Something cheesy this way comes
[Recent Entries][Archive][Friends][User Info]
[The Franchise]
[Sarah]
[Ari EB]
[Elanit]
[ALG]
[Alon]
[Yutopia]
[Code Monkey Ramblings]
Below are the 7 most recent journal entries recorded in the "thegameiam" journal:
|
09:58 pm
[Link] |
Rosh Hashana Tidbits
I've long been of the opinion (based on an offhand drasha by a brief acquaintance named Jonathan) that the akedah was indeed a test of Abraham, but that he in fact failed the test. This explains the complete rupture of his family dynamic (Sarah dies, Isaac never speaks to him again, etc), and also explains one of the great absences in the text: the great moral man who argued for saving Sodom because there may have even been ten righteous men there wouldn't even show any hesitation about taking the knife to his own son? Seriously? it further explains why we have such an elaborate legal system: if the most moral of individuals, who found God in a time when no one else was even looking, would fall prey to such a horrifyingly immoral directive, then God would have evidence that we clearly needed more structured rules - in Twain's formulation, common sense is anything but.
However, today another possibility came to mind - what if the test (nisayon) that Abraham passed was that he actually believed what he told Isaac - that God would provide the sacrifice (i.e. that God, after having put him through so much grief with childlessness, the casting out of Ishmael, and the rest, would not actually require this of him)? In that case, the akedah becomes more of a symbol of trust that while God will put us in situations which look bad, He will not actually abandon us to those fates, nor will he actually require from a person more than he or she can or should give.
=====
We had several folks over for second night dinner, and I made my chicken soup, about which I'm quite proud. Sarah made her version of Emeril's brisket (sans sugar, chili sauce, and a few other things) (note: I've never found kosher for passover chili sauce...), curried sweet potatoes, and roasted root vegetables.
The coolest part, however, was getting to harvest a cantaloupe from the garden on Friday and eat it on Saturday for lunch and dinner. It had an earthiness that store-bought fruit just doesn't have - it managed to be much more succulent and yet not quite as sweet. It inspired a new blessing for a new year: may it be sweet but not cloying.
=====
Count me among those who prefer not to use Shabbat or popular music tunes for the high holidays - I think that nothing is quite as effective at setting the mood for what the prayers are actually saying than the traditional tunes (which, honestly, are a catalogue - there are scores of "traditional" tunes that are not used anywhere else - and that's what I mean: I like those tunes which are special for these days only)
My favorite tune: Areshet safateinu after the shofar - it's lively and celebratory, and this is the only time it's ever used. Runner up: the high holiday yigdal tune. Haunting and majestic, rather than festive and didactic (as the usual one is). It's still stuck in my head...
My favorite words: v'kol ma'aminim - it isn't saying "I believe X" - it's saying that "everyone believes X." It's a dramatic statement of faith, and I think its underrated (sort of like yigdal is underrated).
=====
Boy will I be happy when Koren publishes a new English Mahzor (currently in the rumor stage). In addition to the page-flipping issues with the Birnbaum, I sure would like to provide better instruction for the shaliah tzibur regarding the kamatz katan... (and sadly, Artscroll doesn't mark them, leading all of the folks who speak Israeli hebrew in the US to not be precise about their use, and there's a lot of them in very obvious places [like Avinu Malkeinu] on the high holidays...)
=====
This year's shofar was particularly hard for me. I strongly miss Phil, who was my mentor and inspiration in this as many things. It was also a struggle physically, because during the run-up in Elul, I had had a hard time doing more than about 40 notes in a row, and the final chunk is exactly that right in the middle of Kaddish. In addition, I really was moved by RDBF's drashot on the subject of t'shuva (repentance) - and that emotion, combined with the yom hazikaron (day of remembrance) aspect of the holiday, brought me to an almost complete meltdown during DR's hininei.
God willing, this should be a good and sweet year for all, and the sealing of the book of life should be completely for the good.
Current Location: home
Current Mood:  tired
Current Music: none
Tags: grammar, religion
|
|
11:50 pm
[Link] |
Political Grammar
One of the frustrating things about political issues as they are discussed is that multivariate issues often get expressed as binary conditions: "are you in favor of net neutrality?" "what is it?" (insert 11+ possible answers [and by the way, those 11+ possible answers were from über-connected types who have access to the legislation as it's being written]).
My most recent experience with this is the health-care topic of "saving lives."
Um, no life can be saved. We will, in fact, all eventually die. Those who believe in a world-to-come, or an afterlife, etc, all agree that before that happens, this life has to end in death.
So my proposal is this: let's about "prolonging life" or "postponing death" instead. Death cannot be defeated, bargained with, or denied. It can, in some cases, be delayed.
Current Location: home
Current Mood: tired
Current Music: none
Tags: grammar, politics, rant
|
|
04:35 pm
[Link] |
You keep using that word...
Quantum of Solace
American Heritage Dictionary - QUANTUM - n. pl. quan·ta (-tə)
1) A quantity or amount.
2) A specified portion.
3) Something that can be counted or measured.
4) Physics
4a) The smallest amount of a physical quantity that can exist independently, especially a discrete quantity of electromagnetic radiation.
4b) This amount of energy regarded as a unit.
adj. Relating to or based upon quantum mechanics.
[Latin, from neuter of quantus, how great; see quantity.]
hmm
And then there's apotheosis n. pl. a·poth·e·o·ses (-sēz')
1) Exaltation to divine rank or stature; deification.
2) Elevation to a preeminent or transcendent position; glorification: "Many observers have tried to attribute Warhol's current apotheosis to the subversive power of artistic vision" (Michiko Kakutani).
3) An exalted or glorified example: Their leader was the apotheosis of courage.
[Late Latin apotheōsis, from Greek, from apotheoun, to deify : apo-, change; see apo- + theos, god; see dhēs- in Indo-European roots.]
I've now heard a second highly educated person use apotheosis when the word they were looking for was epiphany, except given that these were both in the context of an Orthodox synagogue, the users may have been uncomfortable with the Christian connotations (and for that matter the denotations) of the proper word.
Current Location: Herndon, VA
Current Mood:  good
Current Music: none
Tags: grammar, rant
|
|
09:11 pm
[Link] |
Beauty
One thing I noticed on the plane today was that the timing of the kosher meal was pretty much perfect for the end of Tzom Gedaliah (n.b. flying on a fast day isn't actually that bad: you're in cliamate-controlled areas, and if you get sleepy, you can sleep).
I spent some time reading Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks' introduction to the Authorised Daily Prayer Book - it's called "Understanding Jewish Prayer," and it is some of the most beautiful writing on the subject of prayer which I have ever read.
Here are a couple of exerpts, which cannot hope to do justice to the gentle profundity of his whole piece (about 40 pages or so).
From section 8, "Prayer and Faith"
The fact that Jewish faith was written into the prayers, rather than analysed in works of theology, is of immense significance. We do not analyse our faith: we pray it. We do not philosophise about truth: we sing it. Even Maimonides' Thirteen Principles of Jewish faith - the most famous creed in the history of Judaism - only entered the mainstream of Jewish consciousness when they were turned into a song and included in the Siddur as the hymn known as Yigdal. For Judaism, theology becomes real when it becomes prayer. We do not talk about God. We talk to God.
From "Keywords of Prayer: the names of God"
The Tetragrammaton not only has a different meaning, it is also a word of a different grammatical type. It is God's proper name standing in relation to him as the names Abraham or Sarah attach to human beings (hence it is sometimes referred to as Hashem, "the name"). The use of a proper name in connection with God means that a direct relationship between us and heaven is possible. We can speak to God, and He listens. There is a direct connection between the Tetragrammaton and the word "You". Only a being that has a proper name can we address as "You". Hence, in prayer, "You" is always directed to the Tetragrammaton; Elohim goes with the third-person, "He". Thus Elohim signifies God-as-law, natural or moral. The Tetragrammaton refers to God as we encounter Him in intimacy, compassion and love.
The whole essay is amazing to me: I have longed to hear an intellectual speak of God with the kind of reverence and love which R' Sacks uses - all too often, descriptions of a personal relationship with God are absent in the Jewish world, and the conversation is abdicated to Christians, who by their theology believe that the personal relationship with God is only achieved through Jesus. That we disagree with this notion should not be an unstated premise: we too should be ready and eager to embrace God, who is both our Father and our King.
Rabbi Sacks also, in the second excerpt I quoted, completely demonstrates why I do not like the Artscroll Siddur's use of the word "Hashem" as the "translation" for the Tetragrammaton in English: Hashem is a reference to God's name - not to God Himself. They confuse the map with the territory, and make a category error. It's an honest mistake - I'm certain that they did not intend to set God at a greater distance from His people - but the effect is what it is. I have seen that phenomenon map itself into other venues as well: for instance, people under a certain age sing Mizmor l'David (Psalm 23) using the word Hashem instead of Adonai (the traditional pronounciation of the Tetragrammaton during prayer) - that practice was unheard of 40 years ago (go ask the old guys, who still remember...) But the issue is that Mizmor l'David IS a prayer - it's one of the most earnest of the psalms, written by the greatest of the psalmists, and it's sung at seudah shlishit (the third meal) to evoke the memory of king David continually occupying himself with prayer because he feared death when Shabbat would end.
It's one thing to know that we cannot behold God in all his glory: even Moses only caught a glimpse of "God's back" (however one interprets that) - it's another to be unwilling to address God by name. We should not behave toward God as though He is a nameless functionary - we should strive for a close and continual relationship.
Perhaps this is why on the second day of Rosh Hashana, first Dave and then Jonathan successively brought me to tears: the immediacy of their prayer called out, and I could not help but be elevated by their words.
I hope that Rosh Hashana was meaningful for those who celebrate it, and that Yom Kippur will be as well - I'll leave with another of Rabbi Sacks' paragraphs, from section 9, "Prayer and Sacrifice":Sacrifice, like prayer, is a transformative act. We should leave the synagogue, as our ancestors once left the Temple, seeing ourselves and the universe differently, freshly conscious that the world is God's work, the Torah God's word, our fellow believers God's children, and our fellow human beings God's image. We emerge re-focused and re-energised, for we have made the journey back to our source, to the One who gives life to all. Distant, we have come close. That is prayer as sacrifice, korban, giving back to God a token of what He has given us, thereby coming to see existence itself as a gift, to be celebrated and sanctified.
====
I just received some pictures from my trip to Rigi - you can get a hint of the beauty of the Alps in the background. The adorable little girl is D's and A's oldest daughter Thalia.
( Thalia and I at Rigi )
ok, now I'm really going to sleep...
Current Location: Kista, Stockholm, SE
Current Mood: awed
Current Music: Smashing Pumpkins, "Landslide"
Tags: grammar, religion, travel
|
|
09:44 am
[Link] |
Why do they say "sick as a dog"?
Seriously: "lazy as a dog" I could see. "Hungry like the dog" I could also see; but the dogs I know are either healthy or fake it well: they don't seem to get the "big hunk o'misery" that people get when sick.
Sort of like saying that one is sweating like a pig, and then realizing that pigs don't sweat...
Does anyone have convenient access to the OED? I am trying to verify that the original plural for "dolphin" is "dolphin," and that "dolphins" is the more modern form (much like the pronounciation of Celtic with a soft 'c', both of these have been well cemented by the names of sports teams...)
===
For those playing along at home, MH has been having all kinds of problems with the Google-video uploader, so we're going to try doing an end-run around it. I don't know if this'll still get me some scotch, but I'd certainly be slow to refuse...
Current Location: home
Current Mood:  sick
Current Music: Jane's Addiction, "Ripple"
Tags: grammar, illness, purim
|
|
01:26 pm
[Link] |
Jump the snark
As much as I tend to think that Speaker Pelosi's style is much ado about nothing, Lisa Schiffren's article about attending a dinner at which Pelosi was the guest of honor is exceptionally snarky and nasty. Schiffren is correct on some points: Pelosi has not particularly distinguished herself via her legislative agenda, and her rise to power has been relatively mysterious (then again, most legislators' rises have been mysterious - genuine charisma, or genius, or valour, are not as common as one might hope). But the article Schiffren wrote spends more words on the frippery of costuming than on the substance of legislating, and isn't a fair critique of Pelosi's House.
===
Sarah sent me this from her word-of-the-day:
Uxorious: Excessively submissive or devoted to one's wife.
Personally, I'm fascinated by this word: it has two qualitatively different meanings, an unclear adverb, and contains the possibility of being either a positive or a negative.
excessively submissive to one's wife
That's probably not good - whether or not one should be submissive, it seems clear that one should not be excessively submissive.
devoted to one's wife
This is clearly a good thing - devotion to a person is a mark of love and character, and should be viewed as a positive. I wouldn't mind being described as behaving uxoriously, in this context.
excessively devoted to one's wife
This is more ambiguous: as above, devotion to one's wife is a good thing, but excessive devotion is normally considered bad. Then again, is it really even possible for devotion to be excessive? Perhaps a nullification of the self is occurring - but there are plenty of faiths which would encourage (nay, require!) such a thing. Perhaps, then, the issue is not minimal uxoriousness, but rather the explosion of uxoriousness to the exclusion of other values - the excessive grasp of uxoriousness.
Note: in the WOTD Sarah sent, the definition was "a wife" not "one's wife," which calls into question whether or not an adulterer could be behaving uxoriously, but I will leave that aside for some other enterprising person to explore.
===
Continuing on the grammar theme, here is an argument about whether "who" or "that" is appropriate in a given sentence. It's surprisingly hard to find good online English grammar rulesets, and many of those found contradict one another. I'm moderately amazed that anyone can actually write English clearly, given the complexities involved...
To summarize:
person who
group of persons who
group of persons that (in restrictive clause only)
object that (in restrictive clause)
object which (in non-restrictive clause only)
===
Psychotoddler rants about proper behavior during shul, and he's completely correct. (hattip to DovBear).
An excellent article by Marc Angel on the topic of yuharah (presumptiousness / false piety) is available from the now-defunct edah.org.
I find PT's complaint particularly resonant because in recent days, I have been largely unable to davven with a minyan (due to commuting issues), and so it is all the more valuable to me when I am there. I've had multiple mornings disrupted by folks who were reading the sh'ma VERY loudly, very slowly, and continuing to do so when the rest of the community (including me) had passed on to the shmonei esrai. My first thought in these cases is "why do you think God is so deaf that you need to shout?" And of course, that thought completely disrupts my kavanah (focus).
When I finished trying to pray, I noticed that the person who was so loud was using a transliterated Siddur, which means of course that he was praying neither in English nor in Hebrew, but in sounds which were meaningless to his own ears. (Notice in the pull example, that the word ashrei is translated as "praiseworthy," that selah is left untranslated, and that the hideous phrase "...whose G-d is HASHEM" is printed in place of a reasonable English translation.)
In any case, the halakhot are pretty clear: if any person can hear your prayer, you're too loud.
===
One final note: I am occasionally greeted with surprise when I tell people that I play guitar. QC has a great mental image:
What, you mean you can't imagine me in leather pants and a leopard-print spandex tanktop, all shreddin' mad arpeggios on a pointoy guitar with an airbrush drawing of a snake fighting a hot ninja babe?
Current Location: Frederick, Md.
Current Mood: good
Current Music: Seal, "Killer"
Tags: comics, grammar, music, politics, rant, religion, sarah
|
|
09:34 pm
[Link] |
more grammar!
I warned you it was coming:
het and hey behave the same way when ending words: a patakh under either is recited before the consonant instead of after as usual. The hey will ususally have a dagesh in it in this case, indicating emphasis.
Examples: The father of Shem & Aver is noah, not noha. In Hallel (psalm 114), The phrase is Elo-ak Ya-akov not Elo-ka Ya-akov.
That situation doesn't happen a whole heck of a lot - nothing like the kamatz katon - but it's in obvious enough places (generally in the middle of a responsive prayer) that it's VERY clear if the ba'al tefilah (prayer leader) doesn't know the rule.
Here's a rule which is far more often observed in its breach: in a traditional siddur, The last letters of the first and last words of the sh'ma prayer are larger - they're an ayin and a dalet - this spells eid (witness). They're larger to serve as a visual cue for a profound concept: by saying the sh'ma we are serving as a witness for the oneness of God, which is an intrinsic article of faith.
Anyway, there is a custom of elongatating the dalet at the end of ehad, as a way of adding emphasis to the witnessing. Most people end up saying something like ehaaaaaaaaaDuh. However, the dalet doesn't have a vowel under it, and doesn't have a dagesh - so both extending the kamatz under the het, and pronouncing a hard "d" are wrong. Rather, what's supposed to be extended is the dalet itself - and a dalet without a dagesh is ideally pronounced as something like "dh" - slightly softer than the typical hard "d" in other cases, and a dalet without a dagesh shouldn't be pronounced as one which is harder than one which does have a dagesh. Most modern Hebrew speakers don't differentiate between the consonants with dageshim, but that's the wrong place for the emPHASis. Regarding the kamatz: that's just on the wrong letter - so what people are saying there is perhaps ah (brother) which would of course be a heretical term if applied to God.
So what's right? ehadhhh. (think dh &asymp th &asymp j)
more to come...
Current Location: home
Current Mood: sick
Current Music: Barenaked Ladies, "Life in a Nutshell"
Tags: grammar, religion
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
thegameiam's journal