Q&A - Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews - Why so Many Differences?

the issue of ashim the origin of these different things uh you know I always say that when a person's a Chua and certainly when a person's a g they do have a certain freedom to decide to be ashkanazi Ori meaning you're not necessarily Bound by your parents ethnic backgrounds if they were not keeping Mitzvah so if I have to decide do I want to be ashkanazi or sari G I got to go through a whole big list uh pros and cons one week a whole month okay so that's in favor of razm uh rice on PES that's a favor of sardam uh polygamy that can go either way uh you know so I don't know um now the thing is this the thing is uh there is a Havana that actually says that the ultimate origin of course ashaz and are ultimately two geographical areas right that's uh ashkanazi is the European continent and sardam are well SP plus um the Middle East and and the like but some say that the naam and are actually rooted in bav and Yi and that's very fascinating and that is uh in the time of the mishna gamara the two main Torah centers in the world were B and erel and these were two different Torah centers uh the hos of Israel were largely cified in the toi and the B was cified in the T B and interestingly enough the sim took over more of the minhagim of B and the ashkenazim took over more of the minhagim of er Isel and in fact the interesting idea was because it really was from Italy meaning to say the way Jews got to Europe how did they get to Germany Poland Russia was from Italy so er Israel Italy Germany France Poland Russia so as a result theel became the theim ofad uh came from B now this is very very difficult to fully understand because L for both ashaz and the talmud B is more authoritative than the talmud Yi so in terms of the talmud B wins almost all the time but in terms of minhagim the old idea was that ashim were based on the and the were based on theh of B so that's one source of origin of the difference now the other thing is you have to understand the following the fact that ashkenazim and spum have differences is not necessarily because Asim do it one way and spum do it another way it goes back to the poim meaning to say there were pokim let's say the Ramba the rambam didn't decide anything because he was a spari the rambam didn't say oh I'm spartic so I have to decide rather the rambam pasin because the ramban pasin now it happens to be he was aardi so therefore followed the ram see what I'm saying in other words ashaz andard became ashaz andm based on the poim in their geographical area that were considered to be the greatest poim so it wasn't that we pass in a certain way because I'm or I pass in a certain way because I'm masazi rather if I'm I looked at the rambam as my main Authority if I was ashaz I looked at the rash or Rashi as my main Authority so essentially keep in mind that a lot of this you know I mean everything is but one could imagine that if if uh if the reim lived in a time that had email facts zoom and Skype perhaps there wouldn't have been so many differences in ASM and SP because we would have been aware of everybody's opinion but the hasaka was that the development of Al occurred at a time when Communications between countries was not so great and as a result there were different enclaves that had their rabam and their teachers and they were not always aware of those other enclaves and as a result Halos developed differently now had there been a more integrative Communication System the system might have been different now I'm not suggesting all of this is by accident I mean Hashem wanted Hashem wanted it that way so that's the way it was but nevertheless part of ashaz is simply geographical separation that resulted in different interpretations so everybody accepted the Babylonian tement as definitive but saric re him interpreted the sakar certain way ashm interpreted it a different way and that had hak ramification so you're dealing with the same primary text and you had different modes of interpretation but it is it is a good question I mean especially the thing that I said before is a bit problematical to say that ashik stem fromel and stem from B while at the same time saying that even ashkenazim consider the talmud B more definitive seems to be almost a bit of a contradiction but that's kind of uh how that system is set up yeah so then is there like when when we say different filos for example like it's because the the post scheme said you should say this in Shimon EST versus you know yeah so here's the question let's take Shimon EST as a good example uh now Shon was not written by later generations Shon was compiled by the UN Ezra now if Shimon was comp presumably they wrote it one way so how do you get not just asazi but and different types of now it is important to note that even considering all the differences of shon they are relatively minor they are relatively small in number meaning to say a does not look radically different than Aon asazi show there are differences in words Etc but overall the structure is the same but how do you reconcile it with the Ana in which there was a definitive Shon I mean somebody's wrong here either ashkenazim are wrong or spam are wrong or they're both wrong because both of them have deviated from the official text right how did that happen so there are really two types of explanations that are offered here maybe they amount to almost the same thing but they are a little different explanation number one is the an Kessa sagola never gave you a full text of shon they determined the content of the Bros and they determine the order of the Bros you know AOS goros Etc and they determine the of the Bros Ro goel Israel Etc however the particular stuff in the middle how you express the prayer for the sick they left it to local communities to be able to improvise now what that means is that at some point in our history Not only was there ashaz andad there may have been a hundred different versions every city may may have had Shon in a different way because according to this idea thean agola never formalized a word forword text they again they formalized the content of the Bros you know illness Redemption pessa and they formalize the order of the Bros and they formalize theim of the Bros but the stuff in the middle was left for local and it could be that Sardi and ashkanazi and tamman are the last survivors of what would have what what what actually could have been multiple multiple multiple new because eventually uh communities organized and they kind of standardize their liturgies within their areas that is mahalik number one mahalik number two uh is the name of the Aral the Aral points out that in the bikash the not not in the the the temple building but in the Azara the courtyard of the Bas mikash according to one opinion in M MOS there were 13 gates to the B mikdash 13 Gates why 13 Gates because each tribe had its own gate and if you didn't know what tribe you belong to you went into What's called the shakol the general gate for anyone who didn't know his tribe for whatever reason so the Aral says the same way there are 13 gates to the base of mikdash there are 13 gates to shamayim to access the Heavenly Temple through our prayers and the different texts of the amida and the daving represent the remnants of different tribal ways would actually say we I don't think we can count 12 new today but he actually says there were 12 new of uh giving each tribe a sh and then the AR claim that his is the sh that if you don't know what tribe you belong to works for everybody now that's a bit of a problem because we actually don't know what is I mean that that's a big problem I mean as you know labels it's but you have to understand what that means uh it is the batak as to what was meaning every of is I mean it's based on cabala the balatan went through 60 different versions and this was his so it it's not actually nari it's the balat Gea of what he felt wasar but as it may the AR did say that his is now this second answer is a little confusing because what does that mean so you're telling me that the different of other than are MIM to the tribe that I come from so the question then becomes then how do I know I'm daving the right amida I mean maybe I'm ding the ruon right when I'm really from Shimon what's what's going to be the matchup here and how can a CO and is D the sameon since they for sure are from different tribes right the Israel is not from Ley and the Cohen is from Ley so there are going to be some difficulties with the AR's approach so I think the easiest Mahal is the first Mahal that the Ana left it to each seore to improvise that way um and therefore uh these now we don't we don't do that we don't do that improvisation today you know you don't make up words but theoretically you could you and as a result if you follow it's going to be fine now there's a big asazi U you know this is a kind of AES 22 because thei poim tend to say and asazi is allowed to switch to Sardi and not vice versa and the ashkanazi postum tend to say exactly the opposite so you kind of need a POS who's neither asaz to kind of look at this in a totally objective way uh and the is generally speaking though we follow least follower of mos that if you're normal asazi and you're in ay show you should still DAV ashkanazi but whatever is required for a minion like kadha you should say the kadha of the seor okay that's important so if I'm daving in aardi show I answer the kadus of spim if aardi is ding in an ashkanazi show he answers the Kad of an ashkanazi uh but the should be what your isi or asazi with the exception if you're Ain if you're Ain the silent should match the karat because the whole purpose of theen daving Silent is to prepare himself for Kazar so if I'm and I'm ding for the my silent amid should be asazi and vice versa but if I'm not Ain and I normally D in my silent am should be that's how we work now just uh what about pronunciations uh that that's actually became an issue with uh last jais uh and that is General Al speaking most people are not in with the pronunciation of the so frazi Andi we don't make a big deal with pronunciations uh but some people are M for every that they want to hear the in their most people are not m in that either but many people are M that for par which may be a they're mockit on hearing it in the pronunciation that they are mael as a legitimate pronunciation even that is not a problem because the truth of the matter is neither Asim nor speak uh the correct pronunciation of Hebrew in other words so we're basically all messed up in Hebrew pronunciation I mean if we ask the question how Didu speak how Didu sound it wouldn't sound like uh any body's uh today and think about this because if you look at the Hebrew alphabet you see uh the alphabet doesn't doesn't make sense the way it's current I mean what is the difference between a Tess and a tough and if you're Sparty what is the difference between a tough and a or a Bas and a vas what is the difference between a and a uh these are the same in our impoverished pronunciation these things are indistinguishable letters what type of alphabet has uh uh the same letters uh pronounced the same way multiple times and then we have other phonm other sounds that are not in the alphabet at all we don't have in our pronunciation th a th sound we don't have a soft gimmel although do we don't have a so both asaz and are not pronouncing Hebrew correctly uh in fact what is called saric pronunciation in medel was really made up by elzra Ben yud who was ashkanazi but since he uh hated Uh Russian Jewish ashkanazi culture so when he came to arel he was determined that only sard were authentic and he he put on a Turkish Fez and all sorts of stuff so he was the one who pushed for saric pronunciation but it's not real saric pronunciation so the closest that we probably have to the way Hebrew sounded in the days of mosha rabenu is ton tamon is different tamon is different than regular spartic pronunciation but even tamon has been adulterated by Arabic uh there has been a strong Arabic infusion and think and think about differences in ashkanazi pronunciation uh how do you pronounce the the the the the o sound right do you say Torah T but let's let's forget about ACC for a moment do you say Tor do you say which is the German pronunciation do you say TOA which is the Polish pronunciation do you say Tera which is the Lisha pronunciation right very confusing these are different dialects Poland Russia Hungary Germany that existed within ashkenazic uh communities um and then you have the communities where the the u sound becomes an e sound la that's the joke they say that you know it says in you should train a child according to his way so it says too many parents are gitanas they say dark train the child according to my way right so where do you where do you get that stuff where do you get pronunciations like that the truth of the matter is and I'm not I'm not the biggest expert in this but a lot of Hebrew pronunciation were corrupted by the local SEC the local secular language and the way it was pronounced the way certain sounds were pronounced or not pronounced in general culture influen the way Hebrew is pronounced as a result we don't always have the original pronunciations of Hebrews I say tonim are the closest but even the tonim there's been an adulteration of Arabic influence but I do know I know I do know at least one person who was born askanazi uh he's he's actually a lumon but he has he's a little out of the box uh he insists on only daving tamon he says even though he's a regular ashkanazi but you know tamon is Hebrew and this is the this is what he's going to D in with and uh he says that people think oh there's no way I'm 25 how can I learn to you know pronounce and he says that's not so hard you know you could habituate yourself to uh DAV or whatever whatever it is so the question that uh again I know I'm digressing here the question you might ask is well if all of us are speaking Hebrew wrong then are any of us y say anything am i y say shma I mean I'm not saying the words right I'm mispronouncing the words so there is a concept in h that's a very intriguing concept and that is the valid pronunciation of Hebrew becom defined by a community that a that once a community has established a pronunciation of Hebrew even if it's not the original pronunciation it becomes hierarchically acceptable for members of that Community it's a very strange idea because one would have thought pronunciation should be should have an objective reality standard and yet allows communities to Define it uh by their even their erroneous pronunciations so that's why with their pronunciation and LV with their pronunciation and Germans yakis Yi with their pronunciation Etc uh the only question is is a person outside of that congregation G with that pronunciation so Hebrew does allow a multiplicity of pronunciations