[Avodah] Shmoneh esrei - 18/19

[Micha Berger]

On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 04:34:40PM +0200, D&E-H Bannett wrote:
: Didn't some list members wonder at times about the unusual nusach in our
: Boneh Yerushalayim brakha? We say, come back to Jerusalem and live in it
: as promised and rebuild it soon ... and speedily prepare David's throne
: there. Why does David appear here when the next b'rakha is specifically
: about David.

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:07:35AM +1100, SBA wrote:
: The AHVH goes on "...vetamtsis devarav - deshapir haveh chasima me'ein
: hap'sicha deBinyan yerushalayim veChisei Dovid chada milsa....she'ein anu
: mevakshin al binyan yerushalayim - ela be'ofen sheyihye raui leKisei Dovid
: - lo be'ofen achar.."

I did, and here was what I thought was going on. Not quite the same as
the AHVH, but not all that different.

If one leaves the order of phrases alone, then the "besokha" that kisei
David would be established would be the same as the previous phrase's
subject -- "uvnei osah beqarov beyameinu binyan olam".

IOW, this isn't so much about the melukhah directly, but about the aspect
of the BHMQ that includes the presence of the melekh. For that matter,
"Kisei David" is arguably a seat in the lishkas hagazis as well.

At least, that's what I'm thinking when I say it.

Then, after having the discussion of keser melukhah as part of the BHMQ,
ben David's presence as a human expression of the ideals of the
shulchan, we move on to the value of melukhah as melukhah itself.

This is binyan Y-m -- keser kehunah, keser melukhah, keser Torah,
vekeser shem tov oleh al gabeihem.

...
: Why is this remnant of David in Boneh Yerushalyim? Was it in the original
: Bavel nusach which had separate b'rakhot for Yerushalayim and David?
: Or, perhaps, someone looked in the Tosefta or Yerushalmi and interpreted
: the statement that one is kolel David b'voneh Yerushalayim as applying
: also to a nusach other than that of E"Y.

My kavanah would explain why, even if they were split, the phrase was
left in what would otherwise be the wrong berakhah.

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:28:19PM +0200, D&E-H Bannett wrote:
: Another teirutz to explain the mystery to those who seem to 
: think that the number 18 for the 'Amida was commanded by H' 
: and given to Moshe be-Sinai.

Wasn't the basic structure of the Amidah cointed by Anshei Keneses
haGedolah? Now, that's not as far back as Sinai, but still ancient history
by the time we get to Shemu'el haQatan and the Kerem beYavneh asking
him to write birkhas minim. Chazal not only attribute the chasimos to
AKhG, they also tell us that it was said by the kohanim in bayis sheini
(along with the 10 diberos and Shema).

: I was not very surprised that Artscroll backs such 
: teirutzim. What is the halakhic or other justification for 
: ignoring the evidence of the Yerushalmi, the nusach of the 
: combined b'rakha in the nusach E"Y found in the geniza and 
: the lack of a krova for the extra b'rakha.

This is the bit I don't get. Who was in Bavel at the time? The berakhah
dates back to a period when we don't hear of too much halachic authority
in Bavel. In contrest, "Maaravah" had a somewhat-functioning Sanhedrin,
fully capable of making gezeiros and taqanos. How would Bavel evolve a
different response to the new berakhah than they had in Yavneh itself?

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 02:35:03AM +0000, rabbirichwolpoe at gmail.com wrote:
: Perhaps nothing wrong but IIRC the gmara in brachos links 18 with Psalm
: 29 having 18 hazkoros. And FWIW so does Baruch Hashem l'olam
...
: While David may be correct historically I prefer the logic of the way I
: was taught because it all fits together. 17 doesn't seem to fit as well.

Why would AKhG choosing to correspond to David' mizmor make it David
haMelekh's idea any more than corresponding to bones in the spine (as
we count distinct bones) make it HQBH's?

It's like gematria cha"i vs gematria to"v. A choice of Remez.

-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "'When Adar enters, we increase our joy'
micha at aishdas.org         'Joy is nothing but Torah.'
http://www.aishdas.org    'And whoever does more, he is praiseworthy.'"
Fax: (270) 514-1507                     - Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l