- At Cross-Currents, Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein has suspicions about the Yosef coins. I discussed these coins here and here.
- The plot thickens. It turns out Rav Elyashiv didn't really sign on to the psak against Shabbos elevators. (And see here as well.)
- Matzav has an interview with Reb Abish, where he speaks out against much Jewish music, which he feels is superficial. He partners with R' Shmuel Brazil, whose views on Jewish music I discussed here and here.
- Wolfish Musings thinks Rabbi Falk would be in favor of obeying common courtesy, at the expense of tznius chumra. I am not sure how he knows this. But Rabbi Falk allows a husband to say "thank you" to, though not chat freely with, an adult girl who helps out in his home. But he does praise Ruth for her excessive tznius of not saying a word, such that people thought she was mute, since her particular situation warranted this extreme of tznius.
- The label at parshablog for Sukkot. Some good posts there, if I say so myself.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Interesting Posts and Articles #217
What was Yonah's message?
Sefer Yonah begins:
What was the message Yonah was to call upon it? The pasuk does not seem to describe it. And so says Rashi, that he should call upon it Hashem's keriah.
Metzudat David makes it even more clear, that He did not spell out just yet what to proclaim upon it. And a bit later, he works this fact into the narrative. Yonah fled outside of Eretz Yisrael, where prophecy does not reach. This way, he would avoid the possibility of receiving another message from Hashem, which would spell out the particular prophecy.
Radak also maintains that it is not written here just what the prophecy was to be. Though it seems that Radak does think that the prophecy was spelled out at this point to Yonah. We just have to deduce from the words that Yonah eventually says just what the prophecy was. And indeed, this certainly seems true later on in Yonah, where Hashem again tells him to prophesy and he does, but with words not spelled out earlier in the text. Thus, in perek 3:
Here, the pasuk just refers to "the proclamation that I bid thee". And we deduce just what the proclamation was that Hashem commanded by looking two pesukim later. And this the meforshim note. And indeed, by saying הקריאה, Rashi is certainly looking ahead to this ambiguous pasuk in perek 3 and stating that whether it says את הקריאה or not, it means the same thing, and both ambiguous pesukim should be resolved via Yonah 3:4.
I look at the second pasuk in Yonah and I see a pasuk ripe for ambiguous parsing. "Ki" can either mean "because" or "that". Rashi et al. adopt the former, such that he merely it to proclaim something upon it, and such that the second half of the pasuk is the reason for that unspecified proclamation.
However, if we read "Ki" as "that", then we could have the following translation instead:
Thus, the second half of the pasuk is the content. We see later that the proclamation is for the overturning of Ninveh, וְנִינְוֵה נֶהְפָּכֶת.
To me, this calls to mind parshat Vayera, and the overturning of Sodom. Just as in Ninveh, their wickedness came before Hashem, we see regarding Sodom that:
and in the next perek, regarding the destruction that results:
| כה וַיַּהֲפֹךְ אֶת-הֶעָרִים הָאֵל, וְאֵת כָּל-הַכִּכָּר, וְאֵת כָּל-יֹשְׁבֵי הֶעָרִים, וְצֶמַח הָאֲדָמָה. | 25 and He overthrow those cities, and all the Plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground. |
Thus, the message was Divine recognition of the wickedness of Ninveh, and associated with it, an overturning of the city. And so, while Yonah 3:2 gives us solid basis to interpreting it as an unspecified prophecy, I believe there is much merit to the alternative parse I proposed.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Check out Sukkot to Go 5770
Yeshiva University's Center for the Jewish Future and Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary presents
Interesting Posts and Articles #216
- On the Torah and Science front, at ladaat.net, some fellow counted the number of seeds in a pomegranate and found it to be about 800, not 613! This is understandably disturbing since Malbim and Chatam Sofer say that there are 613 seeds in a pomegranate, and people reacted in different ways. One suggested that it is kefirah to question this, because כל המהרהר אחרי רבנן... is like he is meharher acharei haShechina. And someone suggested it was simply the average, comparing it to Zohar who says that the shoshana has 13 petals, when he counted and often found more or less.
To justify the "average", they cited from and linked to the hoax study from aquaphoenix. Someone linked to my debunking of the cute yet silly hoax, though it seems to me that they were likely bringing it as evidence for the average justification.
Rabbi Dr. Avi Zivitofsky already discussed this misconception. - Thanbook wonders where the 'Snag kabbalah is. He details how it was taken out of the curriculum, and wonders whether it is time to introduce it in a controlled way. Of course, from my perspective, it is good we don't know or follow kabbalah, and the sequestering of it is just an easy way to place it in geniza, which is good because it is not, theologically speaking, the authentic Judaism of Chazal.
- Life In Israel wonders whether the lulav shortages are deliberately manufactured in order to allow for easier importation, and wonders whether importing from Gaza and the like is positive, in the overall picture.
I remember on one kibbutz they showed us date palms, and how only lulavim from the center are not spread out and are good for lulav, which leads to the shortage. - Hirhurim about whitewashing history.
- Vos Iz Neais covers the Yosef coin story, and there are some interesting comments in the comment section about Jewish sources regarding the institution of coinage.
And another story, about Rav Elyashiv's answer to someone who asked him about wearing crocs on Yom Kippur. Of course, he is not the posek for everyone. See the comment section, also. - Environmentalists seek to wipe out plush toilet paper.
- Avakesh posted a clip of this, and I liked it. From David Zasloff. Hatikva on the Shofar:
and Jumpin' In Jerusalem: - An African village believes that evil powers created a half-man, half-goat creature. Of course, this is because they lack medical knowledge.
- The Muqata discusses Rav Elyashiv et al. forbidding all Shabbos elevators, and Tzomet's reaction blasting the ruling without having at the very least contacted them. (See also at the Yeshiva World.)
They make a point which should resonate, and which is all too familiar:In addition, Rabbi Rosen questions those in the “court of the rabbonim”, explaining gedolim are obviously called upon to affix their signatures by rabbis who have access to them deciding to bring this specific issue to their attention. He asked how such a decision can be reached, quoting experts in the field, when Zomet, which is one of two institutes in the field working to find technological advances that can be incorporated into permitted shabbos use, was not contacted by any of the rabbonim who brought this to the attention of gedolei yisrael shlita. He stated, “I am not a ‘bal plugta’ with any of the gedolim” but question how such a ruling can be issued without even conferring with rabbinical experts such as those at Zomet.
Rabbi Rosen added that it is difficult for him to comment since the p’sak circulating in chareidi circles is not detailed.
Rabbi Rosen told Kol Chai Radio that he feels the gedolim at times are led by those who have access to them, pushing certain issues before them and in this case, opting to ignore the experts who address the issues for the past years, relying on torah giants such as Reb Shlomo Zalman.
- Here at parshablog, on mermaids and Yosef coins.
Melech Elyon variant
I meant to post this a while back, but didn't get a chance until now.
My father has a "scholarly" machzor, which
has the original text of Melech Elyon. Basically, instead of what we have, which is a bunch of Melech Elyons with an ending of two Melech Evyons followed by one final Melech Elyon, the original had about twice as many stanzas, and a good many more Melech Evyons. The original alternated between these Melech Elyons and Melech Evyons throughout.
My father has a "scholarly" machzor, whichhas the original text of Melech Elyon. Basically, instead of what we have, which is a bunch of Melech Elyons with an ending of two Melech Evyons followed by one final Melech Elyon, the original had about twice as many stanzas, and a good many more Melech Evyons. The original alternated between these Melech Elyons and Melech Evyons throughout.
My guess is that they stopped this practice because the guy who got peticha began to develop carpal tunnel syndrome.
;)
Sunday, September 27, 2009
When the fast of Yom Kippur begins, and ends, in Gardens Hills
Of course, check your own local times at the sites given. What is given here is for Zip code 11367, in New York.
According to Chabad it begins today at candle-lighting time, at:
| Candle Lighting | Fast Begins | 6:27 pm | |
| Shkiah (sunset) | 6:45 pm |
and ends tomorrow at:
| Shkiah (sunset) | 6:44 pm | |
| Tzeit Hakochovim (nightfall) | 7:17 pm | |
| Holiday Ends | Fast Ends | 7:24 pm |
You can confirm yourself when candle-lighting is. There is an inyan of tesefet yom hakippurim at play here.
According to MyZmanim, about when the fast ends:
| Yom-Kipper Ends with the emergence of 3 stars at: 7:23 PM [?מהיכא תיתי] Some wait 72 minutes - until 7:55 PM |
posts so far for Yom Kippur
2010- Well, this first one from 2010, at least. I'm going to point out a bunch of my Yonah posts. First, Did the Malbim on Yonah predict an undersea river? I don't think so.
. - What was Yonah's message? A different parse yields a different message for Yanah to deliver.
. - Yonah and the Goldfish
. - Yonah's Rebellion and Yonah as Metaphor
2009
- My theory about the runaway scapegoat -- that they let it run away deliberately.
- Did the designated man live out the year? And what is the basis for saying he did not?
- A defense of Rabbi Eleazar haKallir from Ibn Ezra's criticisms -- here and here.
- The nusach for shlugging kapporos.
2008
- Two whole goats?! -- a post for Toledot, which touches on the idea that the two goats prepared for Yitzchak corresponded to the two goats on Yom Kippur.
- From Acharei Mos, the Goral LaAzazal, and what it might mean.
2007
- Makom Kavuah, and Astro-turf. A short anecdote which teaches an interesting lesson.
- And saying Selichot.
- No greater days for Israel than Yom Kippur and Tu BeAv.
- An important note for women shlugging kapparos using money -- a correction to the Artscroll nusach. Well, not so important. But a correction nonetheless.
- All of Rif on masechet Yoma.
- The goat to Azazel -- which may look like syncretism, but is really sending it off to a place. And I try to prove it.
- Yonah's rebellion, and Yonah as metaphor -- and how Yonah recognizes that he is to serve as a lesson. And a bit on political correctness coming against academic integrity.
2004
- Aruch Hashulchan on (and against) kapparot, with my English translation.
The nusach for shlugging kapparos
If you plan to shlug kapparot today, with either money or chickens, and you don't have a machzor, then this may be of help. Here is the text of "Bnei Adam" followed by "Zeh Chalifasi."Bnei Adam is to the right, while Ze Chalifati is below. As I noted in the past, despite the instructions in Artscroll, if you are a woman using money rather than chickens, one should say "zeh", because it is not going on the person, but rather on either the chicken (tarnegol vs. tarnegoles) or the money (kesef). And kesef would always be described with zeh, not zos.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Mermaids and Yosef Coins
A while ago, after the tsunami in Indonesia, some pictures circulated purporting to show the body of a mermaid which had washed up.
Of course, it was a hoax, and those images had been produced well before the tsunami.
Yet apparently the mermaid did make a big splash. Indeed, as Rabbi Slifkin reports in his Sacred Monsters (page 95), posters were put up in Meah Shearim with the picture, gemara, Rashi's explanation of dolphinim as mermaids, and the caption that there is nothing new under the sun.
Of course, it was a hoax, and those images had been produced well before the tsunami.
Yet apparently the mermaid did make a big splash. Indeed, as Rabbi Slifkin reports in his Sacred Monsters (page 95), posters were put up in Meah Shearim with the picture, gemara, Rashi's explanation of dolphinim as mermaids, and the caption that there is nothing new under the sun.This need not be representative of all chareidim, nor does it necessarily mean that all chareidim are this credulous. But certainly some did believe this hoax. And perhaps it is because the "news" items spoke to their own beliefs, which were somewhat under attack from the modern world. If Rashi had ruach hakodesh, and the gemara itself spoke of mermaids, and everyone nowadays "knows" that mermaids are fictional, then this news which validates our traditional beliefs is to be adopted wholeheartedly. Indeed, the "nothing new under the sun" comment was triumphalism, and effectively saying "see, we knew about this a long time ago, and science is only now catching up." Of course, various other subgroups might prefer other approaches to "coping" with this "difficulty" -- such as that the gemara doesn't really say this, and that Rashi was merely working with the contemporary science of his time, but that approach is not preferred or might be deemed heretical by some "frummer" groups.
|
Indeed, when people at Bat Yam (or rather Kiryat Yam), in Chaifa, spotted a mermaid off-shore, kikar.net posted an article about it. And they wrote:
בדרך כלל, אנחנו מבטלים במחי יד את השמועות. נתקלנו אין סוף פעמים באגדות דייגים, שכנראה חלקם נוטים להזיות מסיבה שבוודאי תיחקר יום אחד.אך לא, הדג הזה קיים בהחלט. כבר במקורות הקדמונים ביותר מצאנו שיש דג שחציו אדם וחציו דג, או חציו אשה וחציו דג, וכמה וכמה הלכות נאמרו לגביו.מה שכתוב בתורה שכל נפש החיה שבמים שקץ הוא לכם, אמרו בתורת כהנים שמרבה את הסילונית. רש"י פירש שסילונית הוא אותה בריה שחציו דג וחציו אדם, והראב"ד אף הוסיף שסירונית (או סילונית) היא חיה שחציה אדם וחציה דג, ומנגנת כאדם. וכן חז"ל דרשו בטומאה: "אדם כי ימות באהל", ולא סילונית.וכן מצאנו בגמרא בבכורות, שהזכירה דולפינים, ולפי אחד הפירושים בגמרא שם זה "בני ימא", או כמו שפירש רש"י, אותה חיה שחציה אדם וחציה דג. ולפי האמור שם בגמרא, החיות הללו יכולות להתרבות כבני אדם או כדגים.מעניין מאד לציין, שבספר "ערוך השולחן" האריך לדון על אותו דג אם יש לו סנפיר וקשקשת. אם נזכה שמישהו יצלם, אולי נדע בבירור.אם יש לכם מרץ, נסו לצלם את הדג, כך תזכו להבין את דברי הגמרא בבירור, ותזכו את הרבים, ואולי גם תרוויחו את הפרס הכספי. סכום לא רע שיכול לעזור לכם קצת ב'בין הזמנים'.
The comments there, on that story, are also fascinating. Of course, this story was pure bunk, probably created to increase tourism.
The same seems to me to be true regarding the latest story, reported by an Egyptian paper, about an Egyptian find of coins which bear Yosef's name, and so on. There is enough about this story to make it rather dubious. Of course, we will see how it plays out, and if authentic, it would be quite amazing. Namely, how it goes against prevailing beliefs of historians of when coinage began (these are really round gems), and the amazing nature of the find. And I don't think we can necessarily trust the science and archaeology of the people around, without knowing more about them and/or having this finding verified by others. It looks like they were trying to find evidence of coinage that early so that Koranic accounts would not be anachronistic.
But I got an email from an otherwise rather skeptical individual about this, titled "Wow!"
I think this is because it fits in to our own beliefs, or what we would want to believe and want to see discovered. Because after all, most archaeologists deny the historicity of the Torah's account.
This, once again, is not to say that this story is not true, or that it is. Rather, it is to say that this story speaks to our biases, and so we should keep that in mind as we evaluate it.
Friday, September 25, 2009
posts so far for parshat Haazinu
- Haazinu sources -- further improved. Alas, based on the timing of the three-day Yom Tov this year, this is all I'll likely have time for.
- 'The Vile nation', censored out of Baal HaTurim.
- Har Sinai, the smallest of all the mountains -- and a good question from Junior.
- Haazinu sources -- links to an online Mikraot Gedolot, by aliyah and perek. Also, more than 100 meforshim on the parsha and haftorah.
- Is corruption His? Reading shiches lo as an accusation by the children of Israel.
- How many lines in Haazinu? Though the printed Rambams have encoded the number of lines as 70, in the good kitvei yad, the number is 67, and people just modified Rambam to accord with their local practice. And this let Cassuto to think that the Aleppo Codex was not for real.
- Teshi, with a unique small yud -- that does not appear elsewhere, because there should not be a small yud in Pinchas. And possible meanings of this unique small yud, from a midrashic perspective.
- Does parshat Haazinu include the promise that Israel will enjoy non-kosher fats?Ibn Ezra might be able to use this pasuk to bolster his assertion in parshat Tzav that really, the only forbidden fats are on animals that are actually korbanot, but on your typical animal of the same species, the prohibition is only derabbanan. Though Ibn Ezra does not cite this pasuk of Haazinu, Shadal brings it up and dismisses it as proof.
- Is vayin`atz a transitive or intransitive verb? Much like oved in Arami oved avi. Given that it is usually transitive, how do we explain it seeming to occur in an intransitive context in Haazinu?
- According to the number of the sons of... A difficult pasuk in Haazinu, with several of the many explanations offered given the traditional reading. And the reading of the Septuagint, of angels of God, and the fragmentary reading of the Dead Sea Scrolls, of bnei el-, which works out well with developed Jewish tradition as well as Ugaritic myth, in a way that neatly fixes up the entire "problem." Perhaps a broader discussion of this in a later post.
- The Natural Order, and the Sun in Giveon -- trying to figure out just what is bothering Ibn Ezra in his missing commentary on sefer Yehoshua, which he hints at in this week's parsha, and why the Moon standing still is somehow an answer to his problem. I think I figured it out.
- Alexander's ascent, via griffin or griffin-vulture -- related to the parsha, but discusses a Yerushalmi of Alexander ascending high into the air and seeing the world like a ball. Pnei Moshe says this was via his nesher, basing himself on Greek accounts. In fact, in (some of?) those Greek accounts, it was via griffin.
. - Is the second Pru Urvu a blessing or a command? A post on Bereishit, but an important principle is established from a pasuk in the tail-end of Haazinu, וּמֻת בָּהָר אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה עֹלֶה שָׁמָּה, where an imperative form is used for something outside Moshe's power. So too Pru Urvu.
- Haazinu sources -- links to an online Mikraos Gedolos, by aliyah and perek.
- In Shadal's Vikuach, in the chapter on the age of trup, an interesting Rabbenu Bachya -- that despite the sof pasuk dividing the two psukim, it should be read as דּוֹר עִקֵּשׁ וּפְתַלְתֹּל with הַ לְיְהוָה, תִּגְמְלוּ-זֹאת. That is, "a generation crooked and perverse, Do ye thus requite the LORD?..."
- Lech Lecha (2005): And I Will Make Your Name Great
- Name as "Title," Name as "Renown." Towards the end, we turn to analyze כִּי שֵׁם ה, אֶקְרָא: {ס} הָבוּ גֹדֶל, לֵאלֹקֵינוּ, and claim this is a case of synonymous parallellism.
- Haazinu: The Shva Na/Nach Problem
- A vocalization problem with Devarim 32:6: הַ לְיְקוָק, תִּגְמְלוּ-זֹאת. Is the shva under the lamed a na or nach? An interesting grammatical analysis.
- The Shva Na/Nach Problem, Take 2
- A reworking of the above, such that it is clearer, with more background. Additionally, an image of the Aleppo Codex is included, as well as a discussion of information provided by Ibn Ezra and Shmuel HaNagid on its pronunciation and way of writing it (with three different traditions). Also, I offer an explanation of the phenomenon. As we see in Targum, the הַ is not the heh expressing wonder, but rather a congnate of the Aramaic הָא, meaning hineh {=behold}. The open patach was initially allowed as an odd archaic feature of Biblical poetry, but then seized the lamed from the next word to close the syllable.
- Related, at Lion of Zion: Ha'azinu's Homoeoteleuton (in Radak), 2008
- A Source for ברכת התורה
- Vayelech/Haazinu/ Vezot HaBeracha - A neat derivation, or hint, to the practice of saying a bracha, blessing, before and after being called up in shul for an aliya to the Torah.
Coins from the time of Yosef, bearing Yosef's name, found in Egypt
This also provides counter-evidence to archeologists' previous claim that they did not mint and use coins in Egypt in the era of Yosef, but instead relied on a barter system.
These coins have Yosef's name (both Yosef and Saba Sabani, perhaps a cognate of Tzofnas Paneach?) and image of a cow.
If true, it is amazing. But I am a bit skeptical of such findings which accord so well to details of the Biblical narrative. Or in this case, the motivation seems to be in justifying aspects of the Koranic narrative. While it is possible that such would have existed, such that it is findable, it also makes sense that some antiquities dealer might make a forgery and tie it in to the Biblical or Koranic account in order to better sell it.
From the Jerusalem Post:
Archeologists have discovered ancient Egyptian coins bearing the name and image of the biblical Joseph, Cairo's Al Ahram newspaper recently reported. Excerpts provided by MEMRI show that the coins were discovered among a multitude of unsorted artifacts stored at the Museum of Egypt.According to the report, the significance of the find is that archeologists have found scientific evidence countering the claim held by some historians that coins were not used for trade in ancient Egypt, and that this was done through barter instead.The period in which Joseph was regarded to have lived in Egypt matches the minting of the coins in the cache, researchers said."A thorough examination revealed that the coins bore the year in which they were minted and their value, or effigies of the pharaohs [who ruled] at the time of their minting. Some of the coins are from the time when Joseph lived in Egypt, and bear his name and portrait," said the report.The discovery of the cache prompted research team head Dr. Sa'id Muhammad Thabet to seek Koranic verses that speak of coins used in ancient Egypt."Studies by Dr. Thabet's team have revealed that what most archeologists took for a kind of charm, and others took for an ornament or adornment, is actually a coin. Several [facts led them to this conclusion]: first, [the fact that] many such coins have been found at various [archeological sites], and also [the fact that] they are round or oval in shape, and have two faces: one with an inscription, called the inscribed face, and one with an image, called the engraved face - just like the coins we use today," the report added.
and from MEMRI, the following excerpt {they have a larger article than this}:
"The researcher identified coins from many different periods, including coins that bore special markings identifying them as being from the era of Joseph. Among these, there was one coin that had an inscription on it, and an image of a cow symbolizing Pharaoh's dream about the seven fat cows and seven lean cows, and the seven green stalks of grain and seven dry stalks of grain. It was found that the inscriptions of this early period were usually simple, since writing was still in its early stages, and consequently there was difficulty in deciphering the writing on these coins. But the research team [managed to] translate [the writing on the coin] by comparing it to the earliest known hieroglyphic texts…"Joseph's name appears twice on this coin, written in hieroglyphs: once the original name, Joseph, and once his Egyptian name, Saba Sabani, which was given to him by Pharaoh when he became treasurer. There is also an image of Joseph, who was part of the Egyptian administration at the time.
See also PaleoJudaica who considers this junk archeology. Some of his criticisms seems a bit off, in that they appear rather circular. Thus:
Where does one start with this sort of thing? Coins weren't invented until something like the seventh-to-sixth century BCE in Asia Minor.
And how does he know that coins weren't invented before then? Because of existing archeological evidence! Which this would then contradict, as being earlier evidence! It reminds me of the claim that camels were not domesticated in ancient Mesopotamia in patriarchal times. Then, they discovered a figurine of a camel. But it couldn't be a camel, because camels had not been domesticated yet! So it was a horse with odd humps.
Similarly, he writes:
The Joseph story, if it has any historical basis at all, is perhaps a vague memory of events of the Hyksos era or perhaps even later.
This is called begging the question. This was the assumption, based on lack of other evidence. So dismiss the evidence because it contradicts the previous reconstruction? We can similarly dismiss any evidence of David's reign, because Biblical minimalists have determined that he did not exist, or if he did, he was a minor figure in some village somewhere.
Yes, it does not accord with existing notions, which makes it a rather important discovery. If true. Though he makes that point:
There is no archaeological evidence for the existence of Joseph as a real person and any such find would receive immediate, enthusiastic, international attention.
Of course, this might be the international attention. Of course, this might all be a hoax, or overblown. It seems somewhat likely to me. We'll have to see how it shapes up.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Interesting Posts and Articles #215
- Wolfish Musings makes the point that being uninformed is not the same as being stupid. This as a reaction to a Yeshiva World Coffee Room discussion, where someone asked, in terms of arguing on various rabbis about scientific facts, whether the person arguing was:
Smarter than the Rema, the Maharal, Aruch Hashulchan, Chasam Sofer, Rabbeinu Bachyai, the Alshich, the Radvaz, and the Chida combined?
Smarter than any one of them. - In a comment thread at Emes veEmunah, someone raises the issue of Rav Kanievsky apparently believing that gentiles have a different number of teeth than Jews, and the possible ramifications in terms of whether one should rely of him for pesak, (I would say) especially in matters pertaining to science. To which Rabbi Maryles wrote:
a) I don't believe he said or wrote that.
(a) is always possible, despite it having appeared in print as an answer from him, together with a lot of additional details. (See here.) And despite that we see other frum rabbis in Israel saying the same (see here and here). There is always the danger of misattribution to Rabbi Kanievsky.
b) If he did it must have been in some sort of metaphysical or allegorical context - the meaning of which I have no clue.
In terms of (b), as I wrote there, the details of what was written make it clear that he did not intend this in some sort of metaphysical or allegorical context. (See here, again.) The Midrash Talpiyot asks it as a question based in metzius, and proving it via appeal to his relative who is an expert on medicine and halacha, and proving it via a story about an anti-Semitic dentist in America demonstrates that he intended it absolutely literally.
But I think that we can learn a lot from this reaction. And from his reaction, a little bit down, that:I can't speak for RCK but I can't believe he would deny the actual Metzius. Would he look at the moon and say it is the sun? There has to be an explanation for this. He is not an imbecile.
As Wolfish Musings noted (see previous item), one need not be stupid, or an imbecile, to get scientific facts wrong. While the very idea of a different number of teeth sounds strange to us, we are not chareidim living in Bnei Brak. We have a much greater secular education, as well as exposure to gentiles, such that they are not alien creatures, but humans just like us. And even Rav Kanievsky thought it was a bit strange, and so he did his due diligence, or what is due diligence in chareidi circles. He asked an expert, his brother-in-law who is an expert on medical halacha, and who is the rav of a hospital in Bnei Brak, who confirmed it was true by way of an actual story about an anti-Semitic dentist in the US. That we would recognize it as an urban legend is not pertinent.
Similarly, Rav Yaakov Emden was not an imbecile for believing accounts that gold grew on trees in Tokaj, because the world is a strange place, in his scientific worldview such things were strange but not impossible, and the gemara says that this very thing happened with trees planted by Shlomo Hamelech.
But there is this attitude that we are smart, and Chazal or great contemporary rabbis are smart, and so we must be in agreement. And that if we are not in agreement, either we are heretics and idiots, or else we are saying that they are idiots. And so the inclination to remake Chazal, or post-Talmudic Sages, in our own image. And so Rav Kanievsky must have meant this allegorically.
But he didn't, and similarly in many instances Chazal might well have intended literally various midrashic statements which we find implausible. This is why I am a big fan of evaluating sources on their own merits. Afterwards, if we find it implausible, we can either blame ourselves or accept that we differ from them and believe we are correct. - At Mother In Israel, the problem of insects infesting schach, where the insect might end up being consumed. Mekubal, in the comments, makes a valid point about the tradeoff with the "solution" of spraying one's schach with pesticide.
- At Reason Online, questioning the science of shaken baby syndrome, with the end result that many innocent people may be in prison as a result of shaky science.
- At Snopes, a confirmation of a rumor of exploding Pyrex. This is a case where Pyrex is no longer borosilicate, (and being manufactured by a different company,) despite it retaining the name.
- At the Yeshiva World, efforts by various rabbonim to close the age gap in shidduchim, to help solve the shidduch crisis.
- PETA tries to discourage Jews from performing kapporos on chickens. Or at least wants to publicly decry the practice. While my sentiments are with Rav Yosef Karo and others, that this is a superstitious and possibly halachically iffy practice, I don't think that they are going to persuade frum Jews in this way. Selective citation of Rav Yosef Karo, where the Rama ruled otherwise, will not impress.
- Rabbi Slifkin answers a question about a ruby segulah, which has bases in Jewish sources, and whether there are any objections to it. He notes that this was also discussed on Hirhurim a while back. See also the discussion of this at the Zchus Avos Yagen Aleinu blog. Some aspects of it may be simply faulty scientific beliefs about the physical properties of this gem. If so, back then it might have been mere faulty science, whereas nowadays it would be buying into a superstitious practice.
- Here on parshablog, the Sun in Giveon and the Natural Order, which relates to an Ibn Ezra on this week's parsha.
Alexander's ascent, via Griffin or Griffin-Vulture
In Haazinu, we read of the eagle bearing its young on its pinions (wings):
| יא כְּנֶשֶׁר יָעִיר קִנּוֹ, עַל-גּוֹזָלָיו יְרַחֵף; {ס} יִפְרֹשׂ כְּנָפָיו יִקָּחֵהוּ, יִשָּׂאֵהוּ עַל-אֶבְרָתוֹ. | 11 As an eagle that stirreth up her nest, hovereth over her young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her pinions-- |
and while it is meant allegorically, ain mikra yotzei miydei peshuto, and the mashal needs to make sense and be true before we get to the nimshal. Some connect it to the pasuk in parshat Yitro, in Shemot 19:4:
| ד אַתֶּם רְאִיתֶם, אֲשֶׁר עָשִׂיתִי לְמִצְרָיִם; וָאֶשָּׂא אֶתְכֶם עַל-כַּנְפֵי נְשָׁרִים, וָאָבִא אֶתְכֶם אֵלָי. | 4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto Myself. |
and again, this is meant to be allegorical, though there presumably should be some actual physical observable phenomenon of nesharim bearing things (such as young) on their wings, as a basis for this. And see Rashi and midrashim on this.
Could an eagle, or perhaps griffin-vulture, be big enough to lift a man, if we wanted to take the allegorical as absolutely literal? We wouldn't really expect birds so big.
Yet there is a giant, man-killing eagle, thought until just recently to be legendary, which survived until about 500 years ago, at which point it became extinct:
New research has confirmed that a giant man-eating bird long spoken of in legends actually existed.
And the Haast eagle was even bigger and more deadly than first thought, fulfilling the same role as the killer lions of Africa.
Each creature had a wingspan of three metres and weighed almost 20kg, making more than twice the size of the largest eagle that survives today.
"It was certainly capable of swooping down and taking a child," Paul Scofield, of Canterbury University in New Zealand, said.
This is not precisely the same as bearing a fully grown person on its wings, but it brings it more into the realm of imagined possibility. (Though there may well be scientific reasons that birds, including eagles and vultures, cannot get so large.)
I bring all this up because there is a Yerushalmi which seems to have a man riding on the back of a nesher, which is probably a griffin vulture.
I bring all this up because there is a Yerushalmi which seems to have a man riding on the back of a nesher, which is probably a griffin vulture.
Yerushalmi Avodah Zarah 18b reads:
א"ר יונה אלכסנדרוס מוקדון כד בעא מיסק לעיל והוה סלק וסלק סלק עד שראה את העולם ככדור ואת הים כקערה בגין כן ציירין לה בכדורא בידה. ויצורינה קערה בידה.
Thus, according to Rabbi Yonah, when Alexander the Macedonian {the Great} wanted, he ascended up, until he saw the world like a ball and the sea like a plate. Because of this they depict him with a sphere in his hand, and a plate {/discus} in his hand.
So why do I say that Alexander ascended upon a nesher? Where does it state that in the Yerushalmi?! All it said was אלכסנדרוס מוקדון כד בעא מיסק לעיל והוה סלק וסלק סלק, but it did not mention the method by which he ascended! To answer, I got this from Pnei Moshe on the daf, who said that Alexander went up by nesher.
Pnei Moshe writes that he did something, and say on the nesher to raise himself above and to see the face of the earth, as it written in their Chronicles.
Thus, admittedly the Yerushalmi does not mention a nesher. But he recognizes that this maamar Chazal is likely citing Greek legend, and so he turns to Greek legend -- or perhaps if he believes it to be true and historical, Greek history -- and discovers that Alexander's ascent was by nesher.
This is a fairly popular tale, and an old one. This museum website puts the emergence of the legend to 200 BCE, well before this statement in the Yerushalmi was written:
But if we look at Greek legend, it does not seem to be an eagle or griffin-vulture by which Alexander ascends. Rather, it appears to be by griffin:
One legend involving griffins is the Ascension of Alexander the great. According to this story, Alexander captured a pair of griffins and, having starved them for three days, hitched them to his throne and, teasing them with chunks of roast beef held above their heads on lances, flew heavenward for seven days. Alexander would've stolen a peek at God Himself if an angel had not asked him why he wanted to see the things of heaven when he did not yet understand the things of earth. Chastised for his presumptuousness, Alexander flew back to earth. Representations of Alexander's ascension were placed in French and Italian cathedrals during the 12th century.
200 BC Emergence of the legend of Alexander, in which Alexander of Macedonia flew in the company of some half-starved griffins to the end of the world. This theme turns up frequently (on exhibit in the Museum).
And here is an article (8+ MB PDF) tracing the history of this story as well as artwork about it. One interesting variant has a king using similar hunks of meat to make two griffins (or else eagles) carry his throne up high. (The picture to the right has Alexander using these hunks of meat.) Compare to the griffins on King Shlomo's throne, which brought him up.If so, why does Pnei Moshe say nesher? Maybe he saw (or thought he saw) a variant of the popular legend, maybe he considers nesher an adequate translation of griffin, or perhaps he is rewriting it to be more plausible -- even though a human being lifted in this way by two eagles is not very plausible to me.
Aside from simply being an interesting Yerushalmi, or at least Pnei Moshe, if it refers to griffins or even to eagles lifting Alexander up, or even if it merely refers to a popular Greek legend, there might be some interesting things we can deduce about this Yerushalmi if we bring in eagles or griffin-vultures or griffins.
Specifically, this famous Yerushalmi shows a belief within Chazal in a round earth. There is, of course, another gemara in Bavli Chagiga, which strongly implies a flat earth. Did they intend this Yerushalmi literally, or is it an allegory? Even if literal, does it reflect Greek beliefs or Chazal's beliefs? Or both?
The whole point in the Yerushalmi of citing this legend is that those under Alexander's rule consider the world to be under Alexander's dominion -- though the continuation of the Yerushalmi challenges them on the accuracy of that statement. If the whole point is dominion, then the Yerushalmi does not necessarily have to actually maintain that Alexander ascended on high. Rather, they just need to believe that the Greeks believed that. And if the Greeks believed this, we can understand the statues with the ball or plate in hand to have a specific meaning. And if is only the Greeks who believe this, this is no absolute evidence that "Chazal" believed in a spherical earth -- especially as there are certain other gemaras which seem to contradict this. Of course, sources in Bavli and Yerushalmi can readily contradict one another, because Chazal are not monolithic.
But even before getting to that point, I have to wonder whether Chazal really believed the Greek legends about Alexander's ascent on high, literally. While it is nice that Chazal get some contemporary science right, it would be a shame if they believed it because they believed in some implausible nonsense about Alexander riding up to the heavens on eagles or griffins.
Given that he ascended upon a nesher, and a nesher is often a symbol of power (king of the birds, much like the lion as the king of the beasts), and given that a griffin is a combination of two kingly beasts (griffin-vulture/eagle + lion) all of this might be a further allegory for Alexander's dominion. Even if allegory, of course, details of what he saw might be based on scientific knowledge of the world. And so if he would see the world, they would describe the world as a sphere.
In sum, this is an interesting Yerushalmi not just for its references to a spherical earth. Pnei Moshe's suggestion is bold, in that he is willing to fill in details from Greek legends. His suggestion seems quite plausible, given the history of this story. And I wonder whether even as Greek legend, the griffin was intended allegorically.
Rabbi Slifkin discusses griffins in his Sacred Monsters. While he does not address this Yerushalmi in particular, he does discuss some of the royal aspects of the griffin in the context of certain midrashim.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
