The liturgy of Orthodox Judaism
Robert
The Orthodox liturgy is continuous with the 2,000 year old rabbinic Jewish
liturgical tradition. While the text of the liturgy has never been static,
it is undoubtably the Orthodox prayer books which retain the most
traditional formulations that have evolved over the past few centuries.
While innovations became less common in the last few centuries due to the
introduction of the printing press and various social factors, Orthodox Jews
take pride in their community's tradition of liturgical preservation.
Orthodox Jewish liturgy has not undergone significant change in the past 200
years. The Encyclopaedia Judaica [EJ] notes that even up to the 1990s
"standard editions of the Orthodox prayer book continued to appear with no
visible change in either content or format... At the same time, however, new
and modernized editions have also appeared, designed either for centrist
Orthodox (religious Zionist) Jews in Israel and elsewhere or for right-wing
Orthodox (non-Zionist) Jews in the English-speaking Diaspora... they display
three characteristics: improved binding, layout, and typography; instructive
notes, together with a modern translation (substituting 'you' for 'Thou,'
etc., in English) and commentary; as well as the inclusion of new material.
Zionist editions acknowledge the State of Israel's religious importance by
including new prayers and services; other editions do not."
"After World War II, Philip Birnbaum's daily and High Holiday prayer books
attained an unrivaled circulation among Orthodox Jews... they included a
modern English translation and notes...The Orthodox resurgence of the 1970s
created. ..an expanding market for religious books. One response to this was
the Metsudah Siddur...Innovative hallmarks of these Orthodox best sellers
were the linear English translation and anthologized commentary by Avrohom
Davis." In 1976, the Brooklyn publishing firm of Mesorah launched the
Artscroll series of books, including the popular Artscroll siddurim and
machzorim... the siddur's success was remarkable, more than 250,000 copies
being sold within five years. It owes it popularity "to Art-Scroll's
mindfulness of esthetic considerations as well as content. Binding, layout,
and typography are of a high standard, each volume containing an
introductory 'overview', plain English translations of the Hebrew text,
detailed guidance to the worshiper, and an inspirational running commentary
by Nosson Scherman. There is, however, one notable failing to which leaders
of mainstream, centrist Orthodoxy have drawn attention: a Diaspora-oriented
outlook on Judaism that inspires not only the old-fashioned Ashkenazi
transliteration of Hebrew terms, but also the rigid exclusion of any prayers
or services relating to the State of Israel's existence." [EJ]
"Prayer books of every conceivable type and arranged in accordance with
several different liturgical rites are now obtainable in Israel... Some have
been reprinted without change for generations, others have undergone a
slight "Zionist" updating, while others again are entirely new." The
Encyclopaedia Judaica has as extensive discussion of this topic. [Liturgy,
Developments, 1970-1990, Orthodox Liturgy, EJ]
To learn more about the structure and content of the traditional Jewish
liturgy, see this website:
http://www.jewfaq.org/liturgy.htm
To order prayerbooks:
http://judaism.com/books/prayer.asp
Shalom,
Robert Kaiser
Lisa
<judai...@yahoo.com.spammenot> wrote:
>The Liturgy of Orthodox Judaism
According to someone who has never done anything but attack Orthodoxy.
Take this with a major grain of salt.
Lisa
Jess Olson
Although he probably didn't write it...(that doesn't say anything about
where he got it from, though...)
JO
> Lisa
>
Fiona
Jess Olson wrote in message ...
Well judging by the fact that the first paragraphs of all four articles are
the same with the words reform, reconstructionist, orthodox, and
conservative replaced each time (and a few other alterations for political
effect) I'd say it's his style. Unless Cindy is doing some more ghost
writing for him (that was wonderful btw Cindy) :-)
Fiona
Robert
"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote
> >The Liturgy of Orthodox Judaism
>
> According to someone who has never done anything but attack Orthodoxy.
> Take this with a major grain of salt.
This slander on the excerpts from the Encyclopaedia Judaica (as noted in the
original) are shocking. The author of those excerpts is an Orthodox Jew, and
does not deserve this grotesque slander.
Robert
Cindy S.
"Fiona" <fi...@intxtdoc.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ao29lo$ijj$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk...
It wasn't me! It was the Modern Orthodox scholars of the Encyclopedia
Judaica! How dare you engage in this shocking slander?!!
(Thanks:-)
Best regards,
--Cindy S.
>
> Fiona
Robert
"Jess Olson" <j...@stanford.edu> wrote
> > >The Liturgy of Orthodox Judaism
>
>> According to someone who has never done anything but attack Orthodoxy.
>> Take this with a major grain of salt.
> Although he probably didn't write it...(that doesn't say anything about
> where he got it from, though...)
Huh? Are you talking about my posting? This information came from the
Encyclopaedia Judaica, and I explicitly stated so. Please re-read the
message. And the author of this peer-reviewed article himself was an
Orthodox Jew.
Once again I quote an Orthodox Jewish scholar..and everyone screams that the
sources aren't identified (even though they clearly are) and other claim
that the article is anti-Orthodox (which is a ridiculous slander.)
I think people need to be a little less hysterical. Please re-read what I
wrote: "Orthodox Jewish liturgy has not undergone significant change in the
past 200 years. The Encyclopaedia Judaica [EJ] notes that even up to the
1990s "standard editions of the Orthodox prayer book continued to appear
with no visible change in either content or format... At the same time,
however, new and modernized editions have also appeared, designed either for
centrist Orthodox (religious Zionist) Jews in Israel and elsewhere or for
right-wing Orthodox (non-Zionist) Jews in the English-speaking Diaspora...
they display three characteristics: improved binding, layout, and
typography; instructive notes, together with a modern translation
(substituting 'you' for 'Thou,' etc., in English) and commentary; as well as
the inclusion of new material. Zionist editions acknowledge the State of
Israel's religious importance by including new prayers and services; other
editions do not."...
What about this is unclear?
A bit peeved at the constant and unwarranted tiffs.
Robert
Fiona
Robert wrote in message
<6D2p9.12416$k_2.8...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
Who is the author?
Fiona
Fiona
Robert wrote in message
<7D2p9.12417$k_2.8...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
>
>"Jess Olson" <j...@stanford.edu> wrote
>> > >The Liturgy of Orthodox Judaism
>>
>>> According to someone who has never done anything but attack Orthodoxy.
>>> Take this with a major grain of salt.
>
>> Although he probably didn't write it...(that doesn't say anything about
>> where he got it from, though...)
>
>Huh? Are you talking about my posting? This information came from the
>Encyclopaedia Judaica, and I explicitly stated so. Please re-read the
>message. And the author of this peer-reviewed article himself was an
>Orthodox Jew.
The only part of you posts any normal person can be bothered to read is the
first paragraph, and you wrote that yourself didn't you? The quote from the
EJ started in the second paragraph but your *statement* and tone was set by
the first paragraph.
Fiona
GAN EDEN WINES
>
> Robert wrote in message
> <6D2p9.12416$k_2.8...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
> >
> >"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote
> >> >The Liturgy of Orthodox Judaism
> >>
> Who is the author?
Who is this poster? I wonder where Robert has the energy to procure and
post all of the idiotic articles on diverse topics (although he occasionally
posts a truly substantive one, I'll grant him that). Truly sad that he
doesn't have anything better to do with his time. It wouldn't be bad if
most of the articles he posted weren't total manure.
In this case, I wonder what the orthodox "liturgy" is composed of? The
siddurim differ by nusach, and the nusach of one can be quite different from
the next. The core is similar, but is also similar to the core of the
conservative, and the core of the reform, siddurim. At my nephew's bar
mitzvah (on a monday, and we davened before attending) in a conservative
shul in Connecticut, we found the Hebrew service to be identical in all
respects to the nusach Ashkenaz orthodox service. Another, newer siddur had
slight differences. But in the English translation, there were many
intentional mistranslations in an attempt to make it more "gender neutral".
What is the orthodox liturgy, and how does it differ from conservative? If
the liturgies are compared in Hebrew, there seems to be little, if any,
difference. With most of the differences being in translation, one must
wonder if it is the English that conservative considers it liturgy, or if it
is the Hebrew.
I would say that the question of liturgy is not worth the amount of time,
effort, and bandwidth that has been afforded it by Robert. The liturgy is
not the thing that separates conservative from orthodox. Legitimacy is not
conferred or removed due to liturgical differences. There are broader, more
important questions that deserve the time.
Craig Winchell
GAN EDEN Wines
>
>
> Fiona
Jess Olson
>
> "Fiona" <fi...@intxtdoc.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:ao380n$p05$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk...
> >
> > Robert wrote in message
> > <6D2p9.12416$k_2.8...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
> > >
> > >"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote
> > >> >The Liturgy of Orthodox Judaism
> > >>
> (snipped)
> > Who is the author?
>
> Who is this poster? I wonder where Robert has the energy to procure and
> post all of the idiotic articles on diverse topics (although he occasionally
> posts a truly substantive one, I'll grant him that). Truly sad that he
> doesn't have anything better to do with his time. It wouldn't be bad if
> most of the articles he posted weren't total manure.
Sadly true.
>
> In this case, I wonder what the orthodox "liturgy" is composed of? The
> siddurim differ by nusach, and the nusach of one can be quite different from
> the next. The core is similar, but is also similar to the core of the
> conservative, and the core of the reform, siddurim. At my nephew's bar
> mitzvah (on a monday, and we davened before attending) in a conservative
> shul in Connecticut, we found the Hebrew service to be identical in all
> respects to the nusach Ashkenaz orthodox service. Another, newer siddur had
> slight differences. But in the English translation, there were many
> intentional mistranslations in an attempt to make it more "gender neutral".
>
> What is the orthodox liturgy, and how does it differ from conservative? If
> the liturgies are compared in Hebrew, there seems to be little, if any,
> difference. With most of the differences being in translation, one must
> wonder if it is the English that conservative considers it liturgy, or if it
> is the Hebrew.
>
It so happens that on a lark once I opened up the C prayerbook "Sim
Shalom," to see what the differences were. Remarkably, the core was almost
taken verbatim from the Birnbaum siddur (although such things as the
korbonos and other pre-pesukei d'zimra elements were heavily abridged).
The most profound difference was in Shabbos musaf, where a couple of
paragraphs, to my recollection, were significantly altered...
Also worth noting, perhaps most intrestingly, that the _translations_
provided were somewhat different from the standard Orthodox...and were
often, for lack of a better word, quite liberal in their adjustments to
the meanings of the words. I imagine this is due somewhat to the fact that
it is taken for granted that a great number of worshipers who use the
siddur would be most inclined to decipher the meaning of the prayers from
the parallel translation, rather than by knowledge of Hebrew (note this is
not meant as a slam...I know many C people whose Hebrew is quite good --
it is just a hypothesis).
I was surprised further by the stuff that _was_ included, and which I
thought for sure would be elided...I think that Kiddush Levanah was there,
as was "Got fun Avraham" (I think I'm remembering correctly)...I would
have thought that these would be the first things cut.
Please not that the version of the C siddur I was looking at ws not the
most recent. My understanding is that there has been a new version put
out, which contains the Imahot in the Shemona Esrey, among other
adjustments. I have no idea how different the new version is from the old.
> I would say that the question of liturgy is not worth the amount of time,
> effort, and bandwidth that has been afforded it by Robert. The liturgy is
> not the thing that separates conservative from orthodox. Legitimacy is not
> conferred or removed due to liturgical differences. There are broader, more
> important questions that deserve the time.
>
True enough, although liturgical differences have historically been one of
the "flagship" manifestations of differences touted by the Reformers. Thus
to them, the differences in liturgy are crucial.
JO
Creedmoor Chronicles, Ltd (Tirana, Albania)
>
> Jess Olson wrote in message ...
> >On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Lisa wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 02:03:49 +0000 (UTC), "Robert"
> >> <judai...@yahoo.com.spammenot>
Kindly spamusnot.
wrote:
> >>
> >> >The Liturgy of Orthodox Judaism
> >>
> >> According to someone who has never done anything but attack Orthodoxy.
> >> Take this with a major grain of salt.
> >>
> >
> >Although he probably didn't write it...(that doesn't say anything about
> >where he got it from, though...)
>
> Well judging by the fact that the first paragraphs of all four articles
are
> the same with the words reform, reconstructionist, orthodox, and
> conservative replaced each time
What about his own movement, Recalcitrant?
Ian
Henry Goodman
"Robert" <judai...@yahoo.com.spammenot> wrote in message
news:H%Io9.13179$ue4.6...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Why all this fuss about translations? Round here I find most Orthodox Jews
prefer to daven from siddurim (Israeli or artscroll) that are Hebrew only.
Ditto Chumashim
--
Henry Goodman
henry....@virgin.net
Creedmoor Chronicles, Ltd
consists of Beavud Reshoim Rina (Mishlei), a couple of snippets from Vayoel
Moshe taken out of context, a few words from the Rebbe Rashab of Lubavitch
ZYA taken out of context, some words from the Sefardi chachamim of pre-State
Yerushalayim taken out of context etc etc etc. So what then should this
community use as the Conservative liturgy?
Ian
Charles Vitez
called Tiferes Yehuda, which quaintly just about only translates the prayer
for the President of the United States, I was surprised by the claim for
ubiquity made on behalf of the Birnbaum siddur in the English speaking
world.
Have you people never heard of that pride of the British Empire, the
Singer's Prayer Book?
Or, if you are looking for scholarship, the Hertz prayer book? That is the
big one with masses of explanations.
In its millennium edition the opportunity was taken to upgrade the English
translation of the Singer's and in my opinion it is now an excellent
translation and altogether a pretty good prayer book (except that the print
is a bit small).
I am not fond of the either the Artscroll (translated into English) or the
Rinas Yisroel (only the plain Hebrew text) prayer books as they try to and
succeed in making the printed page look uninteresting.
But more to the point, who has time to read translations while davening?
Charles Vitez
"Henry Goodman" <henry....@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:3Xnp9.4517$fV4.2...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
Eliyahu
"Charles Vitez" <vi...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:aokbnl$m98$1...@paris.btinternet.com...
> While I personally use a siddur printed by the Hebrew Publishing Company
and
> called Tiferes Yehuda, which quaintly just about only translates the
prayer
> for the President of the United States, I was surprised by the claim for
> ubiquity made on behalf of the Birnbaum siddur in the English speaking
> world.
>
> Have you people never heard of that pride of the British Empire, the
> Singer's Prayer Book?
>
> Or, if you are looking for scholarship, the Hertz prayer book? That is the
> big one with masses of explanations.
>
> In its millennium edition the opportunity was taken to upgrade the English
> translation of the Singer's and in my opinion it is now an excellent
> translation and altogether a pretty good prayer book (except that the
> is a bit small).
>
> I am not fond of the either the Artscroll (translated into English) or the
> Rinas Yisroel (only the plain Hebrew text) prayer books as they try to and
> succeed in making the printed page look uninteresting.
>
> But more to the point, who has time to read translations while davening?
>
Eliyahu
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
snip
>> But more to the point, who has time to read translations while davening?
>>
> People who can't speak or read Hebrew.
Hmm, when I saw Charles' question, I wanted to raise my hand :-)
I try to avoid siddurim with translations because I tend to get
engrossed in the translation (and commentary), at the expense of
kavannah in the words of the prayer themselves.
Eliyahu's point is a very cogent one.
Moshe Schorr
It is a tremendous Mitzvah to always be happy! - Reb Nachman of Breslov
May Eliyahu Chayim ben Sarah Henna (Eliot Shimoff) have a refuah Shlaima.
Charles Vitez
anyone should wish to pray in a language other than hebrew (or should I say,
lashan kodesh).
But, I should make it clear that I am all for really good translations into
secular languages, but not to be read while davening. It is a great learning
tool, just like the translated chumash.
If someone needs to read the translation because at present they cannot
follow the hebrew, then my view is that they should quickly run to classes
so as to learn hebrew - they are missing so much that until they do learn
hebrew they are guilty of committing violence on themselves.
There isn't any objective reason why they should continue not to be able to
read hebrew. After all it is a pretty simple alphabet to learn and with
vowelling it is a phonetic read.
Many of the generation who were young during WWII in the UK failed to get an
adequate Jewish education and found themselves unable to follow the service,
so we have considerable experience in running such classes. Many came to
these classes when they sent their own children to heder, so as not to be
left behind. Funnily enough there were no hopeless cases and all I came
across graduated.
Charles Vitez
"Eliyahu" <lro...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uqulq88...@corp.supernews.com...
Eliyahu
> Perhaps I am one of those people that find it difficult to understand that
> anyone should wish to pray in a language other than hebrew (or should I
say,
> lashan kodesh).
>
> But, I should make it clear that I am all for really good translations
into
> secular languages, but not to be read while davening. It is a great
learning
> tool, just like the translated chumash.
>
> If someone needs to read the translation because at present they cannot
> follow the hebrew, then my view is that they should quickly run to classes
> so as to learn hebrew - they are missing so much that until they do learn
> hebrew they are guilty of committing violence on themselves.
>
> There isn't any objective reason why they should continue not to be able
to
> read hebrew. After all it is a pretty simple alphabet to learn and with
> vowelling it is a phonetic read.
>
difficulty learning to read the characters and pronounce them. (Although
some people, through no fault of their own, do have difficulty with new
languages...) I was able to teach myself, with nothing more than the
transliteration of the kaddish to serve as a rosetta stone. The difficulty
is not in learning to read the words, but learning to understand their
meaning. For instance, I just read, in another post, the word "l'havdil."
Had it been in Hebrew characters, I could have read it just as easily, but
would still have no more idea what it meant than from seeing the
transliteration. Hence, having a translation of the siddur on each pair of
pages provides a far better understanding of what it means than I could
grasp from the few words of Hebrew I can recognize from each sentence. I
have to admire translators who can both capture the meaning and nuances of
Hebrew in English and simultaneously write text that is pleasant, flow
smoothly and doesn't read like a translation.
Eliyahu
Dan Kimmel
And let me just add, that in *Israel* I can understand if siddurim with
translations from the Hebrew are not readily available everywhere since
Hebrew *is* the common language. Elsewhere, while learning to read Hebrew
should be a priority so as to be able to follow and participate in the
service, the notion that translations are a drag on the ability of people to
pray strikes me as being particularly arrogant.
That attitude, of course, comes from the same corner that insists that one
can not read Torah or discuss halacha unassisted but need many, many
"commentaries" to understand what things "really" mean, even if it is the
complete opposite of the plain meaning of the text.
Talqcom
>From: "Dan Kimmel" dan.k...@worldnet.att.net
>Date: 10/20/2002 12:47 PM Eastern Standard Time
>the notion that translations are a drag on the ability of people to
>pray strikes me as being particularly arrogant.
Is it possible in your ken that arrogance and other malicious notions are
absent, yet the conclusion simply does not go your way?
Translations never are the same, like it or avoid it. Jewish men ar required
under Jewish Law to teach their sons Hebrew. This is one of the reasons why.
The Tora is a polysemic text. Translations often cannot recreate this, so they
restirct the text, narrowing it. The liturgy is similar, and the Biblical
allusions therein, which it is chock full of, are just absent in even the best
translations.
>That attitude, of course, comes from the same corner that insists that one
>can not read Torah or discuss halacha unassisted but need many, many
>"commentaries" t
No it does not, at least in the case of everyone I know. We do not study
Talmud or halakha with any commentaries, yet maintain the requirement of Hebrew
for making any sense of prayer in non-Jewish general surroundings. Your
attempt to set up an either or fails.
> to understand what things "really" mean, even if it is the
>complete opposite of the plain meaning of the text.
Plain meaning? Determined by what? A translation? Or an "innocent reading"
only known to you and those who agree with you?
Ray
Herman Rubin
Talqcom <tal...@aol.com> wrote:
>>Subject: Re: The liturgy of Orthodox Judaism
>>From: "Dan Kimmel" dan.k...@worldnet.att.net
>>Date: 10/20/2002 12:47 PM Eastern Standard Time
>>the notion that translations are a drag on the ability of people to
>>pray strikes me as being particularly arrogant.
>Is it possible in your ken that arrogance and other malicious notions are
>absent, yet the conclusion simply does not go your way?
>Translations never are the same, like it or avoid it. Jewish men ar required
>under Jewish Law to teach their sons Hebrew. This is one of the reasons why.
They are never the same, but neither is rabbinic Hebrew the
same language as Torah Hebrew. Especially with the recent
findings of large amounts of Ugaritic, which is extremely
close to Hebrew, we often have much better insight.
>The Tora is a polysemic text. Translations often cannot recreate this, so they
>restirct the text, narrowing it. The liturgy is similar, and the Biblical
>allusions therein, which it is chock full of, are just absent in even the best
>translations.
Often it is the translations, made with a much greater
understanding coming from other languages related to
ancient Hebrew.
>>That attitude, of course, comes from the same corner that insists that one
>>can not read Torah or discuss halacha unassisted but need many, many
>>"commentaries" t
>No it does not, at least in the case of everyone I know. We do not study
>Talmud or halakha with any commentaries, yet maintain the requirement of Hebrew
>for making any sense of prayer in non-Jewish general surroundings. Your
>attempt to set up an either or fails.
Ancient Israel did not exist in isolation. We often have a
much better secular understanding of the situation than the
usage of the members of a single sect.
>> to understand what things "really" mean, even if it is the
>>complete opposite of the plain meaning of the text.
>Plain meaning? Determined by what? A translation? Or an "innocent reading"
>only known to you and those who agree with you?
Plain meaning as distinguished from major exaggeration. One of
the best instances of this is, "Do not seethe a kid in the
milk of its mother."
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
YZK
Dan Kimmel wrote:
....
> Elsewhere, while learning to read Hebrew
>should be a priority so as to be able to follow and participate in the
>service, the notion that translations are a drag on the ability of people to
>pray strikes me as being particularly arrogant.
>
>That attitude, of course, comes from the same corner that insists that one
>can not read Torah or discuss halacha unassisted but need many, many
>"commentaries" to understand what things "really" mean, even if it is the
>complete opposite of the plain meaning of the text.
>
Sorry that squicks you. You sure you wouldn't rather be a Karaite?
To give you an example, I'd bet that not too many people think of Kayin
(Cain), the world's first murderer, as a *prophet*, but so far, Hashem
hasn't talked to me!
>
Henry Goodman
"Dan Kimmel" <dan.k...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:M6Bs9.18686$1P1.1...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
I will repeat the point I made a few days ago. In the shuls I frequent
siddurim with and without translations are available and the majority of
worshippers prefer the ones without. If you daven through the same prayers
every day you get very familiar with them and really don't need a
translation. However, on RH and YK where the prayers are less familiar more
people use a machzor with translation. Artscroll is becoming increasingly
popular but other translations were used before that became available (about
10 years ago).
--
Henry Goodman
henry....@virgin.net
Harry Weiss
> While I personally use a siddur printed by the Hebrew Publishing Company and
> called Tiferes Yehuda, which quaintly just about only translates the prayer
> for the President of the United States, I was surprised by the claim for
> ubiquity made on behalf of the Birnbaum siddur in the English speaking
> world.
but last week visiting my brother, I noticed he still uses it.
> Charles Vitez
--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com
wba...@panix.com
: "Dan Kimmel" <dan.k...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
: --
: Henry Goodman
: henry....@virgin.net
I have noticed an interesting thing about myself. As I have a vision
problem, I am now using one of the large print Sidduim, )from Ateret)
intended for young children and old people. It contains no translation
and my Hebrew is not strong, but I have been davvening for many years. I
find that I a esily able to follow the davvening with this nice large
print and understand rather more of it than I thought. I guess it's like
my "stress French" Where I found I could both understand and speak the
language some (3 years in HS French classes soem 50+ years ago) IF the
person to whom I was speaking knew absoluely no English. If they had even
a little bit of English, my French just flew out of my head.
I must say that it is a plesure to be able to concentrate on the words and
not spend all my time deciding is the letter is a nun or a gimmel, etc.
I now, also print out the Gemorrah I am suding, with the Rashi and Tosphot
in quite large print from my Soncino CD, which Jonathan so kindly gave me
for a recent birthday. this has also improved my understnding of
Gemorrah. It's wonderful what can happen when you are able to put your
whole mind to understanding, rather than half to deciphering the letters
and the other half to the understanding.
Wendy Baker
R
>
> Charles Vitez <vi...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > While I personally use a siddur printed by the Hebrew Publishing Company and
> > called Tiferes Yehuda, which quaintly just about only translates the prayer
> > for the President of the United States, I was surprised by the claim for
> > ubiquity made on behalf of the Birnbaum siddur in the English speaking
> > world.
> The Tiferes Yehuda is what I grew up with. I haven't used it in years,
> but last week visiting my brother, I noticed he still uses it.
Does anyone remember the Tikkun Meir Siddur? In my youth, that
one was the most commonly found in American shuls, both Nussach
Ashkenaz and Nussach Sfard. One teacher of mine remarked that the
Tikkun Meir was a remarkable work of scholarship. Whoever put it
together managed to compile every textual error that had crept up
in the past two centuries, and included it in this edition.
Dr. Shlomo Argamon (Engelson)
R <rut...@concentric.net> writes:
Not to mention including every single typographic technique designed
to make it difficult to use! (Maximally pessimized, as we say...)
-Shlomo-
bac...@vms.huji.ac.il
ROTFL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I remember the siddur well. I haven't seen a copy in 30 years.
Josh
Harry Weiss
It is still around in some places. I think it was also the cheapest
siddur out, which is what caused it popularity as a shul siddur. I never
saw it used in a home setting.
Creedmoor Chronicles, Ltd (Tirana, Albania)
"R" <rut...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:3DB354B9...@concentric.net...
That level of accuracy is found in the Rinas Reshoim siddur of the
Creedmoorer Jewish Communities; it even manages to spell Noach with seven
mistakes in honor of one of the kehila's greatest misspellelim.
Ian
Charles Vitez
sfard copy). The plus was that they were really very cheap, the minus was
that you had to go through the siddur carefully with your biro to make the
amendments, where possible. It is one thing to put in extra commas, but
deleting them is a real bind and pinning in the extra word doesn't make too
much of a mess but a whole phrase is a bit more difficult.
While reminiscing, does anyone remember the Siddur Shilo (another American
work)? For some reason the compilers did not think it worthwhile having a
separate weekday mincha, so you had to find the bits in schach'ris and the
schach'ris amidah had the necessary options. Apart from that and other
similar (maddening) foibles it had the clearest, most beautiful print.
I am actually only on my 3rd Tiferes Yehuda and I find that the pages now
turn by themselves. For instance, the book nearly always opens at the
shabbat musaf keduscha, except when I first pick it up at schach'ris in the
morning, when it opens at the birkas haschachar. Could the amount of
sellotape it carries have anything to do with that?
Who says you cannot have a love affair with your siddur?
Charles Vitez
"R" <rut...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:3DB354B9...@concentric.net...
R
Certainly cheap. The last time I priced one, it cost 80 cents.
Even back then (about 1957?) that was cheap.
Talqcom
>Date: 10/20/2002 2:55 PM Eastern Standard Time
>They are never the same, but neither is rabbinic Hebrew the
>same language as Torah Hebrew.
I fail to to see the point. Rabbinic hebrew is the language of the prayers.
Except for quotes from the Bible.
>Especially with the recent
>findings of large amounts of Ugaritic, which is extremely
>close to Hebrew, we often have much better insight.
Into what? The Bible? Fine. But one cannot use Ugaritic to any understanding
of Hebrew if they do not know Hebrew to begin with.
>Often it is the translations, made with a much greater
>understanding coming from other languages related to
>ancient Hebrew.
That is just bull. Show me an English translation made by a semitic scholar.
Just one. You find JPS to have made use of Ugaritic?
Now Shadal's translation to Italian is an example of a translation made by a
semitic scholar. However, his also delimits the text.
Do you assume that when I say knowing Hebrew I mean just reading it? Knowing
Hebrew means precisely that.
>Ancient Israel did not exist in isolation.
Nor did Rabbinic Israel. You are preaching to the choir here.
>We often have a
>much better secular understanding of the >situation
What is secular understanding? Again I sense the need to distance yourself
from the "Orthodox" or the shtetl or the lower east side or whatever as
primary, and understanding the text as secondary.
In any event, in my world we see no secular/religous distinctions, and have
been dealing with comparative semitics formally for some one thousand years.
There is more ot the Bible than Ugarit, as well.
>Plain meaning as distinguished from major exaggeration. One of
>the best instances of this is, "Do not seethe a kid in the
>milk of its mother."
>
Again you confuse legal rhetoric with peshat. Nobody ever said the actual text
means anything more than a kid inits mother's milk. The question is is that an
idiom or literal. The text will not tell you, the royal annals Ugarit will not
tell you, and a secular understanding will not tell you. The interpretation of
a constitution or a law code by the people whose actual every day law it was is
relevant.
You do not like Rabbinic Judaism. You mistrust the Rabbis and their tradition.
But you do this as an outsider, imagining your "catching" of rhetorical
devices as demonstartive of the Rabbis lying or exaggerating. But you are also
wholly unfamiliar with the system.
Why is the history of Ugarit very relevant to the Bible, but the history of
Israel wholly irrelevant to it?
This fundamental question is never, ever, really addressed.
To my ears (and I do know the system) your writing is reminiscent of other Jews
involved in deauthorizing Judaism in one way or another, such as Spinoza, da
Costa, Astruc, Mendelssohn, etc.
Ray
Harry Weiss
> Thanks for the happy reminder of the Tikkun Meir (I still have a nusach
> sfard copy). The plus was that they were really very cheap, the minus was
> that you had to go through the siddur carefully with your biro to make the
> amendments, where possible. It is one thing to put in extra commas, but
> deleting them is a real bind and pinning in the extra word doesn't make too
> much of a mess but a whole phrase is a bit more difficult.
> While reminiscing, does anyone remember the Siddur Shilo (another American
> work)? For some reason the compilers did not think it worthwhile having a
Shilo was the common one used for children due to the size and clarity of
print. (Of course now that I am aging, I would not mind the big print) I
got my children a Shilo when they were starting to learn to read.
I think the Tiferes Yehuda was the first Siddur with English instructions.
For me it makes me think back to my Carnegie days.
> Charles Vitez
--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com
Jonathan J. Baker
>> Charles Vitez <vi...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> > While I personally use a siddur printed by the Hebrew Publishing Company and
>> > called Tiferes Yehuda, which quaintly just about only translates the prayer
>> > for the President of the United States, I was surprised by the claim for
>> > ubiquity made on behalf of the Birnbaum siddur in the English speaking
>> > world.
>> The Tiferes Yehuda is what I grew up with. I haven't used it in years,
>> but last week visiting my brother, I noticed he still uses it.
There were about a dozen Tiferes Yehudas in the shul in Park Slope,
but they had mostly switched over to Artscroll-with-English. Those
TY's were, of course, 50 years old, but the Artscrolls fell apart
very quickly.
>Does anyone remember the Tikkun Meir Siddur? In my youth, that
Right. That and the all-Hebrew Birnbaum made up the supply of siddurim
in the bet midrash at Lincoln Square, for the daily minyanim. Now, of
course, it's all all-Hebrew Artscrolls.
>one was the most commonly found in American shuls, both Nussach
>Ashkenaz and Nussach Sfard. One teacher of mine remarked that the
>Tikkun Meir was a remarkable work of scholarship. Whoever put it
>together managed to compile every textual error that had crept up
>in the past two centuries, and included it in this edition.
ROTFL.
--
Jonathan Baker | Marches-wan, marches-two,
jjb...@panix.com | March the months all through and through
Web page <http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker>
Jonathan J. Baker
>While reminiscing, does anyone remember the Siddur Shilo (another American
That's what we used in elementary school every day.
>work)? For some reason the compilers did not think it worthwhile having a
>separate weekday mincha, so you had to find the bits in schach'ris and the
We used separate mincha booklets.
>schach'ris amidah had the necessary options. Apart from that and other
>similar (maddening) foibles it had the clearest, most beautiful print.
I have the same situation with the siddur I use for the office mincha
minyan, a Roedelheim Sfas Emes. They don't believe in repeating ANYTHING,
so you have to pick mincha out of shachris, read Musaf Rosh Chodesh by
reading the first and last three paragraphs out of the regular spot, plus
the middle bracha after Hallel, etc. I think it does have a full musaf
for Shabbat & YT, though.
>I am actually only on my 3rd Tiferes Yehuda and I find that the pages now
>turn by themselves. For instance, the book nearly always opens at the
>shabbat musaf keduscha, except when I first pick it up at schach'ris in the
>morning, when it opens at the birkas haschachar. Could the amount of
>sellotape it carries have anything to do with that?
>Who says you cannot have a love affair with your siddur?
One fellow I know who went through a Lubav phase during his journey
to Orthodoxy still uses a falling-apart 30+-year-old Tehillas Hashem,
even though he could buy a new one anytime he wants to.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> Talqcom <tal...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>From: "Dan Kimmel" dan.k...@worldnet.att.net
>>>the notion that translations are a drag on the ability of
>>>people to pray strikes me as being particularly arrogant.
>
>>Is it possible in your ken that arrogance and other malicious
>>notions are absent, yet the conclusion simply does not go your way?
>
>>required under Jewish Law to teach their sons Hebrew. This is one
>>of the reasons why.
>
> They are never the same, but neither is rabbinic Hebrew the
> same language as Torah Hebrew. Especially with the recent
> findings of large amounts of Ugaritic, which is extremely
> close to Hebrew, we often have much better insight.
Right! Now we can just go to the hundreds of thousand of people, who
have been using Ugaritic all these years, and ask _them_ what our
Hebrew "really" means. ROTFLOL!
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> Harry Weiss wrote:
>> Charles Vitez <vi...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> > While I personally use a siddur printed by the Hebrew Publishing Company and
>> > called Tiferes Yehuda, which quaintly just about only translates the prayer
>> > for the President of the United States, I was surprised by the claim for
>> > ubiquity made on behalf of the Birnbaum siddur in the English speaking
>> > world.
>> The Tiferes Yehuda is what I grew up with. I haven't used it in years,
>> but last week visiting my brother, I noticed he still uses it.
>
> Does anyone remember the Tikkun Meir Siddur?
Yes <wildly waving my hand>
> In my youth, that one was the most commonly found in American
> shuls, both Nussach Ashkenaz and Nussach Sfard.
One reason it was popular, was that it _spelled out_ HaShem's Name
rather than two "yud"s.
> One teacher of mine remarked that the
> Tikkun Meir was a remarkable work of scholarship. Whoever put it
> together managed to compile every textual error that had crept up
> in the past two centuries, and included it in this edition.
LOL! I still use a Xerox copy of its Kriyas Shema.
Sammy
news:ap2hj2$dhl$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> Right. That and the all-Hebrew Birnbaum made up the supply of siddurim
> in the bet midrash at Lincoln Square, for the daily minyanim. Now, of
> course, it's all all-Hebrew Artscrolls.
Why not the Hebrew-English Artscroll?
I remember when LSS had the RCA Edition of the Artscroll (the one that has
the prayer for the Medina HaTemeiah :o) )
--
Always Check 'X-Original Date:' in Full-Headers to See When Post was
Actually Submitted (vs. When It was _Approved_.)
Creedmoor Chronicles, Ltd (Tirana, Albania)
"R" <rut...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:3DB402E6...@concentric.net...
WHAT? The Rinas Reshoim was 30 cents in 2001, and it is 1000 sheets long. I
bought a Hungarian version of the Rinas Reshoim in Budapest for only 10
forints (250 forints to the dollar).
Ian
Lisa
>hru...@stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>> Talqcom <tal...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>From: "Dan Kimmel" dan.k...@worldnet.att.net
>>
>>>>the notion that translations are a drag on the ability of
>>>>people to pray strikes me as being particularly arrogant.
>>
>>>Is it possible in your ken that arrogance and other malicious
>>>notions are absent, yet the conclusion simply does not go your way?
>>
>>>Translations never are the same, like it or avoid it. Jewish men are
>>>required under Jewish Law to teach their sons Hebrew. This is one
>>>of the reasons why.
>>
>> They are never the same, but neither is rabbinic Hebrew the
>> same language as Torah Hebrew. Especially with the recent
>> findings of large amounts of Ugaritic, which is extremely
>> close to Hebrew, we often have much better insight.
>
>Right! Now we can just go to the hundreds of thousand of people, who
>have been using Ugaritic all these years, and ask _them_ what our
>Hebrew "really" means. ROTFLOL!
In truth, Moshe, Ugaritic and languages like it really can be
informative. All we've had of Hebrew over the last couple of millenia
are the words that happened to be used in Tanach and rabbinic
literature. And in some cases, we don't really know what the words
meant. We may know how they're darshaned, but that's not the same
thing.
Take the verse "Im eshkacheich Yerushalayim, tishkach yemini". "If I
forget thee, O Jerusalem..." How many times have I heard lame Israeli
politicians misquote it by saying "tishakach yemini"? Because
"tishkach yemini" doesn't seem to make any sense at all. If I forget
you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget...? Tishkach is a transitive
verb, and needs an object. Forget... what? So translators have
changed it to "lose its cunning", which is cute, and a lot more
readable, but it's nonsensical, and not at all what the words say.
I had a rabbi in Israel who was an amazing polyglot. I forget which
Semitic language it was that he was talking about, but in that
language, there's a verb shachach that means "to whither". And that
verb may very well have been used in Hebrew as well. But with this
being the only place it's used in Tanach, we lost track of it.
There are a lot of other examples. The story in Megillah about Rava
and Rav Zeira at Rava's Purim party, for instance. The verb "shachat"
is well known as "to slaughter", but in Akkadian (another semitic
language, and one more local to where Rava and Rav Zeira were living
at the time), there's a word "shachat" that means "to attack". When
Tzippora did that emergency bris and said "chatan damim ata li", it's
worth remembering that she came from Midyan, on the Arabian peninsula,
and that in Arabic, the verb "chatana" means "to circumcize".
Of all the semitic languages known, only two have the verb "daber"
meaning "to speak". Hebrew and Ugaritic". Arabic doesn't have it.
Aramaic doesn't have it. Akkadian and Amharic don't have it. So
there's reason to believe that Ugaritic and Hebrew are closely
related. Possibly even the same language in different dialects.
Ugarit, after all, was within the boundaries of Eretz Yisrael at the
time of Shlomo.
So don't laugh it off just because Herman is using it as one more
bludgeon to beat us with.
Lisa
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
Agreed.
> Take the verse "Im eshkacheich Yerushalayim, tishkach yemini". "If I
> forget thee, O Jerusalem..." How many times have I heard lame Israeli
> politicians misquote it by saying "tishakach yemini"? Because
> "tishkach yemini" doesn't seem to make any sense at all. If I forget
> you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget...? Tishkach is a transitive
> verb, and needs an object. Forget... what? So translators have
> changed it to "lose its cunning", which is cute, and a lot more
> readable, but it's nonsensical, and not at all what the words say.
And what do "classical comentators" say? Not lame Israeli politicians
and not "translators"?
> I had a rabbi in Israel who was an amazing polyglot. I forget which
> Semitic language it was that he was talking about, but in that
> language, there's a verb shachach that means "to whither". And that
> verb may very well have been used in Hebrew as well. But with this
> being the only place it's used in Tanach, we lost track of it.
>
> There are a lot of other examples. The story in Megillah about Rava
> and Rav Zeira at Rava's Purim party, for instance. The verb "shachat"
> is well known as "to slaughter", but in Akkadian (another semitic
> language, and one more local to where Rava and Rav Zeira were living
> at the time), there's a word "shachat" that means "to attack". When
> Tzippora did that emergency bris and said "chatan damim ata li", it's
> worth remembering that she came from Midyan, on the Arabian peninsula,
> and that in Arabic, the verb "chatana" means "to circumcize".
>
> Of all the semitic languages known, only two have the verb "daber"
> meaning "to speak". Hebrew and Ugaritic". Arabic doesn't have it.
> Aramaic doesn't have it. Akkadian and Amharic don't have it. So
> there's reason to believe that Ugaritic and Hebrew are closely
> related. Possibly even the same language in different dialects.
> Ugarit, after all, was within the boundaries of Eretz Yisrael at the
> time of Shlomo.
>
> So don't laugh it off just because Herman is using it as one more
> bludgeon to beat us with.
I was laughing because he seems ready to give Ugaritic _more_
authority than Hebrew. Even though it's not been used for how many
millenia?
Fiona
"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote in message
news:3db5597...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...
> >Right! Now we can just go to the hundreds of thousand of people, who
> >have been using Ugaritic all these years, and ask _them_ what our
> >Hebrew "really" means. ROTFLOL!
>
> In truth, Moshe, Ugaritic and languages like it really can be
> informative. All we've had of Hebrew over the last couple of millenia
> are the words that happened to be used in Tanach and rabbinic
> literature. And in some cases, we don't really know what the words
> meant. We may know how they're darshaned, but that's not the same
> thing.
Have you ever seen BDB, Brown, Drivers, and Briggs' Lexicon of the Old
Testement? It brings all the known cognates to Toraitic Hebrew, a
masterpiece but not exactly a pocket edition.
> Take the verse "Im eshkacheich Yerushalayim, tishkach yemini". "If I
> forget thee, O Jerusalem..." How many times have I heard lame Israeli
> politicians misquote it by saying "tishakach yemini"? Because
> "tishkach yemini" doesn't seem to make any sense at all. If I forget
> you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget...? Tishkach is a transitive
> verb, and needs an object. Forget... what? So translators have
> changed it to "lose its cunning", which is cute, and a lot more
> readable, but it's nonsensical, and not at all what the words say.
>
> I had a rabbi in Israel who was an amazing polyglot. I forget which
> Semitic language it was that he was talking about, but in that
> language, there's a verb shachach that means "to whither". And that
> verb may very well have been used in Hebrew as well. But with this
> being the only place it's used in Tanach, we lost track of it.
Nice, and it retains the connection with forgetting - a withering of the
memory.
> There are a lot of other examples. The story in Megillah about Rava
> and Rav Zeira at Rava's Purim party, for instance. The verb "shachat"
> is well known as "to slaughter", but in Akkadian (another semitic
> language, and one more local to where Rava and Rav Zeira were living
> at the time), there's a word "shachat" that means "to attack". When
> Tzippora did that emergency bris and said "chatan damim ata li", it's
> worth remembering that she came from Midyan, on the Arabian peninsula,
> and that in Arabic, the verb "chatana" means "to circumcize".
Nu, so? We use Lehem for Bread, Arabic uses Lehm for meat. So are you going
to say you only need to wash for a meaty meal?
Arabic is the youngest of all semitic languages, and other than a few
drinking songs and erotic poems from around 2-300 CE, the Koran is the
oldest surviving document in Arabic. I don't see how you can learn the
meaning of a word in Torah from a language whose oldest proof of existance
is some 1500 years later.
> Of all the semitic languages known, only two have the verb "daber"
> meaning "to speak". Hebrew and Ugaritic". Arabic doesn't have it.
> Aramaic doesn't have it. Akkadian and Amharic don't have it.
I assume you mean Ge'ez rather than Amharic. Amharic is a very modern
language, which apart from its semitic syntax and structure is almost
entirely Hamitic in vocabulary. Ge'ez on the other hand is a direct
descendant of Southern Amaraic, and it does have the root D-B-R, although it
refers to a mountain, particularly a mountain with a monastary. However the
noun Dabtara, for a preacher, or cantor is from the same root.
Fiona
Fiona
<mos...@mm.huji.ac.il> wrote in message
news:2002Oct2...@mm.huji.ac.il...
> li...@NOstarSPAMways.net (Lisa) writes:
> > So don't laugh it off just because Herman is using it as one more
> > bludgeon to beat us with.
>
> I was laughing because he seems ready to give Ugaritic _more_
> authority than Hebrew. Even though it's not been used for how many
> millenia?
Ah, but Moshe, maybe it's that pickled in amber effect that gives it some
use (for something kodesh), if it had be a spoken language for the last 2500
years it may have become so corrupt from its original form that it could no
longer be seen as even parallel. But in this pickled form, providing the
cuniform an be accurately translated (and there can't be many new words left
to learn, can there?) it can have a value in helping to expound new ideas.
Fiona
Micha Berger
: Take the verse "Im eshkacheich Yerushalayim, tishkach yemini". "If I
: forget thee, O Jerusalem..." How many times have I heard lame Israeli
: politicians misquote it by saying "tishakach yemini"? Because
: "tishkach yemini" doesn't seem to make any sense at all. If I forget
: you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget...? Tishkach is a transitive
: verb, and needs an object.
A possible literal translation: Take the "ti-" prefix as "you". "If I
forget J'lem may you/You forget my right hand."
As for the use of comparative languages: Isn't that how the gemara
addresses the word "totafos"?
-mi
Lisa
> li...@NOstarSPAMways.net (Lisa) writes:
> >>
> > forget thee, O Jerusalem..." How many times have I heard lame Israeli
> > politicians misquote it by saying "tishakach yemini"? Because
> > "tishkach yemini" doesn't seem to make any sense at all. If I forget
> > you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget...? Tishkach is a transitive
> > verb, and needs an object. Forget... what? So translators have
> > changed it to "lose its cunning", which is cute, and a lot more
> > readable, but it's nonsensical, and not at all what the words say.
>
> And what do "classical comentators" say? Not lame Israeli politicians
> and not "translators"?
I don't know. But according to the rav I heard this from, who has
seen many of those classical commentators inside, they're consistant
with the other meaning of the word.
> > So don't laugh it off just because Herman is using it as one more
> > bludgeon to beat us with.
>
> I was laughing because he seems ready to give Ugaritic _more_
> authority than Hebrew. Even though it's not been used for how many
> millenia?
Probably between 2.5 and 3. And I think that Herman's mania for
poo-pooing the Torah any way he can is a given. I was ignoring that
and referring just to the issue of cognate languages.
Lisa
Lisa
<mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
>On Tue, 22 Oct 2002 14:20:43 +0000 (UTC), Lisa <li...@nostarspamways.net> wrote:
>: Take the verse "Im eshkacheich Yerushalayim, tishkach yemini". "If I
>: forget thee, O Jerusalem..." How many times have I heard lame Israeli
>: politicians misquote it by saying "tishakach yemini"? Because
>: "tishkach yemini" doesn't seem to make any sense at all. If I forget
>: you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget...? Tishkach is a transitive
>: verb, and needs an object.
>
>A possible literal translation: Take the "ti-" prefix as "you". "If I
>forget J'lem may you/You forget my right hand."
Possible.
>As for the use of comparative languages: Isn't that how the gemara
>addresses the word "totafos"?
I remember Rashi bringing that. I didn't know it was from the Gemara.
Lisa
Lisa
<fi...@intxtdoc.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote in message
>news:3db5597...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...
>
>> >Right! Now we can just go to the hundreds of thousand of people, who
>> >have been using Ugaritic all these years, and ask _them_ what our
>> >Hebrew "really" means. ROTFLOL!
>>
>> In truth, Moshe, Ugaritic and languages like it really can be
>> informative. All we've had of Hebrew over the last couple of millenia
>> are the words that happened to be used in Tanach and rabbinic
>> literature. And in some cases, we don't really know what the words
>> meant. We may know how they're darshaned, but that's not the same
>> thing.
>
>Have you ever seen BDB, Brown, Drivers, and Briggs' Lexicon of the Old
>Testement? It brings all the known cognates to Toraitic Hebrew, a
>masterpiece but not exactly a pocket edition.
And dated. Yeah, we have a copy. It was Havah's from way back.
>> There are a lot of other examples. The story in Megillah about Rava
>> and Rav Zeira at Rava's Purim party, for instance. The verb "shachat"
>> is well known as "to slaughter", but in Akkadian (another semitic
>> language, and one more local to where Rava and Rav Zeira were living
>> at the time), there's a word "shachat" that means "to attack". When
>> Tzippora did that emergency bris and said "chatan damim ata li", it's
>> worth remembering that she came from Midyan, on the Arabian peninsula,
>> and that in Arabic, the verb "chatana" means "to circumcize".
>
>Nu, so? We use Lehem for Bread, Arabic uses Lehm for meat. So are you going
>to say you only need to wash for a meaty meal?
Do you think I am? Read both passages I mentioned here. Do you think
Rava got drunk and slaughtered Rav Zeira and that he came back to
life, or do you think he got drunk and attacked Rav Zeira and that he
got better? And in the case of Tzippora, the text even makes it
fairly clear she was saying something in another language. After the
whole chatan damim ata li thing, the Torah tells us "She said chatan
damim about the circumcision".
>Arabic is the youngest of all semitic languages, and other than a few
>drinking songs and erotic poems from around 2-300 CE, the Koran is the
>oldest surviving document in Arabic. I don't see how you can learn the
>meaning of a word in Torah from a language whose oldest proof of existance
>is some 1500 years later.
What language do you think they spoke in Arabia?
>> Of all the semitic languages known, only two have the verb "daber"
>> meaning "to speak". Hebrew and Ugaritic". Arabic doesn't have it.
>> Aramaic doesn't have it. Akkadian and Amharic don't have it.
>
>I assume you mean Ge'ez rather than Amharic. Amharic is a very modern
>language, which apart from its semitic syntax and structure is almost
>entirely Hamitic in vocabulary. Ge'ez on the other hand is a direct
>descendant of Southern Amaraic, and it does have the root D-B-R, although it
>refers to a mountain, particularly a mountain with a monastary. However the
>noun Dabtara, for a preacher, or cantor is from the same root.
To repeat, it does not have the verb daber, meaning "to speak". Only
Hebrew and Ugaritic have that verb.
Lisa
chano
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote in message
news:<2002Oct2...@mm.huji.ac.il>...
> li...@NOstarSPAMways.net (Lisa) writes:
> >>
> > Take the verse "Im eshkacheich Yerushalayim, tishkach yemini". "If I
> > forget thee, O Jerusalem..." How many times have I heard lame Israeli
> > politicians misquote it by saying "tishakach yemini"? Because
> > "tishkach yemini" doesn't seem to make any sense at all. If I forget
> > you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget...? Tishkach is a transitive
> > verb, and needs an object. Forget... what? So translators have
> > changed it to "lose its cunning", which is cute, and a lot more
> > readable, but it's nonsensical, and not at all what the words say.
----------------------------
The translation of "tishkach yemini" is, "my right hand WILL forget" not, as
is incorrectly translated "let my right forget its cunning". The word
"tishkach" is feminine future, the verse must be understood in the context
in which it was written. It is from psalm (137) "By the rivers of
Babylon..." written by David who, in a prophetic vision, foresaw the
destruction of the Beis Hamikdosh. A thousand Levites who used to play the
harp in the temple were told by Nevuchadnezzar upon their arrival in
Babylon, to play their harps while he ate. The Levi'im refused because they
would not play or sing about Jerusalem in foreign captivity so
Nevuchadnezzar cut off their hands. David alluded to this in the psalm when
he said, "If I ever forget you Jerusalem, my right (hand) will (also)
forget" meaning all the skills in my right hand in playing the harp will
disappear, just as if it were cut off like the hands of the captive Levi'im.
Keep smiling.
Chano
Henry Goodman
"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote in message
news:3db6a30...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...
Sanhedrin 4b
--
Henry Goodman
henry....@virgin.net
Fiona
"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote in message
> >Nu, so? We use Lehem for Bread, Arabic uses Lehm for meat. So are you
going
> >to say you only need to wash for a meaty meal?
>
> Do you think I am? Read both passages I mentioned here. Do you think
> Rava got drunk and slaughtered Rav Zeira and that he came back to
> life, or do you think he got drunk and attacked Rav Zeira and that he
> got better?
Did I say that?
> And in the case of Tzippora, the text even makes it
> fairly clear she was saying something in another language. After the
> whole chatan damim ata li thing, the Torah tells us "She said chatan
> damim about the circumcision".
>
> >Arabic is the youngest of all semitic languages, and other than a few
> >drinking songs and erotic poems from around 2-300 CE, the Koran is the
> >oldest surviving document in Arabic. I don't see how you can learn the
> >meaning of a word in Torah from a language whose oldest proof of
existance
> >is some 1500 years later.
>
> What language do you think they spoke in Arabia?
Well the people of Saba (Sheba) spoke Sabaen (they left lots of monolithic
writing all over the place), the Midyanites probably spoke Midyanite. Both
are mentioned in the Torah, the Arabs aren't. Why assume that because the
land is called Arabia (first mention is from the Romans) that it was named
after the language, or people? Could be the other way round.
> >> Of all the semitic languages known, only two have the verb "daber"
> >> meaning "to speak". Hebrew and Ugaritic". Arabic doesn't have it.
> >> Aramaic doesn't have it. Akkadian and Amharic don't have it.
> >
> >I assume you mean Ge'ez rather than Amharic. Amharic is a very modern
> >language, which apart from its semitic syntax and structure is almost
> >entirely Hamitic in vocabulary. Ge'ez on the other hand is a direct
> >descendant of Southern Amaraic, and it does have the root D-B-R, although
it
> >refers to a mountain, particularly a mountain with a monastary. However
the
> >noun Dabtara, for a preacher, or cantor is from the same root.
>
> To repeat, it does not have the verb daber, meaning "to speak". Only
> Hebrew and Ugaritic have that verb.
Agreed, but that's why I mentioned the Lehem/Lahm cognate above, meanings
change, but if there is a cognate root in two related languages, there is
always some connection that can be made. Which is why I don't disagree with
the Hatana connection you made, only with the reference to Arabic. Chances
are Arabic got it from Midyanite, but that does not mean Midyanite and
Arabic are the same language.
Fiona
Lisa
<ch...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>Lisa wrote:
>
>mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote in message
>news:<2002Oct2...@mm.huji.ac.il>...
>> li...@NOstarSPAMways.net (Lisa) writes:
>> >>
>> > Take the verse "Im eshkacheich Yerushalayim, tishkach yemini". "If I
>> > forget thee, O Jerusalem..." How many times have I heard lame Israeli
>> > politicians misquote it by saying "tishakach yemini"? Because
>> > "tishkach yemini" doesn't seem to make any sense at all. If I forget
>> > you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget...? Tishkach is a transitive
>> > verb, and needs an object. Forget... what? So translators have
>> > changed it to "lose its cunning", which is cute, and a lot more
>> > readable, but it's nonsensical, and not at all what the words say.
>----------------------------
>The translation of "tishkach yemini" is, "my right hand WILL forget" not, as
>is incorrectly translated "let my right forget its cunning".
Hands (or more properly "arms") cannot "forget". The proper
translation is "may my right arm whither". The future tense can be
predictive or hopeful. "Yitgadel v'yitkadesh sh'mei rabba" can mean
"His great Name will be made great and unique", and it can mean "may
His great Name be made great and unique".
>The word
>"tishkach" is feminine future, the verse must be understood in the context
>in which it was written. It is from psalm (137) "By the rivers of
>Babylon..." written by David who, in a prophetic vision, foresaw the
>destruction of the Beis Hamikdosh. A thousand Levites who used to play the
>harp in the temple were told by Nevuchadnezzar upon their arrival in
>Babylon, to play their harps while he ate. The Levi'im refused because they
>would not play or sing about Jerusalem in foreign captivity so
>Nevuchadnezzar cut off their hands. David alluded to this in the psalm when
>he said, "If I ever forget you Jerusalem, my right (hand) will (also)
>forget" meaning all the skills in my right hand in playing the harp will
>disappear, just as if it were cut off like the hands of the captive Levi'im.
Nice drush.
Lisa
Lisa
<fi...@intxtdoc.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote in message
>news:3db6a19...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...
>
>> >Nu, so? We use Lehem for Bread, Arabic uses Lehm for meat. So are you
>going
>> >to say you only need to wash for a meaty meal?
>>
>> Do you think I am? Read both passages I mentioned here. Do you think
>> Rava got drunk and slaughtered Rav Zeira and that he came back to
>> life, or do you think he got drunk and attacked Rav Zeira and that he
>> got better?
>
>Did I say that?
What a strange reply. You threw a strawman at me, suggesting that I'd
say you only need to wash for a fleishig meal, which you know I
wouldn't say. I then asked if you thought the story meant A or B, and
you replied "Did I say that?" Did you say *what*?
>> And in the case of Tzippora, the text even makes it
>> fairly clear she was saying something in another language. After the
>> whole chatan damim ata li thing, the Torah tells us "She said chatan
>> damim about the circumcision".
>>
>> >Arabic is the youngest of all semitic languages, and other than a few
>> >drinking songs and erotic poems from around 2-300 CE, the Koran is the
>> >oldest surviving document in Arabic. I don't see how you can learn the
>> >meaning of a word in Torah from a language whose oldest proof of existance
>> >is some 1500 years later.
>>
>> What language do you think they spoke in Arabia?
>
>Well the people of Saba (Sheba) spoke Sabaen (they left lots of monolithic
>writing all over the place), the Midyanites probably spoke Midyanite.
Which language we know, right? It's not farfetched to imagine that
Midyanite might have been a precursor to what became Arabic. It's not
as if there was so much outside influence in Arabia between the days
when Midyan flourished and when Arabic is known to have arisen.
>Both
>are mentioned in the Torah, the Arabs aren't. Why assume that because the
>land is called Arabia (first mention is from the Romans)
Babylonians. Check your sources.
>> >I assume you mean Ge'ez rather than Amharic. Amharic is a very modern
>> >language, which apart from its semitic syntax and structure is almost
>> >entirely Hamitic in vocabulary. Ge'ez on the other hand is a direct
>> >descendant of Southern Amaraic, and it does have the root D-B-R, although
>it
>> >refers to a mountain, particularly a mountain with a monastary. However
>the
>> >noun Dabtara, for a preacher, or cantor is from the same root.
>>
>> To repeat, it does not have the verb daber, meaning "to speak". Only
>> Hebrew and Ugaritic have that verb.
>
>Agreed, but that's why I mentioned the Lehem/Lahm cognate above, meanings
>change, but if there is a cognate root in two related languages, there is
>always some connection that can be made. Which is why I don't disagree with
>the Hatana connection you made, only with the reference to Arabic. Chances
>are Arabic got it from Midyanite, but that does not mean Midyanite and
>Arabic are the same language.
The earliest use of the root "L-H-M" is for a warrior/hunter. Lahamu
is another name for the god Nimrud (Ninurta). This is the common
denominator between bread and meat. A hunter brought food. The word
milhama (war) comes from the same root.
Lisa
Lisa
Thank you.
Lisa
Dr. Shlomo Argamon (Engelson)
li...@NOstarSPAMways.net (Lisa) writes:
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2002 15:39:05 +0000 (UTC), "chano"
> <ch...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Lisa wrote:
> >
> >mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote in message
> >news:<2002Oct2...@mm.huji.ac.il>...
> >> li...@NOstarSPAMways.net (Lisa) writes:
> >> >>
> >> > Take the verse "Im eshkacheich Yerushalayim, tishkach yemini". "If I
> >> > forget thee, O Jerusalem..." How many times have I heard lame Israeli
> >> > politicians misquote it by saying "tishakach yemini"? Because
> >> > "tishkach yemini" doesn't seem to make any sense at all. If I forget
> >> > you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget...? Tishkach is a transitive
> >> > verb, and needs an object. Forget... what? So translators have
> >> > changed it to "lose its cunning", which is cute, and a lot more
> >> > readable, but it's nonsensical, and not at all what the words say.
> >----------------------------
> >The translation of "tishkach yemini" is, "my right hand WILL forget" not, as
> >is incorrectly translated "let my right forget its cunning".
>
> Hands (or more properly "arms") cannot "forget". The proper
> translation is "may my right arm whither".
Apropos our earlier discussion about spelling:
Whither my right arm? Connected to my right shoulder, where it's
always been.
But if I forget Jerusalem, may my right arm wither.
-Shlomo-
Herman Rubin
Fiona <fi...@intxtdoc.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote in message
>news:3db6a19...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...
................
>> And in the case of Tzippora, the text even makes it
>> fairly clear she was saying something in another language. After the
>> whole chatan damim ata li thing, the Torah tells us "She said chatan
>> damim about the circumcision".
It is not clear that it was not rewritten in Hebrew,
rather than being literal.
>> >Arabic is the youngest of all semitic languages, and other than a few
>> >drinking songs and erotic poems from around 2-300 CE, the Koran is the
>> >oldest surviving document in Arabic. I don't see how you can learn the
>> >meaning of a word in Torah from a language whose oldest proof of
>existance
>> >is some 1500 years later.
>> What language do you think they spoke in Arabia?
I suggest you learn something about linguistics. The
general development of languages is to reduce forms,
unless new types of constructions are introduced.
Arabic has the same type of constructions as Hebrew,
but has far more binyonim for the verbs. This would
indicate that Arabic is older.
>Well the people of Saba (Sheba) spoke Sabaen (they left lots of monolithic
>writing all over the place), the Midyanites probably spoke Midyanite. Both
>are mentioned in the Torah, the Arabs aren't. Why assume that because the
>land is called Arabia (first mention is from the Romans) that it was named
>after the language, or people? Could be the other way round.
Was Arabic the sole language spoken in Arabia, even later?
The Akkadians and Chaldeans invaded Mesopotamia from the
Arabian peninsula. I do not know enough about those
languages to make comparisons. The Semitic Akkadian
essentially displaced (but not completely) the older
Sumerian, which is not in any of the present families.
These languages are all related. Hebrew is in a different
branch of the Semitic language family.
>> >> Of all the semitic languages known, only two have the verb "daber"
>> >> meaning "to speak". Hebrew and Ugaritic". Arabic doesn't have it.
>> >> Aramaic doesn't have it. Akkadian and Amharic don't have it.
Hebrew and Ugaritic are almost the same language.
>> >I assume you mean Ge'ez rather than Amharic. Amharic is a very modern
>> >language, which apart from its semitic syntax and structure is almost
>> >entirely Hamitic in vocabulary. Ge'ez on the other hand is a direct
>> >descendant of Southern Amaraic, and it does have the root D-B-R, although
>it
>> >refers to a mountain, particularly a mountain with a monastary. However
>the
>> >noun Dabtara, for a preacher, or cantor is from the same root.
>> To repeat, it does not have the verb daber, meaning "to speak". Only
>> Hebrew and Ugaritic have that verb.
>Agreed, but that's why I mentioned the Lehem/Lahm cognate above, meanings
>change, but if there is a cognate root in two related languages, there is
>always some connection that can be made. Which is why I don't disagree with
>the Hatana connection you made, only with the reference to Arabic. Chances
>are Arabic got it from Midyanite, but that does not mean Midyanite and
>Arabic are the same language.
>Fiona
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
sussmanbern
> Singer's Prayer Book?
>
> Or, if you are looking for scholarship, the Hertz prayer book? That is the
> big one with masses of explanations.
=========
The Singer prayer book is the old old edition of The Authorised Daily
Prayer Book of the United Hebrew Congregations of the British Empire,
edited by Chief Rabbi Simeon Singer, and was first published in 1890,
and often reprinted. It was also reprinted (sometimes without proper
attribution) in the US. According to Singer's intro, the text was
largely based on Baer's Siddur Avodat Yisroel, which is practically
the gold standard for siddurim.
In 1914, Israel Abrahams, a professor of rabbinic studies at
Cambridge, put out a small book titled A Companion to the Authorised
Daily Prayer Book ... Historical and Explanatory Notes. This book,
entirely in English, provided commentary to the Singer prayerbook,
keyed to the page numbers in Singer. It was so very helpful that,
under Chief Rabbi Joseph Hertz, the Singer Prayer Book and the
Companion were often printed together in one binding.
The Singer Prayer Book is the one whose page numbers are given in
the commentary to the Soncino Talmud, and Montefiore's Rabbinic
Anthology. However, the Singer edition went out of print circa 1960
when the United Congregations issued an entirely new siddur by its
current Chief Rabbi, and then there was yet another new siddur about
30 years later. The newer editions are not dramatic changes but the
page numbers differ from the Singer edition.
The Hertz edition of the Authorised Daily Prayer Book, published
(I think since around 1950) in America by Bloch, essentially
reproduces the text of Singer - but evidently with reset type - with
explanatory footnotes (much of which closely resemble the material in
Abrahams's Companion) on the same page as the text. Hertz did
introduce a few changes - he fiddled with the Hebrew and English of
Maoz Tsur, for example, and the American edition has its own prayer
for the US government instead of for the Royal Family. Reading the
main text of Hertz is essentially the same as reading Singer but the
page numbers are all different.
After much scouting around, I managed to get a couple of copies of
the old Singer prayerbook (at used book sales at Jewish schools!), and
promptly marked up my copy of Hertz to show in the margin the
corresponding page of Singer, so I could make use of the references in
the Rabbinic Anthology and the Soncino Talmud, etc.
Some time ago I made a point of getting as many ANNOTATED (in the
English language) siddurim as I could. There is the Singer edition
bound with Abrahams's Companion. There is Hertz. There is ArtScroll
(which also has an annotated Sefardic siddur, and annotated
machzorim).
Feldheim published an English edition of Samson Raphael Hirsch's
annotated siddur -- but the English text does not line up perfectly
with the facing Hebrew; the English translation of the prayers is
translated from Hirsch's German rendering and reflects Hirsch's
editorial decisions (e.g., in the Aleynu, ArtScroll includes Al Tiro
but Singer, Hertz, and Hirsch omit it), but the Hebrew text does not
always match it because Feldheim did not reproduce Hirsch's Hebrew
text but rather used the printing plates from a very ordinary public
domain siddur.
The Spanish & Portuguese Synagogue in NY publishes the old De Sola
Pool Sefardic siddur (actually sort of a compromise that has been
called "Ashkefard") - and also publishes a separate small volume
titled Minhath Shelomo - A Commentary on the Book of Prayer of the
Spanish and Portuguese Jews, which owes a big debt to Abrahams and is
similarly keyed to the pages of the DeSola Pool siddur. Within the
last decade a series of annotated Sefardic (somewhat more
authentically Sefardic than the DeSola Pool version) siddurim and
machzorim have been issued by Orot, 314 Fifth St., Lakewood NJ 08701.
And that seems to be fairly exhaustive.
Lisa
<wince> Oops...
Lisa
Jonathan J. Baker
>In <3DB354B9...@concentric.net> R <rut...@concentric.net> writes:
>>Does anyone remember the Tikkun Meir Siddur? In my youth, that
>Right. That and the all-Hebrew Birnbaum made up the supply of siddurim
>in the bet midrash at Lincoln Square, for the daily minyanim. Now, of
>course, it's all all-Hebrew Artscrolls.
Tikun Meir is still being printed. I saw a new-ish one on the
dashboard of my gemara teacher's car.
Jonathan J. Baker
>"Jonathan J. Baker" <jjb...@panix.com> wrote in message
>> Right. That and the all-Hebrew Birnbaum made up the supply of siddurim
>> in the bet midrash at Lincoln Square, for the daily minyanim. Now, of
>> course, it's all all-Hebrew Artscrolls.
>Why not the Hebrew-English Artscroll?
>I remember when LSS had the RCA Edition of the Artscroll (the one that has
>the prayer for the Medina HaTemeiah :o) )
I see you never or rarely davened in the bet midrash. Note that I said
the bet midrash, not the main sanctuary. Main sanctuary has a mix of
Artscroll RCA Editions and old Pool RCA siddurim.
People who come to daily minyan don't generally need the English.
If they do, they bring their own.
Fiona
"sussmanbern" <sussm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> attribution) in the US. According to Singer's intro, the text was
> largely based on Baer's Siddur Avodat Yisroel, which is practically
> the gold standard for siddurim.
Please, please, please, while I accept that you mention the S & P at the end
of your post, it doesn't take much to add in the word Ashkenazi to make such
sweeping statements a) more accurate and b) less like you are trying to blot
out a large chunk of the Jewish nation. The *gold standard* siddur for
Eastern/Oriental Jewry is probably Teffilat Yesharim out of Baghdad, and it
is considerably different anything Ashkenazi.
Fiona
Jonathan J. Baker
>> Lisa wrote:
>> > Take the verse "Im eshkacheich Yerushalayim, tishkach yemini". "If I
>> > forget thee, O Jerusalem..." How many times have I heard lame Israeli
>> > politicians misquote it by saying "tishakach yemini"? Because
>> > "tishkach yemini" doesn't seem to make any sense at all. If I forget
>> > you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget...? Tishkach is a transitive
>> > verb, and needs an object. Forget... what? So translators have
>> > changed it to "lose its cunning", which is cute, and a lot more
>> > readable, but it's nonsensical, and not at all what the words say.
Well, that too is Metzudos' translation "tishkach et cochah."
>----------------------------
>The translation of "tishkach yemini" is, "my right hand WILL forget" not, as
>is incorrectly translated "let my right forget its cunning". The word
>"tishkach" is feminine future, the verse must be understood in the context
>in which it was written. It is from psalm (137) "By the rivers of
>Babylon..." written by David who, in a prophetic vision, foresaw the
>destruction of the Beis Hamikdosh. A thousand Levites who used to play the
Snarf. That's Metzudos, but Rashi & Ibn Ezra have no problem with
taking the authorship to be someone who actually was in galut in
Bavel. Nor does RSR Hirsch.
>harp in the temple were told by Nevuchadnezzar upon their arrival in
>Babylon, to play their harps while he ate. The Levi'im refused because they
>would not play or sing about Jerusalem in foreign captivity so
>Nevuchadnezzar cut off their hands. David alluded to this in the psalm when
>he said, "If I ever forget you Jerusalem, my right (hand) will (also)
>forget" meaning all the skills in my right hand in playing the harp will
>disappear, just as if it were cut off like the hands of the captive Levi'im.
Davidic authorship of all the psalms is a minority position. Therefore,
any interpretation based on that assumption is likely to be a cute story,
but not necessarily definitive. I'd say that Lisa's reading with Akkadian
cognates makes more sense, and doesn't require interpolating extra words
as Metzudos does.
Charles Vitez
recollection. Just in case anyone is interested I have added a few footnotes
to your text.
I can also report that the "Singers Prayer Book" committee (that is not
actually what they are called; as soon as I find the leaflet I will post
again) has been reconstituted and have asked for feedback and suggestions
for the new version due in about 2 year's time.
From something that was said to me, this may be a fightback against
Artscroll.
Charles Vitez
"sussmanbern" <sussm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9d95e4ee.0210...@posting.google.com...
> > Have you people never heard of that pride of the British Empire, the
> > Singer's Prayer Book?
> >
> > Or, if you are looking for scholarship, the Hertz prayer book? That is
the
> > big one with masses of explanations.
> =========
> The Singer prayer book is the old old edition of The Authorised Daily
> Prayer Book of the United Hebrew Congregations of the British Empire,
> edited by Chief Rabbi Simeon Singer, and was first published in 1890,
> and often reprinted. It was also reprinted (sometimes without proper
> attribution) in the US. According to Singer's intro, the text was
> largely based on Baer's Siddur Avodat Yisroel, which is practically
> the gold standard for siddurim.
>
> In 1914, Israel Abrahams, a professor of rabbinic studies at
> Cambridge, put out a small book titled A Companion to the Authorised
> Daily Prayer Book ... Historical and Explanatory Notes. This book,
> entirely in English, provided commentary to the Singer prayerbook,
> keyed to the page numbers in Singer. It was so very helpful that,
> under Chief Rabbi Joseph Hertz, the Singer Prayer Book and the
> Companion were often printed together in one binding.
***CV***
This does not seem to have sold all that well. I have only ever come across
one copy and the man who owned it, quite naturally, did not want to give it
up.
***
>
> The Singer Prayer Book is the one whose page numbers are given in
> the commentary to the Soncino Talmud, and Montefiore's Rabbinic
> Anthology. However, the Singer edition went out of print circa 1960
> when the United Congregations issued an entirely new siddur by its
> current Chief Rabbi, and then there was yet another new siddur about
> 30 years later. The newer editions are not dramatic changes but the
> page numbers differ from the Singer edition.
***CV***
This merely caught up with minor changes in the US nusach [order of
services] and some additional prayers appeared. More importantly, the
typeface was changed from the fairly crabbed to beautifully square and bold
hebrew lettering (oh, and the price went up to something like 30 shillings
if I recall correctly).
The next version was the centenary version produced under the auspices of
Chief Rabbi Jakobovits. It is expanded and the translation considerably
improved - still blue cover - with a more modern and condensed typeface.
Within 2 years this was superceded by the millemium edition (in maroon
cover) under Chief Rabbi Sacks.
***
>
> The Hertz edition of the Authorised Daily Prayer Book, published
> (I think since around 1950) in America by Bloch, essentially
> reproduces the text of Singer - but evidently with reset type - with
> explanatory footnotes (much of which closely resemble the material in
> Abrahams's Companion) on the same page as the text. Hertz did
> introduce a few changes - he fiddled with the Hebrew and English of
> Maoz Tsur, for example, and the American edition has its own prayer
> for the US government instead of for the Royal Family. Reading the
> main text of Hertz is essentially the same as reading Singer but the
> page numbers are all different.
***CV***
The Hertz is now sadly out of print and it may be that the US editions are
the only ones available now. I inherited a copy. It is pretty good.
***
***CV***
Although DeSola Pool was a minister of the Bevis Marks sefardi synagogue
(and I believe later moved to the USA) his machzorim and siddur were
actually prepared for the UK ashkenazi market. I actually use DeSola
machzorim (in preference to the Routledge, which is still the standard
version in the United Synagogue) myself.
***
Fiona
"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote in message
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 13:28:32 +0000 (UTC), "Fiona"
> <fi...@intxtdoc.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote in message
> >news:3db6a19...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...
> >
> >> >Nu, so? We use Lehem for Bread, Arabic uses Lehm for meat. So are you
> >going
> >> >to say you only need to wash for a meaty meal?
> >>
> >> Do you think I am? Read both passages I mentioned here. Do you think
> >> Rava got drunk and slaughtered Rav Zeira and that he came back to
> >> life, or do you think he got drunk and attacked Rav Zeira and that he
> >> got better?
> >
> >Did I say that?
>
> What a strange reply. You threw a strawman at me, suggesting that I'd
> say you only need to wash for a fleishig meal, which you know I
> wouldn't say. I then asked if you thought the story meant A or B, and
> you replied "Did I say that?" Did you say *what*?
Slip of the fingers, I meant "did I question that?" but it's moot anyway, I
already explained why I brought the Lehem/Lehm cognate, which you also added
too.
> >> And in the case of Tzippora, the text even makes it
> >> fairly clear she was saying something in another language. After the
> >> whole chatan damim ata li thing, the Torah tells us "She said chatan
> >> damim about the circumcision".
> >>
> >> >Arabic is the youngest of all semitic languages, and other than a few
> >> >drinking songs and erotic poems from around 2-300 CE, the Koran is the
> >> >oldest surviving document in Arabic. I don't see how you can learn the
> >> >meaning of a word in Torah from a language whose oldest proof of
existance
> >> >is some 1500 years later.
> >>
> >> What language do you think they spoke in Arabia?
> >
> >Well the people of Saba (Sheba) spoke Sabaen (they left lots of
monolithic
> >writing all over the place), the Midyanites probably spoke Midyanite.
>
> Which language we know, right? It's not farfetched to imagine that
> Midyanite might have been a precursor to what became Arabic. It's not
> as if there was so much outside influence in Arabia between the days
> when Midyan flourished and when Arabic is known to have arisen.
Well it's generally considered that Midyan was northern Arabia and what is
now called Jordan, the only permanent settlements in the Arabian peninsular
were/are on the Hijaz (west coast mountain range) and mainly in the south
(Mecca, Medina). So you expect Sabaen to be much more influential than
Midyanite. Saba was Yemen+, and even today the borders are not clearly
defined. As for the time scale and other influences, in the few centuries
leading up to the blastocistic expansion of Arabic culturer with the rise of
the Islam, the Hijaz and Yemen were a hive of activity. The lingua franca of
the area at that time was Aramaic, and there was an influx of Jewish and
Christian refugees, and then Christian missionaries. It was a haven of peace
between the warring empires of Byzantium and Persia, the Romans came and
went (their armour probably got too hot so they made Pax Arabia). There was
trade with Ethiopia, Nubia, and Egypt across the Red Sea and trade with the
Persian empire across the desert and round the coast.
> >Both
> >are mentioned in the Torah, the Arabs aren't. Why assume that because the
> >land is called Arabia (first mention is from the Romans)
>
> Babylonians. Check your sources.
Happy to, what's your source for the Babylonian mention? What's the context
there, people, land, or language?
> >> >I assume you mean Ge'ez rather than Amharic. Amharic is a very modern
> >> >language, which apart from its semitic syntax and structure is almost
> >> >entirely Hamitic in vocabulary. Ge'ez on the other hand is a direct
> >> >descendant of Southern Amaraic, and it does have the root D-B-R,
although
> >it
> >> >refers to a mountain, particularly a mountain with a monastary.
However
> >the
> >> >noun Dabtara, for a preacher, or cantor is from the same root.
> >>
> >> To repeat, it does not have the verb daber, meaning "to speak". Only
> >> Hebrew and Ugaritic have that verb.
> >
> >Agreed, but that's why I mentioned the Lehem/Lahm cognate above, meanings
> >change, but if there is a cognate root in two related languages, there is
> >always some connection that can be made. Which is why I don't disagree
with
> >the Hatana connection you made, only with the reference to Arabic.
Chances
> >are Arabic got it from Midyanite, but that does not mean Midyanite and
> >Arabic are the same language.
>
> The earliest use of the root "L-H-M" is for a warrior/hunter. Lahamu
> is another name for the god Nimrud (Ninurta). This is the common
> denominator between bread and meat. A hunter brought food. The word
> milhama (war) comes from the same root.
I wondered about the connection between Lehem (bread) and Laham (to fight),
thanks. That gives L'humei reshef in Devarim 32:24 (usually translated -
devour fiery bolts/darts) a little more sense, devour being an agressive way
to consume. And that in turn makes Mishlei 4:17 much stronger, so rather
than "they shall eat the bread of wickedness," Ki Lahamu Lehem Resha is
better translated "they shall devour the bread of wickedness."
While Genesis 3:19 (by the sweat of your brow...) is ambiguous and could
apply to both farming (bread) or hunting (meat) we know from Abraham Avinu
in Bereishit 18:5 were he says Pat-Lehem (Pat being the word used by Aramaic
for bread, Arabic btw has no letter p and uses Khobz for bread) that the
Hebrew version is clearly defined as bread before Kabbalat Torah. This
raises the interesting question (to me anyway) of whether the Hebrew usage
is inidicative of a sedentary existance in Egypt or whether Abraham "HaIvri"
already used it in his urban surroundings of Ur and Haran before taking up a
nomadic life at 70?
Where is the L*H*M = warrior/hunter from, and is it a generic term, or is
your reference specific to Lahamu/Nimrod?
Fiona
sussmanbern
> Eastern/Oriental Jewry is probably Teffilat Yesharim out of Baghdad, and it
> is considerably different anything Ashkenazi.
I am grateful for that identification, I had wondered what was the
model of Sefardic liturgy.
In describing Feldheim's English-language edition of Hirsch's
annotated siddur, I may have left something out. Hirsch provided
(evidently the original was German) a translation of the Hebrew
prayers, and the Feldheim edition translates into English both his
translation of the prayers and his annotations. Judging from the
prayers that are translated, Hirsch was willing to skip chunks of
liturgy that appear elsewhere (e.g. in ArtScroll), such as Al Tiro at
the end of Aleynu, and the Six Remembrances, and the Akeidah. It
might have been helpful if Feldheim also had printed the Hebrew text
from Hirsch's own edition, but Feldheim instead used the printing
plates from someone else's (ordinary) siddur, which has the Hebrew for
Al Tiro and those other things even though it's not in the translation
or annotations.
I had compared the DeSola Pool S&P siddur with, among others, the
ArtScroll Sefardic siddur (which, being edited, I think, by an
Ashkenaz editor, is sort of bland in terms of not including much that
is exotic or unique), the (all-Hebrew) Sefardic siddur and the
Mizrachi siddur published in Israel by Koren, and the Orot annotated
Sefardic siddur, and it is clear that the DeSola Pool siddur is sort
of, well, homogenized compared to the others. On the other hand, the
differences and similarities between the different liturgical
traditions are very instructive in indicating the relative antiquity
of certain prayers.
Kim Bebbington
arg...@sunlight.cs.biu.ac.il (Dr. Shlomo Argamon (Engelson)) wrote:
Whither my right hand? Up to slap my forehead for not knowing the
difference between "whither" and "where"....
(Oooo - picky, picky, picky... Sorry)
Harry Weiss
> "Fiona" <fi...@intxtdoc.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:<apbif9$6hf$1 The *gold standard* siddur for
>> Eastern/Oriental Jewry is probably Teffilat Yesharim out of Baghdad, and it
>> is considerably different anything Ashkenazi.
> =======
> I am grateful for that identification, I had wondered what was the
> model of Sefardic liturgy.
I am making one comment based on your comment below. There is a nussach
tefilla for edot Hamizrach often called Sephardim, which includes the
Baghdadi Nussach, but there is also a diffeent nussach for the Greek/Turk
and for Syrian (Aram Sovar), and N. Africa.
What is frequently refered to a Sepahrd in the US is Nussach Sefard,
which is an Ashenazi Nussach, started by the various Chassidic movements
that incorporated many Sepahrd items, but it is not the same as true Sepahrd.
>
> In describing Feldheim's English-language edition of Hirsch's
> annotated siddur, I may have left something out. Hirsch provided
> (evidently the original was German) a translation of the Hebrew
> prayers, and the Feldheim edition translates into English both his
> translation of the prayers and his annotations. Judging from the
> prayers that are translated, Hirsch was willing to skip chunks of
> liturgy that appear elsewhere (e.g. in ArtScroll), such as Al Tiro at
> the end of Aleynu, and the Six Remembrances, and the Akeidah. It
> might have been helpful if Feldheim also had printed the Hebrew text
> from Hirsch's own edition, but Feldheim instead used the printing
> plates from someone else's (ordinary) siddur, which has the Hebrew for
> Al Tiro and those other things even though it's not in the translation
> or annotations.
> I had compared the DeSola Pool S&P siddur with, among others, the
> ArtScroll Sefardic siddur (which, being edited, I think, by an
> Ashkenaz editor, is sort of bland in terms of not including much that
> is exotic or unique), the (all-Hebrew) Sefardic siddur and the
> Mizrachi siddur published in Israel by Koren, and the Orot annotated
> Sefardic siddur, and it is clear that the DeSola Pool siddur is sort
> of, well, homogenized compared to the others. On the other hand, the
> differences and similarities between the different liturgical
> traditions are very instructive in indicating the relative antiquity
> of certain prayers.
--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com
sussmanbern
> Although DeSola Pool was a minister of the Bevis Marks sefardi synagogue
> (and I believe later moved to the USA) his machzorim and siddur were
> actually prepared for the UK ashkenazi market. I actually use DeSola
> machzorim (in preference to the Routledge, which is still the standard
> version in the United Synagogue) myself.
> ***
the printing history of the Singer siddur and its organizational
successors was sketchy ... well, sketchier than most of my knowledge.
I don't think we are talking about the same De Sola Pool
prayerbook. David De Sola Pool edited the "Book of Prayers" for the
Union of Sephardic Congregations (in NYC) in 1941, which is still in
print, with the very same printing plates, after more than 60 years.
Although it does differ from the Hertz in several places, it turns out
that other Sefardic siddurim (such as Orot) differ even more, which is
why I described it as homogenized.
The same De Sola Pool was distinguished during World War Two for his
energetic work with the Jewish Welfare Board - responsible for Jewish
chaplains in the US armed forces - including working up an abbreviated
siddur, machzor (Very Much abbreiviated), and haggadah for Jewish
soldiers, which tended to follow the Ashkenaz traditions.
In 1960 the same David De Sola Pool worked up The Traditional
Prayer Book for Sabbaths and Festivals (Sidur Leshabbos Veyom Tov),
published by Behrman House in NYC, -- and he did this for the
Rabbinical Council of America, which is the Orthodox Ashkenaz(!)
rabbinical assocation. So this was positively an Ashkenaz siddur
notwithstanding De Sola Pool's very reknown Sefardic background. This
RCA edition differs from his Sephardic siddur. One characteristic was
that, rather than work up his own English translation, he borrowed
liberally from several very polished English renderings of the prayers
and hymns (Behrman also provided very nice Hebrew printing). So it
may be that the UK editions you see are the RCA edition of 1960 rather
than the Sephardic Union edition of 1941. When ArtScroll came out
with its complete Ashkenaz siddur, circa 1980, the RCA put its name on
a special edition of it which added some prayers for the US and
Israeli governments.
---- In a previous note, another contributor mentioned a siddur
published in Baghdad which is supposed to be the gold standard for
Sefardic siddurim. I would appreciate some bibliographic info about
that book and its author/editor. Also, to reveal my complete
ignorance about some things, would someone explain to me to
differences and distinctions between Sefardic and Mizrachi
traditions/liturgy.
Having previously listed a bunch of annotated (in English)
siddurim, I should also mention The Encyclopedia of Jewish Prayer:
Askenazic and Sephardic Rites by Macy Nulman, published by Jason
Aronson Inc., 1993, 429 pages. This lists, according to the English
alphabet by transliteration (!), just about all the prayers you could
find in siddurim, machzorim, haggadot, and some other liturgical
sources, both Ashk. & Sef. Nulman is a retired cantor, very much into
writing reference works. I have marked up my copy unmercifully,
connected each entry with its page in Hertz and/or ArtScroll or other
editions; there are even some items that Nulman lists that don't seem
to have appeared in any English-language siddur. Unlike the Hertz,
Hirsch or ArtScroll annotations, Nulman's comments do not attempt to
discuss the turns of phrase or the theological implications of a
prayer but rather a background to its authorship and history within
the liturgy.
Lisa
<fi...@intxtdoc.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote in message
>news:3db80219...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...
>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 13:28:32 +0000 (UTC), "Fiona"
>> <fi...@intxtdoc.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Lisa" <li...@NOstarSPAMways.net> wrote in message
>> >news:3db6a19...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...
>> >
>> >> >Nu, so? We use Lehem for Bread, Arabic uses Lehm for meat. So are you
>> >going
>> >> >to say you only need to wash for a meaty meal?
>> >>
>> >> Do you think I am? Read both passages I mentioned here. Do you think
>> >> Rava got drunk and slaughtered Rav Zeira and that he came back to
>> >> life, or do you think he got drunk and attacked Rav Zeira and that he
>> >> got better?
>> >
>> >Did I say that?
>>
>> What a strange reply. You threw a strawman at me, suggesting that I'd
>> say you only need to wash for a fleishig meal, which you know I
>> wouldn't say. I then asked if you thought the story meant A or B, and
>> you replied "Did I say that?" Did you say *what*?
>
>Slip of the fingers, I meant "did I question that?" but it's moot anyway, I
>already explained why I brought the Lehem/Lehm cognate, which you also added
>too.
<nod> Okay.
>> >Both
>> >are mentioned in the Torah, the Arabs aren't. Why assume that because the
>> >land is called Arabia (first mention is from the Romans)
>>
>> Babylonians. Check your sources.
>
>Happy to, what's your source for the Babylonian mention? What's the context
>there, people, land, or language?
I believe there are mentions at the very least at the time of
Nabonidus (last king of the Chaldean Dynasty and father of
Belshazzar), who spent most of his reign playing amateur archaeologist
in Teima in Arabia. The reason he apparently went there was so that
his mother could be priestess of the moon goddess (the Medes were
preventing access to Haran).
>> The earliest use of the root "L-H-M" is for a warrior/hunter. Lahamu
>> is another name for the god Nimrud (Ninurta). This is the common
>> denominator between bread and meat. A hunter brought food. The word
>> milhama (war) comes from the same root.
>
>I wondered about the connection between Lehem (bread) and Laham (to fight),
>thanks. That gives L'humei reshef in Devarim 32:24 (usually translated -
>devour fiery bolts/darts) a little more sense, devour being an agressive way
>to consume. And that in turn makes Mishlei 4:17 much stronger, so rather
>than "they shall eat the bread of wickedness," Ki Lahamu Lehem Resha is
>better translated "they shall devour the bread of wickedness."
That's good. It's interesting that there's an El-Amarna letter that
refers to a town of Bit Ninib. At least, it was once transcribed that
way. But then they found that Ninib could also be read Ninurta. The
ib sign was found elsewhere matched with the two signs read ur and ta.
But those two signs, it turns out, can also be read ru and ud, and
there are those who think this deity was called Nimrud. And this
deity was a god of war and hunting. Sound familiar?
Anyway, there are texts that give parallel names for various deities.
And in one of these texts, this deity is matched with Lahamu. So it
may be that the Amarna letter is referring to Beit Lehem, which may
mean "House of the Warrior", rather than "House of Bread".
Furthermore, the letter that mentions this town refers to it
especially as belonging to the king of Urusalim.
>While Genesis 3:19 (by the sweat of your brow...) is ambiguous and could
>apply to both farming (bread) or hunting (meat) we know from Abraham Avinu
>in Bereishit 18:5 were he says Pat-Lehem (Pat being the word used by Aramaic
>for bread, Arabic btw has no letter p and uses Khobz for bread) that the
>Hebrew version is clearly defined as bread before Kabbalat Torah. This
>raises the interesting question (to me anyway) of whether the Hebrew usage
>is inidicative of a sedentary existance in Egypt or whether Abraham "HaIvri"
>already used it in his urban surroundings of Ur and Haran before taking up a
>nomadic life at 70?
>
>Where is the L*H*M = warrior/hunter from, and is it a generic term, or is
>your reference specific to Lahamu/Nimrod?
Well, other than the textual identification of Lahamu as a term
referring to the god Nimrud, there's the fact that the Hebrew word for
war is from that root. I don't actually know if there are cognates in
other languages that fit.
Lisa
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
snip
> Tikun Meir is still being printed. I saw a new-ish one on the
> dashboard of my gemara teacher's car.
Have you any idea where I might get one? My copy is falling apart.
Moshe Schorr
It is a tremendous Mitzvah to always be happy! - Reb Nachman of Breslov
May Eliyahu Chayim ben Sarah Henna (Eliot Shimoff) have a refuah Shlaima.
Fiona
"sussmanbern" <sussm...@hotmail.com> wrote
> ---- In a previous note, another contributor mentioned a siddur
> published in Baghdad which is supposed to be the gold standard for
> Sefardic siddurim.
I did say *probably*. And just to clarify further, it was/is actually
published by Tzalah Mantzour in Jerusalem, according to the nusach of Haham
Yosef Hayyim - the Ben Ish Hai - of Baghdad.
>I would appreciate some bibliographic info about
> that book and its author/editor. Also, to reveal my complete
> ignorance about some things, would someone explain to me to
> differences and distinctions between Sefardic and Mizrachi
> traditions/liturgy.
Unfortunately I do not have enough experience with Western Sephardi nusach
(Spanish & Portuguese, Greek/Turkish) to draw a comparison. As a general
overview from the times I have prayed in a Spanish & Portuguese Esnoga, I
tend to think they are much closer to the Ashkenasi but with
Portuguese/Ladino thrown in here and there.
> Having previously listed a bunch of annotated (in English)
> siddurim, I should also mention The Encyclopedia of Jewish Prayer:
> Askenazic and Sephardic Rites by Macy Nulman, published by Jason
> Aronson Inc., 1993, 429 pages. This lists, according to the English
> alphabet by transliteration (!), just about all the prayers you could
> find in siddurim, machzorim, haggadot, and some other liturgical
> sources, both Ashk. & Sef. Nulman is a retired cantor, very much into
> writing reference works. I have marked up my copy unmercifully,
> connected each entry with its page in Hertz and/or ArtScroll or other
> editions; there are even some items that Nulman lists that don't seem
> to have appeared in any English-language siddur.
The only Edut HaMizrah siddur I know of that has English translation is the
Orot, published in the USA according to the Syrian nusach, and following the
general style of Artscroll. Historically the Syrian community had little
influence, but since many of them have grown quite wealthy in the US their
influence has grown.
Fiona
Fiona
"Harry Weiss" <hjw...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:apfkl1$f4$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> sussmanbern <sussm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > "Fiona" <fi...@intxtdoc.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:<apbif9$6hf$1
The *gold standard* siddur for
> >> Eastern/Oriental Jewry is probably Teffilat Yesharim out of Baghdad,
and it
> >> is considerably different anything Ashkenazi.
> > =======
> > I am grateful for that identification, I had wondered what was the
> > model of Sefardic liturgy.
>
> I am making one comment based on your comment below. There is a nussach
> tefilla for edot Hamizrach often called Sephardim, which includes the
> Baghdadi Nussach, but there is also a diffeent nussach for the Greek/Turk
> and for Syrian (Aram Sovar), and N. Africa.
>
> What is frequently refered to a Sepahrd in the US is Nussach Sefard,
> which is an Ashenazi Nussach, started by the various Chassidic movements
> that incorporated many Sepahrd items, but it is not the same as true
Sepahrd.
I thought that Nussach Sephard was created by the Ari z"l, in Eretz Yisrael,
taking the best from both the major nusachs. It was adopted by the Hassidim
for that reason and because of the kabbalistic associations of the Ari
himself. It is of course the "official" nusach of Eretz Israel, being used
by most battei knesset, the army, and most state occasions where tefillah is
included.
Fiona
Jess Olson
You're right that the Nusah Sefard is the Nusah Ha-Ari z"l (not to be
confused with the nusah of Sefardi Jews, which has nothing to do with the
nusah Sefard), but I'm not sure about the conclusion that it is the
"official" nusah of Eretz Yisroel. I know that the "official" nusah among
Ashkenazi Jews (at least in Jerusalem, if not the rest of E"Y) is the
nusah ha-GR"A, due to the fact that many of the GR"A's students made
aliyah (in the old-fashioned, pre-state sense) in the early 19th century
and brought with them the customs of their teacher. I myself found that
in most shuls I davened, the nusah was nusah ha-GR"A, and all those who I
know who either became religious in Israel or who were born there follow
this nusah.
I don't know about the army, though.
JO
>
>
> Fiona
>
Raphael
>confused with the nusah of Sefardi Jews, which has nothing to do with the
>nusah Sefard), but I'm not sure about the conclusion that it is the
>"official" nusah of Eretz Yisroel. I know that the "official" nusah among
>Ashkenazi Jews (at least in Jerusalem, if not the rest of E"Y) is the
>nusah ha-GR"A, due to the fact that many of the GR"A's students made
>aliyah (in the old-fashioned, pre-state sense) in the early 19th century
>and brought with them the customs of their teacher. I myself found that
>in most shuls I davened, the nusah was nusah ha-GR"A, and all those who I
>know who either became religious in Israel or who were born there follow
>this nusah.
>
>I don't know about the army, though.
OK, here goes.
There were many regional versions of nusach throughout the world. The two most
popular traditional nuschaot are Nusach Ashkenaz, the European version, and the
Sepharadi Nusach also known as Nusach Edot Mizrach, of the Middle-East.
The AriZal davened the Sepharadi Nusach, since that is where he lived (the
Middle-East, not Spain). He explained many of the particulars of that Nusach
according to Kabbala.
When the Ashkenazim got into Kabbala with the advent of the Chasidic Movement,
they began making slight alterations to their Siddurim in line with the
comments made by the AriZal regarding the Sepharadi Siddur. These alterations
"al pi kabalas haAriZal" made the siddur look more like the Sepharadi siddur,
so people began calling this newly retouched Ashkanazi siddur, "Nusach
Sephard". What they meant to say was that it was the Ashkenazi Nusach with
alterations based on the AriZal, which is exactly what one Rebbe did, calling
his particular revision "Al Pi Nusach HaAriZal", and not the colloquial "Nusach
Sephard.
The GR"A's version is really Nusach Ashkenaz, with some difrerences due to the
fact that the GR"A preferred the original nuschaot appearing in older versions
of Ashkenaz. The Ashkenazi community in Jerusalem tends to daven according to
the GR"A's rulings. However, it seems to me that most of the Dati Leumi camp
davens Nusach Sephard. This is what I have seen in their Yeshivot and shuls.
Why?
I asked one Israeli and he told me that in Israel they consider Nusach Sephard
to be more "Zionist" because it is a form of "Kibutz Galuyot" of the main
versions of the siddur, and represents Ashkenazim and Sephardim coming together
to form a common nusach. Now of course this is not a Halachic justification.
But this is how many people seem to feel about it.
Apparently, Shlomo Goren, one fo the former Chief Rabbis of the State, created
something called "Nusach Achid", which was an attempt a better "bridging" the
two main versions, A and S. R.Ovadia Yosef, his co-chief rabbi, was deadset
against the whole idea. I have never seen one myself. If anyone knows where I
can get a copy, I would love to buy one. I try to collect various Nuschaot for
my library.
Raphael
----------------------------------------
If you reply to a post I wrote, please e-mail it to me as well.
Charles Vitez
himself. From memory, he was a minister at Bevis Marks around 1900. My
machzorim were printed around 1950s; but reprints based on the original
translation. I have seen 1920s versions but no first editions. I will look
up the dates and let you know. Also, I should be able to find out more about
where he went to in the USA (somehow Rhode Island sticks in the memory?).
Charles Vitez
"sussmanbern" <sussm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9d95e4ee.02102...@posting.google.com...
Lisa
I'm sure that it's incorrect. Rav Goren tried to declare it "Nusach
Achid", but it didn't take.
Lisa
Harry Weiss
First, the it is nuermous different derivation of the Nussach Harri that
is either the Sfard used by different Chassidic groups or The so call
nusach haari used by Chabad.
The Army created Nusach Achid which is basically the Nussach Sefard
(galician version) with a few minor changes from nussach Hagra. This was
adpated by Bnei Akiva and thus became the primary nussach of Asheknazim in
Israel.
> I don't know about the army, though.
> JO
>>
>>
>> Fiona
>>
--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com
Talqcom
>From: raphae...@aol.com (Raphael)
>Date: 10/27/2002 10:02 AM Eastern Standard Time
>The AriZal davened the Sepharadi Nusach, since that is where he lived (the
>Middle-East, not Spain). He explained many of the particulars of that Nusach
>according to Kabbala.
>I asked one Israeli and he told me that in Israel they consider Nusach
>Sephard
>to be more "Zionist" because it is a form of "Kibutz Galuyot" of the main
>versions of the siddur, and represents Ashkenazim and Sephardim coming
>together
Interesting. However the Air used the qabbalistic Sephardi nosah, which was
developed in N. Spain.
Original Sephardi nosah is very close ot Ashkenazi. E.g., tahanunim (including
lowering the head), most of kedusha, "ledor vador nagid godlekha ..., etc.are
identical.
A good examle of this nosah is the pre qabbalistic "siddur aram soba" printed
in Italy in 1525. Wholly absent is much of what is now known as "Sephardi."
Ray
News Admin
"Talqcom" <tal...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021027144712...@mb-me.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: The liturgy of Orthodox Judaism
> >From: raphae...@aol.com (Raphael)
> >Date: 10/27/2002 10:02 AM Eastern Standard Time
>
> >The AriZal davened the Sepharadi Nusach, since that is where he lived
(the
> >Middle-East, not Spain). He explained many of the particulars of that
Nusach
> >according to Kabbala.
>
> >I asked one Israeli and he told me that in Israel they consider Nusach
> >Sephard
> >to be more "Zionist" because it is a form of "Kibutz Galuyot" of the main
> >versions of the siddur, and represents Ashkenazim and Sephardim coming
> >together
>
> Interesting. However the Air used the qabbalistic Sephardi nosah, which
was
> developed in N. Spain.
Where in Northern Spain? This is very important because the Muslim conquest
only ever took over two third of the county, the northern third was alway
Xtian and the Jews who lived in that part maintained a connection with
French Jewry rather than with Babylon, via Kairouan, as existed in the
Southern Muslim two thirds. Until the Al-Andalus (Southern) Jews developed
their own yeshivot and battei din that were able to pasken (quite late in
the 800 occupation), all halakic decisions were passed to Babylon, so it is
likely then that they started to use the Siddur of Saadyah Gaon long before
they developed their own nusach. As the Reconquesta gradually marched South,
the French (Askhenazi) influence increased as the connections with the South
and Baghdad was cut and the connection with the North and France/Askenaz was
opened up to new communities.
> Original Sephardi nosah is very close ot Ashkenazi. E.g., tahanunim
(including
> lowering the head), most of kedusha, "ledor vador nagid godlekha ...,
etc.are
> identical.
Because by the time Granada fell in 1492 most of Spanish Jewry had been been
exposed to Ashkenazi, rather than Baghdadi, influence for hundreds of years.
> A good examle of this nosah is the pre qabbalistic "siddur aram soba"
printed
> in Italy in 1525. Wholly absent is much of what is now known as
"Sephardi."
If it was Nusach Italia it never was Sephardi! The Italian community had
their own nusach going back to before Sephardi hit the scene. That said the
oldest known siddur, is that of Saadyah Gaon of Babylon.
Fiona
Lisa
Actually, his Nusach Achid *was* Nusach Ari.
>R.Ovadia Yosef, his co-chief rabbi, was deadset
>against the whole idea. I have never seen one myself. If anyone knows where I
>can get a copy, I would love to buy one. I try to collect various Nuschaot for
>my library.
You already have this one. <grin>
Lisa
Raphael
>>Apparently, Shlomo Goren, one fo the former Chief Rabbis of the State,
>created
>>something called "Nusach Achid", which was an attempt a better "bridging"
>the
>>two main versions, A and S.
>
>Actually, his Nusach Achid *was* Nusach Ari.
>
>>R.Ovadia Yosef, his co-chief rabbi, was deadset
>>against the whole idea. I have never seen one myself. If anyone knows
>where I
>>can get a copy, I would love to buy one. I try to collect various Nuschaot
>for
>>my library.
>
>You already have this one. <grin>
>
>Lisa
>
Lisa, please clarify this point for me.
Are you saying that the "Nusach Achid" of Shlomo Goren is Nusach Ari?
Do you mean R'Shneur Zalman's nusach or the other kind of Chasidish Nusach
sefard?
Why then do people have this term "Nusach Achid"?
Thanks,
Robert
same; they are based on the order of prayers listed by Rav Amram Gaon (9th
century Babylon), the siddur of Rav Saadyah Gaon (10th century) and on
Simcha ben Samuel's "Machzor Vitry" (11th century France), which was based
on the work of his teacher, Rashi. These rites come in many variations;
however four major liturgical rites comprise the majority:
(1) The Yemenites are Jews from Yemen, at the southern tip of the Arabian
peninsula; they use Nusach Temen. There are two main Yemenite ethnic groups,
Shamai and Baladi, each with their own liturgical variants.
(2) The Sephardim are those Jews from, or desended from, the Jews of Spain
and Portugal, and can be found in Western Europe, North Africa, and in many
countries of the near-east, including Israel. They use a rite called Minhag
Sepharad or Minhag Sepharadi, or sometimes called Nusach Aedot ha'mizrach
(rite of the community of Eastern Jews). All of these names refer to the
same rite. There are a number of Sephardic variations, including: The London
rite; the Amsterdam rite; the North African rite; Nusach Yerushalayim.
(3)The Ashkenazim are the Jews of Eastern Europe, including those of German,
Polish, Lithuanian and Russian descent. They use a rite called Nusach
Ashkenaz. There are a number of variations, including: Southwest Ashkenazi;
Minhag Poland; Nusach Ha'Gra (the Siddur as adapted by the Vilna Gaon);
Minhagim of Eretz Yisrael, a version of the Nusach Ha'Gra adapted by the
Vilna Gaon's followers in Israel; Nusach Conservative (Masorti). The
Conservative nusach is an Ashkenazic nusach whose distinctive elements came
from theologians within the Jewish Theological Seminary, and from rabbis and
laypeople in the movement's Ramah camp system.
All versions of Nusach Asheknaz have adopted a few parts of the Lurianic
rite (described below). For example, portions of Kabbalat Shabbat, the
saying of "Mizmor Shir Chanukat Habayit" before "Barukh She'amar" as well as
a few others.
Nusach Ashkenaz in Eretz Yisrael is slightly different than Nusach Ashkenaz
the diaspora. For example, "Sim Shalom" is said on Mincha Shabbat and not
"Shalom Rav". "Ain K'Elokaenu" is said daily and not just on Shabbat. A
second "Barichu" is added at the end of Shacharit on days when there is no
Torah reading.
(4) The Hasidic (Kabbalistic) rite.
Hasidic Jews (such as Lubavitch, Satmar, and Gerer Hasidim) do not use the
standard Ashkenazic or Sephardic rite. Instead, they use a rite based the
Lurianic Siddur. This practice was developed by Rabbi Yitchak Luria, aka the
Ari. He was a 16th century Kabbalist (practitioner of Jewish esoteric
mysticism) who lived in Sefat, Israel. He created special kavvanot
(statements of intentions) relating to a mystical union of man and God. He
believed that one could derive a precise text in which every letter had
cosmic importance, such that when recited properly, one could repair and
perfect the ultimate basis of reality. He combined kabbalistic prayers with
the Sephardic liturgy, and eventually developed his own unqiue nusach, the
Lurianic nusach. The exact text of the Ari's actual siddur was not
preserved; its influence lies in the Hasidic siddurim available today.
Over time, the Ari's siddur spread to the Jews of Europe, where it became
popular among the Hasidim. Since Hasidim were Ashkenazim, they felt it
inappropriate to pray from a Sephardic text. Thus, they adapted his siddur
by taking an Ashkenaic siddur, and adding to it Sephardic and Kabbalistic
elements of the Ari's siddur. This resulted in the formation of a new nusah.
Confusingly, this new rite became known to European Jews as "Nusach
Sepharad", even though it is not really a Sephardic rite. Thus, to avoid
confusion, the actual Sephardic rite is now denoted by either Minhag
Sepharad (or Minhag Sepharadi), or Nusach Aedot Hamizrach (Nusach of the
eastern community).
A number of editions of Hasidic siddurim are in use today by Hasidic Jews.
One of the most widely seen is the Lubavitch [Habad] Siddur. The first
Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liady, edited a version of the
Hasidic siddur now termed Nusach ha-Arizal, or Nusach Ha'Ari. It has become
the official rite of Lubavitcher Hasidim.
It is interesting to note that in Israel, most Jews who use a Hasidic rite -
even non-Lubavitchers - use the Lubavitch version, and not the more general
Hasidic one. Seth Kaddish notes that "Popular Israeli siddurim such as
'Rinat Yisrael' and 'Koren' are based on Nosach ha-Arizal in their 'Nosach
Sefarad' editions."
The popular Israeli siddur "Rinat Yisrael", which was edited by R. Tal, is
now available in three variations: Ashkenaz, Sefarad (Hasidic), and Aedot
Hamizrach (Sephardic). The Haredim (ultra-Orthodox) community does not use
either "Rinat Yisrael" or "Koren" because both of them contain the prayer
for the State of Israel and the additional prayers to be said on Yom
Ha'Atzmaut and Yom Yerushalim.
Variations of the Sephardic rites include:
The Italian rite (rite of the Loazim); The Romaniot (Romali, Greek,
Romanian) rite, used in the Balkan countries.
The Baghdadi rite
http://members.tripod.com/~adaniel/index.html
There are a series of prayerbook in use among the Israel Defense Forces
known as "Nusach Achid," which some people mistakenly believe is a hybrid of
the Ashkenazic and Sephardic rites. This is incorrect. These prayerbooks are
the standard Nusach Sefard, the Hasidic rite.
http://www.ottmall.com/mj_ht_arch/v35/mj_v35i30.html#CJH
For further reading:
"Kavvanah: Directing the Heart in Jewish Prayer" Seth Kadish, Jason Aronson,
Inc.
"To Pray As A Jew" by Hayim HaLevy Donin. (384 pages).
"Entering Jewish Prayer" Reuven Hammer.
"Jewish Liturgy: A Comprehensive History" Ismar Elbogen, translated by
Raymond P. Scheindlin, JPS, 1993
"The Encyclopaedia of Jewish Prayer: Ashkenazic and Sephardic Rites" Macy
Nulman, Jason Aronson Inc., 1993
For a good Sidur that explains Nusach Ashkenaz in general and is according
to the German rite look for Rabbi Isaac Seligman Baer's "Siddur Avodat
Yisrael". It is one of the first scholarly works analyzing the differences
in the rites as they've come down to us.
Shalom,
Robert Kaiser
Robert
"Fiona" <fi...@intxtdoc.demon.co.uk> wrote
> I thought that Nussach Sephard was created by the Ari z"l, in Eretz
Yisrael,
> taking the best from both the major nusachs. It was adopted by the
Hassidim
> for that reason and because of the kabbalistic associations of the Ari
> himself. It is of course the "official" nusach of Eretz Israel, being used
> by most battei knesset, the army, and most state occasions where tefillah
is
> included.
The origin of this Hasidic nusach was based on the work of Rabbi Yitchak
Shalom,
Robert Kaiser
Harry Weiss
>> A good examle of this nosah is the pre qabbalistic "siddur aram soba"
> printed
>> in Italy in 1525. Wholly absent is much of what is now known as
> "Sephardi."
> If it was Nusach Italia it never was Sephardi! The Italian community had
> their own nusach going back to before Sephardi hit the scene. That said the
> oldest known siddur, is that of Saadyah Gaon of Babylon.
I thought Aram Soba was the Syrian (Aleppo) nussach.
Harry Weiss
>>
>>>Apparently, Shlomo Goren, one fo the former Chief Rabbis of the State,
>>created
>>>something called "Nusach Achid", which was an attempt a better "bridging"
>>the
>>>two main versions, A and S.
>>
>>Actually, his Nusach Achid *was* Nusach Ari.
>>
>>>R.Ovadia Yosef, his co-chief rabbi, was deadset
>>>against the whole idea. I have never seen one myself. If anyone knows
>>where I
>>>can get a copy, I would love to buy one. I try to collect various Nuschaot
>>for
>>>my library.
>>
>>You already have this one. <grin>
>>
>>Lisa
>>
> Lisa, please clarify this point for me.
> Are you saying that the "Nusach Achid" of Shlomo Goren is Nusach Ari?
> Do you mean R'Shneur Zalman's nusach or the other kind of Chasidish Nusach
> sefard?
The Nussach Achid siddurim are more similar to regular Chasidish Sefard
than Chabad Ari.
> Why then do people have this term "Nusach Achid"?
> Thanks,
> Raphael
> ----------------------------------------
> If you reply to a post I wrote, please e-mail it to me as well.
--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com
Harry Weiss
There are serious errors in this posts as well as internal conflicts.
> The liturgical rite that Jews use - called a nusach - are basically the
> same; they are based on the order of prayers listed by Rav Amram Gaon (9th
> century Babylon), the siddur of Rav Saadyah Gaon (10th century) and on
> Simcha ben Samuel's "Machzor Vitry" (11th century France), which was based
> on the work of his teacher, Rashi. These rites come in many variations;
> however four major liturgical rites comprise the majority:
> (1) The Yemenites are Jews from Yemen, at the southern tip of the Arabian
> peninsula; they use Nusach Temen. There are two main Yemenite ethnic groups,
> Shamai and Baladi, each with their own liturgical variants.
> (2) The Sephardim are those Jews from, or desended from, the Jews of Spain
> and Portugal, and can be found in Western Europe, North Africa, and in many
> countries of the near-east, including Israel. They use a rite called Minhag
> Sepharad or Minhag Sepharadi, or sometimes called Nusach Aedot ha'mizrach
> (rite of the community of Eastern Jews). All of these names refer to the
> same rite. There are a number of Sephardic variations, including: The London
> rite; the Amsterdam rite; the North African rite; Nusach Yerushalayim.
Most Sephardim in the Middle East did not come from Spain, but remained in
Babylong (currently Iraq) since the destruction of the 2nd Temple. there
were major institutes of learning upon which much of the siddurim are
based. The Gaonim thorugh R. Hai Gaon were in Iraq. This inlcudes
the Persian and Syrian communities, though some of the Syrian may have
moved from Israel without going through Iraq.
Some of N. Africans came from Spain. Most did not, but predate the Spanish
Jewish community.
The Main true Sephardi from Spain communities went to Greece and Turkey.
Smaller communites were found in Holland and Brazil.
> (3)The Ashkenazim are the Jews of Eastern Europe, including those of German,
> Polish, Lithuanian and Russian descent. They use a rite called Nusach
> Ashkenaz. There are a number of variations, including: Southwest Ashkenazi;
> Minhag Poland; Nusach Ha'Gra (the Siddur as adapted by the Vilna Gaon);
> Minhagim of Eretz Yisrael, a version of the Nusach Ha'Gra adapted by the
> Vilna Gaon's followers in Israel; Nusach Conservative (Masorti). The
> Conservative nusach is an Ashkenazic nusach whose distinctive elements came
> from theologians within the Jewish Theological Seminary, and from rabbis and
> laypeople in the movement's Ramah camp system.
The conservative nussach, unlike the other, is not a halachic one, but
one that rejects Judaism's fundamental belief of the reinstituion of
Temple Sacrifice and newer versions include additional heresies.
> All versions of Nusach Asheknaz have adopted a few parts of the Lurianic
> rite (described below). For example, portions of Kabbalat Shabbat, the
> saying of "Mizmor Shir Chanukat Habayit" before "Barukh She'am2ar" as
well as
> a few others.
> Nusach Ashkenaz in Eretz Yisrael is slightly different than Nusach Ashkenaz
> the diaspora. For example, "Sim Shalom" is said on Mincha Shabbat and not
> "Shalom Rav". "Ain K'Elokaenu" is said daily and not just on Shabbat. A
> second "Barichu" is added at the end of Shacharit on days when there is no
> Torah reading.
This is all mentioned above regarding the nussach Hagra.
The Chabad siddur is used only by Chabad and is not widely used by anyone
else.
> It is interesting to note that in Israel, most Jews who use a Hasidic rite -
> even non-Lubavitchers - use the Lubavitch version, and not the more general
> Hasidic one. Seth Kaddish notes that "Popular Israeli siddurim such as
> 'Rinat Yisrael' and 'Koren' are based on Nosach ha-Arizal in their 'Nosach
> Sefarad' editions."
As you referred somewhat above all Nussach Sfard is a version of Nussach
Haari. Most Jews in Israel who use a Chassidic nusach do NOT use the the
Lubaaavitch nussach, nor is the Rinat Yiroel or any other Israeli siddur
based on Chabad Nusach. Due to the lack of a prolifiration of Chabad
Houses in Israel compared to the US, Chabad nussach is used much less in
Israel than the US. See you own comments below whcih conflict with the
above.
> The popular Israeli siddur "Rinat Yisrael", which was edited by R. Tal, is
> now available in three variations: Ashkenaz, Sefarad (Hasidic), and Aedot
> Hamizrach (Sephardic). The Haredim (ultra-Orthodox) community does not use
> either "Rinat Yisrael" or "Koren" because both of them contain the prayer
> for the State of Israel and the additional prayers to be said on Yom
> Ha'Atzmaut and Yom Yerushalim.
Rinat Yisroel also comes in chutz Laret editions.
> The Baghdadi rite
> http://members.tripod.com/~adaniel/index.html
> http://www.ottmall.com/mj_ht_arch/v35/mj_v35i30.html#CJH
> For further reading:
> Shalom,
> Robert Kaiser
--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com
Lisa
(Raphael) wrote:
>>
>>>Apparently, Shlomo Goren, one fo the former Chief Rabbis of the State,
>>created
>>>something called "Nusach Achid", which was an attempt a better "bridging"
>>the
>>>two main versions, A and S.
>>
>>Actually, his Nusach Achid *was* Nusach Ari.
>>
>>>R.Ovadia Yosef, his co-chief rabbi, was deadset
>>>against the whole idea. I have never seen one myself. If anyone knows
>>where I
>>>can get a copy, I would love to buy one. I try to collect various Nuschaot
>>for
>>>my library.
>>
>>You already have this one. <grin>
>>
>>Lisa
>>
>
>Lisa, please clarify this point for me.
>
>Are you saying that the "Nusach Achid" of Shlomo Goren is Nusach Ari?
Almost entirely.
>Do you mean R'Shneur Zalman's nusach or the other kind of Chasidish Nusach
>sefard?
>
>Why then do people have this term "Nusach Achid"?
There may be a minor difference here or there, but it's substantially
the same. And there's a term nusach achid (which many people use for
Nusach Sefarad itself) because Achid sounds nice. It sounds unifying,
which was actually what Rav Goren had in mind.
Lisa
Charles Vitez
been the minister at Bevis Marks in the 1840s. There is a picture of him on
the Bevis Marks web-site, wearing a tricorne hat.
One of my machzorim, dated 1956 is stated to be the 14th edition (the rest
are called "revised edition", but since it was published by Shapiro
Vallentine, I suspect the revisions were between minor and insignificant).
I am pretty sure there was a short article about him in the (London) Jewish
Chronicle, but I have not been able to locate it. I seem to have been kicked
off their web-site once again.
Charles Vitez
"Charles Vitez" <vi...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:aph5vv$625$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
Talqcom
>Date: 10/27/2002 7:19 PM Eastern Standard Time
>I thought Aram Soba was the Syrian (Aleppo) nussach.
>
It is. She confused *printing* in Italy with artciulating an Italian rite.
Italy was the printing place of choice for the Sephardim for hundreds of years.
*Most* of the early works by Ottoman Empire Jews were printed in Italy.
Ray
Talqcom
>Most Sephardim in the Middle East did not come from Spain, but remained in
>Babylong (currently Iraq) since the destruction of the 2nd Temple.
Not really. Most are descendants of Spanish Exiles. Even the Musta'arab
liturgy of pre 1500s Syria is Andalusian, there having been a wave of
immigration from 1100s Spain.
>Some of N. Africans came from Spain. Most did not, but predate the Spanish
>Jewish community.
No. The Spanish Exiles vastly outnumbered the original N. Africans. As they
did throughout the Near East.
That is why the Sephardi ritual is universal, and corresponds to the
megurashim. Exceptions are the Yemeni.
>The Main true Sephardi from Spain communities went to Greece and Turkey.
Simply untrue. 80% of Egyptians, Syrians and Moroccans are Spanish Exiles.
Ray
Raphael
>liturgy of pre 1500s Syria is Andalusian, there having been a wave of
>immigration from 1100s Spain.
>
>
The last several weeks has seen Sephardi Haftaras being much shorter than the
Ashkenazi one.
What would be wrong with an Ashkenazi shul adopting the Sephardi Haftaras as a
measure to cut down on Tircha D'Tzibura (inconveniencing the community)?
Fiona
> >Subject: Re: The liturgy of Orthodox Judaism
> >From: Harry Weiss hjw...@panix.com
> >Date: 10/27/2002 7:19 PM Eastern Standard Time
>
> >I thought Aram Soba was the Syrian (Aleppo) nussach.
> >
>
> It is. She confused *printing* in Italy with artciulating an Italian
rite.
I did say "if it is..." not being familiar with the Aram Soba I could not
know whether is was Nusach Italia, or any other.
Fiona
Fiona
> >Subject: Re: Different Jewish liturgies and nusachs - Was: The liturgy
of
> >Orthodox Judaism
> >From: Harry Weiss hjw...@panix.com
>
> >Most Sephardim in the Middle East did not come from Spain, but remained
in
> >Babylong (currently Iraq) since the destruction of the 2nd Temple.
>
> Not really. Most are descendants of Spanish Exiles. Even the Musta'arab
> liturgy of pre 1500s Syria is Andalusian, there having been a wave of
> immigration from 1100s Spain.
And what is your source for that claim? Spanish names were not exactly
common in Baghdad, and there is very little Portuguese in the Baghdadi
minhagim.
> >Some of N. Africans came from Spain. Most did not, but predate the
Spanish
> >Jewish community.
>
> No. The Spanish Exiles vastly outnumbered the original N. Africans. As
they
> did throughout the Near East.
Just how many Jews do you think there were in Spain in 1492, that when they
were expelled they could outnumber all the local communities in Morocco,
Algeria, Tunisia, Lybia, Greece, Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq?
The maghreb got the majority of Spanish Jews in 1492 or more accurately
after the 1498 Portuguese expulsion, for purely economic reasons, the more
money you had the sooned you could leave and the further you could travel.
Firstly the vast majority of Spanish Jews converted to Xtianity in 1492
rather than go into "exile", secondly those who couldn't afford to travel
far went overland into Portugal, to be either converted by force or for
those who managed to scrape the money together and got to the ports before
they were closed, flee to Morocco. For this reason the Moroccan nusach and
minhagim are very close to the Spanish and Portuguese communities of London
and Amsterdam, and their decendants in the Caribbean. And these are all very
different to our Baghdadi minhagim.
> That is why the Sephardi ritual is universal, and corresponds to the
> megurashim. Exceptions are the Yemeni.
Sephardi "ritual" is universal, how do you explain the vast differences
between what goes on in a Spanish and Portuguese 'Esnoga' and a Baghdadi bet
knesset? And they vastly different.
> >The Main true Sephardi from Spain communities went to Greece and Turkey.
>
> Simply untrue. 80% of Egyptians, Syrians and Moroccans are Spanish
Exiles.
80% were do you get that figure from?
Fiona
Charles Vitez
cannot sing in tune.
Our rabbis, who prescribed a different tune for the haftoras were really
smart. It would be difficult, after the "high" of the reading of the law
cantillation, to resume the more melodic tunes for musaf (smoothly changing
gear), without the intermediate step of the haftorah cantillation.
Charles Vitez
"Raphael" <raphae...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021028101540...@mb-ci.aol.com...
sussmanbern
> My dating for the Reverend D De Sola Pool was a little out. He seems to have
> been the minister at Bevis Marks in the 1840s. There is a picture of him on
> the Bevis Marks web-site, wearing a tricorne hat.
> > himself. From memory, he was a minister at Bevis Marks around 1900. My
> > machzorim were printed around 1950s; but reprints based on the original
> > translation. I have seen 1920s versions but no first editions. I will look
> > up the dates and let you know. Also, I should be able to find out more
> about
> > where he went to in the USA (somehow Rhode Island sticks in the memory?).
The David De Sola Pool of whom I was speaking, the leader of the
Spanish & Portuguese Synagogue in NYC was born in 1885 in England,
died in NY 1970. He had been a rabbi at the S&P Synagogue in NYC
since 1907.
He was born, however, in England, which may indicate an English
dynasty of De Sola Pools. Yes, I remember reading of scholarly works
by earlier De Sola Pools but at this late date I cannot remember any
details, such as their names or the names of their books. Evidently
the NYC rabbi came from a distinguished family. An attempt to find
them in the US internet has been unavailing but perhaps Anglo Jewish
resources has material on them.
Talqcom
>Orthodox Judaism
>And what is your source for that claim?
Perception.
>Spanish names were not exactly
>common in Baghdad,
You assume Baghdad=Near East. I do not. Nonetheless, Andalusain exiles had
**Arabic** names. Megurashim Arabicized their names:
De Trani --> Mitrani;
Angel --> Malakhi; etc.
Syrians and Egyptians and Israelites and Moroccans have many many Spanish
names.
>and there is very little Portuguese in the Baghdadi
>minhagim.
Baghdad does not the entire Near East make. Yet, in Baghdadi satellite
communities, such as Bombay, numerous Spanish names are found. Halegua, etc.
>Just how many Jews do you think there were in Spain in 1492, that when they
>were expelled they could outnumber all the local communities in Morocco,
>Algeria, Tunisia, Lybia, Greece, Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria,
Spanish exiles had been streaming to the Arabic speaking places on the list
since the late 1100s.
In Turkey and Greece the Romanotes were completely swallowed up except in a few
places like Janina.
Iraq is a different story, but not devoid of megurashim. They even made it to
Yemen.
>Firstly the vast majority of Spanish Jews converted to Xtianity in 1492
Vast majority? In 1492? No.
>For this reason the Moroccan nusach and
>minhagim are very close to the Spanish and Portuguese communities of London
>and Amsterdam, and their decendants in the Caribbean.
They are closer to the Turkish. Nearly identical maqamim for nearly identical
purposes. Also similar to the Spanish/Portuguese.
>And these are all very
>different to our Baghdadi minhagim.
Again, Baghdad is not the entire Near East.
>Sephardi "ritual" is universal, how do you explain the vast differences
>between what goes on in a Spanish and Portuguese 'Esnoga' and a Baghdadi bet
>knesset?
You picked the two least common extrema. And yet the maqam for the Yamim
nora'im is still nearly identical.
>80% were do you get that figure from?
Egyptians, Syrians, and Moroccans. The present day people as wel as their
respective histories and literature.
Ray
Talqcom
>Date: 10/28/2002 12:04 PM Eastern Standard Time
>> It is. She confused *printing* in Italy with artciulating an Italian
>rite.
>
>I did say "if it is..." not being familiar with the Aram Soba I could not
>know whether is was Nusach Italia, or any other.
The why assume the place of publication is determinative?
Ray
Fiona
Why not? Anyway I didn't, hence the "if" in my comment.
Fiona
Jonathan J. Baker
>I think that we must be talking about a descendant rather than the Rev
>himself. From memory, he was a minister at Bevis Marks around 1900. My
>machzorim were printed around 1950s; but reprints based on the original
>translation. I have seen 1920s versions but no first editions. I will look
>up the dates and let you know. Also, I should be able to find out more about
>where he went to in the USA (somehow Rhode Island sticks in the memory?).
David de Sola Pool was born in 1882; his grandfather Solomon had been
president of Bevis Marks. RDdSP became rabbi at Spanish/Portuguese in
New York in 1907, at the age of 25, and served for something like 50
years. The book about the Spanish-Portuguese says that he started the
translations early in his career. The machzorim were published in
1937 (RH) and 1939 (YK).
--
Jonathan Baker | Marches-wan, marches-two,
jjb...@panix.com | March the months all through and through
Web page <http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker>