Avodah Mailing List

Volume 32: Number 89

Sun, 25 May 2014

• 1. Stopping after Kedushah in Yotzer Or (Micha Berger)
• 2. "Black Wedding" on Har haZeisim, 1904 (saul newman)
• 3. You Don't Need a Minyan for Kaddish (Micha Berger)
• 4. Re: You Don't Need a Minyan for Kaddish (Zev Sero)
• 5. Long hebrew names for stars (lreich)
• 6. Can you have milchigs and fleishigs in the same meal? ()
• 7. Re: Can you have milchigs and fleishigs in the same meal? (Micha Berger)
• 8. Re: Women going to shul was women wearing Tefillin (Chana Luntz)
• 9. Re: Moshe Rabenu's yahrzeit ()
• 10. Re: Women going to shul was women wearing Tefillin (Ben Waxman)
• 11. Re: Moshe Rabenu's yahrzeit (Zev Sero)
• 12. Re: Women going to shul was women wearing Tefillin (Zev Sero)
• 13. Can a 12-year-old be counted in a minyan for maariv? (Zev Sero)

The AhS (OC 66:10 <http://j.mp/1gkZxUo>) wonders about the coexistence
of two halakhos.

1- If a chazan can't finish Shema or its berakhos, you get a new one.
The new chazan starts at the begining of the pereq of berakhah. However,
the Y-mi says that if the first chazan got as far as "Qadosh", the
second doesn't start at the beginning of the berakha; instead he begins
"Veha'ofanim". And if the first Chazan finished "Barukh Kevod" the next
Chazan starts "LaKeil barukh". (49:15 <http://j.mp/1jDpAGY>)

2- But when it comes to interrupting to greet or answer a greeting,
the beginning and end of this Qedushah do not count as "bein haperaqim".
We have a list of bein haperaqim in the mishnah.

The AhS leaves it with a tzarikh iyun.

I struck me that there may be a simpler solutution... Perhaps we should
say that before Qadosh and laKeil barukh are indeed considered bein
haperaqim WRT hefseiq. So why didn't the misnhah list them?

Perhaps the mishnah didn't discuss the case of someone davening betzibur,
since being greetied in the middle of a formal minyan is comparative
unlikely. And perhaps the mishnah holds that Qedushah demiyushav isn't
said beyechidus!

The issue of saying this qedushah biychidus is a machloqes the Rambam
(no) and the Rosh (yes). (R' Saadia Gaon's siddur also skips it if there
is no minyan.) The AhS (59:11 <http://j.mp/TupqqV>) brings the fact that
we say it sitting -- and indeed the Zohar requires we say birkhos Shema
seated -- as proof it's not a real Qedushah. And this is why the Beis
Yoseif says we should be saying this qedushah with trop, so that it's
like leining rather than qedushah.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 36th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        5 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Yesod: What is the kindness in
Fax: (270) 514-1507                 being a stable and reliable partner?

http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Weddings--------

Weddings took a variety of forms. ..... An-ski?s questionnaire mentions
several types of exceptional weddings. Panic weddings, described by Yekhezkl
Kotik <http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Kotik_Yekhezkl> in his
memoir about growing up in
Kamenets<htt
p://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Kamianets-Podilskyi>,
were a response to a rumor in 1835 that minors would not be allowed to
marry. *Shvartse khasenes* (black weddings), reported from
Che?m<http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Che%C5%82m>
,Opat?w <http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Opatow>, and other
places, were intended to end a crisis such as a cholera epidemic by
arranging a wedding in the cemetery for two people who were poor, orphaned,
or disabled, as this was considered a very good deed.

http://www.museumoffamilyhistory.com/ce/kirshenblatt/kirshe
nblatt-black-wedding.htm

*Artist's narrative*:

"The memorial book for Apt recounts how another holy rabbi helped the town
during a cholera epidemic in 1892. Everyone few days someone died. In a
community of about six thousand, that was a calamity. Prominent citizens
went to the holy rabbi, imploring him to say a few prayers to the Almighty.
Maybe the epidemic would subside. The rabbi thoughtfully replied, 'Let's
try a wedding in the Jewish cemetery. Perhaps the dearly departed will
intervene with the Holy One to help.' It is considered a great *mitsve*, or
good deed, to help the poor to marry. All that was needed was a bride and
groom.

The matchmakers got busy. In town there was a young bachelor who was
supported by the community. His job was to clean the communal bath. Each
week he drained the water and replaced it with a fresh supply. He also kept
the fire going in the*mikve* so that the water would always be hot. He
lived in the *hegdesh*, a room where the burial society kept the implements
for cleaning the dead. On being approached, the young man gladly accepted.

Now a bride was needed. There was in town a young lady, an orphan (...) She
was what is called a* kalekhdike yesoyme*, a round orphan, because she had
absolutely no relatives. In exchange for place to sleep on top of the oven,
her daily bread, and a few cast-off clothes, she did the housework for a
well-to-do family. She received no wages. On being approached, she also
gladly agreed.

A proclamation was issued in the synagogue, the houses of study, and the
Jewish schools that a black wedding, a *shvartse khasene*, would be held in
the cemetery at a designated time. Everyone was to attend."

  Mayer talks about the cholera epidemic in 18921 that befell the citizens
of Apt (Opat?w) and the "black wedding" that occurred there in the hope
that this would cause the epidemic to subside. Listen to
it<http://www.museumoffamilyhistory.com/ce/kirshenblatt/ki
rshenblatt-black-wedding-wav.htm>
.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140521/e5a5ee1f/attachment-0001.htm>

Really, it appears you need a minyan for whatever it is you're
saying Qaddish to close.

Another AhS-ism, OC 55:7 <http://j.mp/1oSGWS8>. "For example: In
the middle of pesuqei dezima some of them left -- you finish through
'Yishtabach' and say Qaddish. But no more, because 'Yotzer Or'
is a different topic." Similarly Qedushah when the minyan left between
the start of chazars hasha"tz and Qedushah, and the Qaddish as well.

I was surprised, I assume I wouldn't be alone.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 36th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        5 weeks and 1 day in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Chesed sheb'Yesod: What is the kindness in
Fax: (270) 514-1507                 being a stable and reliable partner?

On 21/05/2014 1:56 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote:
>
> Really, it appears you need a minyan for whatever it is you're
> saying Qaddish to close.

I wouldn't put it quite that way.  I'd say you *do* need a minyan for
kaddish, but if you start it with a minyan and someone leaves, then bediavad
you can finish, because what else can you do?  And on the same principle, if
a concluding kaddish is an integral part of whatever it is that you did start,
then once again when your tenth man leaves you're in a bediavad situation,
and you can complete it, including the kaddish.

The way you put it implies that if the tenth man arrives after Yishtabach
you can't say kaddish, which I don't think is correct.


> Another AhS-ism, OC 55:7

It's an open law in SA, isn't it?


But this only applies to mandatory kaddeishim, not to ones that are only minhag,
e.g. the kaddish after a shiur.  If you started a shiur with ten and then one
left, you can't say kaddish until you have ten again.  And when a tenth man comes
you *can* say kaddish even if you didn't have ten for the shiur.


> I was surprised, I assume I wouldn't be alone.

I guess you don't daven in a shul where these issues come up regularly :-)

-- 
Zev Sero             Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name        from malice.
                                                          - Eric Raymond

According to the Talmud in Brochos 32b there are 1064,340,000,000,000,000 stars in the

universe, that is a 19 digit number, over a miillion trillion.

Current astronmical guesstimates of the number of stars in the "Observable Universe"

give a 24 digit number. (A distance of 46 billion light years is a current postulate of the size of the Observable Universe)

Since every star has an individual name "Lekulom Shaymos Yikro"  and there are only 22

letters in Aleph-Beth, there must be many stars with long and very long names.

A quick calculation of permutations shows that for the Talmud's number we need names

of up to fifteen letters ! 

If we calculate for the astronomer's current guess, we have to go up to 24 letters.



Elozor Reich, Manchester

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140522/26ff5ebd/attachment-0001.htm>

 
An argument I've been having with my husband: can you have milchigs and  
fleishigs in the same meal?  Could you wash and eat challah, have a cup of  
coffee with milk or a piece of cheese cake on Shavuos, then rinse your mouth 
and  eat chicken or meat?  Or do you have to bentsh after the milchigs and 
wash  again and make a new motzi before eating fleishigs? 

 

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


-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140522/b047739c/attachment-0001.htm>

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 06:07:27PM -0400, RnTK wrote:
: An argument I've been having with my husband: can you have milchigs and  
: fleishigs in the same meal?  Could you wash and eat challah, have a cup of  
: coffee with milk or a piece of cheese cake on Shavuos, then rinse your mouth 
: and  eat chicken or meat?  Or do you have to bentsh after the milchigs and 
: wash  again and make a new motzi before eating fleishigs? 

According to the Rama (OC 494:2), one should eat milchig on Shavuos
in memory of the shetei halechem. By having milchig IN ADDITION TO the
meat meals normally obligated on Yom Tov, on is forced to have separate
bread. Or, as RMF puts it (IM YD 1:38), at least the cut breat which
was taken of the challlah board. The big piece which had no chance of
contact with the milchig could be left on the table for the meat meal.
Then RMF adds that it's a nice hanhagah to switch loaves entirely,
since that better commemorates the qorban.

IOW, I thnk the "same meal" thing is exactly the Rama's version of the
Shavuos minhag. (Not that I have seen anyone who inherited this version.)

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 38th day, which is
mi...@aishdas.org        5 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Tifferes sheb'Yesod: How does reliability
Fax: (270) 514-1507           promote harmony in life and relationships?

RTK wrote:

>These data points add up to I don't know what, but I must add that a mother

> taking care of her small children is a tremendous mitzva and fulfillment 
>of a  woman's main mission in life.  Yet it is also something that applies 
>only  for a limited time in a woman's life.  The idea that elderly women  
>shouldn't go to shul because young women have to take care of small
children  
>seems a non sequitur to me.
 
Yes, but note that is precisely the argument that appears to be raised vis a
vis tephillin or tzitzis (by the Aruch HaShulchan amongst others).  That is,
because taking care of small children is difficult to combine with taking
the time out for tephillin wearing, women should not wear tephillin or
tzitzis even when they have no children, or when their children are grown.

All I was trying to point out was that such an argument applies all the more
so to shul going.  Shul going has surely to be defined as more difficult to
do than tephillin wearing when one has small children.  If you want to argue
for depending on others (such as husbands) to enable such activities, the
husbands would need to be on duty more for weekday shul going than for
weekday tephillin wearing.  And even shabbas shul going, while it is time
clumped together, those husbands who do go to hashkama to enable their wives
to go the shul on shabbas likely in total spend more time babysitting than a
husband would do if he were to decide to babysit each day so as to enable
his wife to lay tephillin.   
 
Then RBW added:

>The idea that young women shouldn't go to shul because there are young 
>children is a non-sequitur to me. Have hubby go to the early minyan 
>(assuming that there is one) and he can take care of the kinder later in 
>the morning. At least make sure that she has time for part of shul.

I confess I don't understand why this is a non-sequiter.   While it may be a
very nice thing for a husband to do, you are by definition in this
arrangement depriving said husband of what may be much needed sleep.  Or (if
no hashkama) involve taking him out of shul - which if you follow the Aruch
HaShulchan and Rav Moshe, is a full fledged mitzvah for him, but not for
her. The latter seems a lot worse than asking a husband to babysit while the
woman lays tephillin (he is sacrificing part of his mitzvah for hers), and
the former seems at best comparable (assuming you are asking the husband to
get up earlier in order to babysit to enable his wife to lay tephillin, or
otherwise to give up his time).  Ie this is a mitzvah (or nice practice that
is not a mitzvah, or semi mitzvah or however you want to define it) that is
done on the cheshbon of somebody else, and I can't see how you can mandate
that any husband does such a thing.  Of course couples work things out
between each other, and those with small children often cover for the other
to enable the other to do something that is very important to them, whether
it is going to see old friends or engage in a hobby or whatever, but why
should woman shul going be any more mandatory than any of these other
optional activities?  If a particular woman got more out of laying tephilin
than going to shul, why should the husband enable the one and not the other?

>Ben

Then RMB wrote:

>BTWm the ezras nashim today is miles ahead of what the Gra was worried
>about his wife participating in. Women who couldn't follow the davening in
>the siddur would end up spending the time comparing outfits and speaking
>rechilus and LH. The Gra warns that for a woman who couldn't afford what
>the other women had, it was an invitation for jealousy.

>We can be cynical and say the same is true of shul today, but the truth
>is that with universal education for girls, the level of engagement with
>services today is incomparably better.

Hmm note the "times have changed" argument inherent in all this - women are
more knowledgeable and engaged in davening that previously.  Isn't that
precisely the argument that is being run vis a vis tephillin?


In another post RMB wrote:

>Or, it might speak to the relationship between tefillah and shul. Is the
value of going to shul specific to tefillah betzibur? (I thought not, but I
have no meqoros.) And if not, perhaps women >gain as much from being in shul
when they daven as a minyan of men do, and this specific locale issue is not
about gender.

I was, I confess, using the English term "going to shul" as a codeword for
tephilla b'tzibbur.  I was not particularly distinguishing between a man
going to a full-fledged shul or a local house minyan - but merely commenting
on the very large amount of time each day that men who are concerned about
tephilla b'tzibbur put into this particular activity.  Nor was I considering
shul going absent the joining to a minyan.  While there are statements in
the gemora that would suggest that it is meritorious to daven in a shul even
without a minyan (see eg Brochos 6a), I was not considering that.  I don't
know many men who will leave their wives looking after the children while
they travel to a shul in which they know they will not find a minyan in
order to daven, nor who spend significant time (even absent wives and
children) spending in travelling to a shul to daven when no minyan will be
there.  The time component I was therefore referring to was the time spent
by many men in pursuing tephilla b'tzibbur, both in the going, and in the
nature of the activity, which includes chazaras hashatz, divrei
shebekedusha, and periodic leining, all of which increase the time
commitment considerably over and above davening privately.  The question I
was therefore raising was, should one protest the indulgence by women in
such a pursuit, given the time commitment it involves.

>Micha

Then RAF wrote:

>Berakhot 6b:
>R. Helbo, in the name of R. Huna, says: Whosoever has a fixed place for his
prayer has the G"d of Abraham as his helper.

I confess that there are better quotes - this one could just as well be
about a corner of one's house.  But if you turn back an amud, there is a
strong indication that merely being in a shul, even without a minyan being
present, has benefits.

>Sotah 22a:
>A certain widow had a Synagogue in her neighbourhood; yet she used to come
daily to the School of R. Johanan and pray there. He said to her, ?My
daughter, is there not a Synagogue in your >neighbourhood?? She answered
him, ?Rabbi, but have I not the reward for the steps!?

Yes but those, such as the Aruch HaShulchan, who reject women putting on
tephillin, do so despite there being a ma'aseh shehaya in the gemora (in the
shape of Michal bas Shaul).  So if one were following the Aruch HaShulchan
then one would surely have to say that this woman was an exception, and you
cannot learn anything from her to the general run of the mill woman today,
and we can't just go learning out from ma'asim in the gemora.  As I have
pointed out, the ma'asah shehaya of Michal is far more compelling, given
that the whole Ashkenazi women making brachos position is learnt out from
the ma'aseh sheyaha of Michal (and even if not the making of brachos, the
Sephardi position of poskening like Rabbi Yosi that nashim somchin reshus
likewise), whereas, as mentioned in my previous posts, there is some
considerable debate about the extent to which there really is an individual
mitzvah of tephilla b'tzibbur even on men (but merely on the community as a
whole to ensure one is constituted), so it is much easier to learn this
gemora as being at best supportive of a rejected position than the case of
Michal.

That is, all I was trying to demonstrate was is that an argument that one
must protest the tephillin and/or tzitzis wearing of women on the basis that
these are time consuming mitzvos is difficult to sustain if one does not
simultaneously protest the minyan attending of women.

Regards

Chana

 

Question: In those communities which *do* fast on 7 Adar, is the  seudah 
held at night after the taanis, or is it earlier, so that the seudah  cancels 
the fast similar to Taanis Bechorim?

Akiva  Miller



>>>>
 
I don't know what they do in other communities but our chevra kadisha in  
south Florida has the seudah at night after the fast, actually 8th  Adar.
 
There is another chevra kadisha in south Florida, the Chabad one, but I  
don't know what they do.
 
 

--Toby  Katz
t6...@aol.com
..
=============


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




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20140522/64149acb/attachment-0001.htm>

I wrote in short hand and quite a few people misunderstood me, so it was 
my bad.

My basic point is that if a wife wants to go to shul, then it is 
incumbent on the husband to try and find a way to make this happen. If 
there is an early minyan, than he should go to it.  If there isn't, OK, 
there isn't. But in that case, maybe organize one.  Or another common 
situation: If husband goes to the faster minyan, he'll get his sleep and 
still get home in time for his wife to catch Mussaf at the Chabad 
minyan. He would like to daven in the slow minyan, where there is less 
talking and a real drash. Is that mandatory?

Her spiritual needs are also needs. Is it mandatory that she go to shul? 
No, it is not mandatory that she go. But who says we do what is 
mandatory only? For spiritual needs people make sacrifices. Kollel wives 
work while their husbands.  Is it mandatory that they work? Not in the 
least. But they do it, to help their partner in his quest.

Ben

On 5/23/2014 12:09 AM, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote:
> I confess I don't understand why this is a non-sequiter.   While it may be a
> very nice thing for a husband to do, you are by definition in this
> arrangement depriving said husband of what may be much needed sleep.  Or (if
> no hashkama) involve taking him out of shul - which if you follow the Aruch
> HaShulchan and Rav Moshe, is a full fledged mitzvah for him, but not for
> her.

On 22/05/2014 5:52 PM, via Avodah wrote:
> I don't know what they do in other communities but our chevra kadisha
> in south Florida has the seudah at night after the fast, actually 8th
> Adar. There is another chevra kadisha in south Florida, the Chabad
> one, but I don't know what they do.

I'm sure they do it on 15 Kislev, since that's the universal Litvisher minhag.
But yes, the fast is on the 15th, and the seudah is on the night of the 16th,
after tzeis hakochavim.  I don't know what they do about the seudah when the
fast is on a Friday.

-- 
Zev Sero             Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name        from malice.
                                                          - Eric Raymond

On 23/05/2014 9:22 AM, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote:
> My basic point is that if a wife wants to go to shul, then it is
> incumbent on the husband to try and find a way to make this happen.
> If there is an early minyan, than he should go to it.  If there
> isn't, OK, there isn't. But in that case, maybe organize one.  Or
> another common situation: If husband goes to the faster minyan...

> Her spiritual needs are also needs. Is it mandatory that she go to
> shul? No, it is not mandatory that she go. But who says we do what is
> mandatory only? For spiritual needs people make sacrifices...

Then, as RCL keeps pointing out, why not say the same thing about a wife who
feels a spiritual urge to put on tefillin?  It would be a lot easier on the
husband to accommodate that urge than it is to accommodate this one.

-- 
Zev Sero
z...@sero.name

Tonight, as we waited for a 10th for maariv, the following occurred to me:
Tefilas arvis is reshus, and the only reason we consider it binding is as
a neder; nedarim are binding on boys from the age of 12; therefore a 12-year
old boy's chiyuv is the same as that of the adults.  So if being counted in
a minyan for a given purpose depends on being mechuyav in that thing, then
why can't he be counted?

And if you will tell me that the definition of a minyan is fixed by gezeras
hakasuv, and has nothing to do with who is mechuyav in whatever is to be
done in its presence, then why is a minyan for kiddush haShem different?

OTOH perhaps kiddush haShem is indeed different, that it doesn't require a
"minyan" at all, but rather "asara miyisrael", which is a completely different
concept that only by "coincidence" has the same number that make up a minyan.


-- 
Zev Sero             Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable
z...@sero.name        from malice.
                                                          - Eric Raymond


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



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


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


**************************************

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..."


A list of common acronyms is available at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)