Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 013

Friday, September 24 1999

• Re: Rashi, Bavli
• Nusach avodah
• [none]
• re: Sukkah under tree
• Re: composing prayers nowadays
• Re: Noraot harav
• Re: Rashi also Paskened by Posookim/ text vs. psak
• Re: Fans: Hendel vs. Bannett
• Re: Ashkenaz and Israel
• Succoh bees: The penultimate solution
• Re: Succoh bees: The penultimate solution
• Kittels and Women
• Re: Ashkenaz and Israel
• Re: Succoh bees: The penultimate solution
• Kinnos and Tzimtzum
• Three meals on Shabbat
• Three Meals on Shabbat
• DUI

In a message dated 9/23/99 12:45:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
richard_wolpoe@ibi.com writes:

> (Note: that there is a parallel trend in Chabad.  They ahve editions of 
both 
>  the MB and the KSA with glosses reconciling those wroks to the SA hoRav)
>  
Just an interesting note the Misgeres di just that on the KSA

GT

Yitzchok Zirkind

From: richard_wolpoe@ibi.com
> A few months ago we learned YOMA in daf yomi so when we recited the 
> Avoda piyut  (Amitz Koach or Ata Konnanta) in Musaf yesterday I was
surprised to 
<snip>
> If it's so *wrong*, why is it still in Musaf unchanged or unmodified 

> )BTW, FWIW I heard the Rav quoted that he rejected the Amitz Koach 
> and favored  Ato Konanto.)
	Only half true.  He   **preferred**   ata konanta because its language
indicated to him that it was of much older (tekufas bais sheni) origin
than the amitz koach.  He did not reject amitz koach.  This would be out
of character,  since he is quoted in Dr. Lustiger's book (Thoughts of
Rabbi JB Soloveitchik on the High Holy Days) as saying that the machzor
should be learned like a sugya in the Gemara or language to that effect. 
This is also clear to anyone who attended his teshuva droshos and/or read
them in print.  He "darshened" many piyutim and brought proofs from them
to halacha/hashkafa positions he took in those derashos.  That would
include a tefila such as amitz koach which,  while of more recent origin,
 is certainly "yesudaso beharrerei kodesh"

Gershon

>>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.

>I would like to see the actual arguments. IN the meantime

The arguments appear in Noroat haRav vol. 9
They are developed over many pages and so I offer only a very! short
summary.

1. "The Rav was very opposed to modern day rabbis who offer their
own prayers. The text of all prayers should be exclusively derived from Siddur 
and the Machzor (I assume also Tehillim ET). Only those Tefillos
authored by the great scholars of anshei kennes hagedola and prominent
payatim may be recited. "
(personal comment - what about modern kinot about the Holocaust?)

2. Hence, the rabbis introduced only e tefillot based on the precedent
of the avot.
"Since Chazal did not comprehend the rationale for prayer they
utilized pessukim from tanach as the exclusive text of Tefillah"
Hence if someones relative is sick he can either add something to
the beracha of refueinu or else say tehillim - no other options.

3. The only exception is "seder selichot". 
"Interstingly, Selichos are not recited during the same time as other
tefillos"
"Selichos is the only set of prayers offered outside the context of the 
standardized text".

This is explanation of Rav Yochanan's statement (rosh Hashana 17b)
that G-d wrapped himself in a Tallis like a chazzan. He told Moshe
that they should pray in accordance with this order.

If not for this statement Chazal could not have introduced
"seder selichos" (not an individual vidui which is different)

chag Sameach,
Eli Turkel

p.s. If anyone can get hold of all the volumes (especially the early ones)
of Noroat haRav, please let me know  -  turkel@math.tau.ac.il)

Noah Witty asks: <<< what if the tree is so high that as a practical
matter it never/rarely actually provides shade at the very area where the
sukkah is located? (Concedely this is because the zenith is never over
the sukkah due to high latitude, certainly not in the autumn.) >>>

The sun is NEVER directly overhead anywhere north of the Tropic of
Cancer, 23.5 degrees N latitude (near the border between Egypt and
Sudan). This is something which anyone with a sundial would have known.
Even at noon on the first day of summer, when the sun is at its highest,
it would still be 6.5 degrees south of vertical.

But despite the ubiquitous references to shade, the important criteria is
that there be nothing directly overhead, no matter how high it is. I will
check when I get home, but I recall the Mishna Brura using the phrase "ad
hashamayim". In contrast, I have never seen anyone cast aspersions on a
sukkah which is built NEXT TO a solid wall such that the schach NEVER
gets any sunlight. The criteria is not the presence or absence of ACTUAL
shade, but rather the THEORETICAL shade which would occur IF the sun
happened to be directly overhead.

<<< This person states that in Bnei Brak there are sukkah porches built
under other porches, but the higher ones are so many stories high and
that therefore it is not sukkah psulah (for whatever reason one would
otherwise pasul.) >>>

Eretz Yisrael is at about 30 degrees North latitude. Around the equinox,
which is when Sukkos occurs, the sun will reach at most 60 degrees over
the southern horizon. At this angle, if the wall of our building faces
due south, there can be a porch upstairs, two meters wide, and if its
bottom is more than 3.5 meters above my schach, it will *never* cast any
shade on my schach during Sukkos.

The math is a lot more complicated if the wall does not face due south,
and the upstairs sukkah will have to be much further up. But if actual
shade is the problem, I'll have to start worrying about all the other
sukkahs on my building, and even other buildings. But, as I said above, I
have not seen any authority who cared about actual shade, as opposed to
theoretical shade. I'd be interested to hear the source on whom those
Bnei Brak sukkahs are relying.

Akiva Miller
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

--- Eli Turkel <turkel@math.tau.ac.il> wrote:
> >>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.
> 
<snip>
> 1. "The Rav was very opposed to modern day rabbis who offer their
> own prayers. The text of all prayers should be exclusively derived
> from Siddur 
> and the Machzor (I assume also Tehillim ET). Only those Tefillos
> authored by the great scholars of anshei kennes hagedola and
> prominent
> payatim may be recited. "
> (personal comment - what about modern kinot about the Holocaust?)
> 


I wonder whether his son, Dr. Chaim, would agree.  He pointed out in
his course that most prominent scholars would compose piyutim, even
if those scholars were not particularly adept in the composition of
piyutim.  Dr. Chaim said that piyut composing then was like giving a
dvar torah today--a rosh yeshiva has to give divrei torah even if
that is not his forte; it's expected.  So if non-gifted rabbis in the
Middle Ages composed piyutim (presumably) with the expectation that
they would be recited, why can't modern day rabbis do that?

Kol tuv,
Moshe
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

In a message dated 9/23/99 11:22:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
turkel@math.tau.ac.il writes:

<< 
 p.s. If anyone can get hold of all the volumes (especially the early ones)
 of Noroat haRav, please let me know  -  turkel@math.tau.ac.il)
 
  >>
I called Eichler's a few months back and they told me that the author was 
planning to reissue a number of the Noraot together in hardcover form - I'm 
still waiting

Gmar Tov
Joel Rich

--- Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@juno.com> wrote:
> Moshe cited Rabbi Chaiim Soloveitchick
> 
> >In fact, Dr. Hayim Soloveitchik noted (in class) that Rashi was
> the
> >first to systematically compare the Bavli to accepted halacha and
> to
> >try to eradicate non-Bavli halacha.  Rabbeinu Gershom, in
> contrast,
> >(according to Dr. S.) often paskened from psukim or midrashim,
> often
> >ignoring Talmud Bavli.
> 
> But Rashi knew Posookim.
> 
> More importantly the Talmud Bavli knew posookim
> 
> Can Moshe kindly give me 3-6 examples of psaks where
> Rabaynu Gayshorm followed Posookim, the Bavli disagreed
> AND the Bavli ignored posookim
> 

That's not the issue--I'm not talking about R. Gershom paskening
against Bavli or the Bavli paskening against psukim.  The point is
that while Rabbeinu Gershom knew the Bavli, he didn't consider it
binding (I like Rich Wolpoe's formulation--it was a study text, not a
psak text).  Therefore, he would often not cite the Bavli in a
situation where someone who would consider the Bavli as binding would
have quoted the Bavli.

Can you imagine Rav Moshe Feinstein paskening a sheilah based on a
Midrash when there is a Bavli on point saying exactly the same thing?

The issue mentioned by R. Wolpoe (text vs. psak) reminds me of the
following which I wrote on June 4, dealing with why the Bavli became
accepted as binding:

I wrote a paper on this issue 11 years ago (for Dr. Hyman) dealing
with the opinions of R. Elchan Wasserman in Kovetz Shiurim, the
Chazon Ish's response, and the opinion of Prof. Shlomo Yosef Havlin. 
Personally, I thought Havlin's position made the most sense--he
viewed this as a sociological issue rather than a halachic one.  In
his opinion there is no reason not to argue on the gemara, just that
klal yisrael, as generations passed, felt that the Talmud was
binding (even though this feeling has no halachic status).  He makes
a similar with regard to the "binding" nature of the Shulchan
Arukh--especially because of the completeness of the work, and I
would make a similar argument with respect to the MB.

Kol tuv,
Moshe
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

In v4n11, D or E-H Bannett <dbnet@barak-online.net> writes:
: Sorry, you didn't succeed in avoiding the sparks. Neither large nor small
: induction motors have arcing while running but both have arcing at the
: moment of disconnection. Big motors have big sparks, small motors have small
: sparks,. Are we at eileh devarim she'ain lahem shiur?

First, can't you use a capacitor to avoid the sparking issue? I'm under the
impression that for simple appliances they don't, however, if we could design
a Shabbos fan...

Second, a DC motor or an AC motor whose speed isn't determined by the line
frequence (60Hz in the US, usually 50Hz elsewhere) usually uses brushes
touching the armature in order to use the motor itself to switch the polarity
of the magnets on it. Isn't there sparking each time the plate under the
brush changes?

Third, and the REAL question <grin>: Would R' Dovid Lifshitz have assured the
production of sparks that are too small to be seen by the naked eye?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 23-Sep-99: Chamishi
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 42b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Nefesh Hachaim II 7

In v4n11, Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com> writes:
: In fact, Dr. Hayim Soloveitchik noted (in class) that Rashi was the
: first to systematically compare the Bavli to accepted halacha and to
: try to eradicate non-Bavli halacha.  Rabbeinu Gershom, in contrast,
: (according to Dr. S.) often paskened from psukim or midrashim, often
: ignoring Talmud Bavli.

Since we're speaking of R"Dr HS, does he use this as another example of
"Rupture and Reconstruction"? It sounds like he's describing R' Gershom as a
mimeticist, trying to get the texts that fit the common practice. Rashi,
OTOH, accepted TB as *the text* and modified those practices of his day that
didn't fit -- textualism.

My knowledge of Jewish history is poor. Was there a rupture in Jewish living
during that period? (In Ashkenaz. I'm not sure how to argue that the fall of
Bavel's centrality was the cause.) The Crusades hadn't attacked Jews yet, did
they?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 23-Sep-99: Chamishi
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Pisachim 42b
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         Nefesh Hachaim II 7

A succoh question.  I've been pondering the use of a net for some time now
as my tolerance for sharing my succoh with the yellow jackets which swarm in
my neighborhood has decreased, and as the evil %XX!&&** critters themselves
continue to demonstrate a perverse resourcefulness in their ability to
penetrate the increasingly desperate defensive measures i have mounted to
bar their entry these last few years.  i have about reached the point where
the choices have dwindled to a portable nuke (with an ER warhead, want the
house to stay standing) or a net.  not wishing to posqen this for myself i
have consulted with a highly competent talmid chochom whom i greatly respect
and received a heter to proceed, with the caveat that i first establish the
succoh without the net (actually fiberglass screening with, of course, the
areal density of material<<areal density of air), before deploying the net,
which would not then disturb the established chazoqoh - and of course leave
me with a rove of still kosher sichach over every square centimeter (though
not millimeter - the scale length of the net weave) of the succoh.  While
I'm not sure why this before/after should make any difference and the
requirement does impose certain logistical difficulties because of the
peculiarities of my own succoh design, i figured things could only go
downhill if i continued. So i quit the conversation at that point, happy to
stop contemplating ultimate measures. 

Since i'm aware that not everybody may agree with this pisaq, I'm curious if
somebody out there knows of, or could summarize, the expressed halachic
opinions by other competent authorities who may have commented on this.  I'm
under the impression that i once heard this discussed in terms of a chicago
venue, and that it had been controversial, but I know no details. 

Mechy Frankel				H:(301)593-3949
michael.frankel@dtra.mil		W:(703)325-1277
mechyfrankel@zdnetmail.com

Chicago Venue Details:

Both Rabbi Soloveichik and Rabbi Fuerst permit the use of mosquito
netting. They rely on the parutz merubeh al haomed aspect of the netting
linked with its bittul to the schach. I do not see any reason to be
machmir, but I should note that I do not use netting (for practical
reasons only) and will sit inside the house when the yellow jackets are
intolerable without compunction.

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 Michael.Frankel@dtra.mil wrote:


> Since i'm aware that not everybody may agree with this pisaq, I'm
> curious if somebody out there knows of, or could summarize, the
> expressed halachic opinions by other competent authorities who may have
> commented on this.  I'm under the impression that i once heard this
> discussed in terms of a chicago venue, and that it had been
> controversial, but I know no details. 
> 

YGB

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

Russel Handel:
>>4) The basic reason of wearing a Kittle is NOT to
resemble angels but rather the resemblance of
angels is an intermediate step to non emphasis
of ones physical being. This certainly applies to
women (That is we want women to be aware of
their non physical side).

Bottom line: Women should wear a kittle.<<

FWIW, I 've never seen a woman wear a kittle on Yomim Noraim. I have seen that 
women in the Breuer's Kehillo ware at least SOME white garment on YN and sevral 
don an all-white ensemble...



Rich WolpoeGm 

--- Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:
> In v4n11, Moshe Feldman <moshe_feldman@yahoo.com> writes:
> : In fact, Dr. Hayim Soloveitchik noted (in class) that Rashi was
> the
> : first to systematically compare the Bavli to accepted halacha and
> to
> : try to eradicate non-Bavli halacha.  Rabbeinu Gershom, in
> contrast,
> : (according to Dr. S.) often paskened from psukim or midrashim,
> often
> : ignoring Talmud Bavli.
> 
> Since we're speaking of R"Dr HS, does he use this as another
> example of
> "Rupture and Reconstruction"? It sounds like he's describing R'
> Gershom as a
> mimeticist, trying to get the texts that fit the common practice.
> Rashi,
> OTOH, accepted TB as *the text* and modified those practices of his
> day that
> didn't fit -- textualism.
> 

He didn't seem to view it that way in class.  I would argue that even
Rashi was a mimeticist--he respected minhag.  The difference between
R. Gershom and Rashi is that the latter considered the Bavli to be
binding while the former considered it just a learned text.

A follower of the mimetic tradition does not junk halachic text.  Cf.
Arukh Hashulchan.  Rather, he is slow to discard minhag even where it
seems to conflict with the text.  In fact, Dr. HS has a source book
dealing with Ribit where he focuses on Rashi's defense of common
practice which seemed to contradict the Bavli.  And Dr. HS emphasized
in class that the Ba'alei HaTosfot went through many machinations to
interpret the gemara in consonance with Minhag.

One of the main points of Dr. HS's class was that Ashkenazic poskim
respected the common folk's intuitions because the common folk were
considered righteous (after all, they were moser nefesh during the
Crusades), while the Sephardic poskim did not respect their common
folk, who were known for moral laxity.  The same divergence existed
between the Arukh Hashulchan and the Mishna Brurah: the former
respected the common folk's practices, while the latter was
suspicious of them because the erosion of the haskalah.

Kol tuv,
Moshe
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

Michael.Frankel@dtra.mil wrote:

> Since i'm aware that not everybody may agree with this pisaq, I'm curious if
> somebody out there knows of, or could summarize, the expressed halachic
> opinions by other competent authorities who may have commented on this.
>

Take a look at Tosfos Succah 10a and the Aruch HaShulchan O.H. #629:33-35

                                Daniel Eidensohn

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999, Eli Turkel wrote:

> 1. "The Rav was very opposed to modern day rabbis who offer their own
> prayers. The text of all prayers should be exclusively derived from
> Siddur and the Machzor (I assume also Tehillim ET). Only those Tefillos
> authored by the great scholars of anshei kennes hagedola and prominent
> payatim may be recited. "  (personal comment - what about modern kinot
> about the Holocaust?) 
> 

He was well known to be oppposed to modern kinnos. I think I heard this
from him personally the summer that I was in Boston.

Notwithstanding the comments in the "Nora'os Ha'Rav", based on
conversations with members of the Chicago branch of the Soloveitchik
family, I think the reticence to add tefillos (manifest in other ways such
as not using the shem Hashem when singing zemiros nor in the Mi Shebeirach
l'Chayalei Tzahal) is more of an expression of Yiras Shomayim than a
formal halachic objection. This is similar to RYBS's "glorification" of
tzimtzum in Ish Ha'Halacha - the barriers between Boreh and Nivra are
there for a reason, and meant to be respected. V'yesh l'ha'arich!

YGB

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

Three meals on Shabbat
From  Bert L. Kahn
<bilk1@ix.netcom.com>
September 23, 1999

	Russel J. Hendell says that the mention of Hayom 3 times in the 
pasuk,Exodus 25:21 can not be the basis for Seudah Shlishit. The Gemara in 
Shabbas 117(b) says it is.

			bert l kahn
				

Three Meals on Shabbat
From: Bert L. Kahn
<bilk1@ix.netcom.com
September 23, 1999

	Russel J. Hendel says that the reason for Seudah Shlisit can not be 
Exodus 25:21 where the pasuk uses the word "hayom" (today) three times. The 
Gemara in Shabbas 117(b) says it is.

			bert l kahn

hillafellow rabbanim..
no DUI, is not driving under the influence, BUT
duchenim under the influence!!!
with simchat torah just around the corner it's time for ALL of us to load up
on some solid p'sakim on just what defines DUI!!!!
yes, as we all know in OH 125:38, there is an explicit halacha on just what
DUI is/is not!!
to further simply/complicate matters, many of the classical commentators to
Eruvim 64:a, and OH 99:1-3, try to present their own version of DUI (it's
common practice to link the halachot for Davening Under the Influence with
Duchenim Under the Influence).
To make a long story short, Every Simchat Torah there are young energetic
yeshiva bochrim in my shul, who by virtue of patrilineal descent (one of the
few halachot that reform and orthodox agree on), claim a biological/genetic
link to Moshe Rabbenu's Brother.
Some skip kiddush and Fast till 4-5 p.m. (musaf time after our lively
hakafot), so they can mekayem mitzvat "L'baraech et amo yisrael b'ahava"
le'mehadrim (i.e. without any chasha of DUI.)
Some just can't resist and make kiddush after the first Hakafa, and claim
that by the time musaf time comes around they are in the state of "masir
yeyno", and they duchen (though on occasion I've caught some of them not
making a 90 degree turn towards the khilla during the B'racah).
Some come up with all kinds of P'sakim that they heard in their various
yeshivot:
ie.:
1) grape juice has the same din as wine..and you are technically DUI for 24
hours (including 8 hours of sleep)..so you got to make a choice.. FAST
(.re-incarnate Yom Kippur/t'sha b'av.)..and duchen...or make kiddush,  join
AA or better yet, become a candidate for PFC in the salvation army...
2) no matter what you make kiddush on (including a bottle (more than a
riviit)  of ABSOLUT vodka), by the time you finish dancing 7
hakafot...you've covered more than a "mil"..so there is no chashash of DUI.

Anyway...It would be great if All of us on the list share with each other
some SOLID well documented P'sakim of JUST exactly what entails DUI
(type/amount  of liquor/grape juice, latency time between last drink and
duchenim time, physical exertion/sleep/time factors etc)..
also a cute anecdote of the problems you've faced in your shul would help to
uplift the spirits...

a freilech Yom tov

chaim

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


[ 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         ]