Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 008

Thursday, September 16 1999

• Adam as a prophet
• Re: Definition of Anava
• Re: selichot time
• Re: selichot time
• Re: Definition of Anava
• time of selichot
• Rav Auerbach
• chumra
• slichos time
• re: More questions about Selichos
• MO in five towns towns
• Re: zeicher
• Re: Zeicher
• Re: Age of a Gadol
• revising historical revisionism
• JO
• re: More questions about Selichos
• mechila and zeikher-zekher
• Repeating and repeating

Russell suggested that Adam was a prophet. Unfortunately, Adam isn't listed
as a navi in the lists of nevi'im of Rashi (based on the Baal Halachot
Gedolot) or of Rabbenu Channanel in the gemara in Megilla 14a-14b.

BTW Rashi ha sthe first navi as Avraham whereas Rabbenu Channanel (and the GRA)
start with Moshe.

Josh

Any chumra can be viewed as detrimental to the pursuit of anava in the
vein of casting aspersions on another's yiras shomayim. For example:

[Grouping by topic]
: 1. Not carrying in an eruv where you are unsure of the Rav HaMachshir's
: expertise: Is this not acting as if you cannot trust the YS of another?
....
: 4. Not trusting certain hechsherim: Is one workiing on his/her anava
: required to blithely accept them all?

There are no bad dinim, but there can be bad chumros.

These are just variants of your earlier "trusting a 'K'". These aren't chumros,
they are avoiding s'feikos in real lavim.

There's a conflict in two issues, let's call them A, whose chumrah is more
tangible, because it requires doing without; and B, where better fulfillment
is actually more convenient. We'd call choosing A "being machmir". However,
choosing not to do A (not to keep glatt) is technically muttar.

You're constructing cases where A isn't a chumrah but an actual lav. That's
where the parallel breaks down. The only "chumrah" involved is the tangible
loss of choosing B. Because the word chumrah is used in both, it looks like
a parallel but isn't.

[Grouping by topic]
: 2. Yoshon/Cholov Yisroel: In keeping yoshon is one not implying that those
: who do not keep yoshon/cy lack ys?

: 3. Expensive Arba Minim/Atara/Menorah: Is such conduct not a blatant
: advertisement that one considers one's ys superior to that of others?

I assume you asking why I don't see every chumrah as yuharah -- and therefore
detrimental to seeking Anivus.

You've identified two necessary components for the conflict I'm suggesting
to arise:
1- Choice A (the do-without choice) must be a chumrah, not a din.
2- Choice A must be bein adam lachaveiro whereas choice B must be about how one
   satisfies one's guf.

Let's seek examples that closer parallel our case.

R' Yisroel has far more than these two famous ones:
1- His chumrah in matzah: not to overwork the almanos (at the expense of
   speed);
2- Where he washed with as little water as possible because of the poor girl
   who would have to replace whatever water he used by carrying it all the way
   up from the well.

*Perhaps* a Shomeir Nafsho (which I am currently thinking is different than a
Ba'al Nefesh) would have chosen differently.

[As to the difference between a Shomei Nafsho and a Ba'al Nefesh... A Shomeir
Nafsho works on derech eretz as used in the expression in the hagadah "zu
p'rishus derech eretz" -- proper use of the gashmi (one's own attachment to
eretz). the Ba'al Nefesh works on "derech eretz kadmah laTorah" -- how to
interact in the eretz with the other people you meet there.

[There is also "Torah im derech eretz", where a third aspect of managing eretz
is the intended meaning.]

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 16-Sep-99: Chamishi, Ha'Azinu
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 39a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Nefesh Hachaim I 25

In a message dated 9/16/99 12:55:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
dbnet@barak-online.net writes:

<< 
 3. A simple every day thought:  Selichot means, basically, saying  "Selicha, 
I'm sorry".  
 Isn't every moment of every day of the year appropriate for asking 
forgiveness and 
 considering personal improvement and teshuva? What is need or importance of 
 specific time?
 
 GChT,
 
 David
  >>
Yes, but.......
often times we need a point of focus to remind us of things we need to be 
doing. Once the rules for the focus are established, we maintain them (eg 
davening 3 times a day)

Gmar Chatima Tova,
Joel Rich

In a message dated 9/16/99 12:55:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
dbnet@barak-online.net writes:

> 1. Reb Moshe wrote a teshuva permitting selichot to be said from 1/3 of 
night 
> (approx 
>  10 PM) in sh'at ha-dechak. (I"M, Orach Hayim 2, 105)

That is if possible, otherwise he permits earlier too, see inside.

>  2. R" Ovadya Yosef wrote that if selihot cannot be said after midnight, 
the 
> preferable 
>  time is at mincha rather than before midnight.  I don't have Yechaveh 
Da'at 
> to check 
>  but I think his reason is Sh'at ratzon.

There are however some Mkubolim that permit from the begining of the 2nd 
Ashmoiroh.

>  
>  3. A simple every day thought:  Selichot means, basically, saying  
"Selicha, I'm >sorry".  
>  Isn't every moment of every day of the year appropriate for asking 
forgiveness and 
>  considering personal improvement and teshuva? What is need or importance 
of 
>  specific time?

See Tur O"C 581, Rambam Hil. Tshuvah 2:6

GCT

Yitzchok Zirkind

On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Micha Berger wrote:

> There are no bad dinim, but there can be bad chumros. 
> 
> These are just variants of your earlier "trusting a 'K'". These aren't
> chumros, they are avoiding s'feikos in real lavim. 
> 

Every "chumra" is based on din (hiddur mitzva is not, so they are related,
but not the same).

Eating only glatt is based on din just as much as eating only cy, yoshon,
etc. It is to be chosheish for the Poskim who hold non-glatt is
non-accptable, either because of the BY or because of the question of
mi'uch and how it is done.

Thus, eating only glatt is precisely parallel to not trusting the K. I see
no distinction.

I am curious what you would do with the Gemara's attribution to Yechezkel
of a chumra not to eat basar she'hora bo chochom. Seems to me like an even
greater lack of anava from your standpoint.

> There's a conflict in two issues, let's call them A, whose chumrah is
> more tangible, because it requires doing without; and B, where better
> fulfillment is actually more convenient. We'd call choosing A "being
> machmir". However, choosing not to do A (not to keep glatt) is
> technically muttar. 
> 

If that is the case, so is choosing not to keep yoshon, cy, or buy a
bargain basement arba minim.

> You're constructing cases where A isn't a chumrah but an actual lav.
> That's where the parallel breaks down. The only "chumrah" involved is
> the tangible loss of choosing B. Because the word chumrah is used in
> both, it looks like a parallel but isn't. 
> 

As above, no.

> R' Yisroel has far more than these two famous ones:

> 1- His chumrah in matzah: not to overwork the almanos (at the expense of
>    speed);

Not at all comparable! This was a *hakpada* on Choshen Mishpat - one of R'
Yisroel's great peeves was the willful neglect of CM. Not relevant to the
current discussion. There is no defecit CM-wise in not trusting a certain
hashgocho.

> 2- Where he washed with as little water as possible because of the poor girl
>    who would have to replace whatever water he used by carrying it all the way
>    up from the well.
> 

Kana"l.

> *Perhaps* a Shomeir Nafsho (which I am currently thinking is different than a
> Ba'al Nefesh) would have chosen differently.
> 

Chas v'Shalom! Then he would be shomer nefesh on OC but the opposite on
CM!

It is very important - especially in light of the Chazon Ish's criticism
of Mussar - to relaize that Maran R' Yisroel did not see Mussar as
touchy-feely "chumros" but shuras ha'din!

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

> 
> 3. A simple every day thought:  Selichot means, basically, saying  "Selicha, I'm sorry".  
> Isn't every moment of every day of the year appropriate for asking forgiveness and 
> considering personal improvement and teshuva? What is need or importance of 
> specific time?
> 
Rav Soloveitchik answers that we do not have permission to make up our
own prayers. Shemonei esrei is limited to 3 times a day, not whenever
we want. He firther shows that selichot is similar to shemonei esrei
and in fact has an ashrei and kaddish before it like minchah and
tachanun afterwards like shacharit.

In order to justify the saying of selichot Rav Yochanan brings that
G-d appeared to Moshe as a shiach tzibbur wrapped in a tallit.
Only because this was given to Moshe were Chazal permitted a
"fourth" shemonei-esrei like tefila. Hence, they instituted at a time
that is not appropraite for other tefillot.
Thus, Rav Soloveitchik was insistent that it be said after midnight
and before daybreak.
I have not seen anything in print, but based on this I suspect he
would disagree with Rav Ovadiah Yosef that minchah time is a
second best.

GCT
Eli Turkel

> 
> Except that RSZA himself refused to argue with the Chazon Ish 
> once he discovered that they differed. 

As far as I know Rav Auerbach never changed his mind about electricity
that it was not boneh.
In his teshuva about inviting over a nonreligious person that won't
make a bracha RSZA hints very strongly that Chazon Ish disagrees.
He nevertheless stuck to his guns.

GCT 
Eli

> 
> My impression is that at least within the "Litvisher velt, this was a major 
> break from tradition.  The general Litvisher Derech, as well as the specific 
> branches such as Brisk, usually worked with an analytical, scientific style in
> order to come to a definite conclusion about halacha. 

I alwats thought of Brisk as the epitomy of trying to satisfy every
possible shittah.
There is the Brisk minhag, actually due to Rav Soloveitchik, of blowing
5 sounds for shevarim to be yotzei every possibilty.

There is a joke said that once Chaftex chaim heard someone blowing
shofar in the afternoon. He turned to someone and said that it was 
probably the Briskers who were still blowing shofar in order to be
yotzei all the shitot.
The Brisker Rav used to buy many different etrogim so that he could
have many possibilities of fulfilling the mitzva.

GCT
Eli Turkel

For those who say selichos at night (event after midnight):

What of all the references to "boker", and "shachar"?  How can someone
declare at 10pm (or even 12:45am), "kidamti shachar"?  Should those piyutim
be omitted or altered?

Also does Sunday AM still qualify as "motza'ai menucha"?

While I'm at it, does someone have a "reworking" of the phrase "midas
harachamim aleinu hisgalgili", that does not pray to the midas harachamim
but preserves the rhyme and the meter?  I saw somewhere (I think in nefesh
harav) that the Rav actually said, "galgail midas rachamecha"...

This morning I heard someone suggest:

Midas rachamecha aleinu hisgalgili (asking God to "roll" his mercy on us)
velifnei koneinu techinaseinu apili (the chazan refers to himself in 1st
person)
uv'ad amecha rachamim ashali (same)
(I don't remember the rest).  The "i" endings are poetic license.

Any comments?

Moshe
mrayman@lehman.com
==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Sholem Berger wrote: <<

(A) say all the piyutim with low comprehension;
(B) say one or two with high comprehension;
(C) same as (A), but be sure to include certain selichos? >>

Interestingly, the minhag in Rechasim (Yeshivas Kfar Chasidim) is as
follows:

1.  Selichos before Erev Rosh Ha-Shana - no omissions
2.  Selichos Erev Rosh Ha-Shana:
            -   Only 9 selichos are said  (most are omitted)
            -  13 Midos are said only 3 times (once after the p'sicha, again
after
                two selichos are said, and again after 3 selichos, an akeda,
and
                the pizmon are recited.
3. Selichos of Aseres Y'mei Tshuva:
            -  only one selicha, one akeda, and one pizmon are recited,
except
                on Tzom Gedalia, when an additional 2 selichos are recited
            -   13 midos are recited only 3 times
4.  Selichos of Erev Yom Kippur - no omissions

The nosach used is minhag Lita.   As far as I know, all of the Nusach
Ashkenaz shuls in Rechasim follow this minhag as well.

In yeshivas generally, less selichos are recited, but I never witnessed
such
a "streamlined" approach until I arrived in Rechasim.   Anybody familiar
with
similar minhagim?

Gmar chasima tova,
Shlomo Godick


Kol tuv,

see NYTimes web site for article on the suburban life of MO Jews in the 5
towns.

It seems like these topics go through various cycles as the players on the
list come and go, or as we pass a few half-lives in our average reader's
memories.  While extensively reviewed in the past (in conjunction with
mail-j) D & E-H Bannett <dbnet@ibm.net>
fine review of the zeicher/zecher stuff should serve well for the current
era of readership. however readers interested in much more detail are again
advised to consult jordan penkower's extensive and very fine article in Vol
4 of Iyunei Miqroh U'foroshonus (bar ilan U Press). there is also R.
Breuer's shorter, considerably less extensive but somewhat more emotional
article on the subject published in a couple of places, including (i think -
i'm at work and winging this) Techumim.

The only additional note of interest that i might add that is not included
in penkower's review (i think) is the very clever limud/pilpul attributed to
a R. Rota.  R. Rota points to the citation of the aggodoh in bova qamoh in
connection with Yo'ov's "mistake' in only killing the amaleiq males because
he misread the posuq to mean erasure of the zochor (qometz/qometz)  of the
amaleiqis. Now - why on earth is this ma'aseh yo'ov ever brought in support
of the notion that the text should be zecher (double segole)? R. Rota clairs
the pattern that (some) qometz-qometz words which appear as nouns will have
segole-segole patterns in semichus, after the paradigm of o'shon and eshen
(hakivshon). With this pattern in mind, we may now infer that if yo'ov made
such a mistake to think the subject of the posuq was male amaleiqis, it
could only be because he had a different text in front of him which had
zecher amoleiq in semichus. qed. gotta admire that, even if not all readers
will take it seriously. i believe i saw this limud quoted and attributed to
R. Rota in a footnote in R. Moshe Sternbuch's Moadim U'zimanim, though R.
Sternbuch only knew (or only published)that the origin of the zeicher/zecher
sofeiq in modern times was rooted in disputed vesrsions of the gra's
practice. the MB doesn't even mention that. again, if you want the full
story - including relationship to siddur versions, historical lubavitch
practices, different understandings of what the radaq's position actually
was etc, read penkower.

now i gotta run off to omaha if the hurricane hasn't grounded flights out of
national. best wishes for a gct to one and all.
 
Mechy Frankel				H:(301)593-3949
michael.frankel@dtra.mil		W:(703)325-1277

R' JB Love (a passaic LOR) is of the opinion that the Gra means there's a
semantic difference. R' Love suggests that zeicher means "that which reminds"
(the more rounded tzerei implying causative; compare pa'al to pi'el) whereas
zecher is the memory itself.

In the case of Amaleik, the obligation is to remove all reminders of Amaleik.
If it were to obliterate all memory, the "lo tishkach" at the end would be
impossible. (It's impossible to remember to destroy Amaleik without remembering
that Amaleik exists.)

That is why, R Love explains, the Gra (l'fi R' Chaim) said P Zachor with the
reading "zeicher" (five points).

However, in Ashrei, we are speaking about giving utterance to the memory of
Hashem's goodness (and not to reminders thereof), so there perhaps it should
be "zecher" (six points).

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 16-Sep-99: Chamishi, Ha'Azinu
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 39a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Nefesh Hachaim I 25

>  I dont think we have gedolim like the Ramban who wrote major works at
>  the age of 17 but thet are not all in retirement age. Also if I remember,
>  the first seforim of Chazon Ish and the Steipler appeared when they were
>  not that old.

Seems to me that the age seforim were written and/or published is of no
consequence. Publication is not recognition as a gadol. That may precede such
adulation or not come for many years later or in some cases not until many years
after the gadol's petirah.
GCT
steve

This posting from last month was too good to be true so I finally decided
to verify it.
On the way to work this morning I stopped at a local seforim store.
They have the third edition, 1998. And lo and behold like the claim made,
on page 141 is a picture  of R. Moshe shaking hands with R. Aaron Kotler.
But contra the claim ... Rav Soloveitcik is right there. And the caption
does mention him.

GC"T,

Ari



> Avodah 3:190
>
> Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 00:49:44 +0300
> From: "Carl and Adina Sherer" <sherer@actcom.co.il>
> Subject: Objectivity in History
>
> Shaul Weinreb writes:
>
> > I am not a great defender of artscroll, but to make this claim
> requires
> > more concrete examples.  I am tantalized by your suggestions and I
> would
> > love to have another example of historical revisionism in the
> "right-wing"
> > publishing camp, but I can't accept this without verification.
>
> Do you own the Artscroll biography of R. Moshe Feinstein? Which
> edition? Which edition, you might ask? What a silly question!
> Actually, it isn't a silly question. Open the book to Page 141. In the
> first edition, there is picture of R. Moshe shaking hands with R.
> Aaron Kotler, with R. Yosef Dov Soloveichik sitting between them.
> The caption reads (I own the first edition), "Greeting Rabbi Aharon
> Kotler at a Chinuch Atzmai dinner; in the center is YIVLAC"H
> Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveichik, Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivas Rabbi
> Yitzchak Elchonon." In the later editions, you will not find Rav
> Soloveichik - his picture has been cropped out.
>
> I have learned a lot of history about recent Gdolim from Artscroll. I
> have also learned to take what they write with a grain of salt.
>
> -- Carl
>
> Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
> Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
> Thank you very much.

Steve Katz recently wrote:

>Had to wait nearly a year to find something worth reading in the Jewish
>Observer. "Schkoiach" (like that spelling?) to Rav YGB.

I also commend Rabbi Bechhofer (although I favor "y'yasher kochacho") on his translation in the current JO of an inspiring passage from the writings of R' Tzvi Hirsh Meisels, the Veitzener Tzaddik. As a child, I was privileged to pray in the
Veitzener's shtiebel on occasion and he made a lifelong impression on me. This
unusual gadol and his unique s'forim certainly deserve the renewed interest and
attention that the translation in JO will hopefully promote. Z'chuso yagen alaynu. 

Steve's unnecessary "dig" at The Jewish Observer bothers me a bit, however. I take it
(perhaps wrongly) as a knee-jerk anti-Right declaration that unjustly impugns by implication
the worth and abilities of many fine articles and contributors. There was, for example,
an excellent article in JO a few months back about another Chicago gaon and tzaddik,
R' Mordechai Rogov, and there is a brilliant piece in the current issue by R' Fyvel
Shuster, to mention just two. The fact that they appear in an Agudist periodical and
were not written by Rabbi Bechhofer hardly detracts from their inherent merits.

Articles and editorial policies in JO do deserve criticism from time to time, but on a rifle-shot, not a shot gun, basis. I think we should confine ourselves to direct, not back-
handed, criticism in only those specific instances that warrant it.

G'mar Chasima Tova
David

We (in our Daf Yomi Minyan - mostly Misnagdim, davening in a Chabad Shul)
have come to do almost precisely this, based on the conglomeration of the
streamlining of selichos as practiced by Skokie yeshiva combined with the
Minhag Chabad to diminish the amount of 13 Middos recited.

On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Shlomo Godick wrote: 

> Sholem Berger wrote: <<
> 
> (A) say all the piyutim with low comprehension;  (B) say one or two with
> high comprehension;  (C) same as (A), but be sure to include certain
> selichos? >>
> 
> Interestingly, the minhag in Rechasim (Yeshivas Kfar Chasidim) is as
> follows: 
> 
> 1.  Selichos before Erev Rosh Ha-Shana - no omissions 2.  Selichos Erev
> Rosh Ha-Shana: 
>             - Only 9 selichos are said (most are omitted) 
>             - 13 Midos are said only 3 times (once after the p'sicha,
> again after
>                 two selichos are said, and again after 3 selichos, an
> akeda, and
>                 the pizmon are recited.  3. Selichos of Aseres Y'mei
> Tshuva: 
>             - only one selicha, one akeda, and one pizmon are recited,
> except
>                 on Tzom Gedalia, when an additional 2 selichos are
> recited
>             - 13 midos are recited only 3 times 4.  Selichos of Erev Yom
> Kippur - no omissions
> 
> The nosach used is minhag Lita.  As far as I know, all of the Nusach
> Ashkenaz shuls in Rechasim follow this minhag as well. 
> 
> In yeshivas generally, less selichos are recited, but I never witnessed
> such a "streamlined" approach until I arrived in Rechasim.  Anybody
> familiar with similar minhagim?
> 
> Gmar chasima tova, Shlomo Godick
> 
> 
> Kol tuv,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

YGB

Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila

Because I receive the digest version of Avodah and do not check to regularly, it 
seems my comments are usually very delayed and, therefore, . not always necessary. 
Mechila on the tircha, please.

In my posting, I wondered about R'MFeldman's acceptance of the "known safek", to 
which he answered:

:Those who know me (in a laining sort of way) know that I often make
:mention of R. Breuer's kuntrus zeicher/zecher.  My point was that the
:hamon 'am, which has accepted the "safek" announced by the MB,
:nevertheless only does so for Parshat Zachor.  From here we can
:derive that for regular kriyat haTorah we do not reread psukim based
:on safek, but we make a decision as to the correct girsah.  

Even though I do not know RMF in a laining sort of way but only in an Avodah sort of 
way, I am quite aware from his postings that he would not have accepted that "known 
safek". I was taking advantage of his slip in terminology to emphasize that there is no 
safek and certainly no reason for repetition (bimechilat kevod ha-MB). But if RMF 
thought I suspected him of the incorrect notions of the hamonei 'am, I beg him for 
mechila.

Et chata'ai ani mazkir hayom: Despite being convinced that there is no safek, I 
continue to lein parashat zakhor as I was taught over 60 years ago and repeat the 
phrase "timcheh et zeikher 'Amalek"  (not the sentence).
 Al titosh torat morekha. However, by accident, I read zekher the first time and then 
repeat to correct the error.  Of course I never make that error in Ki Tetzei. I succeed in 
reading it correctly both in shevi'i and maftir..

R'RWolpoe wrote:

: it would be characteristic of PSAK to read either Zeicher or Zecher as :opposed to 
starting a brand new minhag of re-reading.  OTOH the world of :Cheshash says do 
both - but why stop there?

But they didn't stop there! There are yeshivot in Israel with multi-eidah student bodies 
where they read the entire parashat zakhor over and over again.  The chashash shita 
says every person must hear zakhor in his traditional pronunciation to be yotzei yedei 
chova. So It is read in Modern Israeli Ashkenazi, Litvish, Galitzianer, Polish, Hungarian 
and then in Sefardic, Moroccan, Tunisian (Jerba), followed by Parsi, Bukhari, Central 
Yemenite and  South Yemenite.  And,if there are students of other origins, it goes on 
further.

Gemar Tov le-khulam,

David

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


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]