[Mesorah] HQBH

[Minden]

I'm sorry I didn't answer yet on all your posts. I'm afraid I just can't find where I read about this quite some time ago. I checked R' Hamburger's and R' Sperber's series as well as some other regulars - maybe it was in R' Berliner's Randbemerkungen, which I don't have at hand at the moment. If I find it, I'll share it, of course.

RMB wrote:
>> IIRC, the right parsing is "... shemeih dekudsho." New sentence: "Berich hu..."
>
> Then why do Sepharadim and many Chassidim (including the SA haRav) answer "amein", making shemei deQBH a clear coda?

Exactly this machloukes led to people saying Berich hu aloud so's to remind the chazzen to start with Brich hu, IIRC.


REMT wrote:
> How, then, does one understand and parse "ana avda d'kudsha b'rich hu"?

That touches on the question when the seifer hazouer was written.


>  And what is the function of the dalet in "d'kudsha," if it is "hakodesh" and not "hakadosh"?  "Sh'mo shel hakadosh" makes sense; "sh'mo shel hakodesh" does not.

The Hebrew forms and their respective Aramaic corresponding forms are (in the massoretic standard):
qawdhosh - qaddish
haqqawdhosh - qaddishaw
qodhesh - qodhash
haqqodhesh - qudhshaw

So, if "shamo shellaqodhesh" doesn't make sense, then "shame dequdhshaw" doesn't make sense either, and if the latter does, then the former does as well.


LPhM
http://lipmans.blogspot.com