Avodah Mailing List

Volume 27: Number 224

Mon, 27 Dec 2010

• 1. Re: Musaf Amidah on Shabbath (Ken Bloom)
• 2. Re: Musaf Amidah on Shabbath (D&E-H Bannett)
• 3. Re: Changing the tune in Lecha Dodi - Revisted (Goldmeier)
• 4. Re: Changing the tune in Lecha Dodi - Revisted (Ben Waxman)
• 5. taharos (T6...@aol.com)
• 6. Re: Women and TSBP [was: mayim achronim] (Arie Folger)
• 7. Re: Are "Gedolim Stories" Good for Chinuch? (Arie Folger)
• 8. Testing for Cancer Genes [BRCA] (Mike Miller)
• 9. Is a Bell Definitely Mukze? (Arie Folger)
• 10. Wearing Red (matthewjmille...@gmail.com)
• 11. Re: Wearing Red (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Wearing Red (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer)
• 13. Re: Wearing Red (Yitzchok Zirkind)
• 14. nittel sources (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 15. Re: Are "Gedolim Stories" Good for Chinuch? (Joel C. Salomon)
• 16. gedolim stories (Eli Turkel)
• 17. Re: Changing the tune in Lecha Dodi - Revisted (Micha Berger)
• 18. Re: Koseiv on computers, was [Areivim] People of the Ebook (Yitzchak Schaffer)
• 19. Re: Koseiv on computers (Micha Berger)

On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 17:06 -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> Spanish-Portuguese do a sort of combination.  The kahal starts out
> together with the chazan, then after kedusha the chazan says the middle
> bracha silently and waits just before its end until everyone finishes,
> and then he picks up aloud.

My shul does that when we have a minyan but aren't synchronized enough
to do a full chazara (i.e. less than 6 people davened the lachash at the
same time). We do a heicha kedusha, then everyone except the shaliach
tzibbur finishes silently. The shaliach tzibbur goes silently through
shomeia tefillah, waits and continues out loud at retezi. The point is
so that we can still get birkat kohanim in even though we did a heicha
kedusha.

>    I've also seen this in some Moroccan
> minyanim.   I've also seen Moroccan minyanim omit duchening in musaf
> in order to save time.
> 
> 

Re: <<I asked one Moroccan rav who said he knew of such a 
practise among "old" Moroccan minyanim, but not in his 
experience.  I'm not quite sure what he meant by "old.">>


As ROY came out against not repeating Musaf twice the 
pracice has been dying out in Israel.  This might be the 
answer to what was meant by "old".

It was already pointed out that, in addition to Teimanim, 
"Western" Sefaradim also have or had a shortened Musaf.  I 
have heard the shortened Musaf also in Halabi (Aleppo, 
Syria) minyanim who might or might not be considered 
Western.  What I have encountered is not that the hazzan 
waits after kedusha and continues aloud only after the kahal 
is finished, but that he says the entire amida without a 
break and the kahal says it silently along with him.
From the few times I have davened weekday mincha with them, 
I believe that the Dardai Teimanim, close followers of the 
Rambam, have the shortened amida custom not only for musaf 
but for all amidot.


David 

of it just means you have not yet found the source..

On 24/12/2010 4:01 PM, Ben Waxman wrote:
>  The upshot of that is if something doesn't have a source, it is not a 
> minhag.

Well I was postulating that a change to a custom which in of itself is only 
500 years old can not, by definition, have a source.

Of course it depends how someone defines what is a source. If some rebbi 
from 19th century makes some hiddush, is that a source?

Ben
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Goldmeier" <goldme...@012.net.il>


> of it just means you have not yet found the source..
>
> On 24/12/2010 4:01 PM, Ben Waxman wrote:
>>  The upshot of that is if something doesn't have a source, it is not a 
>> minhag. 

I would like permission from all those who have participated in the recent  
tahara threads on Avodah and Areivim to forward your emails to Rabbi  
Kalman Baumann, the head of the chevra kadisha here in Miami, for his  comments.  
If you do not want your name mentioned in my correspondence with  him I 
will send him edited posts without identifying information.  I am  also making 
this request to those who have emailed me off list.  Thank  you.
 

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


--------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20101226/3e6b5260/attachment-0001.htm>

RMB wrote:
> (Which I still don't think is a technical "eis la'asos". The CC
> also argues that the original rule of teaching only what they
> need to lead observant lives is extended beyond learning
> halakhah lemaaseh and the basics by the realia of their
> receiving a secular education. That's enough to justify the
> change without saying that observance of the whole trumps
> a single issur.)

This reminds me of a statement by R' Nosson Kaminecki that (a) we
pasken like Ben 'Azai regarding how appropriate it is to teach women
Torah, and paskening like R"E was a horaat shaah, and the CC's
positive disposition towards the Beit Yaakov movement only truly makes
sense if we assume the CC really held like Ben 'Azai. This, at that
time, the reasons for following R"E 'al pi horaat shaah had gone, so
we were to go back to the baseline din, which is that we do teach
women all of Torah.

RNK's statement can be heard here: http://tinyurl.com/kaminecki [YUTorah.org]

-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Moses und Ach?r
* Dodging the Draft in Dodgy Ways
* When Does Death Begin, According to Halacha?
* Nicht Rassismus, sondern ein mildes Urteil
* Basler Gymnasium experimentiert mit Chawrut?-Lernen
* Where Will We Find Refuge ... from technology overload
* Video-Vortrag: Psalm 34

RAM wrote:
> For example: When the post office clerk offered to ship
> the Chofetz Chayim's seforim for free, did he have the
> authority to do so? I doubt it.

Never heard that story. Can you elucidate? If a government office
offers you a service, why should it be prohibited to accept? OK, there
is seineh matoneis yichyeh, but that is a minhag chassidus (or, in our
case, minhag Litkvakious)

> But when the CC purchased an equivalent value of stamps and tore them
> up, this is portrayed as an amazing feat of tzidkus. Why? Isn't this a
> basic act which should be expected of *all* of us?

Why? Was there really ever a law that prohibited people from carrying
packages for others either as a favor as as a special courier service?
Non one was  running any parallel post services, so why should tearing
up the stamps be required from all of us?

Please elucidate me,

-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Moses und Ach?r
* Dodging the Draft in Dodgy Ways
* When Does Death Begin, According to Halacha?
* Nicht Rassismus, sondern ein mildes Urteil
* Basler Gymnasium experimentiert mit Chawrut?-Lernen
* Where Will We Find Refuge ... from technology overload
* Video-Vortrag: Psalm 34

Does anyone have any references to contemporary shu"t addressing the
advisability of testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2, which are associated with
an increased risk of developing, but not indicative of currently
having, several different cancers?

I would assume a major factor would revolve around doing a "proper"
hishtadlus vs. "denying" HKB"H the option to perform a nes nistar (or
even less, since probabilities != certainties, and many of the issues
would be the same as those cited pro and against such tests as
sonograms. That said, I'm wondering if anyone has seen anything
specific for this issue.

Suggested sources [are there any journals that specialize or
frequently cover these types of issues?] would also be appreciated.

Thanks

-- Mike Miller
Ramat Bet Shemesh

Dear Ovedim and Ovedot,

In OC338, BY prohibits all *musically* *intended* sounds made through
the agency of any object.

Ramo goes further, and prohibits all sound productions through the
agency of an object, including non-musical sounds. Taz extends this to
the bells on a mantle of a Torah scroll.

However, Arukh haShul'han finds all that excessive, and seems to follow BY.

Unsurprisingly, Mishnah Verurah goes with Ramo's stringency. Shemirat
Shabbat keHilkhato rules like Ramo, with the exception of a person who
is ill and needs assistance, even when such assistance does not
represent a great pressing need (for the great pressing need of
relieving oneself, he allows using an electronic button through a
shinui, because of gadol kevod haberiyot, but for lesser needs, he
allows the use of a bell).

I wonder, did any Ashkenazi poskim cite Arukh haShul'han approvingly
in this matter?

Kind regards,
-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Moses und Ach?r
* Dodging the Draft in Dodgy Ways
* When Does Death Begin, According to Halacha?
* Nicht Rassismus, sondern ein mildes Urteil
* Basler Gymnasium experimentiert mit Chawrut?-Lernen
* Where Will We Find Refuge ... from technology overload
* Video-Vortrag: Psalm 34

What's the source for women not wearing red?
Sent on the Sprint? Now Network from my BlackBerry?

On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 01:48:26AM +0000, matthewjmille...@gmail.com wrote:
: What's the source for women not wearing red?

R' Ada bar Ahavah, Berakhos 20a.

Interestingly, see also http:/
/www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081028074323.htm
although, a study released last August showed the same is true in reverse
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20012387-501465.html and yet I never
heard of an issur on /men/ wearing red...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             You will never "find" time for anything.
mi...@aishdas.org        If you want time, you must make it.
http://www.aishdas.org                     - Charles Buxton
Fax: (270) 514-1507

It's assur for both men and women. Yoreh Deah 178:1, in the Rema:

??? - ??? ??? ????? ??? ???????? ????? ????? (??). ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? 
???? ????? ?? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ????? ??????? 
??????, ???? ????? ???? ?????? ??? ??????? ???????

(see the mefrashim there).

YGB

On 12/26/2010 9:11 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 01:48:26AM +0000, matthewjmille...@gmail.com wrote:
> : What's the source for women not wearing red?
>
> R' Ada bar Ahavah, Berakhos 20a.
>
> Interestingly, see also h
> ttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081028074323.htm
> although, a study released last August showed the same is true in reverse
> http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20012387-501465.html and yet I never
> heard of an issur on /men/ wearing red...
>
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha
>

See S"A Y"D 178:1 in the Ramoh and Shac"h s"k 3 (that includes men as well,
see also Kitzur S"A 3:2), there is a thorough discussion on this in Sefer
"Lvusha Shel Torah" chapter 63.

On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 01:48:26AM +0000, matthewjmiller07@gmail.comwrote:
> : What's the source for women not wearing red?
>
> R' Ada bar Ahavah, Berakhos 20a.
>
> Interestingly, see also
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081028074323.htm
> although, a study released last August showed the same is true in reverse
> http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20012387-501465.html and yet I
> never
> heard of an issur on /men/ wearing red...
>
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha
>
> --
> Micha Berger             You will never "find" time for anything.
> mi...@aishdas.org        If you want time, you must make it.
> http://www.aishdas.org                     - Charles Buxton
> Fax: (270) 514-1507
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>



-- 
Kol Tuv,
Yitzchok Zirkind
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20101227/6a2e935f/attachment-0001.htm>

http://michtavim.blogspot.com/2010/12/readings-for-nittle-nacht-2010.
html 
thanks  to menachem butler  for assembling this collection.
if one looks  in the well-sourced nit'ei gavriel, he brings down in the 
notes that the chazon ish  felt the reason was physical danger , and 
therefore not noge'ah  [though the author disbelieved the CI could be 
disparaging  a minhag  that the author writes is held by rov yisrael...] 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20101226/63a95f6a/attachment-0001.htm>

On 12/26/2010 03:42 AM, Arie Folger wrote:
> RAM wrote:
>> But when the CC purchased an equivalent value of stamps and tore
>> them up, this is portrayed as an amazing feat of tzidkus. Why?
>> Isn't this a basic act which should be expected of *all* of us?
> 
> Why? Was there really ever a law that prohibited people from carrying
> packages for others either as a favor as as a special courier service?
> Non one was  running any parallel post services, so why should tearing
> up the stamps be required from all of us?

This ties in to how Halacha treats legal monopolies, e.g., copyrights,
or the disputes in centuries past over who was allowed to print the Talmud.

If the Imperial Postal Service has a monopoly, are you obligated to --
or is it even a midas chassidus to -- pay the monopoly holder when using
a (legal) free alternative?  According to this story, the CC held at
least the latter.

(I assume that Dina D'Malchusa Dina would preclude using an unlicensed
commercial alternate courier service.)

--Chesky

This weekends Hamodia (English) had an article on emunas chacjamim by Rabbi
Dovid
Hofstedter nasi of Dirshu
partial quotes

While every individual has bechirah Hashem sends certain very special people
into
this world who are endowed with lofty neshamod FROM BIRTH. They are on a
plane
far above and beyond the level of their peers and with sustained avodah they
can
reach truly elevated levels of spirtuality
...
Nevertheless, Hashem sends exalted neshamos to every generation - those of
tzaddikim and gedolim.
On a superficial level we may think that we understand their intentions and
the
reasons they conduct themselves as they do. The truth however is that with
our limited understanding
we cannot truly comprehend the reasons and the intentions behind so many of
the actions of
our gedolim so we dare not presume to question them

(of course he doesnt discuss how we know who is the gadol)


-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20101227/bebb3c89/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 06:36:08PM +0200, Ben Waxman wrote:
> Of course it depends how someone defines what is a source. If some rebbi  
> from 19th century makes some hiddush, is that a source?

If his chiddush gives a motive for the new practice, why not?

I was thinking that a minhag with no source is something people just
started doing for no particular Torah motive.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

Let's consider an LCD screen. (I'm not familiar with e-ink tech.) True,
that the image disappears once the signal changes, but for the moment, my
command is causing the liquid crystal to take the shape of a word. So the
question becomes, is there a chiluk in eino-niskayem between writing in
dust, and making a computer display an image. I don't see one; I will now
consult the Avodah archives :)

--
Yitzchak Schaffer

On Dec 27, 2010, at 2:12, "Shoshana L. Boublil" <toram...@bezeqint.net> wrote:

> The screen does not keep what you wrote on it in any way, shape or
> form. That is how all screens function ? you can write the whole Bible
> on a screen by "scrolling" down one screen at a time, but in fact it
> is inside the memory, and not on the screen.

We're discussing on Areivim an article which discusses the decline of
print media, that it's likely that soon new books in physical print will
be rare.

From RYLevin's post, quoting the Atlantic's article "People of
the E-Book? Observant Jews Struggle With Sabbath in a Digital Age"
<http://tinyurl.com/2cq8spz>:
> E-readers are problematic [on Shabbos and Yom Tov] not only because they
> are electronic but also because some rabbis consider turning pages on the
> device - which causes words to dissolve and then resurface - an act of
> writing, also forbidden on the Sabbath.

> Yet industry trends suggest digital media will eclipse print in a matter of
> decades.

And the article quotes Mechachem Wecker's blog entry on the Forward's
web site <http://www.forward.com/articles/11819/> Oct 17, 2007, which
asks:
> Has the Sabbath, in its modern prohibitions against computers, cell
> phones and iPods, changed substantially from its biblical day free of
> stick gathering and animal-skin dyeing? Will Shabbat observance ultimately
> dwindle as people choose electronic entertainment over media-free rest,
> or will technology-addicted folks flock to Shabbat to escape their
> electronics-obsession of the rest of the week?

As a current Kindle user, I can say that having a side-effect of
encouraging one to read Jewish literature on Shabbos and YT isn't so
terrible. However, let's say you need to unwind, your first language
isn't Hebrew, and you have certain standards in quality of writing that
make much of Jewish fiction frustrating to read. Now what?

So, why would an e-book reader be a problem?

The article raises two issues: electricity and mechiqah/kesivah. I lump
the latter two together because they both boil down to a single issue --
is the written word on an ebook screen considered kesivah?

The issur on electrical devices has widespread acceptance and yet is
hard to justify.

Particularly when discussing a device that doesn't have to be pluggged
into the wall (with the cell connection turned off, my year-old Kindle
can go about 2 weeks on a charge), thereby minimizing the justificability
of invoking "binyan".

Makeh bepatish stands about as well as it always does, but in devices
that aren't designed to run 24x7, it's hard to consider these things
broken when off.

There is no glowing filament (havarah/bishul) nor a sound made when
reading a book. (We might need book readers without a built-in audio
function.)

Reading an e-book is uvda dechol???

However, the general ban on electricity /is/ widely accepted. My forecast
is that the next Sanhedrin will allow many types of electrical devices,
but until they do we lack the authority to change things. And really the
only people qualified to make a reliable forecast would be candidates
for membership in that Sanhedrin...

What about kesivah?

Well, we usually do not consider letters written on a screen to be
kesivah, at least WRT sheimos. That it's like writing sheim H' on
the seashore below the high tide line, where the gemara says it lacks
qedushah because it was made to be transitory.

1- Is the definition of kesivah the same on Shabbos? Perhaps the
permanence of kesivah for sheimos is a longer interval? Don't we say
that transitory kesivah on Shabbos and YT is assur derabbanan, with
Machon Tzomet limiting the use of disappearing ink to situations like
hospital records. (Which are Xero

2- My real question is about e-paper, the kind of LCD used in the Kindle,
Nook, and other (B&W) readers, as opposed to the back-lit screen of a
cell phone, ipad, or laptop. The fact that it's passive, just something
that changes color rather than emits light, is a tzad leheter on the
electricity side. But e-paper only uses electricity when you change
pages. Meaning, if you display an image and leave the e-reader alone,
the text will stay on screen indefinitely.

It is thus un-like the question of sheimos on a regular computer display.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Weeds are flowers too
mi...@aishdas.org        once you get to know them.
http://www.aishdas.org          - Eeyore ("Winnie-the-Pooh" by AA Milne)
Fax: (270) 514-1507


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 27, Issue 224
***************************************

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..."