Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 81

Fri, 08 May 2009

• 1. Re: Forces Within Man (Saul Mashbaum)
• 2. Re: water and electricity (D&E-H Bannett)
• 3. Avel leading Qaddish and Benching (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 4. karet (Shlomo Pick)
• 5. Re: water and electricity (Gershon Dubin)
• 6. Re: Avel leading Qaddish and Benching (Gershon Dubin)
• 7. Re: Avel leading Qaddish and Benching (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 8. Re: Electricity (D&E-H Bannett)
• 9. Re: Arayot and Mitat Beit Din (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Yeast isn't chameitz (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: Yeast isn't chameitz (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Love/Mercy as a Factor in Halakhic Decision making - Rabbis Uziel and Halevy (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Dr. Berkovits and R' Marc Angel (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: sephira question (Micha Berger)
• 15. Fw: Tisha-Asar Mi Yode'a (L Reich)
• 16. Tisha-Asar Mi Yode'a (L Reich)

I wrote:
>>
What bothers me about the s'irim is the lottery, which seems to
indicate that not conscious, moral choice, but mere chance and fate,
as it were,  determines whether a s'ir becomes la-Shem or la-Azazel.
...the lottery is a unique, intrinsic element of the 2 s'irim. However, I am
unable to fathom what its symbolic message is
>>

With the much-appreciated aid of REli Turkel's invaluable work
"M'korot Harav", I discovered that RYBS related directly , in a public
discourse, to the symbolic meaning of the lottery on YK.
See Divrei Hashkafa, p 214.

RYBS sees the lottery as relating not to the s'irim per se, but as
symbolic of the human condition, reflecting man's helplessness in the
face of forces over which he has no control. This helplessness has two
significant implications:
1) It engenders in man the quality of humility, an essential moral
trait, and one which brings man to repentance
2) Man is worthy of forgiveness and atonement, because his esssential
condition is so
precarious, and so much is beyond his control.
Thus the essential Yom Kippur motives of t'shuva and kappara are
reflected in the lottery, a central part of the Avodat Yom haKippurim.

If the s'irim represent "Forces within man", the lottery represents
"Forces beyond man".

This passage is in a public lecture of RYBS on the topic of "The
Metaphysical Meaning of Purim", the lottery being a theme common to YK
and Purim.

I found this passage very interesting as a most clear example of RYBS'
existential thought, man's response to a world filled with
irrationality and absurdity. Indeed RYBS explicityly relates in this
discourse to the fact that man often encounters, and must respond to,
the absurd.

Shabbat Shalom

Saul Mashbaum

Re: RDS's <<I heard Rav YY Neuwirth (the ShShK) say (some 25 
years ago in shiur) that RSZA (who was still alive) would 
have permitted (non-Bishul)
electricity but felt incapable of disagreeing with the 
CI.)>>

This was not only heard second hand. RSZA wrote quite 
clearly that he saw an issur in electricity only when the 
resultant action was assur (e.g, eish or bishul).  While he 
differed from the CI on boneh and from the Bet Yitzhak on 
molid zerem, he wrote that he felt that "kvar horah zaken" 
and he must accept the issur on chashmal of the Bet Yitzhak.


David

Given: 
We have a well established custom of mourner's saying Qaddish and 
There is also a minhag for mourner's to lead benching 
 
Q: 
What is the connection? 
 
A: 
The essence of Qaddish in Talmudic terms is to trigger the "yehei sh'mei
rabba mevarach"

Similarly In benching the leader triggers yehi sheim Hashem mevorach

Therefore, both these cases involve causing "Qiddush Hashem"


RRW 
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Zev said: In the case of someone who has been executed we don't even need
that reasoning;

what would karet *mean* to someone who is already dead?

His question is correct according to Rashi, but according to the Ramabam
theoretically one could get karet and mitat beit din, for karet means being
cutting from klal yisrael in the next world also, which is not the case of
mitat beit din.

I reiterate theoretically for I agree that if he got mitat beis din then
there would be no karet.  However, that's assuming that with his mitat beit
din as well as the makkot that zev mentioned, he did teshva and vidui. What
would happen if he did not do teshuva with his mitat beit din. Or in a case
of kanna'im poge'im bo, where he did not have a chance to do teshuva, is the
karet then still viable according to maimnonides.  With Divine punishment we
see that there is mitah and karet and in Korach and his eidah. Is the same
for the earthly court?

Shabbat shalom

Shlomo

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090508/cde5e1b3/attachment-0001.htm>

From: D&E-H Bannett db...@zahav.net.il

<<This was not only heard second hand. RSZA wrote quite 
clearly that he saw an issur in electricity only when the 
resultant action was assur (e.g, eish or bishul).>>
IIRC this was Rav Henkin's position as well.
Gershon
gershon.du...@juno.com


____________________________________________________________
Find success and happiness with drug and alcohol rehabilitation. Click now.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL21
41/fc/BLSrjpTJWRWYE8X9N4gG1xJG98YgUtzFrsw28ftSk7VLhEr9Vq6OfPIxe8o/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090508/39a49dc8/attachment-0001.htm>

Where is there a minhag for an avel to lead benching?

Gershon
gershon.du...@juno.com

____________________________________________________________
Click now to find great remedies for hangovers!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL21
41/fc/BLSrjpTKyJnvv6th4zRDNVSGRI484RvIXEaTXCmJqLL8kzopi9VpIqz1IQ4/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090508/601ff69b/attachment-0001.htm>

> "Where is there a minhag for an avel to lead benching?
>Gershon gershon.du...@juno.com

Mourning in halachah pM 380 40:19

"The mourner, during the entire 12 months should make an effort to serve
as the "mezamen" since thus of benefit to the depparted soul"

Fn 40: "Shevus yaakov..., pischei teshuva 375:3 
Yosif ometz also writes that this raises the deceased from gehinnom. And
see she'eilas Yavetz 1:74"

-RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Re: <<When the timer is off and the appliance isn't plugged 
in, you just have a circuit that is broken in two places. 
once you plug in the appliance, until the timer ticks (if it 
is a mechanical timer for sure and even an electrical timer 
probably) the circuit remains broken and should not be 
considered boneh.>>

Many years ago, I questioned Harav Elyashiv about an alarm 
system someone was selling which used the "broken in two 
places" idea.

His reply was that. If closing both connections are required 
for the system to operate, the first connection might be 
considered gramma.  In the alarm system, however, closing 
the second switch is not what makes the device operative. 
Closing of the first switch makes the system operative and 
ready to disclose the intruder who closes the second switch. 
This, said Rav YSE, is an exact example of CI's boneh, and 
not what some say it is. Closing the first switch makes the 
system alive and doing it's job. That's the boneh. So I 
recommended to the one who had questioned me that he should 
not buy that alarm system.

R' E Turkel said something similar to this about the CI's 
boneh in his posting a day or two days ago.

I also just discovered that RSPick quoted additional 
information from RSZA's Kovetz Ma'amarim b'inyan CHashmal. 
This reminded me that I had not supplied a source in my 
previous posting on RSZA's issur or lack of issur  on 
chashmal.  The same source, pages 21 and 54.

To help clear up the various ideas being posted about CI 
boneh, I think I should quote the exact words of the CI. 
"od yesh bazeh mishum tikkun mana mikivan shema'amido al 
tekhunato lizrom et zerem hachashmal bitemidut karov hadavar 
d'zeh mimlekhet boneh min haTorah k'oseh kli"

Pls note the CI's "weak" terminology:  mishum, karov 
hadavar.


David 

On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 05:21:17AM -0400, Gals...@aol.com wrote:
: My understanding is that Mitat Beit Din is more severe punishment than
: Karet. Reading the peirush Rashi in Devarim 23 pasuk 1-4, and Rambam
: "Isurei Bi'ah" Perek Alef, I understand that in Arayot whenever one gets
: Mitat Beit Din, he gets also Karet.  My questions are:
: 3. Is it not contcredit the rule of not having two punishments on one
: aveira?

Kereis isn't included in that rule, as it's not meted out by BD.

Rashi would have to be discussing different cases, since leshitaso
kareis is physical death. Misas BD with eidus, hasra'ah, etc.. and 
kereis if not.

As already noted, this is comprehensible according to the Rambam as
refering to a single judgment -- BD kills him, and then his soul ceases
to exist. Venikhresah hanefesh hahi mei'ameha is from the "am" for which
the mishnah says "Kol Yisrael yeish lahem cheileq le'olam haba".

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 29th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Hod: When is submitting to another
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       an act of kindness?

On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 02:38:16PM -0600, Jay F Shachter wrote:
: Now, a far more interesting question, is not whether rye belongs in
: the barley family, but why the Amoraim thought that it does, and
: modern speakers of English think that it does not.  You can learn much
: about a culture from its language....

On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 10:50:47PM +0300, Michael Makovi wrote:
: I don't understand how anyone could discount the science in this area.

If RMM means the one in the subject line, any argument for why lice have
no mamashus would apply to airborn yeast.

If he means the Brisker approach to tekheiles or orez (as per the
aforementioned Nefesh haRav), it's nothing to do with that topic. Rather,
it's a matter of the legal process being closed. Not a question of what's
right, but of what has the authority to become law. Halakhah can only
come from halakhah.

I think it's of a piece with the contrast between Brisker and Telzher
derakhim. Brisk explains individual dinim in terms of grander halachic
patterns. Halakhah explained in terms of halakhah. Telzh (both subtypes)
will harken back to first principles.

To quote RYGB <http://www.aishdas.org/rygb/derachim.htm>:
>  In Brisk they would mockingly say that in Telshe one would klerr
>  (analyze) the following chakira (problem):

> What makes tea sweet, is it the sugar or the spoon stirring?
...
> Brisker Derech: Intrinsic Categorization and Definition - There are two
> (tzvei) dinim in sweetening tea: The cheftza (substance), i.e., the
> sugar; and the pe'ula (activity), i.e., the stirring with the spoon.
> Everyone knows that Lipton is the "Brisk" tea bacause it has a double
> (tzvei dinim) tea bag.
...
> Reb Yosef Leib & Reb Shimon's Derech: Abstraction to an Essence - It is
> the Hitztarfus (Fusion) of tea molecules and sugar molecules that makes
> the tea sweet.
...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 26th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        3 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Netzach: When is domination or taking
Fax: (270) 514-1507         control just a way of abandoning one's self?

On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 06:55:59PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
: I still don't get it.  You're assuming that there is an unquestioned
: mesorah that shibolet shual is oats, and chadashim mikarov ba'u and
: questioned that mesorah on the basis of science.  But that isn't so.
: On the contrary, the main question is from Torah sources, and the
: science just supports the question.  AFAIK the *only* reason to suppose
: that sh"sh means oats is that Rashi translated it that way into French.
: At best, that makes it a machlokes of Rashi against the Rambam and
: whoever else translated it differently (not sure who those were; RSG?
: Ibn Jannach?)

Except that RYBS assumes that Ashkenazim would hold like Rashi and
Tosafos, regardless of scientific evidence for the Sepharadi position.

The Rambam has "se'orim midbarim" (wild barley???).
The Arukh has two possiblities -- avena (oats) or secale (rye).

BTW, scientific taxonomy speaking -- which I just posted was irrelevent
-- does place oats in a different family than wheat and barley, but
avena is closer on the taxonomy tree than any other edible grass seed.

 From an experiential perspective, oats and rye were originally weeds that
grew in one's wheat or barley crops, and then were bred for their own
sake. People would plausibly lump it together pyschologically with the
other grains. Problem is, not anywhere near the "eretz chitah use'orah".

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 29th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Hod: When is submitting to another
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       an act of kindness?

On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 07:01:18PM +0000, rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
: Michael:
:> So as far as I know, the
:> end of the Tannaitic age was the end of direct Scriptural exegesis as
:> a method of *creating* law."

: See. SA Orach Chayyim 494
: where Taz requires waiting to daven arvis after tzeis due to "temimos"

Since we're glossing over this debate, my I gloss over the reply. I
don't think the Taz considers this ikkar hadin. I recently listed three
uses of the word chumrah (pesaq halakhah, minhag and hanhagah). I would
argue that the Taz was not speaking in the first category, and thus it
wasn'ta real derashah.

: There is also a minhag for unmarried men not to wear a Tallis due a
: drasha of semuchos

Also a hanhagah that since became a binding minhag. There is no chiyuv
to wear tzitzis. Therefore, one can come up with a new sevara or asmachta
not to.

On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 12:11:21AM +0100, Chana Luntz wrote:
: RYG writes:
: > I think that Justice Holmes would be horrified at the insinuation that
: > his jurisprudence did not qualify as "emet l'amito" and "btzedek
: > tishpot amitecha" :)

: Sorry?  You quote the story as follows saying:

: " I [Judge Hand] remember once I was with [Justice Holmes]... I said to him:
: "Well, sir, goodbye. Do justice!" He turned quite sharply and he said: "Come
: here. Come here." I answered: "Oh, I know, I know." He replied: "That is not
: my job. My job is to play the game according to the rules."

Side-note: I assume he didn't mean it, it's just a conversation started
and a way of getting his point remembered. I assume that R' Uzziel
wouldn't even sound like he's denying a fundamental value as a pedagogic
trick, but it doesn't mean they disagree in substance.

I would have presented this whole thing differently, without this
comparison (which in retrospect proved distracting).

RMM presented it as though chessed vs din comes into play; ie that
it's using love/mercy to tone down halakhah. And because he sees the
compassion as extrahalachic, he asked how it was any different than what
we disparage about C's legal process.

However, R' Uzziel is working within halakhah. Not love/mercy in an
extrahalachic sense, but the halakhos of hefseid merubah, Rabba b"b
Chana's barrels, etc.... It's not chessed vs halakhah=din, but that
halakhah tells you how to do the "vs" incorporating both sides of the
balance.

As a side note, RMM is using the very broad terms "love/mercy" to lump
together hefseid merubah and compassion on the sho'eil with mitzvos
BALC and the sho'eil's need to be compassionate to others. They are
very different things, particularly within a legal (incuding halachic)
frame of mind.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 29th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Hod: When is submitting to another
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       an act of kindness?

On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 06:14:02PM -0400, Michael Makovi wrote:
: I was reading Rabbi Marc D. Angel's "The Rhythms of Jewish Living: A
: Sephardic Approach" this past Yom Tov...

I found it hard to read. Much of it is: Seph is right, as it preserved the
natural rhythims. Ashk is wrong, being overly indoors (as opposed to the
mindset of seder zeraim and the agricultural role of mitzvos), unnatural,
nearly Xian cloistering, and a product of other assimilated concepts.

: Now, to quote Rabbi Angel:
: Pp. 66ff:
: The words of the Torah, even with their ancient explanations, still
: leave many questions unanswered. The language of the Torah is not
: legalistic, for the most part. Even in its legalistic sections, it is
: not usually precise as a code of law...

Tanakh is a Mussar work. Halakhah comes from derashah, not peshat,
because peshat tells us the values, not the din. As Rashi quotes on
"ayin tachas ayin".

Therefore, when RMA writes:
:                                 The Torah provides us with the word of
: God - but also leaves much room for human interpretation and
: application of principles....

This assumes a very human creative conept of dershah, something in the
range of the Rambam's. Far from universally accepted, though.

: These categories of halakhah are not based directly on God's command,
: but on the rabbinic application of Torah principles to their
: contemporary situations....

This is overstated to the point of being (IMHO) wrong. If he were to
stress "application to contemporary situations" as basis rather than
outgrowth any stronger, it would be Historical School.

: ...
: The Great Court had the authority to interpret the Torah and to
: declare its judgment concerning the will of God. Yet interpretations
: could change from one generation to the next; the oral law was "oral"
: so that it would retain fluidity and flexibility [the same reason
: offered by Rabbis Glasner and Berkovits]. Maimonides writes (Laws of
: Rebels 2:1): ... [to summarize Rambam: if one Great Court rules the
: halakhah one way, based in its exegesis of the Torah, a latter Great
: Court can overrule that interpretation in favor of its own personal
: exegesis].

For derashos (2:1). For gezeiros (2:5) there is no repeal after it was
nispasheit, and for other legislation or pesaq, overturning requires
BD gadol mimenu bechokhmah uveminyan (2:2).

See RZLampel's DoD pg 103. On pg 107 he notes, thought that such repeal
of a gezeirah isn't actually found anywhere in Shas, but rather the
earliest source is R' Hai Gaon as quoted in Yad Ramah.

: ...
: ... The dissolution of the Great Court changed the method of halakhah.
: No longer was there one universally recognized institution which could
: rule authoritatively for all Jews. No longer did rabbis go directly to
: the Torah in order to determine halakhah.
: ...

Then what's the gemara? Anything that's nispasheit bekhol Yisrael
is as binding as a court. Lemaaseh the Rambam (haqdamah to the Yad)
was wrong about how totally shas was accepted across all of Jewery --
the Ashkenazim had a number of exceptions. (As did Italy and Pravance)
But that is his grounds for the authority of the gemara is based on its
broad acceptance, making R' Ashi's BM akin to a BD hagadol.

RYBS uses this notion to explain the authority of the SA, Rama, and the
usual nosei keilim on the page.

Also, Ravina veR' Ashi, centuries after the end of true semichah, are
the sof hora'ah. Where does RMA base his opinion that derashah is linked
to BD haGadol?

And, as I noted in the past, the various rules of derashah fell out of
use at different times. Gezeira shava was first. Y-m Pesachim 33a (6:1)
places the end of gezeira shava to be earlier than the Benei Beseira,
who challenge Hillel's authority to cite one. Well before the end of
semichah and BD haGadol.

...
: There have been some individuals who have called for the establishment
: of a new Sanhedrin in our times. They would like a revival of a
: central halakhic authority for the Jewish people. The Sanhedrin would
: not only provide unity in halakhah, but would re-institute the
: original methodology of the oral law - interpreting the Torah itself,
: applying the law to life with the freedom to overrule precedents and
: previous decisions.
...

Agsin, only those laws that were established by derashah alone.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 29th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Hod: When is submitting to another
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       an act of kindness?

On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 07:35:02PM -0400, hankman wrote:
: I also think the ordinal/cardinal issue is a red herring as is the
: notion of temimos as an answer to my question. They do not imply a count
: of days in arrears, as I could hear these going either way - neither being
: more compelling than the other. We seem to want to dance at both chasunas,
: its 49 that are also fifty that are sort of in arrears but not really
: as we only count 49 with 49 brochos (which implies count in advance).

I think the distinction does help. ("Red herring" is a strong term, I
think you're confusing my pointer to other people grappling with the
same question with someone claiming to present a final answer.)

Are we counting days, or measuring time? I am suggesting that we count
50 days because we're measuring the passage of 49 days from the night
of the seder (day 0). "Hayom yom echad" means, it's 1 day, 24 hours,
since day 0. Which would also work for not counting shavu'ah echad
until one week since day 0.

Day 0 is the 1st day, such that when we measure the passage of 49 days,
we fulfilled "tisperu chamishim yom".

:-)BBii!
-Micha

----- Original Message ----- 
From: L Reich
To: Avodah Postings
Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 5:16 PM
Subject: Tisha-Asar Mi Yode'a


?From: Elozor Reich
Tisha-Asar Mi Yode'a or
Anniversaries, Birthdays & Cycles
Many are aware that Hebrew and Civil birthdays don't usually correspond in 
most years, but that they often
do coincide or come near to each other on any 19th anniversary or on any 
multiple of 19 years. This note explains this phenomenon and more.
The Hebrew calendar attempts to reconcile the astronomical length of the 
lunar month of over 29.5 days
with the solar year of under 365.25 days and its four seasons. In use it 
ensures that Rosh Chodesh is
always near the time of the astronomical new moon and that Pesach occurs in 
Spring and Rosh
Hashonoh in Autumn. This is done by arranging a 19 year cycle, known as 
Machzor Koton. This 19
year cycle consists of 12 year of 12 months, and 7 years of 13 months, known 
as Shnois Ha'Ibur,
during which we have an extra Adar.
The longer or Ibbur years are those which have a remainder of 3, 6, 8, 
11,14, 17 & 19, when dividing the
year number by 19, so giving us its position in the Machzor. The 19 year 
cycle or Machzor lasts for 235 months since 19 X 12 + 7 = 235, or 12 X 12 + 
7 X 13 = 235. Currently (Year 5769) we are in the
12th year of Cycle 304. The arithmetic for this is straight forward, e.g. if 
we divide 5769 by 19 we get a dividend of 303 ? showing that we have 
completed 303 cycles and are now in cycle 304 ? and a remainder
of 12 ? which is not one of the Shnois Ha'Ibur
(Although all the classical works use a time system of hours being divided 
into 1080 "Parts" (Chalokim) and each
"Part" (Chelek) being divided into 76 "Moments" (Rego'im), we shall here 
make things more familiar by using
minutes and seconds. A minute has 18 Chalokim; one Chelek equals 3? seconds 
and one Rega is equivalent to
five parts of a one hundred and fourteenth of a second , 5/114 sec.)
The accepted astronomical length of a lunar month for fixed calendar 
purposes is an average; individual
months can vary considerably. This average, known as Molad Ho'emtzo'i, is 29 
days, 12 hours, 44 Minutes
& 3? seconds. Multiply this by the above mentioned 235 gives us the 
astronomical length of a Machzor Koton. 6939 days, 16 hrs, 33 minutes & 3? 
seconds.
We can now divide the last figure by 19 and get a very near approximation of 
the astronomical solar year. It come to 365 days 5 hours 55 minutes and 25.4 
seconds. This year length (about 7 minutes longer than the
true solar year, which is known to astronomers as the tropical year) is the 
basis of the Jewish Calendar and
is commonly called Tekufas Rav Ada. The solar year of 365 days and exactly 6 
hours is called Tekufas Shmuel. Tekufas Shmuel is equivalent to the old 
civil Julian Calendar which was replaced by the Gregorian
one, which is shorter by three days in a 400 year period.
?
From an Halachic viewpoint Tekufas Shmuel has only two uses. It decides the 
date of the start of the Tefiloh for rain (Tal U'Motor in Chutz Lo'oretz and 
is also the basis for the 28 year Machzor Godol, whose
completion we commemorated this year. (It is also used by some in Minhagim 
connected with the avoidance of drinking water at the change of seasons.) 
However, Tekufas Rav Ada is the one which matters in settling the 19 year 
cycle. It governs all calendar dates and this is the one which we will 
continue to explore.
Now a Machzor Koton starts on Rosh Hashonoh of year 1 of the cycle and ends 
on the last day of Ellul 19 years later. Astronomically this is about 6939.7 
days later. Since we can't split days in the real calendar, one might think 
that the calendrical length of a Machzor would be either 6939 or 6940 days. 
In fact it can also
be 6941 and even, very rarely, 6942 days. The cause of this wide range is 
the fact that Rosh Hashonoh is decided by the Molad Ho'emtzo'i of the 1st of 
Tishri. By the basic rules of the Jewish Calendar Rosh Hashonoh can land on 
the same day as the Molad but can also be postponed one or two days (Molad 
Zokon, Lo Adu Rosh etc). If one Machzor starts on the day of the Molad and 
the following one is postponed by a day or two, then the calendrical length 
of the Machzor is extended.
Furthermore, 19 Civil Years can include either 4 or 5 leap years, i.e. 6939 
or 6940 days. The 4 year
Civil Leap Year cycle is not linked to the Machzor Koton pattern, hence 
another contributor to the 'discrepancies' in the 19th anniversaries.
To summarise; take any Hebrew Calendar date, move on to its 19th Hebrew 
anniversary, and you have,
in effect, completed a Machzor Koton , but it may be 6939, 6940, 6941 or 
6942 days later. Take the
Civil Date of the same starting point, move on to its 19th Civil anniversary 
and it may be 6939 or 6940
days later. This means that 19th anniversaries can show a difference of two 
(& very rarely three) days
in their Hebrew and Civil dates.
Let us now look at the Machzor Koton more closely. We start the cycle with 
the Hebrew and Civil years
being level. Since the Civil Year of 365+ days is approximately 11 days 
longer than the average Hebrew
Shono Peshuta (a non-leap year) of 354+ days, by the next Rosh Hashonoh the 
Hebrew year lags by
11 days. After two years it is 22 behind. After three years it would 33 
behind had we not made it a Shono Me'uberes (adding an extra Adar), which 
"pays off" 30 of the 33 days, but still leaving us three days "in
arrear". This slipping and correcting continues throughout the 19 year 
cycle. The addition of an extra Adar
in years 3,6,8,11,14,17 and 19 makes up for all the slippage and gets us 
back to our starting point at the
end of the final leap year in year 19.
If you do this addition and subtraction for the whole of the cycle, you will 
discover that although we only
get back exactly to par at the end of the 19th year, we come quite near to 
it at the end of years 8 and 11.
After 8 years into the cycle, the Civil Calendar will have counted the 
passing of 2922 days; the
corresponding Hebrew count (5 years of 12 months and 3 of 13) comes to 
around 2923 (non-leap years
can be 353, 354 or 355 days and leap years 383, 384 or 385), so we are not 
far out. A similar exercise for the
first 11 years shows 4017 or 4018 days in the Civil Calendar and around 4016 
(7 years of 12 months
and 4 of 13) in the Hebrew one.
All this arithmetic shows us that 19th anniversaries and their multiples 
will be spot on or near, and that multiples of 19 with the addition of 8, 
e.g. 27, 46 & 65, or with addition of 11, e.g. 30, 49 & 68 will
either be spot on or not be far out.
Although I have not attempted a rigorous mathematical analysis of the 
probability ratio, an inspection of a sizeable sample shows as follows. On 
19th anniversaries around one half land on the same Hebrew and
Civil dates and an additional third within one day, leaving a small fraction 
more than one day out. On both
19th + 8 and on 19th + 11 anniversaries around one eighth coincide precisely 
and over one half of the
remainder land within one or two days.
Readers interested in arithmetic might wish to explore the following. In 
examining the Machzor Koton it
has been pointed out that we nearly reach equilibrium after 8 years with 
their 3 leap years, and after 11
years with their 4 leap years, and reach a true balance after 19 years with 
their 7 leap years. Consider the relationship of this to the three fractions 
3/8, 4/11 and 7/19. The difference between 3/8 and 4/11 is only
1/88. 7/19, which lands between the two is 1/152 less than 3/8 and 1/209 
more than 4/11.
?
Elozor Reich)
?
?
? 

?From: Elozor Reich

Tisha-Asar Mi Yode'a or

Anniversaries, Birthdays & Cycles 

Many are aware that Hebrew and Civil birthdays don't usually correspond in most years, but that they often 

do coincide or come near to each other on any 19th anniversary or on any multiple of 19 years. This note explains this phenomenon and more.

The Hebrew calendar attempts to reconcile the astronomical length of the lunar month of over 29.5 days 

with the solar year of under 365.25 days and its four seasons. In use it ensures that Rosh Chodesh is 

always near the time of the astronomical new moon and that Pesach occurs in Spring and Rosh 

Hashonoh in Autumn. This is done by arranging a 19 year cycle, known as Machzor Koton. This 19 

year cycle consists of 12 year of 12 months, and 7 years of 13 months, known as Shnois Ha'Ibur, 

during which we have an extra Adar. 

The longer or Ibbur years are those which have a remainder of 3, 6, 8, 11,14, 17 & 19, when dividing the 

year number by 19, so giving us its position in the Machzor. The 19 year
cycle or Machzor lasts for 235 months since 19 X 12 + 7 = 235, or 12 X 12 +
7 X 13 = 235. Currently (Year 5769) we are in the 

12th year of Cycle 304. The arithmetic for this is straight forward, e.g.
if we divide 5769 by 19 we get a dividend of 303 ? showing that we have
completed 303 cycles and are now in cycle 304 ? and a remainder 

of 12 ? which is not one of the Shnois Ha'Ibur

(Although all the classical works use a time system of hours being divided into 1080 "Parts" (Chalokim) and each 

"Part" (Chelek) being divided into 76 "Moments" (Rego'im), we shall here make things more familiar by using 

minutes and seconds. A minute has 18 Chalokim; one Chelek equals 3? seconds and one Rega is equivalent to 

five parts of a one hundred and fourteenth of a second , 5/114 sec.)

The accepted astronomical length of a lunar month for fixed calendar purposes is an average; individual 

months can vary considerably. This average, known as Molad Ho'emtzo'i, is 29 days, 12 hours, 44 Minutes 

& 3? seconds. Multiply this by the above mentioned 235 gives us the astronomical length of a Machzor Koton. 6939 days, 16 hrs, 33 minutes & 3? seconds.

We can now divide the last figure by 19 and get a very near approximation
of the astronomical solar year. It come to 365 days 5 hours 55 minutes and
25.4 seconds. This year length (about 7 minutes longer than the 

true solar year, which is known to astronomers as the tropical year) is the basis of the Jewish Calendar and 

is commonly called Tekufas Rav Ada. The solar year of 365 days and exactly
6 hours is called Tekufas Shmuel. Tekufas Shmuel is equivalent to the old
civil Julian Calendar which was replaced by the Gregorian 

one, which is shorter by three days in a 400 year period.

?

From an Halachic viewpoint Tekufas Shmuel has only two uses. It decides the
date of the start of the Tefiloh for rain (Tal U'Motor in Chutz Lo'oretz
and is also the basis for the 28 year Machzor Godol, whose 

completion we commemorated this year. (It is also used by some in Minhagim
connected with the avoidance of drinking water at the change of seasons.)
However, Tekufas Rav Ada is the one which matters in settling the 19 year
cycle. It governs all calendar dates and this is the one which we will
continue to explore.

Now a Machzor Koton starts on Rosh Hashonoh of year 1 of the cycle and ends
on the last day of Ellul 19 years later. Astronomically this is about
6939.7 days later. Since we can't split days in the real calendar, one
might think that the calendrical length of a Machzor would be either 6939
or 6940 days. In fact it can also 

be 6941 and even, very rarely, 6942 days. The cause of this wide range is
the fact that Rosh Hashonoh is decided by the Molad Ho'emtzo'i of the 1st
of Tishri. By the basic rules of the Jewish Calendar Rosh Hashonoh can land
on the same day as the Molad but can also be postponed one or two days
(Molad Zokon, Lo Adu Rosh etc). If one Machzor starts on the day of the
Molad and the following one is postponed by a day or two, then the
calendrical length of the Machzor is extended. 


Furthermore, 19 Civil Years can include either 4 or 5 leap years, i.e. 6939 or 6940 days. The 4 year 

Civil Leap Year cycle is not linked to the Machzor Koton pattern, hence another contributor to the 'discrepancies' in the 19th anniversaries. 

To summarise; take any Hebrew Calendar date, move on to its 19th Hebrew anniversary, and you have, 

in effect, completed a Machzor Koton , but it may be 6939, 6940, 6941 or 6942 days later. Take the 

Civil Date of the same starting point, move on to its 19th Civil anniversary and it may be 6939 or 6940 

days later. This means that 19th anniversaries can show a difference of two (& very rarely three) days 

in their Hebrew and Civil dates. 

Let us now look at the Machzor Koton more closely. We start the cycle with the Hebrew and Civil years 

being level. Since the Civil Year of 365+ days is approximately 11 days longer than the average Hebrew 

Shono Peshuta (a non-leap year) of 354+ days, by the next Rosh Hashonoh the Hebrew year lags by 

11 days. After two years it is 22 behind. After three years it would 33
behind had we not made it a Shono Me'uberes (adding an extra Adar), which
"pays off" 30 of the 33 days, but still leaving us three days "in 

arrear". This slipping and correcting continues throughout the 19 year cycle. The addition of an extra Adar 

in years 3,6,8,11,14,17 and 19 makes up for all the slippage and gets us back to our starting point at the 

end of the final leap year in year 19.

If you do this addition and subtraction for the whole of the cycle, you will discover that although we only 

get back exactly to par at the end of the 19th year, we come quite near to it at the end of years 8 and 11. 

After 8 years into the cycle, the Civil Calendar will have counted the passing of 2922 days; the 

corresponding Hebrew count (5 years of 12 months and 3 of 13) comes to around 2923 (non-leap years 

can be 353, 354 or 355 days and leap years 383, 384 or 385), so we are not far out. A similar exercise for the 

first 11 years shows 4017 or 4018 days in the Civil Calendar and around 4016 (7 years of 12 months 

and 4 of 13) in the Hebrew one.

All this arithmetic shows us that 19th anniversaries and their multiples
will be spot on or near, and that multiples of 19 with the addition of 8,
e.g. 27, 46 & 65, or with addition of 11, e.g. 30, 49 & 68 will 

either be spot on or not be far out.

Although I have not attempted a rigorous mathematical analysis of the
probability ratio, an inspection of a sizeable sample shows as follows. On
19th anniversaries around one half land on the same Hebrew and 

Civil dates and an additional third within one day, leaving a small fraction more than one day out. On both 

19th + 8 and on 19th + 11 anniversaries around one eighth coincide precisely and over one half of the

remainder land within one or two days.

Readers interested in arithmetic might wish to explore the following. In examining the Machzor Koton it 

has been pointed out that we nearly reach equilibrium after 8 years with their 3 leap years, and after 11 

years with their 4 leap years, and reach a true balance after 19 years with
their 7 leap years. Consider the relationship of this to the three
fractions 3/8, 4/11 and 7/19. The difference between 3/8 and 4/11 is only 

1/88. 7/19, which lands between the two is 1/152 less than 3/8 and 1/209 more than 4/11. 

?

Elozor Reich)

?

?

?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20090508/e360a864/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 81
**************************************

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..."