Avodah Mailing List

Volume 24: Number 19

Mon, 22 Oct 2007

• 1. Re: An-im Zemiros (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Minhag Yisroel and Gra on 2 Matzos vs.3 Matzos (Arie Folger)
• 3. Re: Minhag Yisroel and Gra on 2 Matzos vs.3 Matzos (Rich, Joel)
• 4. Re: Zelig Schachnowitz (Allen Gerstl)
• 5. Re: An-im Zemiros (Richard Wolpoe)
• 6. Re: What did they learn in the yeshiva of Shem and Ever (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 7. Re: May Kohanim visit the Rebbe's Ohel by means of a box (Richard Wolpoe)
• 8. Why does Rosh Hashana come BEFORE Yom Kippur? (Richard Wolpoe)
• 9. Re: What did they learn in the yeshiva of Shem and Ever (Zev Sero)
• 10. Re: An-im Zemiros (Zev Sero)
• 11. Re: Minhag Yisroel and Gra on 2 Matzos vs.3 Matzos (Richard Wolpoe)

On Sun, October 21, 2007 9:26 am, RallisW@aol.com wrote:
: Is one permitted to recite An-im Zemiros on Shabbos or Yom Tov as a
: majority of Ashkenazic shuls do? Is one allowed to recite it at the end
: of  davening?

Why not? Or is this a tie-in to RRW's question about when common
practice doesn't fit the texts.

Ashkenazim traditionally did so. Yeshivos trimmed it out, along with
other arguable sections, in order to minimize time taken from
learning. I do not know the justification for shuls that do not have a
Shabbos morning seder immediately following to continue omitting
pieces of the standard nusach hatefilah. For example, tefillah
leshalom hamedinah (your host state) is a chiyuv stated by tannaim,
implemented by over a millenium of Ashkenazim with this particular
tefillah. What justifies a shul simply omitting the tefillah?
(Ironically, this is a case where the "MO" shul is more likely to be
the less modern and innovative...)

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
micha@aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv

RJR wrote:
> No problem, just pointing out that this implies 2 identically situated
> individuals may get a different dvar hashem depending on who they go to
> (some find this objectionable hashkafically) and that it does, as
> previously discussed, imply subjectivity which then brings into question
> the role of motivation (e.g. had the women's tfila groups come the same
> route as amen groups, would they have been allowed).

Eh... why not. I believe that many WTG opponents have a philosophical problem 
with them, which in turn engenders halakhic issues. However, I am not aware 
of any of the WTG opponents who also oppose Beit Yaakov schools' group 
prayers.

> It also raises the question of what if my 2 identically situated people
> meet each other and decide they should seek the "true" dvar hashem by going
> to a higher level posek, ?and why shouldn't this be the 1st option if one
> is seeking the "true" dvar hashem (if one thinks there can really only be
> one)

The two identical people in the quote are not posqim, but shoalim. We all know 
that different posqim can sometimes give different answers to the same 
question, and no two posqim are identical. Furthermore, insofar as a psaq is 
within the halakhically imaginable, why can't there be more than one "true" 
answer, especially regarding issues that depend on kireot 'eyney hadayan etc.

I'll even go further. The halakhah clearly is against excessive consensus in 
criminal cases. If all members of Sanhedrin convict someone to the death 
penalty, he is freed. Some mebers must invariably believe that the criminal 
cannot be executed or the punishment cannot be carried out. Remember, we are 
talking about Sanhedrin, the greatest tzadiqim and ba'alei messorah in the 
whole Jewish nation. And yet they must disagree!

Nonetheless, most of the questions we have looked at did not involve anything 
remotely so difficult. Having two or three matzot at the seder is probably 
not even a derabbanan. In other cases, we have a ma'hloqet about a derabbanan 
[aspect of a deOraita mitzvah].

Finally, I can give you a theological underpinning of the plurality of certain 
kinds of pessaq. Pessaq is a struggle, the struggle to do the right thing, 
the struggle to act with yirat shamayim, the struggle for deveikut. Hence, 
the process is as important as the outcome, provided one approaches a 
qualified, G"d fearing posseq (or one is such oneself).

True, it could be that after going to a bigger posseq the question will be 
resolved in favor of one of the approaches, but that will have been the 
result of a new struggle, and hence has a new outcome. Also, the "higher" 
posseq might rule that each of the pisqei halakhah are right for their 
respective shoalim.

There is, however, one point in which I disagree with the quote I posted: I do 
not believe that two identical shoalim exist. Hence a pessaq is always 
personal.
-- 
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com

 


True, it could be that after going to a bigger posseq the question will
be resolved in favor of one of the approaches, but that will have been
the result of a new struggle, and hence has a new outcome. Also, the
"higher" 
posseq might rule that each of the pisqei halakhah are right for their
respective shoalim.

There is, however, one point in which I disagree with the quote I
posted: I do not believe that two identical shoalim exist. Hence a
pessaq is always personal.
--
Arie Folger
================================
OK try this one - 1 shoel has an issue.  If he takes it to R' X  he gets
one response based on R' X's struggle.  If he takes it to R' 2X he gets
a different response based on R' 2x's struggle.  Is it your contention
that either result is the most fully appropriate dvar hashem for the
shoel (implication - HKB"H really doesn't have an opinion on the
eventual act, just the process)

KT
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.

Rn' Toby Katz asked about the above-indicated author.

Please see:

http://www.amazon.com/Jewish-Kingdom-Kuzar-Zelig-Schachnowitz/dp/1583309292

KT
Eliyahu

On 10/22/07, Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, October 21, 2007 9:26 am, RallisW@aol.com wrote:
> : Is one permitted to recite An-im Zemiros on Shabbos or Yom Tov as a
> : majority of Ashkenazic shuls do? Is one allowed to recite it at the end
> : of  davening?
>
> Why not? Or is this a tie-in to RRW's question about when common
> practice doesn't fit the texts.
>
> Ashkenazim traditionally did so. Yeshivos trimmed it out, along with
> other arguable sections, in order to minimize time taken from
> learning. I do not know the justification for shuls that do not have a
> Shabbos morning seder immediately following to continue omitting
> pieces of the standard nusach hatefilah. For example, tefillah
> leshalom hamedinah (your host state) is a chiyuv stated by tannaim,
> implemented by over a millenium of Ashkenazim with this particular
> tefillah. What justifies a shul simply omitting the tefillah?
> (Ironically, this is a case where the "MO" shul is more likely to be
> the less modern and innovative...)
>
> SheTir'u baTov!
> -micha
>
> --
> Micha Berger



It appears that originally in Sheknaz Shir Hakavod was said on Yamim Nora'im
[YN]or YK only  Furthermore, one of the most common Traditional Meolodies
sung in many American Shuls is a drevitive of the  the Selichos YN Motif
used in at least the following  sections:

   1. Maran divsihmaya
   2. Shomeir yisreol [bimei Selichos]i
   3. Eder vahod {RH Shacharis]
   4. Moreh chata;im' {YK Shacharis] Both from R Mehullam b. Kalonymos

The ubiquitous use of this tune for Shir Hakavod  alludes to its having been
used primarily  or exclusively during YN & Yemei Selichos  AISI, the yeshiva
world did not  shave down its popular use so mucha as actually RESTORING its
original usage.

I don't know about most Yeshivos, but apparently Telz was influenced by
German nusach kach shamatti.


FWIW my old congregation said shir hakavod on every Shabbos but NOT on
weekday Yamim Tovim.

[Tangentially, AISI, all of our Selichos before RH/YK are really an
extension of YK nusach, and that is why I would extend the "heter" of Kol
Nidre night to recite 13 middos-  to permi the entire Selichos season - .
kein nir'eh li lehakeil."  Although it is obvious that Selichos are for
Ashmeores haboker and at least 1 teimani said that selihcos is termed
"ashmoreth" ]


Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
Please Visit:
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071022/c250aa91/attachment-0001.htm 

Cantor Wohlberg asked:
> BTW, who was the Rosh Yeshiva of the Yeshiva of Shem and Ever?

There is a timeline on pp 596-7 of Vol 3 of The Torah Anthology. It gives an awful lot of dates, including these: (All wordings and spellings theirs)

2085: Isaac enters Shem's academy
2121: Jacob goes to academy
2158: Shem dies; Jacob returns from academy
2171: Jacob goes to Eber's academy
2187: Eber dies

I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that the academy was headed by Shem and Ever.

Akiva Miller

On 10/22/07, M Cohen <mcohen@touchlogic.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> re: ...significant change to the previous halacha (2 inspections every 7
> years) and it is a direct result of the new technology
>
> there is no halacha requiring regularly worn tefillin inspection 2/7yrs.
>
>
> sincerely,
> Mordechai Cohen
>

Is this a case of  Hiddush or of Shinuy?



-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
Please Visit:
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071022/7f0495c9/attachment-0001.html 

Why does RH come BEFORE YK?  Wouldn't the ideal model be to gain Kapparh
FIRST and then have yom Hadin?
There are a number of anwwers to this..

AISI our nusach has been adjusted due to address this very concept. IOW the
Selichos BEFORE RH are actually to effect a YK-style selicha/kapparah. E.G.
the Pizmon Erev RH is the same for YK Shacharis [see Roedelheim and Vilna
Kol Bo Machazorim].

Thus, we as a people have not accepted the other answers inpractice, but
have actually adjusted OURSELVES to implement a form of YK Kotton
[expeically erev RH] in order to effect Selicha before RH!

NB:

   1. The Ramabam OTOH starts Selihos  AFTER RH during 10 days of Teshuva
   only.
   2. Conversely, Chabad END Selichos with RH with the exception of Tzom
   Gedalyah itself.
   3. And sost Ashkenzim [Western and Eastern] do both before RH and
   before YK.



-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
Please Visit:
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071022/8132cb04/attachment.htm 

Richard Wolberg wrote:
> ?They're also allowed to take on almost any mitzvah they like?
> 
> * *
> 
> *Perhaps I?ve been under a misconception, but I don?t think a goy can 
> accept tallis and tefillin, licht bentch?n, etc. etc. etc.  I would say, 
> farkeirt, they?re NOT allowed to take almost any mitavah they like. *

The Rambam rules explicitly that they can, and they get sechar for it.
From Tanach it's clear and undisputed that a goy can bring a korban,
can come to the BHMK to pray, can pray in the direction of the BHMK,
and in the future the goyim will celebrate Sukkot (which strongly
implies that they may do so now).   Rebbi sent Ardeban a mezuzah,
and said that it would protect him; if he would not be doing a mitzvah
how could he get its sechar?

I'm not aware of any source that forbids goyim to take on any mitzvah
besides Shabbat and Talmud Torah.  The Radbaz says they should be
steered away from mitzvot that involve devarim shebikdusha (tefillin,
mezuzah), but doesn't say it's forbidden to them.  (And he doesn't
explain Rebbi sending Ardeban that mezuzah.)


> *Is a goy obligated to kibud av va?aim.

It would seem that he is not obligated, but he certainly gets sechar
for it, as evidenced by the story of Dama ben Netina.


> Vov: Adultery

Huh?


> Though the gemara Sanhedrin 
> says that a goy who learns Torah is chayav misa, it is metaphoric and 
> for sholom bayis, if a goy wants to learn anything beyond the zayin 
> mitzvoth, we shouldn?t consider killing him.

Not for sholom bayis, but because we have no basis on which to kill
him.  There are many things of which the gemara says "chayav mita"
or "mitchayev benafsho", but that's not a license for a BD (let alone
an individual) to kill someone who does it!


-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

Micha Berger wrote:
>  For example, tefillah
> leshalom hamedinah (your host state) is a chiyuv stated by tannaim,
> implemented by over a millenium of Ashkenazim with this particular
> tefillah. What justifies a shul simply omitting the tefillah?

It was printed in the siddurim, but (in Russia at least) it was only
said in the big shuls, where the government was aware of what went on;
it was never said in smaller shuls.

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

On 10/19/07, Arie Folger <afolger@aishdas.org> wrote:
>
> On Friday, 19. October 2007 11.25:24 avodah-request@lists.aishdas.orgwrote:
> > I guess I feel RHS is coming across not acknowledging other "kosher"
> > approaches - his way or the highway. Whether he intends to do that, I do
> > not know, I have not verified this with him. I would say that we can
> > quibble with the underlying premise in any given paragraph.
>
> This is common in literature, especially in books like MiPninei HoRav, for
> there, RHS is trying to explain his master, it is not a Shu"t.
>
> BTW, I am fascinated by your abilities to analyze this matter with such
> thoroughness


Thank you


, but fear it will go nowhere.


I guess same can be said for learning kadashim and Taharot w/o a Mikdash.
It's still Torah <g>



Halakhah is not mathematics, and
> posqim are not mechanics. Clearly, the GRA often overturned consensus, and
> it
> doesn't always jibe with what we are used to see. Others do so more
> modestly
> all the time.


AHA!  Story:
When I was in RIETS bm I once said it is clear to [based upon publications,
etc]. that the GRIZ was a bigger Talmid Chochom than his Older Brother R.
Moshe Soloveichik etc.

The answer:
"Just becasue R. Moshe Solo.. was a bigger anav  does not mean he couldn't
learn better than his more famous younger borther!"

The over-arching mussar heskel:
How much Piskei Halachah are accepted from G'dolim due to to their sheer
stature or their FORCE Of PERSONALITY over and above the cogency of their
arguments!

E.G. A member of this list said that I have a igher threshold to prove my
case becasue I am not as learned as so-and-so. I would answer, look at the
issue and do not judge a book by its cover. Gadlus is not infalliblity!
[this is aside from the "midget on the shoulder of giants model". If I can
muster enough sources, my gadlus is irrelevant to the issue at hand, but the
mare'h mekomos count].

Furthermore. RSR Hirsch posits that Moseh Rabbeinu was davka k'vad lashon so
as to PROVE we weer not swept away by a charismatic guru-type, but my the
Word of HKBH Himself.  I would suggest that this has changed. That  BY and
Rema won the day because they generall humbled themselves to earlier sources
[see maggid Meisharim] while today the opposite is often the case.  [ROY,
kaf Hachayim etc might be exceptions since Sephardim still feel the
obligation to prove their cases via siting sources.]



I would tend to believe the following: Halakhah - within bounds - clearly
> develops over time.


Agreed. but how many right-wingers agree to this premise?


>
> Some people are very modest, on account of their less great stature, and
> hence
> will not want to overturn consensus so quickly. Others, like the GRA, are
> so
> great that they are bothered by some deviations that most of us don't
> feel.
> Being as great as they are, they are bold and quick to disregard some
> concensus, and on account of their greatness, that is tolerated.


Not problem R. Eliezer and Tanur achnai.  But esakl did NOT follow R.
Eliezer or R. Meir [for the most part] despite of or even BECAUSE of their
very genius. {Beis Shammai might have even been more learned than Beis
Hillel!}

IOW in Talmudic times the bigger the genius the LESS likely he won any
arguement against consensus  E.G. halacha Ker. Akiva meichaveiro but NOT
machaveirov!

Today the opposite is true.  The most charismatic leaders who come out with
the LEAST consensus seem to be the most popula - at least in some circles.

The GRA is to be praised honestly speaking HIS mind.  I ONLY question his
followers for rejecting normative Halachic consensus in favor of charismatic
geniii.  I think this is a breach of Halachic Tradition.  See  AhSh on Al
nekkiyus Yadyaim re: RAshba vs. Rosh/Tur as an example of what I mean.


> Finally,there are some little people who feel that they can act like the
> GRA did, and
> they overturn consensus, but no one (or almost no one) will listen. The
> process of accepting ideas here is probably similar to the way RMF
> discribed
> his growth into becomming the American posseq par excellence.


I think a LOT of people find it  "attractive" to see a  novel radical view
as a form of shtick.  I know one guy who davka davens Nusach haGRA just to
be "different" or special.   Antoher one follows Nusach haRambam. I humbly
suspect they are  expressing their individuality rather than a
well-researched shita.

Also relevant is the kind of halakhic issue we are talking about. Having two
> matzot instead of three isn't as grave IMHO as blowing shofar on RH
> she'hal
> beShabbat where unwarranted. Hence, you'll find a lot fewer people
> entertaining pasqening like the RIF on shofar, but more about 2 matzot
> like
> the GRA.


FWIW yated ne'eman recroded seveal debates on this Rif and RH matter a few
years ago. Fascinating debate between Traditionalists and Textualists.  And
it is not so simple to completely be mevateil a Mitzvas Asseh d'oraisso
givein

   1. we ARE beki'im in the kevius - and Day 2 could be seen as les than
   it used to be
   2. There is a loophole in Shas exploited by the Rif himself.  and the
   Hinuch says "take your pick" whom to follow.


In conlusion, I do not believe that we can find a single overarching
> principle
> that explains all ma'hloqot in halakhah.


Agreed. My problem is with indiivduals that have no consistency.
IOW I get why the GRA ssaid what he said and I get why the Rema said what he
said
What I do NOT get is the eclectic nature of how people implement this today
[disclaimer, even if you follow Shita X there is room for exceptions...]


My first Sahbbos In Teaneck I asked RDEK
Q: How come we omit here Baruch  hashem L'olamon weeknights and SAY
v'shamrua on Friday Nights?
A : What do you want from Me? I am stuck with these minhaggim!

IOW he did not defend the eclectic nature of the his own shul's minhaggim
which evolved willy nilly w/o a shita. Bt he did live with them.

Given:

> "An unexamined life is not worth living." -
>   --  *Socrates*


Might we say something like:

An unexamined Minhag is not worth impmlementing?
or an unexamined p'sak is not worth following?



To quote my friend Rabbi Ben Hecht:

> Where has all the philosophy gone?
>
To paraphrase"

> Where has all the drisha vachakira gone?
>

--
> Arie Folger
> http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com
> _______________________________________________
>

BY, Rema and Kitzur [by and large] submitted their  decisions  to a
hypothetical BD. ROY follows  Maran BY. Ben Ish Hay implements  as much
ARIZAL as the populace can handle.
Kaf hachayim quote as many sources as he can [ROY, too]

OTOH, MB seems to have a multi-faceted shita re: z'manei hayyom that leave
me confused. He does not seem to follow strictly  GRA nor Magen AVraham nor
Rabbeinu Tam nor Levush. See what I mean?

Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
Please Visit:
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071022/4bae9fd5/attachment.html 

------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avodah@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 24, Issue 19
**************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."