowly (he's trying but really
incapable of davening at the pace that this minyan is accustomed to.)
The minyan is now ending about 7:10 or 7:15 -- which is a problem for
the "regulars" who have carpools, and busses to catch to get to work on
time.
Starting earlier is really not an acceptable option.
Any comments / suggestions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <MJGerver@...> (Mike Gerver)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 09:05:45 EST
Subject: Where was Shushan?
Moshe Bach asks, in v47n45,
Where in modern-day Iran is Shushan?
While I'm on it, where in modern-day Iraq are the various towns
mentioned in the Gemara: Sura, Pumpedita, Nehardea, Mechoza, Nehar
Pekod?
I'm pretty sure that Shushan was called Susa at the time of the Gemara.
"The Talmud, the Steinsaltz Edition: A Reference Guide" (in English) has
a map on page 27 which shows Susa at the same location as a town in Iran
called "Shush" listed in the 1982 "New York Times Atlas of the World,"
about 70 miles NNW of Ahwaz, Iran, and about 150 north of Basra, Iraq. I
don't know if modern Shush is in exactly the same location as ancient
Shushan, but it seems pretty clear that the name comes from Shushan, and
that it is very close to where Shushan was. The same map in Steinsaltz
also shows all the locations in Bavel that you ask about, and many more
besides. The ones you ask about are all located on the Euphrates or
Tigris Rivers, or in between, south or west of Baghdad. You can look at
the map (or similar maps which I have seen in many "coffee-table" type
Gemaras) if you want to know the exact location. Or if you can't find
one, I can scan this one for you.
Moshe, are you by any chance related to my grandmother's cousin Sam
(Shlomo) Bach, originally Bachmutsky, who was born in Ukraine about 1880
and died in New York in 1950?
Mike Gerver
Raanana, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 47 Issue 48
