Avodah Mailing List

Volume 10 : Number 011

Friday, September 20 2002

• Re: Yaknehoz candles
• Re: CC, pesaq, and mussar
• Re: Business Ethics
• Re: Yaknehoz candles
• Re: Tziruf for a zimun
• Re: Shofar after Maariv during Elul
• Re: tachanun and chasan
• The Kohen Gadol's Viduy
• tachanun
• CI on borei nefashos on water
• To: Avodah - High Level Torah Discussion Group
• RE: Business Ethics
• Re: Rav Bulman
• FW: tachanun (was: avinu malkenu and selichot,LeDovid Hashem Ori )
• RE: Rav Bulman
• RE: CI on borei nefashos on water
• RE: Yaknehoz candles
• Re: Tziruf for a zimun
• RE: Business Ethics
• Simchat Torah
• new LA eruv
• Re: Ketivah va-hatimah tovah
• drinking on simchas torah

In a message dated 9/19/2002 6:05:49pm EDT, MFeldman@CM-P.COM writes:
> Isn't this motzee laaz al ha'rishonim--i.e., for hundreds of years people
> have been putting candles together for Yaknehaz and no one was choshesh
> that this was assur because of mechabeh.

> Pashtus, I would think that this is not mechabeh--the candles are still
> burning although the flame is smaller....

It seems the zeigeist today is that no one is really relying on what used to 
be done and everything is called into question.

EG:  One local rabbi did not do Yizkor on Shabbos shel Shavuos because he 
claims the Gra said not to do so on Shabbos.   I wonder what he will do on 
Shmini Atzeres.

Shanah Tovah
Richard Wolpoe
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

In a message dated 9/19/2002 6:01:13pm EDT, micha@aishdas.org writes:
> . But part also is that "the MB is about developing the person
> reading the seifer into a shomeir Torah umitzvos, not about developing
> the halachah." (That quote is what I recall, but as I also recall my
> rebbe saying it in his quasi-Poilish-quasi-modern IVris, something's
> off with my memory.)

I'll concede that the ChCh was more inspirational than the AhS but I 
completely disagree that a work on Halachah is the proper place for 
Inspiration as a main focus.

KSA gives some mussar here and there too.  So the line is not hard and fast.  
But the MB is trying to bring forth the Halachic process after the Ba'ei 
hetev and getting the Deios of the Gra etc.  I want you to learn MB and tell 
me his shita on zmanei hayyom and wich acharon he got it from. I've been 
trying for years.

KSA OTOH states what  he holds lkula nad lechumra.  Period.  unambiguous.
  
Shanah Tovah
Richard Wolpoe
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

"Carl M. Sherer" <cmsherer@ssgslaw.co.il> wrote:
> I was thinking whether it would be mutar to pad the bill for clients
> who are problematic, with the intention of negotiating away the padding
> without negotiating away the meat. But before I ask a shaila as to
> whether it's permitted to do that, I wanted to ask you guys what you
> think of it. I think it's ona'a to do it without putting an explicit
> line in the bill that says "premium" or something similar.

At the minimum it sounds like Gneivas Daas to me. I understand your
dillema and sympathize with it, but unless it is common knowledge to
that all legal invoices are inflated, which I find hard to beleive than
I would assume it is Assur.

What is more likely the case is that people who are somewhat sophisticated
know about this practice of bill padding. That would mean that in a
significant number of cases, the "bargaining down" would be in the false
belief (by the client) that he was getting a discount when in fact he
wasn't. Gneivas daas.

And what about the rare instance that someone wouldn't bargain you down?
Would you automatically reduce the bill? How would you then explain it?

HM

In a message dated 9/19/2002 8:18:33pm EDT, atwood@netvision.net.il writes:
> but when you put them together it DOES increase the fuel supply (melting
> more wax) -- and when you separate they the fuel supply is reduced.

And when you light candle B from Candle A on YomnTov you may no longer 
separate them lest you reduce the volume of the flame?

 
Shanah Tovah
Richard Wolpoe
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

Tangentially:

Scenario: 9 people daven Shmoneh Esrei
In walks number 10.
Question: Is a chiyyuv of Chazaras hashatz suddenly incurred or is it too 
late.

We know the converse if there were 10 davening and 1 left, we continue with 
Chazaras Hashatz etc.

Shanah Tovah
Richard Wolpoe
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

In a message dated 9/3/2002 5:58:30pm EDT, AStein@wtplaw.com writes:
> The Mateh Ephraim ("ME") mentions that it used to be the minhag in certain
> places (...) for the shofar to be blown (...) at night, after maariv.
> The ME states that this is not the minhag in his time/place.

> I am curious:  Is anyone aware of any communities where they blow the 
> shofar at night after maariv during Elul?

no I do not
But KAJ/Breuer does blow after Minchah

Shanah Tovah
Richard Wolpoe
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

On Thu, 19 Sep 2002 21:27:56 -0400 R' Elazar M Teitz <remt@juno.com> writes:
> I don't know if RMF wrote it, but it appears in MB 131:26.

I stand corrected. The bottom line:  it's anything BUT unimportant.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

 From what I see in my machzor, the Kohen Gadol said Viduy three times on
Yom Kippur, a little differently each time:

#1: Chatasi, avisi, poshati l'fanecha, ani uveisi - I sinned: me and my
family
#2: Chatasi, avisi, poshati l'fanecha, ani uveisi uvnei Aharon am
kedoshecha - I sinned: me and the kohanim
#3: Chatu, avu, poshu l'fanecha, amcha beis Yisrael - They sinned, Your
people Beis Yisrael

I have two questions:

My secondary question is why he uses singular verbs in #1 and #2. He is
including others, so he ought to say "WE sinned". But that does not
really bother me much; as leader of those families, perhaps he says "I"
to take responsibility for their sins.

But my main question is why he used the first person (I/we) for #2 and
the the third person (they) for #3. Whatever the reason is for using
"I/we" for #2, why was it changed to "they" for #3? And whatever the
reason is for using "they" for #3, why was it changed to "I/we" for #2?

The only guess that comes to me is that the divisions between the
shevatim were stronger than we are used to, so the Kohen Gadol could say
"we" about the other kohanim, but could only say "they" about the other
shevatim, and even about the other Leviim. But if that division is strong
enough to keep him from saying "we", I wonder how effectively he do vidui
on their behalf.

Any ideas?

From: "Stein, Aryeh" <AStein@wtplaw.com>
> According to RSZA in Halichos Shlomo, tachanun (including actual nefilas
> apayim) is like Aleinu, and that if one is passing through a minyan that is
> saying tachanun, one should recite it with the tzibbur.

Is this mentioned by any earlier poskim?

SBA

where does the CI (or anyone) claim that borei nefashos on water, when
thirsty not choking, is reshus?

Shlomo Goldstein

rmb:
> I'm arguing that it's a feature of his mussarkeit -- that to the CC,
> everything came from mussar be it a de'Oraisa or a hanhagah instituted by
> the Alter (either Alter). Therefore the line between "halachah requires"
> and "it's healthy mussar development" is blurred -- and he would believe
> is SUPPOSED to be blurry.

rmb:
> After all, issur veheter is a blurry line. Yeish machmirim, veyeish
> meiqilim. And to a ba'al mussar, promoting some mussar objective is the
> highest reason lehachmir. So, you see that mussar goals encroach halachah.

First, the CC was not an official talmid of the mussar movement. The
3 alters (Slobodka, Kelm and Novarhadok) might never have met the CC
(though the CC met Rav Yisroel Salanter). I don't think the CC ever
accepted any of the hanhagos of the mussar movement per se.

Second, see the intro to CC. There the CC distinguishes between mussar
and halacha. He apologizes for quoting Shaarei Tshuva of Rabbeinu Yonah.
He gives 2 reasons for doing so. One, the CC asserts Rabbeinu Yonah
was expressing the minimal halacha and not mussar recommendations. Two,
the CC claims he does not rely exclusively on Rabbeinu Yona in case it
is in fact a chumra.

Rather, the Mishna Brura has a machmir approach to divrei Acharonim.
He claims, in intro to MB, one of the purposes of the MB is to be a
digest of acharonim. The AhS is much more meikil in approach, pro-minhag,
even saying his own svaros to support minhag. The MB says his own svaros
in understanding sefarim. I think this is the main difference that you
have noted.

Shlomo Goldstein

> I was thinking whether it would be mutar to pad the bill for clients who
> are problematic, with the intention of negotiating away the padding
> without negotiating away the meat. But before I ask a shaila as to
> whether it's permitted to do that, I wanted to ask you guys what you
> think of it. I think it's ona'a to do it without putting an explicit
> line in the bill that says "premium" or something similar.

Two questions first:

1. What do you mean by problematic? Problematic in collecting the money?
Problematic in bargaining when you tell them the cost? Something else?

2. If they see a line in the bill that says premium, how would you
answer the question, "A premium for what?"

I'd like to share some of my personal experiences with Rav Bulman. I
will just focus on aspects that I have not heard mentioned in any of
the hespeidim - that I view as reflecting his unique avodas HaShem.

1) He was first and foremost a Jew - without hyphenation. He was equally
at home with Chasidim, Litvaks, Yeshiva University etc. and was fully
knowledgeable about the unique hashkofa of each group. He belonged
to all of them but also to none of them because he couldn't pledge
allegiance to one at the exclusion of the others. I remember his anger
when he discussed the revised edition of the 19 Letters. "They tried to
make Hirsch into a Charedi Jew....". His comments were in agreement with
Rabbi Danziger's criticism that appeared in the pages of Jewish Action
that Hirsch's hashkofa was not in fact an emergency measure. He felt
it was assur to translate Hirsch into the currently acceptable views
because he fully knew and valued Hirsch's uniqueness.

2). He once told me that the condescending attitude of the yeshiva
world towards baalei batim was not only wrong but that it was producing
severely negative consequences. He related that he was once talking
to a prominent businessman when the phone rang. The conversation went,
"But you promised me that if I was guest of honor for your yeshiva two
years ago you wouldn't ask me again so soon... But you promised... But
you promised...Alright if you insist..." Rav Bulman said he would never
forget the look on the face of the businessman who was being given
"kavod" for the sake of Torah.

3) He was a rarity - a genuine talmid chachom who was an expert about
Jewish history. He noted that the Jewish people are always stuck in the
middle of conflicting forces such as the situation in Poland where Jews
could only make a living by being the intermediaries between the nobles
who owned the land the peasants. As a result when the peasant revolved
they attacked the Jews. He said that this was the Divine Plan to assure
that Jews never are allowed to have menuchah and are constantly being
given opportunities for spiritual growth. This was also a very accurate
description of his own life.

4) He lamented the fact that people got excited about the Meschech Chochma
in Bechukosai because of the "prophecy" concerning the holocaust "people
mistakenly think Berlin is Jerusalem" but miss the Meschech Chochma's
point. That message being that the engine that drives assimilation is
the denial of opportunies to the individual to manifest creativity and
individuality in their religious lives.

5) Several years ago when I started working on my compilation of
hashkofa issues I went to him to get some feedback. He leafed through
the manuscript of several hundred pages for about 15 seconds and said,
"I know exactly what you are doing and you will never get away with
it". Since I was not sure exactly what I was trying to achieve even
after three years of work I asked him what he meant. "You are treating
hashkofa as a dialectic the same way as the gemora treats halacha. You
will never get away with it because the yeshiva world views hashkofa as
fixed - not dynamic. You are following the approach of Rav Tzadok and Rav
Kook. However I want to buy the first copy. Do you understand? I want
to buy it and not receive it as a gift like your other seforim." His
ability to identify and articulate the essence was astounding and his
characterization has since become my conscious plan.

6) When his family was sitting shiva, I was talking to his sons about Rav
Bulman's frustrations in developing a community in Israel. I remember
him in Far Rockaway 30 years ago dreaming about making aliya with "ten
families" and having a community based on pure Hirschian idealism. A
community where Americans and baalei tshuva could continue their spiritual
quest without having to submit to the high social pressures of Israeli
haredi society. One of his son's said, "Baruch HaShem he failed. My
father realized at some point that his vision was not appropriate for
Israel as it is now and that it would just add to the hundreds of American
korbonos. Children of parents who want to retain their American identity
in Israel." I mentioned that Rav Schach had said a similar thing to
the Bostoner Rebbe when he pleaded for accommadation for the different
spiritual needs that American's have. "Those who don't like the Israeli
society as it is should go back to America".

Rav Bulman was acutely and profoundly aware of the nature of reality but
at the same time he was always striving for the impossible ideal as if
reality didn't exist.

                            Chag Someach
                            Daniel Eidensohn

> Derech agav, Rav Dovid Cohen told me that if you miss saying tachanun
> at the appropriate point, there are no tashlumin, i.e. only directly
> after chazaras hashatz.

According to RSZA in Halichos Shlomo ("HS") (p. 135), if a tzibbur
mistakenly skipped tachanun on a Monday/Thursday (e.g., the chazan
thought there was a bris/choson in shul when in reality there wasn't)
and they went ahead and took out the Torah and then realized that they
should have said tachanun, they should lain, return the Torah to the
aron and then say tachanun followed by Ashrei....

"Even though the ikar zman for tachanun is immediately after shemona
esrei, b'dieved one should say it later (and even if a person remembers
after he already came home from shul and remembered that he erroneously
skipped tachanun, he should say it at that time (at home)."

On a related note, whenever RSZA was davening in a minyan where they
said the viduy after shemona esrei, but they said it very fast, RSZA
would only say the following three words: "chatosi, avisi, poshati".
"If one can't say tachanun slowly, it's better to say less rather than
say the whole thing rushed." Perhaps this is a limud z'chus on those
who skip the long tachanun on Monday/Thursday.

Some other interesting things from the same perek in the HS:

On a day in which tachanun was not said, RSZA didn't klop his heart
during the bracha of "s'lach lanu" in shemona esrei.

When davening mincha in a hall during a seudas bar mitzvah or pidyon
haben, tachanun is omitted. R' Shmuel Salant would omit tachanun on
any day on which he was receiving a chashuva guest. While we are not
noheg like R' SS, in the situation of the bar mitzvah or pidyon haben,
it is vadai a zman simcha.

KT, GS and GYT

> community where Americans and baalei tshuva could continue their spiritual
> quest without having to submit to the high social pressures of Israeli
> haredi society. One of his son's said, "Baruch HaShem he failed. My
> father realized at some point that his vision was not appropriate for
> Israel as it is now and that it would just add to the
> hundreds of American korbonos. Children of parents who want to retain their
> American identity in Israel."

I find this surprising -- one, because Rav Bulman's kehilla here
in Neve Yaakov seems to be a continuation (of sorts) of his vision;
and two, because we DO have hundreds of "American korbonos" anyway --
specifically because there ISN'T a community like Rav Bulman envisioned.

Akiva

From: Shlomo Goldstein
> where does the CI (or anyone) claim that borei nefashos on water, when
> thirsty not choking, is reshus?

It is in the ma'aseh ish, first chailek, I believe. If I remember I will
get the page number for you over yom tov. I'll be off line for a few days
but feel free to remind me after if I don't get back to you before ST.

Stuart Klagsbrun
Credit Manager
AGT seven

> Pashtus, I would think that this is not mechabeh -- the candles are still
> burning although the flame is smaller. After all, no one forbids walking
> with a candle even though the flame is diminished while you're walking.

> but when you put them together it DOES increase the fuel supply
> (meltingmore wax) -- and when you separate they the fuel supply is
> reduced.

There can also be a problem if the candles are tilted and some wax drips
off. It is asur to remove oil from a dish that has a burning wick in it
because you are being mekarev the time it will go out.

Yoel

On 20 Sep 2002 at 0:04, RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com wrote:
> Scenario: 9 people daven Shmoneh Esrei
> In walks number 10.
> Question: Is a chiyyuv of Chazaras hashatz suddenly incurred or is it too 
> late.

> We know the converse if there were 10 davening and 1 left, we continue with 
> Chazaras Hashatz etc.

I have this vague recollection of a minyan needing to start together 
in order to have a chiyuv of Chazoras HaShatz. On the other hand, I 
can recall many instances in which someone came in late, and was 
counted as one of the ten for Chazoras HaShatz to begin (although I 
don't think that's le'chatchila). 

-- 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 20 Sep 2002 at 11:11, Mishpachat Freedenberg wrote:
>> I was thinking whether it would be mutar to pad the bill for clients who
>> are problematic, with the intention of negotiating away the padding ..
>>              I think it's ona'a to do it without putting an explicit
>> line in the bill that says "premium" or something similar.
...

> 1. What do you mean by problematic? Problematic in collecting the money?
> Problematic in bargaining when you tell them the cost? Something else?

Problematic in collecting. 

> 2. If they see a line in the bill that says premium, how would you
> answer the question, "A premium for what?"

Why for treating their matter with urgency, of course!

-- Carl

[Bounced from Areivim. -mi]

Actually, even in the time of the Rambam (see: Hilchot Tefilla 13:1)
there were communities still on the three-year Torah reading cycle.

During the time of the gemara what we now call Simchat Torah was called
Yom Tov Acharon (Megilla 31). Only by the end of the Geonic era was
it started to be called "Simchat Torah" (see: Siddur Rav Amram Gaon).
There were still communities that called it "Yom haSheni" or "Yom Tov
Sheni" (see: Sefer haManhig 71; Sefer haOrah Chelek Alef Siman 78).

There were Seudot Chatanim (for the Chatan Torah and Chatan Bereshit)
(see: Ohr Zarua Chelek Bet). However (like today) there was too much
*hollelut* (or as you say in Chinese "hulyeving":-) ) and there were
many takkanot ha'kahal against this.

One of the very early Rishonim (Ritz Ge'ut) talks about "Simchat Torah"
where they have "kilusin v'hadurin l'sefer torah v'omrim kama divrei
shevach v'hodaot lichvod sefer hatorah". Again, there were Seudot Chatanim
(Shiboley haLeket 372) and people drunk wine (SHU"T Mahai Mintz 4)
but no one chas vechalila got drunk.

Chag Kasher v'Sameach
Josh

excerpt from the newsletter of rabbi bess' shul ----- [he is considered
one of the top local litvish poskim in town; he was a former kollel
chaver whose personality established him a lvery large kehilla-THE place
for nonchasidish to daven if they dont want to daven in the kollel---

D'var Halacha

The Bottom Line

To properly understand "the bottom line" it is necessary to give an
introduction to the way Halacha guides and determines our lifestyle.
We would all like things to be "black or white". "Just tell me; is it
forbidden or permitted?" However, life is not so simple. There are many
different situations in Halacha and each situation has its own definite
rules and guidelines. We will present a number of situations and their
guidelines:

1- If there is a dispute among the Poskim regarding a certain issue and
the consensus of the Poskim is to decide the manner according one opinion,
we are mandated to follow that opinion.

2- If there is a dispute among the Poskim and there is no consensus,
if the question is regarding a Torah prohibition, we are mandated to
follow the stringent opinion. If the issue is regarding a Rabbinical
prohibition, we are permitted to follow the lenient opinion.

3- The Shulchan Aruch will sometimes declare that a certain food
is forbidden unless there is a great loss of money, in which case
one may follow the lenient opinion. This is seemingly difficult
to understand. Even if one were to lose all of his assets he is not
permitted to transgress a prohibition. How then may he be lenient
in case of great financial loss. The Ramoh explains, that whenever we
allow leniency in cases of loss, it means that in truth we have decided
the issue according to the lenient opinion. However, since there are
many opinions that rule stringently, we are only permitted to follow
the lenient opinion in case of financial loss. Now, if one were to say
that since the true Halacha follows the lenient opinion, I would like
to follow the lenient opinion even when there is no loss of money, he
would be transgressing the Halacha. If the Shulchan Aruch decides that
one can only be lenient in cases of great financial loss, then we are
mandated to follow the stringent opinion in all other cases

4- At times there is a Halachic situation when most Poskim decide
according to the lenient opinion but, nevertheless, there are reputable
Poskim that decide the issue stringently. The later Poskim may decide
that in this case, though the Halacha follows the lenient opinion,
nevertheless, since there are reputable Poskim who decide the matter
stringently, they recommend that one act stringently, since there has
not been a clear consensus to be lenient. In this case, one is not
mandated according to Halacha to follow the stringent opinion but one
is recommended to do so.

5- There may be a dispute among the Poskim and the consensus is to be
lenient, or, the Jewish nation as a whole, has accepted the lenient
opinion, but there are nevertheless, dissenting Poskim. In such a case,
the general populace is not recommended to act stringently, but those
seeking a higher level of observance are recommended to act stringently.

Historically, the type of Eruvin constructed in the small towns fell
into the fifth category; the general public practiced leniency while
the "Baal Nefesh" (those seeking a higher level of observance) were
recommended to be Machmir.

We, the residents of Los Angeles, a city with a population of a few
million, with streets that are relatively straight and extend for miles
and service 600,000 people have a unique situation. On the one hand,
as stated clearly in the Responsa of R' Chaim Ozer Grodzenski ZT"L, Los
Angeles is definitely considered a Reshus HaRabim of 600,000 making our
city more stringent than the small towns in Europe. [Towns like Baltimore,
though they may have a combined population of over 600,000, nevertheless,
the streets that service the area of the Eruv are rather narrow streets
which have relatively little traffic.]

On the other hand, the construction of an Eruv utilizing "walls"
is better than the European Eiruv which consisted solely of a Tzuras
Hapesach. (According to R' Chaim Ozer and the Chazon Ish, the Halacha
follows the opinion that Lo Ossei Rabim. However, many Poskim say that
the Rif, Rosh, Ramban, Rashba and Ritva, all hold "Asei Rabim" like R'
Yochanan. R' Aharon Kotler and R' Moshe Feinstein both disagreed with R'
Chaim Ozer.)

How does one weigh the efficacy of such an Eiruv and under which of the
abovementioned categories does it fit?

This question was submitted to three of the most prominent Poskim of
our generation: Horav Yosef S Elyashiv Shlit"a, Horav Shmuel Wozner
Shlit"a and Horav Nissim Karelitz Shlit"a. All were of the opinion that
the LA Eiruv, despite its improved construction was not as halachically
permissible as "historical" Eiruvin. All felt that this Eiruv would
fall into the fourth category: Halachicallly permissible; that one is
not mandated to act stringently but, if asked, recommend that everyone
practice stringency unless there is a real "need" to use the Eiruv. The
exact words of Horav Elyashiv Shlit"a were "One should rely on the
Eiruv only 'BeShaas HaDechak' and even then 'HaMachmir Tovoh Olov
Brocho'. [However, since it is Halachically valid, one can freely ask
a nonJew to carry.]

Since many people were utilizing the previous Eiruv, it was decided that
an improved Eiruv should be constructed, which would have greater Halachic
validity. Recognizing that one is not mandated to act stringently, the
RCC accepted to supervise the construction and maintenance of the Eiruv
to ensure its continued conformance with halacha. In the final analysis,
each family will have to decide, in consultation with their Rov, to what
extent, they will utilize the Eiruv.

On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 07:33:29PM -0400, Yisrael Dubitsky wrote:
: 3. Yerushalmi RH 1:3 (57a) has a few opinions:
: a. Everyone (no distinction between tsadik, rasha, or benoni or even Jew or 
: non-Jew) is judged and sealed on RH
: b. Everyone is judged on RH but their fate is sealed only on YK
: c. Everyone is judged on RH but their fate is sealed "in its time."
: d. Everyone is judged in their own (appointed) time and their fate is 
: sealed in its time.
: e. Individuals are constantly judged (R. Yose)
....

Bichlal this raises theodicical questions I haven't heard answers
to.

When someone r"l is sick, we say tehillim. Even if it's Cheshvan.
What happened to chasimah?

And does the notion of kesivah and chasimah mean that someone who
is chotei definitly won't be punished until the next year, since this
year's fate is sealed? If so, I can't rely on recouping my tzedakah or
Shabbos meal expenditures until the next year; I could end up with cash
flow problems if I spend too much.

There ARE shitos by which there is no chasimah, or perhaps none until
The Yom haDin. But they're not the ones we tend to discuss around yamim
nora'im.

It's like we have inconsistant views that grab our attention during
different times of year, and never look at both at the same time to
resolve the setiros.

One rav I asked this to said, "Well, on Yom Kippur it might be sealed
that we'll get rain, but if the person becomes evil mid-year, the rain
will come at the wrong times."

I was left dissatisfied, since that makes the chasimah partial. Wouldn't
his fate for the year include the success or failure of the crops, perhaps
even more so than just the rain (which after all is just the means to
his ratzon, not the desired thing itself)?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 A cheerful disposition is an inestimable treasure.
micha@aishdas.org            It preserves health, promotes convalescence,
http://www.aishdas.org       and helps us cope with adversity.
Fax: (413) 403-9905                - R' SR Hirsch, "From the Wisdom of Mishlei"

Not to take a side, on the issue, but drinking, or the problem of
drunkeness preceded our current mode of hakafos, which was instituted
by the Ari haKadosh.

See R. Avraham Ya'ari excellent historical survey Toldos Chag Simchas
Torah, 530 pages of everything you ever wanted to know about Simchas
Torah, including 11 pages of variant girsaos of Ein Adir.

R. Isaac Tirna and other Ashkenazi sifrei minhagim of that period discuss
dukhanen at Shacharis already.

There certainly seems to have been a "purim" type mode of Simchas
Torah in some places, while in others there was a "gilu be-ra'adah,"
with elements of Yamim Noraim.

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


[ 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         ]