<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 9:55 AM, D&E-H Bannett <<a href="mailto:dbnet@zahav.net.il">dbnet@zahav.net.il</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;">
Re: RRW's <<Ashkenazim tend to incorporate botth versions<br>
at differing times Sepaard tends to conflate e.g.:<br>
<br>
1. saying BOTH BishlmechaAND b'rov oz vshalmo [which are<br>
alternates]<br>
2. Saying BOTH teflillas kol peh AND amcha yisreol<br>
berachmim which are<br>
alternates<br>
<br>
If ashkenaz had the 2 readings they would probably say 1 at<br>
shacharis<br>
another at mincha at arvis etc.>><br>
<br>
There seems to be a mix-up in terminology.</blockquote><div><br>
David<br>
<br></div><div><br>Hatassi<br>I meant to post "the so-called 'nusach Sepahrad'"! Sorry!<br></div></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br>RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com<br>see: <a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a>