1

In the musafs for Shabbat-Rosh Chodesh and the Yomim Tovim we bemoan our inability to offer the sacrifices because of the destruction of the temple. (That we do so only on the Rosh Chodesh which falls on Shabbat and not the "regular" Rosh Chodesh is dealt with here)

However, there is a subtle change in wording. On Yom Tov, we read that the Beit Hamikdash was destroyed " מִפְּנֵי הַיָּד שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּלְּחָה בְּמִקְדָּשֶׁךָ". However, on Shabbat-Rosh Chodesh we say (according to my Siddur Tefillah Hashalem) " מִפְּנֵי הַיָּד השלוחה בְּמִקְדָּשֶׁךָ"

[note -- the sefaria.org site and my artscroll have nishtalcha in both cases]

What would the difference be in terms of meaning and intent of the composer if one were to choose one rather than the other? Do they mean the same thing precisely or refer to exactly the same event?

  • Hashelucha seems to be “that which was sent” - a passive verb, with the subject being the hand - while shenishtalcha seems to be “that which you sent” - an active verb, with the subject being HaShem and the object being the hand. It’s a subtle difference indeed, and I’m not sure why you would use one word over the other. – DonielF Oct 22 '17 at 14:50
  • 1
    Do any early siddurim have the two differently? – mevaqesh Oct 22 '17 at 14:50
  • Both versions exist in both places. You should edit out the comparison with Yom Tov – Double AA Oct 22 '17 at 15:05
1

As mentioned in the comments, shenishtalcha is in the past tense -- "it was sent a long time ago"; hashlucha is in the present -- "sent." In Hebrew today, if you walk into a room and smell smoke, you would say you smell something saruf, present-tense "burned"; not nisraf, "that was burned a while ago."

At the simplest level it's not a major difference; however I've heard in the name of Rabbi Hershel Schachter that perhaps the difference could be connected to the dispute between Rambam and Raavad on the state of the Temple Mount today. If its active Temple sanctity was voided long ago, then you would use nishtalcha -- it happened then. If the site retains active Temple sanctity today, then it is a present-tense loss -- shlucha.

| improve this answer | |
  • Saruf is present tense of Nisraf?? You are mixing up different Binyanim here. – Double AA Oct 25 '17 at 14:40
  • @DoubleAA oh that's possible; what would it be, please? – Shalom Oct 25 '17 at 14:43
  • In Nifal, Nisraf with a Patach is past tense and Nisraf with a Kamatz is present tense. (singular male) (like the discussion about והמן נבעת) – Double AA Oct 25 '17 at 14:46
-1

shlucho is a passive present verb nishtalcha is a past nispael. best with another example. boruch is a passive verb. Meaning hashem is blessed without anyone doing anything. It is a state of being. Like tsorua is being in the state of tsoraas. A hispael is when someone does something to himself. A nispael is when something is done to you similar to a niphal. nisbarech is someone who has been blessed. An action has happened and you are quoting the action. boruch you are quoting the present state not an action.

| improve this answer | |
  • Welcome to Mi Yodeya! Could you edit in some more detail about what the difference between "passive" and "nispael" is, and what the difference in meaning is in this context? – Isaac Moses Oct 25 '17 at 14:26

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .