Avodah Mailing List

Volume 25: Number 440

Wed, 31 Dec 2008

• 1. R. Lorinz and CI (Eli Turkel)
• 2. Re: woman reading a ketuba (Doron Beckerman)
• 3. Re: Modern Day Sifrei Torahs (Ben Waxman)
• 4. Re: amen to birkhot hashachar (T6...@aol.com)
• 5. Re: woman reading a ketuba (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: woman reading a ketuba (T6...@aol.com)
• 7. Re: Women reading a ketuba (Meir Shinnar)
• 8. Modern Day Sifrei Torahs (Harvey Benton)
• 9. Re: Modern Day Sifrei Torahs (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Modern Day Sifrei Torahs (Jesse Abelman)
• 11. Re: woman reading a ketuba (Harry Maryles)
• 12. Re: woman reading a ketuba (Eli Turkel)
• 13. Re: Maoz Tsur (Michael Poppers)

I went this week to a bar mitzvah of a great grandson of R. Lorinz
(former MK for Agudah and about 90 years old). He told a story that
in 1940 he suggested to the CI that students be graded with the better
students going to the better yeshivot. CI was absolutely against it and
said that meant that a lower student had no chance of becoming a gadol.
R. Lorinz continued that some students simply don't have the ability to
become a talmid chacham. CI answered that one of the present (1940)
gedolim couldn't understand pshat in Rashi until he was 18. Had a such a
system been in existence he never would have become a major RY.
R. Lorinz wanted to know who was the RY and CI answered that he thought
it was avak lashon hara and wouldn't tell

-- 
Eli Turkel

>> I'm not even sure why any of the Sheva Brachos of Nesuin can't be made by
women. Since both men and women are obligated in the Birchas Nesuin, a woman
can be Motzie a man with these Brachos just like a man is Motzei a woman. <<

Tavo Me'airah.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081231/3c8b6416/attachment-0001.htm>

Actually I know a few Yeminites who make an effort, when praying in an 
Ashkenazi minyan, not to get aliyot. They told me that since those sefrei 
Torah have petukhim in ways which the Rambam paskened is pasul, they prefer 
not to get an aliya.

Ben
>
>
>
> RHB:  >> If someone from a Sefardi or  Ashkenazi background, davened
> at a Yemenite minyan, would he be allowed to  make a Bracha on an Aliya,
> seeing
> as his mesorah is different?  <<

 

From: "Shlomo Pick" _pic...@mail.biu.ac.il_ (mailto:pic...@mail.biu.ac.il) 


>I believe that is also new [or new-ish]  [--TK]

>>  Actually the custom to answer amen is quite old, recorded in the bei 
yosef to  the tur OH, section 6, found in the SH OH 6:4, agree to by the posekim, 
see  shulkhan aruch harav and aruch hashulkhan ad loc.  <<



>>>>>
 
We were not discussing the general concept of answering amen to a bracha,  
which is indeed very old, as you say.
 
We were talking about the new-fangled custom of making a  magical fetish out 
of "Amen" -- putting more stress on the amen than on the  bracha -- having 
"amen parties" and saying brachos out loud on purpose on every  possible 
occasion, so that others can respond amen loudly and often -- all with  the goal of 
achieving some kind of magical benefit, be it a refuah sheleimah, a  shidduch, a 
child for an infertile couple or whatever.
 
 


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

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


**************New year...new news.  Be the first to know what is making 
headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081231/8a5a732e/attachment-0001.htm>

Doron Beckerman wrote:
>  >> I'm not even sure why any of the Sheva Brachos of Nesuin can't be 
> made by women. Since both men and women are obligated in the Birchas 
> Nesuin, a woman can be Motzie a man with these Brachos just like a man 
> is Motzei a woman. <<
>  
> Tavo Me'airah.

Tavo me'erah on someone who *needs* someone to be motzi him with benching,
because he should know it.  Why should a me'erah come on someone who knows
how to bench but chooses to be yotzei from another bar chiyuva, male or
female?

-- 
Zev Sero                                     May the light of Chanukah
z...@sero.name                                brighten your life

From: "Eli Turkel" _eliturkel@gmail.com_ (mailto:elitur...@gmail.com) 

any problem  with a woman reading a ketuba at a wedding?

-- 
Eli  Turkel
 


>>>>>
Yes, there are several problems.  One is that it will make people  laugh, 
stare, whisper and poke each other in the ribs, taking away from the  solemnity 
of the wedding ceremony.  Another problem is that if the bride  herself was 
never given a speaking role in her own wedding -- presumably out of  concern for 
the modesty and bashfulness of a young maiden, having to speak up in  front of 
all those people -- it would be unseemly for some /other/ woman to have  a 
speaking part.  The only woman who is ever supposed to be the focus of  
attention at any public occasion is a kallah at her own wedding.  It would  not be 
right for some other woman to steal the limelight away from the  kallah.


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

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




**************New year...new news.  Be the first to know what is making 
headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081231/b9a819f8/attachment-0001.htm>

RJR
> You might find this article of interest
> http://media.www.yuobserver.com/media/storage/paper989/news/
> 2008/12/30/T
> houghtsOfStudentLeaders/Women.In.The.Framework.Of.Halakha-3581376.shtml
> My response was : Women/halacha - IMHO the general current YURabbinic
> thinking is that anything that seems to give a positive response to
> something that could be construed as feminist generated (or worse
> conservative generated), even if there are many women who want it for
> all the right reasons, will not be viewed positively (a la R' Moshe's
> Tshuva)
Several comments:

1) I have been at a wedding where the mesader kiddushin had impeccable
haredi credentials (both family, education and smicha, as well as
ongoing involvement and speaking at aguda functions), and the ketuba
was read by a woman (the bride had studied under her) - I don't think
this was the rabbi's optimal choice, but it was done without a
whimper.

2)About YU rabbinate - This seems an accurate description of RHS and
RM Willig - I am not sure whether it accurately reflects all of YU
rabbinic opinion (although don't know to the contrary - especially if
one limits oneself to the rashe yeshiva)

3) That, however,  is more  a reflection that both  RHS and RW Willig
(as well as others in their sphere of influence) are not MO in any
reasonable sense of the term as I understand it (see eg
http://www.jcpa.org/cjc/jl-383-helmreich.htm) - (not a personal
attack, but they are far closer to the hardal community than to the MO
community - being zioni and for torah uparnassa is not quite MO..) -
and this reflects their attitude towards women's issues, but also
multiple other issues.  This is the major tension in the MO community
today - as rabbinate of YU - the premier MO institution - are no
longer MO.

I would add that for many in the moderate MO community, the attitude
of opposition to anything that could be construed as feminist, rather
than focusing on the halachic issues, , is viewed as the
politicization of halacha - essentially the flip side of the more
egalitarian radicals, and equally as problematic - and undermines
their credibility  in setting any standards and limits (tafasta merube
lo tafasta..)

Meir Shinnar

BEST
TO OUR KNOWLEDGE:

R. Toby Katz wrote:

As
long as the Sefer Torah you are using is perfect to the best of your knowledge
and to the best of your ability, it is not pasul, you can make a bracha on it,
you can have an aliyah, you can read from the Torah.?? 

?

HB:
This may be true, but these mitzvas are only being fulfilled bidieved.? At the same time we cannot have both Yemenite
and our ST not to be passul.? Someone
obviously has a mistake (if not both).

?

DECEPTION
& ESSENCE:

RTK:?
No, we are not deceiving anyone. [to what HB wrote regarding saying Zot Hatorah
during Hagbah]

RTK:?
The statement "our Torah is the same as Moshe's" MEANS "the
essence is the same and the wording is as close to identical as human error
will allow over the course of thousands of years."

?

HB:? I was taught that Rambam No. 8 applies
specifically and independently to both TSBP and TSBictav.? To TSBP we say that the principles of the
Torah were given to Moshe Rabeinu (no problem here)? As far as TSBichtav,? people, children, Baalei Teshuvot, etc., are
taught that the Torah is EXACTLY the same, letter for letter,? as what Moshe Rabeinu had. (Aish Hatorah and
Kiruv organizations say it all the time --?
People do not know, and in many cases do not want to know about possible
discrepancies.)? Is this not Geneivas
Daas?

?

POSSIBLE
SOFER DISCLOSURE & ELIYAHU HANAVI:

RTK:?
It seems to you that there is a halacha -- or should be a halacha -- something
like this:??"A sofer?is halachically obligated to state,
when selling a sefer Torah, that slightly different texts exist and that until
Eliyahu Hanavi comes,?he cannot be 100% certain that the sefer
Torah?he has written is identical to Moshe Rabbeinu's sefer Torah down to
the last kutzo shel yud."??? (snip)

?.Why
do? you suppose there is no such halacha in the Shulchan Aruch or the
Mishna Berurah?

?

HB:

It
is my understanding that full disclosure on a sale is required in Halacha.
Whether it be a house (leaky pipes) car (faulty transmission) or whatever.? I would think that for sure this would apply
to Dvarim Kedoshim.? 

Tefillin
are sold by quality, so are Etrogim, and disclosures are made as to quality,
(etrogim from EY v. Yevanim; Tefillin: daka, klaf, sofer, etc., ARE
disclosed).? 

As
for the QUALITY of the MITZVAH being performed, many times we are told as to
what is necessary, what is minhag, what is mehudar, etc. Silver Chanukah
Menoras (recent discussions here); SA on Mehadrin, and Mehadrin min HameHadrin
re lighting the Chanukah Candles etc.

Why
should disclosure re: Selling a Sefer Torah be any Different?

People
have a right to know what they are spending their money on.? And why shouldn?t Soferim have the obligation
to tell them?

?

FALSE
BELIEFS:

RTK:
?To answer that question, you have to consider what alternative, false beliefs
Rambam was trying to counter with his formulation of "Ani ma'amin.

?

HB:
Does the fact that the Rambam and/or the author(s) of Zot Hatorah (Hagbah) may
have phrased their statements to battle anti-Torah beliefs (Karaites, xians,
Wellhausen, etc,) make those statements accurate, applicable and/or necessary
in our days?







? 


TORAH
AFTER MOSHIACH:

RTK:
? And all this angst is over a simple misunderstanding!? "Zos haTorah
lo sehei muchlefes" means "Our Torah will never be EXCHANGED for
another one."? The Christian claim of a 'New Testament' is false,
there is not and will not be a 'New Testament' -- nor will Hashem ever exchange
His Chosen People for some other People.

?

HB:
Possibly not true: There is discussion and meforshim that talk about possible
changes (IN ESSENCE) of the Torah after Moshiach comes.? Some say all the mitzvos will be batel, some
say chazer will be allowed to be eaten, some say all the Holiday
will be abolished except for Purim and Yom Kippur, etc. ??

(I
Googled Vayikra Rabbah 13:3, the top result lists many references, regarding
Kilayim, Niddah, Levyatan (not-kosher) etc.?
It is a Google Groups discussion list, and one person posted that Yoshka
is the Moshiach, nevertheless the many references listed there may be accurate
(I did not check them out).? http://groups.google.com/group/alt.messianic/browse_thread
/thread/656972509f978fba).

?

May
we find out soon and may EYisrael be SAFE !!!!!!

?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081231/cb8608c6/attachment-0001.htm>

Again I ask: Why would someone think that the Rambam was thinking of the
text of the Torah? Part of the 8th ikkar (tr R Eliezer C Abramason
<http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker/13yesodos.html> - thanks RJJB!):
> All this is also true for the explanation of the Torah, which was also
> received from the mouth of the Almighty [the Oral Torah]. The manner in
> which we today make the Sukkah, Lulav, Shofar, Tzitzis, Tefillin, and
> other items is precisely the manner that God, blessed be He, instructed
> Moshe, who then instructed us and Moshe was reliable in relating [God's
> word].

Clearly the Rambam in this ikkar means semantics, not syntax. Now,
changes in the text that change meaning would be included, but not
spelling differences that do not impact even translation. Otherwise,
how would TSBP be part of the same ikkar?

His definition of a denying is:
> One who says that verses and stories like these ["uvnei Cham..." "vesheim
> ishto Meheitaveil", etc... are quoted in the previous line -mi] were
> written by Moshe out of his own mind, behold! He is considered by our
> Sages and Prophets as a heretic and a perverter of the Torah...

> In truth, however, every word of the Torah has within it wisdom and
> wonders for one who can understand them...

Words, verses and stories, not spelling.

But then, that's a dyslexic's take on the subject. <g>

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

RTK:  All your questions stem from one misconception.  As Rambam formulated
it, we say "Ani ma'amin be'emunah sheleimah shekol haTorah hametzuyah atah
veyadeinu hee hanesunah leMoshe Rabbeinu alav hashalom."  You understand
that to mean, "The Sefer Torah we have today is EXACTLY the same, word for
word and letter for letter, as the one that was given to Moshe Rabbeinu.
Not one single mistake has EVER crept in or will ever creep in or can ever
creep in.  No sofer in history ever has copied a single letter wrong or ever
will, and every sefer Torah in the world is EXACTLY the same as the one that
Moshe Rabeinu received."

RMB:  Clearly the Rambam in this ikkar means semantics, not syntax. Now,
changes in the text that change meaning would be included, but not
spelling differences that do not impact even translation. Otherwise,
how would TSBP be part of the same ikkar?


JA: I think there may be a fundemental misunderstanding of the Rambam here,
which needs to be clarified.  However you understand the 8th ikkar broadly,
as being about general concepts, meaning,"semantics," in RMB's words.  It is
also explicitly about syntax (and not just syntax, but morphology as well,)
The Rambam's formulation of the ikkarim is in his first comment on the 10th
chapter of Sanhedrin in his Mishnah after the introduction.  (The ani
ma'amin which RTK so carefully parsed is a later reformulation, not the
Rambam's language at all.)  In it he says explictly (this is my translation
of R. Kapach's translation of the original Arabic, the emphasis), "EACH
LETTER which is in it has wisdom and wonders beyond words to whomsoever God
gives understanding..."  It is clear that he means this to include spelling
in the recieved Torah text, because he also paskins this way in Mishnah
Torah.  In hilkhot Sefer Torah chapter 7 halakha 11 he specifically says
that plene and defective spellings (Maleh and Chaser) pasul a Sefer Torah.
For the Rambam, the Torah text of the Ben Asher Sefer Torah IS the EXACT
Torah Moshe brought down from sinai, including spellings, and all other
versions are simply wrong, and are pasul for that reason.

The truth is, this is a makhlokes Rishonim, which made it into the Shulchan
Arukh.  The Rema mentioned earlier in the conversation follows the standard
Ashkenazi view that we don't know plene and defective spellings, and so we
do the best we can.  The Mechaber, in the same siman, follows the Rambam.
I'm not really sure how to reconcile the Rambam with the empirical evidence
that mistakes have crept into the transmission of the Torah text since
Sinai, but I think it is clear that he believes that they have not, or
rather, that Ben Asher reflects an unmistaken text, even if other texts do
have mistakes.

   Jesse Abelman
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081231/a0aa1d8d/attachment-0001.htm>

--- On Wed, 12/31/08, T6...@aol.com <T6...@aol.com> wrote:



From: "Eli Turkel" elitur...@gmail.com

any problem with a woman reading a ketuba at a wedding?



>>>>>
?
Yes, there are several problems.? One is that it will make people laugh,
stare, whisper and poke each other in the ribs, taking away from the
solemnity of the wedding ceremony.? Another problem is that if the bride
herself was never given a speaking role in her own wedding -- presumably
out of concern for the modesty and bashfulness of a young maiden, having to
speak up in front of all those people -- it would be unseemly for some
/other/ woman to have a speaking part.? The only woman who is ever supposed
to be the focus of attention at any public occasion is a kallah at her own
wedding.? It would not be right for some other woman to?steal the limelight
away from the kallah.
=================
?
It does not have to be the case that a woman reading a Kesubah under the
Chupah is stealing the show (or to put it the way you did - be the focus of
attention). No more than a famous RY might. If modesty is an issue then a
prominent Rav should turn down a Kibud for that reason too. 
?
If by modesty you mean Tznius - again, what is untzniusdik about a modestly dressed woman reading a marriage contract? It's just that were not used to it.
?
If R' Moshe were alive and at the wedding of your child - would you deny
him a Kibud becuase?it will focus attention away from the Kallah? And if
you should answer thatr it is a Kavod to the Kallah to give RMF a Kibud, is
it any less of a Kavod to the Kalla to give Nechama Leibovitz a Kibud
becuase she is a woman? You would consider that unseemly?
?
I have been?discussing this issue on my blog today. And so far?there?have
been?some excellent comments made as to why - or why not - this might be
problematic. 
?
HM

Want Emes and Emunah in your life? 

Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/




      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20081231/9cc198d0/attachment-0001.htm>

> Yes, there are several problems.  One is that it will make people laugh,
> stare, whisper and poke each other in the ribs, taking away from the
> solemnity of the wedding ceremony.  Another problem is that if the bride
> herself was never given a speaking role in her own wedding -- presumably out
> of concern for the modesty and bashfulness of a young maiden, having to
> speak up in front of all those people -- it would be unseemly for some
> /other/ woman to have a speaking part.  The only woman who is ever supposed
> to be the focus of attention at any public occasion is a kallah at her own
> wedding.  It would not be right for some other woman to steal the limelight
> away from the kallah.
>

I found this very strange as it was the Kallah's idea. In any case the
chatan and kallah
both spoke beautifully under the chupah thanking G-d for everything they have.
I did not detect any special noises ot other inattention during the
reading of the ketuva and
everything went very smoothly.
The chuppah ended at the request of the chatan and kallah with the
prayer for the safety
of the Israeli soldiers (wedding was in Jerusalem)



-- 
Eli Turkel

In Avodah Digest V25#431 (yes, I'm way behind, but I checked newer digests'
respective ToCs and only saw the FWD of RSM [bcc:ed]'s thoughts), RSBA
asked:
> I have always said and heard it as NAASEH (with a segol). I took a bit of
survey - and that is how nearly everyone sings it....is this a
charedi/chassidish common error, or do others also say it thus? <
The word has always been sung in KAJ and in my current and past homes w/ a
qamatz.  (BTW, KAJ and my family [and, presumably, some others] sang/sing a
certain other word differently than it's apparently recorded in most of
today's contemporary printings: we say "kalah" [in the 2nd stanza], you say
"kilah," and that what makes the world go 'round :) [especially as both
pronunciations are meaningful, albeit different].)

> So why isn't 'Chashmanim'  also with a kometz? (Presumably 'kankanim'
with a
pasach is OK.). <
See T'hilim 68:32.  Methinks the real Q is whether to say "hash'manim" with
a patach (to match "Chashmanim") or with a qamatz (as per proper diqduq)
;-) (guess what we, and KAJ, do).   (Yes, "qanqanim" is w/ a
pasach[-pasach-chiriq].)

A guten Shabbes and all the best from
--Michael Poppers via RIM pager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20081231/23f640dd/attachment.htm>

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


Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 440
***************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

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..."