- This topic has 28 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Despite the famous drasha “Yitamu Chatoim Min Haoretz” – Chatoim (sins) V’lo Chotiim (and not [the] sinners), most people who fall under the category where their actions we pray shall be vanquished from the earth are like those mentioned frequently in tehillim – Where Dovid Hamelech beseeches constantly that HASHEM utterly destroy eviscerate vanquish decimate demolish to utter ultimate extinction. The obvious kasha is asked by the meforshim why is Dovid Hamelech asking for their demise if we say we hope for their teshuva, and they answer that that is true when their is a chance they will do teshuva. Hence those who are steadfast in their venemous hatred of Isreal and the Jews should be among those mentioned in tehillim. Unfortunately there might be some Jews included in this. . .
No, the Jews are the biggest tzadikim.
mochoh timcheh: I see that you are new here. See HERE. (And keep in mind that some hold that you might be chayav malkos for this offense.)
MT: Saying that Chataim V’lo Chot’im means “sins and not sinners” is a mistranslation.
According to Rav Lior in the name of Rav Kuk any Jew who sides with our enemies is from the Erev Rav.
MT: Nice try, but no. Here’s a tip, by the way: Next time you want to come across as pedantic, make sure that you are actually correct. The word Chata’im is not the plural of the word Cheit, meaning sin. That would be Chata’os. Chata’im is the plural of the word Chata (note the Dagesh in the Tes), which means someone who sins habitually. (In Hebrew, almost all jobs are a verb with a Patach under the first letter of the Shoresh and a Dagesh in the second letter with a Kamatz under that, as is the case here.) Thus, a Chata is someone who sins by profession-i.e. does it all the time. Thus, we prat for those who sin sometimes, but not those who sin habitually.
MT: I can’t answer for how Artscroll or Metzudah translated, but I did give you the explanation as to how to properly translate the word. This should be obvious to anyone who knows Hebrew grammar. And the Gemara in Brachos still works. B’ruriah’s point was that this person was not one who sinned constantly, hence it was still possible to Daven for him to do T’shuvah.
The plural of sins would be Chata’os, in the feminine, as any other similar noun that ends in an Alef (think Kisei). And even if this would be an irregular Chata’im (should such a word exist), for it to be the plural of the word Cheit it would need a Kamatz under the Ches, not a Patach under the Ches with a Dagesh in the Tes, which is how it appears.
Thank you for bringing this up to me though. Artscroll is usually good about these sorts of things. I think I’ll write them a letter, or send them an email, or however one contacts Artscroll.
MT: And what’s your answer to the Dagesh? Also, I checked the Artscroll Siddur for Barchi Nafshi over Yom Tov. They translate it as sinners.
MT: I don’t claim to be an expert, but I do know Dikduk well. And I explained the Gemara according to the proper translation of the words. Do you have an issue with my approach to the Gemara there?
Nice try Sam but the word Chata’im is plural for chait. See Yom Kippur Davening “Ana Bashem Selach..La’chataim”. In that context it clearly refers to sins not habitual sinners.
Mexipal: I don’t have a Yom Kippur Machzor here with me. How is that Chata’im spelled? I’l be willing to guarantee that it has a Kamatz under the Ches and not a Patach under the Ches with a Dagesh in the Tes.
Whew, mochoh timcheh, are you trying to show off your new thesaurus?
MT: Exceptions exist in a lot of things in the Hebrew language, including pluralizing words. This is not such a case. Please, tell me, what was wrong with my P’shat in the Gemara?
This thread should be closed down until someone learns how to spell Israel correctly.
apushatayid: Amen!
I think everyone here is wrong (although feel free to disagree with me). First of all, there are two different hebrew words that are spelled ?????, depending on whether the nekuda under the ? is a patach (and the ? has a dagesh), or the nekuda under the ? is a chataf patach. When it’s just a patach, the word means sinners (as in selichos ???? ????? ??????). When it’s a chataf patach, it means the cause of sins. The word ?????? can only mean sinners. Pshat in the Gemara, is that since the pasuk wrote ????? instead of ??????, it must be coming to teach us that you should wipe out the cause of sins (i.e. the Yetzer Harah) and not the sinners themselves. It can’t mean to wipe out the sins because then Bruriah’s pshat doesn’t answer the question that she asked on R’ Meir – how would it be ?????? ??? ????? Once you say that it means the Yetzer Harah, it is clear how it would be ?????? ??? ????. See Rashi, the Maharsha, and the Yaavetz.
Interestingly, the Tzlach seems to feel (or at least strongly entertain the notion) that we don’t pasken like Bruriah/R’ Meir as evidenced by the fact that in both the preceeding Gemara and the subsequent Gemara, tis pasuk is interpreted as referring to the downfall of the actual Reshaim.
Mochoh, cite your source for your contention that “most people who fall under the category where their actions we pray shall be vanquished from the earth” and your apparent interpretation (“vanquished” can mean that they will see the error of their ways). We see that Beruria’s way worked not Rabbi Meir’s. Here is what Rav Tzvi Pesacch Frank says
(??”? ?? ??? ???? ???? ? ???? ???):
?. ??”? ??? ??? ????? ????? ??????? ????? ???”? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ??????. ?”? ???? ?????? ?? ??, ??? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ???? ?????? ??? ?”? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???.
??? ????? ??? ??? ??????????? ????? ?? ??, ??? ??? ????? ???? ???? ????. ????, ???? ????? ????? (?? ?? ?”?) ?????? ??? ???? – ??? ??? ???? ??? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?’ ?? ???? ????? ???? ????? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?? ?????, ???”? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ???? ??? ????. ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?????. ????? ?????? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???? ????? ???? ????? ??? ??????, ???? ??? ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ?????? ??????. ??”? ???? ????? ???? ???? ?’, ??? ?”?, ????? ?? ?? ??? ???????: ???? ???, ??? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ????. ?????? ???? ????? ?? ?????, ???? ??”? ??????? ??? ?? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???. ???? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???, ??? ???? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ??? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???, ?????? ????.
I used bad phraseology. The Tzlach doesn’t say that we don’t pasken like Bruriah/R’ Meir; he says that we see from the preceding and subsequent Gemaros that the pasuk is not ???? ???? ????? (in that it refers to the downfall of the reshaim themselves).
It is taka a bissel shver (I’m practicing my Yiddish) because I pointed out that
It can’t mean to wipe out the sins because then Bruriah’s pshat doesn’t answer the question that she asked on R’ Meir – how would it be ?????? ??? ?????
yet Bruriah then told R’ Meir ??? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? which would be subject to the same kashya – how will it be ?????? ??? ???? if these hooligans do teshuva? Unless you say that she was specifically referring to these people when she said ?????? ??? ????. But if that’s the case then her kashya on R’ Meir is removed because he can say that the pasuk is referring to the specific reshaim that get wiped out.
In Tachanun it says “????? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ??????”
????? clearly is referring to to sinners, not sins.
What do you make of our thrice daily tefilos for Hashem to wipe out the wicked?:
Let there be no hope for informers, and may all the heretics and all the wicked instantly perish; may all the enemies of Your people be speedily extirpated; and may You swiftly uproot, break, crush and subdue the reign of wickedness speedily in our days. Blessed are You L-rd, who crushes enemies and subdues the wicked.
Knuckle up and give the day advice. Were you really a trainwreck?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.