Avodah Mailing List

Volume 17 : Number 044

Tuesday, May 16 2006

• Re: Shevuos - Matan Torah
• Re: Challah on the Table
• RE: Rambam on variation in length of month of Elul
• opposition to lag ba'omer Meron pilgrimage by gedolim - sources
• Re: Another one for the historians
• Shavuos and Matan Torah
• Shavuos and Matan Torah
• Re: Shavuos Miderabanan
• Re: Shavuos Miderabanan
• shevuos matan torah/Shavuos Miderabanan?
• Re: Rambam on variation in length of month of Elul
• Re: Al Naharos Bavel: Authorship and Ibn Ezra's shitta
• Re: Malachim
• Re: Challah on the Table
• Re: Fiscal Law in Shabbat Beshabbato
• Re: Shavuos and Matan Torah
• Lecha Dodi niggen during Sefira

> From: Glasner, David [mailto:DGLASNER@ftc.gov]
>> My grandfather R. Akiva Glasner discusses this question at length ...
>> his Iqvei ha-Tzon. b'qitzur nimratz, he holds that the day in the
>> Jewish calendar that is the primary commemoration of matan torah is not
>> Shavuot, but Shabbat, based on the statement in masechet Shabbat "hakol
>> modim she'beshabbat nitnah torah." ...

> Destruction of which temple first or second? The tefilot certainly
> go back to Anshie Kenneset Hagdolah - the beginning of the second.

Do we have any evidence that Z'man Mattan Toraseinu was written by the
Anshei K'nesses HaG'dolah?

> The truth is that the famous question of the Magen Avraham which really
> starts off the entire discussion is remarkable - because he is mistaken
> (I say this with all due respect) he asks how can we say "Yom Matan
> Torosanu) when the torah was really given on the next day. The answer
> is we don't say "Yom" we say "Zman" this was already pointed out by
> Rishonim ...
> Zman is general not specific. I have no explanation how the Magen Avraham
> missed this.

Your assumption is that Yom and Z'man are totally different. While
linguistically they are, and would have different meanings, in the
context of VaTittein Lanu...Es Yom...Z'man... it may not matter. As
the Z'man in the description is describing the Yom that God gave us,
the only explanation of Z'man is "this context" would be the "very day."
Otherwise, why give us this very day? If the Torah was given on 7 Sivan,
why celebrate the day before, and the Nusakh HaT'filah indicates that
we are celebrating "this day" of Z'man Mattan Toraseinu.

Furthermore, we don't say Yom Heiruseinu on Pessah, rather we say Z'man,
even though it could technically be Yom.

Jacob Farkas

> Therefore, the Lubavitchers I know go to shul for mincha and kabbolas
> Shabbos, make kiddush and eat the meal by daylight, and then go to shul
> for maariv after nacht.

I am informed that Rav Shmuel Kamenetsky does this as well.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

I understood the gemara not to be astronomical, but calendrical. Given
the rush to get the word out for Rosh Chodesh Tishrei, Elul was made
chaseir. The Rambam, unlike the gemara's "Miymos Ezrah", seems to allow
for exceptions to prevent AD"U Rosh.

This eliminates the need for sheluchim for Tishrei, who lema'aaseh
couldn't succeed anyway.

And then Tishrei, Cheshvan and Kisleiv (most likely the latter two, like
today) would be adjusted to get back to averaging one molad per month.

-mi

I am aware of the following sources in which gedolim expressed
opposition/questioning re the lag ba'omer Meron pilgrimage/festivities
and/or related matters -

1) Teshuvos (responsa) Chasam Sofer, Yoreh Deiah, 233 - In part of this
lengthy teshuvah (see d"h amnam) the CS says that he would not take part
in it. See there for more details.

2) Someone just told me the other day that Williamsburg (Brooklyn) was
full of posters saying that the minhag of Satmar is not to go to Meron
on lag ba'omer. In a subsequent conversation with someone somewhat
knowledgable about such matters, I was told that the Satmar Rebbe,
R. Yoel Teitelbaum, spoke out against it.

3) Rav Elyoshiv shlit"a, despite living in Eretz Yisroel for some time,
has * never * gone to Meron. In a recent newspaper article (Jerusalem
Post, last year, IIRC), he was quoted as saying something like 'I feel
closer to Rav Shimon ben Yochai when I am learning a blatt gemara'. Even
though I am not aware of him being quoted as opposing it more explicitly,
I think that does make a statement of sorts.

The reasons for this opposition vary. Some are questions about the
propriety of making a new yom tov on a day where there was no neis,
not mentioned in Shas or or poskim, questions about making the day of
the petira of a tzaddik for a yomtov when we know that such a day is
normally a day of mourning, taanis or similar (CS). Other reasons are
problems with lack of adequate tznius around Meron, sanitary problems with
animals being shechted there, bittul Torah presumably, etc. I have also
heard about safety concerns there, due to unruliness. A friend related a
story to me about his friend being assaulted there one lag baomer in the
past. There are also concerns re fire safety related to the fires lit,
traffic/road safety, as well as questions re the 'chai rotel mashkeh'
practice, which has become big business of late.

I am curious to hear if anyone has any other sources opposing it that
they can tell me about. Since these sources are often drowned it in alot
of media hype around the day lately, I think it is worthy to focus on
them for a change and give them some well-deserved attention.

Thanks in advance.
Mordechai

Rt Shoshana L. Boublil wrote to Areivim, and mentioned two significances
of Lag baOmer:
> a) a connection with the revolt of Bar Kochva (end of R' Akiva's students
> deaths; start of the revolt etc.)  I recall a song about using bows and
> arrows on Lag BaOmer to commemorate the revolt.

While R' Sherira Gaon says the gemara was speaking back-handedly about
Roman persecution, he does not say it was after Bar Kochva. Hadrian's
persecutions lead to the messianic ferver, it was cause, not consequence
of BK. I agree with the the idea that it's unlikely that R' Aqiva rebuilt
from 5 talmidim in the short time from Beitar until his own death.

As to whether the 5 talmidim in the negev were his talmidim during
the mageifah and therefore survivors, the following may be important:
Yevamos 62b describes them as living from Gav'as to Antiperis. It says
nothing about his having or not having talmidim who lived beyond those
bounds who would not have been afflicted.

Why do I find it so important? Because the shalsheles hadoros which
produced the Mishnah. How did R' Aqiva successfully hand off his work,
even if he took R' Meir on before Bar Kochva? Hadrian came to power in
118 CE, but he originally was pro-Jewish. Around 123CE, he renegged on
a promise to allow us to rebuild the BhM, and rebellions started. BK
was in 132. If the talmidim died during the 9 years, or if R' Meir
was working on the mishnah even after he left R' Aqiva to head south,
there is enough time to explain how the mishnah is devei RA. Otherwise,
I find the logistics problematic.

> b) Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai's Simha in Meiron.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 33rd day, which is
micha@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total
Fax: (270) 514-1507               submission to truth, and what results?

From: "Klahr, Phillip" <klahrpd@upmc.edu>
> Last year, I saw Rav Nevenzal ask an interesting question: Since the
> Torah defines Shavuos as following the 49 days of Sefirah, and according
> to many (most?) Rishonim, Sefirah is nowadays only Miderabanan, it
> should follow that nowadays there is no Chag HaShavuos Mideoraisa,
> only Miderabanan. Any answers? Thanks

The obligation to count is Miderabanan. Shavuos still occurs on day 50,
whether you count or not.

From: "Zev Sero" <zev@sero.name>
> "kennethgmiller@juno.com" <kennethgmiller@juno.com> wrote:
>> It seems to me that even when Shavuos falls on the 5th or 7th of Sivan,
>> there still IS a link between it and Matan Torah, by virtue of the fifty
>> days between Pesach and Shavuos.

> But there were not necessarily 50 days between yetziat mitzrayim and
> matan torah. Everyone holds that matan torah was on a Shabbat. If we
> hold that yetziat mitzrayim was on a Thursday, rather than a Friday
> (see the gemara in Shabbat), then matan torah was on the 51st day of the
> "omer".

Shavuos is always on Day 50. There are different Midrashim as to when
Yetzias Mitzraim happened and as to the lengths of the months between
Nissan and Sivan. They can't necessarily be reconciled but Shavuos is
on Day 50. That is absolute.

There are an number of sectarian sources from the period of Bayis Sheni
that identify Shavuos as a time connected to Divine revelation, and in
some instances, specifically to Matan Torah.

(And at least some of these were using a Tzeduki style date for Shavuos.)

I'm not sure why there is this persistent insinuation that it was invented
by Chazal post-Churban.

Daniel

Rabbi Daniel Yolkut
Cong. Keneseth Beth Israel
www.kbi6300.org

From: "Klahr, Phillip" <klahrpd@upmc.edu>
> Last year, I saw Rav Nevenzal ask an interesting question: Since the
...

an answer i don't have, at least yet. however the question would then
have existed in the times of some of the tana'im and the amoraim and there
would be nafka mina's lhalacha lema'ase in the gemora by various melachos,
i.e. whether on a yom tov d'oraisa one may use the more makel dei'ah,-
also by the machlokes Rav Shimon and Rav Yehuda by muktza one would then
be able on shavuos to be meikil, and i don't recall any mention af this.

reuven

On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 04:35:20PM +0200, reuven koss wrote:
: From: "Klahr, Phillip" <klahrpd@upmc.edu>
:>Last year, I saw Rav Nevenzal ask an interesting question: Since the
: ...
: an answer i don't have, at least yet....

The Shu"t Oneg YT (O"Ch 42) I already cited would address this question.
He made tzei dinim of sefiras ha'omer. 50 whole days starting from Pesach
day 1 that do not require sefirah bepeh, but just waiting out the omer,
and 49 days of bepeh. The OYT ascribed the date of Shavu'os to the 50
day count (which started and ended a day off that first year due to the
need for sheleimim).

If counting bepeh is derbanan bizman hazeh, that wouldn't mean that
counting 50 days and the qevi'ah of Shavuos is.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 33rd day, which is
micha@aishdas.org        4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total
Fax: (270) 514-1507               submission to truth, and what results?

Ari Kahn wrote:
> My grandfather R. Akiva Glasner discusses this question at length ...
> his Iqvei ha-Tzon. b'qitzur nimratz, he holds that the day in the
> Jewish calendar that is the primary commemoration of matan torah is not
> Shavuot, but Shabbat, based on the statement in masechet Shabbat "hakol
> modim she'beshabbat nitnah torah." ...

Destruction of which temple first or second? The tefilot certainly go
back to Anshie Kenneset Hagdolah - the beginning of the second.

I don't think that he addresses that question explicitly. He discusses
the adoption by Hazal of a new name for Shavuot, Atzeret, which he
interprets as a reference not only to the prohibition of work, but as a
reference to Matan Torah, which happened on "yom ha-qahal" and one of
the meanings of "atzeret" is "gathering". LAD, I would say that the
identification with matan torah could have begun already in the first
exile. During the second temple, the two ideas may have coexisted until
the second destruction, when the idea of matan torah took over completely.

> The truth is that the famous question of the Magen Avraham which really
> starts off the entire discussion is remarkable - because he is mistaken
> (I say this with all due respect) he asks how can we say "Yom Matan
> Torosanu) when the torah was really given on the next day. The answer is
> we dont say "Yom" we say "Zman" this was already pointed out by Rishonim
> (Drashot Ibn Shu'ib- R. Joshua ibn Shu'ib was a student of R. Shlomo ibn
> Aderet (Rashba), a colleague of R. Yom Tov ibn Abraham Ishbili (Ritva),
> and the teacher of R. Menachem ben Zerach. R. Joshua lived in Spain
> ca. 1280-1340. His homilies (Derashot) were arranged according to the
> weekly Torah portions and the Torah readings for the Jewish holidays,
> and were first published in Constantinople in 1523. Bal Ilan Shut) Zman
> is general not specific. I have no explanation how the Magen Avraham
> missed this.

Well, there is clearly still a problem even if we accept that "z'man"
is an imprecise reference. Why was matan torah commemorated on a day
other than the day on which the Torah was in fact given? The z'man/yom
issue doesn't really go to that point, which, I assume, is what was
really bothering the Magen Avraham.

> Both Rav Kook and the Gerrer Rebbe explain that HKBH said the torah
> would be given on the third day - Moshe added a day which created the
> 51st day problem - but from a Divine perspective the torah was ready to
> be given on the 3rd day - which was the 50th day. We were only ready to
> accept it on the 51st day - so in subsequent years should we celebrate
> when we received it or when HKBH was ready to give it. Zman Matan Torah.

That's certainly one approach. I think that it is far from
being mukhrah, however, and there is still room for other
interpretations. In my previous posting I failed to provide a link
to my translations of relevant parts of Iqvei ha-Tzon on the Dor
Revi'i website <www.dorrevii.org>. To the petiha which explains
why Shabbat is the essential day of commemoration of matan torah
<www.math.psu.edu/glasner/Dor4/Akiva/IKVEITZN.html>. To the discussion
of Shavuot <www.math.psu.edu/glasner/Dor4/Akiva/shavuot_iqveithatzon.html>

Pinchus Klahr wrote:
> Last year, I saw Rav Nevenzal ask an interesting question: Since the Torah
> defines Shavuos as following the 49 days of Sefirah, and according to many
> (most?) Rishonim, Sefirah is nowadays only Miderabanan, it should follow
> that nowadays there is no Chag HaShavuos Mideoraisa, only Miderabanan. Any
> answers? Thanks

In the above-mentioned discussion of Shavuot, my grandfather brings
several proofs that Shavuot must be d'oraita. Not being familiar with
arguments pro and con, I would just add that verse (vayiqra 23:21)
"huqat olam b'khol moshvoteikhem l'doroteikhem" doesn't seem to me to
leave much room for doubt that it is d'oraita.

David Glasner

On 5/16/06, Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org> wrote:
> I understood the gemara not to be astronomical, but calendrical. Given
> the rush to get the word out for Rosh Chodesh Tishrei, Elul was made
> chaseir. The Rambam, unlike the gemara's "Miymos Ezrah", seems to allow
> for exceptions to prevent AD"U Rosh.

I understood the "mimot ezra" to mean that there was an unwritten rule
(lo matzinu, not lo yachol or something stronger), and that seems to be
what the rambam is saying. Until the time of Rebbi Chanina, there was
an unwritten rule, but what happened from then to the setting of the
calendar, he's not taking a stance and it's 'just' rov.

R' Simcha Coffer  wrote:
> The obvious issue this thread is addressing is how Dovid was able to
> compose a mizmor which portrayed events which had not yet occurred. I
> accept (and am grateful for the clarification of) RZL's explanation
> but I have a kasha. How can Dovid, or anyone for that matter, describe
> events which occur in the future when said events are ostensibly taluy
> on bechira?

Hakol tzafui vehareshus nesunah.

If Hashem can have that foreknowledge without destroying people's bechira,
then He can also transmit it prophetically to nevi'im without destroying
bechira.

There are numerous instances in Chumash of individuals crying or saying
something -- eg in Yakov's brachos -- because they foresaw later events
like churban -- events which would only happen if the Jews sinned.

Consider also that they kept the Torah before it was given and set aside
the Tribe of Levi to be priests already in Egypt but Levi only became
the shevet of kohanim when the first-borns sinned at the chet ha'egel.

 -Toby  Katz
=============

RMB wrote:
> I would have thought the idiom is therefore asur, in that Catholics
> seem to see the world poised as a battle between their god and the
> devil. Wouldn't this make the devil a demigod, an AZ?

They think the Devil is an angel who rebelled against G-d -- in
contradistinction to the Torah view which sees the Satan as performing
tasks set for him by G-d (tempting people to sin so they will have
bechira; acting as the accuser and prosecutor when man is judged;
carrying out the sentence, thus being the Executor and Angel of Death).
We see the Satan as being an angel who is as holy as any other angel.

Although Catholics think the Devil is powerful and intrinsically evil
and in a constant state of rebellion and opposition to G-d, they do not
view the world as having two gods, the way the ancient Persians did,
a god of good and a god of evil. If you ask them they would say the
world has one G-d and He is all-powerful and can vanquish the Devil --
but (possibly) allows him to function for reasons somewhat similar to
the Jewish understanding of why there is a Satan.

Thus, playing devil's advocate would not be an act of avodah zarah for
a Jew!

 -Toby  Katz
=============

>> Therefore, the Lubavitchers I know go to shul for mincha and kabbolas
>> Shabbos, make kiddush and eat the meal by daylight, and then go to shul
>> for maariv after nacht.

R' Gershon Dubin wrote:
> I am informed that Rav Shmuel Kamenetsky does this as well.

That is true. RSK leaves the Beis HaMidrash after Mincha and returns for
Ma'ariv. In the interim the Yeshiva davens Qabalas Shabbos, and has a
[Hummash] Seder for 30-40 minutes afterwards before Ma'ariv.

Jacob Farkas

> Torah Law
> Did You Break It? Pay for It!
> Rabbi Yosef  Carmel, Head of Eretz Hemdah Institute, Jerusalem
> (<beitdin@eretzhemdah.org>)
> Reuven wanted to buy a car from Shimon, and as is common practice he
> took the car to a testing center to have it checked. On the trip to the
> center, one of the tires developed a flat, and the tire was damaged
> beyond repair. Who should pay for replacing the tire?....

I will tell you a true story but I don't know what the end of it was.
It involves a woman I know here in Miami, whom I will call Bina, and
her friend Dina, who went on Aliyah a few months ago and left her car
parked on Bina's property.

They had a verbal understanding that Bina would buy the car, would send
the money to Dina and would take care of the paperwork. However, Bina
never got around to doing any of that. Meanwhile, along came Hurricane
Wilma -- and a tree crashed down on Dina's car, demolishing it.

Dina said that Bina owed her the money anyway and she really needed it
and was depending on it. Bina said that she didn't want the car now --
obviously -- and had never taken possession of it in the first place.

The car was not insured because at the moment, no one was using it.
Who would have thought that a car parked in someone's yard could get
into an accident???

Bina asked me what to do. I told her I didn't think she had to pay for
the car but that she should ask a shaila. The part I don't know but will
ask her the next time I see her is, what was the answer to the shaila?

PS You should have seen the car, what a sight! Oh and Bina's own car
was demolished by the same tree, too.

 -Toby  Katz
=============

Rabbi Daniel Yolkut wrote:
> There are an number of sectarian sources from the period of Bayis Sheni
> that identify Shavuos as a time connected to Divine revelation, and in
> some instances, specifically to Matan Torah.
> (And at least some of these were using a Tzeduki style date for Shavuos.)
> I'm not sure why there is this persistent insinuation that it was invented
> by Chazal post-Churban.

What relevance do sectarian documents have to this discussion? The Rivash
is not insinuating the fixed connection occurred post-churban - but
states it as a fact.
Could you please explain the Rivash as well as the statement of the
Magen Avraham?

Daniel Eidensohn

From: "Y. Stein" <yidste@hotmail.com>
> Where is there a reference to the Minhag of singing a special Sefira
> melody for Lecha Dodi, and where can I hear that melody (cassette,
> online or musical notes)?

Two posts in the archives at
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol13/v13n052.shtml> refer to this minhag.

It is also mentioned in the luach (luach minhogei beis livnei Ashkenaz)
put out by Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz in Bnei Brak.

I don't know where you can hear the melody. I guess some Yekkes would
know, perhaps some Oberlanders too, maybe even some other people.

Mordechai

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


[ 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         ]