Avodah Mailing List

Volume 17 : Number 095

Monday, July 24 2006

• RE: making up pesukei d'zimra
• Re: historical contingency and brachos
• Halachah k'Mishna Brura
• Israeli News on NY Erev Shabbos
• Re: Israeli News on NY Erev Shabbos
• Capital punishment
• Re: malawach
• RE: MB/Yeshiva Communities
• RE: making up pesukei d'zimra
• Re: historical contingency and brachos
• changing tefilos
• Army exemptions
• Kinot for the Holocaust
• Re: historical contingency and brachos
• Re: Music during the Three Weeks
• Re: Music during the Three Weeks
• Re: MB/Yeshiva Communities
• Re: MB/Yeshiva Communities
• Re: MB/Yeshiva Communities
• Re: MB/Yeshiva Communities

> The Tola'at Ya'akov (R' Meir ben Yehezkel ibn Gabai) wrote that "one
> should not go back later to read p'sukei d'zimra... as he is m'hapekh
> ha-seder ha-'elyon according to which all our prayers are organized

IIRC, the Aruch haShulchan writes as well that there is no need to "make
up" missed pesukei d'zimra, and cautions that doing so risks violating
the prohibition of saying hallel every day (shabbos 118).

I believe the Rav suggested that baruch she'amar served as a matir to
recite ps"d (the Rav would not recite mizmor shir chanukas habayis), and
perhaps according to that reasoning as well reciting these mizmorim out
of context may not be the best thing to do.

 -chaim b.

> Even better is the case of Mishneh Brurah 177:3 -- "If he doesn't want
> to eat bread, but he does eat a little bread to cover the brachos of the
> food, the Acharonim write that it is a safek. They question whether the
> bread can cover them, because it's not shayach to say that they're tafel
> to the bread, since he doesn't want to eat it... Or perhaps, since it is
> the derech haolam to establish a meal with bread, the Hamotzi will cover
> them in any event. Therefore, the acharonim write that it is better to
> make the appropriate bracha on each item, and not eat the bread at all..."

Case 1 pas haba b'kisnan - everything that one eats is mtiztareif to
a shiur
Case 2, with hamotzie on pas, you need at leat a k'zayais/k'beitza of
davka bread.
Why this paradox?

Furthermore, why isn't every food eatne lelafeis hapas NOT mitztareif
to pas for a shiur?
this makes no sense to me.

If you eat a tuna fish sandwhich the bracha is hamotzi for sure, and IMHO
the shiur should include the utna the mayo the lrettcue tomato etc. I
do NOT understand why not Plus safeik Benthing is a safeiok d'oraisso. I
don't get it!

Good Shabbos!
 -RRW 

Background: A chavrusa of mine gave a Mishna Braur Shiur. I helped him
prep by learing Tur/Beis Yosef, etc,

I asked him, if you learn Tur/BY, why do you need MB?

H asnwered -ein hachi name - see the Hakdama of the MB himself, that he
wrote the sefer davkabecassue Tur/BY was being negelected...

Q: Nu, so how can MB be infallbile by his own definition? l ich'ora
Tur/BY is more definitive?

You MUST say that MB himnself would not have felt himself as infallible
to be 100% THE Haacha! It msut have come later on!

FWI,my chavrusa also felt that paskening required MORE than the MB
alone. He says that in additoin to Aruch Hashulchan, he would include
Kitzur

And when Rabbi Kanarfogel gave MB shiur at Beth Aarn he USUALLY cited
AhS, too.

To really pasken imho you need Tur/BY first

Then if you want a beis din of poskim I would suggest starting with 
MB
AhS
and Kaf Hachayyim

If they ever publish a kitzur of Igros Moshe and Ychaveh Da'as, I would
add those 2

Kol Tuv
Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

>>> There is a (IIRC) Brisker Rav Al Hatorah that makes this distinction, and
> says that he will not be patur. Because of this, some people are careful
> not to use a non-frum taxi driver to go to the hospital on Shabbos.

It's a Beis HaLevi al HaTorah.  Perhaps the Gri"z repeated it.

Doesn't this all go back on the issue of whether he is a tinok shenishba
or not?

cbk 

RShmuel Weidberg wrote:
: If somebody would have been mechalel Shabbos even if what he was doing
: was not for pikuach nefesh and it happened to be that it was for pikuach
: nefesh, is he patur?

Yes. "One who intended to catch fish and retrieved a (drowning) child
(in his net) is exempt from punishment ( patur) even if he did not know
that (a child) was drowning." Rambam Shabbat 2:16, based on Menachot 64a.

After writing this, but before sending it, I see RZS and RCB have
preceeded me. I'm posting it anyway; a little chazara doesn't hurt.
Indeed the Raavad seems to disagree, but this seems to be because of a
different girsa; it would seem that if he had our girsa, he would agree.

I am surprised to find quoted in the name of the Gri"z an opinion
virtually explicity rejected by the Rambam. Maybe there is some way to
reconcile these opinions.

RGershon Dubin wrote:
>I remember hearing a pesak that given the choice of a frum vs not frum
>doctor for a pikuach nefesh situation, the frum doctor is preferable;
>the not frum doctor does not benefit from the heter of pikuach nefesh
>if he's not otherwise shomer shabbos.

OTOH, the SSK says a religious soldier may "trade" with an irreligious
soldier, the religious soldier leaving the base for Shabbat and having
the irreligious soldier replace him (obviously with the consent of those
in charge) since most of the activities the irreligious soldier does in
the framework of his service on Shabbat are permitted because of pikuach
nefesh. Apparently the SSK holds the irreligious soldier is not culpable
for things he did on Shabbat in the framework of the army; he *does*
"benefit from the heter of pikuach nefesh [even] if he's not otherwise
shomer shabbos". This is in opposition to the pesak cited by RGD.

Regarding the suggestion that visiting the sites of the JP and other
papers encourages chillul Shabbat because they expand their coverage
of the war based on the number of "hits" on their sites: I *highly*
doubt that this is the case.

Regarding radio broadcasts on Shabbat in order to generate support for
Israel , although it is obvious that this is normally prohibited, I think
that in time of war, much can be said that it is permitted. Speaking only
a bit homileticly, I note that the Rambam says in Taaniot 2:6 that the
tekiot of taaniot are prohibited on Shabbat "unless for the purpose of
calling for help" ("l'habetz et haam laazor lahem u'lehatzilam"). Hatzala
takes many forms, and international support for Israel is singularly
crucial in this war..

Saul Mashbaum

[Micha:]
> 3- The beis din hagadol got the name Sanhedrin because the Romans
> acknowledged it as the local court.

 From the latin: Senatorium

cbk

> 1) I don't know what possessed me to buy a frozen package labelled
> "Yemenite Malawach" but I did -- and now realize that I don't have a
> clue what to do with it. What bracha is it, how is it eaten? Is it
> a flaky dough like a knish and the bracha is mezonos? Is it bread and
> the bracha is hamotzi?

Most Ashkenazi poskim poskin it is hamotzi.
Fry it and eat it with shakshuka or the like with a knife and fork

reuven                               

RAMiller wrote:
> Can someone please explain this to me? AIUI, the piyutim were added many
> centuries after the text of the Amidah was fixed, and no one ever said
> them as part of their silent Amidah. So it cannot be the case that we
> say them in order to be motzi one who doesn't know how to daven. So what
> purpose do they have, and why is that purpose best filled by inserting
> them into the Amidah?

> I admit that most of the above can be asked of Kedushah as well, and
> answers in that vein are sought for too.

The text of our core prayers were in slight flux for much longer than
we think. Just compare Rokeach to Siddur Rav Sa'adayah Gaon & Rav
'Amram Gaon, Siddur of Rambam, Things coming from Rashi's circle, etc.,
and you will see that immediately. Thus, the fixed text came centuries
after the core parts of the 'Amidah were composed.

Piyyutim are thus no fundamental modifications of the 'Amidah (BTW, we
should also add "and of the birkat qeriat shema'"), but beautifications,
which are, according to almost everybody, depitse claims to the contrary,
permitted. In fact, I seem to recall vaguely that one is always allowed,
even ("especially", bizman hazeh) in the private 'Amidah, to add baqashot
me'eyn haberakhah. Likewise, adding sheva'h on days when the 'Amidah is
more sheva'h than baqashah would be as appropriate, hence the license
for including piyyutim.

Now a little note: last week I asked whether there were any ahavah
piyyutim. The answer is yes.

Gut vokh, (should I wish all the Western hemisphere people gut Shabbos,
even though they'll read it only at night? :-))
Arie Folger

> I believe the Rav suggested that baruch she'amar served as a matir
> to recite ps"d 
> -chaim b.

If, when you say "I believe" you are implying a lack of surety on the
statement, let me confirm eid mpi eid that he did say this as well as
ashrei being a matir for the amida

Kt
Joel rich

Rabbanit Katz asked:
>1) I don't know what possessed me to buy a frozen package labelled
>"Yemenite Malawach" but I did -- and now realize that I don't have a
>clue what to do with it. What bracha is it, how is it eaten? Is it
>a flaky dough like a knish and the bracha is mezonos? Is it bread and
>the bracha is hamotzi?

According to the the Madrich l'Brachot ha'Nehenin published in Israel,
the bracha for Malawach is Borei Minei Mezonot. How it's eaten ? You'll
have to ask Harav HaGaon Jeffrey Nathan shlit'a :-)

KT
Josh

> Considering the possible horrible results, might I hope that no one
> on this list would want to m'hapekh ha-seder ha-'elyon?

Sifrei Kabbalah and kavanos often use the term "mehapech hatzinoros"
when doing things out of order and strongly advise against it certain
circumstances.

cbk

There is some debate on a blog about this subject which has grown
heated. I would like to ask a historical question for informational
purposes to which I do not know the answer. In the times of Tanach when
there were kings who did not do what was good in the eyes of HKB"H,
is there historical or medrashic evidence that those who wished to do
what was good in the eyes of HKB"H separated themselves (or did not)
from the rest of the community either in general(e.g. physical distance)
or for specifics(e.g. army service)

May we celebrate the upcoming 9th of Av as a true moed

Kt
Joel rich

In the recently released "The Lord is Righteous in all his Ways",
R'YBS goes through the kinot to show parallels to events in the
holocaust. "Of course, the six million Jews deserved to be eulogized on
Tish'ah be'Av. But we do so within the frame of reference of the kinot
we recite on that day"

<snip>

In fact an imitation of a Kinah was written for those killed by Hitler
in the 1940s, and not badly written. <snip> I can not use it because, in
my opinion, there is no one, no contemporary, who has all the qualities
indispensable for writing prayers. <snip> I just do not believe that a
contemporary has the inner ability, the faith, the depth, the sweep of
experience, the ecstasy, and the taharat hanefesh, the purity of soul
that would authorize him....

KT 
Joel Rich

R' Harry Maryles wrote:
> Other types of Maras Ayin are relative to whether anyone will actually
> see you or not. Therefore, AIUI, going into a treif restaurant in a
> situation where no one will see you and having a beer, there is no
> Maras Ayin.

One might argue if people don't know anyway that drinking a beer in such
a restaurant is OK in terms of kashres itself, so that there wouldn't
an issue with mares ho-ayen, but as you beshem RAS argued differently, I
wonder how you can be sure there's not a Jew present - or coming in after
you - who will see you. So, in the classical mares ho-ayen case, you sit
there sipping your beer, a Jew who is considering getting kosher comes
in and thinks "Fine, there's a religous Jew here, seems to be a kosher
restaurant." or "Hey, I always thought Indian restaurants are kosher."

ELPhM

>> Also, when we speak of music we aren't talking "Eli Tzion".

>Because it's part of tefille, or because it's a solemn melody? People
>have a lot of hanoe from it, still humming it in the street with a smile
>on their face weeks after Tishebaf.

While growing up, "Eli Tzion" was considered a great "march" kind of
niggun. A grand finale to end off the mourning. Of course it was also
the tune for Rosh Chodesh bentsching of Menachem Ov which couldn't arouse
any question of mourning on Shabbos.

Eventually the Rov toned it down to a slower rhythm, but still upbeat.

In Yerusholayim we have the identical tune for "Eli Tzion" but sung in
such a way that if it doesn't move you to tears then nothing will.

Nobody here hums "Eli Tzion" even on Tishebaf unless they want to cry.

May we be zoche to deserve singing the upbeat "Eli Tzion" this year.

 - Danny

> I heard that there are some Poskim who are of the opinion that when
> playing a recording of a voice singing, the tape/CD/computer playing
> it is the equivalent to a musical instrument, and therefore may not
> be used, even though it would be permissible were one to be at a live
> performance. Does anyone have any more information about this?

If a voice singing is permitted at a live performance, this would indicate
that it is not considered music. If so, why is an instrument duplicating
such non-music prohibited?

> Doesn't answer your question, but R' Shlomo Miller did asser acapella
> that is difficult to distinguish from musical instruments.

Is there a counterpart in previous generations to adding on such levels
of chumra on something (listening to music in the Three Weeks) which is
itself only a minhag not mentioned in Shulchan Aruch?

EMT

RMB asked:
>: how about catching up on skipped pieces of pesukei dezimra?

>Why bedavka pesuqei dezimrah? Once it no longer serves the role of getting
>one ready for Shemoneh Esrei, is there value to those kapitlach Tehillim
>over any other? The Gra says no, and while the world holds otherwise
>(as is evidenced by people on the bus after the 6:10 minyan), I could
>use help finding a conflicting maqor.

Actually if you read OC 52:1 carefully the SA seems to say that only if
you came so late to shul that you can't even say an abbreviated pesuqei
dezimrah (and make Amida with the tzibbur) then you daven with them and
afterwards read all the pesuqei dezimrah w/o their brachot.

In the case of skipping some of the pesuqei dezimrah it doesn't mention
catching up afterwards.

The KSA in 14:6 & 7 seems to say the same thing, with the exception of the
extra Shabbes pesuqei dezimrah which you are expected to says afterwards.

However, if you change the punctuation of the SA or the KSA (as Wikipedia
<http://tinyurl.com/rh65u> has it) then you would get your "popular" psak.

 - Danny

RMB asked:
>: how about catching up on skipped pieces of pesukei dezimra?

>Why bedavka pesuqei dezimrah? Once it no longer serves the role of getting
>one ready for Shemoneh Esrei, is there value to those kapitlach Tehillim
>over any other? The Gra says no, and while the world holds otherwise
>(as is evidenced by people on the bus after the 6:10 minyan), I could
>use help finding a conflicting maqor.

Actually if you read OC 52:1 carefully the SA seems to say that only if
you came so late to shul that you can't even say an abbreviated pesuqei
dezimrah (and make Amida with the tzibbur) then you daven with them and
afterwards read all the pesuqei dezimrah w/o their brachot.

In the case of skipping some of the pesuqei dezimrah it doesn't mention
catching up afterwards.

The KSA in 14:6 & 7 seems to say the same thing, with the exception of the
extra Shabbes pesuqei dezimrah which you are expected to says afterwards.

However, if you change the punctuation of the SA or the KSA (as Wikipedia
<http://tinyurl.com/rh65u> has it) then you would get your "popular" psak.

 - Danny

On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 05:07:17PM +0300, D&E-H Bannett wrote:
: Re: R' Micha's question on making up skipped p'sukei d'zimra 
:> The Gra says no, and while the world holds otherwise, I could use help
:> finding a conflicting maqor.

: As there are many who wrote about the minhag "ha-oilem", I assume your
: looking for someone who agrees with the Gra. If so, this is what I have
: to offer:

You assume incorrectly.

I want to know if anyone explains the purpose of "making up" skipped
kapitlakh of pesuqei dezimarah. I know many explain that that is how
they hold, I'm asking why.

: The Tola'at Ya'akov (R' Meir ben Yehezkel ibn Gabai) wrote that
: "one should not go back later to read p'sukei d'zimra... as he is
: m'hapekh ha-seder ha-'elyon according to which all our prayers are
: organized...
: Considering the possible horrible results, might I hope that no one on
: this list would want to m'hapekh ha-seder ha-'elyon?

Maybe it depends on whether one is willing to risk the Zohar's warning
and wear tefillin on chol hamo'ed. There seems to be a leshitaso in this,
on whether one adapts pesaq to avoid being mehapeikh hatzinaros.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             The trick is learning to be passionate in one's
micha@aishdas.org        ideals, but compassionate to one's peers.
http://www.aishdas.org   
Fax: (270) 514-1507      

R' Rich Wolpoe wrote:
> Although Bavli has a sort of nusach to the Amidah, it was by NO
> MEANS fixed. That came later and Rav Amram Gaon, etc. made a big
> impact on this... While the Amida was quite fluid, payattanim
> were at work. Yossi Ben Yossi ... Kallir ...

R' Arie Folger wrote:
> The text of our core prayers were in slight flux for much longer
> than we think. Just compare Rokeach to Siddur Rav Sa'adayah Gaon
> & Rav 'Amram Gaon, Siddur of Rambam, Things coming from Rashi's
> circle, etc., and you will see that immediately. Thus, the fixed
> text came centuries after the core parts of the 'Amidah were
> composed. Piyyutim are thus no fundamental modifications of the
> 'Amidah (BTW, we should also add "and of the birkat qeriat
> shema'"), but beautifications...

All you've shown is that at certain points in time, we did not have a
specific text.

What you *want* to show is that the Anshei Kneses Hagedola did not
produce a specific text.

In my view, the evidence you've brought could be used just as easily
to show that the Anshei Kneses Hagedola DID produce a specific text,
but that different communities over the centuries made changes to it,
either through forgetfulness or deliberately.

 From what I've seen, of all the brachos of the Shmoneh Esreh, the
very first one is almost identical in virtually all communiities and
manuscripts. (And even if you can show some ancient menuscripts which have
different text for that first bracha, I'll bet that the other brachos in
that manuscript are even more divergent.) This would be very consistent
with my scenario, but not yours. If the Anshei Kneses Hagedolah wrote
a specific text for Shmoneh Esreh, I see it as quite reasonable that
the first bracha would be the best known, and thus the most resistant
to change. But if they only defined the subject matter of each bracha,
and many variant texts ran concurrently until some became more popular
than others, the fact that all communities today would be using the
identical words for the first bracha is a mere coincidence.

Second: If the Anshei Kneses Hagedola merely defined the subject matter of
each bracha, and allowed many variant texts, then how do we understand the
prohibition against changing the "matbea" which they established? Doesn't
that clearly refer to their fixed text?

Third: Even if one is allowed to add such tefilos to chazaras hashatz, can
someone explain the motivation for it? If the main purpose of chazaras
hashatz is to repeat the prayer for the benefit of those who cannot
say it on their own, why would one add a new tefilah to the repetition
without adding it to the silent one too? Why not put it elsewhere in
the service, as was done with Alenu, Av Harachamim, and other tefilos?

I'm also wondering what a person is to do, if he is unable to say
the Amidah himself, and does rely on the chazan's repetition. (Today,
a thousand years ago, whenever...) Must he pay attention, with feet
together, listening intently to the chazan for the whole duration of
the repetition? Or can he relax a bit during the piyutim?

(BTW, these questions are also relevant for other variations between
the silent amidah and the repetition, such as Kedusha and Anenu, but
I'm content to focus on piyutim for now.)

Akiva Miller

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


[ 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         ]