Avodah Mailing List

Volume 12 : Number 059

Thursday, December 18 2003

• RE: End Slice of Challah
• RE: Chanukah Lights and Late Work
• Re: calculation of ma'aser
• Re: Aram/Bavel
• Re: Chanukah Lights and Late Work
• Re: Chanuka - how common was mehadrins
• Re: Chanuka - how common was mehadrins
• Re: calculation of ma'aser
• Re: calculation of ma'aser
• Re: Demai 3:6
• Re: Demai 3:6
• driving on shabbos in Lakewood?
• Re: Standing/sitting for the chupah
• Re: Aram/Bavel
• Aram/Bavel Charan & Ur
• Re: Standing/sitting for the chupah
• Re: driving on shabbos in Lakewood?
• Re: driving on shabbos in Lakewood?
• Re: Chanukah Lights and Late Work
• Driving on Shabbos in Lakewood?
• Re: Demai 3:6
• Re: Standing/sitting for the chupah
• Re: Chanukah Lights and Late Work

RSBA wrote:
> From: "Rena Freedenberg" free@actcom.co.il
>> The funny thing is that one of my sons [don't remember which] said
>> that they learned that eating the ends of the challa is a segula
>> for pregnancy.

> Isn't he confusing that with biting off the pitum of an esrog...?
> [or is that a segulah for pregnant women for a ben zochor..??]

I heard of giving a pregnant woman the end of a challah from a se'udas
beris as a segulah for a ben zachar. My father brought home such ends
for my wife when she was pregnant. (He did so twice when she was
expecting triplets, and we had two boys and a girl. Make of that what
you will.)

We still didn't explain segulos to my satisfaction. After all, someone
getting something they want or don't want for reasons other than
sechar va'onesh is only yet another factor getting in the way of
hashgachah. Why introduce it? Unlike teva, which aids bechirah, or
bechirah itself, how do segulos serve Ratzon Hashem?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Until he extends the circle of his compassion
micha@aishdas.org        to all living things,
http://www.aishdas.org   man will not himself find peace.
Fax: (413) 403-9905                        - Albert Schweitzer

On 15 Dec 2003 at 23:31, Rena Freednberg wrote:
> Very interesting. My husband asked a shaila of our rav because he
> works until midnight and gets home sometime between 12:30am and
> 1:00am. He told me that he was told that I should light for him and
> that if he wants to light once he gets home he should do so without a
> bracha.

> This is logical if you consider that these are my husband's kavua
> hours and by the time he gets home it will most certainly be past the
> time most people are out on the streets and so it is really pointless
> for him to light at that point. So, I guess I'm the "official lighter"
> this year.

When we lived in the States Carl routinely came home between 1 and 2 
in the morning. In our house each person old enough to make a bracha 
and light safely and with understanding lights, so I used to light at 
a normal time with the children and Carl woke me up when he came home 
and lit at that time.

--adina (does this belong on Areivim? I didn't add a new halachik 
element to the discussion, just an anecdotal point of interest...)

[A single comment wouldn't make sense there detached from the thread, so
I decided to leave it here. -mi]

R Sholom Simon wrote:
> A friend of mine was telling me he felt like he couldn't give 10% to
> tzedaka this year, because he sold a house to purchase another --
> and he netted $140K on his old house but used it all to purchase the
> new house (i.e., an "upgrade")....

> What about for calculation of 1/10th for tzedaka. Does it count?

Back a step. What kind of obligation to you think ma'aser kesafim is?
It can be anything from de'Oraisa (Shelah, Mes Megillah, Tzedaqah
uMa'aseir, "umikol maqom") to an eitzah tovah (Bach YD 331 "Av"). If
the latter, there is plenty of room for qulah. IIRC, the Maharil
invokes safeiq derabbanan lehaqeil.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Until he extends the circle of his compassion
micha@aishdas.org        to all living things,
http://www.aishdas.org   man will not himself find peace.
Fax: (413) 403-9905                        - Albert Schweitzer

R' Yitzchok Zirkind wrote:
> In a message dated 12/11/03 2:17:12 PM EST,
> gershon.dubin@juno.com writes:
>> Someone made the (to me) surprising assertion that Aram Naharayim
>> (as in ir Nachor)is the same as Bavel (geographically, that is).
>> Is this true? If not, can someone give me the geographic
>> parameters in where one ends and the other begins?

> See Ramban Breishis 11:28...

... which says that while Avraham was born in Charan, outside of
Bavel, Ur Kasdim was in Bavel. This gets into the machloqes over the
path of Terach's journeys.

In Pesachim 87b the gemara says that we were sent to Bavel because of
Hashem's Rachmanus. Because Bavel is "beis iman". Rashi explains that
it's our mother's home because Ur Kasdim is in Bavel.

The Maharsha offers two shitos:
1- It's the house of emunah, where Avraham avinu bcame a ma'amin.

2- Sanhedrin 38b says that Adam's head was made from earth from EY,
but his body was made from earth from Bavel. Thus it's a motherland.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Until he extends the circle of his compassion
micha@aishdas.org        to all living things,
http://www.aishdas.org   man will not himself find peace.
Fax: (413) 403-9905                        - Albert Schweitzer

gil@aishdas.org wrote:
> The question comes up very year of when and how to light when coming home
> from work long after the zeman began. 
> [...]
> Question: If a husband comes home late from work, should the wife who
> is at home light in his place?
> [...] 
> The opposite is also the case, when the husband is home before the wife
> (who is at work). Even though min ha-din he should light 

What if both come home late?  Or if, as in my case, there's only one?
When I come home late, the only pirsumei nissa I'm likely to have is
to my cat.  Though I am on the ground floor, so if I put the menorah
in the window rather than the doorway I can have pirsumei nissa to the
street.  The concept of kalya rigla detarmudai doesn't really exist in
NYC; at least not until midnight at the earliest.

What I have taken to doing, with the approval of my father, is to light
at work, with a bracha, which achieves pirsumei nissa, and then when I
get home I light again without a bracha.  When I make the bracha at work
I have in mind that I am going to light when I get home as well.

> Regarding going to a wedding straight from work (after the zeman begins),
> R' Ya'akov Kamenetsky said that one's wife should light for him at home.

What if one has no wife at home?  And a cat isn't a bar chiyuva, so it
can't light for me either...

> He called the practice of lighting at the wedding a joke (ElY, SA OC
> 677 n. 590).

Presumably he agrees that *someone* should light at the wedding, and
is talking about the idea of all the guests lighting, but still, why is
that a joke?  Even if he holds that they must light again when they get
home, doesn't lighting at the wedding achieve pirsumei nissa?

Kenneth Miller wrote:
>One common way to start a drasha about Chanuka is to point out how unusual
> this halacha is, that from the very beginning, we were given the option of
> performing it on several levels...

> My question is: Was it always this way, or is it a recent development?

> One possibility is that in recent decades and centuries, we have been
> blessed with such wealth that lighting a full set of neros has become
> very simple and very inexpensive, and that until recent times only
> the more dedicated would light on the "hamehadrin" or "mehadrin min
> hamehadrin" levels...............

Actually the Rambam, Tur, and Shulchan Aruch all simply bring the practise
of mehadrin min hamehadrin as the normative Halacha without telling you
that it is only a Hidur. They only differ on whether the mehadrin min
hamehadrin also does the mehadrin practise. So it is not a recent Minhag.

Kol Tuv,
Moshe Schor

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 04:46:45AM -0500, Phyllostac@aol.com wrote:
: Within the last two years or so, a sefer came out in Eretz Yisroel called
: 'Bameh madlikin' by Zohar Amar et al (IIRC)...            In recent times
: (as we have discussed here in the past) some women have started lighting
: candles for each child [mistakenly/wrongly based on a knas for those
: who missed lighting due to childbirth, etc., a not very common event
: nowadays], while in the past, at first one ner was used and then two,
: kineged zochor and shomor....

FWIW, I own a book by the Israel Museum of photos from archeological
digs of keilim described in shas. (The pictures of a kira were quite
useful.) Neiros (oil lamps, usually clay) were often made with one large
hole for putting oil in with numerous holes for wicks. FWIW, the typical
shape was a very rounded wedge, with the holes around the arch. Vaguely
reminicent of a food -- the holes are where toenails would go.

They describe that all the wicks would be lit for Shabbos, as an
extravagance lechavod hayom.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Until he extends the circle of his compassion
micha@aishdas.org        to all living things,
http://www.aishdas.org   man will not himself find peace.
Fax: (413) 403-9905                        - Albert Schweitzer

Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:
> Back a step. What kind of obligation to you think ma'aser kesafim is?
> It can be anything from de'Oraisa (Shelah, Mes Megillah, Tzedaqah
> uMa'aseir, "umikol maqom") to an eitzah tovah (Bach YD 331 "Av"). If
> the latter, there is plenty of room for qulah. IIRC, the Maharil
> invokes safeiq derabbanan lehaqeil.

Not only the Bach but the Pischei Teshuva brings many Poskim who state
that Maaser Ksafim is only a Minhag B'Alma.

Tosephos (citing Sifrei Drush) derives the Halacha of Maaser Kesafim
from a Drasha: "Aser TeAser "Es Kol" Tevuos Zarecha HaYotze HaSadeh
Shana Shana." ..."Es Kol" being a Ribui to include Maaser Kesafim (ten
percent of all monetary gain) thus making it a D'oraisa.

But it should also be noted that the Bach does not absolve us of the
Mitzva of Tzedaka. It only absolves us of the the requirement to give
ten percent of our money to Tzedaka.

I have always been a bit perplexed at the concept of Maaser Ksafim.
Rabbi Kagan's guidlines state that one must give a minimum of ten
percent of his earnings and a maximum of 20 percent. He further states
that giving only ten percent is a Midah Beinonis and one should give as
much as one can not limiting it to only ten percent.

In cases of the very poor it takes a great deal more effort then it
does the average income earner to give away ten percent of his income
and then be considered ONLY a Beinoni.

In the cases of the very rich is seems absurd to limit donations to
twenty percent. If someone makes twenty million dollars a year and wants
to give 50 percent to Tzedaka, why shouldn't he be able to?

Perhaps the answer is that one can give Tzedaka in whatever amounts or
percentages one wants but the Massar Kesafim aspect is fulfilled at the
outside limit of 20 percent... the rest is still considered Tzedaka. In
fact I know someone who does give at least 50 percent of his income to
Tzedaka. (...the guy who made the half million dollar weddings for his
daughters and son.)

HM

> R Sholom Simon wrote:
>> A friend of mine was telling me he felt like he couldn't give 10% to
>> tzedaka this year, because he sold a house to purchase another -- and
>> he netted $140K on his old house but used it all to purchase the new
>> house (i.e., an "upgrade")....

>> What about for calculation of 1/10th for tzedaka. Does it count?

> Back a step. What kind of obligation to you think ma'aser kesafim is? It
> can be anything from de'Oraisa (Shelah, Mes Megillah, Tzedaqah
> uMa'aseir, "umikol maqom") to an eitzah tovah (Bach YD 331 "Av").

Good point.  Thanks.

> If the latter, there is plenty of room for qulah. IIRC, the Maharil
> invokes safeiq derabbanan lehaqeil.

Al pi Maharil -- what's the safek here? The net on the old house
was $140K.

-- Sholom

RSS asked:
> It also occurs to me: how was it done in practice?... How did one give
> ma'aser of such small amounts anyways?

Nowadays - especially in cases of doubt - the actual ma'aser is often
not "given" or even "taken". It's simply declared as such' "in the North
corner is the ma'aser". (Though I have been given ma'aser on 2 occasions
in the past few years by neighbours who managed to grow something in
their gardens.)

Since ma'aser may be eaten by all this is not a problem.

The problem is truma which is not applicable to Demai, as even an AH is
assumed to take truma, and trumas ma'aser. This 1% needs to be separated.

We dispose of it nowadays, as we have no use for truma that is not tahor.

So maybe the son-in-law in question put 1% in his pocket and disposed
of it when he got home.

- Danny

> But this is troubling to me. Suppose the "mother-in-law" is the mother,
> wife, and daughter, of a Sage. We are worried about her?

"Eishes chaver k'chaver"

David Riceman

[From an Areivim discussion about a bus to Lakewood that got delayed by
snow and arrived after Shabbos began. With frum Jews on it. -mi]

From: "Avi Burstein" <betera@012.net.il>
> Someone posted an ad (on their blog) that was in
> Yated saying that the rabbonim didn't support it:
> <http://pads.typepad.com/notepad/Driving-on-Shabbos.jpg>.

This past Friday night our rav, R' Yaakov Neuberger, spoke about this
issue because of the pasuk "vayichan es pnei ha'ir" and Rashi writes
that Yaakov reached the city on Erev Shabbos (and the medrash says based
on this pasuk that Yaakov learned hilchos techumin). R' Neuberger
mentioned in passing that if one was on a bus he may be permitted to
continue until the bus reaches its final destination - since the bus
is 10 tefachim off of the ground the person was not "koneh shevisa"
until he got off of the bus. I did not follow up with him on this issue
because he only said it in passing and not as a final psak, but I will,
bli neder, look into the matter tonight.

Brian Gopin

The recent minhag is for everyone to stand as the chasan and kallah
walk down the aisle to the Chupah. RHS reportedly is against standing
for the kallah for reasons that I am not sure of as of this date.

Steve Brizel
Zeliglaw@aol.com

In a message dated 12/17/2003 1:07:25 AM EST, micha@aishdas.org writes:
> [The Ramban] ... which says that while Avraham was born in Charan,
> outside of Bavel, Ur Kasdim was in Bavel. This gets into the machloqes
> over the path of Terach's journeys.

> In Pesachim 87b the gemara says that we were sent to Bavel because of
> Hashem's Rachmanus. Because Bavel is "beis iman". Rashi explains that
> it's our mother's home because Ur Kasdim is in Bavel.

1) WRT the general Maclokes, see Ramban Breishis 12:1 D"H Meiartzcha
umimolad'tcha, and Rashi D"H Meiartzcha, and Rashi and Ramban 24:7 and
the Mforshei Rashi.

2) WRT Psachim 87b Rashi uses the Loshon Avrohom m'Ur Kasdim *Yatza*
(not b'Ur Kasdim Nolad) based on the Possuk Breishis 11:31, the Diyuk
is "Beis Iman" vs. Lech Licha "m'Beis Avicha" as from a mother one is
"Yotzeh".

> The Maharsha offers two shitos:
> 1- It's the house of emunah, where Avraham avinu bcame a ma'amin....

In this Teitch of the Maharsha he means 2 things 1) that it can be
called Beis Iman even if not the place of actual birth (and hence no
Machlokes) since it is were he grew up in 2) Emunah which was Avraham's
main occupation .

Kol Tuv,
Yitzchok Zirkind

Gershon Dubin wrote:
> Someone made the (to me) surprising assertion that Aram Naharayim (as in
> ir Nachor)is the same as Bavel (geographically, that is). Is this true?
> If not, can someone give me the geographic parameters in where one ends
> and the other begins?

While I can not at the moment give you the parameters of the whole Aram
Naharayim, I can give you the parameters of Charan(Ir Nochor) the place
of our ancestral roots. It is in Northern Mesopotamia. According to
Encyclopedia Judaica:

"Haran is located some ten miles north of the Syrian border, at the
confluence of the wadis which in winter join the Balikh River just
below its source. It is strategically located about halfway between
Guzana (Gozan) and Carchemish on the east-west road which links the
Tigris and the Mediterranean, at the very point where the north-south
route along the Balikh links the Euphrates to Anatolia. It is thus the
traditional crossroads of the major routes from Mesopotamia to the west
and the northwest (cf. Ezek. 27:23), and its very name in Akkadian (and
Sumerian) implies as much. The biblical name Paddan-aram (Gen. 25:20
et al.), "the Aramean highway," seems to identify the same site by a
synonym reflecting its later role as a center of Aramean settlement."
Doing Further research I found it on a highly detailed map to be in
Turkey just North of Syria at coordinates 36 degrees North Latitude and
39 degrees East. It is called Harran on the map.For some photos of the
site go to: <http://www.galenfrysinger.com/harran_turkey.htm>.

Using the Encarta CD Measuring tool, I can tell you that the distance
from Beersheva where Yaakov started his journey to Charan is 460 miles,
leaving aside the Kfitzas Haderech. Ur Kasdim which according to Rashi was
Avraham's birthplace (Ramban disagrees & says it was Charan) is located
in Southern Iraq near present day Nasiriyah. The first part of Avraham's
journey was from Ur to Charan which is a distance of about 575 miles. For
more info on Ur see <http://www-oi.uchicago.edu/OI/UR/Arch1.html>.

On 17 Dec 2003 at 12:44, Zeliglaw@aol.com wrote:
> The recent minhag is for everyone to stand as the chasan and kallah
> walk down the aisle to the Chupah. RHS reportedly is against standing
> for the kallah for reasons that I am not sure of as of this date.

Ain hachi nami (at least for the chosson it's probably required because
of chosson domeh l'melech). But the question was what the heter is for
NOT standing for the Sheva Brachos under the chupa. Rav Weiss (BTW I now
have the shiur on tape, and if anyone wants it tonight is probably your
last chance to get it without major tircha) tried to be m'lamed zchus by
saying that chosson domeh l'melech is not mamash like melech (cannot be
poretz geder etc.). But I walked away from the shiur understanding that
l'chatchila one really should stand for the Sheva Brachos.

 - 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 17 Dec 2003 at 12:17, brian.m.gopin@jpmorgan.com wrote:
> R' Neuberger mentioned in passing that if one was on a bus he may be
> permitted to continue until the bus reaches its final destination -
> since the bus is 10 tefachim off of the ground the person was not
> "koneh shevisa" until he got off of the bus. 

I understand this if the driver is a goy - not if (as reported) the
driver is a Jew.

I also don't understand the heter for getting off the bus. When I
worked in the States, it happened from time to time that I had to
travel on Friday afternoons (one time I got the airline to switch me
to a different flight by telling them what the consequences of arriving
after Shabbos started would be; another time I tried to get myself on a
plane to ANYWHERE because the community I was in did not even have Kosher
bread! and I managed to get home for Shabbos anyway; and another time I
really did get stuck for Shabbos out of town, but fortunately that was
clear several hours before Shabbos). The psak that I heard at the time
was that if you landed after Shabbos started, you had to stay on the
plane because you were koneh shivsa, and if you were forced to get off
the plane (where of course you had to leave all of your belongings),
you had to stay in the airport for Shabbos (because having come from
outside the tchum, you could not go more than arba amos).

IIRC, around the time I left the States (1991), there was a sefer put out
by R. Zelig Epstein that dealt with this entire issue (I don't have it -
maybe someone else does).

-- Carl

brian.m.gopin@jpmorgan.com wrote:
> This past Friday night our rav, R' Yaakov Neuberger, spoke about this
> issue (and mentioned in passing that if one was on a bus he may be
> permitted to continue until the bus reaches its final destination -
> since the> bus is 10 tefachim off of the ground the person was not
> "koneh shevisa" until he got off of the bus. 

WADR I can't see what this has to do with being Koneh Shvisa. Once you
have passed Shkia and certainly after Tzeis, it's automatic L'chol
HaDeios. But IIRC there is a heter to continue on a bus under the
circummsances of that Lakewood bus having to do with the lack of any
Melacha on the part of the rider.

[Email #2. -mi]

Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 01:45:36 +0200 "Carl and Adina Sherer"
> <sherer@actcom.co.il> writes:
> << I'm not sure where you mean by the "beginning of the Garden State
> Parkway,">> 

> The beginning of the part that you use going to Lakewood from Brooklyn. 
> At that point (near the bridge over the Raritan River), there are no
> easily accessible Jewish communities (or none that most people on that
> bus would be likely to know about), hence the pesak.

IIRC, if the isue is about Techumin then the issue of being Koneh Shvisa
becomes an issue and the measurement begins at the outside perimeter
of the last populated area. If the issue is about Chilul Shabbos then
there wasn't any by the riders of the bus.

IIRC if one arrives on Shabbos at an airport one has arrived outside his
original Techum and cannot leave the airport buiding, the building being
an extension of the reshus of the plane. I assume the same is true for
a bus.

Admittedly I am fuzzy about these Halachos but I recall RYGB discussing
them with members of his Daf Yomi Shiur a few years ago. Pehaps he can
bring his considerable expertise on this issue form us.

HM

On 17 Dec 2003 at 2:10, Zev Sero wrote:
> What I have taken to doing, with the approval of my father, is to
> light at work, with a bracha, which achieves pirsumei nissa, and then
> when I get home I light again without a bracha.  When I make the
> bracha at work I have in mind that I am going to light when I get home
> as well.

I did this in New York when I had a hava amina of an all-nighter 
during Chanuka (once or twice). 

> Presumably he agrees that *someone* should light at the wedding, and
> is talking about the idea of all the guests lighting, but still, why
> is that a joke?  Even if he holds that they must light again when they
> get home, doesn't lighting at the wedding achieve pirsumei nissa?

I would think that those who have no one to light for them at home 
*should* light at the wedding for exactly this reason. I think your 
interpretation of RYK is probably correct. 

 - Carl

At 07:06 AM 12/18/2003, Harry Maryles wrote:
>Admittedly I am fuzzy about these Halachos but I recall RYGB
>discussing them with members of his Daf Yomi Shiur a few years ago.
>Pehaps he can bring his considerable expertise on this issue form us.

I was also surprised at Rabbi Neuberger's assertion. The Aruch HaShulchan
345:26 rules that train tracks (I assume when several are laid in parallel
to equal 16 amos) are a reshus ho'rabbim - if the l'ma'aloh mei'asarah
was relevant then the travelers on the train should not count,

Moreover, indeed, one who came from l'ma'aloh mei'asoroh is a well
discussed case in eruvin, vis a vis a sefinah that entered port on
Shabbos. One may not leave the makom mukaf mechitzos in which one
finds oneself (i.e., as RHM stated, the airport if it is mukaf, as they
generally are, or, as RCS stated, the plane, if the airport is not mukaf.

YGB 

Sholom Simon wrote:
>Demai 3:6 teaches us that when we give food to our mother-in-law, you
>take ma'aser from what you give her, and ma'aser from what your recieve
>from her (i.e., after she cooks it into a meal), because we are worried she
>might have exchanged some of the ingredients for others...

This is referring to the unusual case of a "chaver" who marries the
daughter of an "am ha'aretz". In those days, the title am ha'aretz was
given to people who were suspected of not taking terumos and ma'asros
(among other things). While the majority did, there was a sizable
minority who did not. Because of that suspicion, a chaver would not be
allowed to eat fruit or vegetables from any am ha'aretz - including his
mother-in-law - without taking ma'aser on the food he was given.

This, presumably, would have been understood before the marriage. After
all, he is a chaver and she is an am ha'aretz. There was an actual
takkanah of Chazal that a chaver must take tu"m from food from an am
ha'aretz.

This was probably somewhat uncomfortable, and that might add another
layer of explanation to the saying in Pesachim 49a that a talmid chacham
should not marry a bas am ha'aretz.

There is an additional suspicion that the m-i-l might switch food without
telling him in order to impress her son-in-law. Since, to her, the food
is perfectly permissible, why wouldn't she switch?

This issue is very relevant halachah le-ma'aseh in many situations,
but if you truly believe that your m-i-l will not switch food on you
(even if she isn't frum) then there are poskim who are lenient.

Gil Student
gil@aishdas.org
www.aishdas.org/student

Zeliglaw@aol.com wrote:
> The recent minhag is for everyone to stand as the chasan and kallah
> walk down the aisle to the Chupah. RHS reportedly is against standing
> for the kallah for reasons that I am not sure of as of this date.

It has been interesting glossing over the discussion on this issue. I
remember discussing the concept of standing for the Chupah with Rabbi
Harold P. Shusterman ZTL, the Rav and Zaken of Chabad here in Chicago
until his Petirah a few years ago. His attitude was that that the
preferable Minhag was to stand and seemed to feel that it was even
inappropriate not to. Since we were just having an informal conversation
at the time, he did not cite any sources. This was the first time I had
ever heard of it.

I have attended hundreds of weddings over my career as a videographer
and have obsereved what the Klei Kodesh do. I can tell you that the vast
majority of RYs and RKs sit, including R. A.C. Levin, R. Chaim Keller,
(...the RYs of Telshe). So, too, does Agudah Dayan R. Shmuel Feurst,
Talmid Muvhak of RMF.

Many do stand, however... primarily the vast majority of the Bnei
Torah/friends of the Chasan who come in from the various Yeshivos.

Even though it may be brought down in Halacha Seforim as mentioned by
some in this thread, but I doubt it is Halacha L'Maasah. How else could
the RYs and RKs sit? I, therefore, find it to be a bit selfish on the
part of these young men to be Poretz Geder in this way.

I have no problem when anyone wants to take on a personal Chumra, as
long as it doesn't impinge on someone else's rights. But when a given
host provides ample seating so that the Chupa can be more orderly and
when an announcement is made for everyone to be seated, THIS personal
Chumra impinges on someone else. The hosts are defacto denied their wishes
for the way the Chupa room should be. Dozens of Bachurim standing in the
aisles while everyone else is seated looks messy and disruptive. It seems
to be a kind of Yuhara to stand in such situations and does not add to
the decorum of the moment especially when many Gedolei Israel ARE seated.

HM

Zev Sero wrote:
>What if both come home late?

Then, obviously, you light at that time.

>Or if, as in my case, there's only one?...
>Though I am on the ground floor, so if I put
>the menorah in the window rather than the
>doorway I can have pirsumei nissa to the
>street.

I think you answered your own question. That is probably le-chatchilah
what you should do even if you don't come home late.

>What I have taken to doing, with the approval
>of my father, is to light at work, with a
>bracha, which achieves pirsumei nissa, and then
>when I get home I light again without a bracha.

Is your father a rav? If not, I would suggest asking one because I can't
think of any reason why that would be not be a berachah le-vatalah.

>>Regarding going to a wedding straight from work
>>(after the zeman begins), R' Ya'akov Kamenetsky
>>said that one's wife should light for him at home.

>What if one has no wife at home?

Then his solution does not work for you and you are still obligated to
light neiros Chanukah at home.

>Presumably he agrees that *someone* should light
>at the wedding, and is talking about the idea of
>all the guests lighting, but still, why is that
>a joke?

Why would there be any inyan of lighting at the wedding? If there
are guests who are not sleeping at their own homes then you might say
makom pito goreim and they should light where they eat. But, otherwise,
I can't see any reason for anyone to light at the wedding.

Gil Student
gil@aishdas.org
www.aishdas.org/student

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


[ 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         ]