Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 43

Sat, 19 Mar 2011

• 1. Re: eating human flesh during the Shoah (Danny Schoemann)
• 2. Re: Zechor/zachar (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 3. Re: More Examples of "Minhagim" That Lead to Kulos (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 4. Re: More Examples of "Minhagim" That Lead to Kulos (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: More Examples of "Minhagim" That Lead to Kulos (Arie Folger)
• 6. tachanun (Eli Turkel)
• 7. Aveinu Malkenu at Mincha on Taanis Esther (Prof. Levine)
• 8. Re: Zechor/zachar (Simon Montagu)
• 9. Re: what's the source? (Liron Kopinsky)
• 10. Vayigash and Vayikrav (Liron Kopinsky)
• 11. RAMBAM on Songs and Using Hebrew (Prof. Levine)
• 12. Re: RAMBAM on Songs and Using Hebrew (Gershon Seif)
• 13. Re: Kavod haMeis (Micha Berger)
• 14. Re: tachanun (Micha Berger)
• 15. Re: RAMBAM on Songs and Using Hebrew (Micha Berger)
• 16. Sobering Thoughts for Purim (Prof. Levine)

From: R' Eli Turkel <elitur...@gmail.com>

> I remember a teshuva about eating human flesh during the shoah
> Does anyone have a exact reference to such teshuvot?

The last last Teshuva (#112 - page 218) in R' Ephraim Oshry's Sefer
"Responsa from the Holocaust" is titled: Cannibalism.

("Responsa from the Holocaust" is translated from "Sheilos Utshuvos Mima'makim")

He concludes "that it is permissible to eat the flesh of a human
corpse for survival."

However he says he never heard of such a thing happen, except by the
non-Jewish Russian soldiers.

He ends the teshuva and the book with:

"How glorious are the Jewish people! One cannot imagine, let alone
describe, the hunger that raged in the concentration camps and the
ghettoes among the Jews. Even so, the Jewish people did not descend
from their level of sanctity, they never ate human flesh."

A Gutten Shabbes and a Freilichen Purim

- Danny, in Jerusalem

R' Eliyahu Grossman wrote:

> 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).

First, my understanding is that most shuls read it the "incorrect" way first, and then they "correct" it.

Second, don't most shuls do this (or something very much like it) twice during Megillas Esther?

8:11 is read with "laharog" and then "v'laharog"
9:2 is read "bifnayhem" and then "lifnayhem"

I find it noteworthy that (just like zaycher/zecher) neither of these
variants is noted in the "kri/ksiv" section of any Chumash I've seen, and
I've wondered if their origin is in the same time/place as that of
zaycher/zecher.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Groupon&#8482 Official Site
1 ridiculously huge coupon a day. Get 50-90% off your city's best!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4d83392e2f1042f3f7cst01vuc

R' Micha Berger wrote:

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

To put this in terms of Beis Shammai is to unnecessarily over-dramatize it. It's the Rama.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Groupon&#8482 Official Site
1 ridiculously huge coupon a day. Get 50-90% off your city's best!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4d83374619f341f3d45st03vuc

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 02:52:17AM -0400, Zev Sero 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.

AIUI, riqud means hammering out a beat with your feet, which is why it's
included in a taqanah about instruments. Like when yeshiva bachurim
pound one foot much harder (and well within the ring) than the other,
so as to drum on the floor.

But this is why I included dancing on Shabbos as among the minhagim that
"require qulah-shopping to justify". Yes, it can be justified; but you're
hard pressed to find anyone discuss chiluqim between mutar dancing and
technical riqud until AFTER the oilem were nohagim lehaqeil.


On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:42:31AM +0000, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
: To put this in terms of Beis Shammai is to unnecessarily over-dramatize
: it. It's the Rama.

OC 271:12, "veyeish omerim", citing the Rosh, the Mordechai, Hagahos
Maimonios, and Tur. " ... Vekhein haminhag pashut bemedinos eilu" (written
in Cracow, remember), "ve'ein leshanos" -- except at the seder. I think
the wording points to the Rama /not/ particularly liking it, but living
with minhag hamaqom. And yet that's not what Poland did in the MB's day,
so they were meshaneh...

Is understanding why these rishonim hold like Beis Shammai rather than
Beis Hillel is easier to understand???

So, while I disagree about "over-dramatize" -- it's equally dramatic --
I will acknowledge that the tehcnical acknowledgment of the qulah may
well predate (or even have caused) the minhag rather than the other way
around, and take it off the list.

-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "'When Adar enters, we increase our joy'
mi...@aishdas.org         'Joy is nothing but Torah.'
http://www.aishdas.org    'And whoever does more, he is praiseworthy.'"
Fax: (270) 514-1507                     - Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l

RYL 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>
> All of this means that this morning they said selichos without
> tachanun and without Aveinu Malkenu.
>
> I am sure that if I continue to observe what goes on in this
> Shteibel, I will find other "minhagim" that lead to kulas.

These are not qulos, but tremendous, painful 'humros. Do not think of
Ta'hanun as something you must say, but rather about the tremendous
opportunity to pour out your innermost emotions and pain before G"d,
Who cares. If it were up to me, instead of reciting Psalms 20, 121 and
142 for sick and otherwise afflicted people, I would recommend the
likes of Psalm 6 (ta'hanun).

So that shtieb'l decided to be very strict, in a way that is really
unwarranted, and prevent people from reciting ta'hanun on those many
days. At first sight, that's sad and restrictive, but, except for
never saying ta'hanun at min'hoh, perhaps all other "minhoggim" in
your list stem from the fact that whenever happy days arrive, they are
so enamored, so taken, tht they forget all their problems and cannot
imagine feeling any pain, so they cannot possibly recite ta'hanun.

Perhaps you should ask them whether they really feel that way ;-).

Nonetheless, they should also ask themselves whether they are not
being too strict on behalf of their members.

Purim somea'h

-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Bilinguals See the World in Greater Depth
* Video: Why is Birkat HaMazon So, So Long?
* Kann Israel sowohl ein j?discher als auch ein demokratischer Staat sein?
* Audio-Schiurim: Die Schomre-Thora-Vortr?ge zu Gebet
* Multimedia Shiur: Was Esther Slow on the Uptake?
* The Onset of Death in Halakha IV: In the Media
* The Onset of Death in Halakha III: Noteworthy Discussions

<<> 1. They do not say tachanun ever at Mincha.

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

I was told that since shtiebels frequently daven mincha late by time
they reach tachanun it is after shkia and one doesnt say tachanun.
From there it evolved to never saying tachanun for mincha.

There are various minhagim (especially chassidic) which seem to be
against halacha and people stuggle to justify.
One frequent explanation is that the minhag arose in some special
circumstances where it was justified but then spread to all occasions.

A famous example in not eating in the succah on shmini atzeret evening
and making kiddush in the succah in the morning and then eating indoors
(all this in chul). This also sometimes justified by claiming that the
rebbes had huge crowds which could not be accommodated in the succah

BTW this leads to a lot of confusion for olim. I have a number of arguments
with recent olim to EY who wanted to make kiddush in the succah on
shmini azeret in the morning and I tried explaining that it didnt apply in
EY

A personal story. I read that RYBS objected strongly to the double daled
knot
for the head tefillin on the grounds that it is a square and not 2 daleds.
Based on that I changed my tefillin to a single daled knot. My son recently
told
me that he has a double daled knot since that is what I ordered when he
was bar mitzvah (before I changed)



-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110318/d43a56db/attachment-0001.htm>

Yesterday I learned that Minhag Frankfurt says Aveinu Malkenu only 
during Aseres Yemei Teshuva.  This is the original Ashkenaz minhag.

The shul where I davened mincha yesterday did say Aveinu Malkenu at 
Mincha. However, I did not. I did not make it obvious. I stood, held 
my siddur but did not say Aveinu Malkenu.

Now I know that there are those who will say, "But what about 
following minhag ha Makom?" So let me share a story that I consider 
to be related to this issue.

Years ago we spent summers in a bungalow colony in Monroe.  Actually, 
there were 3 bungalow colonies that were near to each other.  The one 
I was at had an Ashkenaz minyan (minhag Frankfurt, no less :-) ) on 
Shabbos and Sundays.  The other two colonies were chassidish and 
davened Nusach Sefard.  During the week only one colony had a minyan 
for mincha/maariv, and the mincha minyan did not say tachanun.  There 
was someone in the colony that I was at who was a rebbe in the RSRH 
Mesivtha who was disturbed by the fact that the mincha minyan did not 
say tachanun, so he asked Rav Shimon Schwab, ZT"L, what he should 
do.  Rav Schwab told him forcefully, "When it comes time to say 
tachanun give a loud clap on the table and say tachanun loudly!"  He 
also had some strong words for any rabbi who heads a shul that does 
not say tachanun at mincha, which I will not repeat.

Note that Rav Schwab did not tell this person that it was minhag ha 
Makom or that he should simply say tachanun quietly.

Bottom line, this fellow never did what Rav Schwab suggested, because 
he was concerned at what happen if he did! :-)  He simply said 
tachanun quietly and unobtrusively.  YL

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 12:50 PM, kennethgmil...@juno.com
<kennethgmil...@juno.com> wrote:
> R' Eliyahu Grossman wrote:
>
>> 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).
>
> First, my understanding is that most shuls read it the "incorrect" way first, and then they "correct" it.
>
> Second, don't most shuls do this (or something very much like it) twice during Megillas Esther?
>
> 8:11 is read with "laharog" and then "v'laharog"
> 9:2 is read "bifnayhem" and then "lifnayhem"
>
> I find it noteworthy that (just like zaycher/zecher) neither of these
> variants is noted in the "kri/ksiv" section of any Chumash I've seen,
> and I've wondered if their origin is in the same time/place as that of
> zaycher/zecher.
>

See http://www.herzog.ac.il/index.php?id=739&;option=com_content&task=view

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Zev Sero <z...@sero.name> wrote:

> --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 ]
>>
>
I'm not sure about davka taanis esther, but "igra d'taanita - tzidketa" -
the main schar of a fast day is giving tzedaka (1st perek of Brachos I
think).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110318/45581fab/attachment-0001.htm>

Does anyone know a source that talks about why Vayikra 8:14 uses Vayagesh,
but both 8:6 and 8:22 uses Vayikrav. http://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0308.htm

8:6 is talking about Aharon u'Banav
8:14 is talking about the Par haChatat
8:22 is talking about the Eil haMiluim

I've seen the Bereishit Rabba which quotes on Vayigash yehuda "Ein Vayigash
ela... Korban, sheneemar Vayagesh et par...", but that doesn't answer the
question about why davka here.

Some ideas I had:
1) The Par is in some way a kappara for the Eigel haZahav where it uses the
work Vayigshu (Ex 32:6). http://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0232.htm
2) Vayigash is a more intimate term than vayakrev. Kappara from the Chattat
needs to be more personal than the milluim.
3) Vayakrev WRT Aharon comes before Vayagesh of the Par. This shows that if
we come forward first, Hashem will enable the opportunity of Teshuva to be
brought closer to us. (But this doesn't answer why the Eil haMiluim reverts
to Vayakrev.)

Shabbat Shalom,
Liron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110318/0ba072dd/attachment-0001.htm>

The following is from Pirkei Avot with the Rambam's commentary pages 
74 - 75.  Note the statement,  "the decision whether a particular 
subject is forbidden or permitted, desirable or objectionable, is not 
dependent on the language in which it is spoken, but rather on its 
content. If the content of a song is inspiring, it is necessary to 
sing it, regardless of the language in which it is written."   This 
makes me wonder why some reject out of hand anything that is from a 
gentile source.

Also, note what the RAMBAM wrote regarding Hebrew,  namely, "Because 
of the holiness of the language, [41] it is not fitting to use it 
except for refined purposes."  This makes me wonder how one can use 
Hebrew as a day to day language as they obviously do in EY.  YL

[In this context, it is worthy to note that] songs, regardless of the 
language in which they are composed, are judged according to their 
content. We should follow the same guidelines with regard to them as 
mentioned above with regard to the five categories of speech. 
Although this point of clarification is obvious, it is necessary to 
mention it [specifically], because I have seen men of stature and 
pious individuals from our nation [ignoring it). When they attend a 
party, a wedding, or [a celebration of] that like, and a person 
desires to sing a song in Arabic, they object and refuse to allow the 
song to be sung. This is true even when the song praises courage or 
forthrightness - i.e., it is in the category of desired speech - or 
it praises wine. If, by contrast, a singer sings a Hebrew song, no 
one will object, nor will they remonstrate even though the content of 
the song concerns subjects that are forbidden or that should be eschewed.

This is utter foolishness. For the decision whether a particular 
subject is forbidden or permitted, desirable or objectionable, is not 
dependent on the language in which it is spoken, but rather on its 
content. If the content of a song is inspiring, it is necessary to 
sing it, regardless of the language in which it is written. And if 
its subject matter is corrupt, we are obligated to shun it, 
regardless of the language in which it is written.

I feel, however, that there is a further point to be added in this 
regard. When there are two songs that both arouse sensual desire, 
extol it, and draw the soul
in this direction, this is [surely] a shortcoming. And this is the 
category of speech that should be eschewed, for it arouses and 
stimulates a crude quality, as we
explained in the fourth [introductory] chapter. When one of the songs 
was composed in Hebrew and the other in Arabic or Persian, hearing 
the Hebrew song and speaking of these matters in that language is 
less desirable according to the Torah. Because of the holiness of the 
language, [41] it is not fitting to use it except for refined 
purposes. Surely, the above applies if the person [incorporatesJ a 
verse from the Torah or the Song of Songs. This causes [the song] to 
move from the undesirable category to the forbidden. For the Torah 
has forbidden the use of the words of prophecy for songs about crude 
and lowly matters. [42]

[41.] See the Guide for the Perplexed, Vol. III, Chapter 8, where the 
Rambam discusses the holiness
of the Hebrew language.

[42.] See Sanhedrin 101a.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110318/79669a6e/attachment-0001.htm>

How would the Rambam explain how they communicated with one another in
biblical times? Did they only speak Lashon HaKoesh for refined purposes?
How did they conduct business? In some other language? I doubt it.

<<Also, note what the RAMBAM wrote regarding Hebrew,? namely,
"Because of the holiness of the language, [41] it is
not fitting to use it except for refined purposes."? This makes
me wonder how one can use Hebrew as a day to day language as they
obviously do in EY.? YL>>

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:15:42PM +0200, R Rafi Goldmeier wrote:
> On 15/3/2011 1:49 AM, Micha Berger wrote:
>> Is that due to publicizing the murder, or enraging the qehillah toward
>> murderers? Because the Rama adds that it is done for a woman who died in
>> childbirth, or someone who fell. On the latter case, the Pischei Teshuvah
>> discusses loss of blood. See also the [Taz], who cites shu"t haMaharil 65,
>> also discussing "dam yotzei mimenah". Taharah becomes impossible as the
>> blood would be lost. It would seem that perhaps the problem is the blood
>> in the clothing requiring qevudah, and not necessarily pirsum.

> in Yoreh Dei'ah 364:4, in Shach (11) and Taz (3) and the Be'er heitev  
> (7) as well, they bring the opinion of the BACH who says a murdered jew  
> is different than one who died, and by a murdered Jew we want everyone  
> to see and get angry at the murderer and tave revenge. I dont know if he  
> is calling for vigilante attacks, or if he wants people to call for  
> vengeance by those responsible for security, but that is what he says.

I don't see it. The Shakh's issue is "dam yatza mimenu", citing the
Maharil. Even his citation of the Bakh: The Bakh writes, and it appears,
that this is specifically when he died in his clothing. But if he fell and
didn't die immediately, only after some days so that he was already removed
from his clothes vegam ein hadam yotzei mimenu that it already ended and
he died in his bed from this attack, then ceetainly you are metaheir him
and make for him takhrikhim.

Similarly the Taz, who I already mentioned but mistyped "Raz". Which is
why they all discuss the Maharil (as does the Rama) considering someone
who fell off the roof or a woman who died in childbirth to be parallel
cases.

So, I still say that despite common wisdom, the issue really appears to
be burying the blood, not about getting people upset and davening.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Strength does not come from winning. Your
mi...@aishdas.org        struggles develop your strength When you go
http://www.aishdas.org   through hardship and decide not to surrender,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      that is strength.        - Arnold Schwarzenegger

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 12:55:19PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote:
: I was told that since shtiebels frequently daven mincha late by time
: they reach tachanun it is after shkia and one doesnt say tachanun.
: From there it evolved to never saying tachanun for mincha.

I find that hard to believe, since they hold by Rabbeinu Tam and even
beyond that they are willing to be meiqil for Amidah -- so why not
tachanun too.

BTW, the Satmar Rav held that while he davened after zeman, he rebuked a
chassid for scheduling a minyan and beris after zeman. Why? Because when
the SR davened after zeman, he did so because he was preparing kavanos
already when it was still zeman. But for the hamon am, they lack this
notion that davening really started well before the first word.

-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "'When Adar enters, we increase our joy'
mi...@aishdas.org         'Joy is nothing but Torah.'
http://www.aishdas.org    'And whoever does more, he is praiseworthy.'"
Fax: (270) 514-1507                     - Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 09:00:38AM -0700, Gershon Seif wrote:
: How would the Rambam explain how they communicated with one another
: in biblical times? Did they only speak Lashon HaKoesh for refined
: purposes? How did they conduct business? In some other language? I
: doubt it.

Well, the language of Avraham's homeland was Aramit. And there is such
a concept in Chazal that we always had Aramaic as a second language.
Perhaps this was one of the medrashim the Rambam didn't consider too
fantastical to take literally?

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Friendship is like stone. A stone has no value,
mi...@aishdas.org        but by rubbing one stone against another,
http://www.aishdas.org   sparks of fire emerge. 
Fax: (270) 514-1507                 - Rav Mordechai of Lechovitz

 From 
<http://ww
w.priority-1.org/html/email/Sobering_Thoughts.pdf>http://ww
w.priority-1.org/html/email/Sobering_Thoughts.pdf 


As everyone's favorite holiday approaches, joy is in the air. Liquor 
stores begin to anticipate an increase in sales. However, amidst all 
this joy, there is a group of individuals who are too nervous to 
celebrate, too educated to get caught up in the Purim frenzy. This 
group knows the dangers that Purim can bring, because they have spent 
their past Purims delivering our young Yeshiva students to the 
hospital. They know what can happen to those who drink irresponsibly. 
The situation has become so grave that a respected Gadol said that if 
our sages had observed the scene on Purim they would have abolished 
drinking on Purim. Unfortunately, this is not the case, but the least 
we can do is to try to explore what the sages did say, evaluate if we 
are fulfilling the Mizvah properly, and see if there is any basis to 
drink to the point of intoxication.

Please see the above URL for the rest of this "sobering" article.

Yitzchok Levine 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20110318/2f92d106/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 43
**************************************

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..."