Avodah Mailing List

Volume 08 : Number 017

Monday, October 15 2001

• Re: indivuality/equality - should be individual/collective
• Re: Sukkah on Shmini Atzeres
• Re: sukkah bi-shemini
• Re: Hoshanos - choice and order
• Re: Hoshanos - choice and order
• Re: Hoshanos - choice and order
• Bracha on Sleeping in the Succa
• Re: arba minim in succah
• Re: arba minim in succah
• Re: Yom Tov Sheini vis-a-vis Yom Kippur
• Yom Tov Sheini vis-a-vis Yom Kippur
• Re: Yom Tov Sheini vis-a-vis Yom Kippur
• Birkas Habanim
• Re: Birkas Habanim
• Re: hefsek
• Re: Piyut terminology - Yotzeir / Yotzros, Ofan, Zulas, Krovetz....
• Re: Cutting nails on Thursday
• Re: missing thumbs
• RE: arba minim in succah
• Re: WTC stories, Hashgacha pratis and kiddush HaShem
• Re: Hashgacha peratis, bechirah, and WTC stories
• Re: Hashgacha peratis, bechirah, and WTC stories
• Re: Hashgacha peratis, bechirah, and WTC stories
• Re: Sukkah on Shmini Atzeres
• Re: Birkas Habanim

On Sun, Oct 14, 2001 at 08:38:16PM -0400, Claude Schochet wrote:
:                                                  A more useful dichotomy
: for discussion revolves around a classical (since the Greeks) debate:
: is the fundamental unit of society the individual or the nation (well -
: city-state in the time of Plato). This dichotomy is the simplest way to
: see the critical distinction between classical (18th century) capitalist
: and classical socialist (19th century) political theory....

Similar to this is a dialectic discussed by RYBS in "The Community"
(see RRZ's discussion in <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n094.shtml#01>
and <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n099.shtml#17>).

His position is that Kenesses Yisrael is built on a synthesis of the two
positions and therefore a rejection of both. There is also a beautiful
discussion on why Hashem chose to make man as both a lonely/creative and
communal/affirming being...

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 "And you shall love H' your G-d with your whole
micha@aishdas.org            heart, with your entire soul, with all you own."
http://www.aishdas.org       Love is not two who look at each other,
Fax: (413) 403-9905          It is two how look in the same direction.

From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
> The first, in Nefesh haRav, suggests (presumably tongue in cheek) that this
> is based on the din that a chasan .....because they wouldn't fit in a
> Sukkah without being mitzta'arim. Similarly, a Rebbe and his Chassidim
> ought be patur from the Succah.... "last days", i.e. Sh"A and the end
> of Pesach. Therefore, they didn't have to sit in the Suckkah on Sh"A.

I don't know if RYBS said this TIC or not, but this indeed seems to be
the reason given in the minhogim of some rebbes.

SBA

From: "David Glasner" <DGLASNER@ftc.gov>
> I will only note briefly that in his book Dor Dorim, .... cites the
> Targum Yonatan ben Uziel on Bamidbar 29:35: "b'yoma t'mina'a t'hevun
> k'nishtin b'hedva min matilkhon l'vateikhon."

IMHO, YBU is translating the posuk referring to SA which - shonim
ketikunom veyisroel sheruyim al admosom - is a separate regel bifnei
atzmoy.

And lehalocho does a targum TBU overrule a befeirush gemoro?

> ...But under the principle of meitav yatvinan b'rukhi lo m'varkhinan we are
> obligated to return to the sukkah the following day. v'zeh barur v'emet
> lamitah shel torah.

I was always under the impression that the Chasam Sofer z'l and his
descendants and talmidim did eat in the sukka on SA. Was your grandfather
the only exclusion to this or do you know of others in the family who
agreed with him?

SBA

In a message dated 10/11/2001 3:27:32pm EDT, sherer@actcom.co.il writes:
> ???? AFAIK everyone says Ohm Netzura on Shabbos of Sukkos regardless of
> when it falls.

not Chabad

Shalom and Regards
Rich Wolpoe

On 15 Oct 01, at 0:00, RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com wrote:
>> ???? AFAIK everyone says Ohm Netzura on Shabbos of Sukkos regardless of
>> when it falls.

> not Chabad

According to R. Mordechai, not straight Minhag HaGra either, although
here in Yerushalayim where everyone (allegedly) follows Minhag HaGra,
we say Ohm Netzura on Shabbos.

-- Carl

On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 07:24:51AM +0200, Carl and Adina Sherer wrote:
:>> ???? AFAIK everyone says Ohm Netzura on Shabbos of Sukkos regardless of
:>> when it falls.

:> not Chabad

: According to R. Mordechai, not straight Minhag HaGra either, although
: here in Yerushalayim where everyone (allegedly) follows Minhag HaGra,
: we say Ohm Netzura on Shabbos.

Despite the allegation, in truth minhag E"Y seems to be those minhagei
haGra that were shared by the talmidim of the Tzemach Tzedeq and/or
Sepharadim, and therefore common to more than one qehillah of the
19th cent yishuv.

Which makes this exception even more notable.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 "And you shall love H' your G-d with your whole
micha@aishdas.org            heart, with your entire soul, with all you own."
http://www.aishdas.org       Love is not two who look at each other,
Fax: (413) 403-9905          It is two how look in the same direction.

I discovered yesterday that RSZA paskened that one who is sleeping in
the Succa but does not intend to eat there should make a bracha on the
sleeping. The psak is brought in Rav Weisfish's HaSucca in the Psakim from
RSZA in the back of the sefer, Os 23 (page 454-55). But he notes that the
MB in 668 (Shaar HaTziyon Os 7) is cholek and he lives it b'tzarich iyun.

-- Carl

On 14 Oct 01, at 10:17, Yitzchok Willroth wrote:
>> Yes, that's why Rav Elyashiv (and thousands of other people, including
>> me) go to the Kotel during Chol haMoed - to be choshesh for the Rambam
>> and the possibility of there being a d'oraysa even today....

> Funny, Briskers _don't_ go on Chol HaMoed for precisely the same reason...

I'm afraid they're outnumbered. There are probably a couple of thousand
people at vasikin every day of Chol HaMoed....

-- Carl

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.

On Sun, Oct 14, 2001 at 12:57:11AM +0200, Carl and Adina Sherer wrote:
: Yes, that's why Rav Elyashiv (and thousands of other people, including
: me) go to the Kotel during Chol haMoed - to be choshesh for the Rambam
: and the possibility of there being a d'oraysa even today...

First, it's mashma from the rishonim that one can be meqayeim aliyas
haregel by seeing the ritzpah of where the azarah ought to be. Which
isn't actually possible from the Kotel Plaza. There is even discussion
as to whether you can wear glasses and still be meqayeim this mitzvah.

Noach Witty asked me about this in shul. If one can be maqayeim aliyas
haregel by seeing the fllor of the Har Habayis Platform, would one be
chayav in a korban re'iyah? Does asei docheh lav mean that one can choose
to put oneself into the situation that requires the asei and violating
the lav?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 "And you shall love H' your G-d with your whole
micha@aishdas.org            heart, with your entire soul, with all you own."
http://www.aishdas.org       Love is not two who look at each other,
Fax: (413) 403-9905          It is two how look in the same direction.

The gemara in Rosh Hashanah 21a speaks about a case in which Levi,
an amora, somehow got from Eretz Yisrael to Bavel and discovered that
they had observed Yom Kippur on the wrong day. The Ritva and the Ran
said that the people in Bavel were not doing anything wrong and did not
have to fast on what for them was the day after Yom Kippur. The acharonim
ask why this should be.

R. Menachem Kasher in Torah Sheleimah vol. 13 ch. 10 discusses this issue.
He quotes gaonim who say that there is a halacha leMoshe miSinai that
when you do not know what the "official" date is set by the beis din
then you follow a calculated calendar (like we do now). Therefore, the
people in Bavel had observed the correct date for Yom Kippur based on
the calculation that they were, at that time, obligated to follow.

The Ritva brings another answer which I think is more standard. The
month of Elul is almost never a long month. In the time of Ezra it was
made a 30 day month but since then it has not been (except for the time
of Levi?). Therefore, people can rely on rov and not follow the very
difficult stringency of two fast days in a row.

Rav Kasher doesn't quote it but I seem to remember that there was a
Babylonian amora, maybe Rav, who kept two days of Yom Kippur.

Gil Student

(Moved from Areivim to Avodah)

So now I'm completely confused:

Simcha's "man in the backyard" wrote:
>The answer be'H is that since the declaration of Rosh Chodesh
>is actually dependent on the actual declaration of Rosh Chodesh by the
>Beit Din (i.e. Beit Din doesn't notify of Rosh Chodesh, it creates it),
>therefore the "l'mafrea" status of the declaration is only vis a vis
>mikahn ulhaba. This theory of l'mafrea (as opposed to "iglai milta
>l'mafrea" were the subsequent finding is merely a proof of the status
>ab initio) is a creation of R' Chaim Brisker z"l and can be found in
>Chidushei R' Chaim Halevi on hilchos naara hameurata in referrence to
>miyun. It works beautifully, be'H to answer the present question.

But then also wrote:
> in your case everyone in galus would be chayav a korban chatat.

Som which is it? A case of l'mafrea leading to mikahn ulhaba (in which
case no korban is needed), or not?

I'm also confused as to the comment that "this theory...is a creation
of R Chaim Brisker". How does that apply in the time prior to the fixed
calendar?

R' Gil writes:
>The gemara in Rosh Hashanah 21a speaks about a case in which Levi, an amora, 
>somehow got from Eretz Yisrael to Bavel and discovered that they had 
>observed Yom Kippur on the wrong day.  The Ritva and the Ran said that the 
>people in Bavel were not doing anything wrong and did not have to fast on 
>what for them was the day after Yom Kippur.  The acharonim ask why this 
>should be.

Does the Gemara itself say what happened upon Levi's discovery?

>Rav Kasher doesn't quote it but I seem to remember that there was a 
>Babylonian amora, maybe Rav, who kept two days of Yom Kippur.

I vaguely recall someone in the time of the Rishonim doing that, too.

BTW, on another list, someone wrote:

>there were still non-immigrant Jews in Eretz Yisrael 
>(in other words: until the Crusades) they kept 
>only one day of Rosh HaShanah but now, under pressure from 
>the Golus, even the Jews of Eretz Yisrael now keep two days of 
>Rosh HaShanah

Is this correct? Didn't EY start keeping 2 days of RH in pre-Gemara
times? (And, if so, anyone have a cite handy -- I'm sure it's in Gemara
RH, which I don't have at work....)

-- Eric

>Does the Gemara itself say what happened upon Levi's discovery?

He said that he did not hear directly from the beis din that the month was
long so he could not testify of it (and thereby be an official shaliach -
see Rashi). In other words, no one stopped eating. The rishonim, Tosafos,
Ritva, Ran, etc., try to determine why.

I think the lemafre'a/mikan ulehaba issue, which had me confused for
a while, is just that they subsequently reverted to the calendar as
established in Israel, even if on that day they continued eating on what
was the Israeli Yom Kippur.

Gil Student

From: "Kenneth Miller" <kennethgmiller@juno.com>
> When I give my kids their bracha Friday nights, I've taught them to answer
> "Amen" four times, once at each pasuk...
> My b'chor noticed that in most other families, the children answer Amen
> only once, at the very end...

My late father always 'benched' us on Friday nights - as I do to 
my children and einiklech - but we never had a minhag to say Omen
at all. We would simply say "Gut Shabbos/YT".

I have also observed this at other homes and cannot recall anyone
saying Omen. Maybe Oberlender didn't do so, I will now ask around.

SBA

In Avodah V8 #15, Akiva Miller asked:
> Any other thoughts on this topic? <

Here's one (based on the way my parents blessed me, which I assume was
passed on by _their_ parents, etc.): why not bless your children in an
Amidah-like (or, if you wish, Chanah-like) tone of voice and thus avoid
worrying about their saying anything in response? To put this another
way, does one have to say these verses aloud when they're directed at
the One Who can hear us just fine at lower volumes?

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ

In a message dated 10/12/2001 10:20:08am EDT, sba@blaze.net.au writes:
> Chassidim (and some others) don't say the Yotzros between Borchu and ShE -
> because they consider it a hefsek. So what about the (sometimes lengthy)
> singing that they do during Keil Odon? Isn't that a hefsek as well?

> (And aren't Yotzros called so - because they are said after and during
> the Yotzer Or tefilos??)

Re: the kinds of Piyuutim between Barechu and Amidah: Yotzros are called
so because they fall after birchas yotzeir
There is also:
1) Ofan - during v'ha'ofanim
2) Maorah - before yotzeir heme'oros
3) Zullas - after Ein Elokim Zulasecha
4) G'ulah - before Birchas Go'al Yisrael 
The most famous of the G'ulah genre are the Brach Dodi and the Yom Layabasha 
(authored by R. Yeuhdah Halevi)

It is Clear that Kallir <grin> did not consider yotzros a hefsek.

It is likely that the fact that there are different nuschaos for birchas
yotzeir on weekdays Keil baruch gdol deiah and Keyl Adon on Shabbos
that there was no permenant fixed nusach. Also very likely that those
two piyyutim are by paytanim as they are both alphabetic acrostics -
albeit they are probably very early.

So on weekdays we have very short piyyut on weekdays a longer one
on Shabbas and even longer ones on Yamim Tovim and Yamim Nora'im.
The pattern makes perfect sense to me.

The better reason IMHO for omitting yotzors on YT and YN is that the
lengthier yotzros are a bit of a Tircha detzibbura and this is espeically
so when the texts are not available to all.

Shalom and Regards
Rich Wolpoe
Moderator - TorahInsight@yahoogroups.com
"Knowledge without Insight is like a horse in a library" - Vernon Howard    

In a message dated 10/14/01 9:21:08am EDT, Phyllostac@aol.com writes:
> There are some other related terms too - e.g. Krovetz (of which the oft
> quoted [bifi the hamon am] etymology of it being an acronym for 'kol
> rinah viyshuah bioholei tzaddikim' is said to be an example of incorrect
> 'folk etymology', by the way).

See Hagaha in Ramoh O"C 112:2, it is also brought in the Beis Yosef on the 
Tur begining of O"C 68, and see Ma'adanei Y"T on the Rosh in Brochos Perek 5 
Simon 21, also see R' Ruvein Margoliyes in his Mkor Chesed Pirush to Sefer 
Chasidim Simon 114 note 3, (accordingly since there is Mokor for the word 
there is already room to explain that it was chosen as it has the added 
meaning of the Roshei Teivos, which would explain why in many places the word 
KRVT"Z is written with Simonei Roshei Teivos).

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 10/14/01 9:20:41am EDT, reuveinl@hotmail.com writes:
> Please could somebody advise me if the practice of refraining from cutting
> nails on Thursday includes Thursday Eve (leil Shishi - Erev Shabbos)
> or perhaps Wednesday night.

In the Mili D'chasidusa (notes from R' Avrohom D. of Butchatz (sp?) to
the Tzavo'ohs of the Bal Sefer Chassidim, printed in some editions) he
notes WRT Tzavo'oh 48, that there is reason to permit the night between
two days of Rosh Chodesh, as the Chosid only mentions day, he continues
WRT the nails of fingers and toes (while it may be limited to the day it
only, none the less it certainly) does not include the night after the
day, (Bkodshim Haleilah Holeich Achar Hayom) only the night prior to
day, I assume from this (with a Kal Vchomer of Zil Bosar Tamoh of not
cutting on thursday) that it definately does not include Leil Shishi,
while it does include Leil Chamishi.

However this is only with regard to the issue of when *not* to cut the
nails, not when is the proper time to cut them.

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 10/14/01 9:20:49am EDT, Joelirich@aol.com writes:
> The pisikat rabah quotes a medrash on tehilim 137 (al naharot bavel) that the 
> leviim bit their fingers off rather than  playing their kinorot for shirei 
> tzion. 

This is also brought in Rashi (and Tos.) Kidushin 69b.

> Assumedly in general it's assur to mutilate oneself, what is the issur 
> in singing shirei tzion that overcame this issur of selfmutilation?

Adifa Hava Lei Lhakshos, while WRT Choveil Batzmoi there is Machlokes on 
Issur, and whether it's Min Hatorah, what hetter did the Pirchei Khuna have 
to kill themselves (Taanis 29a, Veod), there are some who point out WRT Chana 
and her 7 sons, that it was Al Derech Halacha Vein Morin Kein by Pinchus and 
many other such examples, (while others hold she snapped in which case she 
has no Halacha of Mabeid as brought in the Poskim in Y"D), V'al Derch Zeh 
this was done out of Kovod Shomayim, Val Derech Rambam Hil. Aveil 14:25-26, 
Umisaymim Btoiv.

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

> First, it's mashma from the rishonim that one can be meqayeim aliyas
> haregel by seeing the ritzpah of where the azarah ought to be. Which
> isn't actually possible from the Kotel Plaza. There is even discussion
> as to whether you can wear glasses and still be meqayeim this mitzvah.
> 

Isn't that specific "place" currently underground?

Akiva

On 14 Oct 2001, at 19:23, Jay S. Lapidus wrote:
> Carl inquired:
>> And why were those things not done? Maybe because Hashem 
>> didn't want them done....

> Let's see: Someone somewhere in authority realized that there was an
> immediate terrorist threat, but did nothing, either because he heard the
> word of the Lord, or because God magically made the authority physically
> unable to perform. Is _that_ what you mean to impl?! I hope not.

> Those "things were not done" for the simple reason that humans freely
> chose not to have them done, preferring profits to security, complacency
> to effort, and savings to preparedness.

Or because human beings did not recognize the threat as being so immediate
because Hashem blinded them to it. There's an explicit Gemara in Bava Kama
and Sanhedrin which says that when Hashem wants to punish "Sonei Yisrael"
(b'lashon sagi nahor - but no reason it could not also be interpreted
literally) He gives them a "blind goat" to lead the flock. That doesn't
mean that He interferes with man making the proper choice - but He does
make it a lot less likely that man will choose correctly.

> "No, it's a choice between maintaining the integrity of the natural
> order or not. God has not interrupted the natural order at any time
> during recent history..."

> You replied:
>> .......as far as you know.

I don't think that was me, but....

> As far as I know?! As far as _anyone_ knows! If this were not so, then
> what would have been the point of God's subverting nature? God performed
> the ten plagues and Kriat Yam Suf in ways that were unmistakably "Etzba
> E-lohim" as opposed to a natural occurence, even an unusual, natural one.

And I would argue that the "natural order" has been interrupted 
many times in Eretz Yisrael over the last 50 years or so, 
particularly in the last year. 

> J:
>>> ... God has not interrupted the natural order at any time
>>> during recent history...

> Carl:
>> You obviously have not been in Eretz Yisrael recently. 

> Ad hominem.  

As Micha pointed out this was not intended as personal criticism.

>> Every time a
>> terrorist manages to blow himself up without taking anyone else with
>> him, that's an interruption in the natural order for which all of us
>> here are grateful.

> You and I have different definitions of what constitutes "natural 
> order" and " an interruption in the natural order."  Since we don't 
> agree on the definition of the terms, I'm going to stop here.

If you're limiting "an interruption in the natural order" to a nes
nigleh (which is how I understand you), we probably do have different
definitions.

-- Carl

On 15 Oct 2001, at 10:30, Micha Berger wrote:
> I'm uncomfortable with approaches that make eating from the eitz hada'as
> an aveirah lishmah. First, because it leaves you wondering how the
> nachash is "arum mikol chayas hasadeh". Second, because it removes the
> onesh component of the effects of the cheit or at least the justice
> therein.

Correct. Rav Nebenzahl describes what we refer to as the onshim that
follow the cheit eitz ha'daas as metzius and not as onshim (he attributes
the snake's loss of its previous abilities to the need for balance between
the kochos ha'tov and the kochos ha'ra in this world). That struck me as
similar to (RSRH's IIRC) explanation of "b'zeias apecha tochal lechem"
as a necessity to prevent boredom in a world in which man is mortal.

-- Carl

Carl inquired: 
>>> And why were those things [preventive measures against terrorism] 
>>> not done? Maybe because Hashem didn't want them done....

J: 
>> Let's see: Someone somewhere in authority realized that there was an
>> immediate terrorist threat, but did nothing, either because he heard the
>> word of the Lord, or because God magically made the authority physically
>> unable to perform. Is _that_ what you mean to imply?! I hope not.

>> Those "things were not done" for the simple reason that humans freely
>> chose not to have them done, preferring profits to security, complacency
>> to effort, and savings to preparedness.

Carl:
>Or because human beings did not recognize the threat as being so 
>immediate because Hashem blinded them to it. There's an explicit 
>Gemara in Bava Kama and Sanhedrin which says that when 
>Hashem wants to punish "Sonei Yisrael" (b'lashon sagi nahor - but 
>no reason it could not also be interpreted literally) He gives them a 
>"blind goat" to lead the flock. That doesn't mean that He interferes 
>with man making the proper choice - but He does make it a lot less 
>likely that man will choose correctly.

So who are the "sonei yisrael"... the people of New York? The US military?
The NYPD and the FDNY? America?

I'm aware of the various aspects of theodicy that we find in Biblical and
Rabbinic writings over the ages regarding all manners of catastrophes,
each one unique. There is no unanimity of opinion regarding any
catastrophe and it's difficult, if not useless, to try to formulate
general principles. The conclusion that God caused (Has veShalom) the
WTC atrocity to happen makes a mockery of E-l rachum veHanun, HaShofet
kol ha'aretz, tamim po'alo, and is Jewishly unacceptable.

>If you're limiting "an interruption in the natural order" to a nes nigleh 
>(which is how I understand you), we probably do have different 
>definitions. 

Yes.

Jay S. Lapidus     http://jlapidus.tripod.com

> If you want to recast this into a question of valuing natural order
> rather than valuing free will, you are left with the question of why
> Hashem would want a concept of nature. As I said above, I can't think
> of a reason without invoking the concept of free woll. The two I
> came up with were:
> 1- To allow us an environment in which we can plan our actions; and
> 2- It gives us an opportunity to be heretics by making His Presence
>    less blatant.

Here's a possible third reason: That just as we were created as a figment
of HaShem's imagination (a rough paraphrase of my favorite [R'in Gila
Atwood -mi] signature-line quotation), our free will allows us in our
very weak and limited mortal way to imagine HaShem as a figment of our
creation. After all, what we think we understand of HaShem is purely
a matter of the limited perceptional faculties with which He endowed
us. In our minds we re-create Him -- i.e., we objectify him -- whenever
we think of Him.

Earlier, cruder religions objectified their deities without agonizing over
issues of moral refinement. Judaism is all about such agony. Why? Because
HaShem allows of to think of him through a purely moral discourse. What
gives us the ability to engage in this discourse? Our ability to ponder
the old game of truth and consequences, cause and effect. Without
continually facing the dilemmas of free will, cause and effect would be
meaningless to us. Were that the case, then HaShem would be meaningless
to us as well.

IOW, without free will, we cannot think about HaShem. In Judaism, that
is all we think about. Without free will, there is no Judaism.

David Finch

From: "SBA" <sba@blaze.net.au>
> OTOH it also mentions the rebbe once receiving a copy of the sefer (I
> forget its name) by Rav Tzodok Hakohen z'l where he thoroughly explains
> the reasons of those who do not eat in the sukka and (IIRC) went thru
> it all in a single sitting and was extremely impressed.

Rabbi Hershel Shachter recounted this story with a very different ending,
one that explained the Satmar Rav's changed behavior. I was listening to a
tape of R' Shachter's thursday chumash shiur from parshas breishis 5752,
and he was discussing the fact that it takes a lot of Torah (learning
and knowledge) to be able to separate tov and ra. Even gedolim may change
their positions after many years, as they learn more. He then recounted
this story as having occurred in the sukka of the Bostoner Rebbe (of
Brooklyn), who would not let the Satmar Rav take the sefer home (so he
read the whole kuntrus in one sitting). But R' Shachter said the Satmer
Rav apparently found the reasons to be so weak that he subsequently
changed his minhag and began to eat in the sukka on Shmini Atzeres!

elly
--
Elly Bachrach
Heide Corporation http://www.heidecorp.com
Phone: (847) 676-2880
Fax: (847) 982-2304
mailto:ebachrach@heidecorp.com

On 15 Oct 2001, at 13:03, SBA wrote:
> My late father always 'benched' us on Friday nights - as I do to 
> my children and einiklech - but we never had a minhag to say Omen
> at all. We would simply say "Gut Shabbos/YT".

> I have also observed this at other homes and cannot recall anyone
> saying Omen. Maybe Oberlender didn't do so, I will now ask around.

My father did not bentch us as children, so I picked up the minhag from
my shver (whose family came from Chelm) and in my wife's mishpacha no
one answers Amen - they just say Gut Shabbos (we don't bentch on weekday
Yom Tov except by Hadlokas Neiros on Erev Yom Kippur).

-- Carl

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


[ 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         ]