Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 70

Mon, 02 May 2011

• 1. Re: Heicher Kedusha and l'dor v'dor (Rich, Joel)
• 2. Re: Heicher Kedusha and l'dor v'dor (Micha Berger)
• 3. Re: our way of (roundabout) speaking (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: Heicher Kedusha and l'dor v'dor (Rich, Joel)
• 5. Re: Ashkenazi minhag (Ben Waxman)
• 6. Re: If the rabbi did not actually sell the Chamets (kennethgmiller@juno.com)
• 7. Regarding Baruch Hahem (David Bachrach)
• 8. order of layning (Eli Turkel)
• 9. Why Don't Women Wear A Yarmulke? (Prof. Levine)
• 10. Re: Regarding Baruch Hahem (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: royal wedding (Simon Krysl)
• 12. Re: Why Don't Women Wear A Yarmulke? (Rich, Joel)
• 13. Re: royal wedding (Hankman)
• 14. Haftorah question (Gershon Dubin)
• 15. Re: If the rabbi did not actually sell the Chamets (Danny Schoemann)
• 16. Re: Calling people up to the Torah (Michael Kopinsky)
• 17. re Rabbis at Royal Wedding (martin brody)
• 18. Re: re Rabbis at Royal Wedding (Allan Engel)

> After Shiur every day the Rav (Rav Joseph Soloveitchk) would have one
> of us lead Minchah using a Heicher Kedusha. That meant that all of us
> would say with the Shaliach Tzibbur the beginning of the Amidah together
> and out loud until Kedusha. At that point we would stop and the
> Shaliach Tzibur would lead us in a "normal" Kedusha until L'dor V'dor.
> Then all of us would say L'dor V'dor out loud with the Shaliach Tzibur
> until the end of Hakel Hakadosh, and we would then continue with the
> rest of the Amidah silently.

> Stu Grant

Which IIRC I have heard was due to R'YBS's approach to the importance
of tfilat Hatzibbur as well as tfilla btzibbur

KT
Joel Rich

On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 09:10:35AM -0400, Rich, Joel wrote:
: Which IIRC I have heard was due to R'YBS's approach to the importance
: of tfilat Hatzibbur as well as tfilla btzibbur

The idea of saying the first 2 berakhos with the Chazan isn't specific
to RYBS or to R' Chaim's diyuq in the Rambam of a distinct concept of
tefillas hatzibur (THZ).

My father recalls RYBS saying one should only use this variant of hoiche
qedushah (HQ) because RYBS held that HQ was only mutar as a means to
squeeze in minchah before shaqi'ah. Therefore there shouldn't be a case
of saying HQ when you have aren't such a hurry that you can start
Shemoneh Estei after the Chazan.

As for stopping for Qedushah, if that's what RJR meant RYBS tied to
THZ... Briskers similarly pause after "Modim anachnu lakh"
to allow the tzibbur to say Modim deRabbanan without missing any of the
Chazan's Modim.

But most of the world do not hold of THZ -- they do not stand, feet
together, for chazaras hashatz. Does this mean that if RYBS said the
reason was bedavqa to accomodate something they don't hold of, there
is actually a raayah that without R' Chaim's diyuq one would not [say
the first two berakhos with the chazan and then] pause for Qedushah?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 13th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 6 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Yesod sheb'Gevurah: To what extent is judgment
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   necessary for a good relationship?

Quibble:

I would translate "im yitzeh H'" to "I want it to happen, and hope He
does to." However, "be'ezras Hashem" is a statement of intent -- "I am
going to try to do it, and I hope He allows me to succeed." There is a
slight difference between realizing the difference between hope and
bitachon and realiting the difference between hishtadlus and success.

E.g. Be"H we're going to the doctor tomorrow, iy"H they'll find a
medicine for him then.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 13th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 6 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Yesod sheb'Gevurah: To what extent is judgment
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   necessary for a good relationship?

As for stopping for Qedushah, if that's what RJR meant RYBS tied to THZ... Briskers similarly pause after "Modim anachnu lakh"
to allow the tzibbur to say Modim deRabbanan without missing any of the Chazan's Modim.

But most of the world do not hold of THZ -- they do not stand, feet
together, for chazaras hashatz. Does this mean that if RYBS said the reason
was bedavqa to accomodate something they don't hold of, there is actually a
raayah that without R' Chaim's diyuq one would not [say the first two
berakhos with the chazan and then] pause for Qedushah?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Bingo-which is why I noted the reason (as I do follow the practices you
mention but know most don't) so as I noted in a recent audioroundup, people
don't just follow a practice without understanding the reason and end up
with tartei dsatrei's.
KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.

What is the actual problem: having two customs or the (possible?)subsequent 
splitting up?

Ben
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Micha Berger" <mi...@aishdas.org>
>
> When we started sticking behind a mechitzah those who don't conform to
> the minyan, did we expect a large crowd? Or was it one or two people
> who would be unnoticed in the back? Because that would be a quiet thing,
> whereas what went on in the yeshiva -- or in the minyan I was in as well
> -- really is "agudos agudos". The very splitting into two subpopulations
> we're trying to avoid!
> 

R' Meir Rabi responded to my question (which he thought was from R' Danny Schoemann):

> I chose to use the word DIVEST since I thought it reflects better
> the requirement that OWNERSHIP is NOT the Halachic concern but
> that we deem the Chamets to be of no significance. Perhaps it
> might be compared to one who OWNS skiing equipment but has not
> used it for a number of years. It sits in the garage or the
> basement without any real likelihood of ever being used again.
> Perhaps it will be sold at a trash sale, or given to a friend or
> just eventually just put out as trash to be taken by whoever
> pleases. For the time being the equipment still belongs to the
> owner but it has no significance. I suggest that by Halachic
> standards this mindset is what is required in regards to Chamets.

From where do you get this idea? Everything I've ever learned on this topic
indicates that ownership *IS* the concern. In fact, it goes BEYOND
ownership to include responsibility, and that's why I can't even have
chometz which clearly belongs to a non-Jew, if it is in my house, and
that's why we rent out those areas where the sold chometz is stored.

> It will be like one who has valuable Chamets under a collapsed
> shed which although the owner certainly intends to salvage at the
> conclusion of Pesach, need not be sold and according to some does
> not even require Bittul since it is already Battel and of no
> significance for the duration of the Chag

If he intends to salvage it, then it is NOT battel! Bittul means that he considers it as worthless garbage, which is certainly not the case!

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Penny Stock Jumping 3000%
Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4dbecd5336ba81d5379st03vuc

I am old enough (Baruch HaShem) to remember the Yiddish expressions "Danken Got," Got in himmel," and Got zu danlken," etc.
Over the years we have so distant ourselves from God that not only is the
dash added to G-d but also to Hashe-m. It is a long time since Boaz used
the YHVH in his secular greeting.
David Bachrach
bachra...@verizon.net


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110502/0fbb1c3e/attachment-0001.htm>

<<Those shuls that have the minhag to leyn Shir Hashirim, Rus and Koheles,
why
do they they do so before Kerias Hatorah?

Doesn't Torah take precedence over Kesuvim, and also why wouldn't the
principle of Tadir V'she'eino Tadir apply? Furthermore, on Purim we read the
Megillo after leyning.>>

To answer a question with another question:
Someone asked me how come we layn after shmonei esrei in schararit
but before shomonei esrei for Mincha on shabbat

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110502/d760f2ad/attachment-0001.htm>

 From http://revach.net/article.php?id=1378

Why Don't Women Wear A Yarmulke?

There are two halachos of covering one's head.  The first is not to 
walk 4 amos with your head uncovered.  Whether this is a minhag or a 
Halacha is not the subject of this Teshuva.  However this was never 
intended for females and is not practiced.  The second Halacha of 
head covering (OC 91:3) is that it is forbidden to say Hashem's name 
or to even walk into a Shul with your head uncovered.  This Halacha 
should apply to unmarried women as well.  The Tzitz Eliezer (12:13) 
brings from a number of seforim that there is no logical heter for 
unmarried girls not cover their head when saying Hashem's name or 
going into Shul.  He even brings from the Ish Matzliach who says that 
in Tunisia they enforced this Halacha and all girls covered their 
head when required to do so by Halacha.  Why is this not the case in 
the rest of the world?

The Tzitz Eliezer says that we can explain this with the Chassam 
Sofer (Nedarim 30b) who says that while in the times of the gemara 
men did not always cover their heads, today one must cover their 
head.  The Taz says (OC 8:3) since the goyim worship with uncovered 
heads, if we were to do the same we would be oveir "U'BiChukoseihem 
Lo Seileichu", do not go in the way of the Goyim.  He adds that by 
women it was just the opposite.  Women were required to cover their 
heads for services.  Therefore since single women do not cover their 
heads in general, if they were to cover their head specifically to 
say Hashem's name or to go into Shul they would fall straight into 
"U'BiChukoseihem Lo Seileichu".

Please not the disclaimer at the bottom of this web page.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110502/7ea281b3/attachment-0001.htm>

On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 10:46:01AM -0700, David Bachrach wrote:
: Over the years we have so distant ourselves from God that not only is
: the dash added to G-d but also to Hashe-m. It is a long time since Boaz
: used the YHVH in his secular greeting.

Have you met anyone who thinks your chayav to hyphenate "Hashem"? Or is
this just a practice some people have knowing it's beyond the call, but
makes for a good foil for someone trying to make this kind of point. IOW,
I think your holding up "Hash-m" as where we're up to to be guzma.

We also have Sheim Havayah -> 3 yuds -> 2 yuds -> hei / dalet.

In any case, the distancing is that of emphasizing His Transcendence,
not due to neglect. So, I don't see it as a symptom of what your words
appear to imply.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 13th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        1 week and 6 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Yesod sheb'Gevurah: To what extent is judgment
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   necessary for a good relationship?

Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 13:50:39 +0000
From: Dov Kaiser <dov_...@hotmail.co.uk>
> As to the substance of the question, my impression is that risk of
> sakana need only be tenuous to invoke sh'lom malchus. In this case,
> there would be the risk that Orthodoxy could lose its control over the
> chief rabbinate if the Chief Rabbi had not attended - I wonder whether
> this itself could serve as a heter? Does anyone know if Lord Rabbi
> Jacobovits attended the last big royal wedding in the 1980s?

Lord Jacobovits was not invited in 1981.

Kol tov,
Simon Krysl

Why Don't Women Wear A Yarmulke?

There are two halachos of covering one's head.	The first is not to walk 4
amos with your head uncovered.	Whether this is a minhag or a Halacha is
not the subject of this Teshuva.  However this was never intended for
females and is not practiced.


funny/ironic- I gave a shiur on the topic of male head covering a number of
years ago and was unable to figure out why "this was never intended for
females and is not practiced.  " given that the primary sources imply the
reason is to show fear of heaven (especially if you say the reason then was
because women stayed home)
KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110502/d71498d5/attachment-0001.htm>

RZS wrote:

There is a significant area of heter
for shtadlanim in all the issurim related to socialising with goyim; the
grand-daddy of them all, Nechemiah ben Chachalyah, was called Hatirshoso
because the Sanhedrin gave him a heter to drink goyishe wine!

CM notes:

I don't question that Lord R. Sacks knew of a heter that was applicable.
However, the tzushtel of Nechemiah is not that clear (though not
impossible). 1) Lord R. Sacks did not have a Sanhedrin to provide him with
a special heter, 2) The heter issued to Nechemiah was as you put it, "to
drink goyishe wine," not for presence in a church during a religious
service which may be different.

Kol Tuv

Chaim Manaster
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110502/006fe7db/attachment-0001.htm>

Do we ever read the haftorah of "hasishpot hasishpot es ir hadamim"?  Does anyone ever remember reading/hearing it?

Gershon
gershon.du...@juno.com
____________________________________________________________
Penny Stock Jumping 3000%
Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4dbefd761dbd21deff7st05vuc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110502/0def08bc/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Meir Rabi <meir...@gmail.com> said:

>R' Danny Schoemann asked - What makes you say that they are divested from
>their Chamets?

Actually it was R' Akiva Miller <kennethgmil...@juno.com> who asked that.

- Danny

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Poppers, Michael
<MPopp...@kayescholer.com>wrote:

> KAJ/"Breuer's" calls the oleh for Shvi'i up that way.
>

Why is shvi'i  different from any other aliyah?

KT,
Michael
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110502/f98ab418/attachment-0001.htm>

"Does anyone know if Lord Rabbi
Jacobovits attended the last big royal wedding in the 1980s?
Kol tuv,
Dov Kaiser"

Yes, and CR Lord Jakobovitz had been in church more than once and so has CR
Lord Sacks.
There was a difficulty once when some event was on Shabbat at St.Paul's. CR
Brodie didn't attend but sent a  O Rabbi on his cabinet as a Shliach. Same
difference.

Martin Brody
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110502/e8f66216/attachment-0001.htm>

I presume that was Churchill's funeral, which was on a Shabbos.

Incidentally, Ben Gurion walked to that funeral, rather than take a car
befarhesia on Shabbos while representing the Jewish State. (see
http://www.winstonchurchill.org/l
earn/biography/funeral/newspapers/110-nations-leaders-attend-funeral-servic
e
 )

On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 9:13 PM, martin brody <martinlbr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> There was a difficulty once when some event was on Shabbat at St.Paul's. CR
> Brodie didn't attend but sent a  O Rabbi on his cabinet as a Shliach. Same
> difference.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20110502/9183e233/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 70
**************************************

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..."