Avodah Mailing List

Volume 34: Number 130

Thu, 20 Oct 2016

• 1. Ritual washing on Yom Kippur (Akiva Miller)
• 2. Re: Taking a challah from the freezer on the first day of Yom Tov, so that it will be defrosted for Second day (Akiva Miller)
• 3. Re: alenu edit (Akiva Miller)
• 4. Matana Al M'nas L'hachzir (Akiva Miller)
• 5. Re: conservatism in davening (Chesky Salomon)
• 6. Re: conservatism in davening (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: alenu edit (Chesky Salomon)
• 8. Suicide in Halakhah (Micha Berger)
• 9. Request for greater information (Ben Waxman)
• 10. Waterproof S'chach? Really? (Chaim Tatel)
• 11. Re: Waterproof S'chach? Really? (Micha Berger)
• 12. Erev Shabbos Kugel (Akiva Miller)
• 13. Re: Waterproof S'chach? Really? (Zev Sero)
• 14. Re: Erev Shabbos Kugel (Zev Sero)

1) On Yom Kippur, one washes in the morning, but only the fingers. -
Mechaber 613:2

2) On Yom Kippur, one washes after the bathroom, but only the fingers. -
Mechaber 613:3

3) On Yom Kippur, a Kohen washes before duchaning, to the wrist as usual. -
Mishne Brurah 613:7

4) On Yom Kippur, a choleh who eats bread washes as usual, to the wrist. -
Shmirat Shabbat K'hilchatah 39:31 (39:33 in the new 5770 edition)

I realize that it is risky to compare halachos that come from different
poskim, but I haven't heard that the MB and SSK disagree with the Mechaber
about #1 and #2. So unless someone shows me otherwise, I will presume that
all three poskim agree on all four situations.

If so, then why are #1 and #2 different than #3 and #4? In all four cases,
the washing is allowed because it is a ritual washing, and not done for
pleasure.

The bracha of Al Netilas Yadayim can't be relevant, because that is present
for #1 and #4, but absent for #2 and #3, so it doesn't fit the pattern.

I suppose an argument can be made that #1 and #2 are merely for
cleanliness, while #3 and #4 are for tahara. But if that were so, then I
don't know why even the fingers can be washed for #1 and #2 - we should be
required to simply wipe the fingers on a towel or something else that
cleans, without any water at all.

Any suggestions?

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161016/037fa0e4/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Yitzchok Levine quoted "From today's Halacha Yomis":

> Q. Is one permitted to take a challah from the freezer on
> the first day of Yom Tov, so that it will be defrosted in
> time for the nighttime meal?
>
> A. ... ... Since one does not actively thaw the food, but
> rather it defrosts on its own, this is not a prohibited
> form of hachanah.

I am very surprised by this. The thawing is irrelevant. Taking the challah
out is already hachana.

Even taking an already-thawed challah from the closet and placing it
somewhere else, would constitute hachana if it is done in preparation for
the nighttime meal. In fact, if the husband would remind his wife when he
leaves for mincha, "Remember to take the challah out of the freezer after
tzeis," that speech would be enough to constitute a violation.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161015/f7cb5e5d/attachment-0001.htm>

R"n Lisa Liel wrote:

> There is a glaring flaw in the article, which is the absence
> of any mention of the Rinat Yisrael siddur.

The author is rather ambivalent about ArtScroll; on the one hand the line
*is* included in their siddur, but he writes on the other hand that they

> encased the verse in parentheses, as if to suggest that the
> reader serve as the arbiter of the moral dilemma.

It seems that the author did not notice what was done in the ArtScroll Rosh
Hashana Machzor (1985), where the line is included *without* parentheses in
the Musaf Amidah (both silent and repetition), yet keeps the parentheses in
the version of Alenu at the very end of Musaf. A clue to their decision
might be found in the comments on page 500 (in the Chazan's repetition):

> This was part of the text originally included by the Sages
> in the Rosh Hashanah Mussaf. Although it was later deleted
> from the Siddurim by Christian censors, R' Yehoshua Leib
> Diskin and others insist that at least in Mussaf it must
> be recited in its entirety.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161016/5401e206/attachment-0001.htm>

Suppose I give you my lulav on condition that you return it, but you
*don't* return it. Mechaber 658:4 says that you failed to fulfill the
tenai, so my gift to you is void, so it never left my ownership, and you're
not yotzay.

Now suppose an adult gives his lulav to a child, clearly and expressly
invoking that it is a Matana Al M'nas L'hachzir. It appears to me that the
child is halachically incapable of fulfilling the tenai, so the gift is
never chal to begin with. This would totally eliminate the problem of
transferring ownership back to the adult, because the child never acquired
it to begin with. The lulav was, and still is, property of the adult. This
would seem to be a great way for the same lulav to be used by any group
containing both adults and children. The procedure has the advantage that
the exact same words are said regardless of whether the recipient is an
adult or a child.

(I do realize that there's a side problem, regarding Mitzvas Chinuch,
because if the child doesn't own it, then the child is not doing the
mitzvah properly, so how is the parent doing Chinuch? This is dealt with in
the second half of MB 658:28.)

If this procedure works, I wonder why the poskim don't suggest it. Could it
be that if one makes a tenai which is not possible to fulfill, then the
halacha ignores it, and the kinyan is valid as if there had been no
stipulation? Suppose I am mekadesh a woman Al Tenai that two equals three.
Is the kiddushin valid?

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161016/074a349a/attachment-0001.htm>

On 2016-10-13 12:36 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> PS: As for broken tunes.... I still have a deep problem with "Az beqol,
> ra'ash gadol, adir vechazaq mashmi'im qol" -- the standard nusach has
> the pauses in places that don't fit the grammar.

Fortunately, the nusach barely needs to be changed to accommodate the
correct grammar: the musical phrase for "az beqol" can be filled with
just "az", that for "ra'ash gadol" takes "beqol ra'ash", and that for
"adir vechazaq mashmi'im qol" needs a very subtle change to take "gadol
adir vechazaq, mashmi'im qol" (works better if you pronounce "gadol
adir" correctly milra).

--Chesky Salomon

On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 09:18:58AM -0400, Chesky Salomon via Avodah wrote:
:>                         ... I still have a deep problem with "Az beqol,
:> ra'ash gadol, adir vechazaq mashmi'im qol" -- the standard nusach has
:> the pauses in places that don't fit the grammar.

: Fortunately, the nusach barely needs to be changed to accommodate the
: correct grammar: the musical phrase for "az beqol" can be filled with
: just "az", that for "ra'ash gadol" takes "beqol ra'ash", and that for
: "adir vechazaq mashmi'im qol" needs a very subtle change to take "gadol
: adir vechazaq, mashmi'im qol" (works better if you pronounce "gadol
: adir" correctly milra).

Yes, and there are traditional tunes that isolate "Az".

The pasuq from the Maaseh haMekavah (Yechezqeil 3:12) is
    vatisa'eini ruach
    va'eshma acharai
    qol ra'ash gadol.

So, I would say that the noun is qol, the adjectives "ra'ash gadol"
are tighly bound to it as that's the quotes, and "adir vechazaq" is
there to describe the navi's "qol ra'ash gadol".

So:
    Az, beqol-ra'ash-gadol adir vechazaq, mashmi'im qol...

One comma moves, from after gadol to after vechazaq.

My guess is the source of the nusach is an overemphasis of the difference
between the navi's adjectives and the ones we're adding.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Here is the test to find whether your mission
mi...@aishdas.org        on Earth is finished:
http://www.aishdas.org   if you're alive, it isn't.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Richard Bach

On 2016-10-13 11:48 AM, saul newman via Avodah wrote:
> http://www.thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/2016/9/29/problem-of-alenu

> what group besides chabad spits?

As a side note, I have seen a manuscript /machzor/ (from the 1200s,
IIRC) in the NYPL where the censorship was evident: "??? ???????? ????
???? ???????? ?? ?? ?? ????? ??????...". The letters were scraped off,
but their remnants are visible.

[The Hebrew reads: Sheheim mitshtachavim lehevel variq... va'anachnu..."
Which leaves me wondering: "variq" or "velariq"?
-micha]

- Chesky Salomon

I was convinced, sinced quite young, that how we treat suicides in
halakhah is one of those cases where the application of theoretical
halakhah to make halakhah lemaaseh had changed as our understanding of
the metzi'us changed.

However, after seeing AhS YD 345, I see that's not quite so.

R' Aqiva held that at the funeral, "lo sechabdo velo seqalelo, for who
can know whether he was out of his mind, or an oneis due to some fear or
panic. Therefore, lay him to rest stam..." (Semachos, beginning of ch. 2)

Deeming someone a me'abeid atzmo lada'as requires a statement tokh
kedei dibur, so that we know for sure it's ledaas, and that his daas
was sound. Afterall, we have to overcome the norm that people don't just
commit suicide.

There is also the case of Ben Gorgos, whose father frightened him so
badly abot what his punishment would be, he committed suicide rather
than face his father. The fear was irrational, as his chosen way out was
worse than anything his father would have done. R' Tarfon deemed it oneis.

So it seems we were avoiding applying the din of me'abeid atzmo lada'as
since the days of the tana'im. It isn't some modern change.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "Fortunate indeed, is the man who takes
mi...@aishdas.org        exactly the right measure of himself,  and
http://www.aishdas.org   holds a just balance between what he can
Fax: (270) 514-1507      acquire and what he can use." - Peter Latham

When posting a link, can I request that there be some information 
regarding the content of the linked article? Add in the first paragraph, 
a quick summary, something?

TIA

Ben

Has anyone seen this in action?
From what I've seen in the poskim, if it can't rain in your sukkah, the
s'chah is pasul.

https://issuu.com/lakewoodweekly/docs/lakewood_weekly_vol_18_issue_35
See pages 44-45.

Any ideas?

Chaim Tatel, Outer Golus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161019/761e508b/attachment-0001.htm>

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 09:58:22AM -0700, Chaim Tatel via Avodah wrote:
: Has anyone seen this in action?
: From what I've seen in the poskim, if it can't rain in your sukkah, the
: s'chah is pasul.

From <http://www.dailyhalacha.com/m/halacha.aspx?id=2766> it seems
RYSE discusses your question, which has become a machloqes haposqim:

                         ...  Such Sechach enables one to continue
   performing the Misva of Sukka even under rainy conditions, and it
   thus might seem preferable to use such Sechach.

   Indeed, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv (1910-2012), in Sefer Ha'sukka,
   ruled that it is permissible and even recommended to use this rainproof
   Sukka. He was then asked how to reconcile his ruling with the custom
   recorded by the Tur (Rabbenu Yaakob Ben Asher, 1269-1343), in the
   name of the Samak (Sefer Misvot Katan by Rabbi Yishak of Corbeil, 13th
   century), not to construct Sukkot with impenetrable Sechach. According
   to this custom, which is codified by the Shulhan Aruch, the Sechach
   must be a temporary covering which does not protect the Sukka from the
   elements. Rav Elyashiv responded that this refers to very dense Sechach
   which cannot be penetrated by wind, rain or insects, and such Sechach
   cannot be used because the Sukka must be a crude, temporary structure.
   The new rainproof Sechach, by contrast, has spaces through which wind
   and insects can enter the Sukka, but is constructed in such a way that
   rain immediately falls off the Sechach without entering the Sukka. Such
   Sechach does not violate the requirement to use a temporary covering.
   This is also the position taken by Rav Elyashiv's son-in-law, Rav
   Haim Kanievsky (contemporary), in Sheraga Meir.

   Several other Poskim, however, disagreed. The Shebet Ha'levi (Rav
   Shemuel Wosner, contemporary) wrote that we should not be trying
   to "outsmart" Halacha by devising creative strategies, and we
   should use the same kind of Sechach that Jews have been using for
   generations. Likewise, the Kinyan Ha'Torah maintained that although
   rainproof Sechach might be technically permissible, one should use the
   traditional Sechach. This is also the view of Rabbi Yishak Yaakob Weiss
   of the Eda Ha'haredit (in Keneh Ha'bosem). The Yalkut Yosef (Sukka, p.
   85) cites both views without reaching a conclusion, and it appears
   that Hacham Ovadia Yosef did not issue a ruling on this issue.

   In light of the difference of opinion that exists, it would seem that
   one should preferably not use such Sechach, especially given the fact
   that we are dealing with a Biblical obligation. However, one who
   already owns this Sechach may certainly rely on the ruling of Rav
   Elyashiv and use it for the Misva.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The thought of happiness that comes from outside
mi...@aishdas.org        the person, brings him sadness. But realizing
http://www.aishdas.org   the value of one's will and the freedom brought
Fax: (270) 514-1507      by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook

I know that there is a mitzvah to taste one's Shabbos food on erev Shabbos
afternoon. But I understand that the express purpose of this is for testing
the flavor, so that one can adjust the cooking or ingredients,  to make
sure that the food comes out as desired.

I have seen a new trend in recent years, in which people are making a
special kugel or cholent, specifically for erev Shabbos, and sharing it
with family and friends in the last half hour or hour before shul on Friday
evening. This would make sense to me, perhaps, if it were earlier in the
afternoon, in the summer when Shabbos will be beginning very late. It could
also be a good idea for guests who just arrived afyer a long and hungry
trip. But the idea of a scheduled snack specifically for enjoyment before
Shabbos seems to violate the whole issur against eating late Eruv Shabbos
afternoon.

Has anyone else seen this practice? Does anyone know what the origin of
this practice is, or the justification for it?

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20161020/a6bf7d58/attachment-0001.htm>

On 19/10/16 12:58, Chaim Tatel via Avodah wrote:
> Has anyone seen this in action?
> From what I've seen in the poskim, if it can't rain in your sukkah, the
> s'chah is pasul.
>
> https://issuu.com/lakewoodweekly/docs/lakewood_weekly_vol_18_issue_35
> See pages 44-45.
>
> Any ideas?

It's a machlokes rishonim.   Rabbenu Tam says the definition of a
sukkah is a structure that offers shelter from the sun but *not*
from the rain.  If it shelters from the rain too, it's a house.
The Rosh disagrees, because the pasuk (Yeshaya 4:6) says that a
sukah also protects from storms and rain.

-- 
Zev Sero                Wishing everyone a good aquittal
z...@sero.name

On 20/10/16 09:16, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
> I know that there is a mitzvah to taste one's Shabbos food on erev
> Shabbos afternoon. But I understand that the express purpose of this is
> for testing the flavor, so that one can adjust the cooking or
> ingredients,  to make sure that the food comes out as desired.

If that were the reason then only the cook should taste it.  The
first source I know of for the minhag, and the connection to the
phrase "toameha chayim zachu", is in Machzor Vitry, who attributes
it to an unknown braisa that gives no reason but simply says that
one who tastes the shabbos food on erev shabbos will enjoy a long
life, and to an equally unknown Yerushalmi which says it's for
sholom bayis, to assure oneself that the cooks didn't burn the food.
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14643&;pgnum=382

The AriZal gives a reason closer to yours, but again it's symbolic
rather than practical.  It's not so much to actually ensure that the
food is good, but to be seen to be concerned about it, which shows
honour to the expected guest for whom the food has been prepared.
This again explains why it's the host, not the cook who tastes the
food, because he feels a need to reassure himself that all is in order
and the guest will have a good time.



> But the idea of a scheduled snack specifically for enjoyment before
 > Shabbos seems to violate the whole issur against eating late Eruv
 > Shabbos afternoon.

The issur is to have a fixed meal, which is an insult to Shabbos.
Again this is about symbolism rather than actuality.  Even if ones
appetite will not be affected, scheduling a meal just before shabbos
would show that shabbos is not ones top concern.  But scheduling a
tasting shows just the opposite, that one is thinking of nothing but
the coming shabbos, and can't wait for it to arrive.

Naturally one whose appetite *will* be affected should be careful to
take only a tiny taste, or even not eat at all, if that's what he
needs to do.

-- 
Zev Sero                Wishing everyone a good aquittal
z...@sero.name


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



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


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


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

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..."


A list of common acronyms is available at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)