Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 33

Tue, 02 Feb 2010

• 1. Re: saying kaddish together (Zev Sero)
• 2. Re: Ein Mevatlin issur lechatchilah (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 3. Aramaic Pronunciation (Gershon Dubin)
• 4. Re: Aramaic Pronunciation (Yosef Skolnick)
• 5. Re: How much is an Omer? (T6...@aol.com)
• 6. Re: Women and kaddish (Danny Schoemann)
• 7. Re: Ein Mevatlin issur lechatchilah (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 8. Kol Isha - HETER (Michael Makovi)
• 9. harbotzas tora kneged kulam (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 10. Re: Women and kaddish (Richard Wolpoe)
• 11. Re: Aramaic Pronunciation (Gershon Dubin)
• 12. Re: Aramaic Pronunciation (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Kol Isha - HETER (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: bal tashchis (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)

Micha Berger wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 07:34:29PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> : Micha Berger wrote:
> : >On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 05:08:37PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:

>:>: Since when are 9 listeners, or any listeners at all, required for 
>:>: kaddish?  AFAIK they are only required for chazarat hashatz.

>:>... and for a davar shebiqdushah -- including Qaddish, Barekhu,
>:>Qedushah, Barukh Sheim recited out loud YK night, etc...

>: Where is this found?
 
> Megillah 23b

Where on that page?  I can't find it.


> Tur, OCh 55 lists devarim shebiqdushah.

That's not the issue.  The question is where do you get the requirement
for nine listeners, and the Tur says absolutely nothing about that.


> I added Shema on YK night because
> it too is an out lout "barukh sheim kevod malkhuso..."

And therefore?


> Berakhos 47b-48a lists who can be counted

In the minyan.  Again, where are listeners mentioned?


> My thesis, that women aren't counted because they lack the same chiyuv,
> is in Mei'ri Megillah 51

> R' Yaaqov Emdan (Migdal Oz (even bochein 1:69) uses this to distinguish
> dying al qiddush H', for which women are counted.

According to him.   Who else says they are counted?  As I wrote yesterday,
the Pischei Teshuvah raises the possibility that not only are women not
counted for this, but nor are geirim(!) and sends us to YD 2:6 where he
presumably discussed it and gave his answer; unfortunately it seems to
have gone missing.  (As I noted yesterday, this is unlikely to be a typo,
since the term "parhessia" is indeed discussed there.)


> The sources are pretty numerous... RAFrimmer does a better job
> doscumenting this opinion in
> http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/english/tfila/frimer2-1.htm
> sec: "B. The First School."
> The second and third schools are FAR smaller.

How did you arrive at this conclusion?  Just looking at RAF's footnotes
that is not clear at all.  (Since the crucial footnotes refer to multiple
claims in the text, it's not easy to determine who says what without
following each reference; also, e.g., R Yosef Engel appears both in
note 56 *and* note 63.)


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher

Clarification
My original thesis was basically simple

European Models could rely upon certain kullos and b'diavads that American
model agencies could not

I might add that I see the American Model as preferable, but not as
absolutely required

Illustration:
Given: I can purchase Orange Juice Before Passover - it may have some
minute amount of Hametz, and use it on Passover

Question:
Can a kashrus agency certify that OJ as KP?

I would say not! I would expect that KP implies it is so free of Hametz
that I could purchase it even During Passover

This is the way Milk was certified KP in Hartford by the local va'ad.
Many of us knew we COULD buy non-certified milk before Passover.

BUT during ChhM only certified KP milk was acceptable

I hope people have flexible minds and can see the parallel between that
and the European vs. American models

Now why would certified milk or OJ w/o any hametz be superior to bittul of
a minute amount? Well EG as per Rambam - that minute amount is a davar
sheyeish lo mattirim and so could pose a real problem of hozer v'neiur.

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


principles and by and large can justify most of their policies.

Caveat: I'm not addressing American Passover humros.

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Pursuant to a topic mentioned by Rabbi Reisman in the Navi shiur a few
weeks ago, does anyone have a source for whether general
Hebrew rules of dikduk are followed in Aramaic, WRT mil'el, milra, sheva
na/nach, etc.?

Gershon
gershon.du...@juno.com
____________________________________________________________
Diet Help
Cheap Diet Help Tips. Click here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=vu-mKDih4l4qu1j4XotnWgAAJ
1BiYjhMSt0qMJcLz_08tNkJAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYQAAAAAA=

Rabbi Frank in the intro to the white germorah grammar book has a long
discussion about this.  He says that there are a few trends of thought wrt
to aramaic grammer and the locations of the nekudos.  So it actually depends
on which school of thought you are speaking about.  Also I recommend that
you send this question to the Mesorah discussion group, this is really up
their alley.
Yosef Skolnick
516-690-SKOL


On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Gershon Dubin <gershon.du...@juno.com>wrote:

> Pursuant to a topic mentioned by Rabbi Reisman in the Navi shiur a few
> weeks ago, does anyone have a source for whether general
> Hebrew rules of dikduk are followed in Aramaic, WRT mil'el, milra, sheva
> na/nach, etc.?
>
> Gershon
> gershon.du...@juno.com
> ____________________________________________________________
> Diet Help
> Cheap Diet Help Tips. Click here.
>
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=vu-mKDih4l
> 4qu1j4XotnWgAAJ1BiYjhMSt0qMJcLz_08tNkJAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAA
> AAAAAAAAAAAYQAAAAAA=
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100202/0b72633b/attachment-0001.htm>

From: "kennethgmil...@juno.com" _kennethgmiller@juno.com_ 
(mailto:kennethgmil...@juno.com) 



>>The last pasuk in Parshas haMan tells us that "An omer is  one-tenth of 
an eifah." ....

a) Why was this information included in  Torah Sheb'ksav? Isn't this 
exactly the sort of thing which is usually relegated  to Torah Sheb'al Peh?

b) Are there any other examples of where the Torah  goes out of its way to 
define a word? We have lots of places where the Torah  explains why a person 
was given a certain name, but that's not quite the same  thing.<<


Akiva Miller






>>>>>
There is a certain pattern seen in several places in Torah where things  
that are weighed or measured are specified/defined, and the omer that you  
cite is just one example.  Here are some others:
 
1.  Avraham pays 400 shekels for Me'aras Hamachpela and the shekels  are 
defined as "over lasocher." (Ber. 23:16).   The pasuk doesn't just  say 
Avraham "paid" 400 shekels, it says he "weighed out" 400 shekels, so you  know he 
paid top dollar.
 
2.  Eliezer gave Rivka a nose-ring and two bracelets, and their value  is 
spelled out:  the weight of the nezem is a beka and the weight of the  
bracelets is a total of asarah zahav. (Ber. 24:22)
 
3.  Bnei Yisrael were counted by giving a machtzis hashekel each, and  the 
shekel is defined there as "beshekel hakodesh" and further defined as "esrim 
 gerah hashekel." (Shmos 30:13).   Although we don't know what weight  that 
is (at least, I don't), it seems clear that the shekel hakodesh had a  
specific defined weight and that was twenty gerah, and of course, a gerah also  
had a specific defined weight.
 
4.  The shemen hamishchah had several ingredients, each a specific  measure 
(500 shekel-weights of myrhh, 250 cinnamon, etc) and the measure is  
defined as "shekel hakodesh." (Shmos 30:23-24)  
 
5.  Each person gave a beka to the mishkan, a beka defined in the same  
pasuk as a half-shekel (Shmos 38:26)
 
6. If a person vowed to donate the value of a man, that value was  defined 
as fifty silver shekel "beshekel hakodesh" (Vayikra 27:3).  A  woman's value 
is set at 30 silver shekel, a child's at 20 or 10 and so on.   The value of 
the shekel hakodesh is defined once again, as twenty gerah.  ((Vayikra 
27:25).
 
7.  The "extra" first-borns are redeemed by kohanim ((Bamidbar 3:47)  in 
the desert and the general law of pidyon haben for all time is set (Bamidbar  
18:16) and in both places the amount is specified as five shekalim "beshekel 
 hakodesh" which once again is defined as "esrim gerah."  The definition of 
 the shekel hakodesh appears repeatedly, as you see.
 
8.  My final example for the night, and quite appropriate as I think  
sleepily that it is time for me to go to bed already:  Moshe recounts  the 
victories that B'Y have already experienced, even before entering E'Y, and  he 
speaks of the slaying of the giant, Og Melech Habashan, whose  bed  -- still on 
display in Rabbat Bnei Amon -- was nine amos long and four  amos wide 
"be'amas ish."  It is our loss that we don't know how long this  amah is (at 
least, I don't) but Moshe's audience did!  
 
We do know it was BIG.  (I think 13 1/2 feet long and six feet  wide.)  
Some say it was bigger because it was measured not by the ordinary  amah -- 
arm's-length of an average man, maybe 18 inches -- but by the amah of  Og, but 
that kind of measurement is circular because without knowing how long  his 
arm was we can't know how long his amah was and so such a measure is  
meaningless.  So I personally think that "be'amas ish" means "by the amah  of an 
average man" which gives the enormous dimensions I gave above.
 
So we arrive by stream of consciousness some distance from where we  
started, but to sum up, the Torah does often define things that can be weighed  or 
measured with numbers, whether mannah, money, jewelry, ingredients or  King 
Og's bed.  
 
 
 

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

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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100202/f8dec28b/attachment-0001.htm>

From: Ben Waxman <ben1...@zahav.net.il>

> Rav Ovadia has paskened that women can say kaddish for their parents
> if there are no sons to say it, however they shouldn't say it in a beit knesset.

Actually R' Shlomo Ganzfried paskened so almost 200 years ago in the KSA 26:20:

??? ??? ?? ???? ???? ???? ?????, ?? ?? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ????
????? ????? ?? ????? ????, ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??? ?????

"A daughter may not say Kaddish in shul, though some say that if they
want to make a Minyan in her home so she can recite it, they are
allowed to. Others forbid it."

I don't have a SA handy, but I suspect that RSG based this Halocho too
on the SA or it's commentators.

- Danny

Here is a simple summary in SA style

Halachah:
Lechatchilah we may rely upon products containing problematic agreements
- so long as it has been bateil by means of an Eino-Yehudi and was not
done on behalf of a Yehudi.
V'yeish Holqin u'machmirin.

Hagahah:
Uvimdeenos elu [viz. North America]. machmirin k'deiah hashkniyyah
shelo lismoch al bittul eino y'hudi l'chatichila ela bimqom mikreh bilvad
[v'ein l'shanos]

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

An article I've just written, "A New Hearing for Kol Ishah", has been
published by Rabbi Marc Angel's Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals:
http://www.jewishideas.org/articles/new-hearing-kol-ishah

To summarize my article:

1) Rambam and Tur-Shulhan Arukh link kol isha to etzba ketana and say
kol isha is prohibited only kedei leihanot. So if there is no hana'ah
/ hirhur, then there is no issur either.

2) According to the ha-kol le-shem shamayim shita (see especially
Rabbi Yehuda Herzl Henkin), we may be lenient on ANY law of tzniut
provided that hirhur / hana'ah is absent.

3) Ra'avad and Ra'avyah limit kol isha to singing, whereas Rambam and
Rabbi Yehuda he-Hasid include even mere speech in the prohibition.
This speech-shita makes more sense, actually, since kol isha literally
means "a woman's VOICE", i.e. even speech. How could Ra'avad and
Ra'avya limit kol isha to only singing? They said that people are used
to women's speaking voices, that a speaking voice is like a normally
exposed part of the body. This is a general principle in the laws of
tzniut, that the laws of tzniut prohibit the exposure of that which is
customarily covered, but permit the exposure of that which is
customarily exposed. The basic fabric of the laws of tzniut permit
anything which is customary or usual (its being customary or usual is
assumed to negate its being sexually enticing).

4) The Jewish communities of the Ottoman Empire, Egypt, Syria,
Germany, and Cochin were historically lenient. (I wanted to avoid an
over-textualism, a la Rupture and Reconstruction. This is thus my
mimetic argument.)

5) Whereas the Aharonim forgot what the prohibition of kol isha was,
and treated it like some magical non-negotiable lo-plug-rabanan, by
contrast, the rishonim (and Rabbi Yehiel Weinberg) analyzed kol isha
based on its purpose and intention, i.e. hirhur and hana'ah. The
Aharonim somehow managed to avoid the embarrassing fact that kol isha
is limited to singing NOT because of the inherent basic nature of the
prohibition, but only because of habituation / hergel. The Aharonim
ran with the idea that kol isha is limited to singing, but
simultaneously forbade leniency based on hergel, even though this
position is self-contradictory.

The only criticism I can envision is that I have perhaps
underestimated how much hirhur and hana'ah people actually get from
women's singing. But I personally, and many people I know, claim to
get no hana'ah or hirhur from most women's singing.

Michael Makovi

http://havolim.blogspot.com/2010/02/186-ani-chosencha-yisro-ba-eile
cha.html



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100202/4b03b2cf/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 3:37 AM, Danny Schoemann <doni...@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Ben Waxman <ben1...@zahav.net.il>
>
> Actually R' Shlomo Ganzfried paskened so almost 200 years ago in the KSA
> 26:20:
>
> ??? ??? ?? ???? ???? ???? ?????, ?? ?? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ????
> ????? ????? ?? ????? ????, ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??? ?????
>
> - Danny
>
>
how about 150 years ago?  First published in the late 1860's. I know one of
his descendants personally and this fellow's Dad wrote a biography of the
Author which was his GGF

-- 
Shalom uVRacha
RabbiRichWol...@Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nishma-Minhag/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100202/0fb99b18/attachment-0001.htm>

<<Rabbi Frank in the intro to the white germorah grammar book has a
long discussion about this.  He says that there are a few trends of thought
wrt to aramaic grammer and the locations of the nekudos.  So it actually
depends on which school of thought you are speaking about. >>
I considered sending it to mesorah but reconsidered. I don't have access to the book mentioned;  where can I get/see it?

Gershon
gershon.du...@juno.com



____________________________________________________________
Nutrition
Improve your career health. Click now to study nutrition!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=Kt_M4SQs-q1mOoMB7GYkCAAAJ
1DzeK-F0bLcqGb51B0rOTOKAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASQwAAAAA=

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20100202/619fcb1e/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 11:34:39PM -0500, Gershon Dubin wrote:
: Pursuant to a topic mentioned by Rabbi Reisman in the Navi shiur a few
: weeks ago, does anyone have a source for whether general Hebrew rules
: of dikduk are followed in Aramaic, WRT mil'el, milra, sheva na/nach, etc.?

I don't think it is likely that Babylonian Aramaic and that of EY had
the same rules to that level of detail.

In EY initial vowels often fell off. OTOH, in Bavel, final vowels often
dropped. That's how the amorah we know from the Bavli as Rav Avin is
called in the Y-mi "Rabbi Bun". That hints at (although doesn't prove)
a tendency toward milra in EY, and mil'el in Bavel.

We use the system of niqud invented in Tiveriah. The niqud system in
Bavel is different -- eg what we call patach and segol are the same
vowel. There are times Rashi refers to the segol as a patach qatan, I
assume that's part of the same mesorah. Yemenites still have texts in
Aramaic with Babylonian niqud. We think of as regional differences in
how various vowels are prounounced. However, before vowels were marked
in the text, those were regional differences in how we grouped vowel
sounds into vowels.

BTW, niqud bavli had 6 symbols, and would work quite well for the accent
of contemporary Syrian Jews. See
http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%9
3_%D7%91%D7%91%D7%9C%D7%99
or http://bit.ly/8YpPHX . To round things out, here is EY's niqud
http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki
/%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%93_%D7%90%D7%A8%D7%A6%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%A8%D7%90%
D7%9C%D7%99
or http://bit.ly/dcMFDM . Interestingly, they had a sheva na, but sheva
nach simply was a lack of vowel. So this difference in vowel set could
very well touch on your sheva na question.

And now you're asking about whether those same vowels map one-to-one
in a different language, not just a different region.

Also, I'm not sure if we should care overly much. Lashon haQodesh is
itself part of Torah. Thus, getting it right is as important as Talmud
Torah. Things written in Aramaic were done so to be generally available
to the masses. (Except perhaps Qaddish, given the aggadita about being
in Aramaic to be hidden from the mal'akhim. However, see Tosafos,
Berakhos 4a "ve'onin".)

RYBS said on a number of occasions that we do not say Qaddish in
our country's la'az simply because we lack the ability to produce a
translation that captures all its nuances. I could say the same of
Talmudic jargon. But it's not really inherently holy or Torah.

When using Aramaic, knowing the word is "meichamas" made the light-bulb
turn on as to why it is used for "because of". The mashal is of B being
true "from the heat of" the truth of A. But if the whole point of Aramaic
is to be using the common tongue and be understood by others studying
the topc, shouldn't I actually say "machmas" as is now common?


FWIW, ArtScroll assumes the laws of sheva developed by analyzing Hebrew
sheva usage applies to Qaddish, Yequm Purqan, etc...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             I thank God for my handicaps, for, through them,
mi...@aishdas.org        I have found myself, my work, and my God.
http://www.aishdas.org          - Helen Keller
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 06:23:12PM +0200, Michael Makovi wrote:
: 1) Rambam and Tur-Shulhan Arukh link kol isha to etzba ketana and say
: kol isha is prohibited only kedei leihanot. So if there is no hana'ah /
: hirhur, then there is no issur either.

Arguably, it is more accurate to define kedei leihanot as:
Only if there is no shred of desire to find hana'ah, even if that desire
remains unfulfilled.

Similarly your point 2:
: 2) According to the ha-kol le-shem shamayim shita ... we may be
: lenient on ANY law of tzniut provided that hirhur / hana'ah is absent.

: 3) Ra'avad and Ra'avyah limit kol isha to singing, whereas Rambam and
: Rabbi Yehuda he-Hasid include even mere speech in the prohibition...

You see, I would take that to mean that narrowing it down to only music
is already a qulah, and therefore one should think thrice before
whittling it any further.

: 4) The Jewish communities of the Ottoman Empire, Egypt, Syria,
: Germany, and Cochin were historically lenient....

Which proves nothing. You would need to show that they historically
weren't being yelled at, despite violating the pesaq of their own
community's rishonim. Most Litvisher women didn't cover their hair, but
no one was pasqining it's okay. Just that it wasn't a battle they could
win.

: 5) Whereas the Aharonim forgot what the prohibition of kol isha was,
...

I can't relate to this sentiment. If you assume such breaks in the
mesorah, can your result be halakhah?

: contrast, the rishonim (and Rabbi Yehiel Weinberg) analyzed kol isha
: based on its purpose and intention, i.e. hirhur and hana'ah...

And many rishonim saw that as reason to be more makhmir than we.

And RYYW was only meiqil because it was to inspire kids who would
otherwise seek clubs not particular to promoting Yahadus! You keep on
invoking him, but RYYW didn't buy into any of your arguments except
where there was a conflicting mitzvah involved!

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of
mi...@aishdas.org        heights as long as he works his wings.
http://www.aishdas.org   But if he relaxes them for but one minute,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      he plummets downward.   - Rav Yisrael Salanter

Last Sunday, I bought a bilingual Tomer Devorah divided by days of the
month at the YU-SOY book sale

Today's lesson - 18th of the month end of chapter 3 - deals with
bal tashchis, bizuy ochel, K'vod habriyyos, tzaar baalei Hayyim etc.
A "must read" on the machshava of this issue.
 
KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile



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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 27, Issue 33
**************************************

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..."