axm9839@acf4.UUCP (Asher Meth) (03/14/84)
Yom Gimel Leparshas Tzav / Parshas Zachor, 9 ADAR II 5744
corresponding to Tuesday, March 13/'84 (lemisparam)
Re : Nemi Klein's questions about Purim & Parshas Zachor
Especially in the spirit of Purim, as we learn from the Megillah,
"Kol haomer davar beshem omero meivi geulah laolam" :
I consulted my brother Kalman Zvi on this as he is more "up" on it.
Nemi asked basically one question : what is the whole business of
Zeicher & Zecher ?
My brother's information is based on lectures he heard from Rabbi Mordechai
Breuer, from Jerusalem, ISRAEL, an authority on "kisvei yad" (manuscripts)
of Tanach (the 24 "books" of the Bible).
Before the time of the Vilna Gaon, about 200 or so years ago, we find NO
Halachic literature on the matter of Zeicher/Zecher. In fact, the Sepharadim
have no such "question" in this matter - they say Zeicher (w/ a tzeire).
"Zeicher IS an actual, REAL word found in Tanach - Tehillim (Psalms) 112:6.
QUESTION : Is there a REAL word "Zecher" in tanach ? I'll have to check in a
Koncordantzia (concordance). Are there any bekiim or baalei dikduk out there
who can clue-in the rest of us ?
As far as repeating parts of or the whole pasuk :
In general, we try NOT to repeat ANY words.
If there IS a word "zecher", then : (a) if it means the same thing as "zeicher"
then perhaps we should NOT repeat the pasuk since we are already "yotzai" with
this reading; on the other hand, repeating the pasuk would then be no worse
than saying a pasuk from the Torah twice (Q - is there any problem with doing
this, especially since THIS pasuk has a Shem ? also, if we repeat a pasuk, are
we automatically implying that the first reading was wrong ? this Q can be asked
in general.).
(b) if "zecher" does NOT mean the same as "zeicher" (assuming that "zeicher"
DOES mean that which we wish to say) then saying "zecher" in the context of
the pasuk (1) may not make any sense, and (2) may therefore constitute saying
a Shem "levatoloh" (for naught).
Why do we say both ? Good question. My only answer now is - that is what is
brought down in halachah, so that is what we do.
In any case, I am NOT attempting to answer the question, just mentioning
Rav Breuer's remarks. Rav Breuer also says that we should NOT say the other
two "repeated verses" of the Megillah more than once - i.e., he says that
we NOW have a good Masorah and should follow it. Most of us say both - at least
wherever i've heard the Megillah; among the Sepharadim it may be different.
A Freilichin Purim to one and all !!!
Asher Meth
allegra!cmcl2!acf4!axm9839klein@lzpfc.UUCP (03/14/84)
Asher Meth has basically echoed my question regarding repeating the whole pasuk (verse) if one of the readings is wrong. My feeling (and I have heard this done) is that the whole verse should not be repeated but only the phrase that way one is not saying the Shem for naught. The only problem is by saying Zecher second does that mean that you are correcting yourself from the first pronunciation of Zeicher. Now regarding the origin of the two pronunciations. As Asher mentioned, all thru Tanach (e.g. Tehillim - Psalms) we see it as Zeicher - with a tzeire (two dots) however I believe I have an earlier source for the differences in pronunciation (my apologies to Chaya Bleich who received this in the mail). The Talmud in Baba Bathra 21 relates a story of Yoav Ben Tzruya (the head of the armed forces for David) accidentally read it as Zachar (males) instead of Zeicher (rememberance). Being that the Talmud does not have vowels in it and both words are spelled ZHR - the commentaries explain how to pronounce the words. The Bach says that the Yoav's mistake was between Zachar and Zeicher - which is the way we would interpret it. The Maharsha on the other hand quotes a Rashba (Asher - that is before the Vilna Gaon) who says to pronounce the word Zecher with a Segol (three dots). I checked into this last Shabbos morning and the place I was in did not have a Rashba on Baba Bathra so I did not have a chance to see if there was any explanation. Anyway, I can't think of any difference in meaning but as Asher said if that is what is brought down in the halacha then that is what we do. By the way there are a few opinions that if one missed Parshas Zachor one may fulfill their obligation on Purim morning with the reading of "Vayavo Amalek" (although many authorities disagree since there is no mention of the commandment to wipe out the rememberance of Amalek - see Mishna Brura Siman 785 Seif Katan 16). If that is true and we are stringent with the pronunciation of ZHR in Zachor why not in Vayavo Amalek also - the word ZHR appears also. Finally, in response to my question as to why the laws of the 4 Parshios are in the laws of the Chanuka - I have received responses that it is a misprint. That was my initial reaction but if one looks at the Tur which does not have titles for the chapters - just chapter numbers one will see that that chapter 785 which discusses the 4 Parshios is _BEFORE Hilchos Megilla. A friend of mine when reviewing the laws of Chanuka before Chanuka told me that he had also reviewed the laws of the 4 Parshios - that far I did not go. May we all be zoche to have Ora, Sasson, Simcha, and Yekar. By the way if you have any parking tickets you want to fight Adar is the month to do it in. (For an explanation send mail.) A Freilichin Purim to one and all! Nemi (pegasus!lzpfc!klein)