[Avodah] Missing Rambam. Help!

[Seth & Sheri Kadish]

>> Over YT someone pointed out to me Rambam, Hilchos Talmud Torah, Perek 7.
Halacha # 8 is missing.

Halakhah 8 is not missing. All that happened is that in the numbering of the
halakhot provided by the printers (which in any case is generally a poor
numbering in any case from which nothing should ever be learned or
inferred), they simply forgot the number 8 and jumped from 7 to 9.

All manuscripts and editions have the same text here; no text is missing.

In general, for all questions of girsa in the Rambam, for learning bekiut in
the Rambam, and for looking of citations in the Rambam, no Torah home should
be without the new edition:

www.mishnetorah.com

Seth

סימני ספר המידות - ארחות צדיקים
http://www.seforimonline.org/seforim7.html (#169-172)

הקהילה היהודית הפתוחה
http://www.makorrishon.co.il/show.asp?id=7467

מדריך לקריאת נביאים וכתובים
A Guide to Reading Nevi'im & Ketuvim
http://skadish1.googlepages.com/guide
----- Original Message -----
From: <avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org>
To: <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 1:51 PM
Subject: Avodah Digest, Vol 3, Issue 6


> Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
> avodah at lists.aishdas.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> avodah-owner at lists.aishdas.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Chazarat hashatz (Micha Berger)
>    2. Ushpizin and Sheva Berakhos (Gershon Dubin)
>    3. Re: Agag (David Riceman)
>    4. Re: Chazarat hashatz (Rich, Joel)
>    5. ENDING ON A GOOD NOTE (Cantor Wolberg)
>    6. Re: Ushpizin and Sheva Berakhos (Rich, Joel)
>    7. Re: Ushpizin and Sheva Berakhos (T613K at aol.com)
>    8. Re: Rav Keller's JO article on evolution (Micha Berger)
>       (Meir Shinnar)
>    9. Agag (Yisrael Medad)
>   10. Re: Kiddush Levanah on Motzoei Yom Kippur (Akiva Blum)
>   11. Missing Rambam. Help! (SBA)
>   12. Re: RE; Ushpizin and Sheva Berakhos (Simon Montagu)
>   13. Re: 12 Step Programs (Harry Maryles)
>   14. Re: Missing Rambam. Help! (Simon Montagu)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 10:29:11 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "Micha Berger" <micha at aishdas.org>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Chazarat hashatz
> To: "A High-Level Torah Discussion Group" <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID:
> <29196.171.159.192.10.1160144951.squirrel at webmail.aishdas.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
> On Thu, October 5, 2006 5:07 pm, Joel Rich wrote:
> : Is anyone aware of any written sources that allow learning during
chazarat
> : hashatz?
>
> Didn't you ask something similar in v17 (old) n90? See the thread
> <http://tinyurl.com/jzvqy#MBYESHIVA%20COMMUNITIES>.
>
> Tir'u beTov!
> -mi
>
> --
> Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
> micha at aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
> http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
> Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 15:10:37 GMT
> From: "Gershon Dubin" <gershon.dubin at juno.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] Ushpizin and Sheva Berakhos
> To: avodah at lists.aishdas.org
> Message-ID: <20061006.081045.15633.454649 at webmail27.lax.untd.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> From: Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org>
>
> <<So you do see why I would consider it. Once one says that Shabbas
> haMalkah can serve, why not the Ushpizin? What sevara would distinguish
> one from the other?
>
> (No I do not have sources; that's what I was asking for!)>>
>
> Following up on R' Saul's he'ara on yichud, think of the Gemara of
> issur yichud of the kallah if the choson should go out for a few minutes.
>
> Even if they're panim chadashos, don't be mechabed them with a beracha
> (certainly not with bentching unless it's Dovid Hamelech, the only one
> who accepted the offer!)
>
> Gershon
> gershon.dubin at juno.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 13:22:13 -0400
> From: "David Riceman" <driceman at worldnet.att.net>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Agag
> To: "A High-Level Torah Discussion Group" <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Cc: sober at pathcom.com
> Message-ID: <001001c6e96b$f7a9a320$9c054c0c at Ricemanhome1>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> From: "Sober Family" <sober at pathcom.com>
>
> <I definitely recall hearing that Agag - in the brief interval after Shaul
> spared him and before Shmuel killed him - found a shifcha through whom he
> was able to continue his line of descent. But I can't find the source for
> this! Does anyone know the source?>
>
> Targum Sheini 4:13.  It's supposed to be in Esther Rabba also, but I
> didn'tfind it there (only a brief glance).
>
> David Riceman
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 10:35:37 -0400
> From: "Rich, Joel" <JRich at Segalco.com>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Chazarat hashatz
> To: "A High-Level Torah Discussion Group" <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID:
> <7F5EC37AC45DE64DB56C8AD3D409C2B273DBFD at NYCEXCL01.segal.segalco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
>
> On Thu, October 5, 2006 5:07 pm, Joel Rich wrote:
> : Is anyone aware of any written sources that allow learning during
> chazarat
> : hashatz?
>
> Didn't you ask something similar in v17 (old) n90? See the thread
> <http://tinyurl.com/jzvqy#MBYESHIVA%20COMMUNITIES>.
>
> Tir'u beTov!
> -mi
>
> ====================
> Yes, but I've been asked for written sources (versus mpi hashmua or
> "that's what R' X does")
> GT
> Joel Rich
> THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE
> ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL
> INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee
is
> strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify
us
> immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 11:15:20 -0400
> From: "Cantor Wolberg" <cantorwolberg at cox.net>
> Subject: [Avodah] ENDING ON A GOOD NOTE
> To: <avodah at aishdas.org>
> Message-ID: <011601c6e95a$3ccd3e10$650fa8c0 at CANTOR>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> The very last letter of the Torah is lamed and the very first letter is
beis.
> The two letters together form the word Lev, "heart."
>
> In order for the heart to be complete and whole, there is no break between
the end of the Torah and the beginning.  Bereshis follows D'vorim with no
interruption.
> If there were a break, it would break both the heart of the A-mighty, as
well as the Jewish People.
>
> Now, in reverse, you would have "bal" (bet, lamed) meaning "don't" or
"not".
>
> Going in the natural order, we complete D'vorim and immediately begin
B'reishis, thus we have the lamed of "Yisroel" and the beis of "B'reishis."
When you change the natural order and go in reverse, then you get "bal"
which is a negative?"Not". We must not change the natural order of things,
and we should follow the order of the Torah and "NOT" reverse it.
>
> The last word of the Torah, Yisroel, and the first word of the Torah,
B'reishis, both contain a yud, shin, reish and aleph. If there were a lamed
in B'reishis, it also would spell Yisroel. I thought of the following cute
d'rash regarding no lamed in b'reishis:  The word Yisroel contains the first
letters of the Ovos and Imahos: Avraham, Yitzchok, Ya'akov, Sara, Rivka,
Rochel and Leah.
>
> The word B'reishis contains the letters of all but Leah. If you recall,
Ya'akov was supposed to have married just Rochel, but he was tricked into
first marrying Leah.  So for B'reishis, there is no lamed for Leah, because
Jacob wasn't supposed to have married Leah. However, as history would have
it, Jacob did marry Leah and hence the last word of the Torah also contains
her initial.
>
> Richard Wolberg
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20061006/d
2a29023/attachment.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 13:36:52 -0400
> From: "Rich, Joel" <JRich at Segalco.com>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Ushpizin and Sheva Berakhos
> To: "A High-Level Torah Discussion Group" <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID:
> <7F5EC37AC45DE64DB56C8AD3D409C2B273DEA7 at NYCEXCL01.segal.segalco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
>
>
> Following up on R' Saul's he'ara on yichud, think of the Gemara of issur
> yichud of the kallah if the choson should go out for a few minutes.
>
> Even if they're panim chadashos, don't be mechabed them with a beracha
> (certainly not with bentching unless it's Dovid Hamelech, the only one
> who accepted the offer!)
>
> Gershon
>
>
> How about a golem?  Before you laugh too hard see sh"ut Chacham Tzvi #
> 93
> Gmar Tov,
> Joel
> THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE
> ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL
> INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee
is
> strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify
us
> immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 14:08:57 EDT
> From: T613K at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Ushpizin and Sheva Berakhos
> To: avodah at lists.aishdas.org, smash52 at netvision.net.il
> Message-ID: <bee.5b179ea.3257f5b9 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
>
> >>. Are you in doubt as to whether the  Ushpizin count for a  minyan? A
> mezuman? Do they affect issur yichud? I rather imagine the answer is  "of
course
> not". I don't know of any basis for thinking that panim chadashot is  any
> different.
>
> It is true that there is one non-corporal entity which  counts as panim
> chadashot: Shabbat. AFAIK, this is the only such  case....<<
>
> Saul Mashbaum
>
>
>
> .
> If you have nine men at a bris do you not count Eliyahu Hanavi as the
tenth?
>  Of course since he went up alive to Heaven, he may not be  "non-corporal"
> but merely invisible.
>
>
>
> --Toby  Katz
> =============
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20061006/5
3672470/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 14:09:33 -0400
> From: "Meir Shinnar" <chidekel at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Rav Keller's JO article on evolution (Micha
> Berger)
> To: avodah at lists.aishdas.org
> Message-ID:
> <c802bdbe0610061109j3bc2c030td3134fa7b11c6cef at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> me
>
> : 2)  there is a strong tradition (even amongst literalists like the
kuzari)
> > : that, even if one does not argue for the rationality of torah, torah
> > does
> > : not contradict reason - eg, the kuzari argues that there is no good,
> > solid
> > : evidence for a world older than 5000 years (his time) - but admits
that
> > if
> > : there was such evidence, the position and argument would have to be
> > : rethought - because nothing in the torah can contradict reason.
> > RMB
> > Actually, the statement is that the two could never contradict. Period.
> > The Kuzari and Rambam probably didn't entertain the possibility that
> > their shitos in Torah would need to be rethought. And if they did face
the
> > apparant contradiction, it can not be proven that they would reinterpret
> > the pasuq rather than question the philosophical grounds of using
science
> > to understand origins.
>
>
> 1) The rambam and kuzari are different.  Without going again into our
debate
> on the meaning of that phrase in MN, as a general rule the rambam believed
> that truth from torah and philosophy coincided - but that torah expressed
> its truths allegorically.  He is explicitly aware and states elsewhere
that
> his allegorical interpretation doesnot come from a specific tradition
about
> a verse or an issue - but that the two sources of truth  need to be
> reconciled.  We can argue about the limits of this reinterpretation - but
he
> is quite explicit that issues of time don't bother him....
>
> The kuzari isn't as clear, but I think is somewhat stronger than RMB
states
> - he says that if the  king  had stronger proofs  for the  age of the
world
> being  ~5000 years than merely  Indian traditions,  which  were dismissed
> as  more  mythological than  historical,  then  he would have to  give  a
> different  answer.
>
> It is also in the Kuzari that he explicitly accepts a position that matter
> is eternal as being acceptable (not that it is his position or what he
> considers to be true - but that it is an acceptable position for a
ma'amin)
>
> However, the kuzari was brought in for a different reason - not for the
> issue of explicit allowing of reinterpretation - but that his statements
> about the pshat meaning occur within an explicit  framework of accepting
the
> intrinsic compatibility of torah and reason - and that that compatibility
is
> one that is an intrinsic part of torah beliefs..  For those of us who
accept
> an ancient universe as scientifically and rationally proven - the choice
is
> between accepting the pshat statements of the kuzari about a particular
> statement, or accepting the framework in which they were said - the two
are
> now incompatible.
>
> Therefore, while I can't prove what the kuzari's position would be today,
> the use of the kuzari (or any of the other rishonim or statements of hazal
> brought down which suggest a pshat understanding is problematic evidence
for
> this discussion - because they are all made in the framework where that
> understanding is viewed as compatible with reason. Therefore, the question
> is what their position would be if it was now viewed as incompatible with
> reason - as many of us do.
>
> Meir Shinnar
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20061006/7
9cdcf85/attachment.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2006 21:23:31 +0200
> From: "Yisrael Medad" <yisrael.medad at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] Agag
> To: avodah at aishdas.org
> Message-ID:
> <6f06ff2b0610071223i7c6e75s10ed1c5de0df6b68 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> For Agag impregnating a slave-girl see:
>  Torah Shleima Esther 3:1; Megiilah 13A; Yalkut Shimoni, B'shelach, Item
> 268; Yalkut Mei'Am Loez Shmuel I, p. 188; Daat Mikra Esther 3:1, note 6
>
>
> --
> Yisrael Medad
> Shiloh
> Mobile Post Efraim 44830
> Israel
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20061007/a
f9c0c1a/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 11:35:46 +0200
> From: "Akiva Blum" <ydamyb at actcom.net.il>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Kiddush Levanah on Motzoei Yom Kippur
> To: <Avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID: <200610080935.k989Z5US021220 at smtp4.actcom.co.il>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
>
>
> Harry Maryles <hmaryles at yahoo.com> wrote:
>    >Subject: Re: [Avodah] Kiddush Levanah on Motzoei Yom Kippur
>    >To: A High-Level Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
>    >Message-ID: <20061005015537.19690.qmail at web36702.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>    >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>    >
>    >
>    >
>    >--- Yitzchok Levine <Larry.Levine at stevens.edu> wrote:
>    >
>    >> Many have the custom of making Kiddush Levanah on Motzoei Yom
>    >> Kippur
>    >> right after Maariv. However, this means that the wives of the men
>    >> making Kiddush Levanah have to wait longer before they can break
>    >> their fast, because they have to wait for their husbands to return
>    >> home and make Havdalah before they can eat. Is it really proper to
>    >> perform this mitzvah at the "expense" of others who may well be
>    >> feeling weak from fasting?
>    >
>    >This practice is Halachicly incorrect. One is supposed to eat before
>    >making Kiddush Levana. It is only out of expedience that many shuls
>    >do so. In my son's Shul in Ramat Bet Shemesh everyone goes home to
>    >make Havdlaha and eat immediately after the Maariv and return later
>    >at a pre-determiend time to do Kiddush Levanah.
>
> This practice would seem to ignore the heter of the MB (426:11 see shaar
hatziyoon) that one is not required to eat before KL on MYK, because of the
simcha of mchilas avonos. This is unlike Tisha beav where the practise is
widespread to do as above.
>
> Akiva
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 23:33:32 +1000
> From: "SBA" <sba at sba2.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] Missing Rambam. Help!
> To: "avodah" <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID: <032901c6eade$6bc63930$427131d2 at sbaws1nnv993q7>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Over YT someone pointed out to me Rambam,
> Hilchos Talmud Torah, Perek 7.
> Halacha # 8 is missing.
>
> It seems to be known by some, who have attached to it
> some chassidish urban legend, which, IMHO, is too ridiculous to repeat.
>
> But can anyone shed any light on this? Is it the work of a censor?
> What about earlier editions and those in Yemen etc?
>
> SBA
> sba at sba2.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2006 20:01:28 +0200
> From: "Simon Montagu" <simon.montagu at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] RE; Ushpizin and Sheva Berakhos
> To: "A High-Level Torah Discussion Group" <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID:
> <580f9f600610071101r40b3bbb1h8a65130dff089c96 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 10/6/06, Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org> wrote:
> > So you do see why I would consider it. Once one says that Shabbas
> > haMalkah can serve, why not the Ushpizin? What sevara would distinguish
> > one from the other?
>
> We know that Shabbat is present. We invite the ushpizin, but we have
> no guarantee that they accept the invitation: the Zohar explicitly
> says that if one isn't machnis (physical) orechim, the ushpizin refuse
> to come (Emor 103a).
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 01:20:34 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Harry Maryles <hmaryles at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] 12 Step Programs
> To: A High-Level Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID: <20061009082034.49915.qmail at web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
>
> --- Dov Kay <dov_kay at hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I am exceedingly leery of the 12 steps, although I appreciate
> > that
> > Rabbi Dr Twerski has no doubt helped many using them.
>
>
> I do not understand all this handwringing about the 12 step program.
> Why are we darshaning certain steps? This program is not meant as a
> primer on Torah Hashkafa. It is meant as a means to overcome an
> addiction.
>
> As such the twelve steps make emminent sense. Trying to say that this
> or that step is not in concert with Torah Hashkafa is way besides the
> point and counterproductive. Besides these steps are not counter to
> Torah Hashkafa if understood properly.
>
> For example, the first step: "We admitted we were powerless over our
> addiction - that our lives had become unmanageable" ...does not mean
> we do not believe in Bechira Chafshis. Of course we do. It is simply
> an acknowledgement that we have become so addicted to a beahvior
> pattern that it has overcome our natural ability to control it. It is
> a matter of admitting the diminution of will power on this particualr
> act. Of course we know in theory that we can at a moment's notice
> change the behavior... that we have Bechira... but our psychological
> state is very weak and therefore  makes the pratical application of
> Bechira Chafshis seem impossible.
>
> I applaud Rabbi Twerski's efforts and successful use of the twelve
> step program. I don't think it is wise to do an Halachic or Hashkafic
> analysis of it. For those who use it successfully, such discussions
> can only be damaging.
>
> HM
>
>
> Want Emes and Emunah in your life?
>
> Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 09:25:45 +0200
> From: "Simon Montagu" <simon.montagu at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Missing Rambam. Help!
> To: SBA <sba at sba2.com>, "A High-Level Torah Discussion Group"
> <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID:
> <580f9f600610090025j680d9a75p1c5f137ed9978591 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 10/8/06, SBA <sba at sba2.com> wrote:
> > Over YT someone pointed out to me Rambam,
> > Hilchos Talmud Torah, Perek 7.
> > Halacha # 8 is missing.
> >
> > It seems to be known by some, who have attached to it
> > some chassidish urban legend, which, IMHO, is too ridiculous to repeat.
> >
> > But can anyone shed any light on this? Is it the work of a censor?
> > What about earlier editions and those in Yemen etc?
>
> http://mechon-mamre.org/i/1307.htm has the text from Yemenite
> manuscripts, and in this chapter also has the numbering from the
> printed editions in square brackets. AFAICT the difference is only in
> the numbering, and the text is the same.
>
> By the way, see http://mechon-mamre.org/i/3130.htm halacha 15 for a
> case where the censors made nonsense of the text. The original is
> "mehhallel shabbat beferhesia harei hu ke'oved avoda zara, ushneihem
> kegoyim". In the printed edition this becomes "...harei hu ke`akum
> ushneihem ke`akum.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avodah at lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>
>
> End of Avodah Digest, Vol 3, Issue 6
> ************************************
>