<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/9/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Richard Wolpoe</b> <<a href="mailto:rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com">rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
There is a fasincating Rema [orach chaim 668:1] re: <br><div style="margin-left: 40px;">"es Yom HaShimni hag Ho'atzeres hazeh"<br></div>Rmea states this is NOT a hag at all! It reall should say: <br><div style="margin-left: 40px;">
"es Yom HaShimni Ho'atzeres Hazeh"<br clear="all"></div><br></blockquote></div><br>=================================================<br>Re: Zman<br>It is absent in the Vatiten lanu of the Yamim Nora'im<br>
If Z'man were introducing something seasonal it could have read for RH<br><div style="margin-left: 40px;">Es Yom Hazikaron hazeh, z'man Shofroseinu [or something similar] instead of Yom (zichron) T'ruah<br></div>
And for YK<br><div style="margin-left: 40px;">Es Yom Hakippurim hazeh z'man Selichoseinu [or something similar] instead of just limchila<br><br></div>IOW why not use Z'man as a consistent formula throughout?<br><br>
Some want to read Herisueinu & Mattan Toroseinu as the historical points and then shift to the agriucltural for Sukkos. While plasuible it is not as likely as seeing all following the hisorical aspect. Matan Torah is certain openly indicated in the Humash. The 3 agricultural reasons are. If Z'man indicative of an agricultural theme for one, it could have easily been used for all 3.
<br> <br><br> <br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br><a href="mailto:RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com">RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com</a><br>Please Visit: <br><a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a>