tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post110814498260353836..comments2024-03-05T21:22:43.426-05:00Comments on parshablog: belated Teruma #2: The Extra Vav That Wasn'tjoshwaxmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03516171362038454070noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-1141405421648373242006-03-03T12:03:00.000-05:002006-03-03T12:03:00.000-05:00IMHO, Dr. Shapiro proves rather persuasively that ...IMHO, Dr. Shapiro proves rather persuasively that the sifrei Torah we have today are not at all perfect. He quotes Reb Moshe as ruling that "the kashrut of our Torah scrolls is not so certain," (p.93-94), following a discussion of poskim who feel that if a mistake is found in a scroll in malei and chasar letters, no need to take out a new one. One has to read the chapter in its entirety to appreciate what's really going on. It's fully 30 pages long, 191 footnotes. Besides, the "ikkar" we say at the end of davening does nothing more than approximate a headline. See Rambam in the original. The materials he brings down will shake you up if all you've had is the typical Mother Goose approach to Judaism, which I guess I had until now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-1141196557409328282006-03-01T02:02:00.000-05:002006-03-01T02:02:00.000-05:00interesting.of course, this is an easy insertion f...interesting.<BR/>of course, this is an easy insertion for the printers to put in, especially since lechem HApanim is the more common word and thus less likely of the two options to be original under the principle of <I>lectio difficilior</I>. and my mikraot gedolot has no HA, nor does the mosad haRav Kook edition.<BR/><BR/>what is unique about the <I>vav</I> is that it is explicitly discussed by two commentaries, Ibn Ezra and Rashi, and thus cannot be dismissed as a common printer's error. <BR/><BR/>This is similar to the variants of pesukim sometimes cited in the gemara. In many instances we can ascribe this to either accident when, after all, a sefer Torah was not being written, or to deliberate mangling for religious reasons, so as not to cite a pasuk. However, it is more difficult to do that when the <I>derasha</I> the gemara makes is based on the very detail which varies.joshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06958375916391742462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-1141183781189326732006-02-28T22:29:00.000-05:002006-02-28T22:29:00.000-05:00The dibur hamaschil of Rashi in the chumashim I lo...The dibur hamaschil of Rashi in the chumashim I looked at had lechem HApanim at the end of the parsha teaching about the shulchan, whereas the text we have says just panim.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com