Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 5

Wed, 07 Jan 2009

• 1. Re: A Prayer During Operation Cast Lead (T6...@aol.com)
• 2. slippery slope (Eli Turkel)
• 3. Re: A Prayer During Operation Cast Lead (Yitzhak Grossman)
• 4. Re: A Prayer During Operation Cast Lead (Micha Berger)
• 5. Dream Interpretations (M Cohen)
• 6. Forgiveness, Shalom. Yoesf and his Brothers (Meir Rabi)
• 7. Re: al Hanissim (was "Re: 'Al Hanisim") (Michael Poppers)
• 8. Re: If I knew Him.... (T6...@aol.com)
• 9. Re: A Prayer During Operation Cast Lead (Zev Sero)
• 10. Re: al Hanissim (was "Re: 'Al Hanisim") (Elazar M. Teitz)
• 11. Re: Your Father Instructed that You Must Forgive Us (Zev Sero)
• 12. Re: A Prayer During Operation Cast Lead (Simon Montagu)
• 13. Mekor for Shabbas Sheva Brachos preparation (I. Balbin)
• 14. One size fits all? (I. Balbin)
• 15. Re: If I knew Him.... (Zev Sero)
• 16. Re: A Prayer During Operation Cast Lead (Micha Berger)
• 17. Re: A Prayer During Operation Cast Lead (Zev Sero)
• 18. Re: A Prayer During Operation Cast Lead (Micha Berger)
• 19. A MINOR FAST WITH MAJOR CHORDS (Cantor Wolberg)

From: Noah Witty _nwitty@optonline.net_ (mailto:nwi...@optonline.net) 
(BTW, would  someone be kind enough to articulate the argument for not 
using Masorti  tefilla, e.g. if you don't like the reference to 
'Imma-hoat, skip it.
2nd  BTW: Their website URL is deceiving (intentionally or not) since 
Yeshivat  Har Etzion has a VBM and these people are BMV.)

Noach  Witty
 
 
>>>>
Same as using a sefer Torah written by minim.
 


--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/20090107/f86f2202/attachment-0001.htm>

We have discussed recently the concept of the slippery slope.
I still am confused if the objection to any change in halacha due to
changed circumstances or just to those with a preceived femimist
motivation.

As many have pointed out halacha constantly changes with circumstances.
A famous case is Chanukah candles. Where once they were lit outside
to publicize the miracle in Europe they were lit inside for safety reasons.
Then it was paskened that one can light candles all night since in any case
pedestrians can no longer see the lights. Also two entrances no longer need
separate candles since we dont care about outsiders.
In fact the halacha that one lights by the door with the mezuza on one side
and the menoah on the other side had less meaning since most doors
no longer had mezuzot again for safety reasons. This led to different customs
as to the order/direction of lighting the candles.

It is interesting to note that I have seen opinions that someone on an
upper floor should not light on the ground floor since that changes
the custom of
lighting inside!!! i.e. we dont abandon a custom of the last 1000
years for that of chazal

It is well known that on Yom Tov one can do certain melachot if they bring
benefit as long as the benefit is "universal". However,
things that were not
universal in the past are not almost universal, a typical example
being taking a hot shower. If the halacha changes is then debated

If slippery slope applies only to ";feminist" changes then we start
analyzing the motives of people. Many women have objected strongly that
their motives are to increase and display their
spirituality and not for feminist reasons. It is easy to attack the
motives of others with whom one disagrees implying all sort of sinister motives
without any proof concerning the individual in question.
Now changes in halacha become more of a political issue than the halachic
poretz geder which seems to apply more to people who are conscientiously
going against halakha such as not keeping yom tov sheni of galut

-- 
Eli Turkel

On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 12:10:41 EST
T6...@aol.com wrote:

>> From: Noah Witty _nwitty@optonline.net_ (mailto:nwi...@optonline.net) 
>> (BTW, would  someone be kind enough to articulate the argument for not 
>> using Masorti  tefilla, e.g. if you don't like the reference to 
>> 'Imma-hoat, skip it.

> Noach  Witty

> Same as using a sefer Torah written by minim.

It is not.  Without taking a position on the actual issue of the
utilization of Masorati prayers, this is a flawed analogy; we burn a
Sefer Torah written by a Min since Halachah assumes that it has
certainly been written "Leshem Avodas Kochavim" (Rashi Gittin 45b s.v.
yi'saref, Maggid Mishneh Tefillin 1:13, Taz YD 281:1 and Shach YD
281:1). Masorati are not ovdei avodah zarah any more than Muslims are.

> --Toby  Katz

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - http://bdl.freehostia.com
A discussion of Hoshen Mishpat, Even Ha'Ezer and other matters

On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 03:06:29PM -0500, Yitzhak Grossman wrote:
: It is not.  Without taking a position on the actual issue of the
: utilization of Masorati prayers, this is a flawed analogy; we burn a
: Sefer Torah written by a Min since Halachah assumes that it has
: certainly been written "Leshem Avodas Kochavim" (Rashi Gittin 45b s.v.
: yi'saref, Maggid Mishneh Tefillin 1:13, Taz YD 281:1 and Shach YD
: 281:1). Masorati are not ovdei avodah zarah any more than Muslims are.

Never mind Muslims....

R' Elyashiv was asked about the permissability of 12 Step programs
(Alcoholics Anonymous and the like). Among the questions asked is the
use of the Paternoster ("Our Father Who art in heaven..."), a Notzri
prayer. Issues of trinitarianism, etc...

RYSE was matir saying it! Admittedly, the context may have been given
motivation lehaqeil

(Speaking of context: I am curious whether RYSE knew that he was not only
speaking of people at or hovering near piquach nefesh when he allowed
such programs (not speaking of any prayers for the moment). Members
of Overeaters Anonymous who are far from the "risking heart failure"
stage rely on his heter of 12 Step as well.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Live as if you were living already for the
mi...@aishdas.org        second time and as if you had acted the first
http://www.aishdas.org   time as wrongly as you are about to act now!
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning

R Dessler has a long arichus on dreams and dream interpretation. ayin sham.

In the footnotes, the editor (R Carmell) says that R Dessler spent much
effort
on interpreting his own dreams.

After reading this many yrs ago, I began wondering if I should do the same.

..I send the question to R Wolbe z'l

He told me that many years earlier he (R Wolbe) had the same question wrt
a series of dreams that he had.

He went to the Chazon Ish to discuss the matter, who told him
that he should ignore the dreams, because nowadays there 
we are not on the level to interpret the msgs of our dreams
(or that the dreams do not contain msgs that we can interpret)

regards,
mordechai cohen

Zev Sero wrote:

 

It doesn't matter that the bros of Yosef were forcing Y to forgive them
through a fabricated message that YaAkov had left a final wish to that
effect.  So long as Yosef continues to act as if he forgave them, and
doesn't kill them all, now that Yaacov is safely dead (as Esav had planned
to do to Yaacov), they don't care whether he truly forgives them.

 

R' Zev, I think that three important points must be noted: Firstly, (and
this applies also to R Micha's comment - they despaired of being forgiven,
and were willing to settle for saving their lives) they could not have had a
serious thought that Yosef would kill them since their lie in that case
would not be Mipney HaShalom, as the Gemara says but more simply for PiKuAch
Nefesh.

 

Secondly, it would be a perversion for the Gemara to prove that one may lie
for peace when in fact they should have pursued the proper option of
mollifying Yosef. Certainly they knew they had sinned, they said so
themselves, Yosef might pay us back for all the evil we did to him
[Bereishis 50:15]

 

Thirdly, one can hardly permit lying under the pretext of Shalom when in
fact your only real concern is your own comfort. Dare anyone suggest that
the brothers lied just to ensure that they retain their privileges and
luxuries from Yosef's purse? And along similar considerations, I believe
that the last comment, 'they [the bros] don't care whether he [Yosef] truly
forgives them' is not well crafted.

 

 

Meir Rabi

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090108/38e105d9/attachment-0001.htm>

In Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 434, REMT responded to RZS, who had 
responded to RJJB:
>>> Baer notes that almost all old siddurim, both Ashkenazic and Sphardic, 
don't use V'al, but Al.  He notes that even those few commentators (Mateh 
Moshe and a couple of others) who add the Vav only do so in Benching, 
where there is a string of V'als.  In Shmoneh Esreh, though, the string of 
V'als is broken by Hatov ki lo calu rachamecha vehamerachem ki lo tamu 
chasadecha. <<<
>> Then whence the continuation "ve'al kulam"? <<
> Probably because unlike Al Hanissim, "v'al kullam" refers explicitly to 
the string of v'als in Modim, and is thus a continuation thereof. <
While (I'm emphasizing the parallels...) "v'al hakol *H' Elokeinu anachnu 
modim* lach" does _not_ refer to the string of "v'al"s in "*Nodeh l'cha H' 
Elokeinu* al..."?!

My tuppence is that one can't change "Al haNissim" to "V'al haNissim" 
based on the "v'al [kulam/hakol]" which follows when we see that other 
insertions, e.g. "R'tzei," do not begin with a vav (e.g. "Urtzei"), but I 
hear RZS' question on what RJJB quoted as a rationale for saying "V'al 
haNissim" in Bircas haMazon and "Al haNissim" in the Amidah.  I would 
argue for consistency :), and the consistent "Al haNissim" in the siddurim 
of Rav Amram Gaon, RaMBaM, etc. is hard to argue with.

All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ, USA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090107/c0d1840a/attachment-0001.htm>

 
From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: [Avodah]  Your Father Instructed that You Must Forgive Us



quoted by Rabbi  Jonathan Sacks:

"If I could know G-d,"
said one sage, "I would  be G-d."

>>>>>

Who was the sage?  Does anyone know?
 
I have heard it as "Ilu yadativ, hayisiv" -- "if I knew Him, I would be  Him."
Is that correct, and where does it come from?
 

--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/20090107/6d029911/attachment-0001.htm>

Micha Berger wrote:

> R' Elyashiv was asked about the permissability of 12 Step programs
> (Alcoholics Anonymous and the like). Among the questions asked is the
> use of the Paternoster ("Our Father Who art in heaven..."), a Notzri
> prayer. Issues of trinitarianism, etc...

I don't see any issues with their lord's prayer, except its associations.
As far as I can tell there's nothing in it with which we would disagree,
let alone see as treif.  The worst that I can say about it is that it's
been associated with AZ for so long that the words may have absorbed some
tum'ah, or have become hateful to Hashem like a matzeivah.  But if someone
who didn't know its origins were to see it I don't think they'd find
anything to object to.

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

R. Jonathan Baker:

<<<< Baer notes that almost all old siddurim, both Ashkenazic
and Sphardic, don't use V'al, but Al.  He notes that even those few
commentators (Mateh Moshe and a couple of others) who add the Vav only do
so in Benching, where there is a string of V'als.  In Shmoneh Esreh,
though, the string of V'als is broken b Hatov ki lo calu rachamecha
vehamerachem ki lo tamu chasadecha.>>>>

R. Zev Sero:

<<<Then whence the continuation "ve'al kulam"?>>>

EMT:

<<Probably because unlike Al Hanissim, "v'al kullam" refers explicitly to the string of v'als in Modim, and is thus a continuation thereof.>>

R. Michael Poppers:
 
<While (I'm emphasizing the parallels...) "v'al hakol *H' Elokeinu
anachnu modim* lach" does _not_ refer to the string of "v'al"s in "*Nodeh
l'cha H' Elokeinu* al..."?! 

     I don't understand your point.  The claim was made that "al hanissim
     is sans vav because it is interrupted from the preceding list of
     "v'al"s by the phrase "hatov ki lo chalu."  I was attempting to give
     an explanation for the appearance of the vav in "v'al kulam," despite
     its following that same interruption -- because it refers back to what
     was listed before the interruption.  Birkas Hamazon, on the other
     hand, has no interruption, so that the vav could reasonably appear in
     both "v'al hanissim" and "v'al hakol."  

     (That's just a l'shittasam.  The minhag of most practitioners of Nusach Ashk'naz, including our kehilla, is to say "al hanissim" in both locations.)

RMP:

My tuppence is that one can't change "Al haNissim" to "V'al haNissim" based
on the "v'al [kulam/hakol]" which follows when we see that other
insertions, e.g. "R'tzei," do not begin with a vav (e.g. "Urtzei"), but I
hear RZS' question on what RJJB quoted as a rationale for saying "V'al
haNissim" in Bircas haMazon and "Al haNissim" in the Amidah.  I would argue
for consistency :), and the consistent "Al haNissim" in the siddurim of Rav
Amram Gaon, RaMBaM, etc. is hard to argue with.>

     While I agree with the maskana, the example of "r'tzei," I believe, is
     not comparable.  "Al hanissim" refers to the statement of "Modim
     anachnu" or "Nodeh l'cha."  By itself, it makes no sense. We can say
     that we thank Hashem for the nissim and the purkan, but the statement
     "for the nissim and for the purkan," without reference to hoda'ah, is
     meaningless. Since it is a continuation, one can question why there is
     no "and." "R'tzei," on the other hand, is completely independent of
     the paragraph which precedes it, so there is no call for a vav
     hachibbur.

EMT

____________________________________________________________
Take a break - you deserve it.  Click here to find a great vacation.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/
PnY6rw2gGU5GiMoA1y7MaRXNL6KgSt6MtsGM38p35dRao5z7n5Qsa/

On the same topic (Yosef and his brothers):  What was the big revelation
with "aval ashemim anachnu"?  Why did it take until that moment for them
to realise that they'd done wrong?  Malbim explains that until then they
had regarded the accusation of being spies as so bizarre that it couldn't
be taken seriously.  The Egyptian must be stam a rasha an antisemite, and
is making things up against them at random.  So why should they learn
anything from it?  But then the Egyptian comes and tells them that he
fears Hashem and doesn't want to punish innocent people, and tries to offer
them opportunities to prove their innocence, if indeed they are innocent.

That's when they realise that he actually thinks they're spies!  He's not
trying to get them, it's not some sort of libel, he really believes it.
It's like finding an honest well-meaning Xian who honestly believes that
Jews drink Xian blood, and so he has to protect his children from us.
But how could a sane and decent person come up with such a bizarre notion?
That must be from Above.  And so they realised that if they were being
punished in a way that questioned their brotherhood, it must be for
something they'd done wrong with their brother.  So they decided that even
though (as they then thought) their brother had deserved to be killed, they
should have had mercy on him and listened to his pleas.


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

On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:
> R' Elyashiv was asked about the permissability of 12 Step programs
> (Alcoholics Anonymous and the like). Among the questions asked is the
> use of the Paternoster ("Our Father Who art in heaven..."), a Notzri
> prayer. Issues of trinitarianism, etc...
>
> RYSE was matir saying it! Admittedly, the context may have been given
> motivation lehaqeil

Is this the prayer as written in the NT, or as it appears in Xian
prayer books? The original text is not trinitarian, but IIRC there is
an extra line usually added at the end which very much is ("in the
name of ...")

I am wondering if anyone has seen a Mekor that this one (I presume  
Shabbos Lunch) is done by the mother of the bride.
I do know that it is done in some circles.

PS. If anyone has a direct personal email or fax number for RHS, I  
would appreciate it if they could email this to me.

I am being a little lazy here. I could look in various Tshuvos,  
including Bnei Banim etc
At a wedding, IF it is decided that there will be a Mechitza then I  
would expect that there ought to be two dinim/hanhogos
therein. For the "dance floor" one would expect a Mechitza that was  
dense enough and high enough to prevent
Histaklus, as per one loshen of the Rambam, with the aim being to  
prevent men being able to see women
dancing. What about the other component, where people are sitting. Is  
there an Inyan of Histaklus here as well
because presumably the main reason is a) Shesimcha BIMONO b) prevent  
Hisarvus
Yes, I am aware of Deyos that say say you don't need one etc, and I am  
not at all saying that you do.
Rather, I am asking, according to those who say that you do need one  
for this component, is the Mehus of the
Mechitzah requirement different for those two sections of a hall  
(assume all are seated in one hall)
Would, for example, there be able to be gaps of a maximum size between  
(say) pot plants, and would the height of those
pot plants be able to be theoretically lower than the dance floor  
section.

I have noticed that when it comes to "finger food" or "smorgasbord"  
prior to the Seuda proper, people who do have
a Mechitza seemingly rely on no Mechitza and/or men/women being on  
either side of a room. Is that a din of Hisarvus (mixing) that they  
are "meikel" on (because inside the room they do have a Mechitza)

T6...@aol.com wrote:

> Who was the sage?  Does anyone know?
>  
> I have heard it as "Ilu yadativ, hayisiv" -- "if I knew Him, I would be 
> Him."  Is that correct, and where does it come from?

This page <http://www.kipa.co.il/bikorim/show_art.asp?id=33582> sources
it to Sefer Ha'ikarim, maamar 2, chapter 30.

I've heard it sourced to the Rambam, but not to any specific place, so
this seems more plausible.

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

On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 04:02:28PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
: I don't see any issues with their lord's prayer, except its associations.
: As far as I can tell there's nothing in it with which we would disagree,
: let alone see as treif.  The worst that I can say about it is that it's
: been associated with AZ for so long that the words may have absorbed some
: tum'ah...

AZ includes worshipping the Borei with their rituals. Derekh Emori.
Etc...

RZS, though, reinforces my point that if RYSE can hold (even if it is,
as I suspect, because of the special context) a Notzri prayer can be
reused, al achas kamah vekamah a Mesorti one (that contains nothing
objectionable).

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Life is complex.
mi...@aishdas.org                Decisions are complex.
http://www.aishdas.org               The Torah is complex.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                                - R' Binyamin Hecht

Simon Montagu wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:

>> R' Elyashiv was asked about the permissability of 12 Step programs
>> (Alcoholics Anonymous and the like). Among the questions asked is the
>> use of the Paternoster ("Our Father Who art in heaven..."), a Notzri
>> prayer. Issues of trinitarianism, etc...
>>
>> RYSE was matir saying it! Admittedly, the context may have been given
>> motivation lehaqeil
> 
> Is this the prayer as written in the NT, or as it appears in Xian
> prayer books? The original text is not trinitarian, but IIRC there is
> an extra line usually added at the end which very much is ("in the
> name of ...")

Not in any version I've ever heard of (not that I'm an expert in such
things).  And the WP article doesn't mention it.  The only chiluk
nuschaot WP mentions is that RCs leave out the last line (the one that's
based on "lecha H' hagedulah...").

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

On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 04:51:51PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
: Not in any version I've ever heard of (not that I'm an expert in such
: things).  And the WP article doesn't mention it.  The only chiluk
: nuschaot WP mentions is that RCs leave out the last line (the one that's
: based on "lecha H' hagedulah...").

I'm not sure why the moderation is letting this conversation pass,
but...

In R' de Sola Pool's monograph on Qaddish, he discusses Qaddish
and lehavdil the Paternoster as having a common ancestry. See
http://ia360907.us.archive.org/1/items/kaddishk00poolrich/k
addishk00poolrich_bw.pdf
or http://kitzur.com/a7r0 , appendix D (pp 111-112). In it he quotes people
I never heard of who speak of the prayer's Jewish roots. (And that it
must have been Aramaic originally.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When faced, with a decision, ask yourself,
mi...@aishdas.org        "How would I decide if it were Ne'ilah now,
http://www.aishdas.org   at the closing moments of Yom Kippur?"
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

Apparently, the tenth of  Tevet  is  "the  Day of God" about which  
many prophets spoke  --  the tenth  day of the tenth month. The number  
ten in  kabala is  related  to  the  sefira of malkhut  (kingship),   
and therefore,  the very essence of the day is appropriate  to the   
theme of God's kingship.

Chazal  teach  that  at midnight a north wind would blow, rousing King  
David from his  sleep  to serve his Creator. It is in the middle of  
the night, specifically in the depths of the darkest part of the  
night, that the sovereignty of Israel awakens, and the kingship of God  
is revealed in the world.

At this time more than ever we pray:  May the Kingship of the Almighty  
finally rule all mankind thus fulfilling the vision of the prophets:
"Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall men  
learn war anymore; for all men, both great and small shall know the  
Lord."

AMEN
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20090107/883e1ccd/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 5
*************************************

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..."