Avodah Mailing List

Volume 36: Number 107

Thu, 20 Sep 2018

• 1. Re: Ha'azinu (Micha Berger)
• 2. kaddish yatom by non-mourner (Rich, Joel)
• 3. Sinat chinam (Daas Books)
• 4. Re: religious scientists? (Zev Sero)
• 5. Re: kaddish yatom by non-mourner (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: Ha'azinu (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: Sinat chinam (Zev Sero)
• 8. Numbers 20:11 and Exodus 17:6 (Jay F. Shachter)
• 9. Re: religious scientists? (Zev Sero)
• 10. Re: Numbers 20:11 and Exodus 17:6 (Zev Sero)
• 11. mixed prayers at the Kotel (Prof. Levine)
• 12. Re: kaddish yatom by non-mourner (Rich, Joel)
• 13. Re: mixed prayers at the Kotel (Zev Sero)
• 14. Re: kaddish yatom by non-mourner (Zev Sero)
• 15. Re: kaddish yatom by non-mourner (Micha Berger)
• 16. Nusach Ashkenaz in the Center of Chasidic Davening: The Interesting Cases of Belz, Sanz, and Berdichev (Professor L. Levine)

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:07:33PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
: On 17/09/18 17:16, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote:
: >I am utterly puzzled by this Zohar, because tzur and sela` are two
: >totally different words that mean different things.  Their meanings
: >don't even overlap.

: 1. First of all, what are these different meanings, and how do you
: know they do mean different things and are not synonyms?

Even if they are synonyms, wouldn't using different words push toward
not making that kind of derashah? Otherwise, why wouldn't the connection
been highlighted by common word?

Just as using homonyms or near homonyms /are/ used, even when the
meanings will only overlap after such analysis. Eg: "Vehanachash haya
arum"... "vayeid'eu ki arumim heim." (Bereishis 3:1, 7)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Feeling grateful  to or appreciative of  someone
mi...@aishdas.org        or something in your life actually attracts more
http://www.aishdas.org   of the things that you appreciate and value into
Fax: (270) 514-1507      your life.         - Christiane Northrup, M.D.

The Rama in O"C 132:2 states that the "kaddish yatom" (mourners'
kaddish)after aleinu must be said even if there is no yatom in the Shul. He
adds that it may even be said by one who has live parents if they aren't
makpid (finicky?) about it. Question: If the parents went to their Rav,
would he answer the question should they be finicky about it? If he would,
what would his answer be?

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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180920/0a94cec0/attachment-0001.html>

One of the most poignant prayers of YK which is said several times
including during Neila, we ask HKBH to remove (or protect us from) all
kinds of terrible things. They are all external except for one - sinat
chinam. Since it is a mitzvah not to engage in sinat chinam, why are we
asking for God to save us from it? It?s our choice, not his???
(If this was already discussed, kindly direct me, thanks.)
Alexander Seinfeld

On 20/09/18 03:18, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
> Assume that ?surveys? show that the percentage of ?top? (TBD) scientists 
> who consider themselves religious is dramatically lower than that of a 
> similar demographic of non-top scientists (and non-scientists). How 
> would one go about explaining the causes of this differential 
> theoretically and then testing the theory?

I would be wondering whether some aspect of the same extremely skeptical 
personality that makes a person tend toward atheism also helps him 
succeed at the sciences.

I would also be looking at that "TBD" you left open, i.e. the definition 
of "top" scientists, which is controlled almost entirely by subjective 
factors, including bias against open religiosity.  IOW a scientist who 
is openly religious will tend (consciously or not) to be thought of by 
his less-talented peers as not a real scientist, and thus will be rated 
as "not top".

-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

On 20/09/18 03:20, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
> The Rama in O?C 132:2 states that the ?kaddish yatom? (mourners? 
> kaddish)after aleinu must be said even if there is no yatom in the Shul. 
> He adds that it may even be said by one who has live parents if they 
> aren?t makpid (finicky?) about it. Question: If the parents went to 
> their Rav, would he answer the question should they be finicky about it? 
> If he would, what would his answer be?

I don't think "finicky" is the correct translation.  "Lehakpid" means to 
be upset, to take offense.  Because this kaddish is associated with 
yetomim, to the point where we actually call it the "kaddish yatom", 
it's natural for parents to feel hurt at the thought of their child 
saying it.  Whether they should feel that way is not a halachic 
question, so it would never occur to anyone to ask it of a rav; nor 
would he have any halachic basis for answering it.  He ought to advise 
them to go to either a (Jewish and frum) counsellor or to a rebbe, 
depending on what kind of people they are.

-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

On 20/09/18 10:08, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:07:33PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
> : On 17/09/18 17:16, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote:
> : >I am utterly puzzled by this Zohar, because tzur and sela` are two
> : >totally different words that mean different things.  Their meanings
> : >don't even overlap.
> 
> : 1. First of all, what are these different meanings, and how do you
> : know they do mean different things and are not synonyms?
> 
> Even if they are synonyms, wouldn't using different words push toward
> not making that kind of derashah? Otherwise, why wouldn't the connection
> been highlighted by common word?

Absolutely, and in fact the derasha is based on the use of the *same* 
word, but I was asking about the assertion that they are such different 
words.   What do the two words mean, and how does RJFS know this?


> Just as using homonyms or near homonyms /are/ used, even when the
> meanings will only overlap after such analysis. Eg: "Vehanachash haya
> arum"... "vayeid'eu ki arumim heim." (Bereishis 3:1, 7)

The relevant pesukim there are not so much 3:1 & 3:7 but 2:25 and 3:1. 
"Vayihyu shneihem `arumim" leads directly into "vehanachash haya `arum".

-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

On 20/09/18 11:24, Daas Books via Avodah wrote:
> One of the most poignant prayers of YK which is said several times
> including during Neila, we ask HKBH to remove (or protect us from) all
> kinds of terrible things. They are all external except for one - sinat
> chinam. Since it is a mitzvah not to engage in sinat chinam, why are we
> asking for God to save us from it? It?s our choice, not his???
> (If this was already discussed, kindly direct me, thanks.)

If you're referring to the "Avinu Malkenu" before "Uchsov" in each 
tefillah, I believe the "sin'as chinam" referred to is directed from 
others to us, not vice versa.   We're asking Hashem to protect us from 
other people's baseless hatred.


-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

> 
>> I am utterly puzzled by this Zohar, because tzur and sela` are two
>> totally different words that mean different things.  Their meanings
>> don't even overlap.
> 
> 2. Second, even if it is so, the water came from a tzur, so what's the 
> problem?
> 

I am astonished at your question.  In Numbers 20:11, the water came
from a sela`.  This was the occasion when Moshe sinned.  The intent of
the Zohar is that Moshe was referring to the occasion of his sin, that
he was not ignoring or minimizing it.  Exodus 17:6 describes water
coming from a tsur, nearly 40 years earlier, but that was not an
occasion when Moshe sinned.  The Zohar was clearly and obviously
referring to Numbers 20:11 and not to Exodus 17:6, so your question
astonishes me.


                        Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
                        6424 N Whipple St
                        Chicago IL  60645-4111
                                (1-773)7613784   landline
                                (1-410)9964737   GoogleVoice
                                j...@m5.chicago.il.us
                                http://m5.chicago.il.us

                        "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"

On 20/09/18 13:46, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
> Just to consider another way the community's culture could have played
> out. Had history not included things like the Church denying Copernicus,
> which set up an adversarial background even before Darwin was born....

Historical nitpick: The RC Church did not deny Copernicus; on the 
contrary, it honoured and valued him.  He was himself a churchman, and 
was encouraged in his research and speculations, all the way up to the 
pope himself.   The key factor, though, was that he never pretended to 
be doing more than speculating.  He didn't claim that his theory was The 
Truth(tm), since there were many scientific problems with it that he 
could not resolve.  He was so embarrassed by his inability to resolve 
these that he delayed publishing his theory until what proved to be the 
last year of his life.

Galileo, on the other hand, despite the serious unresolved problems with 
it, asserted that heliocentrism was the absolute truth, and proposed 
ways to reinterpret the Bible to fit it.  The Church's position was that 
there are only two sources of absolute truth: science and the Bible, and 
since Galileo's theory was confirmed by neither one he had no right to 
present it as more than a theory to be discussed. Cardinal Bellarmine 
told him at his trial, if you could prove this scientifically then we 
would have to accept it, would have no problem reinterpreting the Bible 
accordingly, and wouldn't need or appreciate your help with that; but so 
long as you not only can't prove it but can't answer the strong evidence 
against it we see no need to do so.

-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

On 20/09/18 09:25, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote:
>>> I am utterly puzzled by this Zohar, because tzur and sela` are two
>>> totally different words that mean different things.  Their meanings
>>> don't even overlap.

>> 2. Second, even if it is so, the water came from a tzur, so what's the
>> problem?

> I am astonished at your question.  In Numbers 20:11, the water came
> from a sela`.  This was the occasion when Moshe sinned.  The intent of
> the Zohar is that Moshe was referring to the occasion of his sin, that
> he was not ignoring or minimizing it.

Where in the Zohar do you perceive such an intent?


>  Exodus 17:6 describes water
> coming from a tsur, nearly 40 years earlier, but that was not an
> occasion when Moshe sinned.  The Zohar was clearly and obviously
> referring to Numbers 20:11 and not to Exodus 17:6, so your question
> astonishes me.

On the contrary, if this were so then this Zohar should have been in 
Bamidbar, not in Shemos!

-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

At 4:12 PM 9/18/2018, Ben Waxman wrote [on Areivim, about selichos
at the kotel -mb]:
> Without a doubt, the largest group of Jewish people praying in a group
> not separated by gender is selichot at the Kotel. Women of the wall are
> a drop in the bucket compared to these selichot sessions.? Both chief
> rabbis were in attendance last night.

While I am sure this is true, this does not make it right.

My understanding is that one is not supposed to daven outdoors, and
davening at the Kosel is indeed davening outdoors, is it not.


From http://dinonline.org/2012/07/11/davening-outdoors/

    Is it problematic to daven outdoors?
    Thanks.

    Answer:

    One should not daven in an open area outdoors, 
    and should daven in a closed building, or a sheltered area.

    Sources:

    The Gemara (Berachos 34b) writes that it is wrong (arrogant ? chatzuf)
    to daven in an open field.

    Rashi explains that in an open field, one doesn?t feel fear of the
    King, and one doesn?t pray with a broken heart. Tosafos, however,
    understands that the concern is for passers-by, who are liable to
    disturb a person?s davening.

    The Magen Avraham (90:6) rules that the problem is that davening
    outside makes a haughty statement: ?Even though there are passers-by,
    they will not disturb my intent in davening!? This is arrogant
    and wrong.

    The Shulchan Aruch (90:5) rules that one should not daven in an
    open place, and the Mishnah Berurah (11) adds that those who are
    always travelling should can daven in an open place, but should try
    to daven by a tree.

    Therefore, although it is not forbidden to daven outdoors, it is
    wrong to daven in an open area, and one should seek a sheltered place.


Also, my understanding is that often at the Kosel there are many minyanim
going on at the same time, but are indifferent places in the davening.
Is this proper? Furthermore, what about the principle of B'rov am
Hadras Melech , shouldn't there be only one large minyan at the Kosel
at any given time?

YL

I don't think "finicky" is the correct translation.  "Lehakpid" means to 
be upset, to take offense.  Because this kaddish is associated with 
yetomim, to the point where we actually call it the "kaddish yatom", 
it's natural for parents to feel hurt at the thought of their child 
saying it.  Whether they should feel that way is not a halachic 
question, so it would never occur to anyone to ask it of a rav; nor 
would he have any halachic basis for answering it.  He ought to advise 
them to go to either a (Jewish and frum) counsellor or to a rebbe, 
depending on what kind of people they are.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting, since it says that one could say it unless the parent is
makpid, then it is at some level a halachic question -what degree of
hakpada would be required?  Also what percentage of the orthodox Jewish
world today makes the differentiation between what is asked a "Rav" versus
a "Rebbi"?  Another question - when one has 2 mitzvot in front of them,
would it not be a halachic question which to give precedence to if all the
standard measures are equal ?
GT
Joel Rich
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.

On 20/09/18 12:43, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote:
> My understanding is that one is not supposed to daven outdoors, and
> davening at the Kosel is indeed davening outdoors, is it not.

We've already discussed this before.  No, the Kosel is *not* "outdoors" 
in the sense relevant here, i.e. an open field; it is an enclosed space 
that happens to have no roof.

> Also, my understanding is that often at the Kosel there are many minyanim
> going on at the same time, but are indifferent places in the davening.
> Is this proper?

Why not?


> Furthermore, what about the principle of B'rov am
> Hadras Melech , shouldn't there be only one large minyan at the Kosel
> at any given time?

While nice, this is not usually practical.  On some occasions during the 
week, e.g. these selichos or the birchat kohanim on chol hamoed, it is 
done.   On other occasions, while one does not have the giant "rov am", 
one also does not *lose* whatever "rov am" one would have by davening 
elsewhere, since each minyan is of about the size one would find 
anywhere else.


-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

On 20/09/18 15:07, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
> Interesting, since it says that one could say it unless the parent
> is makpid, then it is at some level a halachic question -what degree
> of hakpada would be required?

It would seem any degree is sufficient.


> Also what percentage of the orthodox Jewish world today makes the
> differentiation between what is asked a "Rav" versus a "Rebbi"?
It's not a halachic question at all.  If they're asking whether there's 
any reason al pi torah whether they *should* feel upset then the rov can 
tell them there isn't, but that it's a legitimate feeling to have.


> Another question - when one has 2 mitzvot in front of them, would it
> not be a halachic question which to give precedence to if all the
> standard measures are equal ?
But there's no question that upsetting ones parents is a avera, while 
saying kaddish is not any sort of chiyuv on any individual.  So each 
person whose parents will be hurt if he says it has an easy cheshbon to 
make: don't say it.  If that means nobody says it, so be it.


-- 
Zev Sero            A prosperous and healthy 5779 to all
z...@sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 04:27:48PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
: But there's no question that upsetting ones parents is a avera,
: while saying kaddish is not any sort of chiyuv on any individual.

But, going back to the OP:
> Question: If the parents went to their Rav, would he answer the question
> should they be finicky about it? If he would, what would his answer be?

When it's a parent asking the question, should they be maqpdim?

So far I've heard tangential objections to the use of the word "finicky"
and other digressions. So, I want to get back to this question...

I would think it depends on the parents' hashkafah, in particular, how
seriously that hashkafah takes "al tiftach peh lasatan" in comparison
to allowing their son to help out his minyan.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I slept and dreamt that life was joy.
mi...@aishdas.org        I awoke and found that life was duty.
http://www.aishdas.org   I worked and, behold -- duty is joy.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Rabindranath Tagore

Conclusion

The adoption by the Chasidism of a new ???? ?????, in place of the
traditional ???? ?????, was apparently a later development in the movement,
said to be from the time of the Maggid of Mezrich, rather than from R.
Israel Baal Shem Tov, who is called its founder.

There is much difference of opinion and variation among Chasidim as to what
the exact text of this nusach should be. Among many Chasidim, including
very large and significant Chasidic groups, to this very day, important
segments and elements of ???? ????? surprisingly still persist, even at the
heart of their ??????.


Fro more please see


https://treasuresofashkenaz.wordpress.com/2018/09/20/nusach-ashkenaz-in-the-center-of-chasidic-davening-the-interesting-cases-of-belz-sanz-and-berdichev-%d7%a0%d7%95%d7%a1%d7%97-%d7%90%d7%a9%d7%9b%d7%a0%d7%96-%d7%91%d7%9e%d7%a8%d7%9b%d7%96-%d7%aa/


<https://treasuresofashkenaz.wordpress.com/2018/09/20/nusach-ashkenaz-in-the-center-of-chasidic-davening-the-interesting-cases-of-belz-sanz-and-berdichev-%d7%a0%d7%95%d7%a1%d7%97-%d7%90%d7%a9%d7%9b%d7%a0%d7%96-%d7%91%d7%9e%d7%a8%d7%9b%d7%96-%d7%aa/>Let
me add that I was told that a siddur that the BESHT used is in the Chabad
library in Crown Heights and it is Nusach Ashkenaz.


YL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180920/f1654480/attachment.html>

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



_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/lists/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://www.aishdas.org/lists/avodah/avodahareivim-membership-agreement/


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/lists/avodah/avodah-acronyms
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)