Avodah Mailing List

Volume 03 : Number 036

Thursday, April 29 1999

• birkas hachama
• Hirschian Gedolim
• Re: Torani computer programs
• Re: Avodah V3 #35
• Re: Producing Gedolim (RE: Avodah V3#34)
• Re: Avodah V3 #35
• Re: calendar info (fwd)
• Re: Producing Gedolim (RE: Avodah V3#34)
• hee vs hu(which is really hee)
• Re: Calendar Controversy -- R Saadia Gaon-Ben Meir
• RE: Avodah V3 #35
• [none]

RYGB writes:
>It seems that since we blithely follow the Julian calendar for Tal
>u'Mattar that there is a nafka mina. (I am not yet clear on this, but what
>about Birkas HaChama?).

Birkas hachama also follows the Julian Calendar (tekufa deshmuel).  Since
the year is 365.25 days in length, each year, the tekufa (equinox) advances
1.25 days in the week (365 / 7 = 52 and 1/7) each year. I.e. if the tekufa
occurs at sunday 12am, this year, it will occur monday 6am the following
year.  So after 28 years, the tekufa will return to it's original time of
day and week at it was.  This is the meaning of "haroeh chama betekufata"
from the ?mishna? in berakhos.

According to the gregorian/rav ada/mean tropical length of the solar year,
the equinox will NEVER return to the same time and day as it was during
creation (I think, anyone care to do the math?).

Moshe  

==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mark Rayman
Lehman Brothers  - Tech Services Market Data
mrayman@lehman.com
212 526 1336
==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Zvi Weiss takes issue with my statements regarding R. Schwab.  I have no
wish to get into a spitting contest with him.  A few points, however, in
defense.

>First of all,
>there is the "rule" of Ain meshivin al Ha'ari achar she'meis -- that one
>must be extremely circumspect in countering a Gadol -- and which (I
>believe) only another Gadol can do).

Sorry.  Neither I nor anyone on this list defers to a Gadol just because
he's dead.  In any case, on this issue, we do have another Gadol
disagreeing with R. Schwab, namely R. Dessler.

> Second, anyone who knows R. Schwab's
>tremedous integrity (at one point he "rejected" Torah Im Derech Eretz
>and then reversed himself -- without any hesitation) KNOWS that he did not
>respond to R. Dessler simply because of "negiah".

I did not say he did.  I leave the uncovering of other people's
motivations to the Bohen Kelayot..  At the same time, as head of the KAJ
community, R. Schwab obviously felt strongly about defending the
Frankfurt derekh.  It is incomprehensible to me how anyone can say he
was not a noge'a ba-davar.  For what it's worth, I think that the
Frankfurt derekh is wonderful.  But I don't think it has produced much
in the way of Gedolim.

Regarding the parenthetical comment about R. Schwab's integrity, I don't
know what to make of it.  How does changing one's mind prove integrity?
Indecision, maybe.  I believe that it was under R. Schwab's watch that
the offical KAJ interpretation of "Torah im Derekh Eretz" took on a
"blacker" hue.  Do you consider denying R. Hirsch's commitment to
Western culture a sign of integrity?  What about R. Schwab's memorable
article in the Jewish Observer regarding the suppression of historical
facts (in that case, regarding Moshe Mendelssohn) that do not accord
with a desired educational aim?  Need I go on?

>Yes.  But he was also already married into the family.  And, I believe
>that (in Frankfurt) the rest of the family FIRST received their education
>at the RealSchule BEFORE going out to other Yeshivot...

I don't know one way or the other.  But even if so, the need to go to a
proper yeshiva afterward fortifies the argument against te Frankfurt
derekh.  After all, R. Shimon Eider went to YU, but he did not become a
big posek until he spent a decade or more at Lakewood.

>ALso, there WERE Talmidei Chachamim that went to the Hildesheimer
>Seminary...

True, but irrelevant.  Hirsch totally rejected the derekh represented by
R. Hildesheimer's seminary.  The communities did not interact.  Sort of
like what goes on nowadays  . . .

Kol tuv,

Eli Clark

--- Someone on a different list I'm on wrote:
> I'm trying to decide whether to buy "Shutt Bar-Ilan" or "the
> Taklitor
> Torani" by Dbs... and if so, whether to buy the big or little
> version.
> Anyone know the advatages and disadvantages of each, besides the
> actual
> books they do or do not contain?
> 

I have both the Bar Ilan ("BI") and the Taklitor Torani ("TT")--but
only the Machshevet Yisrael disk.  I also have the "Otzar HaPoskim,"
which is inaptly named and should have been called "Otzar HaRishonim"
(the Rishonim on Shas).

BI is clearly the superior product.  First, BI has much more rare
material which I could never get in hard copy.  Second, it has much
more material (think of how many dozen bookshelves the hard copy
versions would fill).  Third BI's interface is better, at least in my
experience.  For example, TT doesn't let you print--you have to copy
to a word processor and print from there!

You might want to wait until BI comes out with version 7 (slated for
September--they have a lot of additional material).  Typically, they
ask $100 for an upgrade and have been coming out with an upgrade
about once a year.  If you wait and don't upgrade, their official
policy is to charge $100 for each level (e.g., to upgrade from v.4 to
v.6 you have to pay $200).

Kol tuv,
Moshe


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

> 
> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 09:02:25 -0500 (CDT)
> From: "Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
> Subject: Luach, Response to RZW
> 
> > Comment Regarding the Calendar:
> 
> > I really do not understand why we have to be concerned with the Lu'ach
> > in terms of the Julian Calendar.  The Birchei Yosef (The Chida) points
> > out that there was NEVER a "real" disagreement between Shmu'el and R.
> > Adah as to the length of the Year.  Shmu'el (who cited the Julian
> > length) simply felt that it was "OK" for Beis Din to "approximate" using
> > the Julian value with the intent that [when we were mekadesh with
> > Witnesses -- which (I think) was still the case in Shmu'el's lifetime]
> > Beis Din -- when necessary -- would apply appropriate "corrections".  It
> > seems that all we REALLY have to be concerned about is whether the Month
> > of Nissan will be "Chodesh Ha'Aviv" in terms of the Spring Equinox.  As
> > far as THAT is concerned, I think that we are still "OK".  Since
> > Mashiach is "supposed" to come no later than the year 6000 (when we WILL
> > have a B"D and Kiddush Al Pi Eidim and the determination of Leap Years
> > based upon Simanim rather than a formula) -- this may be only a
> > theoretical issue. 
> > 
> > --Zvi
> > 
> 
> It seems that since we blithely follow the Julian calendar for Tal
> u'Mattar that there is a nafka mina. (I am not yet clear on this, but what
> about Birkas HaChama?).

==> Correct. BUT this is only in Chutz La'aretz and was supposed to
estimate how long it took people to travel.  That does not seem to be a
very significant halachic impact.  If we were *really* worried about
delaying Tal, we could always start saying it in Shm'a Koleinu "just to be
safe"...



> 
> Allso, for those who put needles in their water barrels on the Yom
> HaTekufa (not me), that seems to still follow the Julian calendar (see
> your Ezras Torah luach).

===> I am not sure how much impact this minhag has one way or the other...

--Zvi

> 
> YGB
> 
> Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
> Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
> ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 10:19:50 -0400
> From: "Allen Baruch" <Abaruch@SINAI-BALT.COM>
> Subject: Producing Gedolim  (RE: Avodah V3#34)
> 
> >Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 12:23:56 -0400 (EDT)
> >From: Zvi Weiss <weissz@idt.net>
> >Subject: Re: Avodah V3 #32
> 
> >===> HOwever, R. Dessler's letter DOES seem to focus on such >"production"
> and in fact overtly alludes to the fact that only a FEW will >succeed
> and MANY will fail --
> but the "cost is worth it"...
> 
> R' Moshe Eiseman of Ner Yisrael,  in a discussion several years ago about
> the "competitiveness"  in our Yeshivos today, told us that he knows for
> a fact of several promising talmidim of the Alter who were "crushed" -
> ie
> their growth slowed dramatically -  when R' Aharon Kotler came to the
> yeshiva, as it seems that the Alter dropped them to concentrate on R'
> Aharon. He asked R' Ruderman why/how the Alter could do this to those
> talmidim. R' Ruderman answered that without R' Aharon there is no Torah
> in America.

==> The difficulty that I have is that this sounds like a "self-fulfilling
prophecy".  Maybe if those others had not been "crushed", THEY might have
provided "Torah in America"...  It is much easier to state that the Alter
was following along the lines that R. Dessler had described -- to "produce
Gedolim" so that as soon as SOMEONE appeared to be more "fruitful", OTHERS
were just "dropped"...

> 
> Sender Baruch
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 09:23:38 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: sefardi poskim
> 
> - --- Zvi Weiss <weissz@idt.net> wrote:
> > > From: Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com>
> . . . .
> > > Don't mean to start a fire here, but I think it would be
> > interesting
> > > to do a survey how many of the above Gedolim were viewed as
> > > "international Gedolim"--i.e., achieving status even in
> > Ashkenazic
> > > circles and being quoted in Ashkenazic teshuvot.
> . . . .
> > >Do Ashkenazi poskim quote Sefardi poskim of
> > the
> > > past 300 years?  (Of course Rav Ovadia Yosef quotes more than any
> > > other shu"t, so maybe the comparison is unfair, but you get my
> > point.)
> > 
> > ===> Given the different methodological approaches between the
> > Ashkenazim
> > and Sefardim, I don't know if this is a valid metric to use.  It is
> > nice
> > when someone from the 18th Century (I think that is the time-line
> > for the
> > Chatam Sofer) cites a 16th century authority but how often do we
> > see ANY
> > Ashkenazim citing "contemporary" sefardim.  
> 
> My point is how many Ashkenazim cite 18th and 19th century poskim. 
> Clearly, it is rare to see Rav Moshe Feinstein citing Rav S. Z.
> Auerbach (or vice versa).
===> See below.


> 
> > And, given the approach
> > that
> > is used (which SEEMS to be less "precedent-based" and more
> > "lomdish-based"), why WOULD they cite Sefardim (who follow a
> > different
> > "Shitas HaP'sak")?  It seems to me that it is SPECIFICALLY the
> > Sefardim
> > who seem much more precedent-based who will cite the works of BOTH
> > Ashkenazim AND Sefardim....  The absence of Ashkenazim -- therefore
> > --
> > would not necessarily show that the Sefardi is less "international"
> > --
> > only that the Ashkenazim are not interested...
> 
> I agree with you that Ashkenazim's shitat hapsak would tend to cause
> them to quote less from others.  Nevertheless, Ashkenazi poskim who
> are lomdish-based would be more likely to quote the "best"
> sevarah--no matter where it comes from--since they are not as
> interested in precedent based psak.  For example, R. Akiva Eiger is
> often quoted because he is considered one of the most brilliant
> lamdonim and not because he is considered the major posek of the
> time.

===> I think that -- for "Ashkenazi p'sak", the "best" sevarah still has
to "fit" within the Shittas HaPsak of Ashkenaz.  Thus, R. Akivah Eiger is
a Brilliant example *within* that School of P'sak..



> 
> In fact, I am often flabbergasted at how much Ashkenazi psak Rav
> Ovadia Yosef quotes considering that he ought to be most interested
> in Sefardi precedent.  The Ashkenazi in me says that he's really
> impressed with the Ashkenazi lomdus, but who knows?

==> But, you see - I think that R. Yosef SHLITA (in particular) focuses a
LOT on overall precedent and NOT JUST that of Sefardi precedent.  He seems
to have taken the Sefardi Shitta of Precedent and carried it to great
lengths.  Of course, the final analysis will be in terms of Sefardi p'sak
but the analysis will be as "Precedent-loaded" as possible.

--Zvi


> 
> Kol tuv,
> Moshe
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:58:12 -0400
> From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
> Subject: Gedolim, Yeshivos
> 
> Zvi:>>Whether the system
> > will succeed in producing "Gedolim" has yet to be determined.  Certainly
> > we are still waiting for the next Hazon Ish to appear.
> 
> ===> I think that there were other factors here -- besides the wealth of
> the community.  In fact, the unfortunate isntances of "scandals" would
> seem to give the lie to such claims of "wealth"...<<
> 
> I heard besheim R. S. Schwab (source supplied offlist) that he insisted that
>  the
> reason today's yeshivos produce fewers Gedolim is is that they are supported 
> with "tainted" money.

===> I also heard b'shem R. Schwab ZT"L that the reason parents often have
trouble with Children "going off the derech" is because the food was not
"really" kosher as the parent had earned "tainted money" and non-kosher
food is "m'tamteim halev" ("stops up the heart")...

--Zvi


> 
> Rich Wolpoe
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:01:54 -0400
> From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
> Subject: Kollel Stipends
> 
> Zvi>>  Here, there is an explicit quid pro quo.  There
> is a "partnership" that INCLUDES both Torah and the Secular World.  <<
> 
> Question: in this quid pro quo is it allowed to be done despite that
> beshito you
> oppose taking money for Talmud Torah?  or since this is a form of
> shelichus, it 
> is not considered remuneration for learning?

==> NO. this is considered a TRUE partnership.  That is, the "secular"
partner is entitled to 1/2 of the Torah learned and "developed" by the
"holy" partner.  I believe that R. Moshe has a Teshuva (that I saw a LONG
time ago) in which he says that a Yissochor/Zevulun arrangement MUST be a
50/50 arrangement ONLY.  That it is a special chiddush that one is even
ABLE to make such a deal because how can 1/2 of one's Torah be "equal" to
1/2 of worldy goods...
In any event, it seems clear that this is NOT Shlichus nor "remuneration"
(since the "Learning partner" is GIVING UP his Torah to the other person).
You may also want to reference the Mishna about "Shim'on Achi Azarya" (I
htink that I got the name correct) and note how the gemara attributes the
learning of the "learner" to the one who is supporting...

--Zvi 




> 
> Rich Wolpoe
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:04:49 -0400
> From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
> Subject: Succession Question
> 
> Zvi:
> >> 
> > R. Hirsch's successor - R. Schlomo Breuer - was a native of Hungary. .  
> 
> ==> Yes.  But he was also already married into the family.  And, I believe
> that (in Frankfurt) the rest of the family FIRST received their education
> at the RealSchule BEFORE going out to other Yeshivot...<<
> 
> Question: How did happen that R. Shlomo Breuer, a son-in-law, succeeded RSR 
> Hirsch when he had a son Mendel who was qite a capable Talmid chochom in
> his own
> right?


===> I assume that the answer is that as great as Mendel Hirsch was, R.
Shlomo Breuer was even greater...
--Zvi

> 
> Rich Wolpoe
>

In a message dated 4/28/99 10:18:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Abaruch@SINAI-BALT.COM writes:

<< 
 R' Moshe Eiseman of Ner Yisrael,  in a discussion several years ago about 
the "competitiveness"  in our Yeshivos today, told us that he knows for a 
fact of several promising talmidim of the Alter who were "crushed" - ie their 
growth slowed dramatically -  when R' Aharon Kotler came to the yeshiva, as 
it seems that the Alter dropped them to concentrate on R' Aharon. He asked R' 
Ruderman why/how the Alter could do this to those talmidim. R' Ruderman 
answered that without R' Aharon there is no Torah in America.
 
 Sender Baruch
 
  >>
Dear Sender,
A most interesting story.  Did you get a sense from R' Eisenmann that the 
Alter did a cost/benefit analysis of the "cost" done to the dropped students 
to the "benefit" of R' Aharon factoring in the likelihood of the various 
outcomes for them as individuals as well as for klal yisrael with associated 
probabilities?(This is not meant tongue in cheek at all) Or was it a case of 
"libi omer li" with history only mentioned to 'justify' the decision. Of 
course the implication is that had the Alter not focused solely on R' Aharon, 
he would have turned out differently....  As for the statement ...there is no 
tora in america.... one might wonder about revach vhatzala coming from 
elsewhere for the Jews had the case been different.

Kol Tuv,
Joel

In a message dated 4/28/99 4:05:55 PM EST, weissz@idt.net writes:

> ==> Correct. BUT this is only in Chutz La'aretz and was supposed to
>  estimate how long it took people to travel.  That does not seem to be a
>  very significant halachic impact.  If we were *really* worried about
>  delaying Tal, we could always start saying it in Shm'a Koleinu "just to be
>  safe"...
>  

In Bovel (and by extension in all of Chutz L'oretz) it is based entirely on 
the (60th night from the) Tkufoh, in Eretz Yisroel it is delayed until the 
farthest traveler would return from Aliyoh L'regel.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

From Remy Landau

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 15:43:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: Remy Landau <rlandau@freenet.toronto.on.ca>
To: "Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject: Re: calendar info

On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer wrote:

> Does the sefer you possess explain how the Rambam would justify RSG
> refusal to go along with BM on Halachic grounds? I gather Malter does not.
> 
> For reasons I am asking, hereby, Mr. Landau to explain, as I do not yet
> understand them, it seems that BM's position has valid astronomical (if
> not Talmudic) underpinnings.
> 

I am not aware of any comment that the Rambam might have made related to 
the RBM/SG mahloket of 4680H. I would certainly be very interested in 
seeing them, if these could be made available.

With regards to the technical details of the RBM/SG mahloket, there was 
no astronomical issue whatever. The issues of the Luach's astronomy were 
put aside many centuries earlier when a decision was taken to construct 
the calendar on the basis of an arithmetic method. 

All that was argued in reality was whether or not 642 halakim could be 
added to the Dehiyyah Molad Zakein. That in turn would cause the limits 
of the remaining 2 dehiyyot to increase by 642 halakim, if the keviyyot 
were to be maintained. 

No changes were proposed for any of the formal "astronomical" parameters 
that were, and still are, in use in the centuries old fixed calendar 
method. Thus, at the tecnichal level, RBM and SG were only arguing over an 
issue governing the FORMAL arithmetic of the Luach. 

Therefore, there never was a question of astronomy in the RBM proposal 
of 4680H.

The Talmud does not provide any guide governing the mechanics of the 
calendar. So whether or not RBM had a basis in the Talmud for the 
proposed changes is entirely unknown to me.

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
|\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\|
|/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Regards From  Remy  Landau /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/|
|\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ Downsview, Ontario, Canada \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\|
|/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/|
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

> In a message dated 4/28/99 10:18:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> Abaruch@SINAI-BALT.COM writes: 
> 
> <<
>  R' Moshe Eiseman of Ner Yisrael, in a discussion several years ago
> about the "competitiveness"  in our Yeshivos today, told us that he
> knows for a fact of several promising talmidim of the Alter who were
> "crushed" - ie their growth slowed dramatically - when R' Aharon Kotler
> came to the yeshiva, as it seems that the Alter dropped them to
> concentrate on R' Aharon. He asked R' Ruderman why/how the Alter could
> do this to those talmidim. R' Ruderman answered that without R' Aharon
> there is no Torah in America. 
>  
>  Sender Baruch
>  

While i have the utmost respect for R' Eisemann - who I learnt much from
and consulted on important issues when I was in Ner Israel - I have
difficulty with the story. R' Aharon Kotler seems very far removed from
the Alter's scope and approach. As to cultivating lomdus, that was the
Rosh Yeshiva, R' Moshe Mordechai Epstein's job.

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

In Torah the word "hee" is spelled he vav alef (like hu) everytime except
for six times where it is spelled in the normal way ie. He yud alef. I
believe that in all of Nach it is always spelled he yud alef and never he
vav alef. Does anyone know why the spelling is different in Torah as
opposed to nach, and why there are six exceptions in Torah
Elie Ginsparg

On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, Clark, Eli wrote:

> RYGB asked for sources regarding the calendrical controversy between R. 
> Saadia Gaon and Ben Meir.  A valuable discussion of the controversy was
> written by Jacob Katz, "Rabbinical Authrity and Authorization in the
> Middle Ages," in Studies in Medieval Jewish History and Literature, ed. 
> I. Twersky.  Highly recommended.  For primary sources, see Otzar
> ha-Geonim, Sanhedrin, no. 207, and an beautifully circumscribed
> collection in Dinur, Yisrael ba-Golah I:2, 394-403. 
> 

I was not aware of these sources, and will try to track some of then down.

> As people familiar with the controversy are aware, R. Aharon ben Meir --
> in Jerusalem -- announced that the in the year 922 both Heshvan and
> Kislev would be haser.  However, according to the calculation in Bavel,
> both months would be malei.  Ben Meir asserted that the Eretz Yisraeli
> calculation was authoritative, because ibbur ha-hodesh has always been
> determined by the beit din there. 
> 
> In response, R. Sa'adia argues that the fixed calendar was received from
> Hashem, who decreed that yom tov would be one day in EY and two days in
> HuL.  Only in response to minim did Hazal seek to demonstrate that the
> fixed calendar was in harmony with kiddush al pi re'iyah.  Thus, EY
> never had superior authority in fixing the calendar, only superior
> knowledge of the calculations.  By the 10th century, however, this
> knowledge was held equally by Bavel and EY; hence, the calculation of
> ben Meir is not authorittative. 
> 

The problem that I continue to have is with the Rambam. R' Remy Landau
wrote to ask where the Rambam comments on the RSG/RABM controversy. As R'
Kasher notes in Torah Sheleima vol. 13 p. 62, the Rambam comments in his
Commentary on the Mishna Chap. 2, where, without mentioning RSG by name,
he makes the stunning statement that the RSG didn't really mean what he
said (i.e., the rationale outlined by REC above), but only used it as
polemic. This is problematic because the RSG seems to have "fooled" an
awful lot of Rishonim into thinking he meant what he said - see that
volume of TS Chap. 3 - but, more importantly to me: If so, would the
Rambam himself, had he been around, have paskened like RABM? I do not
think so, and have a theory - but would like others' opinions.

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

Rabbi Rich wrote:
And as above, I refer to Gadol more in terms of influence than just 
erudition.  
IOW, an anynonymous Talmid chochom is by my definition not a Gadol.
--------------------------------end of quote----------------------

There is an issue of misconception here.  To an Ashkenazi person,the rabbis 
he would know would be Ashkenazim, and nowadays we immediately tend to think 
of them as being international and well known.

But how many of them were actually known in the North African Yeminite and 
Eastern world before WWII?  I doubt that many were.

In the same way, Gedolim like the Chid"a, Rabbi Shalom Shabazi and others 
were famous in Sephardi communities, but I doubt many of the rabbis were 
known by European/American communities.  Some, like the Orah Haim obviously 
were well known.

We live in a time when the world has significantly shrunk b/c of our 
advanced communications and I think it is causing us to misread the 
historical map in this situation.

Shoshana

-------------------------------------
Name: Shoshana L. Boublil
E-mail: toramada@mail.netvision.net.il
Date: 29/04/99
Time: 08:05:21 AM , Israel

This message was sent by Chameleon 
-------------------------------------
Torah U'Madah Ltd. is developing a DB on the topic:
"Environmental issues and the Halacha (Jewish Law)"
any and all related information would be welcome.

Subject: riddles

Enclosed are the "official" answers to the riddles. I am sending them
as I received them except for some minor comments in << >>.

Eli Turkel
------------------------------------------------------------------------

First a correction.   These brain teasers were compiled (or made up,
perhaps) by a guest scholar of Congregation Kehillat Chovevei Tzion. His
name is Ken Goldrich (not Goodrich as I originally had it).

I've included all the answers that seem correct to me, identifying those
who offered a unique solution.  Since it has been suggested that perhaps I
am not an infallible judge in these matters, I have also included the
answers which I feel are wrong.  To avoid possible embarrassment, I have
not identified the sender, but for a small token of appreciation, I can
supply the names privately.


1. When can a person be called to the Torah for 3 successive aliyot on the
same day?

MANY RESPONDERS:  If a Kohen receives the Maftir aliyah on Shabbat morning,
and then at Mincha there is no Levi present, he will receive the first two
aliyot at Mincha as well.

M. PENN: In a minyan of all kohanim, the same person who gets Kohen, can
also get Levi and Yisrael.  It doesn't work with a minyan of all Leviim or
all Yisraelim.  In those cases, you would call a either two or three people
(two Leviim, three yisraelim).

B. WEISS: Simchas Torah - regular aliya, Chasan Torah, Chasan  Beraishis.
Or if he's a Cohen - he can get the first aliya of V'Zos Habracha (on
Simchas Torah), the 2nd aliya (bimkom Levi) if there are no Levi'im and 
if everyone else in the shul has already had an aliya they'll read to the 
end - then he can get Chasan Torah.

2. Someday, if they colonize the moon and there is a Jewish community, what
blessing will they be unable to recite?
ALL. Kiddush Levanah.
C. KANAREK:  They can't do kiddush Levanah (since presumably it can only be
done while the crescent is growing, and also it includes a statement about 
not being able to touch the moon.)


3. How can you have a mixture which is dairy, and when meat accidentally
falls in, the mixture becomes parve (neither meat nor dairy)?
KANAREK:  The original  mixture is 58 parts parve and 1 part milchig.  If 1
additional part (proportional, of course) fleishing falls into it, both
the Milchig and the Fleishig parts become batel b'shishim.

WRONG:  If you boil water in a dairy pot - the water is "milchigly inclined"
- if you drop a metal fleishig bowl into it it becomes parve.


4. What is the explanation of the following? "Shmini B'Shmini Shmini Shmini."
KANAREK:  Does this have something to do with leining Parshat Shmini so many
times because of Pesach taking up 2 shabbosim.  Thus, if the last day  of
Pesach, the shemini shel Pesach comes out B'shmini, the Shabbos which
would have been parshat Shmini,  Then Sh'mini is read 8 (shmini) times.
KAPLAN: I think Chopsy got it.   Shmini B'Shimi (if Parshat Shmini in
Israel falls in the 8th day of Paesach in Diaspora which is a Shabbos,
then) Shmini Shmini (Parshat Shmini is read 8 times  -- Shabbos before
Paesach (1), Mon, Thurs before Paesach (2,3), Shabbos 1st day Paesach (4),
Shabbos eighth day Paesach (5), Mon, Thurs after Paesach (6,7), and on the
Shabbos after Paesach (8).
B. WEISS: Here's a possible explanation - if the eighth kid in a family gets
maftir for parshas shmini in the USA on a year when pesach begins on a friday
nite - we read shmini 8 times that year (M, Th, Shabbos Chol Hamoed Mincha,
Shabbos Chol Hamoed #2  Mincha, M, Th, Shabbos) - then he's the 8th kid
getting the 8th aliya in parshas Shmini the eighth time it's read.

5. One morning there were three people attending the same minyan. Each
finished the silent amidah at the same time, yet, during the repetition of
the amidah, one responded "amen" 26 times, the second only 22 times and the
third only three times. Can you explain this? (By the way, none of these
people fell asleep or failed to respond amen as required.)
N. REISS: Weekday Rosh Chodesh in Israel. A Davener says Amen 26 times (19
after each Brocho, 3 for Yaaleh V'Yovoh, and 4 for Birchas Kohanim. A Kohen
says Amen 22 times (Doesn't say it for Birchas Kohanim).  The Ba'al Tefilah
says Amen 3 times (During Birchas Kohanim, after 'V'Yishmere-cho', after
V'chune-kah' and after Shalom).


WRONG:  It was Rosh Chodesh in Israel - The one who responded only 3 times
forgot to say Yaaleh V'yavoh and started repeating the Shmoneh Esrei after
Kedusha and finished fter the chazan (3 amen's were Magen Avraham, Mechaye
HaMeisim, and Atah Kadosh)
The one who said 26 Amen's said the 19 regular brachos, 3 amens from Yaaleh
v'Yavo, and 4 amens when the kohanim duchened.
The one who said 22 Amens was a kohen.


6. What is the shortest word in the Torah?
PENN:  I forget which possuk, but it is in the beginning of HaAzenu.
The one-letter word is Ha, spelled with a heh.

KANAREK:  I think in Parshat Ha'azinu it says:  Ha' lash- em tigmelu zos.
seem to recall that the letter "heh" at the beginning of that is
considered a word in itself.  Thus it is a word consisting of only one letter.

7. The year 2000 is generally thought to have no particular significance to
Jews, yet, the year 2000 is special in one respect: there is a particular
commemoration that will not be observed in that calendar year. What day is it?
MANY RESPONDERS: Asarah B'Tevet (a week or so after Chanukah ends) falls
out in December 1999 and January 2001.

WRONG:  Shabbos Chanukah rosh Chodesh - Rosh Chodesh Tevet doesn't fall out
on shabbos that year!! I dunno if that's considered a commemoration,
however...

8. On what date in the Jewish calendar do we sometimes recite Hallel while,
in other years, on the same date, we recite Tachanun?
L. PADWA: 3-Teveth. In an abundant year (ie 30 day Kislev), 3-Teveth is an
ordinary day and Tachanun is said. In a normal or deficient year 
(ie 29 day Kislev), 3-Teveth is the eighth day of Chanukah, and Hallel 
is said.
PENN:   Yom Ha'Atzmaut, which occurs on 5 Iyar if it is not on a Friday.
If 5 Iyar is a Friday, Yom Ha'Atzmaut is celebrated on Thursday.  So in
one year, we would recite Hallel on 5 Iyar and in another we would say
Tachanun.

S. ENGEL: If Penn is right about Yom Atzmaut, then there would be another
day - 4 Iyar. If 5 Iyar is Friday, then you say Hallel on 4 Iyar. If 5 Iyar
is not a Friday, then you say Tachanun on 4 Iyar.

WRONG:   Yom Haatzmaut - depending on your perception (just kidding)!!
Seriously, Tisha B'Av would qualify - after Moshiach comes it'll be a Chag

9. Triplets and their cousin are born within two hours of each other. Yet
their circumcisions are on four consecutive days. How can this occur? (No
consideration need be given to the international date line or any possible
health related issues.)

KAPLAN:  The triplets are born starting late Friday afternoon (Erev
Shabbos)in the the United States, the cousin is born by C-section in Israel
a couple of hours later, and the following week is a 2-day yom tov (Shabbos
and Sunday).
For the triplets, the one born late Friday afternoon, will have his Bris
the following Friday. If the second is born bein Hashmoshot, the bris would
be the  Monday after the Sunday yom tov.  It cannot be Sunday because it's
yom tov.  If the third is born a little later on Friday night when it's
already Shabbos, the bris is the next Shabbos. The cousin who is born by
C-section in Israel during Bein Hashmoshot in the US which is 100% Shabbos
in Israel, will have his Bris on the following Sunday, because it ain't yom
tov there.

PADWA:  The triplets are born in the twilight period ("bay'n hashmashot) week
before erev yom tov. The first one is born before sunset. The second is born
in the "doubtful" period and the third is born after dark. The first one's
brit is on erev yom tov. The third one's is on yom tov. The second one's is
postponed to the day after yom tov because of the uncertainty.

Now consider that the above scenario took place in Israel, and a cousin of
these triplets was born in Galut but in the same time zone as Israel (say
South Africa). If he were born in the doubtful period, his brit would  be
postponed TWO days (yom tov sheni shel galut) as opposed to the one day
postponement for Israeli triplet #2.

KANAREK:
      a) born before the end of the day
      b) born during bein hashmashot. ( safek as to which day.)
      c) born at night within 2 hours of the first birth.
      d) the cousin.  also born during bein hashmashot, but he is Israeli.

       The eighth day is Shabbos, erev yom-tov.
       a)  bris on Shabbos, bizmano.
       b)  bris on Tuesday shelo bizmano.  cannot be doche Shabbos or
           yomtov due to safek of which day he was born.
       c)  bris on Sunday.  Bizmano.
       d)  Bris on Monday. He is Israeli, so the second day of the Yom-tov
           is Chol Hamoed for him.

WRONG:  One is born before shkiya on Friday, one after shkiya but before
tzeis and one after tzeis. The first has a Friday bris, the 2nd has a sunday
bris and the third has a shabbos bris. The cousin is born in Japan??? or
somewhere where the time difference is such that even though the kids were
born within 2 hrs of each other it's a 20-22 hrs time difference which would
make it either one day earlier or later.


10. Twins are born on the same day, Shabbat, yet their circumcisions are
NOT on the same day. (The health of neither baby is an issue.)
KAPLAN: One was born natural, and the other by c-section.

I feel that for the purposes of this question, Bein Hashmoshot is not
Shabbos. Therefore...
WRONG:	Several possibilities here.  But one could be born after nightfall
on Friday and the other born right before havdalah on Saturday.  Both born
on Shabbat, one bris on Shabbat and one on Sunday.

ALSO WRONG:  One is born bein hashmashot on Friday - the other is born
after tzeis
- the bris of the 1st is pushed off 'till sunday & the second is done on=20
shabbos. 

ALSO WRONG: probably not the answer you're looking for but the question
does not state that one or both twins are male.  So, perhaps the gender 
of one  or both babies is the issue.

>> Actually one of our respondents pointed out that an androgonous child
would answer the question >>

11. Generally because Jerusalem is in an earlier time zone, rituals are
performed earlier there than in New York. What celebration occurs earlier
in New York than in Jerusalem.
MANY RESPONDERS: Purim.
KANAREK:  Purim.  Jerusalem is a walled city.

12.  What single verse (i.e. the same verse, not different verses with
the same words) is read publicly from the Torah most often?

PENN: It's in B'Midbar (Numbers) Chapter 28, possuk (verse) 3.  In a year
when at least one day of each two-day Rosh Chodesh and each one-day Rosh


WRONG (I THINK): I am told that it really is not Rosh Chodesh, or Sholosh
regalim Maftir.  Rather it's the nesiim, read on Chanukah and the same 
for each Nasi.

WRONG:  I think there could be a lot of answers to this question - but my
guess would be the first pasuk of Shema - it's said twice a day in davening
plus before you go to sleep at nite, etc.but it is not READ from the Torah
each time


13. We read the next regular Shabbat weekly Torah reading at Shabbat
mincha. What weekly parashah is read at Shabbat mincha in Israel but NEVER
in the diaspora?

PENN, KAPLAN: Breishit. When Shmini Atzeres comes out on Shabbos in Israel,
they read Breishit during Mincha.  In the United States, they would read
V'zos Habracha. There is no possibility to ever read Parshat Breishit on
Shabbos Mincha in the US.

WRONG: Not 100% sure - but it might be Maasei - I think that one's always 
a double parsha here.


BONUS QUESTION:
Which of the Taryag mitzvot can you not be mekayem while you are standing?
KAPLAN: Lifnei Saivah Takum - You should stand up for an elderly person.
If you are already standing, you obviously can't stand up.  You must first
sit down.

WRONG ANSWERS:  Leshev B'Succah.  Birchat Hamazon.
To those who answered "Leshev B'Succah": This answer is wrong.  Would you
have stilled given the same answer had I asked, "Which of the Taryag
mitzvot can you not be mekayem while you are not sitting?" If you still
would have said Leshev B'Succah, then how would you answer this one? Which
mitzvah can you not be mekayam while you are not wearing Tefillin? If you
would answer "Wearing Tefillin", then you would be consistent.

>> BONUS QUESTION #2 >>

How can one boy be born a week before his (boy) cousin but have his
Bar Mitzvah earlier

The older boy is born at the end of Adar Rishon while the younger boy is
born at the beginning Adar Sheni. In the year of the Bar Mitzvah there
is only one Adar.

********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]