<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Dec 13, 2007 11:50 AM, Micha Berger <<a href="mailto:micha@aishdas.org">micha@aishdas.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>In any case, this would seem to prove RRW's first point, that Yequm<br>Purqan is Israeli.<br></blockquote><div><br>Disclaimer I never said that Yekum Purkan was from Israel. I only stated that Israel used aramaic, too. Au Contraire Reish Galvasa refers to Babylonians. I am not sure wher the confusion is. I clearly pointed it to being Babyylonian
<br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>Which would make it contrary to Agus's theory</blockquote><div><br>Agus Theory or hypothesis is not subject ot yekum purkan. Agus cannto be dproven or disp[oven scientifically, All I can say is that countless books on litrugy prety much say the same thing. Cairo Geniza fragments have served to show the accurcay of his findings.
<br><br>But it is really simple. any school child has learned that the American ideals were founded upon Rousseu. Montesquieu, Voltaire, etc. The same demonstration is obvious for Ashkneaz. Ashknaz latched onto Kallir - a Judean, and to Meshullan be Kalonymous of Lucca Italy and his family. Sephardic eshew the piyyutim of both Kallir and the kalonymos family for the most part. You need no scientific proof beyond that
<br><br> <br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> about Ashkenazi practice<br>showing more heritage of Israeli mesorah. Not a counter-proof, as I
<br>still stand by the other part of that post (pending review) that<br>Agus's theory is simply unfalsifiable and therefore unscientific.<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>(Whether or not the theory is in line with actual migration patterns<br>as already known in more solid ways, and thus true anyway.)<br><br>SheTir'u baTov!<br>-micha<font color="#888888"><br>--<br>Micha Berger
</font></blockquote><br></blockquote><div><br>the pattern is demonstrable. Ashkenazim use Kallir Sephardim don't. Dozens;' of clues are in Geniza fragments. See works on liturgy such as: <br><div style="margin-left: 40px;">
Ta Shma<br>Elbogen<br>Max Arzt<br>etc.<br></div><br>The Ba'al Hamaor reports that the Talmidim of the Rif altered the Minhag of Israel away from the earlier practices. Those earlier practices conform to Kallir. Rif is both Sephardic and Babylonic for the most part.
<br><br>But the truth be told, this is not a black and white issue. E.G. Rashi seems convinced that his Mesorah is from Bavel over Israel. E.G. Rashi opposed a bracha on Hallel on Rosh Chodesh [mahzor Vitri] which matches the Bablyonian/Sephardic tradition, -while Rabbeinu Tam supports this bracha.
<br><br><br><br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br><a href="mailto:RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com">RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com</a><br>see: <a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a><br> <br><br><br></div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br><font color="#888888"></font></blockquote></div>