Why no good music for adults on Hanukkah?
Robert
Adults Aurally Deprived on Hanukkah?" by Charles Davidson.
http://learn.jtsa.edu/hanukkah/hanessay2.shtml
Shalom,
Robert
Dan Kimmel
"Robert" <judai...@yahoo.com.spammenot> wrote in message
news:P9Fy9.863$hK4....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> SCJM readers might want to check out the provocative article, "Why Are
> Adults Aurally Deprived on Hanukkah?" by Charles Davidson.
>
>
> http://learn.jtsa.edu/hanukkah/hanessay2.shtml
>
It gets worse: Adam Sandler is releasing an animated film this month called
"Eight Crazy Nights" with the latest version of his "Hannukah Song."
Eliyahu Rooff
"Dan Kimmel" <dan.k...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:P%Ny9.7582$SY3.3...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Xmas songs, but they're hot sellers as sung by Neil Diamond and Barbra
Streisand....
Eliyahu
bac...@vms.huji.ac.il
It couldn't be worse that the lyrics of a song a few years ago:
"Happy Hannuka in Santa Monica" :-)
Josh
Susan Cohen
Dan Kimmel wrote:
Yeechch!
I can't stand him or that stupid "song" to begin with....
Susan
BlackMonk
"Susan Cohen" <fla...@hers.com> wrote in message
news:3DCBE973...@hers.com...
I liked Yidcore's version. Maybe if Adam Sander had included Joey Ramone,
I'd like his version more than I do now. Maybe not.
Paul
<bac...@vms.huji.ac.il> wrote in message
news:aqgjsf$5d5$1...@falcon.steinthal.us...
> It couldn't be worse that the lyrics of a song a few years ago:
> "Happy Hannuka in Santa Monica" :-)
>
> Josh
>
I believe that the actual song was "Hunukah With Monica" by Sean Altman. For
those interested, I've placed the lyrics below. For those who are easily
offended, please stop reading.
Hanukah With Monica
© 1998 Sean Altman & Rob Tannenbaum
The underwear she wore was so erotica
She liked to serve 'cause she was patriotica
She put that age-old myth to bed - 'bout Jewish girls not giving head
One thing she was not was underfed
He likes jazz, but she likes electronica
He plays sax, but she toots his harmonica
& every day she's in the news is one more bad day for the Jews
How long must we suffer through the blues
'Cause now it's Hanukah with Monica
It all seems so moronica
Hey you nosy paparazzi - let my people go eat matzi
Hanukah with Monica - It's so tragecomica
Stuffed her face with rugelach
She gave his thing a tugelach
He wagged his finger, said it's just platonica
While she drank him like a gin & tonica
She put the head in head of state
Tell Yasser Arafat to wait
It's secret service while you legislate
And now it's Hanukah with Monica
Light up your Cubanica
Eight whole days of goin' nuts - on the presidential putz
It's Hanukah with Monica - this plague is so bubonica
'tis the season to be noshin' - on big Bubba's hamentashen
Oh oval office dreidel - she made it hard as clay
On presidential kneepads - he just sees her beret....
Yes it's Hanukah with Monica - this condition's chronica
We all want to dance the hora - but she blew the whole menorah
Careful don't you make a mess - "That's Manischewitz on my dress"
Hanukah with Monica - this ends our symphonica
A Hanukind of Monikind of year....
Dr. Shlomo Argamon (Engelson)
"Dan Kimmel" <dan.k...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
See
http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/yidcore2?cdbaby=43ca8416af1d40b537da0b46d5b838d3
-Shlomo-
Ravchaz
"Light One Candle" is by Peter Yarrow of Peter, Paul and Mary.
"Lighting Up the World" is by Israeli rocker David Broza and American rocker
Peter Himmelman. You Israelis may have seen Peter recently as part of the "Shai
L'Yisrael" tour with Andy Statman.
The Broza/Himmelman tune is on the CD "Festival of Light" Vol. I. There was a
Vol. II as well -- two Hanukkah-themed CDs on Six Degrees records. They are
inconsistent but quite a bit of the material is very decent.
Charles Arian
Baltimore
bac...@vms.huji.ac.il
> I can think of at least two decent contemporary Hanukkah songs for adults.
Apropos "adult" [this one is dedicated to Ian]: in high school way back in
the mid-1960's, we always had a Chanuka assembly where we would invariably
sing MI YIMALEL GVUROT YISRAEL and when it came to sing the refrain "SHMA",
one clown in the class (who today is #5 in the hierarchy of the CIA)
would say "SCHMUCK" :-)
Brings back old memories.
Josh
Raphael
But there is a gorgeous version of "Haneiros Halolu", the declaration
traditionally said after lighting Chanuka candles, (before Maoz Tzur), composed
by some unknown (to me) Lubavitchers in the 19th century. Avraham Fried sings
it in a tape called "Hopp Cossak".
It is rather lengthy and the words repeat often. I could sing it for eight days
straight, driving my wife crazy in the process. The wordless intro is also
very stirring. R, support me on this one.
Raphael
----------------------------------------
If you reply to a post I wrote, please e-mail it to me as well.
Yisroel Markov
(Raphael) said:
>If you're looking for carol-like Chanukah songs, I can't help you.
>
>But there is a gorgeous version of "Haneiros Halolu", the declaration
>traditionally said after lighting Chanuka candles, (before Maoz Tzur), composed
>by some unknown (to me) Lubavitchers in the 19th century. Avraham Fried sings
>it in a tape called "Hopp Cossak".
>
>It is rather lengthy and the words repeat often. I could sing it for eight days
>straight, driving my wife crazy in the process. The wordless intro is also
>very stirring. R, support me on this one.
FWIW, I support you. I like this nigun a lot, too. AFAIK it was
composed in the times of the Mitteler Rebbe, and the legend is that it
was made to be so long in order to make the Rebbe stay in shul longer
after the lighting.
Yisroel Markov Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for unbiased analysis of the world DNRC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand
Jonathan J. Baker
>On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 17:56:09 +0000 (UTC), raphae...@aol.com
>(Raphael) said:
>>If you're looking for carol-like Chanukah songs, I can't help you.
>>
>>But there is a gorgeous version of "Haneiros Halolu", the declaration
>>traditionally said after lighting Chanuka candles, (before Maoz Tzur), composed
>>by some unknown (to me) Lubavitchers in the 19th century. Avraham Fried sings
>>it in a tape called "Hopp Cossak".
>>
>>It is rather lengthy and the words repeat often. I could sing it for eight days
>>straight, driving my wife crazy in the process. The wordless intro is also
>>very stirring. R, support me on this one.
>FWIW, I support you. I like this nigun a lot, too. AFAIK it was
>composed in the times of the Mitteler Rebbe, and the legend is that it
>was made to be so long in order to make the Rebbe stay in shul longer
>after the lighting.
There's a niggun archive on www.770live.com - can it be found there?
--
Jonathan Baker | Marches-wan, marches-two,
jjb...@panix.com | March the months all through and through
Web page <http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker>
Raphael
>>>traditionally said after lighting Chanuka candles, (before Maoz Tzur),
>composed
>>>by some unknown (to me) Lubavitchers in the 19th century. Avraham Fried
>sings
>>>it in a tape called "Hopp Cossak".
>>>
>>>It is rather lengthy and the words repeat often. I could sing it for eight
>days
>>>straight, driving my wife crazy in the process. The wordless intro is also
>>>very stirring. R, support me on this one.
>
>>FWIW, I support you. I like this nigun a lot, too. AFAIK it was
>>composed in the times of the Mitteler Rebbe, and the legend is that it
>>was made to be so long in order to make the Rebbe stay in shul longer
>>after the lighting.
>
>There's a niggun archive on www.770live.com - can it be found there?
Probably, but the guy who sings for that site does it acapella (sp?) and does
not have such a stirring voice. It is a good site to learn a nigun, not to
enjoy it.
But I found it today by google-ing it. here's the site:
www.thinkjewish.com/fried/hupp_cossack.html
Enjoy.
R
>
> If you're looking for carol-like Chanukah songs, I can't help you.
>
> But there is a gorgeous version of "Haneiros Halolu", the declaration
> traditionally said after lighting Chanuka candles, (before Maoz Tzur), composed
> by some unknown (to me) Lubavitchers in the 19th century. Avraham Fried sings
> it in a tape called "Hopp Cossak".
>
> It is rather lengthy and the words repeat often. I could sing it for eight days
> straight, driving my wife crazy in the process. The wordless intro is also
> very stirring. R, support me on this one.
If you are looking for support of your opinion of the Fried
rendition, I'm sorry I can't help you. I have not heard this
Fried tape. And being (to put it mildly) decidedly not a fan of
Fried, it is unlikely I would appreciate his rendition even if I
did hear it.
But regarding the melody itself, you have my full and
enthusiastic support. Not only is the melody soulful and
inspiring, but it brings back nostalgic memories of of one of the
highlights of the year with the Rebbe in 770. Even in the middle
of the week, the shul would be packed at 3:25 PM for Minchah.
Before Aleinu, the large crowd would suddenly fall silent as the
candles were lit in the original-size-model gold-plated menorah
patterned after the Rambam's drawing of the menorah in the Beis
HaMikdash, complete with the adorning goblets, knobs, and
blossoms. Then, the introductory bars of the Haneiros Halolu
melody would begin.
Departing from his normal custom of facing the eastern wall
throughout the davening, the Rebbe would turn to face the
menorah. A most solemn expression appeared on his face as he
silently mouthed the words along with the congregation. From time
to time he would glance in his siddur, and accasionaly his gaze
would sweep accross the shul, making eye contact with each
worshiper individually. All eyes were on the Rebbe at this time.
Finally, as the tempo of the music increased near its culmination
the Rebbe would suddenly begin swinging his arm to encourage the
singing, louder and faster. "Al nisecha, ve'al nifle'osecha,
ve'al yeshuosechah..." At last, the song would end, the Rebbe
turned back to face east, and Aleinu was begun, followed by
Kaddish.
Ashrei ayin ra'asah zos...
R
>
> If you're looking for carol-like Chanukah songs, I can't help you.
>
> But there is a gorgeous version of "Haneiros Halolu", the declaration
> traditionally said after lighting Chanuka candles, (before Maoz Tzur), composed
> by some unknown (to me) Lubavitchers in the 19th century. Avraham Fried sings
> it in a tape called "Hopp Cossak".
>
> It is rather lengthy and the words repeat often. I could sing it for eight days
> straight, driving my wife crazy in the process. The wordless intro is also
> very stirring. R, support me on this one.
If you are looking for support of your opinion of the Fried
Henry Goodman
"R" <rut...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:3DD6F38F...@concentric.net...
> Raphael wrote:
> >
>
> But regarding the melody itself, you have my full and
> enthusiastic support. Not only is the melody soulful and
> inspiring, but it brings back nostalgic memories of of one of the
> highlights of the year with the Rebbe in 770. Even in the middle
> of the week, the shul would be packed at 3:25 PM for Minchah.
> Before Aleinu, the large crowd would suddenly fall silent as the
> candles were lit in the original-size-model gold-plated menorah
> patterned after the Rambam's drawing of the menorah in the Beis
> HaMikdash, complete with the adorning goblets, knobs, and
> blossoms. Then, the introductory bars of the Haneiros Halolu
> melody would begin.
>
Can we assume that this menorah (presumably still there) differs from the
one in the beit hamikdash in having 8 lights rather than 7?
--
Henry Goodman
henry....@virgin.net
Harry Weiss
--
Harry J. Weiss
hjw...@panix.com
Yisroel Markov
<jjb...@panix.com> said:
>In <E> ey.m...@iname.com (Yisroel Markov) writes:
>
>>On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 17:56:09 +0000 (UTC), raphae...@aol.com
>>(Raphael) said:
>
>>>If you're looking for carol-like Chanukah songs, I can't help you.
>>>
>>>But there is a gorgeous version of "Haneiros Halolu", the declaration
>>>traditionally said after lighting Chanuka candles, (before Maoz Tzur), composed
>>>by some unknown (to me) Lubavitchers in the 19th century. Avraham Fried sings
>>>it in a tape called "Hopp Cossak".
>>>
>>>It is rather lengthy and the words repeat often. I could sing it for eight days
>>>straight, driving my wife crazy in the process. The wordless intro is also
>>>very stirring. R, support me on this one.
>
>>FWIW, I support you. I like this nigun a lot, too. AFAIK it was
>>composed in the times of the Mitteler Rebbe, and the legend is that it
>>was made to be so long in order to make the Rebbe stay in shul longer
>>after the lighting.
>
>There's a niggun archive on www.770live.com - can it be found there?
Yes -
http://www.770live.com/Eng770/nigunim/nigunPlay.asp?nigunId=Dovid_Hurwitz/053.rm&gif=053
but Raphael's observation re: quality is correct, plus it's missing
the lengthy, but quite pretty, intro. OTOH, Avraham Fried's version
has the problem of being, well, Avraham Fried's version. I hate what
he does to nigunim. If I want to listen to rock or disco I will darn
well isten to rock or disco - Jewish musicians don't have to do that.
R
I'm not sure whom you are including in "we." You can assume
anything you like. Whther the assumption will be correct is
another matter. In this case, the assumption would be both
correct and not correct.
The assumption that this menorah differs from the original in
having a number of lights not equal to 7 is correct. As you ought
know, it is forbidden to make a metal candellabrum that mimics
the one in the Temple in possessing 7 branches.
The assumption that this menorah has 8 lights is not correct. In
fact, it has (as do all Chanukah menorahs) 9 lights, one of them
being the shammes. The center branch of this menorah is about 30
cm taller than the others, and the shammes candle is placed
there.
You also made a presumption (the correctness of which you did not
question) that this menorah is "still there." That depends. If
you mean still brought into the shul and used during Chanukah,
then yes, it is still brought in and used. If you mean still
there this very day, then no, it is not there. It was removed
last year after Chanukah (as it has been removed every year after
Chanukah), dismantled, and placed in storage. It will IY"H be
brought back to the shul and put back together in its place this
coming Erev Chanukah (as has been done every year on Erev
Chanukah).
The menorah also differes from the original in height, for the
original is 18 handbreadths tall (exclusive of the lamps), whilst
this one, haveing an extra set of branches (to accommodate 4
lamps on each side instead of only 3) is 21 handbreadths tall
(exclusive of the extra-tall centerpiece, which accommodates the
shammes candle).
Raphael
"Haneiros Halolu", here's an older version. I happen to think that the
arrangement is //awful//, but here it is:
http://nigun.chassidus.ru/Nichoach/04/ra/20/06%20-%20Haneiros%20Halolu.ra
Raphael
>Lubavitch
>"Haneiros Halolu", here's an older version. I happen to think that the
>arrangement is //awful//, but here it is:
>
>
>http://nigun.chassidus.ru/Nichoach/04/ra/20/06%20-%20Haneiros%20Halolu.ra
It was pointed out to me that the link only provides a third of the song. True.
Sorry for getting everyone's hopes up.
The voices on the recording are beautiful, and the orchestral interludes are
nice, but I stand by my assessment that the instrumental accompaniment to the
singing is awful. I don't have the vocabulary to describe why I feel this way,
but I am sure that the words exist!
wsar
I picked up two CDs recently of Hanukkah music:
"Celebrate Hanukkah" (Various artists, published by Craig Taubman)
"Chaukkah in Story and Song" (Western Wind, narrated by Leonard Nimoy).
Both are excellent. There's more to Hanukkah music than than "I have a
little Dreidle" (though there's a great Jazz zersion of it on the Celebrate
Hanukkah CD.)
I particularly like the Ladino "Ocho Kandelikas"
--
Robert
R
>
> For those of you not impressed with Avraham Fried's rendition of the Lubavitch
> "Haneiros Halolu", here's an older version. I happen to think that the
> arrangement is //awful//, but here it is:
>
> http://nigun.chassidus.ru/Nichoach/04/ra/20/06%20-%20Haneiros%20Halolu.ra
That is the original Nichoach recording (c 1962). The singer is
Eli Lipsker. The orchestral interludes in this arrangement are
normally sung vocally. They have also "patchked" with the melody.
It probably follows the notations in "Sefer HaNigunnim," which
are not always accurate. And the link seems to download only the
first 1/3 or so of the nigun. Whatever its faults (and I am not
much bigger a fan of Lipsker than I am of Fried), I would not go
so far as to call this rendition "awful."
Henry Goodman
"R" <rut...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:3DDAE0D7...@concentric.net...
Thank you. I was, of course, aware that it is forbidden to make a metal
candelabrum with 7 lamps like the one in the Beit hamikdash; that is why I
was surprised you said it was patterned after Rambam's drawing so I asked
the question.
May you have the zechus to be present when the next Rebbe lights it for the
first time.
--
Henry Goodman
henry....@virgin.net
Micha Berger
: Thank you. I was, of course, aware that it is forbidden to make a metal
: candelabrum with 7 lamps like the one in the Beit hamikdash; that is why I
: was surprised you said it was patterned after Rambam's drawing so I asked
: the question.
Actually, it's RMMS's chiddush that the Rambam's own picture had the
arms in diagonals rather than curves.
An argument in favor of curved arms, which seems to be the opinion of
most rishonim, is by parallel to the spheres (nowadays we'd say "orbits
of celestial bodies").
An argument against is that this would be unique -- nothing else in
the Temple had arcs in the design.
All this assuming the menorah on the arch of Titus doesn't accurately
depict The Menorah, as opposed to one of the other menoros in the
Temple. If it were, there is no argument. However, it is way overly
decorated, and has six feet under the base rather than three.
-mi
--
Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy.
mi...@aishdas.org I awoke and found that life was duty.
http://www.aishdas.org I worked and, behold -- duty is joy.
Fax: (413) 403-9905 - Rabinranath Tagore
Micha Berger
: Actually, it's RMMS's chiddush that the Rambam's own picture had the
: arms in diagonals rather than curves.
Oops, dropped into Avodah-speak.
RMMS = haRav Menachem Mendel Shneerson zt"l, the 7th Lubavitcher Rebbe.
Use of the acronym evolved from a non-L chassid who was bothered by being
expected to know who "the Rebbe" another poster was writing about. After
all, he'd never call his rebbe "the Rebbe" in a forum consisting of people
who aren't fellow chassidim of that rebbe.
We also encourage YU people to refer to R' JB Soloveitchik as "RYBS"
rather than "the Rav" for similar reasons. BTW, in many Israeli O
communities "haRav" is R' Shelomo Zalman Aurbach.
R
>
> On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 22:18:22 +0000 (UTC), Henry Goodman <henry....@virgin.net> wrote:
> : Thank you. I was, of course, aware that it is forbidden to make a metal
> : candelabrum with 7 lamps like the one in the Beit hamikdash; that is why I
> : was surprised you said it was patterned after Rambam's drawing so I asked
> : the question.
>
> Actually, it's RMMS's chiddush that the Rambam's own picture had the
> arms in diagonals rather than curves.
It is NOBODY'S "chiddush." Lokk at the picture and see for
yourself. And the Rambam's own son mentions in his peirush on
Chumash that his father drew a picture of the menorah with
straight-line diagonal branches.
>
> An argument in favor of curved arms, which seems to be the opinion of
> most rishonim, is by parallel to the spheres (nowadays we'd say "orbits
> of celestial bodies").
What rishonim are those? Rash holds the branches were straight.
The Rambam ecidently does also. Ibn Ezra mentions them as being
round, but it is not clear whether he means that they were
curved, or whether he means that they were circular in
cross-section. R. Imanuel Chai Reiki writes that the curved
branches (which he erroneously ascribes to teh Rambam) would be
in keeping with certain kabbalistic concepts. But he does not so
state definitively. And in any case the Rambam's opinion is
settled. We have his own hand-drawn picture.
>
> An argument against is that this would be unique -- nothing else in
> the Temple had arcs in the design.
The stairs leading up to the ulam were circular, no?
>
> All this assuming the menorah on the arch of Titus doesn't accurately
> depict The Menorah, as opposed to one of the other menoros in the
> Temple. If it were, there is no argument. However, it is way overly
> decorated, and has six feet under the base rather than three.
An ironic point: the political entity that stylizes itself as
"reish tzmichas geulaseinu" adopts as its national coat of arms a
picture taken from a Roman arch that proclaims that the "Jews are
in captivity."
R
>
> May you have the zechus to be present when the next Rebbe lights it for the
> first time.
Thank you for your good wishes. Unfortunately, I am unable to
make any use of them, since I have no clue as to who this "next
Rebbe" might be, nor is there even a single candidate applying
for the position. Chanukah will be here in a few days, and so in
order to fulfill your blessing, time is of the essence. Please
forward to me ASAP the name of this candidate for next Rebbe,
along with a detailed resume, references, and a cover letter
stating what he sees as the duties and functions of Rebbe, and
how he plans to carry out these duties and functions. I'm not
promising anything, but I'll do what I can.
Jess Olson
> An ironic point: the political entity that stylizes itself as
> "reish tzmichas geulaseinu" adopts as its national coat of arms a
> picture taken from a Roman arch that proclaims that the "Jews are
> in captivity."
Actually, I think they'd say "reish tsmichat geulateinu." :-)
JO
>
Micha Berger
:> Actually, it's RMMS's chiddush that the Rambam's own picture had the
:> arms in diagonals rather than curves.
: It is NOBODY'S "chiddush." Lokk at the picture and see for
: yourself. And the Rambam's own son mentions in his peirush on
: Chumash that his father drew a picture of the menorah with
: straight-line diagonal branches.
Do you /really/ think the picture in a published Rambam the original
picture as drawn by the author?
See the picture as included in a standard Vilna Shas, the Rambam's
commentary, at the end of Menachos. Is that any proof the Rambam himself
had a picture there with round arms?
See "Encyclopedia le'Intanei haMiqdash veHamishkan", a five volume set,
the volume titled "Hamishkan veKeilav" includes the book "Ma'aseh Choshev"
with commentary. In section "Hamenorah", par 7, MC explicitly says
they were round. The commentator notes ad loc that this word "be'igul"
(in an arc) is added in a phrase that is otherwise taken from Menachos
28a. The following is from his survey of rishonim.
The only one to say explicitly that the arms are diagonal lines is
Rashi on Exodus 25:32.
Rambam, in the Mishneh Torah (Beis haBechirah 3:10) writes the more
ambiguous "and the continue and ascend". This comes from the braisa
(Melekhes haMishkan 10), the Yalkut (Pequdei 419) and the Talmud
(Menachos 28a).
The Chokhmas haMishkan (bottom of 4b) understands this idiom to mean they
were somewhat rounded. (I assume, that the continue, and then turn to go
upward.) That is also the source for arguing that this is to parallel the
spheres (or in modern terms, orbits) - which also number 7. Tr. Middos
says the lamps parallel the visible planets.
The L Rebbe is immanently qualified to argue with the ChM and MC about
the Rambam's position. However, it's not open-and-shut.
: R. Imanuel Chai Reiki writes that the curved
: branches (which he erroneously ascribes to teh Rambam) would be
: in keeping with certain kabbalistic concepts. But he does not so
: state definitively...
As I sit here with his ChM in front of me, I have no idea where
you get this from. He simply says "be'igul", it's the footnotes
which mention the parallel to the planets -- which is a mishnah,
not a kabbalah text.
:> An argument against is that this would be unique -- nothing else in
:> the Temple had arcs in the design.
: The stairs leading up to the ulam were circular, no?
There was no legal reason to have steps. The mishkan didn't.
...
: An ironic point: the political entity that stylizes itself as
: "reish tzmichas geulaseinu" adopts as its national coat of arms a
: picture taken from a Roman arch that proclaims that the "Jews are
: in captivity."
Sad, ain't it.
Worse: such candelabras with hexagonal bases -- a smaller hexagon
atop a smaller one, and with zoological decorations, were found in
temples of Zeus all over Turkey and western Greece.
The thing in front of the Keneset was a *pagan* symbol in origin!
(Azoi zogt R' Herzog, when they first accepted this version of
the menorah as a symbol of the state in '49.)
-mi
--
Micha Berger It isn't what you have, or who you are, or where
mi...@aishdas.org you are, or what you are doing, that makes you
http://www.aishdas.org happy or unhappy. It's what you think about.
Fax: (413) 403-9905 - Dale Carnegie
Micha Berger
: On Sun, 24 Nov 2002, R wrote:
:> An ironic point: the political entity that stylizes itself as
: Actually, I think they'd say "reish tsmichat geulateinu." :-)
It would be "reishit" (begining *of*).
FWIW, a common variant amongst students of R JB Soloveitchik in the US
puts a "shetehei" (that it should be) before the "reishit tzemichat
ge'ulateinu" (the begining of the sprouting of our redemption).
A blessing, rather than an eschotological and prophetic statement.
(Our shul, FWIW, started saying the old RCA prayer for Israel when the
current uprising began, and doesn't face this issue at all.)
R
>
> On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 00:04:00 +0000 (UTC), R <rut...@concentric.net> wrote:
> :> Actually, it's RMMS's chiddush that the Rambam's own picture had the
> :> arms in diagonals rather than curves.
>
> : It is NOBODY'S "chiddush." Lokk at the picture and see for
> : yourself. And the Rambam's own son mentions in his peirush on
> : Chumash that his father drew a picture of the menorah with
> : straight-line diagonal branches.
>
> Do you /really/ think the picture in a published Rambam the original
> picture as drawn by the author?
It is not a matter of belief. It is a matter of pragmatic fact.
It appears in the manuscript hand written by the author. An
entire manuscript (actually, I think it is assembled from parts
of several manuscripts) of the Peirush HaMishnayos is extant, and
this drawing appears therein.
>
> See the picture as included in a standard Vilna Shas, the Rambam's
> commentary, at the end of Menachos. Is that any proof the Rambam himself
> had a picture there with round arms?
The Vilna Shas was printed in Vilna. They did not have the
manuscript. We now do.
>
> See "Encyclopedia le'Intanei haMiqdash veHamishkan", a five volume set,
> the volume titled "Hamishkan veKeilav" includes the book "Ma'aseh Choshev"
> with commentary. In section "Hamenorah", par 7, MC explicitly says
> they were round. The commentator notes ad loc that this word "be'igul"
> (in an arc) is added in a phrase that is otherwise taken from Menachos
> 28a. The following is from his survey of rishonim.
Maasei Choshev (to which I referred above, written by R. Immanuel
Chai Reiki) did not have the manuscript, he did not see the
drawing, and he did not see Rabbeinu Avraham's commentary where
he explicitly refers to his father's drawing. The (Lubavitcher)
Rebbe states that the Maasei Choshev made his inference because
Rashi includes the word "be'alachson" while the Rambam does not;
but had he seen the above items, he would not have written what
he did.
>
> The only one to say explicitly that the arms are diagonal lines is
> Rashi on Exodus 25:32.
>
> Rambam, in the Mishneh Torah (Beis haBechirah 3:10) writes the more
> ambiguous "and the continue and ascend". This comes from the braisa
> (Melekhes haMishkan 10), the Yalkut (Pequdei 419) and the Talmud
> (Menachos 28a).
And that's why people used to think that the Rambam held
otherwise. But what are we to do now that we have seen his
drawing and have read what his son says, where he explicitly
includes the word alachson (actually, its Arabic equivalent).
>
> The Chokhmas haMishkan (bottom of 4b) understands this idiom to mean they
> were somewhat rounded. (I assume, that the continue, and then turn to go
> upward.) That is also the source for arguing that this is to parallel the
> spheres (or in modern terms, orbits) - which also number 7. Tr. Middos
> says the lamps parallel the visible planets.
So the Rambam was a Kabbalist?
>
> The L Rebbe is immanently qualified to argue with the ChM and MC about
> the Rambam's position. However, it's not open-and-shut.
It's pretty open and shut now that we have the drawing and
Rabbeinu Avraham's commentary.
> : R. Imanuel Chai Reiki writes that the curved
> : branches (which he erroneously ascribes to teh Rambam) would be
> : in keeping with certain kabbalistic concepts. But he does not so
> : state definitively...
>
> As I sit here with his ChM in front of me, I have no idea where
> you get this from. He simply says "be'igul", it's the footnotes
> which mention the parallel to the planets -- which is a mishnah,
> not a kabbalah text.
>
> :> An argument against is that this would be unique -- nothing else in
> :> the Temple had arcs in the design.
>
> : The stairs leading up to the ulam were circular, no?
>
> There was no legal reason to have steps. The mishkan didn't.
>
The Temple was built keyad HaShem alai hiskil; every feature was
built according to prophetic instruction.
> : An ironic point: the political entity that stylizes itself as
> : "reish tzmichas geulaseinu" adopts as its national coat of arms a
> : picture taken from a Roman arch that proclaims that the "Jews are
> : in captivity."
>
> Sad, ain't it.
>
> Worse: such candelabras with hexagonal bases -- a smaller hexagon
> atop a smaller one, and with zoological decorations, were found in
> temples of Zeus all over Turkey and western Greece.
>
> The thing in front of the Keneset was a *pagan* symbol in origin!
>
> (Azoi zogt R' Herzog, when they first accepted this version of
> the menorah as a symbol of the state in '49.)
May we speedily see nechamas Tziyon uvinyan Yerushalayim. Good
Yom Tov.
Yitzchak Goodman
>
> May we speedily see nechamas Tziyon uvinyan Yerushalayim. Good
> Yom Tov.
Good Yom Tov.
May you be inscribed and sealed for a good year
in the study of Chassidus and the ways of Chassidus.
Yitz
Raphael
>forward to me ASAP the name of this candidate for next Rebbe,
>along with a detailed resume, references, and a cover letter
>stating what he sees as the duties and functions of Rebbe, and
>how he plans to carry out these duties and functions. I'm not
>promising anything, but I'll do what I can.
>
>
>
It doesn't seem that any of the other rebbeim had to do all this work.
"stating what he sees as the duties and functions..."
Micha Berger
: The Vilna Shas was printed in Vilna. They did not have the
: manuscript. We now do.
So now you /do/ agree it's a chiddush (novellum), at least amongst
acharonim. So what's the problem?
I'm not permitted to give the name of who (re)discovered the idea,
and note that others disagree(d)?
:> The Chokhmas haMishkan (bottom of 4b) understands this idiom to mean they
:> were somewhat rounded. (I assume, that the continue, and then turn to go
:> upward.) That is also the source for arguing that this is to parallel the
:> spheres (or in modern terms, orbits) - which also number 7. Tr. Middos
:> says the lamps parallel the visible planets.
: So the Rambam was a Kabbalist?
No, someone who learned Tr. Middos.
: May we speedily see nechamas Tziyon uvinyan Yerushalayim. Good
: Yom Tov.
You too.
-mi
--
Micha Berger "I hear, then I forget; I see, then I remember;
mi...@aishdas.org I do, then I understand." - Confucious
http://www.aishdas.org "One can't compare hearing to seeing." - Mechilta
Fax: (413) 403-9905 "We will do and we will listen." - Israelites
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> I ought to drop this, as R is being unnecessarily hostile.
I've noticed that the two of you seem to push each others buttons.
I wonder why. <sigh>
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.
Henry Goodman
"R" <rut...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:3DE0189D...@concentric.net...
Well I don't suppose the Lubavitch hierarchy will appoint a new Rebbe in
time for Chanukah 5763 but I assume that eventually they will realise that
Rabbi M.M. Schneerson z"l passed away some years ago and the movement really
ought to have another living leader. I was merely expressing the wish that
you should live long enough to see such a great simchah.
BTW ever heard the expression "Yiftach b'doro k'Shmuel b'doro"
I am not sure why you were writing "Good YomTov" some days ago but have a
great Chanukah.
--
Henry Goodman
henry....@virgin.net
Creedmoor Chronicles, Ltd (Tirana, Albania)
news:ark3fp$jl7ga$2...@ID-113975.news.dfncis.de...
> On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 23:53:55 +0000 (UTC), Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
wrote:
> : Actually, it's RMMS's chiddush that the Rambam's own picture had the
> : arms in diagonals rather than curves.
>
> Oops, dropped into Avodah-speak.
>
> RMMS = haRav Menachem Mendel Shneerson zt"l, the 7th Lubavitcher Rebbe.
>
> Use of the acronym evolved from a non-L chassid who was bothered by being
> expected to know who "the Rebbe" another poster was writing about. After
> all, he'd never call his rebbe "the Rebbe" in a forum consisting of people
> who aren't fellow chassidim of that rebbe.
>
> We also encourage YU people to refer to R' JB Soloveitchik as "RYBS"
> rather than "the Rav" for similar reasons. BTW, in many Israeli O
> communities "haRav" is R' Shelomo Zalman Aurbach.
How do you encourage people to refer to the Admou"r meCreedmoor on Avodah?
Oops - he belongs on Avodah Zara.
IS
Jonathan J. Baker
>Micha Berger wrote:
>> Henry Goodman <henry....@virgin.net> wrote:
>> : Thank you. I was, of course, aware that it is forbidden to make a metal
>> : candelabrum with 7 lamps like the one in the Beit hamikdash; that is why I
>> : was surprised you said it was patterned after Rambam's drawing so I asked
>> : the question.
>> Actually, it's RMMS's chiddush that the Rambam's own picture had the
>> arms in diagonals rather than curves.
>It is NOBODY'S "chiddush." Lokk at the picture and see for
>yourself. And the Rambam's own son mentions in his peirush on
The picture isn't from the Rambam, it's from a later hand.
>Chumash that his father drew a picture of the menorah with
>straight-line diagonal branches.
>> An argument in favor of curved arms, which seems to be the opinion of
>> most rishonim, is by parallel to the spheres (nowadays we'd say "orbits
>> of celestial bodies").
>What rishonim are those? Rash holds the branches were straight.
> And in any case the Rambam's opinion is
>settled. We have his own hand-drawn picture.
Do we?
And why should the picture that is unaccompanied by textual support
from the Rambam himself be more dispositive than EVERY contemporary
2nd-Temple picture of the Menorah? If it were just the Arch of Titus,
vs. Rashi and this alleged Rambam picture, then I could see some
strength to the RMMS argument. But if you're arguing from a picture
that may or may not represent the Rambam's opinion, then the pictures
from the 2nd Temple period must have equal or greater weight. The
first straight-arm menorah appears in the Synagogue of Dura Europos
in the 3rd century CE. And even there most of the pictures show curved
arms. But there are Hasmonean-period coins, and ossuaries, from J'lem
and from Bet She'arim - which all show curved arms.
>> An argument against is that this would be unique -- nothing else in
>> the Temple had arcs in the design.
>The stairs leading up to the ulam were circular, no?
Yes, azoy shteit der mishne in Middois 2:5
>> All this assuming the menorah on the arch of Titus doesn't accurately
>> depict The Menorah, as opposed to one of the other menoros in the
>> Temple. If it were, there is no argument. However, it is way overly
>> decorated, and has six feet under the base rather than three.
>An ironic point: the political entity that stylizes itself as
>"reish tzmichas geulaseinu" adopts as its national coat of arms a
>picture taken from a Roman arch that proclaims that the "Jews are
>in captivity."
Not ironic at all:
1) it's a nice expression of the pasuk "az yomru bhagoyim..." As
in, turnabout is fair play.
2) it's supported by lots of other contemporary pictorial evidence.
--
Jonathan Baker | Hanuca, Xmas, & Saturnalia all begin on 25th of
jjb...@panix.com | the Winter Solstice Month. Coincidence?
<http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker/>
Jonathan J. Baker
> R <rut...@concentric.net> wrote:
>:> Actually, it's RMMS's chiddush that the Rambam's own picture had the
>:> arms in diagonals rather than curves.
>: It is NOBODY'S "chiddush." Lokk at the picture and see for
>: yourself. And the Rambam's own son mentions in his peirush on
>: Chumash that his father drew a picture of the menorah with
>: straight-line diagonal branches.
>Do you /really/ think the picture in a published Rambam the original
>picture as drawn by the author?
It does seem to be the Rambam's own picture. However, reading over it
and the footnotes in the Kapach Rambam, the Rambam explicitly said that
the picture was a sketch to show the number of gevi'im. Not their
placement, not the exact layout of the arms, etc., but an abstraction.
R' Kapach redraws the picture as he thinks it should have been, with
the gevi'im pointing the right way (in the picture they're upside down),
placed correctly (at the ends of the arms, not scattered up & down the
arms) etc. But even so both Rambam and R' Kapach hold the picture to
be an abstract sketch, not a depiction of how it actually was and was
supposed to be. Kapach includes a photograph of the manuscript, and
his own re-drafting.
>See "Encyclopedia le'Intanei haMiqdash veHamishkan", a five volume set,
>the volume titled "Hamishkan veKeilav" includes the book "Ma'aseh Choshev"
>with commentary. In section "Hamenorah", par 7, MC explicitly says
>they were round. The commentator notes ad loc that this word "be'igul"
>(in an arc) is added in a phrase that is otherwise taken from Menachos
>28a. The following is from his survey of rishonim.
>Rambam, in the Mishneh Torah (Beis haBechirah 3:10) writes the more
>ambiguous "and the continue and ascend". This comes from the braisa
>(Melekhes haMishkan 10), the Yalkut (Pequdei 419) and the Talmud
>(Menachos 28a).
His commentary in Menachos uses the same ambiguous phraseology.
>The Chokhmas haMishkan (bottom of 4b) understands this idiom to mean they
>were somewhat rounded. (I assume, that the continue, and then turn to go
>upward.) That is also the source for arguing that this is to parallel the
>spheres (or in modern terms, orbits) - which also number 7. Tr. Middos
>says the lamps parallel the visible planets.
>The L Rebbe is immanently qualified to argue with the ChM and MC about
"Immanently"? Interesting Freudian slip? Since the claims of the radical
L. fringe hinge on the immanence of God in the Rebbe being most eminently
manifest?
>the Rambam's position. However, it's not open-and-shut.
>: R. Imanuel Chai Reiki writes that the curved
>: branches (which he erroneously ascribes to teh Rambam) would be
>: in keeping with certain kabbalistic concepts. But he does not so
>: state definitively...
>As I sit here with his ChM in front of me, I have no idea where
>you get this from. He simply says "be'igul", it's the footnotes
>which mention the parallel to the planets -- which is a mishnah,
>not a kabbalah text.
>:> An argument against is that this would be unique -- nothing else in
>:> the Temple had arcs in the design.
>: The stairs leading up to the ulam were circular, no?
>There was no legal reason to have steps. The mishkan didn't.
The mishna does say to have steps. I think the ulam was somewhat
elevated.
>...
>: An ironic point: the political entity that stylizes itself as
>: "reish tzmichas geulaseinu" adopts as its national coat of arms a
>: picture taken from a Roman arch that proclaims that the "Jews are
>: in captivity."
>Sad, ain't it.
>Worse: such candelabras with hexagonal bases -- a smaller hexagon
>atop a smaller one, and with zoological decorations, were found in
>temples of Zeus all over Turkey and western Greece.
>The thing in front of the Keneset was a *pagan* symbol in origin!
And the design of the Mishkan and the Bet Hamikdash follows the
design of pagan temples all over Israel. We had keruvim guarding
the Holy of Holies, they had stone lions. We had a horned altar,
they had horned altars. Et bloody cetera.
>(Azoi zogt R' Herzog, when they first accepted this version of
>the menorah as a symbol of the state in '49.)
Parallels doesn't mean non-kosher. As you said about "Holy holy holy":
it's the Object of the worship that matters, not the form.
Jonathan J. Baker
>And that's why people used to think that the Rambam held
>otherwise. But what are we to do now that we have seen his
>drawing and have read what his son says, where he explicitly
>includes the word alachson (actually, its Arabic equivalent).
Don't overstate your case. I read the Kapach Rambam, and do not
see him saying "alachson".
>> The L Rebbe is immanently qualified to argue with the ChM and MC about
>> the Rambam's position. However, it's not open-and-shut.
>It's pretty open and shut now that we have the drawing and
>Rabbeinu Avraham's commentary.
Except for the Rambam's own hedging on the matter, and the other parts
of the drawing which are clearly not correct even by the Rambam's text:
the gevi'im are placed wrong, and are upside down.
Jonathan J. Baker
>> > May you have the zechus to be present when the next Rebbe lights it for
>> > the first time.
>>
>> Thank you for your good wishes. Unfortunately, I am unable to
>> make any use of them, since I have no clue as to who this "next
>> Rebbe" might be, nor is there even a single candidate applying
Clearly, Avrumel Lev. The current rebbe being Asher Lev's father.
Why anyone should wish him dead, I don't know.
>Well I don't suppose the Lubavitch hierarchy will appoint a new Rebbe in
>time for Chanukah 5763 but I assume that eventually they will realise that
>Rabbi M.M. Schneerson z"l passed away some years ago and the movement really
>ought to have another living leader. I was merely expressing the wish that
Do we really need this?
>you should live long enough to see such a great simchah.
>BTW ever heard the expression "Yiftach b'doro k'Shmuel b'doro"
Both were nevi'im and had Divine missions. Do you have anyone on
tap who has a Divine mission, who could convince a bunch of Lubavs
that he's the next Rebbe?
>I am not sure why you were writing "Good YomTov" some days ago but have a
>great Chanukah.
Oh, that's easy. Sunday was 19 Kislev, the "New Year for Chasidus" or
so the Lubavs call it (equating, as they do, Chabad with Chasidus). It's
the date the first Rebbe was released from prison, having disproven the
false charges laid on him by the opponents of Chasidism. This is taken
by them to be a vindication of Chasidism.
Hmm. Institution of a semi-yom-tov on the basis of the actions of a
NON-JEWISH government. And yet, R is reluctant to trust the Arch of
Titus as evidence of the Menorah's shape because it is a NON-JEWISH
artifact. I detect some inconsistency.
Debbie tends to trust the Arch of Titus davka *because* they didn't
have a religious agenda to prove their version of the Menorah to be
correct - they didn't care, so they just drew what they saw.
Disinterested third-party evidence.
Raphael
>>> make any use of them, since I have no clue as to who this "next
>>> Rebbe" might be, nor is there even a single candidate applying
>
>Clearly, Avrumel Lev. The current rebbe being Asher Lev's father.
>Why anyone should wish him dead, I don't know.
???
Who is Asher Lev, besides Potok's fictional artist?
Micha Berger
: And why should the picture that is unaccompanied by textual support
...
False assumption. RMMS cites R' Avraham ben haRamam.
I assume he's a trustworthy source of his father's opinion.
:>The stairs leading up to the ulam were circular, no?
: Yes, azoy shteit der mishne in Middois 2:5
So was the yam (cistern) -- the one with the poor notion of pi.
Neither are keilim.
-mi
--
Micha Berger Time flies...
mi...@aishdas.org ... but you're the pilot.
http://www.aishdas.org - R' Zelig Pliskin
Fax: (413) 403-9905
Jonathan J. Baker
>On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 13:57:54 +0000 (UTC), Jonathan J. Baker <jjb...@panix.com> wrote:
>: And why should the picture that is unaccompanied by textual support
>...
>False assumption. RMMS cites R' Avraham ben haRamam.
And Jeffrey Tigay cites the long-lost (and still unavailable) introduction
to the Bonfils supercommentary to Ibn Ezra to support his reading of "the
secret of 12". Lots of people can cite things that can't be checked.
>I assume he's a trustworthy source of his father's opinion.
You're also thus assuming that RMMS is a trustworthy source of what
someone else says was his father's opinion. In a modern court, that
would be hearsay.
Esp. since the Rambam says himself that the picture is an abstraction,
and the picture itself is evidence of its own inaccuracy (the gevi'im
being upside down and wrongly placed)?
>:>The stairs leading up to the ulam were circular, no?
>: Yes, azoy shteit der mishne in Middois 2:5
>So was the yam (cistern) -- the one with the poor notion of pi.
>Neither are keilim.
Neither is the Menorah, if it comes to that. Rambam classifies
them as part of the structure of the Temple, in Hil. Beit Habechirah.
What does he consider keilim? The bigdei kehuna, the tzitz & the choshen,
the shemen hamishcha, etc.
R
>
> In <3DE06013...@concentric.net> R <rut...@concentric.net> writes:
>
> >And that's why people used to think that the Rambam held
> >otherwise. But what are we to do now that we have seen his
> >drawing and have read what his son says, where he explicitly
> >includes the word alachson (actually, its Arabic equivalent).
>
> Don't overstate your case. I read the Kapach Rambam, and do not
> see him saying "alachson".
The Rambam does not use this word. That is what gave rise to
several centuries of confusion over this matter. It is his son
Rabbeinu Avraham who uses this word in his Peirush on Chumash.
>
> >> The L Rebbe is immanently qualified to argue with the ChM and MC about
> >> the Rambam's position. However, it's not open-and-shut.
>
> >It's pretty open and shut now that we have the drawing and
> >Rabbeinu Avraham's commentary.
>
> Except for the Rambam's own hedging on the matter, and the other parts
> of the drawing which are clearly not correct even by the Rambam's text:
> the gevi'im are placed wrong, and are upside down.
The gevi'im are not placed "wrong" The drawing is simply not to
scale, as the Rambam himself writes. And they are upside-down on
purpose. As the Rebbe points out, it is just as easy even for one
with no artistic talents at all to draw triangles with the virtex
pointing up and the base on the bottom (which would be
"right-side up") as to draw them as the Rambam did, with the
virtex down and the base on top ("upside-down"). It makes no
sense to think that the Rambam, for no apparent reason other than
being not meduyak, would deliberately draw all 22 geviyim upside
down. Thus, the Rebbe concludes that he means them to be upside
down. The Rebbe gives a reason why they are upside down: when a
goblet is right-side up, it is a mekabel (container), which can
hold liquid, but does not fulfil its ultimate purpose; when one
drinks or pours from the goblet, the goblet is turned upsid-down,
and this is its ultimate purpose. The Menorah is for the purpose
of spreading light outward to the world, not for the purpose of
containing the light (vechi le'orah Hu tzarich?), and in token of
this the geviyim are affixed upside-down.
R
>
> In <e> Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> writes:
> >On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 13:57:54 +0000 (UTC), Jonathan J. Baker <jjb...@panix.com> wrote:
> >: And why should the picture that is unaccompanied by textual support
> >...
>
> >False assumption. RMMS cites R' Avraham ben haRamam.
>
> And Jeffrey Tigay cites the long-lost (and still unavailable) introduction
> to the Bonfils supercommentary to Ibn Ezra to support his reading of "the
> secret of 12". Lots of people can cite things that can't be checked.
>
> >I assume he's a trustworthy source of his father's opinion.
>
> You're also thus assuming that RMMS is a trustworthy source of what
> someone else says was his father's opinion. In a modern court, that
> would be hearsay.
You can see it for yourself if you can find a copy of Rabbeinu
Avraham's Peirush. I believe it is in Parshas Terumah. I don't
know what other volumes were printed, but I myself have seen the
peirush (Arabic on one side, Hebrew on facing page) in the
library of Agudas Chasidei Chabad. Unfortunately, for reasons I
will not go into here, the labrarian has put me on his personna
no grata list, and so I no longer have access to the library.
R
>
> "R" <rut...@concentric.net> wrote in message
> news:3DE0189D...@concentric.net...
> > Henry Goodman wrote:
> > >
> > > May you have the zechus to be present when the next Rebbe lights it for
> the
> > > first time.
> >
> > Thank you for your good wishes. Unfortunately, I am unable to
> > make any use of them, since I have no clue as to who this "next
> > Rebbe" might be, nor is there even a single candidate applying
> > for the position. Chanukah will be here in a few days, and so in
> > order to fulfill your blessing, time is of the essence. Please
> > forward to me ASAP the name of this candidate for next Rebbe,
> > along with a detailed resume, references, and a cover letter
> > stating what he sees as the duties and functions of Rebbe, and
> > how he plans to carry out these duties and functions. I'm not
> > promising anything, but I'll do what I can.
>
> Well I don't suppose the Lubavitch hierarchy will appoint a new Rebbe in
> time for Chanukah 5763 but I assume that eventually they will realise that
> Rabbi M.M. Schneerson z"l passed away some years ago and the movement really
> ought to have another living leader. I was merely expressing the wish that
> you should live long enough to see such a great simchah.
I wonder if you could explain exactly why you think that "the
movement really ought to have another living leader." What do
you see as the "job description" of this position, and what
specifically are the duties and functions that are not currently
being fulfilled?
> BTW ever heard the expression "Yiftach b'doro k'Shmuel b'doro"
Yes. Could you tell me what yo think this expression means, and
what specific relevance it has to this discussion?
>
> I am not sure why you were writing "Good YomTov" some days ago but have a
> great Chanukah.
I was referring to teh Yom Tov of 19 Kislev, which others have
now told you about.
Jonathan J. Baker
>"Jonathan J. Baker" wrote:
>> Except for the Rambam's own hedging on the matter, and the other parts
>> of the drawing which are clearly not correct even by the Rambam's text:
>> the gevi'im are placed wrong, and are upside down.
>The gevi'im are not placed "wrong" The drawing is simply not to
>scale, as the Rambam himself writes. And they are upside-down on
>purpose. As the Rebbe points out, it is just as easy even for one
>with no artistic talents at all to draw triangles with the virtex
>pointing up and the base on the bottom (which would be
>"right-side up") as to draw them as the Rambam did, with the
>virtex down and the base on top ("upside-down"). It makes no
The triangles are all the same size, and evenly colored - this
suggests use of a stencil. The lines are straight, and the base
is evenly curved - again suggesting either a stencil, or at least
a straightedge and compass. He was clearly someone used to drafting.
>sense to think that the Rambam, for no apparent reason other than
>being not meduyak, would deliberately draw all 22 geviyim upside
>down. Thus, the Rebbe concludes that he means them to be upside
>down. The Rebbe gives a reason why they are upside down: when a
>goblet is right-side up, it is a mekabel (container), which can
>hold liquid, but does not fulfil its ultimate purpose; when one
>drinks or pours from the goblet, the goblet is turned upsid-down,
>and this is its ultimate purpose. The Menorah is for the purpose
>of spreading light outward to the world, not for the purpose of
>containing the light (vechi le'orah Hu tzarich?), and in token of
>this the geviyim are affixed upside-down.
And when is a rebbe not dead? When his death would injure the worldview
of those who claim to be his followers, even when all the textual and
physical evidence is against them. The human mind is a great tool
for rationalizing preconceived notions.
Ignore the author's own talk of non-meduyakness, and invent a
rationale that would allow your preconceived notion to prevail.
Really honest scholarship, that.
henry.goodman
"R" <rut...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:3DE6A8CE...@concentric.net...
I really don't know enough about Chabad to answer this. I just see a
movement that used to have a Rebbe for hundreds of years trying to manage
without one and as a result forming various splinter groups with crazy
neo-Christian ideas about dead Rebbes coming back to life. You need a leader
to tell these people to stop being so daft.
> > BTW ever heard the expression "Yiftach b'doro k'Shmuel b'doro"
>
> Yes. Could you tell me what yo think this expression means, and
> what specific relevance it has to this discussion?
You have to appoint a leader from whoever is currently available even if he
will be noy up to the standard of his predecessors.
Gut voch
--
Henry Goodman
email henry....@virgin.net
R
Your argument is with teh Rebbe, not with me, nor with any of his
followers. Non-meduyak does not mean deliberately misleading. Why
would he deliberately draw all 22 geviyim upside-down when it is
just as easy to draw them right-side up, unless he means them to
be upside-down? The rationale described above is the Rebbe's, not
mine, nor that of the post-3-Tammuz chassidim. I can still
remember the farbrengen one Simchas Torah night when the Rebbe
instructed everyone to drain their cups of wine. as he finished
his, he turned the becher upside-down to indicate that he had
emptied it of its contents, reminding everyone that this was how
the geviyim were placed on the menorah. And then he instructed
everyone to turn their cups upside-down to demonstrate that they
too had drunk all of their wine. This took place 4 or 5 years
before the dead/non-dead business.
You yourself opine that drafting tools were used in preparing the
diagram, and you point to the curved base. So why would the
author draw straight lines for the branches when he could just as
easily have drawn them curved if that's what he meant? (BTW: the
writing on the page is the Rambams own hand; but there is some
writing around the base that was clearly added by someone else.
It is my opinion that someone (the same one who added the
lettering?) potchked with the base at some later time.
Eliyahu
"henry.goodman" <henry....@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:%hcG9.258$Lk4....@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
of any guidance or instructions from his prededessor? I could see where
trying to reach an accord on "who", right now, might be even more divisive
than not having one at all...
Eliyahu
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
Oy do you whet out appetite! :-(
Jonathan J. Baker
>> >sense to think that the Rambam, for no apparent reason other than
>> >being not meduyak, would deliberately draw all 22 geviyim upside
>> >down. Thus, the Rebbe concludes that he means them to be upside
>> >down. The Rebbe gives a reason why they are upside down: when a
>> >goblet is right-side up, it is a mekabel (container), which can
>> >hold liquid, but does not fulfil its ultimate purpose; when one
>> >drinks or pours from the goblet, the goblet is turned upsid-down,
>> >and this is its ultimate purpose. The Menorah is for the purpose
>> >of spreading light outward to the world, not for the purpose of
>> >containing the light (vechi le'orah Hu tzarich?), and in token of
>> >this the geviyim are affixed upside-down.
>> And when is a rebbe not dead? When his death would injure the worldview
>> of those who claim to be his followers, even when all the textual and
>> physical evidence is against them. The human mind is a great tool
>> for rationalizing preconceived notions.
>> Ignore the author's own talk of non-meduyakness, and invent a
>> rationale that would allow your preconceived notion to prevail.
>Your argument is with teh Rebbe, not with me, nor with any of his
Exactly.
>followers. Non-meduyak does not mean deliberately misleading. Why
>would he deliberately draw all 22 geviyim upside-down when it is
>just as easy to draw them right-side up, unless he means them to
>be upside-down? The rationale described above is the Rebbe's, not
>mine, nor that of the post-3-Tammuz chassidim. I can still
Exactly. I am not saying that the explanation originated with
these latter-day chasidim, but that, rather, the Rebbe's use
of far-fetched rationalizations that ignore the author's intent
may have *served as an example* to those who would make far-fetched
misinterpretations to support their ideas about the Rebbe's death.
>You yourself opine that drafting tools were used in preparing the
>diagram, and you point to the curved base. So why would the
>author draw straight lines for the branches when he could just as
>easily have drawn them curved if that's what he meant? (BTW: the
Because as he said in his comments, it's a sketch to show the
order of geviyim and caphtorim, not a drawing of HOW IT WAS.
>writing on the page is the Rambams own hand; but there is some
>writing around the base that was clearly added by someone else.
>It is my opinion that someone (the same one who added the
>lettering?) potchked with the base at some later time.
In which case, maybe this later party scratched off the whole
drawing, and redrew it to agree with Rashi?