Avodah Mailing List

Volume 35: Number 93

Fri, 21 Jul 2017

• 1. Correcting Baalei Kriah (Joel Schnur)
• 2. Re: Correcting Baalei Kriah (Akiva Miller)
• 3. Re: A Lefty's Mezuzah (Akiva Miller)
• 4. Is it Assur to eat Neveilah? (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi)
• 5. Re: Correcting Baalei Kriah (Lisa Liel)
• 6. Re: A Lefty's Mezuzah (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Correcting Baalei Kriah (Akiva Miller)
• 8. Re: Correcting Baalei Kriah (Rich, Joel)
• 9. Re: Correcting Baalei Kriah (Zev Sero)
• 10. Re: Correcting Baalei Kriah (Akiva Miller)
• 11. Re: Correcting Baalei Kriah (Zev Sero)
• 12. Re: The Ramchal's Beard (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Correcting Baalei Kriah (Ben Waxman)

Our K'vasikin  minyan at the Young Israel of Ave k in Flatbush, K & East 
29, (45 minutes before HaNetz on Shabbos and YT, 30 minutes on cholo 
shel moed and RH), reads from a klaf only al pi HaGra and only the baal 
k'riah reads while everyone else just listens and answers awmen (no BHUS)

-- 
___________________________
Joel Schnur, Senior VP
Government Affairs/Public Relations
Schnur Associates, Inc.
j...@schnurassociates.com
www.schnurassociates.com

.
R' Zev Sero wrote:

> I don't believe there is a chiyuv for the haftarah to be read,
> let alone for anyone to hear it, therefore it can't be invalid.

Perhaps the word "chiyuv" is too strong for the context. Perhaps
"minhag" or "inyan" are more appropriate. Let's avoid getting mired in
such details, and speak in simple English. Surely you will agree that
reading the haftarah is something that we are supposed to do, yes?

> Also, no matter how many mistake he makes, surely he's read
> at least three pesukim correctly, or at least one pasuk.

Can you cite any sources that reading "at least three pesukim
correctly, or at least one pasuk" would suffice for whatever it is
that we're supposed to be doing?

In a later post, he wrote:

> It's not just casual reading, or even just a minhag; it's
> takanas chachamim that it be read, but there's no chiyuv that
> one (or even a tzibur) needs to be "yotze", unlike krias
> hatorah which is a chiyuv of the tzibur.  We can derive this
> from the fact that if the tzibur missed leining one week it
> must make it up the next week, while it does not make up a
> missed haftara.

I honestly don't know how you distinguish between a "takanas
chachamim" and a "chiyuv", but let's ignore that, and just go with the
part that you do concede to: That there *IS* a takanas chachamim that
the haftarah be read.

Now, it seems to me that *IF* there is a takanas chachamim that the
haftarah be read, *THEN* there is a takanas chachamim that the
haftarah be read *properly*. Do you agree, or do you feel it is okay
when the haftarah is read improperly?

Akiva Miller

.
R' Micha Berger asked:
> *Does* anyone discuss if a lefty should hang his mezuzos
> on the other side?

Yes, indeed. In YD 289:2, the Mechaber writes, "You have to affix it
on the right side of the one who enters."

And (someone who uses Rashi script just like) the Rama adds, "And
there's no difference whther he is left-handed or not."

Akiva Miller

R Akiva Miller asked - why can a horse not be Shechted?

A horse cannot be Shechted the same way that a G cannot perform Shechitah.
Shechitah is not a mechanical action performed to meet certain criteria -
Shechitah requires the right person, the right animal and the proper action.

The Mishneh Chullin 72b asks a Q we would never ask, in fact it takes a
very long time to actually read and make sense of the Mishneh, so counter
intuitive is its premise.
Why is it that a horse is a Neveilah even if it is Shechted whereas a cow
which is Shechted is not a Neveilah in spite of it being a Tereifa?

In our mind, the non-Kosher status of a Tereifa is a consequence of its
ritual blemish which in no way affects the Shechitah; of course the
Shechitah should prevent the animal becoming a Neveilah.

But that is not how the Mishneh sees things -  the Mishneh understands that
the Tereifa status of the cow invalidates the Shechitah - it is, in the
Mishneh's mind, equivalent to Shechting a horse.

The Mishneh answers that Yesh BeMino Shechitah -
meaning, although the animal itself ought to be deemed not Shechted,
nevertheless as a species it has an association with Shechitah so the
Shechitah will, in spite of being imperfect, prevent it becoming a Neveilah.

And the Mishneh concludes with the astonishing observation that a premature
calf is Ein BeMino Shechitah. Although it is born from the union of a cow
and a bull, it is - as Rashi explains - not categorised as Bakar nor as
Tzon. It cannot ever be Shechted.

R Micha already noted that this touches upon the [in]famous bar-mitzvah
Pshettel of R Chaim.

But my original Q remains - what is the status of this premature non-Bakar
and non-Tzon, this non-animal?
Certainly however we kill it it is a Neveilah BUT is it Assur to eat? Hence
my Q - is there an Issur to eat Neveilah?

The Gemara [Chullin 113] requires a special Ribbuy to teach that there is
an Issur to cook premature born cow with milk Gedi LeRabbos Es HaShellil.
Why? Why might we think it is not like a regular cow?
The Tiferes YaAkov explains that such an animal has no Issur Cheilev,
Chullin 75a, which is unsurprising considering that it is not a BeHeimah,
so we may well have argued there is no Issur BBCh; KMLan that it is deemed
to be Bassar for the Issur of BBCh.

Now think about this - a Jew may not cook nor eat BBCh
If a Yid however is about to eat Cheilev, which he may not cook with milk
since it is deemed to be Bassar, we cannot warn him that he is
transgressing the Issur of eating BBCh. Why? Because Ein Issur Chal Al
Issur - once the Issur of Cheilev is already in place the later Issur of
BBCh cannot take hold.

Now the problem is - how is there an Issur of eating BBCh with the Shellil,
the non-fully gestated prematurely born cow which will be a Neveilah even
if it Shechted - if it is already Assur to eat then Ein Issur Chul Al Issur
will prevent there being a secondary Issur of eating BBCh?

Which seems to indicate that although it is a Neveilah, there is no Issur
to eat a prematurely born cow.
[To be sure we would need to verify that it has not entered its ninth
month.]

Hence my Q - Is it Assur to eat Neveilah?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170719/fcebe1e0/attachment-0001.htm>

On 7/19/2017 5:23 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
> Now, it seems to me that *IF* there is a takanas chachamim that the
> haftarah be read, *THEN* there is a takanas chachamim that the
> haftarah be read *properly*. Do you agree, or do you feel it is okay
> when the haftarah is read improperly?

I don't think the question works.  Consider: we have a chiyuv to daven 
shmoneh esrei.  But there are different girsaot, so clearly, exact 
wording isn't critical to fulfilling the requirement.  So we already see 
that there are different levels of chiyuvim, and that we are more 
medayek on exact wording on some levels than others.

Certainly the takana is to read it properly, but there's surely a lot 
more give in what can be considered "properly" when it comes to 
something like haftara than there is for Torah.

Lisa

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:37:34PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
:> *Does* anyone discuss if a lefty should hang his mezuzos
:> on the other side?

: Yes, indeed. In YD 289:2, the Mechaber writes, "You have to affix it
: on the right side of the one who enters."
: And (someone who uses Rashi script just like) the Rama adds, "And
: there's no difference whther he is left-handed or not."

Besheim the Mordechai.

The Shakh) says this is true even if the lefty lives alone or the whole
family is lefty. Because mezuzah is a chiyuv on the house, not like
tefillin's chiyuv, which is on the guf. The Be'eir Heiteiv quotes the
Shakh, adding "vekhein nohagim".

The AhS (s' 5) gives multiple reasons:

1- A house is made for anyone who lives there, not this specific person.
Which might be the same explanation, might not. Seems related to the
fact that we do not take mezuzos down when the next owner is Jewish.

2- He contrasts to tefillin, where the pasuq uses the word "yadkha" and
we darshen "yad keihah", whereas "beisekha" is used to darshen the din
that it's direction from which one enters.

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

.
R"n Lisa Liel wrote:

> Certainly the takana is to read it properly, but there's
> surely a lot more give in what can be considered "properly"
> when it comes to something like haftara than there is for
> Torah.

We seem to agree that it *IS* possible to read the haftarah
IMproperly, in contrast to R' Zev Sero, who wrote:

> I don't believe there is a chiyuv for the haftarah to be
> read, let alone for anyone to hear it, therefore it can't
> be invalid.

Akiva Miller

Now, it seems to me that *IF* there is a takanas chachamim that the
haftarah be read, *THEN* there is a takanas chachamim that the
haftarah be read *properly*. Do you agree, or do you feel it is okay
when the haftarah is read improperly?

Akiva Miller
_______________________________________________
If I am not being yotzeih with his reading, then I am indifferent (except for kavod hatzibbur)
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.

On 18/07/17 22:23, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
> I honestly don't know how you distinguish between a "takanas
> chachamim" and a "chiyuv", but let's ignore that,

But that is key.  What is a chiyuv, or rather in Hebrew a chovah?  As 
anyone who's read an Ivrit bank statement or balance sheet can tell you, 
it's a liability.  "Lotzeis y'dei chovah", or "being yotzei", means 
discharging that liability.  If there is no chovah then there is nothing 
from which to exit; one cannot speak of being yotzei something that is 
not a chiyuv.

Now krias hatorah is not a chovah on any individual.  If one missed 
leining one shabbos one needn't make it up.  Even if there are 10 men 
who missed it, and therefore could make it up if they wanted to, they 
don't.  But it is a chovah on the tzibbur; if for some reason an entire 
community was unable to read the Torah one week they must make it up the 
next week by reading two sedros.  If they don't then their liability has 
not been discharged.

When it comes to the haftarah, however, we do not find such a thing.  If 
the tzibbur missed one week's haftarah they needn't make it up.  This 
tells me that there is no communal chovah for the haftarah to be read. 
Chazal instituted that it be read, and they composed brachos to be said 
with it, but it is simply a part of the order of the shabbos service, 
which ought to be followed, but there is no liability, and therefore no 
concept of "yotzei" or "not yotzei".

Of course if it is to be read it should be read correctly.  *Anything* 
that is read should be read correctly; there is no virtue in reading 
carelessly, as if one's words are of no importance so it doesn't matter 
if one butchers them.   But bediavad even if a haftarah were mangled 
beyond recognition it's surely no worse than not having read it at all, 
and since not reading it leaves no undischarged liability on the 
community therefore a bad reading doesn't do so either.



> Can you cite any sources that reading "at least three pesukim
> correctly, or at least one pasuk" would suffice for whatever it is
> that we're supposed to be doing?

Suppose my argument is incorrect, and there *is* some obligation which 
the community must discharge?  How long a reading counts?  We know that 
the gemara's mention of 21 pesukim is merely a recommendation, since we 
routinely disregard it.  So how small *can* we make it?  By analogy with 
krias hatorah we can say that fewer than three pesukim is not a reading 
at all.  But maybe the analogy is inapt, and the takana is fulfilled by 
*any* reading from the nevi'im, even just one pasuk, or perhaps even a 
single phrase.  After all the whole takanah is simply in memory of the 
time when krias hatorah was banned, so we read nevi'im instead; so 
perhaps even a very small reading is enough to evoke this memory.


-- 
Zev Sero                May 2017, with its *nine* days of Chanukah,
z...@sero.name           be a brilliant year for us all

R' Zev Sero wrote: <<< But bediavad even if a haftarah were mangled beyond
recognition it's surely no worse than not having read it at all, >>>

This illustrates why I suggested avoiding words like "chiyuv". Is our goal
to be in a status of "no worse than not having read it at all"? Surely not!
If we would be satisfied with such, then why do we bother reading it?

Let me be clear: I do realize that there may be a downside to correcting
someone who makes a mistake in the haftara (embarrassing him or whatever).
But that should be weighed against the upside, and RZS seems to feel that
there simply isn't any upside, and that's the part that I don't understand.

Akiva Miller
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20170719/af187b9b/attachment-0001.htm>

On 19/07/17 13:20, Akiva Miller wrote:
> 
> Let me be clear: I do realize that there may be a downside to correcting 
> someone who makes a mistake in the haftara (embarrassing him or 
> whatever). But that should be weighed against the upside, and RZS seems 
> to feel that there simply isn't any upside, and that's the part that I 
> don't understand.

I'm saying that it's not *required*, and therefore it becomes a highly 
situational question of balancing the reader's sensitivity and the 
tircha detzibura against a desire to hear a haftara that doesn't grate 
on the nerves.   There's no "I'm sorry but if we don't correct him we 
won't be yotzei".

-- 
Zev Sero                May 2017, with its *nine* days of Chanukah,
z...@sero.name           be a brilliant year for us all

On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 05:02:31PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
: R' Micha Berger wrote:
:> The Ramchal famously had the cleanshaven look.

: I have no idea what you're referring to. Is there a famous painting of
: him that is generally accepted as accurate?

Mequbalim in Itali had a mesorah from the Rama miFano (late 16th - early
17th cent) that beards were only appropriate in EY.

The Ramchal's lack of beard was mentioned in the charges against him
when he was drummed out of Italy for teaching a very messianic Qabbalah
too soon after Shabbeta Zvi. 

Someone once showed me a Chasam Sofer and a Chidah which refer to this
practice. But I couldn't find it. Meanwhile, I found Gilyon Maharshah
(R' Shelomo Eiger), at the end of YD 181, says that kamah gedolei
hamequbalim, talmidei haAri, who cut their beards with scissors.

So, scissors is no my default assumption, which means they probably had
some visible stuble, if not enough to qualify as a "beard".

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             We are what we repeatedly do.
mi...@aishdas.org        Thus excellence is not an event,
http://www.aishdas.org   but a habit.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Aristotle

Ikkar ha-din, someone who  can't properly enunciate Hebrew letters isn't 
allowed to pray from the amud, never mind read the Torah or Haftorah.  I 
don't know if there is a need to correct someone who consistently makes 
mistakes but there is certainly no reason to allow him to read at all if 
he can't do it properly.

As an aside: one of my rabbis said that RYBS didn't correct someone in 
class who made mistakes reading the Gemara text but if someone made a 
mistake with a pasuk in the Gemara, then the Rav let him have it.

Ben

On 7/19/2017 12:31 PM, Lisa Liel via Avodah wrote:
> Certainly the takana is to read it properly, but there's surely a lot 
> more give in what can be considered "properly" when it comes to 
> something like haftara than there is for Torah.




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



_______________________________________________
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/lists/avodah/avodah-acronyms
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)