Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 26

Tue, 03 Feb 2009

• 1. Sewing on Motzai Shabbat - source (Danny Schoemann) (Rabbi Ari Enkin)
• 2. women, melacha on motzash (Shlomo Pick)
• 3. Re: Early morning minyan (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 4. Ta'aroves of yayn mevushal (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 5. Re: [Areivim] Mezuzah in Space (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 6. Ga-ahl Yisroel and Chazarat Hashatz. (rebshr...@aol.com)
• 7. Re: tehillim at night (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 8. Re: Our Attitude towards Segulos (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 9. Re: [Areivim] Mezuzah in Space (Simon Montagu)
• 10. Re: [Areivim] Mezuzah in Space (Micha Berger)
• 11. primitive concepts and missing letters (David Riceman)
• 12. Re: Sewing on Motzai Shabbat - source (Ilana Sober Elzufon)
• 13. Re: primitive concepts and missing letters (rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com)
• 14. Re: primitive concepts and missing letters (Micha Berger)
• 15. Re: Early morning minyan (D&E-H Bannett)
• 16. Objective p'sak (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 17. Re: shatz saying things out loud a.k.a silent ga'al Yisrael (D&E-H Bannett)

From my upcoming sefer.......
 
...and still a few copies left of my first sefer "Dalet Amot"!
 
Ari Enkin
********************************* 
There is some discussion in halachic literature of a custom for women not
to perform certain labors on Motzaei Shabbat, such as sewing and
knitting.[1] The origin of this custom is related to the legend that when
Mashiach comes there will no longer be a need to sew clothes. As there is
an increased potential for Mashiach to arrive on a Motzaei Shabbat, the
custom of refraining from sewing on Motzaei Shabbat evolved accordingly.
Other authorities argue there is no such custom for women not to do certian
forms of work on motzaei Shabbat, at least not one which is based in any
classical sources, and women are free to dismiss the custom should they so
desire.[2]
 
Closely related to the custom of not sewing on motzaei Shabbat is the
tradition that when the Jewish people left Egypt they brought no sewing or
clothing manufacturing utensils with them.[3] Instead, the clothes they
were wearing upon their departure from Egypt miraculously remianed fresh
and clean and even grew with them as their clothing sizes changed.[4]
Indeed, included in this Divine tailoring service was deodorant and
anti-perspirant for all the hot days in the desert. As such, in a gesture
of longing and awaiting future days, the ladies of certain communities
accepted upon themselves to refrain from sewing and similar activities at
the conclusion of Shabbat. Indeed, Motzaei Shabbat is a popular time for a
number of rituals, prayers, and spiritual practices related to the coming
of Mashiach.
 
 
 




[1] Magen Avraham O.C. 299

[2] Rivevot Ephraim 2:107

[3] Shir Hashirim Rabba 4

[4] Ibn Ezra; Devarim 8 Rabbi Ari Enkin Ramat Beit Shemesh, Israel Cell: 011 972 52 579 1773 / Res: 011 972 2 992 0241
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090201/f1a2ed2e/attachment-0001.htm>

Source and discussion in Halichot bat Yisrael, p. 230 and fn. 241 (Hebrew
edition). Source is at the end of abudraham's chapter on motzei Shabbat.
Magen avraham discusses it on 299:15. note aruch hashulchan 299:21 who never
heard of the custom and MB doesn't mention yet, and yet many women do not
sew on motzash

shlomo

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090201/f61f18bc/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Micha Berger asked:
> Shabbos morning, the Chazan will start at "Shochein Ad". How
> is the berakhah hasumekhah lechavertah nature of Yishtabach
> preserved? (Why doesn't this necessitate adding a "Baruch
> atah..." to the front of it?)

It seems to me that the berakhah hasumekhah lechavertah nature of
Yishtabach is preserved, because he did say Baruch She'amar a few minutes
ago, without any hefsek serious enough to disconnect them. Granted that the
Baruch She'amar was said quietly and privately, while the Yishtabach will
be said aloud and publicly, but I don't see why that would be relevant to
berakhah hasumekhah lechavertah.

Or are you suggesting that the Baruch She'amar needs to have been aloud because he is being motzi someone?

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Click to get your online credit check report & score.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/fc/
PnY6rbuoGuWUXCpp9DEiya9XMiS3thjtbA18oGdzU4rc12pQl87tI/

Scenario:

I open a bottle of nonmevushal wine.

Q: in order to avoid contamination by a non-Jew may I mix in mevushal wine?  Or must I mevashel the original wine by itself?

(Note:  This is not a trick question.  - I have a Gentile housekeeper.)


Kt rrw


Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

(On Areivim:)
> On Thu, January 29, 2009 10:18 pm, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
> : http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1059409.html

R' MB: 
> Are the concepts of mezuzos and mashkof well defined without gravity
> defining a "down"?

Well, I think we had better get some clarification on this before we send
the first Israeli spaceship up. :-) Can an artificial gravity (caused, say,
by a rotating spacecraft) make "down" and "up?" Alternatively, AIUI, a
spacecraft that is orbiting a planet is still under the influence of that
planet's gravitational pull, even if weightlessness reigns inside. Maybe
"Down" in that case would be towards the planet it is orbiting.

KT,
MYG

In terms of Ga-ahl Yisroel, the Rav (RYDB) required us to say it with the
Shaliach Tzibbur, but the question arises L'maaseh, if one for whatever
reason doesn't and pauses before starting the Amidah.?? It is true that one
should be going directly into the Amidah from Yisroel without stopping; but
what if one doesn't??? Theoretically the question should be irrelevant, but
because we are not Malachay Hashareit, practically the problem does arise.

As far as coming to Doven late and saying the Amidah with the Shatz, the
Rav required us to do so rather than?rely on the Chazarat Hashatz.? Our
primary obligation is to fulfill the Mitzvah of Tefilah through our
personal prayer.? The Chazarat Hashatz is a communal?obligation?which I may
"witness" if I am able to, but my personal obligation comes first;??Rabbi
Zeigler? does say in his book, however,?that the Rav felt that one should
not?stop dovening his own personal Amidah at the Kedushah of ther Shatz in
order to answer silently, but rather keep dovening.?? That piece I did not
hear directly from the Rav or notice it in practice, but did doven?after
Shiur with the Rav and in the Heichah Kedushah, after having said each word
with the Shaliach Tzibbur, did answer to his Kedushah.?? Of course in that
case since everyone was saying the Amidah with the Shatz there was to be no
Chazarat Hashatz (Tefilat Hatzibur), and if we just continued dovening the
Amidah, no one would have be
 en answering to the Kedushah of the Shaliach Tzibbur.

Kol Tov, 

Stu Grant
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090201/8886b7dd/attachment-0001.htm>

MYG:
> > I always thought that the Gemara towards the top of Berachos 4b was a
> > pretty decent R'ayah that one may learn Torah Sheb'ksav at night...
R' Eli Turkel: 
> The gemara is talking about before maariv when it is still bein hashmashot

The Gemara says "Erev" which, Pashtus, mean after Bein Hashmashos - see the discussion on Daf 2a-b.

KT,
MYG

R' Akiva Miller:
> (Disclosure: I'm actually uncertain about this. It is possible that HaShem
> does indeed change things as time goes on. It is possible that a hundred
> years ago, an electron truly was the smallest object, and that HaShem did
> not introduce quarks until later. But that's a discussion for another
> thread.)

Isn't there some sort of assumption that everything that will be was
created in Sheishes Yemei Bereishis? Otherwise why did those things
mentioned in Avos (like Pi Ha'ason) need to be created then? Why couldn't
they be created as necessary?

<SNIP>
> I'll close with two examples of laws which AFAIK are still in the nistar
> category: Leaving a sefer open causes forgetfulness, and a woman walking
> on fingernails causes a miscarriage. (If you don't like those for any
> reason, feel free to substitute the red rotel or your favorite bubba
> maaseh.)

You are conflating the Red Ribbin and Chai Rotel. :-)

KT,
MYG

On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Moshe Y. Gluck <mgl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> (On Areivim:)
> > On Thu, January 29, 2009 10:18 pm, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
> > : http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1059409.html
>
> R' MB:
> > Are the concepts of mezuzos and mashkof well defined without gravity
> > defining a "down"?
>
> Well, I think we had better get some clarification on this before we send
> the first Israeli spaceship up. :-) Can an artificial gravity (caused, say,
> by a rotating spacecraft) make "down" and "up?" Alternatively, AIUI, a
> spacecraft that is orbiting a planet is still under the influence of that
> planet's gravitational pull, even if weightlessness reigns inside. Maybe
> "Down" in that case would be towards the planet it is orbiting.
>

IMHO "down" and "up" in this context should be correlated to the relative
position of one's head and body when entering the room, not gravitational
pull as such.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090202/0ff267d1/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 5:01am PST, R Simon Montagu wrote:
: IMHO "down" and "up" in this context should be correlated to the relative
: position of one's head and body when entering the room, not gravitational
: pull as such.

That would parallel how we define which side of the doorway is "right",
on the right side when one enters -- based on how the doorway is
generally used.

In which case, it's not a doorway, it's a trapdoor. Generally astronauts
swim through them, head first. (The international space station isn't
spun to proceduce a centrapetal force to imitate a local gravity.)

To back off from my original statement bit, R' Chaim Davis noted that
it may be years before any "room" in space is dalet-al-dalet anyway.
So much for it being lemaaseh...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A sick person never rejects a healing procedure
mi...@aishdas.org        as "unbefitting." Why, then, do we care what
http://www.aishdas.org   other people think when dealing with spiritual
Fax: (270) 514-1507      matters?              - Rav Yisrael Salanter

Two questions:
  1.  In logic a primitive concept is one which is used to explain other 
concepts, but which is not explained by them.  Is anyone familiar with a 
list of primitive concepts in aggada?

  2.  Over Shabbos I was reading something by the Rokeah (the rishon, 
not the aharon) where he is doreish psukim based on which letter fails 
to appear in them.  I am aware that the Zohar does this, but as far as I 
know the Rokeah never saw  the Zohar.  Is there any precedent in Hazal 
for this?

Thanks,

David Riceman

RDS:
>
> I recently discovered that my wife doesn't sew on Motzai Shabbes.....I was
> wondering what the source of this minhag would be.
>

Wild guess, somewhat tongue in cheek: There is enough work to do on Motza'ei
Shabbat cleaning up from Shabbat - who has time to sew!?
- Ilana
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090201/d33d6615/attachment-0001.htm>

> 2.  Over Shabbos I was reading something by the Rokeah (the rishon, 
> not the aharon) where he is doreish psukim based on which letter fails 
> to appear in them.  I am aware that the Zohar does this, but as far as I 
> know the Rokeah never saw  the Zohar.  Is there any precedent in Hazal 
> for this?
...
> David Riceman

If you read Ramban on humash he anticipates the zohar on several things.
I'm guessing that roke'ach had access to a "proto-zohar."

Or iow certain aspects of the Zohar wew not new.

Kt
Rrw
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 05:05:44PM +0000, rabbirichwol...@gmail.com wrote:
: If you read Ramban on humash he anticipates the zohar on several things.
: I'm guessing that roke'ach had access to a "proto-zohar."
: Or iow certain aspects of the Zohar wew not new.

Oviously. The first generations who accepted it as authentic must have
seen ideas that were already familiar to them. Whether from an oral
pre-published version of the Zohar or some more skeptical theory about
the origins. There is no way it could have gained currency otherwise.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

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

Re: RMB's  question <<The chazan goes to the teiva before 
yishtabach so the kahal can answer Amen at the end of 
pesukei d'zimra....>>

Can I flip this around into a question?
 Shabbos morning, the Chazan will start at "Shochein Ad". 
How is the
berakhah hasumekhah lechavertah nature of Yishtabach 
preserved? (Why
doesn't this necessitate adding a "Baruch atah..." to the 
front of it?)>>

I don't see any reason why you cannot flip this any way you 
like. You as a moderator do need my permission.

Why is Shabbat any different from weekday on this?  The 
chazan starts on weekdays before yishtabach, to enable an 
Amen. Yishtabach is an introduction to the brakha ending 
psukei d'zimra. He starts  the same way on Shabbat at the 
introduction.  Nishmat is a lengthened introduction to the 
ending of the psukei d'zimra. So the chazan starts a bit 
sooner.

Why don't you ask the question where it is more appropriate. 
Barukh she-amar the initial brakha is about "uv-shirei David 
nehallelkha". And the basic pesukei d'zimra, ending with kol 
han'shama tehallel ... is from David.  The final brakha to 
this section. yishtabach, should be right there at the end 
of Tehilim.

But we then insert "foreign material" having nothing to do 
with David's shirim and say yishtabach afterwards.  Because 
of the inserted break in shirei David, perhaps a barukh ata 
beginning is appropriate. BTW, siddurei hageonim all have 
Yishtabach after kol ha-neshama and say Vayosha' and Az 
Yashir after yishtabach, before the kaddish (that is, in the 
place where nowadays we are warned that there must be no 
interruption).

But, to answer your question.  the before and after brakhot 
and all the zimra and other paragraphs of praise in between 
are one chativa of the tefila. See my long posting just 
above. The Shabbat lengthening of the introduction to the 
final brakha are not a break. Similarly, kri'at shema beween 
the brakhot fore and aft are one chativa and an extra barukh 
ata is not added.

The length of the "semukha" of semukha la-chaverta is 
variable.


 David

Shoshana:
"We have a saying here in Israel that sometimes judges mark the target - then 
write the judgement."

This is the crux of the tireless arguments I have about p'sak.

Of course no yachid except RSO can be objective By nature.  But at the same time poskim can use objective methods.

Kt 
Rrw
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

I've been more or less following the thread on the custom of 
the chazzan not saying ga'al Yisrael aloud in shacharit so 
as to avoid anyone saying amen. Mention was also made of it's 
somewhat less popular kid brother, not saying "ha-bocher b'amo 
Yisrael b'ahava" and "ohev 'amo Yisrael" out loud.  The 
first custom is to be somekh geula li-t'fila and the second 
to be somekh ahava to sh'ma'.



It was interesting that some posters insist that answering 
amen is altogether wrong as it is a hefsek while others 
insist that the b'rakhot should definitely be said aloud and 
amen answered - each with sources to back it up.  But what 
was most interesting was that what I awaited to see never 
appeared - how and why these two opinions developed.  So, 
here is my opinion.



The usual amen is indicates acceptance and agreement with 
the brakha, a "me-too" or "count me in". The idea that this 
is a hefsek is very peculiar.  When one person makes kiddush 
for a group answering "barukh hu uvarukh sh'mo" is a hefsek 
because this is a custom with no halakhic basis. If 
answering "amen" were a hefsek, those answering would not be 
yotzei yedei chovat kiddush.  Has anyone ever heard that, 
when one person makes a brakha to motzi others, they cannot 
answer Amen?



Let's look at something slightly related. The Gemara in 
Bavli Brakhot 45: states two opinions.

1. It is m'shubach to answer amen to one's own b'rakha.

2. It is m'guneh to answer amen to one's own b'rakha.



The contradiction is easily solved.  It is m'shubach in 
bonei Yerushalayim  (in birkat ha-mazon).  It is m'guneh in 
other brakhot.



The importance of one not saying amen to one's own b'rakha 
is shown in the halakhic instruction that when teaching a 
small child to make a b'rakha by having him repeat word 
after word, one should not say Amen when the child finishes 
as this would teach the child to say Amen himself.



But every Ashkenazic Jew does say a self-Amen in Bonei 
Yerushalayim.  Obviously, it is not a "me too" type of 
reply, and not a reply at all.



Let the Ashkenazi glance at the siddur of\a Sefaradi friend. 
There is a self Amen after Yishtabach. There is another at 
the end of shemoneh esrei  in ha-m'varekh et 'amo Yisrael 
ba-shalom.  There is one at the b'rakha melekh m'hulal 
ba-tishbachot at the end of hallel (but not in the same b'rakha 
in barukh she-amar).  Another self-Amen appears in Ma'ariv 
in shomer (et) 'amo Yisrael la'ad at the end of hashkivenu. 
Oh, of course, there is also one in Bonei Yerushalayim.



All have the same reason.  The Gemara states that bonei 
Yerushalayim is the end of the "official" birkat ha-mazon. 
Similarly, Yishtabach is the end of p'sukei d'zimra; 
Hamvarekh et 'amo Yisrael  is the end of shmoneh esrei; 
mekekh m'hulal ends Hallel, Hashkivenu ends "official" ma'ariv. 
The elf-amen is not an agreement of a reply to anything.  It 
is a signal that indicates the end of a chativa, a  single 
section or group of prayers.



To return, finally, to the original topic,  ga'al Yisrael in 
shacharit and ahava before sh'ma', let's look at some 
rishonim who talk about self-amens.



The Rashba, Rosh, Raviah, Or Zarua, Meiri, and others, 
mention self-amen mostly with respect  to  geula and ahava. 
Obviously, the others were accepted without question, but 
there was another opinion about these two.  The Or Zarua 
mentions the Yerushalmi as his source, but I couldn't find 
it, so it is probably no longer there.  The Rosh quotes the 
Rambam that one says a self amen only after a section of 
prayer that includes two b'rakhot.



Old siddurim:



Sa'adia Gaon has a self- amen in ahava but none in geula. 
Siddur Ha-g'onim of Shlomo ben Natan has a self-amen in 
geula but none in ahava.



Sa'adia considers ahava the end of the pre-sh'ma' section. 
It has two b'rakhot which is the minimum required by the 
Rambam for a section. Therefore it has a self amen. The 
post-sh'ma' segment has only one b'rakha, and so does not 
have a self amen.  In ma'ariv, there are at least two 
brakhot after the sh'ma so the final b'rakha before shmoneh 
esrei has a self amen.



 R' Shlomo ben Natan considers both the pre- and post- sh'ma 
brakhot. Together with the sh'ma' as a single section and, 
therefore, it has a self amen at ga'al Yisrael.  As Ahava is 
in the middle of a section, it doesn't get a self-amen.



Ashkenazim dropped all except the one mentioned in Gemara 
Brakhot.  Sefaradim retained all except those that were 
questionable.





Conclusion:



Self-Amens have nothing to do with answering a b'rakha but 
are signs of an ending. Whether the brakhot of geula and 
ahava  deserve a self-amen indicating a section end is 
questionable. As the need for such a signal is not that 
important, poskim decided that one should not say a 
self-amen at these two brakhot as it might impair the s'mikhat 
geula litfila or perhaps also ahava li-shma' or the 
separation or  the unity of both pre-and post sh'ma' b'rakhot. 
(See Saadia and Shlomo ben Natan above.) Over the 
generations, the concept of an end-signal Amen was forgotten 
and the "not saying amen" was interpreted as applying to the 
"me too" or count me in" type of amen, that of agreement or 
joining to yotzei yedei chova.



Logically, the koach of semikhat geula lit'fila can cancel 
only an amen atzmi but not an amen chova.



All the above is a historical story.  It is not a 
recommendation to change an established custom, neither that 
of ending ga'al Yisrael silently nor that of ending aloud to 
enable an Amen reply.



BTW, as a ba'al tefila, I end silently as I was taught many 
long years ago.  But, if I hear a chazan's ending of the 
brakha, I answer Amen.





k"t,



David





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


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


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

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..."