Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 42

Fri, 18 Mar 2011

• 1. Re: who is going to Gehenim (Micha Berger)
• 2. shaloch manot (Eli Turkel)
• 3. How to measure a kezayis of matza (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 4. Re: Soft Matza in the Ar HaShulchan, M Berura & ShO HaRav (Micha Berger)
• 5. More Examples of "Minhagim" That Lead to Kulos (David Cohen)
• 6. Re: Kavod haMeis (T6...@aol.com)
• 7. Re: More Examples of "Minhagim" That Lead to Kulos (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Soft Matza in the Ar HaShulchan, M Berura & ShO HaRav (Zev Sero)
• 9. Addendum to More Examples of "Minhagim" That Lead to Kulos (Prof. Levine)
• 10. Re: More Examples of "Minhagim" That Lead to Kulos (Poppers, Michael)
• 11. what's the source? (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 12. Zechor/zachar (Eliyahu Grossman)
• 13. Re: Zechor/zachar (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: what's the source? (Zev Sero)
• 15. Re: More Examples of "Minhagim" That Lead to Kulos (Ben Waxman)
• 16. Re: More Examples of "Minhagim" That Lead to Kulos (Danny Schoemann)
• 17. Re: More Examples of "Minhagim" That Lead to Kulos (Zev Sero)

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 12:53:57PM +1100, SBA wrote:
: A friend just sent me a scan of Brochos  59a.

: The gemara gives the reason for earthquakes  (and tsunami) happening - when
: Hashem remembers His children suffering amongst the Umos Haolom, he is
: "morid shtei dimaos leyam hagadol - vekolo nishma misof haolom v'ad sofo"

: So may be quote this gemara when discussing earthquakes??

It depends how.

Explanations that involve the many dying for the sins of a few not only
defy the whole thrust of seifer Iyov, as would any other explanation.
(As per my prior posts on the thread.)

In addition, any notion that 10s of thousands of people who never heard
of two boys in jail died, and countless mores injured, lost everything
they owned, etc... because of their country's sins defies "haShofeit
kol ha'aretz lo ya'aseh mishpat?" Hashem was willing to save the entire
Sedom vaAmora region for the sake of a few tzadiqim.

There are 50 or so "liquidators" in Fukushima right now. "Liquidator"
is an industry term, as shocking as the concept it describes. 50 nuclear
technicians who volunteered to be on the staff that can be sacrificed
to prevent the worst of the disaster. 50 people who chose to stay with
the reactor so that others can live. People who were able to conquer the
most basic yeitzer of survival for the lofty sake of the many... can we
ascribe terms of "justice" to their future suffering and death?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             With the "Echad" of the Shema, the Jew crowns
mi...@aishdas.org        G-d as King of the entire cosmos and all four
http://www.aishdas.org   corners of the world, but sometimes he forgets
Fax: (270) 514-1507      to include himself.     - Rav Yisrael Salanter

<<What happens if the person you sent Mishloach Manos to is dead drunk,
are you yotzei? Rav Menashe Klein (Mishneh Halachos (4:91) says
probably not. Halachically someone who has reached the level of
intoxication of Lot is like a Shoteh and patur from Mitzvos. He
reasons that the mitzva of Mishloach Manos depends on the status of
the recipient and not the sender. If so you have sent to someone who
is patur from the Mitzva and therefore you are not Yotzei. However if
he has time to sober up before Purim is over then you are yotzei.>>

If the recipient refuses to accept the shalch manot it is a machloket
whether
one has fulfilled shalach manot. I thought the generally accepted view was
that
bidived one is yotzeh

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110317/67f7a7e6/attachment-0001.htm>

In the thread titled "oft Matza in the Ar HaShulchan...", regarding how to measure a kezayis of matza, R' Meir Rabi wrote:

> The Acharonim say that Matza which is bendy and soft like a
> sponge - Racha VeAsuYa KeSeFog, need not be compressed.

That is true, but I do not understand why.

MB 208:48 and Igros Moshe O"C 1:71 say that (although the minhag is
otherwise) one ought to count only the flour towards the kezayis for a
bracha acharona, and not the other ingredients. It seems very simple to me
that if we should not count the sugar and eggs, then we certainly should
not be counting the air, which is even less relevant.

I posted a longer version of this question on these pages three years ago, in Avodah 25:132
(http://www.ai
shdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n132.shtml#05), but it got no answers, so I
hope it is okay to ask it again: If a piece of cake, which is exactly a
kezayis but only if we include the honey, should preferably *not* get an Al
Hamichya, then why is it okay to be yotzay Achilas Matza on a piece which
is exactly a kezayis but only if we include the air?

(If anyone offers an answer which includes a comment about how the air
holes are tiny and negligible, please make sure to include an explanation
of why the honey disqualifies the kezayis of cake even if it too is of a
very small amount, i.e., less noticable than the sponginess of the matza.)

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Dermatologists Hate Her
Clever Mom Uses $5 Trick to Erase Wrinkles and Look Younger Instantly.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4d82475ae9e3b1de84dst06vuc

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 01:08:51PM +1100, Meir Rabi wrote:
: This is found in the discussion regarding the Shiur of Kezayis, whether the
: food must be compressed or not. In Siman 486 the Rema speaks about
: compressing the lettuce.
: 
: The Acharonim say that Matza which is bendy and soft like a sponge - Racha
: VeAsuYa KeSeFog, need not be compressed.

All sources below in AhS 486.

Of the three acharonim in the title, I had a hard time believing that
the MB and the AhS assume soft matzos. The SA haRav (SAhR) I found more
plausible, since matzos in his day were probably still too thick be
lack squeezability and still be chewable -- and he does mention "afilu
hi rakah va'asuyah kisfug" (se'if 2).

The MB is at s"q 3, and the Ahs is se'if 2. Both mention sefugim, even
though I can't believe Ashkenazim were still using spongy matzah in
their day.

Other things I turned up...

1- The MA (#1) mentions holes, but not rakah or sefug. That is consistent
with either style matzah, although as I wrote earlier, I am convinced
crispy matzos weren't commonplace yet in his day (17th cent, orphaned
by the Gezeiros Ta"ch veTa"t).

RAMiller asked at 2:38pm EDT:
> MB 208:48 and Igros Moshe O"C 1:71 say that (although the minhag is
> otherwise) one ought to count only the flour towards the kezayis for
> a bracha acharona, and not the other ingredients. It seems very simple
> to me that if we should not count the sugar and eggs, then we certainly
> should not be counting the air, which is even less relevant.

When searching for the above, I found SAhR says (453:7) something
similar about matzah made with flour that had rice flour mixed in. One
must eat a kezayis of wheat flour within the kedei achilas peras --
as the SAhR further put it, that every peras of matzah must include a
kezayis wheat flour. (Otherwise, you would have to eat more than a peras
of matzah within that kedei achilas peras.)

To try to answer RAM's question:
My guess is it's because we hold ta'am ke'ikkar. You don't taste air,
so it's bateil and thus part of the matzah. Unlike ingredients that
are part of the dough, but not needed for the mitzvah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The fittingness of your matzos [for the seder]
mi...@aishdas.org        isn't complete with being careful in the laws
http://www.aishdas.org   of Passover. One must also be very careful in
Fax: (270) 514-1507      the laws of business.    - Rav Yisrael Salanter

RYL listed a number of the practices of a shtiebel near his house, mostly
involving the omission of tachanun, but also including the following:

>  They say Aveinu Malkenu only during Aseres Yemei Teshuva

As I understand it, this was the normative practice until relatively
recently.  (To the best of my knowledge, it still is the practice in
Sefaradi communities.)  Most Ashkenazi siddurim up until ~120 years ago have
Avinu Malkenu only for Aseres Yemei Teshuva, not for fast days.

(Source:  Siddur Eizor Eliyahu, IMHO one of the best sources of information
on the development of the Nusach Ashkenaz siddur as we now know it, even for
those who have no interest in the customs of the Gr"a.)

-- D.C.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110317/f8a8701e/attachment-0001.htm>

 

From: Saul Guberman _saulguberman@gmail.com_ 
(mailto:saulguber...@gmail.com) 


I recall learning the reason for burying in their clothes  without
a tahara at a chevra kaddisha shiur. It was not so that the  people
would take revenge, but that God would "see" the plight of his people  &
take He would take revenge. This explanation goes well with adding  HYD,
when speaking of the niftarim.

On a practical note, this  generally does not happen in the US because
by the time EMS,the Emergency  room & the Medical Examiner have finished
their work, the person is no  longer in their street clothes, so a taharah
is done on a murder  victim.

Saul

 
>>>>>
 
 
The law requires an autopsy in a murder case (here in Florida) and if an  
autopsy has been done on the head, a tahara (mikva or pouring water) cannot 
be  done.  There is too much of a gaping wound and it is impossible not to 
lose  blood.  I only remember seeing one case where the lady's head had been  
cut open for a post-mortem, the wound then clumsily stapled closed  again.   
We just cleaned the lady and dressed her in  tachrichim.  All we could do 
was cover  that area in order to keep the tachrichim clean.  (She came from 
the morgue  in a sheet, not in her clothes.   The bloody areas of the sheet 
were  buried with her.)
 
Hashem yerachem and may we never see such sights  again.

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



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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110317/2007215c/attachment-0001.htm>

These new hanhagos may or may not be minhagim, but the fact that they
require qulah-shopping to justify doesn't eliminate the possibility.

Eg:
Dancing on Simchas Torah is riqud on Yom Tov. Is it not a minhag? (Whether
or not your particular eidah participates.)

Eastern Europeans have a minhag that minimizes wearing a tallis.

Yekkes are nohagim to follow Beis Shammai (!) and wash before Qiddush,
a qulah WRT hefseiq.

Etc...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 Time flies...
mi...@aishdas.org                    ... but you're the pilot.
http://www.aishdas.org                       - R' Zelig Pliskin
Fax: (270) 514-1507

On 17/03/2011 5:20 PM, Micha Berger wrote:

> Of the three acharonim in the title, I had a hard time believing that
> the MB and the AhS assume soft matzos. The SA haRav (SAhR) I found more
> plausible, since matzos in his day were probably still too thick be
> lack squeezability and still be chewable -- and he does mention "afilu
> hi rakah va'asuyah kisfug" (se'if 2).

FWIW, RMF mentions that the minhag of using matzos big enough for
everyone at the table to get a kezayis from the smaller half of the
middle matzah of the baal habayis's ke`ara continued into the 19th
century.  This minhag went with the one of making the three matzos
from an issaron of flour, which again makes them huge.  Obviously
such matzos could not possibly be thin as ours but of huge diameter;
not only would they break under their own weight, what sort of table
would hold them?  So they must have been substantially thicker than
our matzos, and if they were thicker then they must have been softer
or they'd be completely inedible, not only for the old and the young
but for everybody.  Therefore the minhag of soft(-er) matzos must
have lasted into the 19th century.

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

I wrote, there is a Shteibel near me that has the following "minhagim."

5.  They say Aveinu Malkenu only during Aseres Yemei Teshuva.

I have been informed that originally Aveinu Malkenu was said only 
during the Aseres Yemei Teshuva. I  was not aware of this.  Thus, 
what is being done in this Shteibel regarding when they say Aveinu 
Malkenu is actually a return to the way things were!

If it were not a Taanis, I would lick the egg off my face.

Yitzchok Levine

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110317/dd2e04b0/attachment-0001.htm>

In Avodah V28n41, RDrYL wrote:
> There is a Shteibel near me that has the following "minhagim."  (Why 
I put quotes around this word will be apparent from what I write below.)
<snip>
> 5.  They say Aveinu Malkenu only during Aseres Yemei Teshuva.
> All of this means that this morning they said selichos without 
tachanun and without Aveinu Malkenu. <
AFAIK, AM was originally constructed to be said only during the Yamim
Noraim; certainly, minhag Frankfurt only says it then (hence it wasn't said
today, Ta'anis Esther 5771, in KAJ/"Breuer's").  Personally, I find
disconcerting the changes to its words to satisfy being said during other
days, not to mention that in KAJ each line is said by Chazzan v'Qahal with
extreme deliberation and kavanah, a level I posit many Ostjuden-nusach
mispal'lim don't reach because of the way in which and/or the relative
frequency with which AM is said.

A gut'n Shabbes/Shabbas Shalom
and best wishes for a wonderful Purim (and Shushan Purim) from
-- Michael Poppers via BB pager

online someone noted in his shul  a collector stating ----

And then he said that it is a minhag to give Matanos La'Evyonim on Taanis 
Esther and on Purim (and then he repeated that it is a minhag to give on 
Taanis Esther), and minhag yisroel torah hee, customs of Israel are like 
actual Torah (and should be treated like obligations). 

--what's the source for the minhag  of  matanos leevyonim on taanis 
esther?
[i will not ask my usual question about the 5th mitzva of  purim ]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110317/37ba1f9f/attachment-0001.htm>

There is a famous formula in Midrashic literature that goes "do not read it
as 'x', but as 'y'..." A quick scan of Midrash Rabbah cme up with more than
a full screen of references. 

However, we do not have a tradition to read any of those pasukim 2 times,
with one time being a correct reading according to the Masoretic (concerning
pronunciation) and then incorrectly, without anyone in the shul correcting
the reader, with one exception, this week's reading of ZECHOR (which is also
named properly). One person said "Well we aren't sure how to pronounce it",
which is an answer that (a) doesn't require the speaker to ponder and (2)
has some far reaching implication with the entire Torah. 

So I've been trying to discover at what point this minhag of reading it 2
times came into being. I cannot find any ancient source (ok, 1900+ years as
being "ancient") where this tradition was intact. Either a Jewish or a
non-Jewish source. (The RAMBAM seems to have, and Rav Kook with no doubt had
the opinion that everyone is born with free will, even an Amalakite (and
thus is redeemable). 

I was pondering this with a friend on the interesting implications on the
minhag to accept a Midrash and turn it into a minhag (although this isn't
the only example of it).

Shabbat Shalom
Eliyahu Grossman
Efrat, Israel

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 07:58:48AM +0200, R Eliyahu Grossman wrote:
: So I've been trying to discover at what point this minhag of reading it 2
: times came into being...

We've discussed it in the past.

The Maaseh Rav says that the Gra advocated reading it with six points
(zekher), wheras in his haskamah in the front R' Chaim Volozhiner
disagrees and says it should be with 5 (zeikher). (Which are pretty
much the same in havarah Sepharadit and the Israeli accent, so I don't
know why someone leining in either would repeat himself anyway.)

The theory I like for why the Gra made a point out of the matter was
suggested by R Jack Love. He believes the Gra held they mean different
things.

One means "reminder", constructing the noun from the hif'il (that which
causes one to remember).

The other means "memory".

The Gra is saying (according to this) that the meaning here must be
"reminder" -- "Erase all memorials to Amaleiq", becuase otherwise
it would contradict the "Zekhor eis asher asah lekha Amaleiq" and "lo
sishqach". We're *supposed* to remember who they were and what they did,
but destroy all memorials to them. (Perhaps because they might inspire
emulation.)

But the Gra's talmidim argue over which one the Gra said meant which.

R' D Bannet writes (13-Nov-2002)
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol10/v10n056.shtml#07>:
> Side remark: Just as 'eshen is the s'mikhut of 'ashan, so zekher could 
> be a s'mikhut of zakhar. As in timcheh et zakhar 'Amalek.

However, that assumes the concept is zakhar, not mizkeret. RJL's
sevara would muddy this clarity.


I had thought the first to advocate turning this ambiguity into practice
was the MB. Realize the Gra held saying one over the other, so his
talmidim each said the one version they thought was correct. So, perhaps
the Gra made a point (pun seasonably intended) about the subject because
it was already immersed in controversy.


R' Zev Sero reported (4-Jun-07; quoted in full):
> It's older than the MB.  Lubavitchers say both, and even have a specific
> minhag as to the order (in Ki Teitzei zeicher is first, in Beshalach
> zecher is first), and they're unlikely to have got the minhag from the MB.

But they are unlikely to have a minhag that is attributed to a machloqes
among Talmidei haGra about what their rebbe held altogether.

In any case, if you define "ancient" as before the late 18th cent CE,
I don't think there is a minhag for a source to discuss.


Let me conclude with this witticism from that post by RDB, after he
shifts to the subject of "Yisgadal" vs "Yisgadeil". After establishing
meqoros that we had clearly originally said "Yisgadal", he writes:
> I won't argue with the Gra and therefore, as posted in the past, I 
> decided many years ago to change from patach to tzeireh right after the 
> shabbat on which we will read parashat va'etchanein. I'm still waiting.

(Perhaps leining /that/ twice really will be next!)

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             If you won't be better tomorrow
mi...@aishdas.org        than you were today,
http://www.aishdas.org   then what need do you have for tomorrow?
Fax: (270) 514-1507              - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov

On 17/03/2011 7:25 PM, Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:
>
> online someone noted in his shul a collector stating ----
>
> And then he said that it is a minhag to give Matanos La'Evyonim on Taanis
> Esther and on Purim (and then he repeated that it is a minhag to give on
> Taanis Esther), and /minhag yisroel torah hee, /customs of Israel are like
> actual Torah (and should be treated like obligations).
>
> --what's the source for the minhag of matanos leevyonim on taanis esther?
> [i will not ask my usual question about the 5th mitzva of purim ]

There's a minhag on every fast day to give the poor the money that one
would have spent on food.  Perhaps that's what he's talking about.
And of course there's the minhag of machtzis hashekel, which is usually
done at mincha on Taanis Ester.

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

How is this different than Ashkenazim not say Ein Keloqeinu during the week (in ROW)?

Ben
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110318/89edfa8d/attachment-0001.htm>

> From: "Prof. Levine" <llev...@stevens.edu>
> There is a Shteibel near me that has the following "minhagim." ?(Why
> I put quotes around this word will be apparent from what I write below.)
>
> 1. ?They do not say tachanun ever at Mincha.

Nor do Boston (in Har Nof; I've never been to Boston.).

> 5. ?They say Aveinu Malkenu only during Aseres Yemei Teshuva.

Like the Yekkes.

> All of this means that this morning they said selichos without
> tachanun and without Aveinu Malkenu.

We had a real Avi HaBen and we said Slichos until "Horachamim VeHaslichos"
We skipped Tachanun but did say  Aveinu Malkenu; but it's is not a Yekkish shul.

- Danny

On 17/03/2011 6:05 PM, Micha Berger wrote:

> Dancing on Simchas Torah is riqud on Yom Tov. Is it not a minhag? (Whether
> or not your particular eidah participates.)

AIUI, riqud means dancing that involves both feet leaving the ground at
the same time; dancing in a circle with one foot always on the ground is
machol, and that's permitted.

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


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 42
**************************************

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..."